Results: Searching for 'Domestic Energy Use'

• We welcome that a target of 600,000 heat pumps is included in the plan as this provides some clear direction for industry. However this is purely a target and it requires a thorough policy and governance framework to both support deployment and protect consumers.
• Despite the clear case for district heating, it is overlooked in the plan, and there is a lack of focus on energy efficiency despite the expected centrality of both of these technologies.

Part of the Energy-PIECES project, this report was developed during a secondment at the Energy Savings Trust.

This systematic review presents data on the total installed costs for domestic heat pumps in the UK and internationally. It covers historic and forecast costs, across a range of technology types and building contexts.

• Current HEMS market in the UK is dominated by relatively simple products with slim margins
• The real long term aim is to establish and own the customer relationship in the home; simple HEMS products are the gateway device to a connected-home
• The connected-home market is most likely to be led by ambitious and well-funded technology players
• Telcos are also well-placed to move into the space with bundled offerings but no sign as yet
• Of the Big 6, currently only British Gas is demonstrating the ambition to drive development of the HEMS market
• Advanced ESCo offers are likely to take longer to, or may never, develop in the market
• Smart home development likely to develop later as an evolution from earlier automation
• The big prize for ETI is in developing the Advanced ESCo proposition where there are 3 primary opportunities identified
  • Right-sizing of heating solutions
  • Optimisation of time of use and demand response benefits via local storage
  • Arbitrage-driven operation of hybrid heat pumps
• Preparing for a non-energy led scenario may also be sensible to consider, especially in the shorter term

• ESCOs ‘right-size’ heating solutions then provide supply contracts with price guarantees
• HEMS enable optimised ToU tariffs and DR benefits via localstorage
• Hybrid heat pump driving arbitrage opportunities in the home

Energy Performance Certificates (EPCs) have been a requirement on sale of all domestic property since December 2007 as part of the introduction of Home Information Packs (HIPs). This report examines how this requirement has been implemented by those on the receiving end of the legislation – the software designers, the domestic energy assessors, the estate agents, the conveyancing solicitors and the householder. Bearing in mind the stated objectives of the EPC, the report then makes a number of recommendations for improving the operation of the scheme.

This workshop brought together 36 experts including policy makers and advisors, scientists and residential electricity management stakeholders to provide a neutral forum, under Chatham House rules, for full and frank dialogue relating to sharing lessons learned and developing strategies and policy recommendations emerging from managing residential electricity demand in the UK and Ontario, Canada. This was an opportunity to reflect upon our various roles within the broader context of residential electricity demand management. The aim of the workshop was to draw out recommendations and actions for demand reduction, load management and carbon reduction. The workshop outputs will provide a base for continued collaboration and identification of new research initiatives.

The workshop explored three objectives: 1. Share lessons learned from the UK and Ontario, Canada regarding demand response and demand reduction initiatives

2. Examine possible strategies; and

3. Develop policy recommendations and actions for demand reduction, load management and carbon reduction.

The issue: a need to better understand the models that inform demand-side energy policy-making

Under the UK Climate Change Act 2008, the government is legally bound to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 80% by 2050 relative to 1990 levels.

Historically, the focus of energy policy in the UK has been on supply-side policies, such as decarbonisation of electricity generation through greater use of low carbon technologies like wind and solar. Increasingly, however, demand-side energy policies are being recognised as having important contributions to make to achieving emission reduction targets, through reducing energy demand or by making energy demand more flexible and compatible with variable renewable energy sources. Such demand-side policies can seek to promote a wide range of technologies and behaviours, for example improved buildinginsulation, reduction in the use of energy intensive materials and increases in teleworking to reduce commuting.

To fully realise the potential of demand-side energy policies, it is important that they can be adequately represented in quantitative energy models, because such models play an important role in informing UK energy policy. However, we do not currently have a good understanding of how well the different energy models that inform UK government energy policy represent energy demand and demand-side energy policies.

Therefore we have undertaken a Rapid Evidence Assessment (a constrained form of systematic review) to examine the energy models that have informed energy policy documents published by the UK government between 2007 and 2017. The overarching question this review seeks to address is:

How suitableare the energy models used toinform UK government energy policy for exploring the full range of contributions that demand-side energy policies can make to climate change mitigation?

Main findings: strengths and weaknesses in existing modelling

Our Rapid Evidence Assessment reveals that the core strength of current energy modelling is the detailed representation of technologies, with many models featuring information on hundreds of potential technological options for increasing energy efficiency. Although uncertainties exist around these technological options, these models allow us to gain a coherent and realistic understanding of how different combinations of technologies could satisfy our future energy service demands under different low-carbon scenarios.

However, the modelling landscape reveals two key limitations with regard to the representationof non-technological drivers of energy demand:

• Firstly, economic, social and behavioural drivers of energy demand, such as thermostat settings, are rarely explicitly included within the models. As a result, changes in such drivers risk being overlooked as potential levers of climate change mitigation. In addition, the economic, social and behavioural assumptions that are included into the models are often not presented in a transparent manner.
• Secondly, while many of the models provide a wealth of detail on different technological options, they are not well-equipped to model how behavioural, social and economic changes impact on the use of technology. This makes it difficult to investigate how technological change comes about and how it could be steered into the right direction using different policy instruments. In many models, the uptake of different technological options is specified exogenously by the user, or is determined within the model by cost optimisation, which does not reflect the many non-cost factors influencing technology diffusion.

Key recommendations for future modelling

• Develop consistent and transparent processes for estimating and presenting the fixed inputs to energy models, such as energy service demands and socio-economic drivers.
• Quantify the potential of demand-side policies and include them as explicit options in energy models to make such policies more visible.
• Improve the representation of economic, social and behavioural processes in energy models where feasible and useful. This endeavour can build on existing research in the academic literature, which is currently not well represented in policydevelopment.
• Research further the potential implications of interactions between different drivers of energy demand and make sure they are consistent. An example of such an interaction would be the impact that a modal shift from cars to cycling would have on the growth and energy demand of the automotive industry.

Under the UK Climate Change Act 2008, the government has committed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 80% by 2050 relative to 1990 levels (Climate Change Act, 2008). This will require a large shift in the UK’s energy system, ranging from energy production, across transmission to consumption.

The public are implicated in the transition process as energy users, increasingly also as energy producers and as active members of society who might support or oppose energy projects and policies. Previous research (Demski et al., 2015; Parkhill et al., 2013) has shown that there is widespread public support for transitioning to a low-carbon, affordable and reliable energy system – however, this change is associated with costs and it remains to be seen how these costs will be covered.

This research explores the views of the British public on how the energy transition should be financed. Drawing on a survey of 3,150 respondents and focus groups in 4 locations across Great Britain, it investigates what responsibility members of the public assign to government, energy companies and the general public for financing energy system change.

Research findings

The results highlight widespread support for an energy system that ensures affordability, reliability and low carbon energy sources. Energy companies and the government were assigned primary responsibility for contributing financially to energy transition, as they were seen to have the structural power and financial means to implement necessary changes. Respondents also indicated that the general public ought to contribute as well, although the public was perceived to be paying over the odds already (through bills to the energy companies and levies to the government). Nonetheless, research participants expressed willingness to accept between 9-13% of their energy bills going towards environmental and social levies.

Distrust in energy companies and government

Willingness to contribute financially towards the energy transition was also found to be dependent on the perception that energy companies and government are contributing financially and showing real commitment to energy system change. It was also notable that this condition was not currently thought to be met; distrust in this regard was particularly evident in focus group discussions.

Distrust in companies: People believe that the majority of energy companies are driven primarily by profit motives leading to inadequate commitments with regards to energy transition goals such as investing in low-carbon energy and ensuring energy affordability.

Distrust in government: The government, and politicians in particular, are seen as too closely connected to the energy industry, leading to inadequate and ineffective regulation of energy companies and their opaque practices.

Examining what underlies people’s distrust, it is evident that the public has a number of justice and fairness concerns that need to be addressed. In particular, beliefs concerning distributive justice (i.e. how costs are distributed across society) and procedural justice (i.e. respectful treatment, transparent practices and decision-making) are important for public acceptance of responsibility and costs.

Key recommendations

Addressing the issues underlying the trust deficit will be challenging, but this is nonetheless important if we are to ensure that there is to be broad societal consent and engagement with the low-carbon energy transition. To begin this process, the briefing includes the following recommendations:

1. Government and energy industry must show strong and clear commitments to low-carbon energy system change
2. Greater transparency and accountability regarding costs, decision-making and practices in relation to financing energy transitions
3. Greater clarity and justification for how money is spent by government and energy companies
4. Innovative thinking on how to distribute current and future costs in a fair manner across society
5. Finding ways to credibly show that energy companies are not driven by profits alone
6. Robust and consistent evidence of clearer separation between government and the energy industry

A recent Government study into personal carbon trading1 (PCT) concluded that as a policy instrument PCT has potential to engage individuals in taking action to combat climate change, but is essentially ahead of its time and expected costs for implementation are high.2 . Yet, at the same time Defra has recognised that further research is being taken forward by academics and research institutions outside of Government, and Defra will keep a watching brief on their progress3 . PCT related research studies being undertaken in different universities and institutions across the UK, or overseas, have not yet been brought together in a coherent way and interaction between researchers has been limited. In addition, the Defra studies have highlighted some areas for further research. Thus, the key aims of the workshop were to:

1. Map the field of PCT research: learn what each of us is doing and our respective research focus;
2. Determine where we have got so far, in terms of knowledge and understanding of PCT and its related issues;
3. Discuss future research directions with regard to funding opportunities;
4. Create a PCT researchers network; and
5. Discuss and agree the process for publishing a PCT edited volume through the Climate Policy journal that provides a comprehensive, state-of-the-art review of PCT research to date.

These key aims have largely been met. In the Appendix of the main report is a document setting out the research interests of the workshop participants, giving a flavour of who is doing what where. The Climate Policy journal has expressed interest in publishing a special issue on PCT in early 2010. Papers for this special issue are now being coordinated by the Environmental Change Institute of the University of Oxford.

This regular ETSAP workshop, held at St Annes College, Oxford, was preceded by a focused UKERC sponsored event which examined issues in modelling future energy technology costs and choice.

The ETSAP meeting was structured around the two main themes. The first was applications of the MARKAL / TIMES model variants in specific methodological and policy focused projects. The second was presentations detailing ongoing model development and improvement in this open-source collaboration in energy system analytical tools.

Two underlying developments were discussed throughout the two days. The first was the surge of interest in scenario quantification and modelling of the options for climate change mitigation policies arising from the G8 Gleneagles Summit. ETSAP is likely to be heavily involved in this process which includes the IEA preparing a new flagship publicationon Global Energy Technology Perspectives (GETP). The first annual GETP is to be published in March 2006, will explore the role energy technologies can play in shaping long term markets and will be closely tied to results from the global MARKAL model. The second was an ongoing aim to continue to interact with key developing countries and to enhance and to link with their energy modelling capacities. This has been done through ETSAP as a whole and through bilateral contacts and this process will continue to be strengthened.

In additional to the modelling insights this workshop offered an excellent opportunity for networking and relationship building between international modelling groups. This was facilitated by the conference dinner held at St Anthonys College, Oxford.

One of the objectives of the research under the UKERC’s quantitative modelling effort is the review and development of models of energy use by the domestic sector. The aim of this paper is to describe version 3 of the Domestic Energy Sub-model, which models household energy use in the UK as a sub-model within the UK multisectoral dynamic model of the UK energy-environment-economy (E3) system maintained by Cambridge Econometrics MDM-E3. The paper does so by describing the structure of the model and development of different versions of the sub-model, with an outline of the appliances and thermal characteristics of domestic buildings included.

The paper then goes on to explain how households use thermal energy services and describes the characteristics of the buildings and appliances which are included in the model. Finally the paper describes the data collection methodology used to update the model’s dataset from 1995 to 2004 for version 3. Such a description allows the reader to see how the model is structured and how the results of the model are generated, based on the historical data.

Direct use of fossil fuels is the main source of space heating in the UK and this drives a major part of national greenhouse gas emissions. Climate stabilisation therefore implies a systemic change in approaches to space heating, involving some combination of radical efficiency improvement and low carbon fuels. The challenge in this area for the UK is made particularly difficult because of the combination of the legal commitment to an 80% reduction in emissions by 2050, an old building stock and a very high penetration of natural gas as a heating fuel.

This paper presents new quantified scenarios for residential energy use in the UK to 2050. These address both factors that are exogenous to the energy system, such as population, but also some systemically different approaches to delivering residential heat.

1. Phase-change materials in a storage unit – using the Sunamp or other system to provide storage over a day or a few days.
2. A seasonal storage pit – using solar thermal energy to store energy from summer to winter.
3. Electric storage heaters – powered by excess solar PV and cheap Economy 7 electricity overnight.
4. A thermochemical system – included for its potential as a disruptive technology, which may need a buffer tank until system designs are refined

• Annual energy use per person in UK (2010)
• 45GW each of PV and Wind
• Heating is very variable
• Complex socio-technical system
• Hierarchy of Appliance Operation
• Power usage

The prices paid for electricity by domestic customers in the UK has been a regular discussion point in both policy debate and the media. A particular concern is the contribution that policies to incentivise low-carbon generation and energy saving make to the bills paid by householders. In response to these concerns, the UK Energy Research Centre’s Technology and Policy Assessment team examined in detail the data available on prices in the UK and other countries to address the question: How do the impacts of government policies funded through consumer electricity bills differ between countries?

This report reviews evidence on electricity prices paid by household (i.e. domestic) consumers with a focus on the UK and selected case study countries (Germany, France, Sweden and Australia), supplemented by consolidated EU-wide data to provide a broader context. Gas prices were not examined in detail because to date, policy has generally had a much greater impact on electricity prices, and UK gas prices are in the lower quartile of the EU range for all domestic consumers and almost all commercial and industrial consumers.

Key findings

• UK domestic electricity prices are higher than many EU countries - but not amongst the highest. They are around the median of those in Western Europe.
• Countries make different choices over which categories of consumer bear which costs, for example how costs are shared between industry and households. Countries also differ in terms of resources, the mix of power stations, and network costs. As a result caution should be exercised when comparing electricity prices between countries. There are significant differences in price breakdown between countries, even for those with broadly similar total prices.
• Wholesale energy and supplier costs together make the biggest component of UK domestic electricity price.
• UK policy costs are the lowest amongst the study countries, and total UK low-carbon policy support costs per MWh are below the EU average, despite an above-average share of electricity that receives support. Policy has contributed to increases in domestic electricity prices in the UK and other countries over the past five years but UK domestic electricity bills have not increased at the same rate as prices, due to the effects of energy efficiency policies designed to reduce overall consumption.
• There are a plethora of policies (both current and past) and taxes. This, together with a conflation of social policies and low-carbon policies, and of policy impacts with concerns over market structures, charging regimes and supplier profit margins, creates a very complex overall picture.
• The evidence for policy impacts is largely well understood but complexity creates the opportunity for differing interpretations or selection of the facts. This may help to explain some of the continuing controversy in the area since it allows different stakeholders to interpret and represent the facts differently, or select different subsets of those facts, to suit vested interests or political positions.

Electricity price formation is complex and affected by policies in the UK and all of the case studies considered in this review. Different policy approaches, geographical factors and mixes of power generation mean that comparison requires considerable caution, avoiding over-simplification. Nevertheless there is no evidence to support the contention that policy costs are either the principal source of high domestic power prices in the UK or are high compared to the country case studies or indeed the majority of Western European nations.