Charlie Pridham wrote:
"Mike Lyle" wrote in message
...
chris French wrote:
In message , JennyC
[...]
OK, so when is the best time plant wise to go (inside and out)?
We can dress for the weather :~))

The spring bulbs looked good on the TV program last week

Let's hear it for the national Botanic Garden of Wales, if it's
managed to survive. Wonderful place, and lots of other stuff to do
in
the area. Maybe rather drier than Cornwall, too?

How does Eden rate on the conservation scale? I haven't been
there,
and know nothing about it, but all that glassware looks dodgy from
an
energy-consumption point of view.

--
Mike.

Its not glass, its a double skin of some sort of high tech plastic
with air between (they are really quite thick when seen close to,
1'
or more) and is extremely energy efficient, the individual panels
behave rather like magnifying glasses.

I used the term "glass" in a loose horticultural sense, not in a
literal fused-silicon one. I still worry about the principle. Are
they doing something important with their energy that the experts at
Kew are failing to do? And how does their total "energy account" add
up at the bottom of the page?

As I confessed, I know nothing about the project; but I have serious
theoretical doubts about its value.

--
Mike.

"Mike Lyle" wrote in message
...
Charlie Pridham wrote:
"Mike Lyle" wrote in message
...
chris French wrote:
In message , JennyC
[...]
OK, so when is the best time plant wise to go (inside and out)?
We can dress for the weather :~))

The spring bulbs looked good on the TV program last week

Let's hear it for the national Botanic Garden of Wales, if it's
managed to survive. Wonderful place, and lots of other stuff to do
in
the area. Maybe rather drier than Cornwall, too?

How does Eden rate on the conservation scale? I haven't been
there,
and know nothing about it, but all that glassware looks dodgy from
an
energy-consumption point of view.

--
Mike.

Its not glass, its a double skin of some sort of high tech plastic
with air between (they are really quite thick when seen close to,
1'
or more) and is extremely energy efficient, the individual panels
behave rather like magnifying glasses.

I used the term "glass" in a loose horticultural sense, not in a
literal fused-silicon one. I still worry about the principle. Are
they doing something important with their energy that the experts at
Kew are failing to do? And how does their total "energy account" add
up at the bottom of the page?

As I confessed, I know nothing about the project; but I have serious
theoretical doubts about its value.

--
Mike.

I understand their heating bill is a lot smaller than other greenhouse
structures because as already mentioned they have good insulation but also
because while in the pictures it all looks free standing it is actually like
a lean to and set into the side of a quarry, they get very good heat
retention. As to its value, well not everyone agrees but is widely credited
with a huge rise in the prosperity of the whole county. It certainly makes a
lot of money (which as a charity they plough back into other projects)
--
Charlie, gardening in Cornwall.
http://www.roselandhouse.co.uk
Holders of National Plant Collection of Clematis viticella (cvs)

Charlie Pridham wrote:
Its not glass, its a double skin of some sort of high tech plastic with air
between (they are really quite thick when seen close to, 1' or more) and is
extremely energy efficient, the individual panels behave rather like
magnifying glasses.

Yup. Those panels let more day light in than glass. The entrance of
Piccadilly train station in Manchester is built with the same stuff.
They also have a lower environmental impact than glass. We went to Eden
2 years ago in August and all my youngest can remember is the 'glassed
jungle where James Bond slided on'... I enjoyed it very much,
especially the californian meadows.