I think that's actually far worse than what we have at the moment.
Why, out of interest?
I do wonder why we need a second chamber at all, and unless someone comes up with a convincing argument abolition is the option I'd actually support, but if we are going to have one I think it should be elected (100%, and no bishops either). Appointment gives too much control to the PM; see afleitch's comment, basically.
I like STV (reasonably proportional but retaining voting for the person rather than the party). That leaves the election by thirds 15-year thing; I think I can see where they're coming from on this (and it isn't new, is it?) as an attempt to make it a different sort of chamber from the Commons while still being elected, but I'm not convinced.