Results: Searching for 'Buildings'

• This deliverable is number 2 of 7 in Work Package 2.
• It presents the initial approach to the costing methodology for thermal efficiency improvements to be employed by the project and incorporated into the computer model being developed.
• Accurate cost information for retrofit interventions is key to ensuring the identification and development of the optimum solutions for each housing archetype previously identified in deliverable D2.1.
• Costs of two types are considered:
  • Unit costs
  • Other fixed costs
• Costs are input for:
  • Loft insulation
  • Cavity wall insulation
  • Hot water tank insulation
  • Floor insulation
  • Replacement windows

• Pre-1919 detached houses
• Pre-1919 mid-terraced houses
• Pre-1919 converted flats
• 1919-1944 semi detached houses
• 1945-1964 semi detached houses

• To address the needs and requirements from a broad range of stakeholders in the national retrofit process
• To formulate a preliminary hierarchy of value of ‘home thermal efficiency’ for stakeholders
• To understand the various barriers and obstacles to the success of a national retrofit implementation plan
• To capture views from the participants and propose a strategy for capturing responses from other under-represented groups.
• To translate the outputs of the workshop into a framework for future deliverables to use as measures of success

1. To cover a sufficient range of house types to gain a good picture of the issues involved with implementing a mass retrofit programme
2. To take the whole house solutions in WP3.3 and examine them with regards to buildability, cost, carbon effectiveness and customer acceptance
3. To test out whole house solutions proposals on the most frequently occurring house types across the UK, focusing on the variations in construction and housing typology in England, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales

1. 1) Preparation to 2020
2. 2) Retrofit rollout 2020 to 2030
3. 3) Future scenarios 2030 to 2050.

• The 4 hour detailed survey with 2 people is possible (even for the most difficult house) and there is scope to reducethis further.
• It has been shown to be possible to retrofit the two levels of intervention, Retro Fix and Retro Plus, across the modelled house types in 10 elapsed days or less (depending on property size/ complexity and weather permitting) using a team of 4 poly-competent retrofitters.
• Increasing competencies will be vital to deliver retrofit brilliantly and at scale - new training systems are required to provide an up-skilling route for people wishing to enter the retrofit industry.
• New or simplified accreditation and warranty systems are needed for retrofit
• Standard retrofit solutions will help generate efficiency gains and simplify the provision of materials.
• Progress has been made to understand how cost is built up within the supply chain but further work is needed to allow key players to share cost information.
• Retrofit cost of under£10,000 for most house types is feasible but challenging for most house types based on our understanding of how cost is built up within the supply chain. More specific cost data will be generated for common house archetypes; these will be presented in follow up reports for this work package.

1. the individual building level, and
2. the UK housing stock level.

• A stock model that uses a simplified energy model as its calculation engine.
• A simplified model for individual dwelling calculations (the same model as used in the stock model).
• A detailed simulation model (or models) for individual dwelling modelling in situations where such a model is necessary.

• Develop a multi-skill site approach which enables seamless, cost-effective site work with minimal disruption to householders; instead of a series of trade based activities.
• Develop factory prepared kits, ready to fit, with short leadtimes; which speed up installation, minimise disruption and give assured quality performance.
• Generate supply solutions that treat retrofit as a System solution instead of a series of bolt on interventions. With product and service providers acting together there will be more potential to improve overall thermal performance, reduce cost and minimise householder disruption.

• a summary of 52 semi-structured interviews with householders who have experienced a building retrofit
• interviews were held with both owner occupiers and with tenants of social housing
• key conclusions from the interviews include
  • need to design out delays from the retrofit process,
  • provide suitable advice as and when the householder wants it,
  • consider the reduction of VAT from retrofit works and
  • design solutions which allow for the use of local tradesmen
  • minimal levels of maintenancegoing forwards.

• 15 one to one interviews,
• 10 focus groups and
• a survey of 20,000 people (932 responses) carried out by the consortium.

• A: Detailed Survey Methodology
• B: Survey Questionnaire
• C: Postal Survey Covering Letter with Glossary
• D: Email covering letter
• E: Survey Responses
• F: Focus Group Structure
• G – Example Focus Group Screener
• H – Virtual Retrofit Interview Script
• References

• The need for a major programme of training and skills development;
• Legislation to help bring the private rental sector into retrofit;
• Consolidation of advice, funding and policy streams;
• Focus on developing a link between asset value and energy performance
• Roles for a project manager or single-point-of-contact liaison officer would help ensure retrofit packages meet customer expectations.

• the existing methodologies available
• the choice of the Experian Mosaic-Green system.
• the ten customer segments are discussed along with their geographic distribution
• A first draft of the metrics is shown
• Further development of the segmentation model is discussed
• Appendices:
  • A: Extract of Micro DE 1.3 Report
  • B: Key datasets

• A summary of the Work Package and its deliverables;
• A final summary of the customer segmentation with segment profiles;
• A detailed summary of potential early adopter segments;
• Synthesis conclusions and recommendations;
• Evaluation of the deliverable and suggestions for future work.

• Validation of House Type and Customer Type Combinations
• Profiles of early adopters terms
  
  • Older Established
  • Stretched Pensioners
  • Transitional Retirees
  • Early Entrepeneurs

1. demographic profile
2. top house types
li>attitudes to refits
3. energy perceptions and behaviours

• A summary of the Work Package and its deliverables;
• A final summary of the customer segmentation;
• The early adopter segments;
• Synthesis conclusions and recommendations;
• Evaluation of the deliverable and suggestions for future work.

• existing methodologies
• choice of Experian Mosaic-Green
• work with Experian to refine the customer segments from their model in this specific context
• summarises the ten resulting customer segments
• presents a diagram showing their relationship to age and affluence
• describes the further work to be done

• English housing stock has been split into 36 different archetypes based on the dates of construction and the dwelling configuration.
• This is to support the analysis of retrofit interventions identified on an individual dwelling basis, and their subsequent extrapolation to the entire English housing stock.
• Data on key characteristics relevant to thermal efficiency or the costs of improvement are presented for each of the housing archetypes.

• Frequency
• Current notional CO₂ emissions
• Predominant wall type & presence of wall insulation
• Roof type
• Percentage of glazing
• Type of glazing
• Presence of bay windows
• Floor area
• Wall area
• Roof area
• Existing loft insulation thickness
• Notional CO₂ reductions following EPC recommended measures
• Presence of ‘additional part’ (an extension or extension-like area)
• Wall finish

1. Splitting the retrofit process into delivery steps and supporting activities, adding a description / specification at each step for the future state, this future state is documented in deliverables 4.3 and 4.4.
2. Add the current state for the existing supply chain
3. Identify the transformation route from current state to desired future state, the participants required to take action, prioritisation and the likely costs / timeframes. The goal is the capacity to achieve 400,000 retrofits per year by 2020. The result of this activity is the transformation plan identified in this deliverable.

• Transformational roadmap, plan and high level budget
• Stakeholder review
• Commercial drivers
• Obstacles & Risks
• Geographical Considerations
• Material and Process Change Requirements

• Householders want to limit the number of people in their home for retrofit work:
• A systems approach to design, manufacture, installation and maintenance of retrofitis likely to deliver significant benefits in cost, speed and efficiency.
• Integration of the whole spectrum of retrofit activities from survey, through design, product manufacture and installation is needed to retrofit of 26 million UK homes before 2050.
• Changes in incentives, accreditation and possibly legislation will be needed to allow required changes to working methods and systems of retrofit delivery to be successfully employed.

• Busy Starters
• Early Enterprisers
• Greener Graduates
• Middle Grounders
• Urban Constrained
• Successful Ruralites
• Unconvinced Dependents
• Transitional Retirees
• Elderly Established
• Stretched Pensioners

• Appendix 1-Survey Process Map
• Appendix 2-Extenal Wall Process Map
• Appendix 3-Internal Wall Timings (not available)
• Appendix 4 - FMEA workshop summary results
  1. Survey Process
  2. Installation Process
• Appendix 5 – Workshop presentations and attendance
  1. Attendees (not available)
  2. 9th June
  3. 12th July
  4. 7th September
  5. 8th September
  6. 13th September

• The current supply chain is split by silos around the existing trades:
  • Windows and doors
  • Loft / Roof insulation
  • Heating and plumbing
  • External insulation
  • Internal insulation
• Delivery of retrofit is centred on these trade silos resulting in duplication in the supply chain and retrofit installation businesses
• There is a piecemeal approach to retrofit design and installation again split by function resulting in a failure to achieve the performance and cost benefits of a systems engineered approach
• The skills and qualifications demanded to work legally and to satisfy warranty provisions with products used in retrofit are mostly general and not “right sized, and fit for the purpose” for a future mass retrofit market
• The existing supply chain is not configured for the retrofit market (which has yet to emerge) and there is no clear strategy for distribution and consolidation of products to effectively support and enable retrofit businesses.
• Routes to obtain funding and investment in domestic retrofit are unclear and the team has been unsuccessful in engaging with the financial community on this project. The green deal mayinclude mechanisms but is unlikely to enable the whole house retrofit systems approach.
• The survey process requires in depth study to provide a robust system to remove risk from the retrofit process. This is likely to include a large element of continuous monitoring, feedback and improvement as the industry forms and matures.
• Current trade skills are inappropriate for retrofit being broad based with limited cover for cross trade working. The retrofit installation process also requires in depth study to understand the basic competences and optimise team working to achieve the best value balance of number of people on site and time taken for retrofit.
• Trade qualifications and legislation for working with gas, water and electricity are likely to limit the speed and effectiveness of the development of retrofit unless reviewed and brought into line with the competence approach suggested here.
• New products are required to simplify retrofit activities and increase the robustness of the end result. Pre fabrication and off site material preparation are also seen as a requirement to increase speed and quality of installation results.
• Significant cost erosion is required to allow whole house retrofit to be a financially attractive investment to home owners.

• loft insulation,
• cavity wall insulation,
• tank and pipe insulation,
• high efficiency boiler installation,
• draughtproofing and
• repair of doors and windows

• Low Energy Victorian House (LEVH)
• Greener Homes for Redbridge
• Metropolitan Housing Trust
• Perry Street,Darlaston
• Birchcroft Smethwick
• 64 Beach Road, Sea Palling
• Zero Carbon House
• Eco-Energy Retrofit
• Self Heating Social Housing
• Solutions for a Holistic Optimal Retrofit (SHOR)
• BASF Meisterhäuser
• Hohenzöllernhöfe
• Brunck Quarter
• Köln
• The Luwoge Zero Heating Cost House
• L’Habitarelle
• Saint Fargeau -Maison Phénix

• Most effective intervention(s)
• Least effective intervention(s)
• New technology difficulties
• Customer acceptance
• Level of expertise
• Availability of materials
• Cost implications how does the scale affect the nature of interventions?

• Retrofit Database Review
• Overview of measures adopted by Retrofit Project

1. Three bed semi detached house
2. Mid-rise block of flats
3. High-rise tower block
4. Hard to Treat property

1. Existing condition - what might you find in a property of this type?
2. Issues and Risks - what are the challenges and unknowns?
3. Improvement Options - what can you do to make the property more thermally efficient?
4. Innovation Options - solutions that are not in the mainstream yet but have the potential to solve difficult problems at the critical building junctions.

• House Types
  • The most likely house types to target for mass retrofit should be based not only on their frequency of occurrence but also their impact on overall carbon emissions.
  • In terms of customer types, segments should be considered according to the size of the population segment, their openness to retrofit, and their awareness of environmental issues.
  • The most likely primary target markets for retrofit would be within the Early Entrepreneurs, Transitional Retirees and Older Established Segments. Stretched Pensioners are open to retrofit but may be limited by their ability to fund the retrofit.
• Whole House Solutions
  • The whole house packages that emerged as a result of this project comprise solutions that scored highly across several criteria categories - solutions that made sense from a design and construction point of view, were affordable, and were relatively easy to bring to market and upscale into mass-market implementation. Solutions that were also cost-effective in terms of cost per kg CO₂ of carbon saved were also included, but were considered in terms of how potential improvements could be applied to both product and supply chain in order to improve scalability and deployment.
  • “Do it once and do it properly” was the key to the generation of these whole house packages. Incremental piecemeal improvements do yield thermal efficiency improvements, but the installation of these improvements as a whole system would yield benefits in terms of cost effectiveness (avoidance of cost duplication), enhanced performance (better thermal detailing at junctions), risk mitigation (minimise damage/decreased performance of previously installed measures), waste minimisation and disruption.
  • Most of the solutions that we would need for mass-scale whole house retrofit currently exist in some shape or form - the key is to work on making them better, high performing, and assembling them as an integrated systems solution that ensures that each component performs as it should instead of the piecemeal approach to retrofit that is employed today.
• There are a number of factors that influence the success of a particular measure or solution - it is not simply about cost or performance. Supply chain maturity, consumer acceptance and the robustness of national and local policies all play a crucial role.
• Current costs of retrofit are high due to the piecemeal, silo-based method that the construction industry uses for costing and for delivering the work. It is apparent that there is a lot of potential for optimising the process (of the costing itself as well as the retrofit activity) in order to bring down the costs. The costing exercises show that the low-carbon options costs over twice as much as doing a ‘quick and easy’ - basic thermal improvements with minimal disruption. And incentives such as a room in roof or a new kitchen and bathroom (depending on the standard of course) could cause a quadrupling of the costs.
• The major dependency for the success of a mass retrofit programme is customer acceptance. Regardless of the preparatory work to 2020, the success of any retrofit scheme will depend on customer awareness, understanding and most importantly, trust.
• The major obstacles beyond customer demand are likely to include:
  • Available funding and cost
  • Heritage and aesthetic concerns
  • Improved trust in the building industry
  • Appropriate upskilling
• Policy initiatives should be aimed to create conditions in 2020 that support both customer interest acceptance and supply chain development.
• One element which has not been included as a significant barrier, but which can contribute to the overall success of the programme is product innovation. The essential products necessary for retrofit are already available, although some will need to become more widely available and with reduced costs.
• External wall insulation has emerged as the key thermal element for both Retrofix and Retropluspackages, and as such the effect of a mass rollout on neighbourhood streetscapes will need to be considered.

• The Construction Industry accounts for only about 5% of the employees in Britain, but still accounts for 27% of fatal injuries to employees and 9% of reported major injuries
• This has remained fairly static for the last three years
• Falls from height account for around half of all fatal accidents in the construction industry
• Biggest hindrances to improvement are
  • Inertia and complacency in industry culture
  • client demands
  • lack of, or poor, training and education

1. “To define within the context of the OTEoEH project what an acceptable level of intervention will be for the five main housing types selected for scenario testing.”
2. “To undertake a Technology development activity to identify technical opportunities that are capable of reducing identified risks of refurbishment to acceptable levels as defined above.”
3. “To include in the series of workshops, special attention to skills, culture and systems and processes issues within the construction industry.”

• Management is not going to have a major impact on health and safety in the retrofit process.
• It is primarily through this competency that risks will be managed.
• For a polycompetent team to be competent, as defined by the CDM Regulations they will need to be trained in:
  • The correct behavioural attitudes for an appropriate safety culture
  • Generic safety best practice, for example in the use of PPE, manual handling etc
  • How to identify risks
• The main significant risks for the works proposed are likely to be:
  • Access around the site to carry out the works which will affect the location of working platforms such as ladders, scaffold, cherry pickers, etc
  • Properties are likely to remain in occupation throughout the duration of the works which means that work will have to be carried whilst the occupants are carrying out their normal lives. This creates a great deal of health and safety issues
  • Possible presence of asbestos in the properties
  • Current condition of the property such the existing electrical wiring that may not be safe or meet legal standards or the structure of the property may not be stable.

1. “To define within the context of the OTEoEH project what an acceptable level of intervention will be for the five main housing types selected for scenario testing.”
2. “To undertake a Technology development activity to identify technical opportunities that are capable of reducing identified risks of refurbishment to acceptable levels as defined above.”
3. “To include in the series of workshops, special attention to skills, culture and systems and processes issues within the construction industry.”

• Laser scanning and CNC machining
• The use of drones to take photos and video of inaccessible places as part of a survey
• Offsite production of roof panels and units
• Improved access systems
• Assistance for manual handling

1. “To define within the context of the OTEoEH project what an acceptable level of intervention will be for the five main housing types selected for scenario testing.”
2. “To undertake a Technology development activity to identify technical opportunities that are capable of reducing identified risks of refurbishment to acceptable levels as defined above.”
3. “To include in the series of workshops, special attention to skills, culture and systems and processes issues within the construction industry.”

1. New concepts and ideas
   • Adaptations to ladders, scaffolding and towers to produce tailored safe efficient working platform solutions, for example for the fixing of insulation, cladding or drylining.
   • The use of attachments for cherry pickers etc. to aid handling of windows (especially triple glazed), cladding, drylining and insulation.
   • The use of laser scanning and CNC cutting to prepare materials offsite, particularly internal wall insulation
   • The prefabrication of roof units for loft conversions to minimise time on site
   • The use of drones to photograph/video as part of the survey of the property – particularly for difficult to see areas that would require a surveyor to work at height eg roofs
2. Skills and Culture
   • The poly-competent team will need to be competent contractor. They will have to have embedded a safety culture and have received training in generic good safety practices and risk identification. This will be the primary means by which risk will be managed and will include reducing risks from slips, trips, falls and handling.

• Background and link to other work packages
• Approach
• High level supply chain design
• Detailed supply chain design
• Survey process
• Installation process
• Supply chain system design
• Current sales and delivery route
• Retrofit demand
• Training and accreditation
• The value of retrofit
• Conclusions and next steps
• Appendices (available as separate documents)
  1. Estimate of Product Volumes
  2. Installation Programmes
     1. Pre 1919 Detached
     2. Pre 1919 Mid Terrace
     3. 1919-1944 Semi
     4. 1945-1965 Semi
     5. 1965-1980 Bungalow
     6. 1965-1980 Detached
     7. 1965-1980 Purpose Built Low Rise Flat
     8. 8 1980 Detached
  3. Stakeholder Interviews

• The market and press reaction to the initial rollout is crucial to future success. Early failures in performance, service or cost will be very difficult to recover from
• There is significant potential from linking low carbon retrofit with other large scale domestic changes: flood protection, smart meter rollout, water company initiatives and IT, electrical or gas infrastructure repair and upgrade.
• Although a street by street approach is considered by some to be more effective, the project team can see limited potential to engage consumers in the dominant Owner Occupier market. In addition a correctly designed process should deliver equally cost effectively for single properties
• Retrofit should enable a general improvement in the currently poor condition of UK housingstock, or at least reduce the rate of further decline
• Mass scale retrofit models can support and be encouraged by other initiatives such as Energy Company Obligations (ECO) and the Green Deal if presentation to the public is clear and objectives are seen to be aligned.

1. the consumer,
2. the solutions implemented
3. the delivery mechanism itself and
4. the potential business opportunities.

The ETI Approach was subsequently subjected to testing, evaluation and improvement via the ETI’s “Domestic Retrofit Demonstration Project”.

• Theperformanceof the ETI Approach;
• The deliveryof the ETI Approach;
• The consumeracceptabilityof the ETI Approach;
• The commercial viabilityof the ETI Approach.

• RetroFix™: Installation period - maximum two weeks; capital cost of £10,000; primary energy consumption reduction of 25% - 40%
• RetroPlus™: Installation period - maximum three weeks; capital cost of £15,000 - £20,000; primary energy consumption reduction of 40% - 60%

• Efficient and advanced survey methods are essential to identify the underlying conditions of the property.
• A library of standard installation details and technical solutions has been proven to reduce time and hence cost at the design stage.
• High performance insulation and building products used in the Retrofit Approach are still at the top end niche of the market.
• Installer productivity is a major opportunity for reduced programme periods and resource costs, however productivity must not be prioritised over quality otherwise the Retrofit Approach cost and technical performance targets will not be achieved.
• It is evident from the demonstration houses that when the retrofit measures are installed correctly there is a significant improvement to the thermal performance of the property, which in turn proves the Retrofit Approach target saving for heat energy consumption.
• The supply chain is not yet set up for delivery logistics to individual home retrofit projects.

• Improving the thermal efficiency of significant parts of the existing UK housing stock over the next thirty years is an important part of a cost-effective UK decarbonisation strategy but cannot substitute for decarbonising the supply of energy to buildings.
• Uptake could be increased by making efficiency improvements an integral part of improving the amenity and value of the dwellings, rather than a series of independent measures.
• A focus on the interests of the owners and occupiers of the dwellings and the performance of the supply chain in delivering retrofit to them is critical to progress.
• Efficiency measures can provide cost-effective carbon savings and improve people’s comfort and living experience considerably. Although cost savings are rarely enough to justify the work at current energy prices, there is nevertheless a strong case for improving the quality of the UK housing stock, with energy being one element in this.
• There are significant opportunities to improve the performance of a traditional business-as-usual approach to housing retrofits. The culture, structure and practices of large parts of the supply chain will need non-trivial changes and investment to deliver this.
• A coherent long-term strategy that recognises the underlying economics will enable more entrepreneurial businesses to invest in the changes required to deliver more cost-effective, high performing retrofits. This will enable progress towards energy, poverty, health and housing goals.

• Low carbon heating must appeal to consumers if the UK is to tackle climate change.
• Consumers might welcome solutions if they enhanced their experiences using heat at home.
• Consumers will need help to get high quality experiences from low carbon heating solution.
• Policies could harness the emerging ‘smart home’ to garner public support for decarbonising heat.
• Decarbonisation could help the vulnerable access basic energy services, but there are also risks.

• The near total elimination of carbon emissions from existing homes is required by 2050
• There are two key solutions for low carbon home heating – local area schemes using heat networks and individual home systems using electric heat, each with different challenges
• Compelling consumer propositions and business models are needed. Social benefits will also be important and affordability needs to be a key element of transition planning
• A system level frameworkis required to package known but underdeveloped technologies into integrated solutions
• System designs and local spatial plans are needed for the efficient development of energy assets and to support end-user engagement
• Integrating the delivery of an energy system transition strategy into local planning processes, with local ownership, will be key to the delivery of near zero emissions
• Low carbon heating systems will introduce the need for new heat production and network assets, along with significant electricity network reinforcement, whilst the utilisation of local gas distribution networks will be reduced
•  The next decade will be critical in preparing for the transition and building confidence. A policy framework is required that supports the combination of individual and collective decisions and investments. Rapid implementation is then required from 2025

• What do we use energy for...?
• An emissions reduction plan
• Priorities to 2030
• Heat - now and in the future
• Which system to pick...?
• Requires local area energy planning... Enabled by EnergyPathNetworks toolset
• SSH Programme Structure
• Where next in low carbon heating...

• WP1: Development of Field Trial Approach
• WP2: Execution of Field Trial
• WP3: De-Commissioning and Closure of the Field Trial

• demonstrating benefit is not easy;
• government incentives take no account of the possible impact of advanced control systems;
• greater account of human factor is required;
• and future designs need to address integration of a host of appliances, devices and micro DE technology.

• schemes are being introduced to encourage building envelope refurbishment to improve insulation and reduce energy needs;
• building owners are installing technologies such as solar thermal, micro-CHP boiler replacements, heat pumps and solar PV panels;
• greater use is being made of energy storage, in the form of thermal mass (both hot and cold) and in batteries, either to exploit time-of-use energy pricing or to match supply and demand efficiently;
• a programme of installation of smart metering for gas, electricity and distributed heat is underway;
• new loads on the distribution system will appear as electric vehicles and air conditioning become more prevalent;
• appliances for lighting, entertainment, etc., continue to evolve.

1. Heating Controls : conventional controls for domestic hot water / storage and heating systems
2. Advanced Controls : products which integrate existing control strategies to improve the performance of micro-generation systems within the built environment
3. Thermal DE : control of heat pump and solar thermal systems
4. Electrical DE : control of solar PV and micro-wind systems used for the generation of electricity

Despite these benefits, barriers such as regulatory gaps, cultural inertia within the construction sector, and lack of consumer awareness hinder MMCs widespread adoption. In light of current challenges, the study underscores the imp

1. What does the householder want?
   Consumers need increased confidence in both the need for retrofit and in suppliers’ ability to deliver with minimal disruption, whilst meeting an investment ceiling of £10,000. Within the UK population the project has identified age and income profiles which define groups that are more likely to take up retrofit ahead of the curve
2. What are the ideal solutions?
   There are both consumer and technical drivers to tackle retrofit by doing it once and doing it properly. RetroFix is proposed as a minimum solution; which takes walls and loft insulation beyond current cavity wall insulation performance and upgrades to the most efficient heat sources (boilers). At the recommended RetroPlus level floors, doors, windows are tackled beyond the RetroFix measures.
3. Where should retrofit be focused?
   The research has identified house types and geographical locations which link with early adopting householder groups. Modelling shows that older properties tend to have significantly higher current energy consumption and hence potential saving, albeit with a wide spread of energy use across each population.

• Examines initiatives (with a clear focus on heat), successes and lessons learned; their outcomes / next steps; and possible learnings for the UK
• Identifies the policies driving these initiatives
• Identifies who’s involved and why

• Recommended countries where there are many learnings for the ETI are Denmark and the Netherlands– heat pumps, market structures, district heating, and exploiting synergies between electric and gas networks.
• Specific projects / areas for investigation in these countries are pointed out
• Consider customer recruitment for trials at a very early stage and place the customer proposition at the heart of project design
• The ETI may be able to utilise platforms / hardware / software that has already been developed for other projects
• We see an absence, generally, of how gas, electricity and heat networks can work together, but some projects integrating two networks into a wider system. We believe this is a critically important aspect of a ‘smart heat system’
• Business models and market frameworks that the ETI could utilise
• Examples of highly relevant purely private sector innovations

• Decarbonising domestic energy is a very complex systems integration challenge
• Consumers have little interest in that complexity... ...they care about the experiences energy affords
• There are few actors today providing the integration to help people achieve the experiences they value
• Without such actors, policy makers are left with little choice to decarbonise but to subsidise components
• The big idea is turning energy retail into an experiential service, not billing for units of commodity consumed
• SSH is creating an ecosystem to help the energy sector make a customer-centric market really work
• We help innovators understand their customers, enabling them to design better products & services
• We help product and service innovators via integrated domestic energy system analysis
• We help product and service innovators develop and test new business models and technologies
• We help local area stakeholders decide on their spatial infrastructure planning to drive change
• We help all stakeholders position for the future ‘smart’ energy system via holistic architecture
• We help industry innovate in business models and processes via whole systems simulation

• Thermoregulation – deals with temperature changes in the environment and how the complex physiological system maintains body temperature
• Defining thermal comfort – review on the thermal environment people find comfortable and how age, gender, race and other factors affect the thermal comfort of the individuals
• Perception of thermal comfort and control – how people perceive thermal comfort and how much control they have to alter their comfort
• Different models of thermal comfort – Fanger’s Model and the Adaptive Model
• Conclusion on the findings

• This research begins with a detailed review of the literature that examines community engagement for energy and non-energy infrastructure projects, incorporating in sight from Government, academic exercisesand non-statutory expert bodies.
• This desk top research is supported by a number of in depth interviews with those reponsible for community engagement in four UK local authority areas: Newcastle City Council, Leeds City Council, Cornwall County Council and the Greater Manchester Combined Authority.
• In addition, these UK case studies we examine some international examples Bottrop (a German city in the Ruhr Valley that is currently embarking on an all-encompassing city-wide energy efficiency scheme) and the Energiesprong pilot project in Tilburg, The Netherlands.
• The final element of primary research is interviews conducted with the community engagement team at the two major non-energy infrastructure projects, Crossrail and the Thames Tidal Gateway project in London.
• Using the primary and desktop research, a range of key principles and methods of communityengagement for the roll out of the EnergyPath Networks tool are identified as key findings.
• In terms of best practice methods, we set out a range of examples related to types of engagement. In addition, we have considered methods with regard to ‘involving’, i.e. providing opportunities for all parties involved in a project to become actively involved and whereby the process provides a genuine opportunity for the local community to have an influence on particular proposals or initiatives.
• We make the important point of the need to recognise that too rigid a categorisation of methods can in some case, inhibit creativity, which is an important factor to retain if engagement is to be effective.
• In terms of the question of community ownership, overall, it is concluded that there is no clear evidence at this stage that an element of community ownership indeveloping energy infrastructure assists in achieving widespread public support.
• We set out our recommended approach to engagement with local communities for the EnergyPath Networks tool model.
• A key finding is that there is no ‘one size fits all approach’ to community engagement and a bespoke approach is needed, tailored to individual communities and local contexts.
• We also set out a number of best practice principles of community engagement which we recommended are taken forward by the ETI.

• Phase 1:The first phase will develop the toolkit and capacity to deliver the prototype ‘product’ to mass market consumers;
• Phase 2:The second phase will validate this with a significant system level demonstration;
• Phase 3:The third phase will focus on commercialisation.

The UK Energy Research Centre (UKERC) has provided research and analysis across the whole energy system since 2004, with funding provided by the Research Councils through a succession of five year phases. Research related to low carbon heat became a significant focus during Phase 3 (2014 2019) and the current Phase 4 includes a research theme devoted to decarbonisation of heating and cooling, with several of our other themes providing relevant insights. Our whole systems research programme addresses the challenges and opportunities presented by the transition to a net zero energy system and economy.

In this submission we address specific consultation questions where UKERC evidence and analysis provides us with relevant insights. In addition there are a number of high level observations that we provide in these introductory remarks.

Overall, we are concerned that the measures outlined in the consultation need to be set within a coherent and ambitious package of policies that work together to drive the UKs transformation to sustainable heating at a rate commensurate with the goal of net-zero by 2050. While we appreciate there are some uncertainties over the future role of the gas grid and the potential for hydrogen for heating, immediate progress in heat system decarbonisation is clearly required as part of this multi-decadal transformation. As the consultation notes, heat pumps offer a low regrets option in some applications and it is widely acknowledged that the UK has a small supplier base and very low level of heat pump deployment compared to many countries. Increasing consumer and installer familiarity, and growing the skills base and supply chain all feature strongly in the process of learning by doing that reduces heat pump costs. Ifheat pump deployment were to proceed linearly to 2050 in line with some scenarios for deployment, annual installations would need to increase by an order of magnitude. Whilst welcome, the current proposals are not sufficient to deliver a large scale market for heat pumps. Ambition and clarity of purpose are essential if heat system decarbonisation is to succeed. We also stress the importance of providing support to support the development of large low carbon heating systems, including systems attached to heat networks. We appreciate that the provisions laid out in the consultation pertain only to specific schemes and note the observations made in the consultation about support for heat networks.

Alongside the required policy changes necessary to support specific heating technologies, wider governance changes will be needed to drive the UK transformation to low carbon heating.Whilst regulation and other forms of financial support for building efficiency improvement are noted in the consultation, we note that it is likely to be important to use sticks as well as carrots if the highest carbon heating systems are to be removed and building efficiency increased. However, it will also be important to consider ownership and regulation of heat networks, the role of local authorities and opportunities for innovation that may be unlocked through regulatory change such as encouraging electricity suppliers to offer smart heating tariffs or enabling community ownership of heat distribution schemes.

While we appreciate these issues are beyond the scope of the current consultation, it is important that these considerations inform policy choices made now.

UKERC ENERGY RESEARCH LANDSCAPE: ENERGY EFFICIENCY RESIDENTIAL & COMMERCIAL

• Section 1: An overview which includes a broad characterisation of research activity in the sector and the key research challenges
• Section 2: An assessment of UK capabilities in relation to wider international activities, in the context of market potential
• Section 3: Major funding streams and providers of basic research along with a brief commentary
• Section 4: Major funding streams and providers of applied research along with a brief commentary
• Section 5: Major funding streams for demonstration activity along with major projects and a brief commentary
• Section 6: Research infrastructure and other major research assets (e.g. databases, models)
• Section 7: Research networks, mainly in the UK, but also European networks not covered by the EU Framework Research and Technology Development (RTD) Programmes
• Section 8: UK participation in energy-related EU Framework Research and Technology Development (RTD) Programmes
• Section 9: UK participation in wider international initiatives, including those supported by the International Energy Agency

The analysis in the UKERC Energy 2050 report broadly agrees with that presented in the Heat and Energy Saving Strategy. There is no correct way to achieve the carbon emission reductions from buildings but it is clear that both demand reduction and the electrification of heat technologies are key elements.

There is evidence that appropriate feedback of energy information to consumers does lead to better control of, and therefore, lower energy use this indicates a need for a rapid roll out of smart meters and a rapid end to estimated billing.

UKERC suggests that the potential for the economy in terms of long-term, sustainable job creation is seriously underplayed in this consultation exercise. The current economic crisis presents an opportunity for helping to shape the economic recovery through investment in improving the sustainability of heat supply, especially in buildings.

This document sets out the response of the UK Energy Research Centre (UKERC) to DECCs consultation document on the Green Deal and the Energy Company Obligation. It is based on the research and experience of the contributing UKERC authors. In line with UKERCs goals, the objective is to bring evidence to bear on the proposals, rather than to support or oppose any specific policy.

Our working assumption is that the proposals form a key part of the Governments plans to deliver significant carbon savings from the UK building stock, to improve affordable warmth, to promote sustainable jobs in the UK and to do so at a reasonable cost to Government and consumers. Our comments attempt to analyse the effectiveness with which the proposals might do this. This introduction is followed by a summary of the key points, drawing together our analysis of the key strengths and weaknesses of the proposals. This followed by more detailed sections on:

• The Green Deal Approach
• Green Deal and ECO interaction
• Links to other policies
• Building Energy Assessment
• Measures, products and systems
• Green Deal Providers
• The Golden Rule
• Installation and Delivery
• Local Government and Communities
• Targets
• Administration,
• Other issues

This report summarises the findings, revealing why homeowners renovate and why they decide to improve their home energy efficiency.

This research helps explain why homeowners decide on energy efficiency renovations, and why they are even thinking about renovations in the first

Energy efficiency in homes can play a key role in delivering energy affordability, sustainability and security. Significant investment from the both public and private sector is required to realise the benefits of improved energy efficiency, but needs policy support.

• Methodology for our qualitative policy analysis,
• Findings
• Shortlist of policies considered in the cost-benefit analysis
• Tables summarising the qualitative assessmentof each policy in turn.

• A brief summary of the framework for customer uptake used within the main report
• How customer attitudes to risk can be incorporated into this framework.
• How customer uptake (both of interventions and of business models which can package up interventions) is modelled within BMET.
• Implications for quantitative customer uptake modelling
  • The “rational agent” approach to modelling adopted by BMET can provide important insights into the long-run potential for interventions, and how business models may be able to overcome specific barriers that can already be quantified (for example, credit constraints).
  • While theoretical predictive models of consumer take-up do exist, it would not be possible to produce a quantitative model that attempts to forecast all relevant aspects of uptake. However, BMET does provide a framework for thinking about uptake. It could help design questions and inform the design of trials to investigate how consumers make these types of decisions within the energy sector.

• Why customers are more likely to take up interventions with relatively short payback periods
• Whether business model providers can help overcome these constraints
• This analysis is primarily focussed on household-level interventions (HEMS,cavity, internal and external wall insulation, and heat pumps). District heat also has long payback periods, and we briefly consider the issues for this technology. While the nature of district heat means that individual consumer contracts might prove less of a barrier, systematic uncertainties are likely to require risk-sharing with government.
• Quantitative modelling from BMET is used to examine the likely payback periods of different types of low-carbon interventions for different customer groups, and look at what might be required to bring these to within a 5-10 year window.

Overall, we find that HEMS and cavity wall insulation are the only interventions which are likely to have payback periods within such a window given BMET default assumptions.

This document was prepared at the time to contribute to ETI internal thinking and planning only.

• Providing fixed-bill contracts
• Using heat pumps and HEMS to provide DSR servicesto entities such as suppliers, DNOs, and National Grid.

• the thermalefficiency of the existing housing stock; and
• the potential for (and cost of) further improvements in thermal efficiency through insulation retrofits tailored to the BMET property archetypes.

• Businesses can be well placed to make it easier for consumers to choose low–carbon interventions.
• Policy support is also required to tackle the fact that some low-carbon interventions currently cost more and in some cases provide fewer benefits to consumers, relative to the incumbent options.
• Whether subsidies in excess of the carbon price would be justified, depends on the extent to which we believe:
• there are wider benefits from low-carbon heating interventions, such as improvements to health and wellbeing;
  • the costs of heat pumps and solidwall insulation will be driven down by the growth of the UK market (rather than global growth); and
  • there are no alternative, more cost-effective options across the energy system for meeting carbon targets.
  These issues would need to be examined further,before a case could be made.
• District heat will also require policy support.

• Annex 1a: Case studies
• Annex 1b: Analysis of existing policy
• Annex 1c: Energy efficiency and low-carbon heating in Germany
• Annex 2a: Qualitative policy analysis
• Annex 2b: Cost benefit analysis of policies
• Annex 3a: Modelling customer uptake (including attitudes to risk)
• Annex 3b: Payback period drivers
• Annex 3c: Factors affecting intervention take-up order
• Annex 3d: Elements of business model offerings
• Annex 3e: Assumptions on current and future levels of insulation

• uptake of a new proposition has occurred;
• the demand side characteristics are similar; and
• the supply side characteristics are similar.

• Which of the barriers and risks that are important to uptake in the SSH sector are important to uptake in the case study sectors and why?
• How do these vary by customer type?
• How have these barriers and risks been overcome?

• mobile phones;
• mortgages;
• boiler insurance;
• dynamic teleswitched meters and tariffs;
• Nest; and
• the motor industry.

• We first summarise our findings.
• We then review existing heat and energy efficiency policies in the UK and internationally, analysing how far policies have overcome barriers to uptake, and their wider effectiveness (e.g. in terms of cost, or impact on industry confidence).

• No ‘silver bullet.’ Our analysis has shown that there is no ‘silver bullet’ that effectively addresses all barriers at onc
• Absent mandating, overcoming or bypassing interestbarriers is a prerequisite for policy success.TheGreen Deal hashad little success in this area to date.
• Supplier obligations have been successful in driving energy efficiency take up but they may not result in the most effective delivery.
• Mandating can be an effective last resort.
• To minimise the cost of mandated standards, they should be set in as broad a way as possible. 
• Setting broad mandates also helps avoid adverse outcomes.
• If financial incentives are high enough, manyother barriers can be overcome.
• Alignment with long-term decarbonisation goals has not always been achieved.
• To be effective, financial incentives must be designed with awareness and interest barriersin mind.
• Consumers’ tendency to focus on near term costs and benefitsand credit constraints could also be driving low take up of financial incentives that are not paid up front.
• Upfront grants may be a more cost effective way of driving uptake than ongoing payments.
• Green Deal loans have not been a success.
• District heat development internationally has relied on a range of enabling policy measures.
• Experience with district heat also highlights the importance of supply side and competition policy.

• Germany is a world leader in energy efficiency, including low-carbon heating.Germanyis one of thefew countries in the world whose rate of primary as well as end user energy consumption has been falling for years despite increased economic output.
• Uptake of low-carbon heating interventions isstrong in Germany.
• Germany also has a pioneering role for smart home solutions
• Policy measures and instruments are a key driverof the comparably high uptake of energy efficient and low carbon systems in Germany. Building regulations mandate adoption of lower carbon heating solutions and of thermal insulation in newly built properties in Germany. Various other policy measures also support voluntary uptake, such as funding as set out in the National Energy Efficiency Action Plan.
• Policy in Germany also supports certain heating technologies by “indirect subsidies”.
• Other drivers of uptake are high (residential) energy and fuel prices, replacement of old buildings and demographic changes followed by urban restructuring.
• The promotion of cogeneration (combined heat and power) is another package of measures to increaseenergy efficiency.

• stamp duty rebates;
• council tax rebates;
• grants;
• including energy bills in headline rental prices; and
• a package of regulation and support for district heat.

Policies such as these will succeed or fail based on their ability to overcome barriers to the take up of low-carbon heating interventions. As many of these barriers are intrinsically difficult to model, many of the most useful insights from this exercise are qualitative in nature, and these are summarised.

In the remainder of this document, we set out the framework used for the quantitative analysis, and present results for each policy in turn.

This document was prepared at the time to contribute to ETI internal thinking and planning only.

• Consumer Response & Behavious Analysis
• Literature Review Personality and Risky Heat Decisions
• Household Heating Design Aids
• Segmentation Analysis

• Consumer Response & Behavious Analysis
• Literature Review Personality and Risky Heat Decisions
• Household Heating Design Aids
• Segmentation Analysis

• Consumer Response & Behavious Analysis
• Literature Review Personality and Risky Heat Decisions
• Household Heating Design Aids
• Segmentation Analysis