Energy efficiency in residential dwellings

One in every five UK households are currently in fuel poverty. Coupled with the fact that energy providers are continually raising their prices, this issue is becoming increasingly prominent; the basic necessity of keeping warm can no longer be taken for granted. It is estimated that a minimum of 5.5 million people within the UK are living in houses that are inadequately heated

Source: www.eco-uk.co.uk

Fuel poverty occurs when a household spends 10% or more of its income on fuel; figures show that one in every five UK households are currently in fuel poverty. Coupled with the fact that energy providers are continually raising their prices, this issue is becoming increasingly prominent; the basic necessity of keeping warm can no longer be taken for granted. It is estimated that a minimum of 5.5 million people within the UK are living in houses that are inadequately heated due to self-rationing, made necessary by insufficient funds (The Guardian 2011). Modern new build properties benefit from legislation such as Part L of the Building Regulations, which ensure that construction is adequately insulated. Efficient methods of heating property are also being implemented more regularly; this however, provides no relief for the millions of people living within existing housing stock. 

While there are ways in which home-owners can improve thermal efficiency, methods often require financial investment (sometimes substantial), and exhibit long payback periods. Improving thermal efficiency, using external wall insulation for example, can result in payback periods of 12 years and cost as much as £65 per square metre (Oxford Solar n.d.). This can mean that while people may want to improve their homes, the same financial concerns which mean they are subjected to cold living conditions, prevent steps being taken to make improvements.  In addition to financial benefits, increasing efficiency will also result in fewer carbon emissions. The Climate Change Act 2008 has made the UK the only Country which has introduced a legally binding framework intended to address climate change by reducing emissions by at least 80% by 2050, when compared to the levels seen in 1990 (Committee on Climate Change n.d). Ensuring that existing homes are used efficiently is a cost effective way of contributing towards this target. The former coalition government saw Green Deal as a vehicle for meeting these targets; however Green Deal did not have the effect that the government had hoped. 

A Thermostatic Radiator Valve (TRV) - Source: abodesolutions.com

Daniel Coghlan, a recent graduate of mine at Coventry University, considered energy efficiency in residential dwellings as part of his final year dissertation, and undertook some very interesting research. The purpose of the research was to ascertain whether heating costs could be reduced by using an existing heating system more efficiently. If this was possible then this would allow savings to be made with little or no financial investment. The research involved taking meter readings in a selected residential property both before and after alterations were made to the use and set-up of the heating system. The usage during both periods was then compared to ascertain whether the alterations that were made have affected the efficiency of the central heating system, and if they have, to what extent.  The property selected was a detached 1970’s house with insulated cavity walls. The heating system comprised of a condensing combination boiler which fed a wet radiator array; heat was controlled using a programmer integral to the boiler, a central room thermostat and thermostatic radiator valves on each of the radiators.

A meter reading was taken on the 1st October 2011 and one was obtained from the resident for the 1st September 2011. The resident at the property was then left to utilise the heating system as they normally would; repeat readings were taken at the first of each month for a total period of 3 months, ending on 01st December 2012. The purpose of this was to ascertain energy usage over a set period of time prior to any system alterations. Following this, alterations were made to the system. These alterations included:

       1. Bleed radiators to remove trapped air
       2. Balance System
       3. Discuss room use and set TRVs accordingly
       4. Reduce temperature of system slightly
       5. Remove restrictions surrounding TRVs
       6. Set a programme timer suitable for general daily use
       
The results from the case study showed that alterations made to the set-up and use of the central heating system within the property resulted in a reduction of 18% in energy usage. It is understood that there were a number of limitations to the research, however this result  provides a strong indication that considered use can improve efficiency. In addition to the case study a questionnaire was devised to establish the levels of understanding of the use of a central heating system. Of the returned questionnaires, only 14% of those who responded used their central heating systems efficiently. Therefore, the combined result of the research shows that the efficiency of a central heating system can be improved by altering use, and currently, there is a deficiency in understanding or common practice of incorrect central heating system use within the UK.  

Limitations with the research were; 

Within the case study, monitoring was undertaken for three months in each period consecutively. This meant that varying weather conditions will have affected the boiler efficiency and the consequential energy consumption may not be completely representative of the alterations made. 

Another consideration is gas usage within the case study property as gas is not used exclusively for heating; the cooker hob is also fuelled using gas. This means that, while the same number of residents were residing within the property during both periods, varying eating patterns may have introduced further inaccuracy into the results. December for example is a time when residents are off work, and likely to entertain, again resulting in more cooking, higher gas usage and less reliable results. 

Different families are likely to have different comfort requirements and eating habits for example. In addition to this, differing windows, doors, thermal insulation, boiler type and radiator sizing for example would all make data obtained from different properties less directly comparable.  In addition there are a number of potential limitations commonly associated with observational information gathering techniques, such as when individuals or groups of individuals are aware they are being watched, they can sometimes change their behaviour, a phenomenon known as the Hawthorne effect (Kumar 2005: 120-121).

Despite these limitations the research demonstrated that energy and consequently cost savings can be made by educating and encouraging people to use their heating systems more efficiently.  Notwithstanding the fact that buildings also need to be made thermally efficient in the first instance, otherwise all of the heat created is likely to disappear through the walls.

(The above article is a summary of research undertaken by Daniel Coghlan BSc(Hons) as part of his final year dissertation at Coventry University and is published with the express permission of Daniel)

Please feel free to share this article and other articles on this site with friends, family and colleagues who you think would be interested

Information/opinions posted on this site are the personal views of the author and should not be relied upon by any person or any third party without first seeking further professional advice. Also, please scroll down and read the copyright notice at the end of the blog. 

Green Deal – Five reasons why take up is so slow

Unless awareness is significantly increased and consumers can be convinced that the scheme will provide financial benefits to them, then unfortunately the Green Deal will be doomed to failure.

Source: http://www.eecuk.co.uk/

At present it seems that whatever you read in the press or hear in the media about the Green Deal, is nothing but negative.  A chaotic, confusing and frustrating image is painted of something that the Government had hoped would have members of the public scrambling for energy efficient enhancements to their buildings.  This was all based on the premise that any costs for these enhancements would be ‘absorbed’ by the savings that would be made on future energy bills, something referred to as the Golden Rule. Therefore, the cost of any enhancements should not be noticed by the consumer or business. Seems very simple doesn’t it? So why has take up been so slow (some would argue embarrassing!) since the Green Deal was officially launched on 28^th January 2013?

On May 15^th 2013 Knauf Insulation warned that ‘the latest Green Deal statistics, released by the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC), showed that it would take more than 200 years to reach the Government’s target of tackling 14 million homes, if the current rate of assessment continued….Data shows that 38,259 assessments have been carried out, resulting in just 245 plans being put in place – an embarrassingly low number that tells you everything you need to know. Behind the scenes the project has been mired in IT and other (legal) delays and, most depressingly for those who have trained as assessors, very few consumers know anything about it’

You may occasionally hear the odd Conservative Member of Parliament or representative from the insulation or renewable technology industry trying to put a more positive spin on the prospects of Green Deal however even in these instances you often feel that they are trying to convince themselves as much as the rest of us.  In short the introduction of Green Deal has shown that there are fundamental flaws in the way the scheme has been set up, the way it has been publicised and the way in which the general public perceive it.  Below I offer some suggestions (in no particular order) of why the Green Deal has so far struggled to have the desired impact:

Source: http://www.thegreendealfactory.co.uk/

1.  The Golden Rule suggests ‘no cost to consumer’?  - The principle of the Golden Rule is good as long as it works, however after making initial enquiries the consumer will soon find out that there are financial implications attached which will impact on them personally.  For example, they will be informed that there is an upfront cost of around £100 for a Green Deal Assessor to visit their property to undertake an inspection and assessment and to make recommendations for enhancements that will meet the Golden Rule.  The Green Deal Assessor will then produce a Green Deal Plan for which the consumer can then approach approved Green Deal Providers in order for the enhancements to be installed. The costs for these enhancements can then be financed through a loan, with interest currently set at 6.9%.

It will be extremely difficult to convince members of the public that taking up a loan and paying an upfront Green Deal Assessment fee, will not be a financial burden to them.  If Green Deal enhancements are implemented, even though there may be cost savings for future energy bills, most consumers live in the here and now, not the future, and will be more concerned with their immediate finances. This is where I think the Government have made an error, by underestimating the public perception of the scheme in the first place.

2.  Poor publicity – People just do not know about it. - Whatever has been done to date to publicise the scheme has not worked:  ‘Awareness about the Green Deal has been steadily rising, growing from 10 per cent before the scheme launched to 22 per cent last month (June 2013), according to latest figures from the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC). This follows a £2.9 million communications campaign by the Government when the Green Deal launched. But today's survey findings suggest that building awareness remains a major marketing challenge for many companies and there are growing calls from the industry to do more to incentivise take up of the Green Deal. Source: http://www.greenwisebusiness.co.uk

Awareness of the scheme is one thing however it would be interesting to find out what level of awareness the 22% above actually have.  For example, is their awareness restricted to having heard of the Green Deal or do they actually know about the scheme and how it works?  From the experience I have when talking to people I would suggest that it will more than likely be the former.

3.  Beset with problems – Financing, IT, Training Assessors – There has been a lot of publicity about these problems, not just after the Green Deal’s implementation but many months before.  ‘Energy Minister Greg Barker has blamed the lack of take-up on delays with setting up software systems to manage the Green Deal and funding problems for the long-term finance plans people take out to pay for the upgrades’. http://www.greenwisebusiness.co.uk 

Although these problems will have an impact on progress of Green Deal, they almost become irrelevant if consumers are not interested in the first place and do not take up the scheme.  Also, Green Deal has been years in the making and you would have expected these issues would have been ironed out before the scheme was implemented.    For the Energy Minister to blame the poor take up on these issues is a poor indictment of the way the scheme has been developed and implemented by the Government.

4.  Possibly seen as ‘blight’ to property as loan stays with the property  - One of the core principles of Green Deal is that the ‘loan’ belongs to the property and not the individual.  Therefore when property is bought and sold, any outstanding payments will become the responsibility of the new owner and deducted via their energy bills. This is an additional check that a Solicitor will need to make during the conveyance process.  Again, those who do not understand the scheme are likely to see this as an additional debt, which they may not have chosen for themselves and one that they may not be prepared to take on.

5.  Lack of interest in the environment and understanding of technologies - As much as many may want to contribute to a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, the vast majority of people will undoubtedly be motivated by the financial benefits 'signing up to the 'Green Deal' will bring to them, and herein lies a potential problem.  Many will have little to no knowledge of the numerous enhancements/renewable technologies that could be installed in their property.  In the event that a consumer proceeds with a Green Deal, it is likely that there will be confusion in the way that enhancement/technologies are used efficiently, which could actually prove to be very cost ineffective. It could prove to be difficult therefore to convince large numbers of people to sign up to a Green Deal scheme when they may have no interest in the environment, will not have any desire to learn about new technology and will not be prepared to take on any financial burden.  Basically, there will be people (and these could be in large numbers) who will just not be interested.

In summary, I have stated in a previous article that in principleGreen Deal is a good idea.  The problem however is the difference between in principle and in practice.  In practice although Green Deal is still in the early stages of implementation where it appears that the general public are both not aware and not convinced by the scheme, which is demonstrated by the extremely disappointed take up to date.  Unless awareness is significantly increased and consumers can be convinced that the scheme will provide financial benefits to them, then unfortunately the Green Deal will be doomed to failure.

Please feel free to share this article and other articles on this site with friends, family and colleagues who you think would be interested

Information/opinions posted on this site are the personal views of the author and should not be relied upon by any person or any third party without first seeking further professional advice. Also, please scroll down and read the copyright notice at the end of the blog.