ECO and the Green Deal – not enough is not enough

Written by Pedro Guertler on . Posted in ACE Research, Projects

Today ACE and the Energy Bill Revolution publish a set of slides and a briefing which assess the impact of the Government’s current energy efficiency policies and compare them against past performance and what needs to happen to effectively tackle fuel poverty and meet the recommendations of the Committee on Climate Change.

We find that the Energy Company Obligation (ECO) and the Green Deal represent a significant loss of momentum in the deployment of energy efficiency measures compared to previous energy efficiency programmes, especially when considering the large energy efficiency potential still available in the housing stock.

The recent cuts proposed to the ECO are exacerbating this loss of momentum, and the introduction of the Green Deal Home Improvement Fund is not enough to turn it around. This means that carbon targets recommended by the Committee on Climate Change will be missed and that fuel poverty will worsen.

We are calling for:

 

Tags: , , , , , ,

Trackback from your site.

Comments (10)

  • S hay

    |

    Well ok but are you going to destroy the homes you retrofit as previous proposals. You also never consider over heating thermal mass and thermal shielding. Fed
    up with half baked non construction professional proposals

    Reply

    • Andrew Warren

      |

      Dear S Hay

      What a profoundly unproductive contribution. Precisely which “previous proposals” destroyed the homes retrofitted with energy saving measures? Who on earth “never considers ” factors like thermal shielding or thermal mass? I think it would be better in future were you to leave such banal slogans to websites designed precisely for such unsubstantiated generalisations – like the Daily Star?

      Reply

  • Peter Wiltshire

    |

    Whatever happens, the current situation is not working. Green Deal and Ecos have an application process which is complicated and leads to hit and miss results. i.e you may or may not get the measures which your home needs. I also suggest that assessing a home on averages is a much better way than by occupancy. Occupancy and behavioral patterns change very quickly and the measures installed under the present Green Deal Assessment could be inappropriate for the next occupant. I feel that a consistent range of measures for each housing type would be far more effective and lead to better future proofing.

    Reply

    • Andrew Warren

      |

      Dear Peter

      As you will know, this is a long standing debate, which effectively shows that there is merit in both forms of measurement – one based on the theoretical performance of a building, the other on actual usage. Both have their advantages : but theory doesn’t always work in practice when a building is occupied- and different occupiers obtain very different energy performances from the same building.

      But thank you for reminding us all of the merits of montoring actual usage.

      Reply

  • GRAHAM FARRALL

    |

    By using advanced techniques of insulation ,such as Nano-Tech Energy Saving Solutions , which are already being used in the advanced countries of the World for Many years ,

    Technology moves on in all fields including Insulation

    The Government funding would go much further , and we could tackle Fuel Poverty quickly and economically , say a third of the cost of Standard Insulation methods

    Reply

    • Chris Baker

      |

      Shameless spamming there…

      Reply

  • GRAHAM FARRALL

    |

    No such thing just trying to save the Economy ££ Billions

    Reply

    • Pedro Guertler

      |

      Hi Graham,

      I know you have the best of intentions, but please don’t use this website to push a specific product, whatever its merits. It’s not the place for it, OK? Aside from the advertising, your comments on policy are much appreciated.

      Regards

      Pedro

      Reply

  • Hugh Small

    |

    To me, business logic dictates that energy companies should be excluded from any home energy efficiency business simply on the grounds of a) lack of expertise and b) potential domination of smaller suppliers. Please look at http://www.matureeconomy.org/?p=957 and tell me if it makes sense.
    Secondly, it seems to me that you are getting pushback from the construction industry. It might help if you argued in favour of proportional local property tax which would encourage replacement of the entire UK housing stock, which is at present a very inefficient user of energy in other ways than home supply. See Property Tax Reform on same sitr.

    Reply

Leave a comment