Page Summary
Active Entries
- 1: Interesting Links for 28-01-2026
- 2: Interesting Links for 26-01-2026
- 3: Interesting Links for 27-01-2026
- 4: Interesting Links for 25-01-2026
- 5: On the current set of politicians leaving the sinking party
- 6: Photo cross-post
- 7: Yaaaaaaawn
- 8: Interesting Links for 24-01-2026
- 9: Interesting Links for 22-01-2026
- 10: Interesting Links for 19-01-2026
Style Credit
- Style: Neutral Good for Practicality by
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
Expand Cut Tags
No cut tags
no subject
Date: 2011-08-23 05:02 pm (UTC)Norway's electricity is 99% hydro-electric, and the remainder is thermal and wind. Therefore, it generates no CO2, and therefore nor do any houses in Norway (as long as they're taking energy off grid and don't have a diesel generator in the back garden). The exact same house in the UK would add lots of CO2 to the atmosphere, since our grid is predominantly gas, coal and oil, so having "zero-carbon" be an attribute of the house instead of the electricity grid makes no sense at all.
no subject
Date: 2011-08-24 10:14 am (UTC)1) Reducing the energy the house uses
2) Producing the energy locally in a non-carbon-producing manner
3) Producing the energy centrally in a non-carbon-producing manner
Where (3) is viable then going with that makes life easier, otherwise (1) and (2) are used.
no subject
Date: 2011-08-24 11:40 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-08-24 11:48 am (UTC)