Heat pumps aren't cheap to run, the only way to make electric heat sources economically viable is to switch the green tax from electric to gas for domestic properties.

Here's a novel idea. If wind and solar are so cheap (as we are constantly being told,)  then why not remove all subsidies from them and let them stand on their own 2 feet  in the mktplace against fossil fuel based energy?

Then, let us see how many jump on the renewable bandwagon when the horses have been taken away.

After all, what could go possibly wrong? Might the emperor not be wearing any clothes after all?

David Cieszynski said:

I also think electric combi-boilers should be considered for older houses are heat pumps aren't the solution for the older housing stock.

Two problems: (1) it would be cheaper to supply a pile of fan heaters; (2) the electrical installation might not be capable of supplying such a large sustained load.

broadgage said:

A large tidal power plant has frequently been proposed in the Severn estuary, near me. I think that the NIMBYs won, with the great increase in natural gas prices, the idea should be re-visited.

Not a bad idea.

I suspect that there are very few viable sites in UK.

There is also the option of thermal storage charged 'off peak'.  GEC made a range of nightstore boilers in the 1980s that charged overnight and ran wet systems in the day.  At the time overnight prices were about half of day prices.  These days the charging could be dynamically controlled to optimise charging costs.  A cost cop of at least 2 could easily be achived compared to day usage and I suspect in practice it would probably turn out between 3 and 4 depending on weather and generation mix.  Flow temperatures would be unchanged minimising costs.  Just another option.....

Rolls-Royce have small modular reactors (SMRs) ready to go. The government is dragging its heels.

Running an immersion heater over night might be an economical way of obtaining domestic hot water (supplied by PV during the day is even better), but I find it hard to believe that sufficient hot water could be stored for heating purposes.

I find it hard to believe that sufficient hot water could be stored for heating purposes.

Depends on your heating load of course (and the weather), but my 500l thermal store, when heated by the log burner for about 4 hours, will then usually keep the rest of the hose toasty (via UFH) for the remainder of the 24 hours without problem, as well as supplying a bit of hot tap water.  I do have an unusually low heating demand though (thanks to lots of insulation, triple glazing and so on).and heat from the the log burner itself will have removed the heating demand from part of the house for part of that time, but the numbers may add up well enough in some circumstances.

  - Andy.

AJJewsbury said:

I do have an unusually low heating demand though

Yes, you put the rest of us to shame.

I rather suspect that one of the principle reasons is the creating and maintaining of the physical security required for such sites. Imagine a country scattered with mini nuclear bombs situated in the middle of nowhere and the cohorts of undesirables coming into the country nearly every day - pc term is 'Bad Actors' who only have to get lucky once- and then imagine the logistics of keeping each site heavily guarded. They have enough problems at the likes of Sellafield and other sites..