All of a quandary

[TheSpid]

So I'm all of a quandary - this house is lovely and some things are needing doing to it and some things we would like to do to it. But how far do we go? Let me give you an example, the one that is really bugging me the most at the moment.

The fireplace. It is big and wide and not so very deep because it has a false wall and stone hood that has been put in it in around the 1980s. The chimney has been condemned for use as the clay liner is not tall enough and soot is gathering in the void and is a fire hazard. So something NEEDS doing. We would like a log burner in there. SO do we a: take the false wall down back to the original gaining around six inches depth to the fire place. It is apparently brick - the rest of the house is stone. We have no idea the condition it is in or why the false stone wall was installed. The builder says maybe because of damp - but then I think cure the damp - and he is only guessing. Of course the bricks may be in awful condition and the only solution would be to lime plaster over them to make them acceptable again. Who knows. But I am interested to find out. The builder recommends just removing the stone hood - as it is too low and a hazard now - keeping the false wall and installing another fireplace for the woodturner to sit in by doing the register plate down and installing a concrete false beam for it to sit on etc. I'd rather the register plate stayed where it was, high up by the bressumer beam. And then I look at the hearth - which looks newish, and the shelves at the side which both hubby and the builder like and are newish. Should these come out? Or is that silly? Is what I am thinking beyond repair and going a t step top far into restoration that isn't necessary? There is an original bread oven to the right hand side and part of me wants to strip the plaster from the right hand side to see what is there. But is that sensible? Necessary? Recommended? Ug.

https://ibb.co/bvKt1V

Also like my window sill post - is putting in slate sills on the outside silly? A step beyond repair to altering what should be? Would some one else come along after us and rip them out as they aren't 'right' in the cottage?

Sorry for the rant - I'm doing my head in thinking round and round in circles. Any help/advice/putting me in my place would be very gratefully received

 

[paulc]

It certainly would be a good idea to knock a small hole in the wall to see what is behind there. If you like what you see, knock the rest down. If the brickwork is in a poor condition, it is possible to get brick slips (basically, slices of birck ~20mm thick) and create a decorative surface with them. If the false wall was put up to hide a damp problem, getting air in there will help, as will the heat from a stove.

Once you have got rid of that hood (I'll keep my opinion of it to myself), a vitreous enamel pipe would look good. Above the register plate, I would strongly recommend installing a flexible liner all the way to the top of the chimney and finish it off with a cowl. It will make sweeping the flue so much easier, and there won't be any voids or ledges where soot & creosote can collect. Whilst a good quality liner will add a sizable cost to the installation, it would be worthwhile in the long run.

 

[malcolm]

I think I share the sentiment that some jobs can take longer than they are really worth. Time and money can be forgotten, but a result you don't like will always be there. On the other hand there might be better things you could be doing. For example parties are more fun than parquet.

From the photo the back of the fireplace doesn't look like so much work. You could always remove a small part of the later addition when you remove the hood, and then put it back if you don't like what you see behind.

Slate sills are good. I'm gradually adding stone sills where windows don't have them. It's a job that doesn't add too much work to window replacement and the resultant interior redecoration. My sashes still have a little wood sill above the stone ones so for me the stone isn't a direct replacement for a wood sill.

 

[TheSpid]

Thanks both - hubby and I searched pinterest today and found pics of very open fireplaces we liked a lot so we are going to try to open it up properly. Always wondering whether it could be better would bug me.

PaulC - not sure if you like the hood or not, I'd like to know - hubby likes it, I dislike it rather a lot - but it's irrelevant anyway as it needs to come down to be able to make the chimney safe etc. We have removed one of the slates from the back of one of the cubby holes and the wall behind is about six inches away and is brick and very sooty. All may be good, all may not but we shall just have to see.

Malcolm - love that phrase - and yes, that was the sentiment hubby came to - better to do it properly now even if it costs more than have to redo it later cos we don't like it. Luckily we have no parquet I think we shall go see a slate place - a fair few round us in Wales - and see what we can do re sills.

 

[paulc]

PaulC - not sure if you like the hood or not, I'd like to know - hubby likes it, I dislike it rather a lot

I was trying to be diplomatic and not cause any offence, But as you asked, I think it ugly. A wrought iron hood would have been much more appealing. But as it has to be replaced, you have the opportunity to fit a stove - This would be much more efficient than an open fire and a lot safer. No more spitting embers across the room. Plenty of types & styles to chose from. From the modern Morso or Arada, industrial look from Dowling. or the more traditional style.

Me, I fitted an i500 set some 400mm from the floor for a sleek modern look. Not to everyones taste, but a recent survey of my area of town passed judgment that "there were no buildings of architectural or historic value in the area". So I'm quite happy to mix modern with (1920s period) without attracting the ire of a conservation officer.

 

[CliffordPope]

If it were me, I'd live with it and do nothing while I did more important jobs, then come back to it and do a full restoration. At the moment it all looks phoney. Naff "feature" stonework detracts from what otherwise sounds a lovely house.

 

[TheSpid]

I completely agree Clifford- it is naff.

This is the room inside we have decided to do first - two big projects for this year - the living room and air source heat, next spring/summer is taking the paint off the walls outside - now trying to decide whether we want UFH in the living room - I'm thinking not. But may need to limecrete the floor. We are trying to concentrate on one thing at a time and not get carried away doing bits and pieces here and there and never finishing anything properly.

It is a lovely house and not really so much to do, compared to so many here.

 

[paulc]

- two big projects for this year - the living room and air source heat - now trying to decide whether we want UFH in the living room - I'm thinking not.

Air (and ground) source heat pumps produce fairly low temperature heating. Underfloor heating is an ideal way to utilise the heat from the ASHP. If you are contemplating laying a new limecrete floor, installing UFH at the same time makes sense. If the heat pump idea falls away, you can still have it plumbed in to a regular central heating system.

A neighbour installed UFH almost as an afterthought when pouring a slab for his kitchen extension. His opinion is that it was well worth the extra expense and the room is nice & toasty in the winter.

 

[TheSpid]

We would have preferred ground source but the land just isn't right for it - so air source is the next best. Just got to work out logistics and timings and how to do it and costings. The house downstairs is around seventy square meters at the moment - no idea as of yet what the terracotta tiles we have throughout are sitting on - I expect I need to be brave and lift them - the idea of digging up concrete is not exactly thralling.

 

[MikeG]

- two big projects for this year - the living room and air source heat - now trying to decide whether we want UFH in the living room - I'm thinking not.

Air (and ground) source heat pumps produce fairly low temperature heating. Underfloor heating is an ideal way to utilise the heat from the ASHP. If you are contemplating laying a new limecrete floor, installing UFH at the same time makes sense. If the heat pump idea falls away, you can still have it plumbed in to a regular central heating system.

A neighbour installed UFH almost as an afterthought when pouring a slab for his kitchen extension. His opinion is that it was well worth the extra expense and the room is nice & toasty in the winter.

Heat pumps are glorified electric heating. If you think that heating a house using an air-conditioning unit is the way forward.....well.........let's just say I profoundly disagree with this approach. Or at least, whilst our electrical generation is based mainly on carbon emitting technologies, I really wouldn't agree with the installation of any form of electrical heating. This stuff really is flavour-of-the-month greenwash in my view.

 

[TheSpid]

I understand where you are coming from Mike - but . . . all my electricity comes from green sources, I pay more for it that way but I do it deliberately - so my electric is solar, wind or wave powered. Therefore my air source will be powered by green power and basically carbon neutral My oil at the moment isn't green in any way shape or form and needs replacing anyway. Without forcing the hand of electric companies to make sure their energy is as green as possible we will only go on relying on fossil fuels and that's not good. It's a way forward I have thought about a lot. Eventually we may install our own solars to create the energy purely for the air source to use [or a wind turbine if we win the lottery]. Six or one and half a dozen of another. UFH utilise the heat provided better, BUT . . . I could just install more radiators instead. The jury is still out on that one.

 

[Edward Ian]

Hi,
I haven't read in detail all the posts here, but here is my tuppence worth:
Open fires - by which I mean inglenooks (as opposed to cast iron inserts or stoves) are hopelessly inefficient. OK if you have a steady supply of labour and firewood to keep it going all day and night, otherwise you will shiver more often than enjoy a warm glow. So I expect that the false wall was an attempt to reduce the wasted space where the fire was just heating itself and not the room.
If there was any damp issue in the chimney, that would be because there wasn't a fire.
If you want to install a log burner (and the only alternative here, let's face it, is central heating) you MUST line the flue with a flexible metal liner. Modern wood burners (which are very efficient and burn their own gases - my favourite is Charnwood, made in England) burn at very high temperatures and you run a real risk of a chimney fire (and your house literally going up in smoke) without a lining to your flue.

 

[MikeG]

I understand where you are coming from Mike - but . . . all my electricity comes from green sources, I pay more for it that way but I do it deliberately - so my electric is solar, wind or wave powered......

Seriously, it doesn't. The stuff coming down your cable comes from the grid. What you are doing is choosing who receives your money, not what electricity you receive.

 

[TheSpid]

Edward - yes proper flue liner will be going in I promise; all HETAS certified etc.

Mike this is what Bulb say - if you say this is an untruth and can prove it then I need to take issue with them. "We supply all our members with 100% renewable electricity .... we make sure that for every unit of electricity you use, a unit is produced and put on the grid by a renewable source like Llyn Brenig Hydro in North Wales. . . We buy our energy from independent renewable generators from across the UK. Wherever possible, we have direct relationships with these generators to purchase their output. To cover any shortfalls, we purchase renewable energy on the wholesale market.
We think it's really important that you know where your energy comes from. From hydroelectricity to anaerobic digestion, our generators are an innovative bunch." It's as good as I can get without making it myself.

 

[MikeG]

They're buying electricity from renewable sources, for sure, but what they cannot do is control what electricity is going down the cable to you. The electricity entering your house is from precisely the same source as that entering your neighbour's house, no matter what companies you each pay your bills to.

 

[MikeG]

........... we make sure that for every unit of electricity you use, a unit is produced and put on the grid by a renewable source.........

There's your answer. They supply electricity into the grid at the rate at which their customers purchase it. Great. But that electricity is going into the general mix. There is no supply company that can direct where electricity on the grid goes.

 

[TheSpid]

Okay - but this is being slightly pedantic - basically, what ever amount of electricity I use is offset by renewable energy on the grid. So MY use is greener than if I didn't use this company, I would say very very green.

 

[MikeG]

Okay - but this is being slightly pedantic - basically, what ever amount of electricity I use is offset by renewable energy on the grid.

It's not being pedantic at all. You said your electricity was all renewable, and therefore you could justify having electric heating. The fact is, though, that your electricity is from pretty much the same blend of fossil fuel, nuclear and renewable as mine, and every other member of the forum (with regional variations). Now that you know that your electricity is just as dirty as mine, I hope this gives you an incentive to rethink your ideas about using electricity for heating your home.

So MY use is greener than if I didn't use this company, I would say very very green.

As always, the very best way of being green is to reduce your demand, therefore my heated-by-oil house is greener than yours. I'm not trying to make this a competition with that statement, but to show you that doing your bit for the environment involves some thought. And no, as I said, your use of electricity is not greener than mine, or anyone else who isn't on a "green" tariff. You are making virtually no difference whatever to the amount of green electricity produced, other than paying a little extra into the pot to help provide incentive for new renewable schemes.

 

[Flyfisher]

Interesting discussion about 'green' energy providers and one we've had before many years ago (where is Biffvernon these days?). I tend to agree with MikeG though I can see both sides of the argument as long as the units consumed by all the 'green' customers does not exceed the amount of 'green' units actually generated and pushed into the grid. But all that only applies on average. What about those days (and nights!) when there is no wind or so overcast that 'green' generation is too low to generate all the units consumed by 'green' consumers? Those 'green' consumers won't suffer a power cut because their excess demand will be met by fossil/nuclear generated electricity. Hmm.

As always, the very best way of being green is to reduce your demand, therefore my heated-by-oil house is greener than yours.

Again, I agree, to an extent. Your house might well be highly energy-efficient but that's only part of your overall demand. What, for example, do you do with the money you save on heating your home? I'm guessing you spend it on something else and that something will almost certainly have an energy demand somewhere in its lifecycle.

Unfortunately, our energy fooprint is inextricably linked to our standard of living and while I'm sure we'd all like to be as energy-efficient as possible I'm equally sure that few of us (and I don't just mean PPUKers) are equally keen to reduce our standards of living. Besides, the Jevons Paradox suggests that greater efficiency actually stimulates more demand. So yes, let's all super-insulate our homes so we can reduce our heating costs and then use the money we've saved to jet off around the world on more holidays using low cost airlines (another example of the Jevons Paradox in action). :wink:

It's not easy being 'green'.

 

[malcolm]

I suspect it is greener for the green electricity companies to use the grid for distribution rather than deliver their electricity on the back of lorries.

I've been doing a lot of insulation, some of it is far from environmentally efficient based on live vs predicted payback, but building regs want it. I thought I had reduced gas consumption and was quite surprised to find it is staying almost exactly constant and also 30% over the national average. Instead I think I might be becoming less tolerant to cold.