School Criticised Over Noisy Heat Pumps
By Paul Homewood
h/t Dave Ward
They are a supposed to be key weapon in the battle against global warming, by reducing carbon emissions.
But a decision to install air source heat pumps at Reepham High School has, say neighbours, led to pollution problems of a different kind and created a distinctly frosty environment in the town.
Residents who live just metres from the devices – which are used to heat classrooms and other buildings – say they are creating such noise pollution that they are unable to open their windows of use their gardens without being disturbed.
They have lodged complaints with the school and local council but say not enough has been done to quieten the eco devices.
They have also called in local MP, Jerome Mayhew, in an attempt to resolve the issue.
The council and school, however, insist they have already done everything they can to minimise noise from the pumps.
The electrically-powered devices work by absorbing heat from the air.
They are said to be more efficient than gas boilers and can be powered by renewable resources, rather than relying on fossil fuels.
The pumps were installed on land off Whitwell Road last year, and planning permission was only sought afterwards.
The nearest homes, on Broomhill Lane, are only around 5m away from the pumps, and problems began shortly after the pumps started whirring.
In an email to Broadland District Council, seen by this newspaper, one resident wrote: "There is an increase in the noise nuisance this proposal creates and it has a detrimental effect on our amenity spaces.
"This is a comedy of errors which [the council] should be ashamed of."
Mark Bridges, who lives nearby and is a long-term campaigner of local issues in Reepham, said: "They are very noisy. They are a 24-hour noise nuisance."
He blamed the council for allowing the pumps to be installed in the first place, without being able to reduce the noise pollution.
He said there were "cheaper, more efficient" schemes which should have been considered.
Locals say they were assured the pumps would be switched off on bank holidays and during the school holidays, but they claim they have been left running.
Mr Mayhew said: “Whilst I welcome the school’s efforts to reduce the carbon impact of their heating system, this needs to be done in a way that is considerate to their neighbours and compliant with the planning system.
“I will continue to help local residents to make sure their concerns are properly considered."
The council said it had investigated the complaints and monitored the noise made by the pumps.
A spokesman said: “The council has been working with all parties to get to a position that has enabled matters to move forwards.
“Noise testing of the pumps has been carried out and concerns and complaints have been investigated by the council’s Planning Enforcement Team.
“The proposals which provide an alternative source of renewable energy to the school will reduce the reliance on centralised, non-renewable energy sources and make a positive contribution towards achieving green energy targets, tackling the challenges of climate change and reducing the reliance on finite energy sources.”
Reepham High School and College head teacher, Tim Gibbs, said: “While I am sympathetic to the complaints raised by our neighbours, we have responded to all of their concerns and remain compliant in everything we have done with the installation of the air source heat pumps."
https://www.edp24.co.uk/news/23601201.row-reepham-school-criticised-eco-heat-pumps/
The council’s boast that they are “tackling the challenges of climate change” is laughable.Do they really believe that two heat pumps will stop global warming in its tracks?
But it is this sort of sort of mentality that makes them think they can run roughshod over the interests of ordinary people.
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
And they wonder why the population is slowly ( or not so slowly in many cases) being driven quite insane by the proliferation of such ‘initiatives’.
There is no way any air source heat pumps can be made silent. They will all lead to an insoluble problem which will severely affect peoples mental health.
“….will reduce the reliance on centralised, non-renewable energy sources and make a positive contribution towards achieving green energy targets, tackling the challenges of climate change and reducing the reliance on finite energy sources.”
Spoken like, or possibly even by, an “I Speak Your Weight” machine. Reminds me of an Asimov story (I think ‘Foundation’) where a speech by some hi’falutin bureaucrat was analysed for content. Every statement was cancelled out by another statement. The speech consisted, if I recall, of nothing but the words “good morning”! Remarkably similar.
I am guessing these are air to air heat pumps (we have them in our house). They have been around for many years for institutional buildings simply to reduce energy costs (they use about 25% of the electricity for the same heat output). They can also act as air conditioners.
I wonder why they didn’t install them in the roof. We did that for our Town Hall (not practical in our house) and it dramatically reduced energy costs while remaining very quiet.
It’s the usual language of ‘tackling’ climate change instead of adapting – something the human race has been doing for thousands of years. I wonder how much thes heat pumps cost compared to gas/oil fired boilers?
Please excuse the typo
My council has recently published guidance for their planners on eco-ising new housing but it’s all on a “nice to have” basis because they know developers won’t comply for profitability reasons and lack of buyer enthusiasm. The only properties built locally that go anywhere near their specs are affordable housing financed by taxpayers and with captive customers. The extra cost will be met by taxpayers because rent formulae don’t recognise it
“The nearest homes, on Broomhill Lane, are only around 5m away from the pumps…”
5m —about the width of a domestic living-room— is an absurdly short distance to place industrial-capacity air-handling units from living accommodation.
“… and planning permission was only sought afterwards.”? In the words of the poet: ‘someone hath blundered.’
We all know how councils usually respond when a member of the public “Forgets” to apply for planning permission until afterwards!
There is no such thing as “carbon impact”!
Don’t buy a diamond ring ..
Imagine how much noise there would be if the whole of Reepham went over to heat pumps.
If heating a school makes that much noise imagine how much noise would be generated if they tried to heat, and provide hot water for, a large hospital or skyscraper with heat pumps.
Imagine how much quieter they would be if they were buried under a heap of soil. A nice job for the summer holidays when they are not there….
If I lived that close I think I’d go and park my car outside the planners house and turn the radio up to a similar noise level. Let him get a feeling for it….
In all probability the environment team will still be using noise measurement methodology designed to prevent hearing damage in industry etc. that completely ignores the psychological and physiological harm of quiet ‘annoying’ and low frequency noises. Indeed the pump noise may not register any increase over background levels when measured with whatever dB meter weighting filter they use, but a hum may be clearly audible because of its distinct characteristic.
If the UK adopted Australian standards for siting and noise from air conditioning and swimming pool pumps etc. for heat pumps, hardly any would be viable.
The noise comes from fans drawing air over the evaporator coils. I seem to remember around the mid-70s someone devising an evaporator coil from a long length of copper tubing wound in the shape of a conifer, It relied on natural convection. The bonus was when it iced up it had a pleasing wintry appearance.
I have an air source heat pump heating our pool and it isover 40 yds from the house but it can still be heard on a windless day.
I saw an installed air heat pump for the first time in Canada fifty years ago. It stood outside the house and was noisy indeed. However its main use was in Summer to cool the house, and the noise was similar to the standard air conditioners, which sat in the walls of many homes and vented outwards with the familiar rattling roar. So the noise was not an additional problem – there; we do not have a culture of employing noisy individual air conditioners. Of course, the machine was completely unused for heating during the winter because the air is so cold.
This is taken from the report above:-
“They are said to be more efficient than gas boilers and can be powered by renewable resources, rather than relying on fossil fuels. ”
The big trouble with that belief is that it is false, how can a device that uses fuel at the point of use be less effcient than one that uses fuel very far from point of use and that converted fuel (electrcity) is then transported to power a heat pump. There is a lot of lost energy between the two.
I have just written my third reply to the Department of Energy (In)Security and Net Zero to try and make them see you cannot calculate the efficiency of a heat pump (280% efficient is their claim) using the electrical units that powers it. You must use the amount of electrical units generated to power it. That is efficiency, i.e. work done using quantity of fuel consumed. A clue is the physical limits of efficiency which cannot reach 100%.
Using the heat pump industry’s own figures for a ground source heat pump (CoP of 5) and that nothing is 100% efficient means that at least five times the electricity has to be generated for the one supplying a GS heat pump. Using the Department’s figure of 280% for an air source gives an effciency of no more than 56% (280/5) significantly below even older gas boilers.
The can be powered by renewable energy is also false , they are powered by gas which provides all the extra load imposed on the grid.
The Council and School are not being honest.
Noise nuisance from Air Source heat pumps is a well known planning issue. The ASHP should not have been sited on the boundary all the guidance says this is prohibited.
I had similar issues, but the school and council in my vicinity acted correctly and put in a planning application beforehand, so I was able to raise reasonable objections in the planning process and after a bit of falling out the location of units was moved. The noise now only adversely affects the school !