| Re: Energy saving better than alternative energy. |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Group: uk.transport · Group Profile
Author: ConorConor Date: Sep 3, 2008 00:29
> Told you so!
Not really, we already knew. It's hardly rocket science.
> "Solar panels are one of the least cost-effective ways of combating
> climate change and will take 100 years to pay back their installation
> costs, the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (Rics) warned
> yesterday..."
>
> "...Solar panels for heating and power and wind turbines generating
> between 3kW and 5kW merited two stars. Smaller 1.5kW turbines of the
> type installed on roofs paid back in 25 years, received a three-star
> rating.
>
> By contrast, cavity wall insulation had a five-star rating: spending
> £440 would save £145 a year in fuel bills, paying back in three years,
> while an investment of £325 in extra loft insulation would save £60
> annually, paying back in five years..."
>
So in fact you've got it wrong again, Doug. The article has nothing to
do with emissions saving and everything to do with the time it'll take
to recoup the monetary value which should ideally be the secondary
consideration.
--
Conor
I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't
looking good either. - Scott Adams
| 
