Heat Pump Installations Running 90% Below Miliband’s Target
Heat pump installations are running 90% short of Ed Miliband’s Net Zero targets, with just 30,000 fitted in six months instead of the 300,000 target. At this pace, it would take 150 years to equip all homes with ‘renewable’ technology. The Telegraph has more.
On Wednesday, new data from the UK’s main renewables trade body found that households increased the number of heat pumps installed over the past year – but it still remains 90% below the Government’s target on an annual basis.
More than 172,000 small-scale renewables – which includes batteries, solar panels as well as heat pumps – were installed between January and June this year, mostly in homes, according to the Microgeneration Certification Scheme (MCS) data. It represents a 37% increase.
Of this, the most popular renewable technology is solar panels, with 123,000 installations in the first six months of this year.
Ian Rippin, the Chief Executive of MCS, said: “Across all renewable technologies, we are seeing a dramatic rise in the number of installations being delivered into homes, helping to reduce energy bills for consumers and drive down emissions.
However, the figures illustrates the yawning gulf between the Government’s ambitions for renewables and the still-glacial pace at which they are being installed.
The UK has 25 million homes heated by gas boilers, and another two million that rely on oil. At the current installation rate it would take 150 years to equip them all with renewable heating technologies.
Mike Foster, the Chief Executive of the Energy and Utilities Alliance, a trade body for heating installers, said the main factor supporting heat pump installations was the Boiler Upgrade Scheme subsidy – worth up to £7,500 per home and paid for by taxpayers and energy bill levies.
“It means that we have a Labour Government which should be progressive, taking money from the poor and giving it to the well-off, so they can boast about their green credentials. I don’t believe people voted Labour for this to happen,” he said.
Worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Installations only running at 10% of the target then. 90% less sounds so much worse. Don’t get me wrong, I have no time for any of this scam but we are using the same tricks as the demented, despicable and educationally subnormal government. Let us not.
Can you explain? I don’t understand your point.
My guess is it’s to do with the way it’s expressed. The media mostly chooses the most impressive form of a stat to generate more sensational headlines.
For example, suppose a headline says something is 200% more likely than ‘x’ saying it’s 3 times as likely is a less impressive way to put it, and the most accurate way would be to fold in the background chance, say increasing from 1 in 1 million to 3 in 1 million.
Such as the “95% effective” Coof Jab, quoted as a relative risk instead of the absolute risk. And that 95% was also a bald-faced lie
Quite a common tactic in the energy/climate issue. We are always given the scary analogy eg “An Iceberg the size of Manhattan has just broken away from Antarctica”. When infact this is as ordinary event as leaves falling from tress in autumn, and isn’t in the least bit scary.
“And that 95% was also a bald-faced lie.”
No it wasn’t, but whilst it was the truth it wasn’t the whole truth abd nothing but the truth.
It did reduce the number of SARS CoV 2 symptomatic infections in the inoculated cohort by 95% compared to non-innoculated.
That is it reduced it from 0.88% to 0.4% = 95%.
The lie being that the risk of getting a symptomatic infection was insignificant anyway so “vaccination” really was unnecessary.
The 95% would also encourage people to believe that with the inoculation they had “only” 5% chance of infection, whereas in fact without it the chance was less than 1%.
No, the 95% absolutely was a lie. The trial was a fraud, the stats were abused, the results were merely smoke and mirrors and didn’t stand up to any scrutiny in the real world. The control group was unblinded, those who fell ill (sometimes very ill) were dropped from the trial. Maddie de Garay for example.
https://www.midwesterndoctor.com/p/what-happened-to-the-covid-19-vaccine
That pharma get to both set and mark their own homework is a crime.
May I recommend “Doctoring Data” by Malcolm Kendrick. If you torture data enough, it will admit to anything.
You are correct presentation of percentages can be manipulative, but in this case I think it is informative.
Saying you are reaching 10% of target might be construed as success. Missing target by 90% indicates failure.
This is unsurprising given this inept government. We are well on the road to ruin.
As an aside can I suggest to the Daily Sceptic that if they are reporting on a subject that is likely to be censored that they redact the “offending” text and put a message that the article has been self censored to comply with the law.
I can’t see how the government can then prosecute for obeying the law.
I wonder how many have been replacements for gas boilers. I bet not many – suspect most of it is in new build
homes where there may be pressure brought to bear on developers.
Perhaps the government could follow the vaccination strategy?
Heat pump refusers should be locked in their homes and not allowed to go out.
Nobody is net zero until everybody is net zero.
If you lock the refusers in their homes, they’ll be the warmest people in the land!
Ian Rippin, the Chief Executive of MCS, said: “Across all renewable technologies, we are seeing a dramatic rise in the number of installations being delivered into homes, helping to reduce energy bills for consumers and drive down emissions.
Ian Rippin, ain’t ripping it, a dramatic rise from a low starting point, he’s delusional.
Just like they say a rise of CO2 from 400 ppm to 430 ppm is dramatic, its just statistical trickery. A rise from 0.04% to 0.043% is less dramatic.
Its a 7% increase in the proportion of a trace gas which accounts for only 0.043% of atmospheric gases. The remaining gases account for 999,570 ppm.
As a percentage of all gases its vanishingly small.
For those who can actually think and are numerate, it’s 400 to 430 parts IN A MILLION. So not dramatic at all.
A nice hockey stick curve.
And just as bollocks as the original.
“At the current installation rate it would take 150 years to equip them all with renewable heating technologies.”, except they will never all be replaced [by 2030 or 35], for a multiplicity of reasons, including Labour will not make it past 2029, there’s no way renewables can generate enough electricity, and subsidising installs to the tune of £7500 will bankrupt us, who’s going to pay for it.
And they’ll all need to be replaced in 10-15 years anyway, so you’ll never get near the target in 150 years or even a thousand years
Mr. Ten Percent. An old comedy film of that name floated through; don’t know why!
The objective has been made very clear. It has nothing to do with the climate and everything to do with the transfer of wealth from the western industrialised nations and changing the capitalist economic model. (ie a move towards global communism).
https://www.climatedepot.com/2017/05/24/global-warming-is-not-about-the-science-un-admits-climate-change-policy-is-about-how-we-redistribute-the-worlds-wealth/
Comrade – we must increase tractor production immediately. Da! More tractors.
How long will it take before folk see clearly that the belief in the utility and legitimacy of ‘the state’ is (precisely) an indoctrinated cult? But the indoctrination runs deep and I am not expecting relief from this evil’s grip on human social order any time soon. Sadly. I think it has all got to reach rock bottom, total failure, before it crumbles and ends when at last we can be free (so long as we don’t just replace it with yet another version of the same).