logo

The expert voice for energy efficiency in the UK.
Follow us:

Energy Efficient Buildings,Non-domestic building,Public Buildings

Energy efficiency policy for workplaces: quick wins for the next Government?

We all know that there is no single ‘magic policy bullet’ that will support the growth of a self-sustaining market for energy efficiency investments, and that a jigsaw of policy pieces is needed to build the necessary framework.

This is the first in a series of blogs looking at ACE’s new policy tracker, and it considers commercial buildings.  It asks, are all the jigsaw pieces in place?  What more can we do easily? And what is going to be a little more difficult?

Where we are now

The Committee on Climate Change identified a least-cost pathway to meeting the 5th carbon budget.  Our analysis of the gap between this and the Government’s projection of emissions given the current policy landscape, shows that – by 2030 – commercial buildings will be emitting 42% more carbon than the ideal, and public sector buildings 34% more.  And the excess energy use involved is costing businesses a lot of money: in London alone, businesses spend over £4 billion per year on gas and electricity; if they could reduce their energy use by a third, that would mean over £1.3 billion every year for these businesses to use on something more productive.

In policy terms, a quick look at the policy tracker clearly shows that we’re really not doing very well.  We don’t appear to have a vision for our commercial buildings, nor do we have an overall target for their energy efficiency.  And we’re not very good at celebrating the achievements of those companies that are working hard to improve their energy productivity.

We have no comprehensive and engaging tax incentives to encourage energy efficiency investments, and there is little action by government to encourage the development of attractive finance offerings.

On a more positive note, the minimum efficiency standards for offices in the Private Rented Sector will result in improvements to our worst commercial buildings, making them better workplaces and hence supporting happier and more productive workers.  We do have energy performance certificates to give organisations information about the premises they are buying or renting, although the requirement for these could be better enforced.  And, in the past, central and local government has taken the lead, through energy demand reduction targets and National Indicators on carbon emissions.

And finally the good(ish) news: products policy has driven up the minimum efficiency standards of widely used appliances, and ESOS has ensured that larger business at least have the tools to understand their energy use and the potential for improvement.  Both these success stories are potentially at risk during Brexit, but we can act to avoid this.

The quick wins

There are some politically and practically easy steps that government and business can and should take right now. The Clean Growth Plan needs to set a high level of ambition for our offices, offering a vision of healthy, comfortable workplaces that support increased productivity; setting a target for commercial buildings energy efficiency and a trajectory towards achieving that target.

The public sector needs to once again set an example: we need targets for energy efficiency in the sector, and public reporting on progress towards these.  Implementing this will help Government achieve the efficiency improvements that it is looking for from the sector without taking money away from public services.

We need a clear message from Government that existing minimum efficiency standards for products, and requirements for energy auditing, will be retained as we exit the EU; and indeed that these policies, which have reduced business energy bills, will be enhanced in the future.

And we as businesses should collaborate on schemes that recognise those companies that are taking a lead in managing their energy use and celebrate their success.

Next steps

Beyond these easy wins, there are other things that won’t be quite as straightforward, but which really do need to happen.

Our existing minimum energy performance requirements for new buildings should be strengthened – by reinstating the trajectory to zero carbon – and our requirements to report on the energy performance of all buildings better enforced.

The review of business energy efficiency taxation has simplified the system but we are still not at the point where all fuels for all users are taxed equitably according to their impact on the climate; and we need to complement the tax with a requirement for public reporting on energy performance for larger companies.

And Government needs to work with the finance sector to ensure that all businesses wishing to invest in energy efficiency (including SMEs) can access attractive finance offerings to support these investments.

If we get these things right, and if we work with the construction trades, we could begin to tap into the already significant market for building refurbishment to ensure that energy performance improvement is a core part of any refurbishment project.

Difficult to do, but we must work out how

Expanding the use of minimum energy performance standards in existing buildings seems to be very difficult politically, and yet business is quite able to deal with regulation in all sorts of areas, provided that it is given sufficient warning and helped to understand how best to respond.  So we should be looking at how we can widen these standards out from the Private Rented Sector and how we can strengthen them.

And we need to bring energy efficiency investments to the top of the pile for business decision-makers: tax incentives for businesses to invest in energy efficiency again seem to be something that Government is reluctant to think about and yet, without them, energy audit recommendations risk being nice projects that get left on the shelf when something more interesting comes along.

 

We’re really not doing that well at the moment, but surely it is time now for Government to act on some of the easy wins whilst working with us on plans for the next steps.  And we should not shy away from the more difficult steps  – the prize: more competitive businesses, a happier and healthier workforce, and greater energy resilience, is too important!

 

Do have a look at the details in our snapshop policy tracker and let us know what your view is.  And if you are interested in finding out more about why we think some policy changes are easier than others, have a look at Chapter 6 in our 2016 report on Buildings and the 5th Carbon Budget.

We look forward to policies developing over the coming months and we will be updating the tracker in response to these changes.

Continue Reading No Comments

Brexit: will consumer energy savings survive?

According to official UK government statistics, the most cost-effective energy efficiency policy for every category of energy consumer covers energy-using products.

But it is clear that, regardless of the fuel bill savings forgone, there are many zealots who wish many of these product standards to be abolished in the UK: witness those vituperative stories regarding high-efficiency vacuum cleaners and energy saving lightbulbs – let alone the toasters that were never included in the EU rules – printed in the xenophobic Daily ExpressMail and Telegraph newspapers.

The financial savings are not stopping those determined, like the the Sun’s similar effort last year to say Up Yours to the EU, to demand a whole clutch of energy efficiency standards are now revoked.

According to the UK’s best selling newspaper its readers will be able to “see the light” best by “bringing back the incandescent lightbulbs, phased out by EU regs”. Never mind that changing these bulbs across our economy is one of the main reasons why UK electricity consumption has fallen by over 15 per cent over the past decade.

Similarly The Sun demands we should be “swapping weak EU-regulated vacuum cleaners for powerful ones”. And that we must have “dryer hair by avoiding EU energy rules on powerful hairdyers”.

Indeed this ‘Newspaper of Record’ is demanding that we must return to”using appliances free of energy constraints”.

Let us just stop there, and consider what doing what The Sun and the other deregulatory champions want, would mean. In practice, rather than in rhetoric.

Products policy covering electricity consuming producers is exclusively controlled by the European Union. Formal involvement with which the UK is set to sever two years from now.

The EU Ecodesign Directive establishes a framework under which manufacturers of energy-using products are obliged to reduce the energy consumption and other negative environmental impacts occurring throughout the product life cycle. The Energy Labeling Directive complements it, providing standardised product information for prospective consumers, under the familiar CE marking.

The genesis of both directives goes back 25 years, to 1992, when the European Single Market for products was first created – ironically with strong backing from a (then as now) Conservative UK government.

Its scope currently covers more than 40 product groups. Such as air conditioning equipment, ventilation units, computers and TVs, boilers, lighting, domestic white goods like fridges and washing machines.

Between them, these products had historically been responsible for around 40 per cent of all EU greenhouse gas emissions.

Official UK government figures show just how much the existence of these directives is saving all of us money on our electricity bills. This is worth repeating. We are dealing here with an environmental  policy that is actually saving us all a great deal of money every single year.

The current estimate is that these policies alone are already saving the average household some £67 a year. Given what is in the pipeline the official estimate for 2020 for each household’s electricity savings each year is £153, including VAT. That will be cutting the assumed average electricity bill by 20 per cent.

These are savings currently enjoyed by households that The Sun and its Little England allies seems to be perfectly content to see removed, in order to satisfy their xenophobic dogma.

What about the classic tabloid hero, white van man? He and his fellow small business entrepreneurs currently benefit even more from European products policy.

The savings for the average small business are reckoned currently to be £700 a year off electricity bills. To put that into context, the annual cost to such businesses of the UK’s unilateral Carbon Floor Price tax is £1,100. By 2020 the product policy will be delivering £1,700 off electricity bills for the average small business.

For larger businesses, of a size to be involved with the Carbon Reduction Commitment, the European product policy is now taking an average of £24,000 a year off electricity bills. By 2020 that average is officially reckoned to have soared to £62,000 annually. In contrast, the yearly cost to such businesses by 2020 of the UK government’s unique Contracts for Difference and Capacity Market Auctions policies is due to be £133,000.

What about large energy intensive industries, albeit ones that benefit from all Floor Price exemptions and compensations? Even they are making useful savings. Those with an average £6.4m electricity bill can reckon to be gaining £125,000 each year from these unsung product policies. By 2020 the bonus savings from European product policies is set to be worth some £432,000 a year to companies of this size.

As Brexit doesn’t take place until the financial year 1919/20, all these 2020 savings can reckon to be “in the bank.” But what happens after 2020? Particularly if the UK does quit any formal involvement with the European Single Market?

After all, it has up till now been the exclusive role of the European Commission to police implementation of product policy. Who will replace this role?

As the House of Lords energy and environment committee chair, Lord Robin Teverson, acidly observes, his committee has “found that effective enforcement of existing legislation would be crucial to overcome such ‘short-term vulnerabilities’.”

And of course, what will happen regarding the introduction of any new categories of products?

The Ecodesign Directive is a framework directive, meaning it does not directly set minimum ecological requirements. These are instead adopted through specific implementing measures for each group of products. They are adopted via the so-called comitology procedure, where implementing measures are based on EU internal market rules governing which products may be placed on the market.

Manufacturers who market any energy-using product covered by an implementing measure in the EU area have to ensure it conforms to the energy and environmental standards set out for the measure. And of course from 2019 UK manufacturers are set to be directly excluded from the process of negotiating these standards. In practice, the introduction of any new minimum requirement results in effectively banning all non-compliant products from being sold in the 28 Member States.

The UKIP 2015 manifesto certainly makes hostility to product energy standards clear. Before dismissing this fact, remember that UKIP’s was the only manifesto at the last General Election that now accurately reflects present government policy regarding the European Union.

Be warned. We will need to seriously guard against surrendering those ever-increasing savings on all our electricity bills, once we have “taken back control” of our energy-using product policy.

Andrew Warren is the Honorary President of the Association for the Conservation of Energy and Chairman of the British Energy Efficiency Federation

Continue Reading No Comments

Energy efficiency: it’s not so special!

Not perhaps what you would expect me to say… but of course I don’t mean that energy efficiency isn’t a wonderful thing. I mean, we should stop trying to separate it out from the other things people do every day.

The Each Home Counts review talks about setting up a separate quality system for home energy efficiency work. Why? Of course we need excellent quality control and customer assurance. But don’t we need this for all work in people’s homes? Isn’t there a risk that, by highlighting the quality control for energy efficiency work, we make it seem like something inherently more risky than other home improvements?

The Green Deal has a ‘Golden Rule’ for finance that only allows people to borrow to a level that will be covered by energy bill savings. Again, the consumer protection benefits of this approach are clear. But someone lending for any other home improvement would only want to be happy that the client could repay the loan; they wouldn’t care about precisely which budget the repayments were coming from. Pay-As-You-Save has a point, but finance providers may want to sell the fact that energy bill savings will help cover repayments whilst at the same time offering additional money for an investment that also delivers comfort and asset value improvements.

Energy efficiency does indeed have some ‘special’ characteristics: it delivers social benefits (including health sector savings and reduced energy imports) that perhaps far outweigh the immediate private benefits to energy consumers. And it faces some barriers that other home improvements don’t (it’s hard to show off your new wall insulation…). So, there are good reasons to implement policy that specifically supports energy efficiency.

But as we develop this policy, we should think about how we make energy efficiency part of ‘the way we do things here’. Not how we make it special. We want to reach a point where people invest in energy efficiency in the same way that they invest in other building improvements – because they recognise that it will make their home / place of work ‘nicer’ to be in; because they believe that it will add value to their property; because it is ‘the done thing’. Not because it is something special, something they should do, something that will set them apart.
If we change our point of view, perhaps we will start to formulate policy that works with the existing refurbishment market, that takes into account the structure of the existing supply chain, and that is actually deliverable.

Continue Reading No Comments

#LocalStories,Fuel Poverty,Housing,Non-Residential Buildings

Local Story – Energy Efficiency in Penistone and Stocksbridge

As temperatures plummet in Yorkshire once more, our new local story report has shone a spotlight on the energy performance of homes and businesses in Penistone and Stocksbridge.

This is the sixth in our series of constituency-focused local energy efficiency stories. The report – which has been welcomed by local MP Angela Smith and by local businesses and charities – shows how tens of thousands of local residents have benefited in recent years from proper insulation and efficient boilers, making their homes more affordable to heat and safer to live in.  But the report goes on to identify the huge untapped potential for delivering to the remaining Penistone and Stocksbridge residents the benefits their neighbours have already seen.

The release of this report has been timed to coincide with the launch of environmental charity Hubbub’s fuel poverty project “Fuelling Connections” and has been sponsored by Calor. Hubbub’s kick-off roundtable event took place on Friday 13th January in Stocksbridge and brought together key stakeholders in fuel poverty and Angela Smith MP to discuss what has worked to date and what remains to be done.

Angela Smith MP added: “I know that fuel poverty is a significant issue in Yorkshire and that many of my constituents will be concerned about the cost of heating their homes this winter. I welcome the report by the Association for the Conservation of Energy, which sheds light on the energy efficiency of the housing stock and businesses across the Penistone and Stocksbridge constituency and commend the work that local installers and programme managers have done in recent years to implement energy saving features in homes, such as better insulation and more efficient boilers. This report does however demonstrate the need for a long term energy efficiency policy to tackle these issues.”

 

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Continue Reading No Comments

The market is not a black box

Louise Sunderland freelance built environment sustainability consultant. She previously worked as Senior Policy Advisor at UKGBC and before this in both the research and parliamentary teams here at ACE.

The ruling theory governing energy efficiency policy has for some time now been that the ‘market will deliver’ the energy and carbon savings we as a society need. And the guiding framework for national and European policy is based on interventions to enable the market to deliver.

But as we know ‘markets’ are not sentient beings that make decisions. What we actually mean by ‘the market will deliver’ is that huge numbers of diverse consumers will respond to market signals and engage, behave and invest (often) their own money in “rational” ways that deliver against policy goals. They will change energy profligate behaviours, they will undertake disruptive works to their homes and businesses, they will purchase equipment, materials and services in exactly the ways that ‘socially’ we need them to.

In the last decade we have seen headline European buildings policy begin to make useful interventions to enable the consumer overcome market barriers – the building energy information tool, the Energy Performance Certificate (EPC), was introduced about 15 years ago and more recently there has been a focus on energy use awareness through accurate billing and ‘smart meters’, and the provision of finance to overcome investment barriers.

But what we haven’t really cracked is getting under the skin of what consumers really need ‘end to end’ to enable them to do what society needs them to – for example taking on deep renovations of their buildings. There is no definition of consumer information or advice provision in the relevant European energy efficiency directives (the 2010 Energy Performance of Buildings Directive [EPBD] and the 2012 Energy Efficiency Directive [EED]), there is no indication of what level of consumer support might be needed to achieve our existing buildings refurbishment ambitions (stated in the EPBD as incrementally moving the existing stock to nearly zero energy [and sometimes carbon] buildings!), and current advisory services (with a few notable exceptions) across Europe are inadequate to address the needs of consumers to achieve these aims.

Unfortunately, we haven’t thought seriously enough about the consumer journey and how well the policy framework supports every step. We also haven’t given sufficient focus to those few examples of really rigorous energy advice and support ‘one-stop-shops’ in Europe – like those in France and Germany – and evaluated these and other programmes to develop understanding and evidence of what support produces what results. This reveals a major blind spot.

Focussing on the market rather than the consumer allows us to imagine a kind of black box – ‘the market’ – in which the most difficult questions, like how does an uninformed consumer negotiate conceiving, financing, managing and getting feedback on a complex whole building renovation, get answered by undefined forces or market players. Until we open this black box and do the work to figure out exactly what we need to put in – what support consumers actually need – to get out what we know we need to get out then the market can never be expected to deliver sufficiently to meet our long-term climate and energy objectives.

Louise, as a member of the Energy Advice Exchange, has recently published a discussion paper and briefing (downloadable here) on revisions to the European energy efficiency package which aim to stimulate exchange and debate on the subject and propose improvements to the key European Directives. Louise has also recently posted a blog on her reaction to the European Commission’s recent “winter package” on sustainable energy (downloadable here).

Continue Reading 1 Comment

#LocalStories

Local Story – Energy Efficiency in Truro and Falmouth

As people once again begin to turn up their heating, our new local story report has shone a spotlight on the energy performance of homes and businesses in Truro and Falmouth.

This is the fifth in our series of constituency-focused local stories and the first to be launched with a roundtable event. The event occurred on Friday 4th November in Truro, was sponsored by Calor and chaired by Truro and Falmouth MP Sarah Newton. It brought together key stakeholders in fuel poverty to discuss the findings of the report and to speak with Sarah Newton MP about what has worked to date and what remains to be done.

The report was welcomed by Truro and Falmouth MP Sarah Newton who added: “I know that fuel poverty is a significant issue in Cornwall and that, as we approach winter, many of my constituents will be concerned about the cost of heating their homes. I am delighted to have been able to work with UKACE and organisations in Cornwall to discuss what more we can do to combat this problem”

CalorPaul Worth, Area Sales Manager from Calor, said: “This is an excellent report which helps shine a spotlight on the fact that Government energy efficiency schemes have repeatedly missed households living in rural off gas grid areas. Having this sort of detailed information will help target future help to those who most need it.”

CEPDr Tim Jones, Chief Executive of Community Energy Plus, said: “A stable and long term investment plan to improve the energy efficiency of Cornwall’s coldest homes is currently desperately needed from the government in order to help eradicate fuel poverty.  It was helpful to make this case directly to Sarah Newton MP and I hope that we can work with her and the other roundtable participants to find solutions so that misery of cold and damp homes can be consigned to part of Cornwall’s history instead of our future.”

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Continue Reading No Comments

5th Carbon Budget,Climate Change Act

The UK will miss its climate targets without a step-change in buildings energy efficiency

The last 18 months have been a major set-back in the British policy landscape affecting carbon emissions from buildings: the trajectory to zero carbon new build has been paused; Government support for Green Deal finance was withdrawn with no alternative mechanisms in place to encourage and enable investment by able-to-pay households; government announced that funding from the Energy Company Obligation will be reduced again; and a review of business energy taxes has led to proposals for a new tax structure but, as yet, no coherent supporting framework to encourage energy efficiency action.

This is despite the fact that an increase in policy action is required: In June, the 5th Carbon Budget was adopted by Government setting firm carbon targets for the period from 2028 to 2032. Parliament approved them in July. Reaching those targets will require bold and ambitious policy action across all sectors.

However, new research by the Association for the Conservation of Energy and the Regulatory Assistance Project paints a worrying picture of the UK’s prospects for achieving its carbon targets in the building sector: the Government’s own projections for abatement show that the UK will not meet the 5th Carbon Budget in buildings. Taken together, policies as they currently stand are projected by the Department of Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy (BEIS) to achieve a 21% cut in direct emissions from buildings by 2030 compared to 1990, just 12% below the ‘business as usual’ emissions for 2030. This means that the UK’s emissions from buildings will exceed those recommended by the Committee on Climate Change for the 5th Carbon Budget, in 2030, by 18%.

Worryingly, a large part of the projected abatement from buildings (85%) is considered by the Committee on Climate Change to be ‘at-risk’, and after the vote to leave the EU there is uncertainty around which previously EU driven policies driven will remain. In other words, the majority of projected emissions abatement from buildings is seen as uncertain and may not be achieved. It may not be technically possible, and it is certainly not economical, to close this abatement gap in the power, transport and industrial sectors instead.

Consequently, we need to de-risk, reform, extend and expand existing policies, but also introduce new instruments in order to speed up carbon abatement in the buildings sector. Additional regulatory policies such as Energy Efficiency Standards at point-of-sale (as is currently being implemented in France and considered in Scotland) are needed and new build standards need to be tightened towards zero carbon or nearly zero energy. Alongside, a substantial financing scheme offering low-interest loans is required to enable households and businesses to upgrade their properties and make them fit for a low-carbon future.

Our research shows that the benefits of meeting the 5th Carbon Budget in buildings justify considerable public and private investment to capture them. We quantified the main costs and benefits generally considered for formal policy impact assessments, calculated in accordance with official guidance. The result is that the benefits exceed the costs to a similar degree as High Speed 2 (a planned high-speed railway linking London to the north of the UK) and the smart meter rollout. This means that there is a strong economic case for investing in upgrading the UK’s building stock.

We estimate the net benefit from energy savings, emissions savings, improved air quality and health, and comfort and productivity to be in excess of £45bn. And this figure does not include the value of employment needed across the country to deliver the 5th Carbon Budget in buildings, the value of avoided gas imports and improved energy security, the GDP boost it would deliver nor the additional revenue it would generate for the public coffers.

Ensuring this happens depends on the creation of a robust and long-term policy framework that supports the development of sustainable markets for low carbon retrofit and construction. The most strategic opportunity at which such a step-change can be signalled is in the forthcoming Carbon Plan; the Building Renovation Strategy due next spring also presents an opportunity.

Continue Reading 1 Comment

Our response to BEIS’s consultation on ECO: Help to Heat

The Energy Company Obligation (ECO) is a programme to deliver energy efficiency measures in homes across Great Britain in order to reduce carbon emissions and improve the ability of low income and vulnerable consumers to heat their homes to comfortable levels. ECO was launched in January 2013 and is currently in its second obligation period (ECO2), which is due to end on 31 March 2017. The Government’s Spending Review 2015 announced plans for a supplier obligation to run for 5 years from April 2017 at an estimated level of £640 million per year. This consultation is on the shape of a transitional year from April 2017 to March 2018, paving the way for a subsequent 4-year scheme

While the overall size of the supplier obligation from 2017 is too small, many of the changes proposed appear sensible. However, under the proposals, there will be significant under-delivery to households during the transition year. This is due to the progress made to date under ECO2, the potential for over-delivery and carryover of excess work into the transition year, and the fact that proposed deemed scores are approximately one third lower than the evidence from RdSAP assessments under ECO2. We therefore strongly recommend that the extended CERO target is increased from 3MtCO2 to at least 4.1MtCO2, and the HHCRO target from £1.84bn to at least £2.08bn. This would comfortably keep the transition year’s delivery costs within its notional spending limits, and make sure BEIS and ECO’s stakeholders deliver what is possible with the (too modest) budget limits established by the last Comprehensive Spending Review.

Continue Reading No Comments

Our response to the National Infrastructure Commission’s consultation on National Infrastructure Assessment

In its plan to establish the National Infrastructure Commission, the government set out a responsibility for the Commission to analyse the UK’s long-term economic infrastructure needs, outline a strategic vision over a 30-year time horizon and set out recommendations for how identified needs should begin to be met, through the publication of a National Infrastructure Assessment once a parliament. The Commission has consulted on the Assessment.

In our response, we provide evidence to support our strongly-held view that energy efficiency should be included firmly within the remit of the National Infrastructure Commission as part of a whole energy system approach to meeting the UK’s demand for energy services in a cost-effective way whilst meeting our climate change targets.

Continue Reading No Comments

#LocalStories

London Local Story: A world-class city, but its buildings lag behind

ACE’s latest Local Story, on energy efficiency in London, has found that despite London’s world status, many of its homes and workplaces are highly inefficient, leading to inflated fuel bills, squeezed family budgets, ill health and reduced business competitiveness.

The challenge London set itself in its 2011 Climate Change and Energy Strategy is ambitious. To reduce the city’s CO2 emissions, the target for buildings is to retrofit 2.9 million homes; retrofit public buildings comprising a total of 11 million m2 of floor space; and retrofit 44 million m2 worth of private sector workplaces by 2025. These 55 million m2 constitute two thirds of London’s current non-domestic stock of buildings. Currently, London is falling well behind on its milestones to 2025, and the rewards of stepping up energy efficiency action in the capital are too good to miss.

Heating, cooling and powering London’s homes and workplaces is costly

  • London’s 3.35 million homes account for 36% of its CO2 emissions, and every household spends on average £1,175 on gas and electricity bills every year – a total of £3.9 billion. Workplaces – 265,000 buildings – account for 42% of London’s emissions, and companies pay a total of £4 billion each year in gas and electricity bills.
  • 830,000 homes (a quarter) and 37% of non-domestic buildings that have been given an Energy Performance Certificate since 2009 have the worst energy ratings of E, F or G and are therefore wasting a large proportion of their energy.
  • 348,000 London households are considered to be fuel poor. This means they can’t afford to keep their homes warm due to a combination of low incomes and high energy costs. In addition to being below the poverty line, each year, they are estimated to have to spend £336 more on their energy than a typical household needs to.

Significant upgrades to the efficiency of London’s buildings have been made in recent years

  • In homes, energy efficiency programmes have helped to insulate 350,000 lofts and 257,000 cavity walls in London. 803,000 efficient boilers have been installed. Also, London’s RE:NEW programme has helped to underpin energy efficiency improvements through advice provision and delivery support in 119,000 homes to date. 400 households have taken up low carbon heating, and 19,000 have installed solar photovoltaic panels.
  • Less is known about improvements made in workplaces. Public buildings’ Display Energy Certificate ratings have been steadily improving since 2009, and London’s RE:FIT programme has underpinned £93m investment in 619 public buildings, cutting annual energy costs by £6.9m. The amount of energy London uses per unit of its economic output has reduced by 40% and its energy consumption has fallen by 16% since 2005.

These improvements bring a wide range of benefits to London

  • London’s homes and workplaces spend upwards of £7.9 billion on energy bills every year – money which doesn’t stay in London’s economy. Improving efficiency and cutting energy costs means more invested in and spent on London’s economy, while further improving its energy productivity and competitiveness
  • Many of these efficiency improvements are delivered by London businesses. An ambitious national retrofit programme for homes, with London taking up its fair share, would support 10,300 jobs in the capital.
  • Thermal comfort in the work environment is now well-established as a real boon to workers’ health, wellbeing and productivity, and cold homes have been shown to be damaging to both physical and mental health. For every £1 invested in renovating cold homes the NHS saves 42 pence in reduced hospital admissions and GP visits.

Millions of homes and businesses still stand to gain from energy efficiency upgrades. A step-change in delivery is needed, combined with a panoramic view and thorough understanding of all the benefits it can bring. Capturing the above benefits simultaneously, by investing in the energy performance of our buildings, will help London to meet its targets, maintain its economic competitiveness and to be a place that people want – and can afford – to live and work.

Continue Reading No Comments

CONTACT US | FIND US | US | © 2017 Association for the Conservation of Energy. CAN Mezzanine, Old Street, 49-51 East Road, London N1 6AH. Tel: 020 7250 8410. Registered company number 01650772