Efficiency key to 80% carbon reduction
Share
The coalition government has promised to improve the energy efficiency of homes as part of plans to reduce emissions by 80 per cent by 2050.
An Annual Energy Statement published by the Department of Energy and Climate Change yesterday set out 32 actions the government will take to achieve this goal.
These include rolling out the Green Deal scheme, which will allow households to access funds to improve the energy efficiency of their homes and pay back the costs over time through fuel bill savings.
The statement says the government is looking at how to make the Green Deal work for social tenants. Under its proposals providers such as energy companies and high street stores would run the Green Deal, guiding households through getting access to the funds.
The statement says these providers could form partnerships with local authorities or registered social landlords to improve the efficiency of rented stock.
A forthcoming Energy Security and Green Economy Bill will provide the legislation needed to implement the Green Deal, although the government is looking for some involvement from providers ahead of its publication.
The statement also says the government will include a new obligation on energy companies in the bill to replace the existing Carbon Emissions Reduction Target. The existing obligation will continue until the end of 2012.
CERT is being ‘re-designed to support the most vulnerable’. A ‘super-priority’ group is being introduced, to ensure energy companies direct their support at those who need it most.
Smart meters giving consumers detailed information about how much energy they use will be rolled out to all homes. Alongside the energy statement the government issued a prospectus outlining how this will work.
The statement notes that as the Green Deal and smart metering develop, there could be the potential for households to install micro-generation equipment through the scheme.
Energy and climate change secretary Chris Huhne said: ‘The era of cheap, abundant energy is over. We must find smart ways of making energy go further, and value it for the costly resource it is, not take it for granted.’
Have your say
You must sign in to make a comment
Readers' comments (7)
Matt Cody | 28/07/2010 9:11 am
I don't understand why there is such a huge emphasis on smart meters as a means to address energy efficiency targets. The meters still require an individual or household to adapt and change their lifestyle, and become more aware of their energy usage.
Voltage Optimisation on the other hand can be fitted to every house and will automatically lower and regulate the incoming voltage, preventing energy waste, typically saving around 10% off annual electricity bills and reducing CO2 emissions in the process - all without requiring any change in lifestyle or energy use behaviour.
Big businesses and organisations - including the DECC - use voltage optimisation in their commercial premises, yet the technology is rarely considered within the domestic environment. In terms of 'easy wins', surely this has to be a better option than smart meters?!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Melvin Bone | 28/07/2010 2:24 pm
Free smart meters are brilliant, I sold mine on ebay and got £30.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
ILAG | 29/07/2010 10:57 pm
Matt Cody | 28/07/2010 9:11 am
Fascinating thanks for sharing. I just googled "Voltage Optimisation" and came up with a host of responses. Any particular supplier or device that you would recommend for the home consumer?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Matt Cody | 30/07/2010 9:55 am
Hi ILAG,
I actually do work for a domestic voltage optimisation company called VPhase - but didn't want to engage in a sales pitch, which is why I didn't mention that previously!
I believe the technology represents a significant means for saving on energy bills and reducing CO2 emissions yet people just don't know about it... yet.
I'm working to raise the profile of voltage optimisation generally, because once the general loft and cavity wall insulation is in place across housing stock, there are few cost-effective alternative technologies available. Voltage optimisation is actually not too dissimilar to loft insulation in terms of cost and payback periods.
I hope that answers your question though?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Andy Merrin | 30/07/2010 4:35 pm
I've just been looking at the VPhase website. If used in a block of flats would it require 1 VPhase per flat or just one per block?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
ILAG | 31/07/2010 0:14 am
Good question. Matt, over to you...
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Matt Cody | 02/08/2010 10:54 am
Hi Andy / ILAG,
I've checked with the tech guys and they've advised that because the VPhase is fitted next to the consumer unit, it would more than likely require one unit per flat.
Larger scale voltage optimisation is possible though - and is used in industry by companies such as Tesco and Asda. Companies like Power Perfector and Powerstar offer these products, but they're many more times expensive than VPhase units and considerably larger too. With a large block of flats they may prove cost effective though; it'd be advisable to have a site survey carried out to assess the viability of these.
The VPhase itself is low cost though and we're constantly working to drive the costs down even further. We're in the process of completing trials so that Ofgem can calculate the lifetime CO2 savings of the product - which will allow the device to qualify for CERT and as a result, the unit can be subsidised, thus making it even more affordable.
For social housing providers that conduct rewires on a proportion of their housing stock each year, buying bulk units would afford volume discounts too - so in terms of affordability, it then becomes very cost effective, lowering costs of installation (the electrician is already onsite) and overall purchase price.
Does that answer your question? If there's anything else you need or want to know... just ask.
Thanks,
Matt
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment