Various august bodies are predicting woe and carnage over the next months, and telling you what to store up in your prepper fortress.
Back in the day power backup was usually a generator, and if fancy
included a switch to cut the grid connection and connect the generator.
More recently there are various battery solutions from house batteries mainly intended for buffering solar, to inverter packs mainly intended for off grid camping.
Does anyone know what the most cost effective solution is?
I think the options are:
(1) Generator with mains cut off switch.
(2) Whole house battery with inverter (can also feed power back to the
grid in peak time and charge in cheap time).
(3) Inverter pack just to protect the freezer.
An added complication is that we can be away from home for long periods
over winter, so I think the solution needs to be automated.
Any thoughts welcome.
I have power to the shed but I'm not sure, for example, if I could safely feed power from a battery pack and inverter back up to the house.
Various august bodies are predicting woe and carnage over the next months, and telling you what to store up in your prepper fortress.
Back in the day power backup was usually a generator, and if fancy
included a switch to cut the grid connection and connect the generator.
More recently there are various battery solutions from house batteries mainly intended for buffering solar, to inverter packs mainly intended for off grid camping.
Does anyone know what the most cost effective solution is?
I really only need backup power in the shed where the chest freezer lives.
I have power to the shed but I'm not sure, for example, if I could safely feed power from a battery pack and inverter back up to the house.
[I need to check the specifications for the load it supports but that wouldn't be the same as the whole house off the grid.]
I could have a battery and inverter charging off the mains which would obviously also feed the shed, but that might be over kill.
I could have a generator but that involves a ventilated but sheltered
space, which also wouldn't annoy the neighbours.
I could have an inverter pack in the shed just to feed the freezer.
Day to day living should(!) be OK as we have a motor home on the drive
with gas and a solar panel.
I think the options are:
(1) Generator with mains cut off switch.
(2) Whole house battery with inverter (can also feed power back to the
grid in peak time and charge in cheap time).
(3) Inverter pack just to protect the freezer.
An added complication is that we can be away from home for long periods
over winter, so I think the solution needs to be automated.
Any thoughts welcome.
Cheers
Dave R
David <wibble@btinternet.com> wrote:
Various august bodies are predicting woe and carnage over the next months, >> and telling you what to store up in your prepper fortress.
Back in the day power backup was usually a generator, and if fancy
included a switch to cut the grid connection and connect the generator.
More recently there are various battery solutions from house batteries
mainly intended for buffering solar, to inverter packs mainly intended for >> off grid camping.
Does anyone know what the most cost effective solution is?
Fill up the freezer with bottles of water. The fuller it is, the longer it will keep everything frozen. Thermal mass is your friend.
Otherwise, do your know how many kWh per day your chest freezer uses? How long of an outage do you want coverage for? That gives you a kWh figure which tells you how big a battery you might need.
If you expecting to use the items in the freezer during a power cut, a
second freezer could be used to decant items you're going to use soon, to reduce the times you open the main freezer.
I think the options are:
(1) Generator with mains cut off switch.
(2) Whole house battery with inverter (can also feed power back to the
grid in peak time and charge in cheap time).
(3) Inverter pack just to protect the freezer.
(4) an EV which will allow use of the battery pack for other purposes, be it mains sockets inside, 'vehicle to load' (charger port turns into mains socket), or a direct tap off the battery (eg disconnect the battery from the car and use it as a stationary battery on wheels - old EVs like the Nissan Leaf are cheap now)
Theo
David <wibble@btinternet.com> wrote:
Various august bodies are predicting woe and carnage over the next months, >> and telling you what to store up in your prepper fortress.
Back in the day power backup was usually a generator, and if fancy
included a switch to cut the grid connection and connect the generator.
More recently there are various battery solutions from house batteries
mainly intended for buffering solar, to inverter packs mainly intended for >> off grid camping.
Does anyone know what the most cost effective solution is?
I really only need backup power in the shed where the chest freezer lives. >>
I have power to the shed but I'm not sure, for example, if I could safely >> feed power from a battery pack and inverter back up to the house.
[I need to check the specifications for the load it supports but that
wouldn't be the same as the whole house off the grid.]
I could have a battery and inverter charging off the mains which would
obviously also feed the shed, but that might be over kill.
I could have a generator but that involves a ventilated but sheltered
space, which also wouldn't annoy the neighbours.
I could have an inverter pack in the shed just to feed the freezer.
Day to day living should(!) be OK as we have a motor home on the drive
with gas and a solar panel.
I think the options are:
(1) Generator with mains cut off switch.
(2) Whole house battery with inverter (can also feed power back to the
grid in peak time and charge in cheap time).
(3) Inverter pack just to protect the freezer.
An added complication is that we can be away from home for long periods
over winter, so I think the solution needs to be automated.
Any thoughts welcome.
Dave R
DonrCOt forget to factor in the value of the freezer contents compared to the cost of all these back-up scenarios. ;-)
What is sure is that all fuel and electricity prices will be woefully
high, because Trump. And renewables
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 15:34:40 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
What is sure is that all fuel and electricity prices will be woefully
high, because Trump. And renewables
I can't really think of anyone else who has done so much to promote renewables as Trump
On 22/09/2026 18:15, Jethro wrote:
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 15:34:40 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
What is sure is that all fuel and electricity prices will be woefully
high, because Trump. And renewables
I can't really think of anyone else who has done so much to promote
renewables as Trump
'Through the windmills of his mind'.
Why does he have a 'thing' about "windmills"? - which most rational
people call "Wind generators", since precious little milling is going on.
On 22/09/2026 13:52, David wrote:
I have power to the shed but I'm not sure, for example, if I could safely
feed power from a battery pack and inverter back up to the house.
backfeeding whole house really not recommended
UPS or small petrol generator for deep freeze already unplugged from dysfunctional 'renewable' grid much better.
Current El Ni|#o is providing extremely 'unusual' weather. It might be
warm and rain all winter. 10 ft snow drifts or just cold and dry. No one
has a ***ing clue.
What is sure is that all fuel and electricity prices will be woefully
high, because Trump. And renewables
Various august bodies are predicting woe and carnage over the next
months,
and telling you what to store up in your prepper fortress.
Back in the day power backup was usually a generator, and if fancy
included a switch to cut the grid connection and connect the generator.
More recently there are various battery solutions from house batteries
mainly intended for buffering solar, to inverter packs mainly intended
for off grid camping.
Does anyone know what the most cost effective solution is?
I really only need backup power in the shed where the chest freezer
lives.
I have power to the shed but I'm not sure, for example, if I could
safely feed power from a battery pack and inverter back up to the house.
[I need to check the specifications for the load it supports but that wouldn't be the same as the whole house off the grid.]
I could have a battery and inverter charging off the mains which would obviously also feed the shed, but that might be over kill.
I could have a generator but that involves a ventilated but sheltered
space, which also wouldn't annoy the neighbours.
I could have an inverter pack in the shed just to feed the freezer.
Day to day living should(!) be OK as we have a motor home on the drive
with gas and a solar panel.
I think the options are:
(1) Generator with mains cut off switch.
(2) Whole house battery with inverter (can also feed power back to the
grid in peak time and charge in cheap time).
(3) Inverter pack just to protect the freezer.
An added complication is that we can be away from home for long periods
over winter, so I think the solution needs to be automated.
Any thoughts welcome.
David <wibble@btinternet.com> wrote:
Various august bodies are predicting woe and carnage over the next
months,
and telling you what to store up in your prepper fortress.
Back in the day power backup was usually a generator, and if fancy
included a switch to cut the grid connection and connect the generator.
More recently there are various battery solutions from house batteries
mainly intended for buffering solar, to inverter packs mainly intended
for
off grid camping.
Does anyone know what the most cost effective solution is?
Fill up the freezer with bottles of water. The fuller it is, the longer
it
will keep everything frozen. Thermal mass is your friend.
Otherwise, do your know how many kWh per day your chest freezer uses?--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
How
long of an outage do you want coverage for? That gives you a kWh figure which tells you how big a battery you might need.
If you expecting to use the items in the freezer during a power cut, a
second freezer could be used to decant items you're going to use soon, to reduce the times you open the main freezer.
I think the options are:
(1) Generator with mains cut off switch.
(2) Whole house battery with inverter (can also feed power back to the
grid in peak time and charge in cheap time).
(3) Inverter pack just to protect the freezer.
(4) an EV which will allow use of the battery pack for other purposes,
be it
mains sockets inside, 'vehicle to load' (charger port turns into mains socket), or a direct tap off the battery (eg disconnect the battery from the
car and use it as a stationary battery on wheels - old EVs like the
Nissan
Leaf are cheap now)
Theo
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 12:52:26 +0000, David wrote:
Various august bodies are predicting woe and carnage over the next
months,
and telling you what to store up in your prepper fortress.
Back in the day power backup was usually a generator, and if fancy
included a switch to cut the grid connection and connect the generator.
More recently there are various battery solutions from house batteries
mainly intended for buffering solar, to inverter packs mainly intended
for off grid camping.
Does anyone know what the most cost effective solution is?
I really only need backup power in the shed where the chest freezer
lives.
I have power to the shed but I'm not sure, for example, if I could
safely feed power from a battery pack and inverter back up to the house.
[I need to check the specifications for the load it supports but that
wouldn't be the same as the whole house off the grid.]
I could have a battery and inverter charging off the mains which would
obviously also feed the shed, but that might be over kill.
I could have a generator but that involves a ventilated but sheltered
space, which also wouldn't annoy the neighbours.
I could have an inverter pack in the shed just to feed the freezer.
Day to day living should(!) be OK as we have a motor home on the drive
with gas and a solar panel.
I think the options are:
(1) Generator with mains cut off switch.
(2) Whole house battery with inverter (can also feed power back to the
grid in peak time and charge in cheap time).
(3) Inverter pack just to protect the freezer.
An added complication is that we can be away from home for long periods
over winter, so I think the solution needs to be automated.
Any thoughts welcome.
Bit of a tangernt but I'd suggest putting up a few PIR nigh5lights - especially near stairs - in case there's a power cut at night.
On 22 Sep 2026 at 19:02:49 BST, "Sam Plusnet" <not@home.com> wrote:
On 22/09/2026 18:15, Jethro wrote:
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 15:34:40 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
What is sure is that all fuel and electricity prices will be woefully
high, because Trump. And renewables
I can't really think of anyone else who has done so much to promote
renewables as Trump
'Through the windmills of his mind'.
Why does he have a 'thing' about "windmills"? - which most rational
people call "Wind generators", since precious little milling is going on.
But not a very great deal of generation either inland in this country considering their cost, and other disadvantages.
David wrote:
An added complication is that we can be away from home for long periods
over winter, so I think the solution needs to be automated.
Any thoughts welcome.
How long a period without power do you wish to prepare for?
Andy Burns wrote:A full chest freezer (left unopened) should survive 48 hours without
David wrote:
An added complication is that we can be away from home for long periods
over winter, so I think the solution needs to be automated.
Any thoughts welcome.
How long a period without power do you wish to prepare for?
Good question.
If we are being told to stock up on non-perishable items like tins of fish
I would assume long outages.
Unless transport of food is expected to be the main issue.
48 hours at a time might be a sensible starting point.
On 22 Sep 2026 at 20:17:33 BST, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 22 Sep 2026 at 19:02:49 BST, "Sam Plusnet" <not@home.com> wrote:
On 22/09/2026 18:15, Jethro wrote:But not a very great deal of generation either inland in this country
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 15:34:40 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
What is sure is that all fuel and electricity prices will be woefully >>>>> high, because Trump. And renewables
I can't really think of anyone else who has done so much to promote
renewables as Trump
'Through the windmills of his mind'.
Why does he have a 'thing' about "windmills"? - which most rational
people call "Wind generators", since precious little milling is going on. >>
considering their cost, and other disadvantages.
Well, offshore contributes about 62% of wind's share of renewables generation,
versus 38% for onshore - for a similar on paper capacity.
So, in absolute terms, inland wind generated a fair chunk of the overall 30% contribution towards UK electricity generation.
You'd have to spell out costs and 'other disadvantages' as it's all relative. Energy from any source isn't exactly cheap right now. And each has downsides.
I'd say, overall, it's a pretty good deal likely to get better when/if we get increased storage and decent grid upgrades.
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 15:34:40 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
What is sure is that all fuel and electricity prices will be woefully
high, because Trump. And renewables
I can't really think of anyone else who has done so much to promote renewables as Trump
Why does he have a 'thing' about "windmills"? - which most rational
people call "Wind generators", since precious little milling is going on.
You'd have to spell out costs and 'other disadvantages' as it's all relative. Energy from any source isn't exactly cheap right now. And each has downsides.
Greens, eh? CanrCOt see the wood for the trees.
Equip the family with USB charged headlights - they are fairly cheap and last a decent length of time on a charge.-a They guarantee lighting+1
wherever they need it, not just on stairs.
RJH <patchmoney@gmx.com> wrote:
On 22 Sep 2026 at 20:17:33 BST, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 22 Sep 2026 at 19:02:49 BST, "Sam Plusnet" <not@home.com> wrote:
On 22/09/2026 18:15, Jethro wrote:But not a very great deal of generation either inland in this country
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 15:34:40 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
What is sure is that all fuel and electricity prices will be woefully >>>>>> high, because Trump. And renewables
I can't really think of anyone else who has done so much to promote
renewables as Trump
'Through the windmills of his mind'.
Why does he have a 'thing' about "windmills"? - which most rational
people call "Wind generators", since precious little milling is going on. >>>
considering their cost, and other disadvantages.
Well, offshore contributes about 62% of wind's share of renewables generation,
versus 38% for onshore - for a similar on paper capacity.
So, in absolute terms, inland wind generated a fair chunk of the overall 30% >> contribution towards UK electricity generation.
The problem of renewables is intermittency, which means conventional power sources for backup.
On 23/09/2026 06:37, RJH wrote:
You'd have to spell out costs and 'other disadvantages' as it's all relative.
Energy from any source isn't exactly cheap right now. And each has downsides.
We have spelled it out time and again , but people simply refuse to listen. WE now realise that renewable energy is not based on logic or cost
benefit accounting or accounting for overall social and environmental
costs,. but is based on narrow self interest, virtue signalling and a religious devotion to imaginary concepts amongst a group of people who
are too egotistical to admit when they have been lied to,
Like flat earthers, it is an article of faith.
Ergo we move forward by simply leaving such people stuck in their
bubbles of imagination and faith, and try to get as much nuclear power installed as ossible
On 22/09/2026 21:06, Jethro wrote:
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 12:52:26 +0000, David wrote:
Various august bodies are predicting woe and carnage over the nextBit of a tangernt but I'd suggest putting up a few PIR nigh5lights -
months,
and telling you what to store up in your prepper fortress.
Back in the day power backup was usually a generator, and if fancy
included a switch to cut the grid connection and connect the
generator.
More recently there are various battery solutions from house batteries
mainly intended for buffering solar, to inverter packs mainly intended
for off grid camping.
Does anyone know what the most cost effective solution is?
I really only need backup power in the shed where the chest freezer
lives.
I have power to the shed but I'm not sure, for example, if I could
safely feed power from a battery pack and inverter back up to the
house.
[I need to check the specifications for the load it supports but that
wouldn't be the same as the whole house off the grid.]
I could have a battery and inverter charging off the mains which would
obviously also feed the shed, but that might be over kill.
I could have a generator but that involves a ventilated but sheltered
space, which also wouldn't annoy the neighbours.
I could have an inverter pack in the shed just to feed the freezer.
Day to day living should(!) be OK as we have a motor home on the drive
with gas and a solar panel.
I think the options are:
(1) Generator with mains cut off switch.
(2) Whole house battery with inverter (can also feed power back to the
grid in peak time and charge in cheap time).
(3) Inverter pack just to protect the freezer.
An added complication is that we can be away from home for long
periods over winter, so I think the solution needs to be automated.
Any thoughts welcome.
especially near stairs - in case there's a power cut at night.
Equip the family with USB charged headlights - they are fairly cheap and
last a decent length of time on a charge. They guarantee lighting
wherever they need it, not just on stairs.
On 22 Sep 2026 at 20:17:33 BST, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 22 Sep 2026 at 19:02:49 BST, "Sam Plusnet" <not@home.com> wrote:
On 22/09/2026 18:15, Jethro wrote:But not a very great deal of generation either inland in this country
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 15:34:40 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
What is sure is that all fuel and electricity prices will be woefully >>>>> high, because Trump. And renewables
I can't really think of anyone else who has done so much to promote
renewables as Trump
'Through the windmills of his mind'.
Why does he have a 'thing' about "windmills"? - which most rational
people call "Wind generators", since precious little milling is going on. >>
considering their cost, and other disadvantages.
Well, offshore contributes about 62% of wind's share of renewables generation,
versus 38% for onshore - for a similar on paper capacity.
So, in absolute terms, inland wind generated a fair chunk of the overall 30% contribution towards UK electricity generation.
You'd have to spell out costs and 'other disadvantages' as it's all relative. Energy from any source isn't exactly cheap right now. And each has downsides.
I'd say, overall, it's a pretty good deal likely to get better when/if we get increased storage and decent grid upgrades.
The problem of renewables is intermittency, which means conventional power >> sources for backup.I know. And if I know, it's a fair bet everyone else knows and they're working
towards a solution.
On 23 Sep 2026 at 09:37:52 BST, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 23/09/2026 06:37, RJH wrote:
You'd have to spell out costs and 'other disadvantages' as it's all relative.
Energy from any source isn't exactly cheap right now. And each has downsides.
We have spelled it out time and again , but people simply refuse to listen. >> WE now realise that renewable energy is not based on logic or cost
benefit accounting or accounting for overall social and environmental
costs,. but is based on narrow self interest, virtue signalling and a
religious devotion to imaginary concepts amongst a group of people who
are too egotistical to admit when they have been lied to,
Like flat earthers, it is an article of faith.
Ergo we move forward by simply leaving such people stuck in their
bubbles of imagination and faith, and try to get as much nuclear power
installed as ossible
And so you keep spelling out. With no substantiation. And against established research, facts, science.
Ergo, in all likelihood false.
QED :-)
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 23:50:59 +0100, Sam Plusnet wrote:
On 22/09/2026 21:06, Jethro wrote:
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 12:52:26 +0000, David wrote:
Various august bodies are predicting woe and carnage over the nextBit of a tangernt but I'd suggest putting up a few PIR nigh5lights -
months,
and telling you what to store up in your prepper fortress.
Back in the day power backup was usually a generator, and if fancy
included a switch to cut the grid connection and connect the
generator.
More recently there are various battery solutions from house batteries >>>> mainly intended for buffering solar, to inverter packs mainly intended >>>> for off grid camping.
Does anyone know what the most cost effective solution is?
I really only need backup power in the shed where the chest freezer
lives.
I have power to the shed but I'm not sure, for example, if I could
safely feed power from a battery pack and inverter back up to the
house.
[I need to check the specifications for the load it supports but that
wouldn't be the same as the whole house off the grid.]
I could have a battery and inverter charging off the mains which would >>>> obviously also feed the shed, but that might be over kill.
I could have a generator but that involves a ventilated but sheltered
space, which also wouldn't annoy the neighbours.
I could have an inverter pack in the shed just to feed the freezer.
Day to day living should(!) be OK as we have a motor home on the drive >>>> with gas and a solar panel.
I think the options are:
(1) Generator with mains cut off switch.
(2) Whole house battery with inverter (can also feed power back to the >>>> grid in peak time and charge in cheap time).
(3) Inverter pack just to protect the freezer.
An added complication is that we can be away from home for long
periods over winter, so I think the solution needs to be automated.
Any thoughts welcome.
especially near stairs - in case there's a power cut at night.
Equip the family with USB charged headlights - they are fairly cheap and
last a decent length of time on a charge. They guarantee lighting
wherever they need it, not just on stairs.
While that's true, they won't just cut in automatically if the power goes
mid step. Unless you wear them 24/7. I imagine some folk do.
We live in a bungalow, so that's less of a worry. But we have had the
power go at night and been grateful for the immediate light from the
motion activated nightlight.
On 23 Sep 2026 at 06:37:22 BST, "RJH" <patchmoney@gmx.com> wrote:
On 22 Sep 2026 at 20:17:33 BST, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 22 Sep 2026 at 19:02:49 BST, "Sam Plusnet" <not@home.com> wrote:
On 22/09/2026 18:15, Jethro wrote:But not a very great deal of generation either inland in this country
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 15:34:40 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
What is sure is that all fuel and electricity prices will be woefully >>>>>> high, because Trump. And renewables
I can't really think of anyone else who has done so much to promote
renewables as Trump
'Through the windmills of his mind'.
Why does he have a 'thing' about "windmills"? - which most rational
people call "Wind generators", since precious little milling is going on. >>>
considering their cost, and other disadvantages.
Well, offshore contributes about 62% of wind's share of renewables generation,
versus 38% for onshore - for a similar on paper capacity.
So, in absolute terms, inland wind generated a fair chunk of the overall 30% >> contribution towards UK electricity generation.
You'd have to spell out costs and 'other disadvantages' as it's all relative.
Energy from any source isn't exactly cheap right now. And each has downsides.
I'd say, overall, it's a pretty good deal likely to get better when/if we get
increased storage and decent grid upgrades.
If we are waiting for a miracle new battery technology why don't we wait for fusion power instead, and miss out the windmills?
On 23 Sep 2026 at 06:37:22 BST, "RJH" <patchmoney@gmx.com> wrote:
On 22 Sep 2026 at 20:17:33 BST, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 22 Sep 2026 at 19:02:49 BST, "Sam Plusnet" <not@home.com> wrote:
On 22/09/2026 18:15, Jethro wrote:
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 15:34:40 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
What is sure is that all fuel and electricity prices will be
woefully high, because Trump. And renewables
I can't really think of anyone else who has done so much to promote
renewables as Trump
'Through the windmills of his mind'.
Why does he have a 'thing' about "windmills"? - which most rational
people call "Wind generators", since precious little milling is going
on.
But not a very great deal of generation either inland in this country
considering their cost, and other disadvantages.
Well, offshore contributes about 62% of wind's share of renewables
generation,
versus 38% for onshore - for a similar on paper capacity.
So, in absolute terms, inland wind generated a fair chunk of the
overall 30% contribution towards UK electricity generation.
You'd have to spell out costs and 'other disadvantages' as it's all
relative. Energy from any source isn't exactly cheap right now. And
each has downsides.
I'd say, overall, it's a pretty good deal likely to get better when/if
we get increased storage and decent grid upgrades.
If we are waiting for a miracle new battery technology why don't we wait
for fusion power instead, and miss out the windmills?
On 23/09/2026 10:06, Jethro wrote:
[quoted text muted]
I have a torch by the bed. But I can negotiate my house with the lights
out. Like i've lived there long enough.
If we are waiting for a miracle new battery technology why don't we
wait for fusion power instead, and miss out the windmills?
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 12:52:26 +0000, David wrote:
Various august bodies are predicting woe and carnage over the next
months,
and telling you what to store up in your prepper fortress.
Back in the day power backup was usually a generator, and if fancy
included a switch to cut the grid connection and connect the generator.
More recently there are various battery solutions from house batteries
mainly intended for buffering solar, to inverter packs mainly intended
for off grid camping.
Does anyone know what the most cost effective solution is?
I really only need backup power in the shed where the chest freezer
lives.
I have power to the shed but I'm not sure, for example, if I could
safely feed power from a battery pack and inverter back up to the house.
[I need to check the specifications for the load it supports but that
wouldn't be the same as the whole house off the grid.]
I could have a battery and inverter charging off the mains which would
obviously also feed the shed, but that might be over kill.
I could have a generator but that involves a ventilated but sheltered
space, which also wouldn't annoy the neighbours.
I could have an inverter pack in the shed just to feed the freezer.
Day to day living should(!) be OK as we have a motor home on the drive
with gas and a solar panel.
I think the options are:
(1) Generator with mains cut off switch.
(2) Whole house battery with inverter (can also feed power back to the
grid in peak time and charge in cheap time).
(3) Inverter pack just to protect the freezer.
An added complication is that we can be away from home for long periods
over winter, so I think the solution needs to be automated.
Any thoughts welcome.
Bit of a tangernt but I'd suggest putting up a few PIR nigh5lights - especially near stairs - in case there's a power cut at night.
On Wed, 23 Sep 2026 10:47:52 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 23/09/2026 10:06, Jethro wrote:
[quoted text muted]
I have a torch by the bed. But I can negotiate my house with the lights
out. Like i've lived there long enough.
Somehow I can't see you remembering those words as you briefly stumble
mid step because the house suddenly went pitch black.
And the fact youy've lived there so long should remind you that you ar getting on, and - as my late mother sadly discovered - "It's the falls
that kill you". (She didn't die from a fall directly, but that broke her
hip got her stuck in hospital from where like many vulnerable folk she
did not emerge alive)
On 23 Sep 2026 at 09:37:52 BST, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 23/09/2026 06:37, RJH wrote:
You'd have to spell out costs and 'other disadvantages' as it's all relative.
Energy from any source isn't exactly cheap right now. And each has downsides.
We have spelled it out time and again , but people simply refuse to listen. >> WE now realise that renewable energy is not based on logic or cost
benefit accounting or accounting for overall social and environmental
costs,. but is based on narrow self interest, virtue signalling and a
religious devotion to imaginary concepts amongst a group of people who
are too egotistical to admit when they have been lied to,
Like flat earthers, it is an article of faith.
Ergo we move forward by simply leaving such people stuck in their
bubbles of imagination and faith, and try to get as much nuclear power
installed as ossible
And so you keep spelling out. With no substantiation. And against established research, facts, science.
Ergo, in all likelihood false.
QED :-)
Stuff moves on, and only a minority of scientists followed the CO2
narrative largely because their position and/or funding depended on it.
On 23/09/2026 14:22, Spike wrote:
Stuff moves on, and only a minority of scientists followed the CO2
narrative largely because their position and/or funding depended on it.
Furthermore. commercial business leapt on a most convenient lie in order
to sell government funded snake oil to a gullible public.
The level of corruption is Russian like. Only the EU could have done it
We already have fission reactors. Perfectly good and cheaper overall by far than windmills.
BUT only a few firms can build them,
so the rest paid the EU to impose a 'renewable obligation'
It's all corruption. at the deepest level
German greens + PR means no more nukes so Siemens has a quiet word with Merkel, and the EU, sponsors the Tory party and hey presto, its wall to
wall whirligigs.
On Wed, 23 Sep 2026 09:40:58 +0000, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 23 Sep 2026 at 06:37:22 BST, "RJH" <patchmoney@gmx.com> wrote:
On 22 Sep 2026 at 20:17:33 BST, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 22 Sep 2026 at 19:02:49 BST, "Sam Plusnet" <not@home.com> wrote:
On 22/09/2026 18:15, Jethro wrote:
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 15:34:40 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>>>>>
What is sure is that all fuel and electricity prices will be
woefully high, because Trump. And renewables
I can't really think of anyone else who has done so much to promote >>>>>> renewables as Trump
'Through the windmills of his mind'.
Why does he have a 'thing' about "windmills"? - which most rational
people call "Wind generators", since precious little milling is going >>>>> on.
But not a very great deal of generation either inland in this country
considering their cost, and other disadvantages.
Well, offshore contributes about 62% of wind's share of renewables
generation,
versus 38% for onshore - for a similar on paper capacity.
So, in absolute terms, inland wind generated a fair chunk of the
overall 30% contribution towards UK electricity generation.
You'd have to spell out costs and 'other disadvantages' as it's all
relative. Energy from any source isn't exactly cheap right now. And
each has downsides.
I'd say, overall, it's a pretty good deal likely to get better when/if
we get increased storage and decent grid upgrades.
If we are waiting for a miracle new battery technology why don't we wait
for fusion power instead, and miss out the windmills?
Don't let perfection be the enemy of progress
On 23 Sep 2026 09:40:58 GMT
Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
If we are waiting for a miracle new battery technology why don't we
wait for fusion power instead, and miss out the windmills?
Because practical fusion power is not even vapourware yet. There's no delivery date, no delivery *century* offered.
Yes, they can strike sparks. In fact, the only SF (as opposed to--
fantasy) fusion power I've seen described was a pulse device, with heatsinking to smooth out the thermal power delivered to a steam
turbine. That might be practical, if it becomes possible to contain a useful-sized fusion pulse. Hell of a lot of RF interference, though.
On 23/09/2026 10:06, RJH wrote:
On 23 Sep 2026 at 09:37:52 BST, The Natural Philosopher wrote:Sigh. I am the qualaified engineer and scientist in charge of facts. I
On 23/09/2026 06:37, RJH wrote:
You'd have to spell out costs and 'other disadvantages' as it's all relative.
Energy from any source isn't exactly cheap right now. And each has downsides.
We have spelled it out time and again , but people simply refuse to listen. >>> WE now realise that renewable energy is not based on logic or cost
benefit accounting or accounting for overall social and environmental
costs,. but is based on narrow self interest, virtue signalling and a
religious devotion to imaginary concepts amongst a group of people who
are too egotistical to admit when they have been lied to,
Like flat earthers, it is an article of faith.
Ergo we move forward by simply leaving such people stuck in their
bubbles of imagination and faith, and try to get as much nuclear power
installed as ossible
And so you keep spelling out. With no substantiation. And against established
research, facts, science.
am te #expert' you should be believing. I am not trying to sell you
anything.
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 23/09/2026 14:22, Spike wrote:
Stuff moves on, and only a minority of scientists followed the CO2
narrative largely because their position and/or funding depended on it.
Furthermore. commercial business leapt on a most convenient lie in order
to sell government funded snake oil to a gullible public.
Oh, quite so - but RJH was waving the rCOfollow the science!rCO flag, so thatrCOs
what I responded to.
Touching, really, as he doesnrCOt seem to understand the science, but expects others to.
The level of corruption is Russian like. Only the EU could have done it
Certainly. And they walk among us, those who would have us rejoinrCa
On 23/09/2026 10:54, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
We already have fission reactors. Perfectly good and cheaper overall
by far than windmills.
BUT only a few firms can build them,
-aOne of which is Siemens.
so the rest paid the EU to impose a 'renewable obligation'
It's all corruption. at the deepest level
German greens + PR means no more nukes so Siemens has a quiet word
with Merkel, and the EU, sponsors the Tory party and hey presto, its
wall to wall whirligigs.
Nor, indeed, let reality be the enemy of progress?If we are waiting for a miracle new battery technology why don't we wait >>> for fusion power instead, and miss out the windmills?Don't let perfection be the enemy of progress
On 23 Sep 2026 at 11:22:18 BST, "Joe" <joe@jretrading.com> wrote:
On 23 Sep 2026 09:40:58 GMT
Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
If we are waiting for a miracle new battery technology why don't we
wait for fusion power instead, and miss out the windmills?
Because practical fusion power is not even vapourware yet. There's no
delivery date, no delivery *century* offered.
I think my point was that the same applies to affordable batteries on the scale needed.
On 23 Sep 2026 at 10:45:38 BST, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 23/09/2026 10:06, RJH wrote:
On 23 Sep 2026 at 09:37:52 BST, The Natural Philosopher wrote:Sigh. I am the qualaified engineer and scientist in charge of facts. I
On 23/09/2026 06:37, RJH wrote:
You'd have to spell out costs and 'other disadvantages' as it's all relative.
Energy from any source isn't exactly cheap right now. And each has downsides.
We have spelled it out time and again , but people simply refuse to listen.
WE now realise that renewable energy is not based on logic or cost
benefit accounting or accounting for overall social and environmental
costs,. but is based on narrow self interest, virtue signalling and a
religious devotion to imaginary concepts amongst a group of people who >>>> are too egotistical to admit when they have been lied to,
Like flat earthers, it is an article of faith.
Ergo we move forward by simply leaving such people stuck in their
bubbles of imagination and faith, and try to get as much nuclear power >>>> installed as ossible
And so you keep spelling out. With no substantiation. And against established
research, facts, science.
am te #expert' you should be believing. I am not trying to sell you
anything.
I don't think you are a climate scientist (like Spike)? But I am being a little unfair - you have at least taken the trouble to set out your thoughts:
http://www.templar.co.uk/downloads/Renewable%20Energy%20Limitations.pdf
Do you still stand by that document?
On Wed, 23 Sep 2026 09:40:58 +0000, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 23 Sep 2026 at 06:37:22 BST, "RJH" <patchmoney@gmx.com> wrote:
On 22 Sep 2026 at 20:17:33 BST, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 22 Sep 2026 at 19:02:49 BST, "Sam Plusnet" <not@home.com> wrote:
On 22/09/2026 18:15, Jethro wrote:
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 15:34:40 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>>>>>
What is sure is that all fuel and electricity prices will be
woefully high, because Trump. And renewables
I can't really think of anyone else who has done so much to promote >>>>>> renewables as Trump
'Through the windmills of his mind'.
Why does he have a 'thing' about "windmills"? - which most rational
people call "Wind generators", since precious little milling is going >>>>> on.
But not a very great deal of generation either inland in this country
considering their cost, and other disadvantages.
Well, offshore contributes about 62% of wind's share of renewables
generation,
versus 38% for onshore - for a similar on paper capacity.
So, in absolute terms, inland wind generated a fair chunk of the
overall 30% contribution towards UK electricity generation.
You'd have to spell out costs and 'other disadvantages' as it's all
relative. Energy from any source isn't exactly cheap right now. And
each has downsides.
I'd say, overall, it's a pretty good deal likely to get better when/if
we get increased storage and decent grid upgrades.
If we are waiting for a miracle new battery technology why don't we wait
for fusion power instead, and miss out the windmills?
Don't let perfection be the enemy of progress
On 24/09/2026 09:33, RJH wrote:
On 23 Sep 2026 at 10:45:38 BST, The Natural Philosopher wrote:Broadly yes.
On 23/09/2026 10:06, RJH wrote:
On 23 Sep 2026 at 09:37:52 BST, The Natural Philosopher wrote:Sigh. I am the qualaified engineer and scientist in charge of facts. I
On 23/09/2026 06:37, RJH wrote:
You'd have to spell out costs and 'other disadvantages' as it's all relative.
Energy from any source isn't exactly cheap right now. And each has downsides.
We have spelled it out time and again , but people simply refuse to listen.
WE now realise that renewable energy is not based on logic or cost
benefit accounting or accounting for overall social and environmental >>>>> costs,. but is based on narrow self interest, virtue signalling and a >>>>> religious devotion to imaginary concepts amongst a group of people who >>>>> are too egotistical to admit when they have been lied to,
Like flat earthers, it is an article of faith.
Ergo we move forward by simply leaving such people stuck in their
bubbles of imagination and faith, and try to get as much nuclear power >>>>> installed as ossible
And so you keep spelling out. With no substantiation. And against established
research, facts, science.
am te #expert' you should be believing. I am not trying to sell you
anything.
I don't think you are a climate scientist (like Spike)? But I am being a
little unfair - you have at least taken the trouble to set out your thoughts:
http://www.templar.co.uk/downloads/Renewable%20Energy%20Limitations.pdf
Do you still stand by that document?
The costs I used are somewhat different, but the same basic principles
have not changed.
Low Energy density
Cost of deployment
Cost of decommissioning
High Environmental impact
Cost of compensating for intermittency
Versus the cost of deploying the sane alternative - nuclear power.
Note I said nothing about climate change in any depth in that.
I simply said in a TLDR sort of way 'if cheap low carbon emission
energy is what you want, you won't get it with intermittent renewables
and ultimately nuclear power is a far better alternative'
I haven't moved from that broad position.
On 24 Sep 2026 at 11:37:51 BST, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 24/09/2026 09:33, RJH wrote:The costs are massively inaccurate. And a good number of your principles rely on cost:
On 23 Sep 2026 at 10:45:38 BST, The Natural Philosopher wrote:Broadly yes.
On 23/09/2026 10:06, RJH wrote:
On 23 Sep 2026 at 09:37:52 BST, The Natural Philosopher wrote:Sigh. I am the qualaified engineer and scientist in charge of facts. I >>>> am te #expert' you should be believing. I am not trying to sell you
On 23/09/2026 06:37, RJH wrote:
You'd have to spell out costs and 'other disadvantages' as it's all relative.
Energy from any source isn't exactly cheap right now. And each has downsides.
We have spelled it out time and again , but people simply refuse to listen.
WE now realise that renewable energy is not based on logic or cost >>>>>> benefit accounting or accounting for overall social and environmental >>>>>> costs,. but is based on narrow self interest, virtue signalling and a >>>>>> religious devotion to imaginary concepts amongst a group of people who >>>>>> are too egotistical to admit when they have been lied to,
Like flat earthers, it is an article of faith.
Ergo we move forward by simply leaving such people stuck in their
bubbles of imagination and faith, and try to get as much nuclear power >>>>>> installed as ossible
And so you keep spelling out. With no substantiation. And against established
research, facts, science.
anything.
I don't think you are a climate scientist (like Spike)? But I am being a >>> little unfair - you have at least taken the trouble to set out your thoughts:
http://www.templar.co.uk/downloads/Renewable%20Energy%20Limitations.pdf
Do you still stand by that document?
The costs I used are somewhat different, but the same basic principles
have not changed.
Low Energy density
Cost of deployment
Cost of decommissioning
High Environmental impact
Cost of compensating for intermittency
And there remains a good deal in all of that.
Versus the cost of deploying the sane alternative - nuclear power.
However sane you might think it to be - and I can agree in the round with many
of the basic principles - it hasn't happened.
Note I said nothing about climate change in any depth in that.
You have - the environmental impact of renewables.
In a sense it's not necessary to touch climate debates because nuclear addresses most of them. But of course they are central to what we're doing now. So one of your bedrock principles (anthropogenic climate change is a myth) does at least seem to inform your inflexibility.
I simply said in a TLDR sort of way 'if cheap low carbon emission
energy is what you want, you won't get it with intermittent renewables
and ultimately nuclear power is a far better alternative'
I haven't moved from that broad position.
Which is sort of fine and there are even some decent examples of a relatively successful adoption. But in the UK it's simply too expensive, takes too long, we don't have the skills, land planning, or construction infrastructure, and public opinion and political conviction is against.
You never know - SMRs might change a lot of that. But that's 15 years off. If indeed it works. And I would add that my opinion on nuclear is influenced by some extended stays in/around Whitehaven - the nuclear aftermath when it sort of works. The financial and social cost (or, rather, impact) is eye watering.
My main concern around renewables is intermittency. But I'm optimistic that the solutions - interconnection, storage, and dispatchable backup will improve. And behaviours need to change - I believe we have to stop thinking about unlimited energy whenever we want it.
And you would doubtless argue that optimism is misplaced and we should have nuclear. But we won't.
On 24/09/2026 12:35, RJH wrote:
On 24 Sep 2026 at 11:37:51 BST, The Natural Philosopher wrote:No. Te envitronmental impact of renewables has nothing to do with
On 24/09/2026 09:33, RJH wrote:The costs are massively inaccurate. And a good number of your
On 23 Sep 2026 at 10:45:38 BST, The Natural Philosopher wrote:Broadly yes.
On 23/09/2026 10:06, RJH wrote:
On 23 Sep 2026 at 09:37:52 BST, The Natural Philosopher wrote:Sigh. I am the qualaified engineer and scientist in charge of facts. I >>>>> am te #expert' you should be believing. I am not trying to sell you
On 23/09/2026 06:37, RJH wrote:
You'd have to spell out costs and 'other disadvantages' as it's >>>>>>>> all relative.
Energy from any source isn't exactly cheap right now. And each >>>>>>>> has downsides.
We have spelled it out time and again , but people simply refuse >>>>>>> to listen.
WE now realise that renewable energy is not based on logic or cost >>>>>>> benefit accounting or accounting for overall social and
environmental
costs,. but is based on narrow self interest, virtue signalling >>>>>>> and a
religious devotion to imaginary concepts amongst-a a group of
people who
are too egotistical to admit when they have been lied to,
Like flat earthers, it is an article of faith.
Ergo we move forward by simply leaving such people stuck in their >>>>>>> bubbles of imagination and faith, and try to get as much nuclear >>>>>>> power
installed as ossible
And so you keep spelling out. With no substantiation. And against >>>>>> established
research, facts, science.
anything.
I don't think you are a climate scientist (like Spike)? But I am
being a
little unfair - you have at least taken the trouble to set out your
thoughts:
http://www.templar.co.uk/downloads/Renewable%20Energy%20Limitations.pdf >>>>
Do you still stand by that document?
The costs I used are somewhat different, but the same basic principles
have not changed.
principles rely
on cost:
Low Energy density
Cost of deployment
Cost of decommissioning
High Environmental impact
Cost of compensating for intermittency
And there remains a good deal in all of that.
Versus the cost of deploying the sane alternative - nuclear power.
However sane you might think it to be - and I can agree in the round
with many
of the basic principles - it hasn't happened.
Note I said nothing about climate change in any depth in that.
You have - the environmental impact of renewables.
'climate change'
I-a meant the loss of habitat, the danger to wildlife, the pollution from BER windmills and solar panels, the access roads smashed through virgin forest, and teh cable riuns across wilderness.
In a sense it's not necessary to touch climate debates because nuclearIt is a separate issue.
addresses most of them. But of course they are central to what we're
doing
now. So one of your bedrock principles (anthropogenic climate change is a
myth) does at least seem to inform your inflexibility.
Anthropogenic climate change *as it is presented* is almost certainly a myth, but of course everything affects climate to so 'anthropogenic
climate change' is, in itself. without further qualification, a myth.
And thats the difference between a qualitative statement and one that
has real scientific falsifiability.
99% of all 'green' arguments are qualitative emotional moral and depend
on believing someone else.
The real issues - whicg are NEVER addresed are
How MUCH have humans changed the climate (Greens say 'massively'.
Eveidence does not suggest this)
Is it on balance better, or worse (Greens say inconceivably worse.
Eveidence says 'netter and worse by a small amount)
What is the cost of stopping humans from affecting it (Greens say
trivial, evidience says civilisation destroying)
What is the cost of humans adapting to it, *whatever*-a the cause?
(Greens never ask the question, because the answer is "100 times cheaper than failing to stop it")
Not one of those statements is in fact true.I simply said-a in a TLDR sort of way 'if cheap low carbon emission
energy is what you want, you won't get it with intermittent renewables
and ultimately nuclear power is a far better alternative'
I haven't moved from that broad position.
Which is sort of fine and there are even some decent examples of a
relatively
successful adoption. But in the UK it's simply too expensive, takes
too long,
we don't have the skills, land planning, or construction
infrastructure, and
public opinion and political conviction is against.
And thats all I want to say
You never know - SMRs might change a lot of that. But that's 15 yearsSMRS are 3 years off.
off. If
indeed it works. And I would add that my opinion on nuclear is
influenced by
some extended stays in/around Whitehaven - the nuclear aftermath when
it sort
of works. The financial and social cost (or, rather, impact) is eye
watering.
Whitehaven has elevated levels of radioactivity yes, but nothing
especially dangerous.
My main concern around renewables is intermittency. But I'm optimisticThe poinmyt is that all of te above is sovcially VERY ECXPENSIVE and
that
the solutions - interconnection, storage, and dispatchable backup will
improve. And behaviours need to change - I believe we have to stop
thinking
about unlimited energy whenever we want it.
nuclear is simply not. THAT expensive
And you would doubtless argue that optimism is misplaced and we shouldOh we will. That is the engineer talking, not the socialist
have
nuclear. But we won't.
We will have nuclear because nothing else works, especially for big
business and AI, and they can out bribe the 'renewable' faction by a
factor of ten-a at least and buy dozens of politicians, which is in the
end *all* it takes
"Construction of the first Magnox reactor at Calder Hall took less than
42 months (about 3.5 years) to design, construct, and commission, with building starting in 1953 and grid connection achieved in August 1956"
THAT is how fast you can build a nuke even when its the first one you
ever made, with 'no nuclear skills' at all
On 24/09/2026 12:35, RJH wrote:
On 24 Sep 2026 at 11:37:51 BST, The Natural Philosopher wrote:No. Te envitronmental impact of renewables has nothing to do with
On 24/09/2026 09:33, RJH wrote:The costs are massively inaccurate. And a good number of your
On 23 Sep 2026 at 10:45:38 BST, The Natural Philosopher wrote:Broadly yes.
On 23/09/2026 10:06, RJH wrote:
On 23 Sep 2026 at 09:37:52 BST, The Natural Philosopher wrote:Sigh. I am the qualaified engineer and scientist in charge of facts. I >>>>> am te #expert' you should be believing. I am not trying to sell you
On 23/09/2026 06:37, RJH wrote:
You'd have to spell out costs and 'other disadvantages' as it's >>>>>>>> all relative.
Energy from any source isn't exactly cheap right now. And each >>>>>>>> has downsides.
We have spelled it out time and again , but people simply refuse >>>>>>> to listen.
WE now realise that renewable energy is not based on logic or cost >>>>>>> benefit accounting or accounting for overall social and
environmental
costs,. but is based on narrow self interest, virtue signalling >>>>>>> and a
religious devotion to imaginary concepts amongst-a a group of
people who
are too egotistical to admit when they have been lied to,
Like flat earthers, it is an article of faith.
Ergo we move forward by simply leaving such people stuck in their >>>>>>> bubbles of imagination and faith, and try to get as much nuclear >>>>>>> power
installed as ossible
And so you keep spelling out. With no substantiation. And against >>>>>> established
research, facts, science.
anything.
I don't think you are a climate scientist (like Spike)? But I am
being a
little unfair - you have at least taken the trouble to set out your
thoughts:
http://www.templar.co.uk/downloads/Renewable%20Energy%20Limitations.pdf >>>>
Do you still stand by that document?
The costs I used are somewhat different, but the same basic principles
have not changed.
principles rely
on cost:
Low Energy density
Cost of deployment
Cost of decommissioning
High Environmental impact
Cost of compensating for intermittency
And there remains a good deal in all of that.
Versus the cost of deploying the sane alternative - nuclear power.
However sane you might think it to be - and I can agree in the round
with many
of the basic principles - it hasn't happened.
Note I said nothing about climate change in any depth in that.
You have - the environmental impact of renewables.
'climate change'
I-a meant the loss of habitat, the danger to wildlife, the pollution from BER windmills and solar panels, the access roads smashed through virgin forest, and teh cable riuns across wilderness.
In a sense it's not necessary to touch climate debates because nuclearIt is a separate issue.
addresses most of them. But of course they are central to what we're
doing
now. So one of your bedrock principles (anthropogenic climate change is a
myth) does at least seem to inform your inflexibility.
Anthropogenic climate change *as it is presented* is almost certainly a myth, but of course everything affects climate to so 'anthropogenic
climate change' is, in itself. without further qualification, a myth.
And thats the difference between a qualitative statement and one that
has real scientific falsifiability.
99% of all 'green' arguments are qualitative emotional moral and depend
on believing someone else.
The real issues - whicg are NEVER addresed are
How MUCH have humans changed the climate (Greens say 'massively'.
Eveidence does not suggest this)
Is it on balance better, or worse (Greens say inconceivably worse.
Eveidence says 'netter and worse by a small amount)
What is the cost of stopping humans from affecting it (Greens say
trivial, evidience says civilisation destroying)
What is the cost of humans adapting to it, *whatever*-a the cause?
(Greens never ask the question, because the answer is "100 times cheaper than failing to stop it")
Not one of those statements is in fact true.I simply said-a in a TLDR sort of way 'if cheap low carbon emission
energy is what you want, you won't get it with intermittent renewables
and ultimately nuclear power is a far better alternative'
I haven't moved from that broad position.
Which is sort of fine and there are even some decent examples of a
relatively
successful adoption. But in the UK it's simply too expensive, takes
too long,
we don't have the skills, land planning, or construction
infrastructure, and
public opinion and political conviction is against.
And thats all I want to say
You never know - SMRs might change a lot of that. But that's 15 yearsSMRS are 3 years off.
off. If
indeed it works. And I would add that my opinion on nuclear is
influenced by
some extended stays in/around Whitehaven - the nuclear aftermath when
it sort
of works. The financial and social cost (or, rather, impact) is eye
watering.
Whitehaven has elevated levels of radioactivity yes, but nothing
especially dangerous.
My main concern around renewables is intermittency. But I'm optimisticThe poinmyt is that all of te above is sovcially VERY ECXPENSIVE and
that
the solutions - interconnection, storage, and dispatchable backup will
improve. And behaviours need to change - I believe we have to stop
thinking
about unlimited energy whenever we want it.
nuclear is simply not. THAT expensive
And you would doubtless argue that optimism is misplaced and we shouldOh we will. That is the engineer talking, not the socialist
have
nuclear. But we won't.
We will have nuclear because nothing else works, especially for big
business and AI, and they can out bribe the 'renewable' faction by a
factor of ten-a at least and buy dozens of politicians, which is in the
end *all* it takes
"Construction of the first Magnox reactor at Calder Hall took less than
42 months (about 3.5 years) to design, construct, and commission, with building starting in 1953 and grid connection achieved in August 1956"
THAT is how fast you can build a nuke even when its the first one you
ever made, with 'no nuclear skills' at all
My opinion (and its just an opinion) is that when the ice caps finish melting and sea levels have risen by another 70 metres then people will still be talking about how we can stop global warming.
This planet is not going to last forever - deal with it
On 24/09/2026 09:28, Roger Hayter wrote:
Nor, indeed, let reality be the enemy of progress?If we are waiting for a miracle new battery technology why don't we wait >>>> for fusion power instead, and miss out the windmills?Don't let perfection be the enemy of progress
That makes no sense.
Reality is the *context* of progress, at least in matters technological.
So called Left wing airy fairy hand-wavey emotionally intelligent
'social ' 'progress' and exercises in pure fantasy, of course need no
grounds in reality.
The whole Woke panoply of utter idiocy demonstrates that.
But consider:
After 15 years or more of renewable deployment world wise, energy has
*never been more expensive* and *CO2 levels have never been higher*.
*Irrespective* of climate change and any pseudo moral arguments,
renewable energy has been a complete FAILURE at delivering cheap low
carbon energy to the world.
Only a fool would persist in his folly in the hopes of becoming wise,
but the penny is finally dropping. Net Zero via renewables is a
massively expensive and complete waste of fucking time. And threatens te economy of nations deploying it.
And will be completely ignored by the two largest in populations terms
and CO2 emissions, namely India and China.
Whereas if we had - say - spent the money of quick build low cost
nuclear, we could have sold that tech to them and lowered emissions as
well as *making* money...
Woke meets reality in reneable energy. People have to decide whether
they want cheap low carbon energy, or a romantic 'green' 'renewable'
future that takes us back to the middle ages in terms of population
levels, technology wealth and social conditions.
Complete with witch trials to burn Brexiteers at the stake...
On 24 Sep 2026 at 11:23:43 BST, "The Natural Philosopher" <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 24/09/2026 09:28, Roger Hayter wrote:
Nor, indeed, let reality be the enemy of progress?If we are waiting for a miracle new battery technology why don't we wait >>>>> for fusion power instead, and miss out the windmills?Don't let perfection be the enemy of progress
That makes no sense.
Reality is the *context* of progress, at least in matters technological.
So called Left wing airy fairy hand-wavey emotionally intelligent
'social ' 'progress' and exercises in pure fantasy, of course need no
grounds in reality.
The whole Woke panoply of utter idiocy demonstrates that.
But consider:
After 15 years or more of renewable deployment world wise, energy has
*never been more expensive* and *CO2 levels have never been higher*.
*Irrespective* of climate change and any pseudo moral arguments,
renewable energy has been a complete FAILURE at delivering cheap low
carbon energy to the world.
Only a fool would persist in his folly in the hopes of becoming wise,
but the penny is finally dropping. Net Zero via renewables is a
massively expensive and complete waste of fucking time. And threatens te
economy of nations deploying it.
And will be completely ignored by the two largest in populations terms
and CO2 emissions, namely India and China.
Whereas if we had - say - spent the money of quick build low cost
nuclear, we could have sold that tech to them and lowered emissions as
well as *making* money...
Woke meets reality in reneable energy. People have to decide whether
they want cheap low carbon energy, or a romantic 'green' 'renewable'
future that takes us back to the middle ages in terms of population
levels, technology wealth and social conditions.
Complete with witch trials to burn Brexiteers at the stake...
I think that is largely what I said (ignoring the EU irrelevance). Windmills are not progress.
David wrote:
Andy Burns wrote:A full chest freezer (left unopened) should survive 48 hours without
David wrote:
An added complication is that we can be away from home for long
periods over winter, so I think the solution needs to be automated.
Any thoughts welcome.
How long a period without power do you wish to prepare for?
Good question.
If we are being told to stock up on non-perishable items like tins of
fish I would assume long outages.
Unless transport of food is expected to be the main issue.
48 hours at a time might be a sensible starting point.
power (you'd probably want to eat everything and replenish soonish)
maybe 24 hours if it's half-empty?
Various august bodies are predicting woe and carnage over the next
months,
and telling you what to store up in your prepper fortress.
Back in the day power backup was usually a generator, and if fancy
included a switch to cut the grid connection and connect the generator.
More recently there are various battery solutions from house batteries
mainly intended for buffering solar, to inverter packs mainly intended
for off grid camping.
Does anyone know what the most cost effective solution is?
I really only need backup power in the shed where the chest freezer
lives.
I have power to the shed but I'm not sure, for example, if I could
safely feed power from a battery pack and inverter back up to the house.
[I need to check the specifications for the load it supports but that wouldn't be the same as the whole house off the grid.]
I could have a battery and inverter charging off the mains which would obviously also feed the shed, but that might be over kill.
I could have a generator but that involves a ventilated but sheltered
space, which also wouldn't annoy the neighbours.
I could have an inverter pack in the shed just to feed the freezer.
Day to day living should(!) be OK as we have a motor home on the drive
with gas and a solar panel.
I think the options are:
(1) Generator with mains cut off switch.
(2) Whole house battery with inverter (can also feed power back to the
grid in peak time and charge in cheap time).
(3) Inverter pack just to protect the freezer.
An added complication is that we can be away from home for long periods
over winter, so I think the solution needs to be automated.
Any thoughts welcome.
Unfortunately when I was campaigning against windmills I walked up
the chain of command. from local council to central government and
local MPS and finally to the EU.
Everybody blamed the layer above . And the buck stopped with the EU
and its ridiculous 'Renewable obligation' . I then talked to MEPs and
they said 'we don't make the decisions, we only reform them or rubber
stamp them'
And when I asked who *did* make the decisions it was a group 27
unelected bureaucrats (The European Commission) who were immune from prosecution or being sacked.
We have windmills because 27 people we can't prosecute and can't sack
and never elected were given enough bribes to tell us we had to.
And AFAIK not one of them knows *anything* about electrical
engineering, and when they wanted advice they asked Greenpeace,
Friends of the Earth and Renewable lobby groups to give them a
narrative that justified their decision as far as a gullible
Europublic were concerned.
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 12:52:26 +0000, David wrote:
Various august bodies are predicting woe and carnage over the next
months,
and telling you what to store up in your prepper fortress.
Back in the day power backup was usually a generator, and if fancy
included a switch to cut the grid connection and connect the
generator.
More recently there are various battery solutions from house
batteries mainly intended for buffering solar, to inverter packs
mainly intended for off grid camping.
Does anyone know what the most cost effective solution is?
I really only need backup power in the shed where the chest freezer
lives.
I have power to the shed but I'm not sure, for example, if I could
safely feed power from a battery pack and inverter back up to the
house. [I need to check the specifications for the load it supports
but that wouldn't be the same as the whole house off the grid.]
I could have a battery and inverter charging off the mains which
would obviously also feed the shed, but that might be over kill.
I could have a generator but that involves a ventilated but
sheltered space, which also wouldn't annoy the neighbours.
I could have an inverter pack in the shed just to feed the freezer.
Day to day living should(!) be OK as we have a motor home on the
drive with gas and a solar panel.
I think the options are:
(1) Generator with mains cut off switch.
(2) Whole house battery with inverter (can also feed power back to
the grid in peak time and charge in cheap time).
(3) Inverter pack just to protect the freezer.
An added complication is that we can be away from home for long
periods over winter, so I think the solution needs to be automated.
Any thoughts welcome.
Sadly, as usual, most of the discussion does not even marginally
address the question asked.
How about thoughts on battery backup for the whole house without
buying an electric car?
How about thoughts on battery backup for the whole house without buying an electric car?When I moved onto an EV tariff, I worked out that if I could get a 6 kWh battery, capable of supplying 3kW, that could charge during the cheap
On Thu, 24 Sep 2026 14:43:10 +0100
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
Unfortunately when I was campaigning against windmills I walked up
the chain of command. from local council to central government and
local MPS and finally to the EU.
Everybody blamed the layer above . And the buck stopped with the EU
and its ridiculous 'Renewable obligation' . I then talked to MEPs and
they said 'we don't make the decisions, we only reform them or rubber
stamp them'
And when I asked who *did* make the decisions it was a group 27
unelected bureaucrats (The European Commission) who were immune from
prosecution or being sacked.
They can be sacked, but only in toto, not individually. It's the only
actual power the European Parliament has. I believe this was the only
time it came close to happening:
"The Commission was subjected to a motion of censure over allegations
of fraud in January 1999, but Members of the European Parliament (MEPs)
voted against dismissing the entire body of Commissioners."
https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/RP99-32/RP99-32.pdf
We have windmills because 27 people we can't prosecute and can't sack
and never elected were given enough bribes to tell us we had to.
And AFAIK not one of them knows *anything* about electrical
engineering, and when they wanted advice they asked Greenpeace,
Friends of the Earth and Renewable lobby groups to give them a
narrative that justified their decision as far as a gullible
Europublic were concerned.
They're all has-been politicians, given a worthless high-paying job
by,,, well, nobody knows. Neil Kinnock, Chris Patten and inevitably,
Peter Mandelson are some of the illustrious former UK Commissioners.
Roy Jenkins was a President.
On 24 Sep 2026 16:19:06 GMT
David <wibble@btinternet.com> wrote:
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 12:52:26 +0000, David wrote:
Various august bodies are predicting woe and carnage over the next
months,
and telling you what to store up in your prepper fortress.
Back in the day power backup was usually a generator, and if fancy
included a switch to cut the grid connection and connect the
generator.
More recently there are various battery solutions from house
batteries mainly intended for buffering solar, to inverter packs
mainly intended for off grid camping.
Does anyone know what the most cost effective solution is?
I really only need backup power in the shed where the chest freezer
lives.
I have power to the shed but I'm not sure, for example, if I could
safely feed power from a battery pack and inverter back up to the
house. [I need to check the specifications for the load it supports
but that wouldn't be the same as the whole house off the grid.]
I could have a battery and inverter charging off the mains which
would obviously also feed the shed, but that might be over kill.
I could have a generator but that involves a ventilated but
sheltered space, which also wouldn't annoy the neighbours.
I could have an inverter pack in the shed just to feed the freezer.
Day to day living should(!) be OK as we have a motor home on the
drive with gas and a solar panel.
I think the options are:
(1) Generator with mains cut off switch.
(2) Whole house battery with inverter (can also feed power back to
the grid in peak time and charge in cheap time).
(3) Inverter pack just to protect the freezer.
An added complication is that we can be away from home for long
periods over winter, so I think the solution needs to be automated.
Any thoughts welcome.
Sadly, as usual, most of the discussion does not even marginally
address the question asked.
How about thoughts on battery backup for the whole house without
buying an electric car?
As always, the counter-question is: 'how much power, and for how long?'
Are we talking a few hours or a few days? I think we can forget a few
weeks.
David wrote:
How about thoughts on battery backup for the whole house withoutWhen I moved onto an EV tariff, I worked out that if I could get a 6 kWh battery, capable of supplying 3kW, that could charge during the cheap
buying an
electric car?
period and supply the vast majority of my usage in the peak period, and
I could not bother replacing my UPS batteries.
Then it became clear the UK plugin solar scheme wouldn't allow batteries
at all, and even if they do allow them by 2028 or 2029, it'll likely
only allow 0.8 kW
Also the worry is that cheap time-of-use tariffs might disappear before
it had paid itself off ...
On Wed, 23 Sep 2026 09:05:24 +0100, Andy Burns wrote:
David wrote:
Andy Burns wrote:A full chest freezer (left unopened) should survive 48 hours without
David wrote:
An added complication is that we can be away from home for long
periods over winter, so I think the solution needs to be automated.
Any thoughts welcome.
How long a period without power do you wish to prepare for?
Good question.
If we are being told to stock up on non-perishable items like tins of
fish I would assume long outages.
Unless transport of food is expected to be the main issue.
48 hours at a time might be a sensible starting point.
power (you'd probably want to eat everything and replenish soonish)
maybe 24 hours if it's half-empty?
Unless, of course, if you ant to open the lid to get at the food because
you are hungry. :-)
On 23/09/2026 10:59, Jethro wrote:
On Wed, 23 Sep 2026 09:40:58 +0000, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 23 Sep 2026 at 06:37:22 BST, "RJH" <patchmoney@gmx.com> wrote:
On 22 Sep 2026 at 20:17:33 BST, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 22 Sep 2026 at 19:02:49 BST, "Sam Plusnet" <not@home.com> wrote:
On 22/09/2026 18:15, Jethro wrote:
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 15:34:40 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>>>>>>
What is sure is that all fuel and electricity prices will be
woefully high, because Trump. And renewables
I can't really think of anyone else who has done so much to
promote renewables as Trump
'Through the windmills of his mind'.
Why does he have a 'thing' about "windmills"? - which most rational >>>>>> people call "Wind generators", since precious little milling is
going on.
But not a very great deal of generation either inland in this
country considering their cost, and other disadvantages.
Well, offshore contributes about 62% of wind's share of renewables
generation,
versus 38% for onshore - for a similar on paper capacity.
So, in absolute terms, inland wind generated a fair chunk of the
overall 30% contribution towards UK electricity generation.
You'd have to spell out costs and 'other disadvantages' as it's all
relative. Energy from any source isn't exactly cheap right now. And
each has downsides.
I'd say, overall, it's a pretty good deal likely to get better
when/if we get increased storage and decent grid upgrades.
If we are waiting for a miracle new battery technology why don't we
wait for fusion power instead, and miss out the windmills?
Don't let perfection be the enemy of progress
If you think windmills are progress, gawd help you...
On Thu, 24 Sep 2026 11:54:52 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 23/09/2026 10:59, Jethro wrote:
Don't let perfection be the enemy of progress
If you think windmills are progress, gawd help you...
I imagine you would have preferred Henry Ford made faster horses ?
On 23/09/2026 09:05, Spike wrote:Do feel free to provide some evidence. I know you won't/can't.
Greens, eh? CanrCOt see the wood for the trees.
Greens are paid by fossil companies to ensure that renewables not
nuclear are deployed, because with renewables you still depend on fossil fuel. And you can charge more for it.
Sadly, as usual, most of the discussion does not even marginally address
the question asked.
How about thoughts on battery backup for the whole house without buying an electric car?
David <wibble@btinternet.com> wrote:
Sadly, as usual, most of the discussion does not even marginally address
the question asked.
How about thoughts on battery backup for the whole house without buying an >> electric car?
I think you'll need to provide some details before we can make much
progress. If you don't have the details, you should gather them before deciding how to proceed..
Now you've reframed it as a whole house question:
1. For a house battery, what does your daily consumption look like? How much seasonal variation?
2. Do you want full coverage or are you prepared to load-shed non essential loads? What's the baseline after shedding?
3. How long an outage do you want cover for?
4. If load shedding, how are you going to wire them or control the shedding? 5. What kind of instantaneous power do you need? Don't forget motor/compressor spinup can take a lot more than running power.
6. Are you going to use it to arbitrage power, either your own consumption, storing your own solar or selling back to the grid?
7. How long do you want charging to take, eg to use tariffs with short cheap rates?
There are lots of options and it helps to refine what you need.--
Theo
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 12:52:26 +0000, David wrote:
Sadly, as usual, most of the discussion does not even marginally address
the question asked.
How about thoughts on battery backup for the whole house without buying an electric car?
Cheers
Dave R
On 25/09/2026 12:22, Jethro wrote:
On Thu, 24 Sep 2026 11:54:52 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 23/09/2026 10:59, Jethro wrote:
Don't let perfection be the enemy of progress
If you think windmills are progress, gawd help you...
I imagine you would have preferred Henry Ford made faster horses ?
No. He was smarter than going back to 2000 year old failed technology,
like windmills...or horses.
And cars succeeded because overall they were cleaner safer and more
efficient than horses. They didn;t need massive subsidies to succeed
On 24/09/2026 18:08, Joe wrote:
On 24 Sep 2026 16:19:06 GMT David <wibble@btinternet.com> wrote:You probably need an average of 1kW to be safe. And at least 10kW max.
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 12:52:26 +0000, David wrote:As always, the counter-question is: 'how much power, and for how long?'
Various august bodies are predicting woe and carnage over the next
months,
and telling you what to store up in your prepper fortress.
Back in the day power backup was usually a generator, and if fancy
included a switch to cut the grid connection and connect the
generator.
More recently there are various battery solutions from house
batteries mainly intended for buffering solar, to inverter packs
mainly intended for off grid camping.
Does anyone know what the most cost effective solution is?
I really only need backup power in the shed where the chest freezer
lives.
I have power to the shed but I'm not sure, for example, if I could
safely feed power from a battery pack and inverter back up to the
house. [I need to check the specifications for the load it supports
but that wouldn't be the same as the whole house off the grid.]
I could have a battery and inverter charging off the mains which
would obviously also feed the shed, but that might be over kill.
I could have a generator but that involves a ventilated but sheltered
space, which also wouldn't annoy the neighbours.
I could have an inverter pack in the shed just to feed the freezer.
Day to day living should(!) be OK as we have a motor home on the
drive with gas and a solar panel.
I think the options are:
(1) Generator with mains cut off switch.
(2) Whole house battery with inverter (can also feed power back to
the grid in peak time and charge in cheap time).
(3) Inverter pack just to protect the freezer.
An added complication is that we can be away from home for long
periods over winter, so I think the solution needs to be automated.
Any thoughts welcome.
Sadly, as usual, most of the discussion does not even marginally
address the question asked.
How about thoughts on battery backup for the whole house without
buying an electric car?
Are we talking a few hours or a few days? I think we can forget a few
weeks.
If you want to cook on a stove
David <wibble@btinternet.com> wrote:
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 12:52:26 +0000, David wrote:
Sadly, as usual, most of the discussion does not even marginally address
the question asked.
How about thoughts on battery backup for the whole house without buying an >> electric car?
Cheers
Dave R
Well if you fancy rCLgoing bigrCY on energy storage this guy does some interesting stuff.
https://driverevolt.co.uk/?fbclid=IwT01FWAUjuPJleHRuA2FlbQIxMABwZG9mBXNydGMGYXBwX2lkDDM1MDY4NTUzMTcyOAABHu_CQs4gofQJ7YAXCklJ7krrmWzZFXV4EBt_3BcHoVp3sliLwifHQCk-j_i8_aem_u1ONj5HZKFNiUzyrKg3Y-Q
Tim
On Thu, 24 Sep 2026 18:53:55 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 24/09/2026 18:08, Joe wrote:
On 24 Sep 2026 16:19:06 GMT David <wibble@btinternet.com> wrote:You probably need an average of 1kW to be safe. And at least 10kW max.
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 12:52:26 +0000, David wrote:As always, the counter-question is: 'how much power, and for how long?'
Various august bodies are predicting woe and carnage over the next
months,
and telling you what to store up in your prepper fortress.
Back in the day power backup was usually a generator, and if fancy
included a switch to cut the grid connection and connect the
generator.
More recently there are various battery solutions from house
batteries mainly intended for buffering solar, to inverter packs
mainly intended for off grid camping.
Does anyone know what the most cost effective solution is?
I really only need backup power in the shed where the chest freezer
lives.
I have power to the shed but I'm not sure, for example, if I could
safely feed power from a battery pack and inverter back up to the
house. [I need to check the specifications for the load it supports
but that wouldn't be the same as the whole house off the grid.]
I could have a battery and inverter charging off the mains which
would obviously also feed the shed, but that might be over kill.
I could have a generator but that involves a ventilated but sheltered >>>>> space, which also wouldn't annoy the neighbours.
I could have an inverter pack in the shed just to feed the freezer.
Day to day living should(!) be OK as we have a motor home on the
drive with gas and a solar panel.
I think the options are:
(1) Generator with mains cut off switch.
(2) Whole house battery with inverter (can also feed power back to
the grid in peak time and charge in cheap time).
(3) Inverter pack just to protect the freezer.
An added complication is that we can be away from home for long
periods over winter, so I think the solution needs to be automated.
Any thoughts welcome.
Sadly, as usual, most of the discussion does not even marginally
address the question asked.
How about thoughts on battery backup for the whole house without
buying an electric car?
Are we talking a few hours or a few days? I think we can forget a few
weeks.
If you want to cook on a stove
Cooking by gas is a good way to insulate yourself from a power cut. That
and keeping a superser and spare gas cylinder.
During the 1970s, my Dad lashed up some old car batteries and a string of lights. Which also powered the (pump for the) gas boiler.
You can only "prep" for so much. A few hours outage yes. But a conflict
style "we have no idea when" less so.
And it amuses me how few "Preppers" appear to have given any thought to
the fact that the most effecient "prepping" is to have a shotgun quietly hidden away, to be used to relieve "preppers" of their stash. Although I admit US preppers have that angle well covered. Or at least the few my brother has encounted in Tennessee ....
On 25 Sep 2026 at 21:32:00 BST, Tim+ wrote:
David <wibble@btinternet.com> wrote:
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 12:52:26 +0000, David wrote:
Sadly, as usual, most of the discussion does not even marginally address >>> the question asked.
How about thoughts on battery backup for the whole house without buying an >>> electric car?
Cheers
Dave R
Well if you fancy rCLgoing bigrCY on energy storage this guy does some
interesting stuff.
https://driverevolt.co.uk/?fbclid=IwT01FWAUjuPJleHRuA2FlbQIxMABwZG9mBXNydGMGYXBwX2lkDDM1MDY4NTUzMTcyOAABHu_CQs4gofQJ7YAXCklJ7krrmWzZFXV4EBt_3BcHoVp3sliLwifHQCk-j_i8_aem_u1ONj5HZKFNiUzyrKg3Y-Q
Tim
c.-u100/kW/hr - interesting . . .
On 25 Sep 2026 at 21:32:00 BST, Tim+ wrote:
https://driverevolt.co.uk/?fbclid=IwT01FWAUjuPJleHRuA2FlbQIxMABwZG9mBXNydGMGYXBwX2lkDDM1MDY4NTUzMTcyOAABHu_CQs4gofQJ7YAXCklJ7krrmWzZFXV4EBt_3BcHoVp3sliLwifHQCk-j_i8_aem_u1ONj5HZKFNiUzyrKg3Y-Q
Tim
c.-u100/kW/hr - interesting . . .
On 26/09/2026 07:19, RJH wrote:
On 25 Sep 2026 at 21:32:00 BST, Tim+ wrote:similar to lead acid...
David <wibble@btinternet.com> wrote:
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 12:52:26 +0000, David wrote:
Sadly, as usual, most of the discussion does not even marginally address >>>> the question asked.
How about thoughts on battery backup for the whole house without buying an >>>> electric car?
Cheers
Dave R
Well if you fancy rCLgoing bigrCY on energy storage this guy does some
interesting stuff.
https://driverevolt.co.uk/?fbclid=IwT01FWAUjuPJleHRuA2FlbQIxMABwZG9mBXNydGMGYXBwX2lkDDM1MDY4NTUzMTcyOAABHu_CQs4gofQJ7YAXCklJ7krrmWzZFXV4EBt_3BcHoVp3sliLwifHQCk-j_i8_aem_u1ONj5HZKFNiUzyrKg3Y-Q
Tim
c.-u100/kW/hr - interesting . . .
On 25/09/2026 18:18, Jethro wrote:
On Thu, 24 Sep 2026 18:53:55 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 24/09/2026 18:08, Joe wrote:
On 24 Sep 2026 16:19:06 GMT David <wibble@btinternet.com> wrote:You probably need an average of 1kW to be safe. And at least 10kW max.
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 12:52:26 +0000, David wrote:As always, the counter-question is: 'how much power, and for how
Various august bodies are predicting woe and carnage over the next >>>>>> months,
and telling you what to store up in your prepper fortress.
Back in the day power backup was usually a generator, and if fancy >>>>>> included a switch to cut the grid connection and connect the
generator.
More recently there are various battery solutions from house
batteries mainly intended for buffering solar, to inverter packs
mainly intended for off grid camping.
Does anyone know what the most cost effective solution is?
I really only need backup power in the shed where the chest freezer >>>>>> lives.
I have power to the shed but I'm not sure, for example, if I could >>>>>> safely feed power from a battery pack and inverter back up to the
house. [I need to check the specifications for the load it supports >>>>>> but that wouldn't be the same as the whole house off the grid.]
I could have a battery and inverter charging off the mains which
would obviously also feed the shed, but that might be over kill.
I could have a generator but that involves a ventilated but
sheltered space, which also wouldn't annoy the neighbours.
I could have an inverter pack in the shed just to feed the freezer. >>>>>>
Day to day living should(!) be OK as we have a motor home on the
drive with gas and a solar panel.
I think the options are:
(1) Generator with mains cut off switch.
(2) Whole house battery with inverter (can also feed power back to >>>>>> the grid in peak time and charge in cheap time).
(3) Inverter pack just to protect the freezer.
An added complication is that we can be away from home for long
periods over winter, so I think the solution needs to be automated. >>>>>>
Any thoughts welcome.
Sadly, as usual, most of the discussion does not even marginally
address the question asked.
How about thoughts on battery backup for the whole house without
buying an electric car?
long?'
Are we talking a few hours or a few days? I think we can forget a few
weeks.
If you want to cook on a stove
Cooking by gas is a good way to insulate yourself from a power cut.
That and keeping a superser and spare gas cylinder.
During the 1970s, my Dad lashed up some old car batteries and a string
of lights. Which also powered the (pump for the) gas boiler.
You can only "prep" for so much. A few hours outage yes. But a conflict
style "we have no idea when" less so.
And it amuses me how few "Preppers" appear to have given any thought to
the fact that the most effecient "prepping" is to have a shotgun
quietly hidden away, to be used to relieve "preppers" of their stash.
Although I admit US preppers have that angle well covered. Or at least
the few my brother has encounted in Tennessee ....
Some of them seem to see an apocalypse simply as an opportunity to go medieval on someone's ass.
Guns before butter - lots and lots of guns.
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 14:30:23 +0100, Andy Burns wrote:
David wrote:
An added complication is that we can be away from home for long periods
over winter, so I think the solution needs to be automated.
Any thoughts welcome.
How long a period without power do you wish to prepare for?
Good question.
If we are being told to stock up on non-perishable items like tins of fish
I would assume long outages.
Unless transport of food is expected to be the main issue.
48 hours at a time might be a sensible starting point.
On Sat, 26 Sep 2026 19:20:27 +0100, Sam Plusnet wrote:
On 25/09/2026 18:18, Jethro wrote:
On Thu, 24 Sep 2026 18:53:55 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 24/09/2026 18:08, Joe wrote:
On 24 Sep 2026 16:19:06 GMT David <wibble@btinternet.com> wrote:You probably need an average of 1kW to be safe. And at least 10kW max. >>>> If you want to cook on a stove
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 12:52:26 +0000, David wrote:As always, the counter-question is: 'how much power, and for how
Various august bodies are predicting woe and carnage over the next >>>>>>> months,
and telling you what to store up in your prepper fortress.
Back in the day power backup was usually a generator, and if fancy >>>>>>> included a switch to cut the grid connection and connect the
generator.
More recently there are various battery solutions from house
batteries mainly intended for buffering solar, to inverter packs >>>>>>> mainly intended for off grid camping.
Does anyone know what the most cost effective solution is?
I really only need backup power in the shed where the chest freezer >>>>>>> lives.
I have power to the shed but I'm not sure, for example, if I could >>>>>>> safely feed power from a battery pack and inverter back up to the >>>>>>> house. [I need to check the specifications for the load it supports >>>>>>> but that wouldn't be the same as the whole house off the grid.]
I could have a battery and inverter charging off the mains which >>>>>>> would obviously also feed the shed, but that might be over kill. >>>>>>>
I could have a generator but that involves a ventilated but
sheltered space, which also wouldn't annoy the neighbours.
I could have an inverter pack in the shed just to feed the freezer. >>>>>>>
Day to day living should(!) be OK as we have a motor home on the >>>>>>> drive with gas and a solar panel.
I think the options are:
(1) Generator with mains cut off switch.
(2) Whole house battery with inverter (can also feed power back to >>>>>>> the grid in peak time and charge in cheap time).
(3) Inverter pack just to protect the freezer.
An added complication is that we can be away from home for long
periods over winter, so I think the solution needs to be automated. >>>>>>>
Any thoughts welcome.
Sadly, as usual, most of the discussion does not even marginally
address the question asked.
How about thoughts on battery backup for the whole house without
buying an electric car?
long?'
Are we talking a few hours or a few days? I think we can forget a few >>>>> weeks.
Cooking by gas is a good way to insulate yourself from a power cut.
That and keeping a superser and spare gas cylinder.
During the 1970s, my Dad lashed up some old car batteries and a string
of lights. Which also powered the (pump for the) gas boiler.
You can only "prep" for so much. A few hours outage yes. But a conflict
style "we have no idea when" less so.
And it amuses me how few "Preppers" appear to have given any thought to
the fact that the most effecient "prepping" is to have a shotgun
quietly hidden away, to be used to relieve "preppers" of their stash.
Although I admit US preppers have that angle well covered. Or at least
the few my brother has encounted in Tennessee ....
Some of them seem to see an apocalypse simply as an opportunity to go
medieval on someone's ass.
Guns before butter - lots and lots of guns.
At the end of the - still perfectly valid, educational and entertaining "Connections, part 1", James Burke puts us in a long term breakdown of society and imagines how it could play out.
The prognosis was not good. We are simply far too interdependent.
"When was the last time you built something for yourself ?
.
.
.
.
Including the tools to do it with ?"
Anyone here smelted their own ore to make their own steel to make a screwdriver ? (Let's starrt with that before we start making screws).
At that point you realise that "prepping" can only take you as far as the next delivery from wherever. You ain't gonna last forever without it.
Just for starters how many people would think to boil (with what ?) any
water from rivers, lakes etc before drinking it ?
On Sat, 26 Sep 2026 19:20:27 +0100, Sam Plusnet wrote:
On 25/09/2026 18:18, Jethro wrote:
On Thu, 24 Sep 2026 18:53:55 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 24/09/2026 18:08, Joe wrote:
On 24 Sep 2026 16:19:06 GMT David <wibble@btinternet.com> wrote:You probably need an average of 1kW to be safe. And at least 10kW max. >>>> If you want to cook on a stove
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 12:52:26 +0000, David wrote:As always, the counter-question is: 'how much power, and for how
Various august bodies are predicting woe and carnage over the next >>>>>>> months,
and telling you what to store up in your prepper fortress.
Back in the day power backup was usually a generator, and if fancy >>>>>>> included a switch to cut the grid connection and connect the
generator.
More recently there are various battery solutions from house
batteries mainly intended for buffering solar, to inverter packs >>>>>>> mainly intended for off grid camping.
Does anyone know what the most cost effective solution is?
I really only need backup power in the shed where the chest freezer >>>>>>> lives.
I have power to the shed but I'm not sure, for example, if I could >>>>>>> safely feed power from a battery pack and inverter back up to the >>>>>>> house. [I need to check the specifications for the load it supports >>>>>>> but that wouldn't be the same as the whole house off the grid.]
I could have a battery and inverter charging off the mains which >>>>>>> would obviously also feed the shed, but that might be over kill. >>>>>>>
I could have a generator but that involves a ventilated but
sheltered space, which also wouldn't annoy the neighbours.
I could have an inverter pack in the shed just to feed the freezer. >>>>>>>
Day to day living should(!) be OK as we have a motor home on the >>>>>>> drive with gas and a solar panel.
I think the options are:
(1) Generator with mains cut off switch.
(2) Whole house battery with inverter (can also feed power back to >>>>>>> the grid in peak time and charge in cheap time).
(3) Inverter pack just to protect the freezer.
An added complication is that we can be away from home for long
periods over winter, so I think the solution needs to be automated. >>>>>>>
Any thoughts welcome.
Sadly, as usual, most of the discussion does not even marginally
address the question asked.
How about thoughts on battery backup for the whole house without
buying an electric car?
long?'
Are we talking a few hours or a few days? I think we can forget a few >>>>> weeks.
Cooking by gas is a good way to insulate yourself from a power cut.
That and keeping a superser and spare gas cylinder.
During the 1970s, my Dad lashed up some old car batteries and a string
of lights. Which also powered the (pump for the) gas boiler.
You can only "prep" for so much. A few hours outage yes. But a conflict
style "we have no idea when" less so.
And it amuses me how few "Preppers" appear to have given any thought to
the fact that the most effecient "prepping" is to have a shotgun
quietly hidden away, to be used to relieve "preppers" of their stash.
Although I admit US preppers have that angle well covered. Or at least
the few my brother has encounted in Tennessee ....
Some of them seem to see an apocalypse simply as an opportunity to go
medieval on someone's ass.
Guns before butter - lots and lots of guns.
At the end of the - still perfectly valid, educational and entertaining "Connections, part 1", James Burke puts us in a long term breakdown of society and imagines how it could play out.
The prognosis was not good. We are simply far too interdependent.
"When was the last time you built something for yourself ?
.
.
.
.
Including the tools to do it with ?"
Anyone here smelted their own ore to make their own steel to make a screwdriver ? (Let's starrt with that before we start making screws).
At that point you realise that "prepping" can only take you as far as the next delivery from wherever. You ain't gonna last forever without it.
Just for starters how many people would think to boil (with what ?) any
water from rivers, lakes etc before drinking it ?
On 26 Sep 2026 at 10:38:48 BST, Nick Finnigan wrote:
On 26/09/2026 07:19, RJH wrote:
On 25 Sep 2026 at 21:32:00 BST, Tim+ wrote:
https://driverevolt.co.uk/?fbclid=IwT01FWAUjuPJleHRuA2FlbQIxMABwZG9mBXNydGMGYXBwX2lkDDM1MDY4NTUzMTcyOAABHu_CQs4gofQJ7YAXCklJ7krrmWzZFXV4EBt_3BcHoVp3sliLwifHQCk-j_i8_aem_u1ONj5HZKFNiUzyrKg3Y-Q
Tim
c.-u100/kW/hr - interesting . . .
If you can use it all.
I'd imagine you can take it down to pretty much zero - as on the cars. Whether
that's a good idea many times and long term, not so sure.
Brand new smaller batteries are available at a
similar rate (e.g. Braun 15kWh around -u1500, 2.4kW out)
So I see - they've gone down a lot since I got my 5kwh battery 3 years ago - that was about -u1500.
At the end of the - still perfectly valid, educational and entertaining "Connections, part 1", James Burke puts us in a long term breakdown of society and imagines how it could play out.
The prognosis was not good. We are simply far too interdependent.
"When was the last time you built something for yourself ?
.
.
.
.
Including the tools to do it with ?"
Anyone here smelted their own ore to make their own steel to make a screwdriver ? (Let's starrt with that before we start making screws).
At that point you realise that "prepping" can only take you as far as the next delivery from wherever. You ain't gonna last forever without it.
Just for starters how many people would think to boil (with what ?) any water from rivers, lakes etc before drinking it ?
On Sun, 27 Sep 2026 19:51:29 +1000, Jethro <jethro_UK@hotmailbin.com>
wrote:
On Sat, 26 Sep 2026 19:20:27 +0100, Sam Plusnet wrote:
On 25/09/2026 18:18, Jethro wrote:
On Thu, 24 Sep 2026 18:53:55 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 24/09/2026 18:08, Joe wrote:
On 24 Sep 2026 16:19:06 GMT David <wibble@btinternet.com> wrote:You probably need an average of 1kW to be safe. And at least 10kW max. >>>>> If you want to cook on a stove
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 12:52:26 +0000, David wrote:As always, the counter-question is: 'how much power, and for how
Various august bodies are predicting woe and carnage over the next >>>>>>>> months,
and telling you what to store up in your prepper fortress.
Back in the day power backup was usually a generator, and if fancy >>>>>>>> included a switch to cut the grid connection and connect the
generator.
More recently there are various battery solutions from house
batteries mainly intended for buffering solar, to inverter packs >>>>>>>> mainly intended for off grid camping.
Does anyone know what the most cost effective solution is?
I really only need backup power in the shed where the chest freezer >>>>>>>> lives.
I have power to the shed but I'm not sure, for example, if I could >>>>>>>> safely feed power from a battery pack and inverter back up to the >>>>>>>> house. [I need to check the specifications for the load it supports >>>>>>>> but that wouldn't be the same as the whole house off the grid.] >>>>>>>> I could have a battery and inverter charging off the mains which >>>>>>>> would obviously also feed the shed, but that might be over kill. >>>>>>>>
I could have a generator but that involves a ventilated but
sheltered space, which also wouldn't annoy the neighbours.
I could have an inverter pack in the shed just to feed the freezer. >>>>>>>>
Day to day living should(!) be OK as we have a motor home on the >>>>>>>> drive with gas and a solar panel.
I think the options are:
(1) Generator with mains cut off switch.
(2) Whole house battery with inverter (can also feed power back to >>>>>>>> the grid in peak time and charge in cheap time).
(3) Inverter pack just to protect the freezer.
An added complication is that we can be away from home for long >>>>>>>> periods over winter, so I think the solution needs to be automated. >>>>>>>>
Any thoughts welcome.
Sadly, as usual, most of the discussion does not even marginally >>>>>>> address the question asked.
How about thoughts on battery backup for the whole house without >>>>>>> buying an electric car?
long?'
Are we talking a few hours or a few days? I think we can forget a few >>>>>> weeks.
Cooking by gas is a good way to insulate yourself from a power cut.
That and keeping a superser and spare gas cylinder.
During the 1970s, my Dad lashed up some old car batteries and a string >>>> of lights. Which also powered the (pump for the) gas boiler.
You can only "prep" for so much. A few hours outage yes. But a conflict >>>> style "we have no idea when" less so.
And it amuses me how few "Preppers" appear to have given any thought to >>>> the fact that the most effecient "prepping" is to have a shotgun
quietly hidden away, to be used to relieve "preppers" of their stash.
Although I admit US preppers have that angle well covered. Or at least >>>> the few my brother has encounted in Tennessee ....
Some of them seem to see an apocalypse simply as an opportunity to go
medieval on someone's ass.
Guns before butter - lots and lots of guns.
At the end of the - still perfectly valid, educational and entertaining
"Connections, part 1", James Burke puts us in a long term breakdown of
society and imagines how it could play out.
The prognosis was not good. We are simply far too interdependent.
"When was the last time you built something for yourself ?
.
.
.
.
Including the tools to do it with ?"
Anyone here smelted their own ore to make their own steel to make a
screwdriver ? (Let's starrt with that before we start making screws).
At that point you realise that "prepping" can only take you as far as the
next delivery from wherever. You ain't gonna last forever without it.
Just for starters how many people would think to boil (with what ?) any
water from rivers, lakes etc before drinking it ?
Its far from clear that you would need to boil it once
the number of people has dropped massively
And trivial to boil it with any metal container,
saucepan etc on a wood fire
Just for starters how many people would think to boil (with what ?) any
water from rivers, lakes etc before drinking it ?
On 27/09/2026 10:51, Jethro wrote:
On Sat, 26 Sep 2026 19:20:27 +0100, Sam Plusnet wrote:
On 25/09/2026 18:18, Jethro wrote:At the end of the - still perfectly valid, educational and entertaining
On Thu, 24 Sep 2026 18:53:55 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 24/09/2026 18:08, Joe wrote:
On 24 Sep 2026 16:19:06 GMT David <wibble@btinternet.com> wrote:You probably need an average of 1kW to be safe. And at least 10kW
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 12:52:26 +0000, David wrote:As always, the counter-question is: 'how much power, and for how
Various august bodies are predicting woe and carnage over the next >>>>>>>> months,
and telling you what to store up in your prepper fortress.
Back in the day power backup was usually a generator, and if fancy >>>>>>>> included a switch to cut the grid connection and connect the
generator.
More recently there are various battery solutions from house
batteries mainly intended for buffering solar, to inverter packs >>>>>>>> mainly intended for off grid camping.
Does anyone know what the most cost effective solution is?
I really only need backup power in the shed where the chest
freezer
lives.
I have power to the shed but I'm not sure, for example, if I could >>>>>>>> safely feed power from a battery pack and inverter back up to the >>>>>>>> house. [I need to check the specifications for the load it
supports
but that wouldn't be the same as the whole house off the grid.] >>>>>>>> I could have a battery and inverter charging off the mains which >>>>>>>> would obviously also feed the shed, but that might be over kill. >>>>>>>>
I could have a generator but that involves a ventilated but
sheltered space, which also wouldn't annoy the neighbours.
I could have an inverter pack in the shed just to feed the
freezer.
Day to day living should(!) be OK as we have a motor home on the >>>>>>>> drive with gas and a solar panel.
I think the options are:
(1) Generator with mains cut off switch.
(2) Whole house battery with inverter (can also feed power back to >>>>>>>> the grid in peak time and charge in cheap time).
(3) Inverter pack just to protect the freezer.
An added complication is that we can be away from home for long >>>>>>>> periods over winter, so I think the solution needs to be
automated.
Any thoughts welcome.
Sadly, as usual, most of the discussion does not even marginally >>>>>>> address the question asked.
How about thoughts on battery backup for the whole house without >>>>>>> buying an electric car?
long?'
Are we talking a few hours or a few days? I think we can forget a >>>>>> few
weeks.
max.
If you want to cook on a stove
Cooking by gas is a good way to insulate yourself from a power cut.
That and keeping a superser and spare gas cylinder.
During the 1970s, my Dad lashed up some old car batteries and a string >>>> of lights. Which also powered the (pump for the) gas boiler.
You can only "prep" for so much. A few hours outage yes. But a
conflict
style "we have no idea when" less so.
And it amuses me how few "Preppers" appear to have given any thought >>>> to
the fact that the most effecient "prepping" is to have a shotgun
quietly hidden away, to be used to relieve "preppers" of their stash.
Although I admit US preppers have that angle well covered. Or at least >>>> the few my brother has encounted in Tennessee ....
Some of them seem to see an apocalypse simply as an opportunity to go
medieval on someone's ass.
Guns before butter - lots and lots of guns.
"Connections, part 1", James Burke puts us in a long term breakdown of
society and imagines how it could play out.
The prognosis was not good. We are simply far too interdependent.
"When was the last time you built something for yourself ?
.
.
.
.
Including the tools to do it with ?"
Anyone here smelted their own ore to make their own steel to make a
screwdriver ? (Let's starrt with that before we start making screws).
At that point you realise that "prepping" can only take you as far as
the
next delivery from wherever. You ain't gonna last forever without it.
Just for starters how many people would think to boil (with what ?) any
water from rivers, lakes etc before drinking it ?
How many would find the means to boil it, if their gas and electricity don't work?
Making a camp fire on the 11th floor of a tower block might be tricky.
On 27/09/2026 17:59, Rod Speed wrote:
On Sun, 27 Sep 2026 19:51:29 +1000, Jethro <jethro_UK@hotmailbin.com>
wrote:
On Sat, 26 Sep 2026 19:20:27 +0100, Sam Plusnet wrote:Its far from clear that you would need to boil it once
On 25/09/2026 18:18, Jethro wrote:
On Thu, 24 Sep 2026 18:53:55 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 24/09/2026 18:08, Joe wrote:
On 24 Sep 2026 16:19:06 GMT David <wibble@btinternet.com> wrote: >>>>>>>You probably need an average of 1kW to be safe. And at least 10kW >>>>>> max.
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 12:52:26 +0000, David wrote:As always, the counter-question is: 'how much power, and for how >>>>>>> long?'
Various august bodies are predicting woe and carnage over the >>>>>>>>> next
months,
and telling you what to store up in your prepper fortress.
Back in the day power backup was usually a generator, and if >>>>>>>>> fancy
included a switch to cut the grid connection and connect the >>>>>>>>> generator.
More recently there are various battery solutions from house >>>>>>>>> batteries mainly intended for buffering solar, to inverter packs >>>>>>>>> mainly intended for off grid camping.
Does anyone know what the most cost effective solution is?
I really only need backup power in the shed where the chest >>>>>>>>> freezer
lives.
I have power to the shed but I'm not sure, for example, if I >>>>>>>>> could
safely feed power from a battery pack and inverter back up to the >>>>>>>>> house. [I need to check the specifications for the load it >>>>>>>>> supports
but that wouldn't be the same as the whole house off the grid.] >>>>>>>>> I could have a battery and inverter charging off the mains which >>>>>>>>> would obviously also feed the shed, but that might be over kill. >>>>>>>>>
I could have a generator but that involves a ventilated but
sheltered space, which also wouldn't annoy the neighbours.
I could have an inverter pack in the shed just to feed the >>>>>>>>> freezer.
Day to day living should(!) be OK as we have a motor home on the >>>>>>>>> drive with gas and a solar panel.
I think the options are:
(1) Generator with mains cut off switch.
(2) Whole house battery with inverter (can also feed power back >>>>>>>>> to
the grid in peak time and charge in cheap time).
(3) Inverter pack just to protect the freezer.
An added complication is that we can be away from home for long >>>>>>>>> periods over winter, so I think the solution needs to be
automated.
Any thoughts welcome.
Sadly, as usual, most of the discussion does not even marginally >>>>>>>> address the question asked.
How about thoughts on battery backup for the whole house without >>>>>>>> buying an electric car?
Are we talking a few hours or a few days? I think we can forget a >>>>>>> few
weeks.
If you want to cook on a stove
Cooking by gas is a good way to insulate yourself from a power cut.
That and keeping a superser and spare gas cylinder.
During the 1970s, my Dad lashed up some old car batteries and a
string
of lights. Which also powered the (pump for the) gas boiler.
You can only "prep" for so much. A few hours outage yes. But a
conflict
style "we have no idea when" less so.
And it amuses me how few "Preppers" appear to have given any thought >>>>> to
the fact that the most effecient "prepping" is to have a shotgun
quietly hidden away, to be used to relieve "preppers" of their stash. >>>>> Although I admit US preppers have that angle well covered. Or at
least
the few my brother has encounted in Tennessee ....
Some of them seem to see an apocalypse simply as an opportunity to go
medieval on someone's ass.
Guns before butter - lots and lots of guns.
At the end of the - still perfectly valid, educational and entertaining
"Connections, part 1", James Burke puts us in a long term breakdown of
society and imagines how it could play out.
The prognosis was not good. We are simply far too interdependent.
"When was the last time you built something for yourself ?
.
.
.
.
Including the tools to do it with ?"
Anyone here smelted their own ore to make their own steel to make a
screwdriver ? (Let's starrt with that before we start making screws).
At that point you realise that "prepping" can only take you as far as
the
next delivery from wherever. You ain't gonna last forever without it.
Just for starters how many people would think to boil (with what ?) any
water from rivers, lakes etc before drinking it ?
the number of people has dropped massively
that won't remove the dead sheep upstream
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2And trivial to boil it with any metal container,
saucepan etc on a wood fire
On 25/09/2026 15:56, Theo wrote:
David <wibble@btinternet.com> wrote:Alternatively lobby your MP for nuclear power and forget all that crap
Sadly, as usual, most of the discussion does not even marginally address >>> the question asked.
How about thoughts on battery backup for the whole house without buying an >>> electric car?
I think you'll need to provide some details before we can make much
progress. If you don't have the details, you should gather them before
deciding how to proceed..
Now you've reframed it as a whole house question:
1. For a house battery, what does your daily consumption look like? How much >> seasonal variation?
2. Do you want full coverage or are you prepared to load-shed non essential >> loads? What's the baseline after shedding?
3. How long an outage do you want cover for?
4. If load shedding, how are you going to wire them or control the shedding? >> 5. What kind of instantaneous power do you need? Don't forget
motor/compressor spinup can take a lot more than running power.
6. Are you going to use it to arbitrage power, either your own consumption, >> storing your own solar or selling back to the grid?
7. How long do you want charging to take, eg to use tariffs with short cheap >> rates?
There are lots of options and it helps to refine what you need.
Theo
On 27/09/2026 10:51, Jethro wrote:
On Sat, 26 Sep 2026 19:20:27 +0100, Sam Plusnet wrote:
On 25/09/2026 18:18, Jethro wrote:
On Thu, 24 Sep 2026 18:53:55 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 24/09/2026 18:08, Joe wrote:
On 24 Sep 2026 16:19:06 GMT David <wibble@btinternet.com> wrote:You probably need an average of 1kW to be safe. And at least 10kW max. >>>>> If you want to cook on a stove
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 12:52:26 +0000, David wrote:As always, the counter-question is: 'how much power, and for how
Various august bodies are predicting woe and carnage over the next >>>>>>>> months,
and telling you what to store up in your prepper fortress.
Back in the day power backup was usually a generator, and if fancy >>>>>>>> included a switch to cut the grid connection and connect the
generator.
More recently there are various battery solutions from house
batteries mainly intended for buffering solar, to inverter packs >>>>>>>> mainly intended for off grid camping.
Does anyone know what the most cost effective solution is?
I really only need backup power in the shed where the chest freezer >>>>>>>> lives.
I have power to the shed but I'm not sure, for example, if I could >>>>>>>> safely feed power from a battery pack and inverter back up to the >>>>>>>> house. [I need to check the specifications for the load it supports >>>>>>>> but that wouldn't be the same as the whole house off the grid.] >>>>>>>> I could have a battery and inverter charging off the mains which >>>>>>>> would obviously also feed the shed, but that might be over kill. >>>>>>>>
I could have a generator but that involves a ventilated but
sheltered space, which also wouldn't annoy the neighbours.
I could have an inverter pack in the shed just to feed the freezer. >>>>>>>>
Day to day living should(!) be OK as we have a motor home on the >>>>>>>> drive with gas and a solar panel.
I think the options are:
(1) Generator with mains cut off switch.
(2) Whole house battery with inverter (can also feed power back to >>>>>>>> the grid in peak time and charge in cheap time).
(3) Inverter pack just to protect the freezer.
An added complication is that we can be away from home for long >>>>>>>> periods over winter, so I think the solution needs to be automated. >>>>>>>>
Any thoughts welcome.
Sadly, as usual, most of the discussion does not even marginally >>>>>>> address the question asked.
How about thoughts on battery backup for the whole house without >>>>>>> buying an electric car?
long?'
Are we talking a few hours or a few days? I think we can forget a few >>>>>> weeks.
Cooking by gas is a good way to insulate yourself from a power cut.
That and keeping a superser and spare gas cylinder.
During the 1970s, my Dad lashed up some old car batteries and a string >>>> of lights. Which also powered the (pump for the) gas boiler.
You can only "prep" for so much. A few hours outage yes. But a conflict >>>> style "we have no idea when" less so.
And it amuses me how few "Preppers" appear to have given any thought to >>>> the fact that the most effecient "prepping" is to have a shotgun
quietly hidden away, to be used to relieve "preppers" of their stash.
Although I admit US preppers have that angle well covered. Or at least >>>> the few my brother has encounted in Tennessee ....
Some of them seem to see an apocalypse simply as an opportunity to go
medieval on someone's ass.
Guns before butter - lots and lots of guns.
At the end of the - still perfectly valid, educational and entertaining
"Connections, part 1", James Burke puts us in a long term breakdown of
society and imagines how it could play out.
The prognosis was not good. We are simply far too interdependent.
"When was the last time you built something for yourself ?
.
.
.
.
Including the tools to do it with ?"
Anyone here smelted their own ore to make their own steel to make a
screwdriver ? (Let's starrt with that before we start making screws).
At that point you realise that "prepping" can only take you as far as the
next delivery from wherever. You ain't gonna last forever without it.
Just for starters how many people would think to boil (with what ?) any
water from rivers, lakes etc before drinking it ?
How many would find the means to boil it, if their gas and electricity
don't work?
Making a camp fire on the 11th floor of a tower block might be tricky.
Jethro <jethro_UK@hotmailbin.com> wrote:
At the end of the - still perfectly valid, educational and entertaining
"Connections, part 1", James Burke puts us in a long term breakdown of
society and imagines how it could play out.
The prognosis was not good. We are simply far too interdependent.
"When was the last time you built something for yourself ?
.
.
.
.
Including the tools to do it with ?"
Anyone here smelted their own ore to make their own steel to make a
screwdriver ? (Let's starrt with that before we start making screws).
At that point you realise that "prepping" can only take you as far as the
next delivery from wherever. You ain't gonna last forever without it.
Just for starters how many people would think to boil (with what ?) any
water from rivers, lakes etc before drinking it ?
It would be impossible to bootstrap a bronze age society today - all the surface copper and zinc deposits
are worked out. But you don't need to -
you can mine landfills or scrap littering the landscape for metals, which
are easier to separate than any ore.
So you only need to make screws once every single screw ever made has rusted away.
More of an issue is forgetting how to do things, if the internet and books were to disappear.
Theo--
On 27/09/2026 17:59, Rod Speed wrote:
Its far from clear that you would need to boil it oncethat won't remove the dead sheep upstream
the number of people has dropped massively
On 27/09/2026 20:39, Theo wrote:
It would be impossible to bootstrap a bronze age society today - all the surface copper and zinc deposits
tin deposits...
are worked out. But you don't need to -
you can mine landfills or scrap littering the landscape for metals, which are easier to separate than any ore.
In fact once you know how to do it, iron is rather easier to smelt
So you only need to make screws once every single screw ever made has rusted
away.
More of an issue is forgetting how to do things, if the internet and books were to disappear.
I read an amusing SF short story, about an advanced spaceship that
landed, said 'hi' and left.
It used unknown technology, but once aware that such technology existed, those doughty earthlings duplicated it. Or so they thought.
When the aliens returned they said 'fuck me, no one else has ever done
it that way'
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
In fact once you know how to do it, iron is rather easier to smelt
True, and I don't think late medieval iron furnaces (the Weald, etc) used
any tech that wasn't available in the prehistoric world. Maybe water power for the bellows, but you could do that with animals too.
I read an amusing SF short story, about an advanced spaceship that
landed, said 'hi' and left.
It used unknown technology, but once aware that such technology existed,
those doughty earthlings duplicated it. Or so they thought.
When the aliens returned they said 'fuck me, no one else has ever done
it that way'
:-)
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 27/09/2026 20:39, Theo wrote:
It would be impossible to bootstrap a bronze age society today - all the >>> surface copper and zinc deposits
tin deposits...
You're right, I was getting confused with brass. Wonder why we never got a Brass Age? (I don't think Victoriana counts)
On 27/09/2026 20:45, Charles Hope wrote:
On 27/09/2026 17:59, Rod Speed wrote:
The foxes will do that.Its far from clear that you would need to boil it oncethat won't remove the dead sheep upstream
the number of people has dropped massively
On 28/09/2026 08:50, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 27/09/2026 20:45, Charles Hope wrote:but when?
On 27/09/2026 17:59, Rod Speed wrote:
The foxes will do that.Its far from clear that you would need to boil it oncethat won't remove the dead sheep upstream
the number of people has dropped massively
On 28/09/2026 11:43, Theo wrote:
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 27/09/2026 20:39, Theo wrote:
It would be impossible to bootstrap a bronze age society today - all the >>>> surface copper and zinc deposits
tin deposits...
You're right, I was getting confused with brass. Wonder why we never got a >> Brass Age? (I don't think Victoriana counts)
We are entering the Boracic Age.
Prices are rising fast and everyone is skint.
| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 74 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 122:24:00 |
| Calls: | 1,194 |
| Files: | 1,352 |
| Messages: | 290,355 |