Today's most viewed
Heaven and earth
 |
| St Laurence's Church: no heating |
A CHURCH is exploring the possibility of harnessing the power of the Earth to keep its congregation warm.
St Laurence's Church, in Lawrence Street, York, is undergoing a £1 million restoration. There is currently no heating system in the church but after winning support from English Heritage the church is considering installing a geo-thermal system.
Andrew Boyce is church architect at Ferrey and Mennim Chartered Architects, in Goodramgate, York.
He said at this stage installing a geo-thermal heating system in the church was just an idea and needed more research to check that it was viable.
But he said that his understanding was that with the size of the site it may be possible to run water-filled pipes around the church horizontally. The heat collected would then be used to heat the building with the aid of a transformer.
Another alternative would be to sink bore-holes, which would also be filled with water, and for the same process to occur although this would depend on the suitability of the ground. He said it was unlikely a geo-thermal heating system could provide all the heat the church needed, but it could be used to off-set the amount of power used from more conventional sources.
Mr Boyce said: "There would also have to be some sensitivity with regard to the graves but again that needs some research."
Brian Fletcher, church warden at St Laurence's, said there had been no heating in the church for eight years and English Heritage, which is bankrolling much of the restoration, was keen for the church to harness environmentally-friendly fuel and were also keen that underfloor heating be installed to help prevent the build up of condensation. Geo-thermal heating, which could cost about £150,000, was being considered because other "green" energy supplies appeared to be unviable. For example, solar heating would require too many panels to be installed in the church's roof.
Mr Fletcher said it was hoped that any heating system would be installed before the end of the year so parishioners did not have to endure the cold of another winter in the church.
Have your say
Is geo-thermal heating a
practical idea?
1:59pm Wednesday 26th March 2008
Print 
Email this 
CommentPosted by: BL on 2:18pm Wed 26 Mar 08
Surely someone must have invented stained glass solar panels by now?
Surely someone must have invented stained glass solar panels by now?
Posted by: bobby dazzler, york on 2:24pm Wed 26 Mar 08
More to the point why waste a million quid on that dump that 5 people a week turn up to!
More to the point why waste a million quid on that dump that 5 people a week turn up to!
Posted by: Stephen, York on 2:27pm Wed 26 Mar 08
Yes geo-thermal heating is a practical idea.
So why not dig up a stretch of the road to the church to lay the geo-thermal pipes. Thus not having to dig the grave yard.
Why not also include solar electric tiles in the steeple to also help with the reduction of future electric costs and drive the pumps needed for the geo-thermal heating.
Yes geo-thermal heating is a practical idea.
So why not dig up a stretch of the road to the church to lay the geo-thermal pipes. Thus not having to dig the grave yard.
Why not also include solar electric tiles in the steeple to also help with the reduction of future electric costs and drive the pumps needed for the geo-thermal heating.
Posted by: Paul Hepworth, York on 2:39pm Wed 26 Mar 08
[quote][bold]bobby dazzler[/bold] wrote:
More to the point why waste a million quid on that dump that 5 people a week turn up to![/quote] I think that the weekly congregation is more than five.
The chirch can also be used as a venue for events.
bobby dazzler wrote:
More to the point why waste a million quid on that dump that 5 people a week turn up to!
I think that the weekly congregation is more than five.
The chirch can also be used as a venue for events.
Posted by: Elizabeth, york on 2:40pm Wed 26 Mar 08
[quote][bold]bobby dazzler[/bold] wrote:
More to the point why waste a million quid on that dump that 5 people a week turn up to![/quote] Religion is important to some people. Plus it is important for historic buildings to be restored. They are living history. Why let it go to ruin just because you think its a 'dump that only 5 people a week turn up to' Any evidence for this?
bobby dazzler wrote:
More to the point why waste a million quid on that dump that 5 people a week turn up to!
Religion is important to some people. Plus it is important for historic buildings to be restored. They are living history. Why let it go to ruin just because you think its a 'dump that only 5 people a week turn up to' Any evidence for this?
Posted by: Cynic, York on 2:44pm Wed 26 Mar 08
[quote]Religion is important to some people. Plus it is important for historic buildings to be restored. They are living history. Why let it go to ruin just because you think its a 'dump that only 5 people a week turn up to' Any evidence for this?[/quote] It does have a small congregation (although the Pentecostal Evos now also use it), and there are plenty of churches in that part of York. It is an unremarkable Victorian church of no great historic or artistic merit and it it went it wouldn't be any great loss the the city. I agree with Bobby Dazzler that it's a waste of money.
Religion is important to some people. Plus it is important for historic buildings to be restored. They are living history. Why let it go to ruin just because you think its a 'dump that only 5 people a week turn up to' Any evidence for this?
It does have a small congregation (although the Pentecostal Evos now also use it), and there are plenty of churches in that part of York. It is an unremarkable Victorian church of no great historic or artistic merit and it it went it wouldn't be any great loss the the city. I agree with Bobby Dazzler that it's a waste of money.
Posted by: bobby dazzler, york on 2:45pm Wed 26 Mar 08
[quote][bold]Elizabeth[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]bobby dazzler[/bold] wrote: More to the point why waste a million quid on that dump that 5 people a week turn up to![/quote] Religion is important to some people. Plus it is important for historic buildings to be restored. They are living history. Why let it go to ruin just because you think its a 'dump that only 5 people a week turn up to' Any evidence for this?[/quote] Look 1 million pounds is rediculas! Also knowing memebers on church boards i am also aware that the preist gets enough money to look after "their church" Agree restoring history is good. But keeping it history is important to. By the sounds of it this is going to be a high tech church nothing like its original state?
Elizabeth wrote:
bobby dazzler wrote: More to the point why waste a million quid on that dump that 5 people a week turn up to!
Religion is important to some people. Plus it is important for historic buildings to be restored. They are living history. Why let it go to ruin just because you think its a 'dump that only 5 people a week turn up to' Any evidence for this?
Look 1 million pounds is rediculas! Also knowing memebers on church boards i am also aware that the preist gets enough money to look after "their church" Agree restoring history is good. But keeping it history is important to. By the sounds of it this is going to be a high tech church nothing like its original state?
Posted by: bobby dazzler, york on 2:45pm Wed 26 Mar 08
[quote][bold]Paul Hepworth[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]bobby dazzler[/bold] wrote: More to the point why waste a million quid on that dump that 5 people a week turn up to![/quote] I think that the weekly congregation is more than five. The chirch can also be used as a venue for events. [/quote] With one million so could a lot of places!
Paul Hepworth wrote:
bobby dazzler wrote: More to the point why waste a million quid on that dump that 5 people a week turn up to!
I think that the weekly congregation is more than five. The chirch can also be used as a venue for events.
With one million so could a lot of places!
Posted by: redp, Huntington on 2:55pm Wed 26 Mar 08
[quote][bold]bobby dazzler[/bold] wrote:
More to the point why waste a million quid on that dump that 5 people a week turn up to![/quote] What would you prefer, more flats?
bobby dazzler wrote:
More to the point why waste a million quid on that dump that 5 people a week turn up to!
What would you prefer, more flats?
Posted by: Cynic, York on 2:56pm Wed 26 Mar 08
[quote]What would you prefer, more flats?[/quote] Converting that church into flats would be frankly more useful than using it for half a dozen old biddies to go to church services in during the summer months when it isn't too cold!
What would you prefer, more flats?
Converting that church into flats would be frankly more useful than using it for half a dozen old biddies to go to church services in during the summer months when it isn't too cold!
Posted by: Cynic, York on 2:58pm Wed 26 Mar 08
[quote]Mr Boyce said: "There would also have to be some sensitivity with regard to the graves but again that needs some research."[/quote] I think you'll find that the present church was built on a field behind the churchyard of the old church (the tower of which still stands) and that there aren't any graves immediately around the present building.
Mr Boyce said: "There would also have to be some sensitivity with regard to the graves but again that needs some research."
I think you'll find that the present church was built on a field behind the churchyard of the old church (the tower of which still stands) and that there aren't any graves immediately around the present building.
Posted by: bobby dazzler, york on 3:05pm Wed 26 Mar 08
[quote][bold]redp[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]bobby dazzler[/bold] wrote: More to the point why waste a million quid on that dump that 5 people a week turn up to![/quote] What would you prefer, more flats?[/quote] Nah flats are even more of a eye sore then that church and the people who walk into it. With the money you could clean the dirty buildings next to the river or even finish off the minster which has looked like a building site for the last 10 years! The money could actually be put to far better use! i.e the bar walls that are hammered!
redp wrote:
bobby dazzler wrote: More to the point why waste a million quid on that dump that 5 people a week turn up to!
What would you prefer, more flats?
Nah flats are even more of a eye sore then that church and the people who walk into it. With the money you could clean the dirty buildings next to the river or even finish off the minster which has looked like a building site for the last 10 years! The money could actually be put to far better use! i.e the bar walls that are hammered!
Posted by: Jo, York on 3:30pm Wed 26 Mar 08
What did they take the photograph with, a 1998 cameraphone?
What did they take the photograph with, a 1998 cameraphone?
Posted by: bobby dazzler, york on 3:35pm Wed 26 Mar 08
[quote][bold]Jo[/bold] wrote:
What did they take the photograph with, a 1998 cameraphone?[/quote] The press had just got updated equiptment due to selling loads of papers with recent classic and gripping stories.
Jo wrote:
What did they take the photograph with, a 1998 cameraphone?
The press had just got updated equiptment due to selling loads of papers with recent classic and gripping stories.
Posted by: Ninjacuts, York on 3:50pm Wed 26 Mar 08
[quote][bold]Cynic[/bold] wrote:
[quote]Mr Boyce said: "There would also have to be some sensitivity with regard to the graves but again that needs some research."[/quote] I think you'll find that the present church was built on a field behind the churchyard of the old church (the tower of which still stands) and that there aren't any graves immediately around the present building.[/quote] Yes and do people also realise that the remaining church tower dates back to before the English civil war?
If you ask me the money is well spent and once the church is done up then maybe it could be used for other events!
Cynic wrote:
Mr Boyce said: "There would also have to be some sensitivity with regard to the graves but again that needs some research."
I think you'll find that the present church was built on a field behind the churchyard of the old church (the tower of which still stands) and that there aren't any graves immediately around the present building.
Yes and do people also realise that the remaining church tower dates back to before the English civil war?
If you ask me the money is well spent and once the church is done up then maybe it could be used for other events!
Posted by: bobby dazzler, york on 4:01pm Wed 26 Mar 08
[quote][bold]Ninjacuts[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Cynic[/bold] wrote: [quote]Mr Boyce said: "There would also have to be some sensitivity with regard to the graves but again that needs some research."[/quote] I think you'll find that the present church was built on a field behind the churchyard of the old church (the tower of which still stands) and that there aren't any graves immediately around the present building.[/quote] Yes and do people also realise that the remaining church tower dates back to before the English civil war? If you ask me the money is well spent and once the church is done up then maybe it could be used for other events![/quote] ??????? A million pounds to add a heating system? And what other events are going to ever be held in a church apart from ceremonys?
Ninjacuts wrote:
Cynic wrote: Mr Boyce said: "There would also have to be some sensitivity with regard to the graves but again that needs some research."
I think you'll find that the present church was built on a field behind the churchyard of the old church (the tower of which still stands) and that there aren't any graves immediately around the present building.
Yes and do people also realise that the remaining church tower dates back to before the English civil war? If you ask me the money is well spent and once the church is done up then maybe it could be used for other events!
??????? A million pounds to add a heating system? And what other events are going to ever be held in a church apart from ceremonys?
Posted by: ennoch, York on 4:03pm Wed 26 Mar 08
"The Campanoloogy & Firkin" has a nice ring?
"The Campanoloogy & Firkin" has a nice ring?
Posted by: Cynic, York on 4:15pm Wed 26 Mar 08
[quote]Yes and do people also realise that the remaining church tower dates back to before the English civil war?[/quote] Yes, but what's that got to do with the present building? The old tower belongs to the Churches Conservation Trust and isn't the responsibility of the present St Laurence's church.
I can't see that we need any more churches which can be used as concert venues: we already have the NCEM (a former church) five minutes' from St Laurece, and elsewhere there is the Minster and plenty more churches which can be and are used for concerts.
Yes and do people also realise that the remaining church tower dates back to before the English civil war?
Yes, but what's that got to do with the present building? The old tower belongs to the Churches Conservation Trust and isn't the responsibility of the present St Laurence's church.
I can't see that we need any more churches which can be used as concert venues: we already have the NCEM (a former church) five minutes' from St Laurece, and elsewhere there is the Minster and plenty more churches which can be and are used for concerts.
Posted by: Pleb, York on 6:04pm Wed 26 Mar 08
As church attendances are generally falling there is no need to save the building as a church. The small number of people attending services could easily go to another church -- it would be cost effective for them to go to/from by bus or taxi.
If the building really has architecural merit then it might be worth saving, but only if a good use is identified for it before the money is spent.
As church attendances are generally falling there is no need to save the building as a church. The small number of people attending services could easily go to another church -- it would be cost effective for them to go to/from by bus or taxi.
If the building really has architecural merit then it might be worth saving, but only if a good use is identified for it before the money is spent.
Posted by: Silver, York on 7:45pm Wed 26 Mar 08
[quote][bold]Ninjacuts[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Cynic[/bold] wrote: [quote]Mr Boyce said: "There would also have to be some sensitivity with regard to the graves but again that needs some research."[/quote] I think you'll find that the present church was built on a field behind the churchyard of the old church (the tower of which still stands) and that there aren't any graves immediately around the present building.[/quote] Yes and do people also realise that the remaining church tower dates back to before the English civil war? If you ask me the money is well spent and once the church is done up then maybe it could be used for other events![/quote] Its not like the money won't pay for itself, even small congregations feel cold and is a nice use of money.
Ninjacuts wrote:
Cynic wrote: Mr Boyce said: "There would also have to be some sensitivity with regard to the graves but again that needs some research."
I think you'll find that the present church was built on a field behind the churchyard of the old church (the tower of which still stands) and that there aren't any graves immediately around the present building.
Yes and do people also realise that the remaining church tower dates back to before the English civil war? If you ask me the money is well spent and once the church is done up then maybe it could be used for other events!
Its not like the money won't pay for itself, even small congregations feel cold and is a nice use of money.
Posted by: bernard briggs on 1:50am Thu 27 Mar 08
when did it become St Laurence's instead of W. I used to go there in the 60s when the primary school was next to it and Im sure it was St Lawrences
when did it become St Laurence's instead of W. I used to go there in the 60s when the primary school was next to it and Im sure it was St Lawrences
Posted by: jackie clayton on 3:54am Thu 27 Mar 08
No Bernard you are wrong. I also went to St. Lawrences school and was confirmed at St. Laurences Church. Don't know why it was spelt differently but it was.
Big Jack Barnawartha
No Bernard you are wrong. I also went to St. Lawrences school and was confirmed at St. Laurences Church. Don't know why it was spelt differently but it was.
Big Jack Barnawartha
Posted by: Cari, York on 11:01am Thu 27 Mar 08
[quote][bold]bobby dazzler[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Ninjacuts[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Cynic[/bold] wrote: [quote]Mr Boyce said: "There would
also have to be some sensitivity with regard to the graves but again
that needs some research."[/quote] I think you'll find that the present
church was built on a field behind the churchyard of the old church
(the tower of which still stands) and that there aren't any graves
immediately around the present building.[/quote] Yes and do people also
realise that the remaining church tower dates back to before the
English civil war? If you ask me the money is well spent and once the
church is done up then maybe it could be used for other events![/quote]
??????? A million pounds to add a heating system? And what other events
are going to ever be held in a church apart from ceremonys?[/quote] bobby read the story again, the geo thermal heating is not costing 1 million but about £150,000. The 1 million is being used for restoration, probably on jobs like roof and stone repairs.
bobby dazzler wrote:
Ninjacuts wrote:
Cynic wrote: Mr Boyce said: "There would
also have to be some sensitivity with regard to the graves but again
that needs some research."
I think you'll find that the present
church was built on a field behind the churchyard of the old church
(the tower of which still stands) and that there aren't any graves
immediately around the present building.
Yes and do people also
realise that the remaining church tower dates back to before the
English civil war? If you ask me the money is well spent and once the
church is done up then maybe it could be used for other events!
??????? A million pounds to add a heating system? And what other events
are going to ever be held in a church apart from ceremonys?
bobby read the story again, the geo thermal heating is not costing 1 million but about £150,000. The 1 million is being used for restoration, probably on jobs like roof and stone repairs.
Posted by: bobby dazzler, york on 12:24pm Thu 27 Mar 08
[quote][bold]Cari[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]bobby dazzler[/bold] wrote: [quote][bold]Ninjacuts[/bold] wrote: [quote][bold]Cynic[/bold] wrote: [quote]Mr Boyce said: "There would also have to be some sensitivity with regard to the graves but again that needs some research."[/quote] I think you'll find that the present church was built on a field behind the churchyard of the old church (the tower of which still stands) and that there aren't any graves immediately around the present building.[/quote] Yes and do people also realise that the remaining church tower dates back to before the English civil war? If you ask me the money is well spent and once the church is done up then maybe it could be used for other events![/quote] ??????? A million pounds to add a heating system? And what other events are going to ever be held in a church apart from ceremonys?[/quote] bobby read the story again, the geo thermal heating is not costing 1 million but about £150,000. The 1 million is being used for restoration, probably on jobs like roof and stone repairs.[/quote] Read between the lines! 1million is rediculas for resturation for a church that is not used and could simply get by with less then half that sum! How are you planning on reparing stone? That wouldn't be keeping history nor would it look like it. The roof would have to become modern. I do not get were the money is being used to keep the church a part of history when in reality they are going to make it a new church and waste 1m quid on it!!! its a f@#kin descrase!
Cari wrote:
bobby dazzler wrote: Ninjacuts wrote: Cynic wrote: Mr Boyce said: "There would also have to be some sensitivity with regard to the graves but again that needs some research."
I think you'll find that the present church was built on a field behind the churchyard of the old church (the tower of which still stands) and that there aren't any graves immediately around the present building.
Yes and do people also realise that the remaining church tower dates back to before the English civil war? If you ask me the money is well spent and once the church is done up then maybe it could be used for other events!
??????? A million pounds to add a heating system? And what other events are going to ever be held in a church apart from ceremonys?
bobby read the story again, the geo thermal heating is not costing 1 million but about £150,000. The 1 million is being used for restoration, probably on jobs like roof and stone repairs.
Read between the lines! 1million is rediculas for resturation for a church that is not used and could simply get by with less then half that sum! How are you planning on reparing stone? That wouldn't be keeping history nor would it look like it. The roof would have to become modern. I do not get were the money is being used to keep the church a part of history when in reality they are going to make it a new church and waste 1m quid on it!!! its a f@#kin descrase!
Posted by: AdmiralN, York Centre on 1:45pm Thu 27 Mar 08
I thought that geo-thermal systems could only be used in areas where the earths crust was thinner such as austrailia. personally i cant really see this being given the go ahead as its just not commercially viable. The church group will have to knit some extra cardigans!
I thought that geo-thermal systems could only be used in areas where the earths crust was thinner such as austrailia. personally i cant really see this being given the go ahead as its just not commercially viable. The church group will have to knit some extra cardigans!
Posted by: AdmiralN, York Centre on 1:56pm Thu 27 Mar 08
[quote]How are you planning on reparing stone?[/quote]
I work at a stonemasons and broken stone can be glued back together, cracked stone can be filled, real old knackered stone can be replaced with material from the same quarry, it can be dowelled, ground, stuck, sawn etc. This can be done to a very high standard by someone with the right skills!
How are you planning on reparing stone?
I work at a stonemasons and broken stone can be glued back together, cracked stone can be filled, real old knackered stone can be replaced with material from the same quarry, it can be dowelled, ground, stuck, sawn etc. This can be done to a very high standard by someone with the right skills!
Posted by: Cari, York on 3:33pm Thu 27 Mar 08
[quote][bold]AdmiralN[/bold] wrote:
[quote]How are you planning on reparing stone?[/quote] I work at a
stonemasons and broken stone can be glued back together, cracked stone
can be filled, real old knackered stone can be replaced with material
from the same quarry, it can be dowelled, ground, stuck, sawn etc. This
can be done to a very high standard by someone with the right skills![/quote] And of course the more highly skilled, usually the higher the cost, or should be just let all the old buildings fall into a state of disrepair until something falls off one of them and kills someone?
AdmiralN wrote:
How are you planning on reparing stone?
I work at a
stonemasons and broken stone can be glued back together, cracked stone
can be filled, real old knackered stone can be replaced with material
from the same quarry, it can be dowelled, ground, stuck, sawn etc. This
can be done to a very high standard by someone with the right skills!
And of course the more highly skilled, usually the higher the cost, or should be just let all the old buildings fall into a state of disrepair until something falls off one of them and kills someone?
Posted by: Dave McBridge, York on 6:32pm Mon 31 Mar 08
English heritage get enough money each year to do up old buildings, even if they are underused.
I'd rather have a church there than another stonebow house, or something else 'modern'.... council offices for instance!
English heritage get enough money each year to do up old buildings, even if they are underused.
I'd rather have a church there than another stonebow house, or something else 'modern'.... council offices for instance!
Posted by: Charlie, York on 3:56pm Wed 2 Apr 08
[quote][bold]AdmiralN[/bold] wrote:
I thought that geo-thermal systems could only be used in areas where the earths crust was thinner such as austrailia. personally i cant really see this being given the go ahead as its just not commercially viable. The church group will have to knit some extra cardigans![/quote] No, they're actually in common usage in the uk:
http://www.energysav
ingtrust.org.uk/gene
rate_your_own_energy
/types_of_renewables
/ground_source_heat_
pumps
AdmiralN wrote:
I thought that geo-thermal systems could only be used in areas where the earths crust was thinner such as austrailia. personally i cant really see this being given the go ahead as its just not commercially viable. The church group will have to knit some extra cardigans!
No, they're actually in common usage in the uk:
http://www.energysav
ingtrust.org.uk/gene
rate_your_own_energy
/types_of_renewables
/ground_source_heat_
pumps
What are these links for?
If you liked this article and would like to share it with others on the web who might be searching for good content we've made it easy for you to do it.
At the bottom of all articles, you'll see links to six sites. These sites - commonly called 'social bookmark' or 'social news' sites - have large communities of web users who share and rate interesting, useful and fun things on the web.
Clicking the links will automatically add the address of the story you are reading to one of these sites, letting you share it with others. Each site will ask you to register to share stories. Registration is free and once a member, you can store, recommend and search for stories that interest you.
More on Digg
More on del.icio.us
More on Furl
More on reddit
More on NowPublic/
More on Yahoo!
