Why all the fuss over 100%?

Being the social landlord behind a brand spanking-new, zero carbon development seems the way to go at the moment. Green new build is what the government has been pushing for the past two years and where all the cash and regulation have been focused.

It also means that tenants can relax in their solar-powered sitting rooms, safe in the knowledge that they are single-handedly saving the planet - or are they? Not really, is the answer. Out of the 25 million homes in the UK, less than 1 per cent is new build. So your eco-design might be greener than thou, but it is probably surrounded by thousands of older homes, which are leaking carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and clocking up enormous energy bills.

There are plenty of reasons why we should worry about emissions from existing homes, says James Honour, architect and senior consultant at the Building Research Establishment: ‘The amount of new housing we are building is so small that it won’t solve the carbon emissions problem.

‘Cutting emissions from the homes that are around at the moment has got to be done. Housing is such a key part of overall emissions: about 25 per cent of the UK’s total carbon dioxide emissions come from existing stock.’

Bleak picture

What’s more, the government is committed under the Climate Change Act to cut carbon dioxide emissions by 80 per cent by 2050. That ambitious target cannot be achieved without addressing emissions from existing homes.

The Energy Saving Trust estimates that the average home emits around five tonnes of carbon dioxide every year. And since the homes we are living in now will account for 86 per cent of the country’s housing in 2050, existing homes are becoming a very important part of the emissions agenda.

‘It is an extremely bleak picture,’ says John Doggart, chair of the Sustainable Energy Academy. ‘If we miss our [emissions] target, the consequences will be dire. As the climate changes, we could get a dramatic population reduction through starvation in this country because we depend on other countries for our food. We have got to act quickly.’

So the consequences could be terrible - and the challenge is incomprehensively large. To meet the 2050 target, Mr Doggart estimates the UK needs to refurbish or retrofit 500,000 houses every year for the next 40 years, of which 100,000 a year will be social housing.

It is a fantastic place to start, according to Olivia Powis, London regional manager for the National Housing Federation. ‘[As the climate changes] we do not know what’s going to happen to fuel bills, so it makes sense that those on low incomes have got a better quality home to live in,’ she says.

But there is one problem. If a housing association decides to add green upgrades to its existing stock, it won’t see a return for its expenditure. While its tenants enjoy lower fuel bills and a more efficient home, the housing association sees no financial benefit at all. So until social landlords can charge higher rents on eco-friendly housing, they need to have a fairly large green heart to start shelling out on improvements.

Help is at hand in the form of grants from the Carbon Emissions Reduction Target, where energy suppliers fund improvements to customers’ homes in order to cut their emissions. Social landlords can also use money from the social housing energy saving programme, run by the Homes and Communities Agency, to pay for cavity wall insulation in hard-to-treat cavity walls which were not filled under the decent homes programme. Also snappily titled, the low carbon buildings programme phase 2 provides grants to public sector buildings and charitable bodies.

But the NHF believes many of these grants are too specific, and often do not look at a house as a whole. This seems borne out by the experience of those already engaged in retrofitting programmes. For example, Gentoo has spent more than £6 million on its energy efficiency programme since 2001. The group provided the majority of funding, with £1.2 million coming from Energy Efficiency Commitment and CERT. Its retrofit reality pilot, involving 129 homes, cost £255,000, with £100,000 of sponsorship from the Tenant Services Authority and £17,073 from LCBP.

Grants can only go so far, though, in plugging the funding gap. An effective way to channel some of the money that tenants with eco-refurbishments get from lower energy bills back to social landlords is needed. Many believe the best way to counter this is to attach an annual or monthly charge to a retrofitted property, similar to a service charge, which would be paid out of the energy savings. This ‘pay as you save’ option would, in theory, mean housing associations do not lose quite so much cash when carrying out green upgrades. In practice, however, the scheme could still prove difficult. ‘Pay as you save is something we and our members are looking at and are keen to make work for social housing tenants and landlords,’ says Ms Powis. ‘As yet, we haven’t been able to identify a clear solution for this as it will obviously differ from private home owners because the housing association will incur the cost of the work and the tenant will benefit from lower fuel bills.

‘Because of restrictions on rents and service charges, associations are unable to straightforwardly apply the pay as you save model, but we are continuing to look into this.’

Education, education, education

For the private rented sector, on the other hand, where fuel poverty is a particular problem, this maintenance charge may be a small price to pay for vastly reduced heating bills.

But cash spent on refurbishment will be wasted if those moving into the homes do not know how to use them. There is little point in cocooning a house in insulation and fitting solar water heaters if the tenants fling the windows open and leave the central heating on. So education is essential for a real cut in emissions to occur. Housing associations are tackling this in different ways.

etropolitan Housing Partnership has distributed leaflets illustrating the savings environmentally friendly living can make, while others are holding workshops or tours of retrofitted homes to help tenants make the most of new features.

Winning tenants round to the whole idea of retrofitting is important, says Alison Matthias, policy manager at the Homes and Communities Agency: ‘A key issue in retrofitting existing homes is that there are people living in them. That has a fundamental effect on what we can do.

‘If we are talking about large-scale retrofits, that can cause a lot of upheaval. And a lot of the cost of putting up solar panels is putting on scaffolding, so it makes sense to carry out retrofitting at the same time as improvements for decent homes so tenants don’t face too much disruption.’

Gauging success

Once tenants are happy and using their retrofitted homes effectively, how do we measure the cut in emissions accurately? It is difficult to compare the reductions made in existing homes as they are, by their nature, highly diverse. A rambling stone cottage will never achieve the same cuts as a 1980s terraced house.

At present, the Ecohomes XB assessment is the most popular - but not mandatory - measurement. This not only analyses the environmental impact of refurbishment work, but also identifies areas which still need improvement. The tool evaluates all aspects of the home, from energy efficient fittings and heating systems to access to public transport and appliance disposal.

‘Ecohomes XB needs a little tweaking as we get feedback on how realistic its objectives are,’ admits the BRE’s Mr Honour. Others agree that it will take time before this standard is accepted by the wider public as something worth attending to when choosing a home.

In fact, Professor Anne Power from the Sustainable Development Commission and the London School of Economics, believes that the wider public still need convincing of the urgent need to refurbish existing homes. ‘We have no choice but to tackle this,’ she says. ‘It is not a big investment compared with the amount people are prepared to spend on a new kitchen or a bathroom.
‘There are 24 million households, all of which have their own ideas about how to run their houses. Unless there is a very strong incentive to retrofit, nothing will happen.’

The easy route

50%

Cutting the emissions of one house in half shouldn’t be too difficult or expensive. A basic standard upgrade will bring most houses up to this. Cavity wall and roof insulation, along with draught-proofing and double glazing will seal the worst leakages. A-rated appliances will also play their part.

The middle road

60%

In addition to cavity wall insulation, to cut a property’s emissions by 60 per cent it will need an additional 50mm of either internal or external insulation. An A-rated gas boiler and insulation on the ground will also prevent waste. Some of the water heating will be provided by solar thermal panels on the roof: around 4m will be needed. Reaching this target should cost between £10,000 and £20,000 per property.

Maximum effort

80%

If you thought reaching 60 per cent was expensive, wait until you see the extra £20,000 you would need to add to the bill for the photovoltaic panels that could bring your property up to the government carbon emissions reduction target. The Sustainable Energy Agency recommends turning to offsite renewable energy sources to reach 80 per cent without breaking the bank.The Building Research Housing Group shares information between social housing providers about meeting the target.
www.brhg.org.uk

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment