For Dylan: Heating in Scotland

  • Active since 1995, Hearth.com is THE place on the internet for free information and advice about wood stoves, pellet stoves and other energy saving equipment.

    We strive to provide opinions, articles, discussions and history related to Hearth Products and in a more general sense, energy issues.

    We promote the EFFICIENT, RESPONSIBLE, CLEAN and SAFE use of all fuels, whether renewable or fossil.
Status
Not open for further replies.

jtcedinburgh

New Member
Sep 19, 2006
133
Fife Riviera, Scotland
Dylan asked (in another topic):

Perhaps this would be fuel for another thread, jt, but fill us in regarding heating options (sources, prices, etc.) in Scotland.

Good questions indeed. As a resident of a small country*, the first thing that needs to be understood is that over here, few have the luxury of land, and as a result most people don't have ready access to woodland to cut their own firewood. With acreage hitting between £200K to £1m/acre, depending on location, and rarely dropping below £100k/acre ($200K US), it's quite an expensive country in which to live.

Most homes are, by international standards, both old and poorly insulated. A greedy government has levied tax on domestic fuels - most notably petrol, which is currently sitting at approximately £4.25 per gallon ($8.50US). The vast majority of that cost is tax. This means that, in the UK, we not only get hit by fluctuations in the wholesale cost of fuel in general, we are also 'supertaxed' in proportion**.

What this means is that we have the unfortunate situation of expensive, low efficiency housing stock combined with high fuel prices. The option to build our own energy efficient homes is stifled by the high cost, and low availability, of land. Not to mention very restrictive planning rules which seem to actively discourage the building of more homes (fuelling a housing shortage too).

Taking all of this into account, most people are still sticking with domestic gas, which is available to the majority of homes in the UK. Prices have risen over 100% in the past two years overall, and the 'cheaper' alternative is now more expensive than ever. All of this despite a negative cost of gas due to a sudden glut in supply. Typical, eh?

For my own part, with a moderate sized, Victorian end-terraced house, built in 1900, I have a modern condensing gas combination boiler, supplying radiators in every room. At the moment this is regulated by a programmer (no thermostat) but that will change next week as I have just ordered one. Due to the typical design of the UK home being compartmentalised, it's not always feasible to heat the entire home using a single heat source - at least, without ducting or piping. So, my Morso stove only really heats the compartment in which it is located. I am therefore considering a second stove or inset in our main living room to supplement this, providing at least wood heating throughout the entire ground-floor area.

Where solid fuel is concerned, though, most people in the UK remain using house coal. Though it is often sold in smokeless form as required by clean air legislation. It is possible still to have coal delivered in bulk throughout most of the UK, with reasonably low charges. The same is not true of wood fuel, whose supply tends to be localised and delivery on a smaller scale and therefore expensive. As far as I am aware, pellets are not common as a fuel source here.

My own combination of gas central heating and supplemental wood-fired room heating is the best I can currently do. Sure, there are moves afoot to improve the UK housing stock by means of grants for insulation and so on, not to mention quite strict efficiency requirements for new build properties, but by and large the problem in the UK is the sheer number of older properties such as my own. These are often stone built (as mine is) and often quite drafty.

In terms of wood supplier - I have used a local estate who delivered a ton of hardwood splits back in September. I will try a local farm for next year, and I also scavenge using my own bow saw from a local woodland, but this is slow and hard work, and so I can see myself purchasing the majority of my wood for some time to come.

Hope this is sort of what you were after,

John

* for the purposes of this topic, I refer to 'country' as meaning Scotland, but in fairness, the same applies UK-wide - in fact, land prices are often considerably higher in some parts of England, say, and could top £2M/acre in the south east.

** Which is one reason why we look to the US with envy over your fuel prices.
 
Wow, and we think the government has things screwed up here (which they do but....... )

I feel very fortunate knowing that if I manage my land (6 acres) properly I will have ample firewood longer than I will be burning it.

Bow saw, is there a reason for this (regulations? )
 
Very interesting post, thanks for the perspective.
 
Bow saw, is there a reason for this (regulations? )
No, just that (a) I don't own a chainsaw, and (b) if I did, my wife wouldn't let me use it, as she's seen how I am with a hammer and therefore doesn't trust me with anything quite so dangerous... ;)
 
Wow, that is staggering for land cost - is that for developable land in small lots? That is, if you purchased a farm which has no development rights, would it be cheaper per acre?

For example, in our part of New York state, a 1 acre lot in the southern part of the county could cost $100-$150K. This is sort of a baseline cost for minimum buildable lot size. A 3 acre lot many only add $25-$50K as you can still only build one house, and the other use options are not particularly valuable.

Similarly, in our township, the minimum size is 5 acres. That may run $200-$250K. But a 25 acre lot may still only cost $300-500K if it cannot be further subdivided or developed.

-Colin
 
Interesting post. We thought we had it bad over here!

So how much did you pay for that ton of hardwood splits?
 
hi jtc
loved your post, interesting how it gets done over on your side of the pond, shame you guys do not have the availability of as many renewable resources as we do over here. but i get the feeling from your post that taxes would likely hurt the industry for them as well.
 
Colin - the land cost of course varies depending on whether planning permissions have been granted for housing or not. If not, there is no guarantee of acceptance and therefore the land cost is an order of magnitude cheaper. Notwithstanding the fact that many developers will sit on 'ungranted' land in the hope that things will change.

Todd: £160 delivered - a mix of oak and other hardwoods, most from mature (i.e. 18th and 19th century) hardwoods that have died, blown over in storms or similar. The local(ish) farm is quoting £55 per ton delivered, though I don't know (a) what the mix is, (b) how seasoned it'd be, and (c) whether it's split.

Mike: Yes, it's one area where living in a small, overpopulated country (meaning the UK as a whole) has drawbacks.
 
[quote author="Mike Wilson" date="1165987438"]Ain't Socialism grand....



How true. A shame what happened to the UK. A Godless shadow of it's former self.
 
Thanks for that insight. It's always valuable to put things into a context other than one's own.

jtcedinburgh said:
Due to the typical design of the UK home being compartmentalised, it's not always feasible to heat the entire home using a single heat source - at least, without ducting or piping. So, my Morso stove only really heats the compartment in which it is located.

You're way ahead of things in this regard - here, we call that 'feature' "zone heating"!
 
JTC:
Contrary to those who think we have it tough, I think we are blessed with options including, fuel sources, places to live, what we can live in, etc. I have heard that most/average Brits have a really rough time heating. Can you give us an idea of what the average UK consumer goes through to keep warm? Cost is the driving force, what are the most economical alternatives? I personally appreciate the insights to make me value my choices.
 
if lucky enough not to live in a smoke controll area, house coal (bituminous) is generally the most economical, most of which doesn't even come from the uk anymore; but rather australia, the continent, and most importantly russia; george orwell wrote about this years ago and how sad it is.
 
Big Eric said:
Where's Craig? He keeps saying how wonderful it is in those socialist countries overseas.

Socialism and capitalism are both bad. In one case the gov't robs you blind, in the other Bill Gates & friends do.

So you got to walk a fine line between the two.

And FYI, we have cheap gass partly because the Gov't subsidizes it about $1 a gallon (through tax breaks)
 
Big Eric said:
Where's Craig? He keeps saying how wonderful it is in those socialist countries overseas. Thank God we don't pay $8.50 per gallon for fuel here. I wouldn't think that there would be old shabby houses in a socialist country. I thought the government would stand up for the people and make sure they are living in quality homes! I know I'm stirring s**t up here, but you just had to read the other posts to understand.

Eric,

I second that....where's the "Webmaster" when you need him????? Web..... how'd you like $8.50/gallon of gas here in the states? Must be a "hidden benefit" to not owning guns in the UK.....you give up your right to bear arms and in return, a grateful government gives you cheap gas at almost $9 a gallon.......LOL
 
jtcedinburgh said:
Bow saw, is there a reason for this (regulations? )
No, just that (a) I don't own a chainsaw, and (b) if I did, my wife wouldn't let me use it, as she's seen how I am with a hammer and therefore doesn't trust me with anything quite so dangerous... ;)

Excellent,

I enjoy hearing about life in other countries. Could you please tell us the following concerning energy costs over there:

1) the cost of a Kw-hr of electricity in US dollars?

2) the cost of 100 cubic feet of natural gas in US dollars?

3) what's the typical electric and gas bill over there in US dollars?

4) do you folks typically do insulation upgrades to older homes to insulate them better or do you just live with the higher energy bills?


thanks
 
castiron said:
Big Eric said:
Where's Craig? He keeps saying how wonderful it is in those socialist countries overseas. Thank God we don't pay $8.50 per gallon for fuel here. I wouldn't think that there would be old shabby houses in a socialist country. I thought the government would stand up for the people and make sure they are living in quality homes! I know I'm stirring s**t up here, but you just had to read the other posts to understand.

Eric,

I second that....where's the "Webmaster" when you need him????? Web..... how'd you like $8.50/gallon of gas here in the states? Must be a "hidden benefit" to not owning guns in the UK.....you give up your right to bear arms and in return, a grateful government gives you cheap gas at almost $9 a gallon.......LOL

Yes, high gas prices do hurt in the immediate future, but if the taxes on gases would be used to help alternative energies so we can become energy independent and help reduce CO2 emissions we or at least our children and grandchildren would be better off. I don't know about $8.50 per gallon, but a higher tax on gas would not be a bad thing if it could be used for those purposes and their was relief for low income and lower middle class families. The problem is that there is no guarantee that the money would be spent reasonably.
 
Fish MT said:
castiron said:
Big Eric said:
Where's Craig? He keeps saying how wonderful it is in those socialist countries overseas. Thank God we don't pay $8.50 per gallon for fuel here. I wouldn't think that there would be old shabby houses in a socialist country. I thought the government would stand up for the people and make sure they are living in quality homes! I know I'm stirring s**t up here, but you just had to read the other posts to understand.

Eric,

I second that....where's the "Webmaster" when you need him????? Web..... how'd you like $8.50/gallon of gas here in the states? Must be a "hidden benefit" to not owning guns in the UK.....you give up your right to bear arms and in return, a grateful government gives you cheap gas at almost $9 a gallon.......LOL

Yes, high gas prices do hurt in the immediate future, but if the taxes on gases would be used to help alternative energies so we can become energy independent and help reduce CO2 emissions we or at least our children and grandchildren would be better off. I don't know about $8.50 per gallon, but a higher tax on gas would not be a bad thing if it could be used for those purposes and their was relief for low income and lower middle class families. The problem is that there is no guarantee that the money would be spent reasonably.

Let's get real here...at $9 a gallon, we could give FREE gas to the poor times almost ten!! Here's the rub: none of that $8 tax would find its way to any place but into some fat, bloated politicians pockets for "social engineering" projects...
 
Anton Smirnov said:
Big Eric said:
Where's Craig? He keeps saying how wonderful it is in those socialist countries overseas.

Socialism and capitalism are both bad. In one case the gov't robs you blind, in the other Bill Gates & friends do.

So you got to walk a fine line between the two.

And FYI, we have cheap gass partly because the Gov't subsidizes it about $1 a gallon (through tax breaks)

Yeah...but there's a difference: Socialism takes it in massive quantities ($9 gas), capitalism is much more economical........so, I vote for capitalism. Also, Bill Gates made his own way in the world.....nobody gave him squat but Socialism takes it from those who work the hardest and gives it to those who choose to not work as hard........so again, I vote for capitalism
 
Let's get real here...at $9 a gallon, we could give FREE gas to the poor times almost ten!! Here's the rub: none of that $8 tax would find its way to any place but into some fat, bloated politicians pockets for "social engineering" projects...
[/quote]

I don't like to pay $60 every time I fill up my truck and $40 for my car but if it makes it so my children don't have to try and live with or fix the problems that we will cause if we don't do something soon I can more than afford it.

Your right $9 a gallon is way to high but increasing it 50 cents or so could do some good. It would cause more companies to look at alternative energies. We need to stop looking at what the immeadiate affects are and start to look into the longterm affects of our decisions
 
Scottie (respectfully):

It seems to me you and your countrymen are prime candidates for doing some serious R&D into developing a low cost fuel saving masonry heater.

They can be expensive but they don't "have" to be as evidenced here:

http://www.turtlerockheat.com/gal_shop.html

I'd guess those doing serious similiar wood burning in a metal stove would go through at least twice the wood cordage I do. And I burn 3 -4 cords of seasoned hardwood per winter in northern Michigan with not much reliance on my furnace except when I skip town for a bit. Mostly my LPG goes to my range and H/W heater and I'm spending about $400./year on the stuff.

If coal is more plentiful (hard coal, hopefully) than wood and more cost effective to heat with than wood, the thought of developing a coal fired masonry heater gives me "goose bumps" and makes me want to go start a fire here 'n now...

Stay warm.

Aye,
Marty
 
Fish MT said:
Let's get real here...at $9 a gallon, we could give FREE gas to the poor times almost ten!! Here's the rub: none of that $8 tax would find its way to any place but into some fat, bloated politicians pockets for "social engineering" projects...
I don't like to pay $60 every time I fill up my truck and $40 for my car but if it makes it so my children don't have to try and live with or fix the problems that we will cause if we don't do something soon I can more than afford it.

Your right $9 a gallon is way to high but increasing it 50 cents or so could do some good. It would cause more companies to look at alternative energies. We need to stop looking at what the immeadiate affects are and start to look into the longterm affects of our decisions[/quote]

And we might even change our habits a little. In the UK, where I'm originally from (I now live in the NE of the US), people don't drive anywhere as far as we do in the US, or drive as often. Public transport is also far better and more common. You could catch a bus in any small village (pop less than 1000) in Wiltshire and get to the nearest hub town and do all that you need to do. Here that is just NOT possible. I say an extra 50 cents to go to new technologies and public transport is fine, and this coming from somebody who drives 120 miles a day to work and back (202,000 miles one the clock and still counting).
 
Fish MT said:
Let's get real here...at $9 a gallon, we could give FREE gas to the poor times almost ten!! Here's the rub: none of that $8 tax would find its way to any place but into some fat, bloated politicians pockets for "social engineering" projects...

I don't like to pay $60 every time I fill up my truck and $40 for my car but if it makes it so my children don't have to try and live with or fix the problems that we will cause if we don't do something soon I can more than afford it.

Your right $9 a gallon is way to high but increasing it 50 cents or so could do some good. It would cause more companies to look at alternative energies. We need to stop looking at what the immeadiate affects are and start to look into the longterm affects of our decisions[/quote]

I agree, but here's the rub: the pols are so corrupt, that regardless of what they tell you and me as to where the added taxes would go, they never get there.........instead, you get massive waste and corruption...... bottom line: the public has come to "accept" this and want's no part of it from the very beginning...... Also, alternative enegy will be (and is) driven by the free market.........
 
Also, alternative enegy will be (and is) driven by the free market.........

That is one of the points of a tax like this to force the market into alternative. Also I agree there is a lot of problems with politics these days, but most of it stems form big buisness and to rely on big buisness to do what is right is scarrier to me than to try and work with politics. Vote, get involved, run for office those are the only way we can change the corrupt system. I think the last election reflected this change. Not because people voted more for Dems but because they voted for moderates.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.