Read on Twitter
To meet carbon reduction targets & stay below 1.5ºC – we need to retrofit a lot of buildings.
We're talking roughly 1 house every 20 seconds between now & 2050 (ideally not sequentially)
so how do we do it?
...
We're talking roughly 1 house every 20 seconds between now & 2050 (ideally not sequentially)
so how do we do it?
...
Many people have published about the need...
@UKGBC @TheIET on why wind/solar won't save us and why we need to go big on retrofitting https://www.theiet.org/media/5276/retrofit.pdf
or @PassivhausTrust on just how many old, cold houses there are in the UK (image below)
@UKGBC @TheIET on why wind/solar won't save us and why we need to go big on retrofitting https://www.theiet.org/media/5276/retrofit.pdf
or @PassivhausTrust on just how many old, cold houses there are in the UK (image below)
But whats often overlooked is the amount of investment needed and logic behind where it will come from
A 'deep retrofit' (as close to net energy neutral as possible) of a typical home being anywhere between £50-150k
That's a lot of
A 'deep retrofit' (as close to net energy neutral as possible) of a typical home being anywhere between £50-150k
That's a lot of
That scale is important.
Because it means mobilising a retrofit sector on a national scale - eg. @NEF earlier this year https://neweconomics.org/2020/07/a-national-house-retrofitting-programme
But this also means grappling with how we align the money we need with what it affords us in the long term. More on that later.
Because it means mobilising a retrofit sector on a national scale - eg. @NEF earlier this year https://neweconomics.org/2020/07/a-national-house-retrofitting-programme
But this also means grappling with how we align the money we need with what it affords us in the long term. More on that later.
Taking the 
sector, the general consensus is that you pay for it with future energy savings. So whoever benefits from that should be the ones who pay.
Useful in some circumstances (home owners or councils in it for the long haul). Less so in others (everyone else).
sector, the general consensus is that you pay for it with future energy savings. So whoever benefits from that should be the ones who pay.Useful in some circumstances (home owners or councils in it for the long haul). Less so in others (everyone else).
#GreenHomeGrants replicated an old idea by providing one-off grants to homeowners for specific energy efficiency measures (mainly as a GDP stimulus)
This highlighted 2 main issues:
1) lack of contractors/quality control
2) bias for single improvements over deep retrofit
This highlighted 2 main issues:
1) lack of contractors/quality control
2) bias for single improvements over deep retrofit
Throwing money at this problem won't solve it.
In fact, w/o designing for the public purpose at the centre of this effort and w/o addressing the extractive investment and procurement models of how this gets done...it will likely make it worse. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/grenfell-firms-share-in-2bn-green-grants-p6dlc6vr5
In fact, w/o designing for the public purpose at the centre of this effort and w/o addressing the extractive investment and procurement models of how this gets done...it will likely make it worse. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/grenfell-firms-share-in-2bn-green-grants-p6dlc6vr5
*How* we spend money is as important as *how much* we spend.
(an excellent piece on reimagining public procurement from early this year from @AlastairParvin)
https://alastairparvin.medium.com/after-the-crisis-lets-fix-procurement-428c598fb558)
(an excellent piece on reimagining public procurement from early this year from @AlastairParvin)
https://alastairparvin.medium.com/after-the-crisis-lets-fix-procurement-428c598fb558)
A common alternative suggestion is to try encourage (read subsidise) institutional investors (eg. pension funds) who are in rush to show theyre 'greening their books' - and get them to stump up the initial cash in return for small but steady returns https://www.ft.com/content/cff58c77-ed90-49ff-bd1f-94b69d00d054
The idea being to get to tie a ~25yr service contract to a property in exchange for what you would have paid for heating. Covering the cost of the retrofit.
A sort of retrofit-as-a-service
At face value this is less of a just transition, and more a green rent-a-recovery.
A sort of retrofit-as-a-service
At face value this is less of a just transition, and more a green rent-a-recovery.
We have to address the dynamics behind this problem.
The reason we have low quality, energy hungry buildings and expensive electricity in the first place is because we treat them both as rent seeking infrastructures. Both suffering from (fairly) monopolistic supply.
The reason we have low quality, energy hungry buildings and expensive electricity in the first place is because we treat them both as rent seeking infrastructures. Both suffering from (fairly) monopolistic supply.
side note - subsidising wind and solar made sense and has helped create a more low carbon energy market, alongside things like Open Energy @IcebreakerOne https://icebreakerone.org/energy/
Yet whats possible with energy (bc it can be measured in kWh) is not possible for retrofitting.
Yet whats possible with energy (bc it can be measured in kWh) is not possible for retrofitting.
Retrofitting is a knot of services, money, knowledge, skills, ownership, networks of trust, care and responsibility.
Viewing this simply as 'a market' to sell retrofit services to won't be enough.
Viewing this simply as 'a market' to sell retrofit services to won't be enough.
Groups like @CarbonCoop & @RetrofitWorks know this. They know that *trust* is their most valuable currency.
Bc we're asking people to trust us with their future homes, health and wellbeing.
https://cc-site-media.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/2020/07/3.-PeoplePoweredRetrofit-Report.pdf
Bc we're asking people to trust us with their future homes, health and wellbeing.
https://cc-site-media.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/2020/07/3.-PeoplePoweredRetrofit-Report.pdf
So this isn't about the number of builders to do the job. Or about the amount of grants for loft insulation.
This is about the creating a professionalism fit for the 21stC - a distributed, networked business model for decarbonising our homes, streets and neighbourhoods.
This is about the creating a professionalism fit for the 21stC - a distributed, networked business model for decarbonising our homes, streets and neighbourhoods.
Viewed through this lens the EPC (energy performance contract) does become and interesting tool.
Companies like @EnergiesprongEU already use EPCs for grouping multiple homes under the same construction contract.
But! the supply chain has huge set up costs & will take time
Companies like @EnergiesprongEU already use EPCs for grouping multiple homes under the same construction contract.
But! the supply chain has huge set up costs & will take time
Its also based in an C20th industrial logic that procurement on mass = success.
We need to think harder than this.
We need to think harder than this.
So what if we understood tools like EPCs in a different way.
What if we saw them as a necessary tool for linking local business and action groups, with the investment they needed to make deep retrofit possible across the counrty.
What if we saw them as a necessary tool for linking local business and action groups, with the investment they needed to make deep retrofit possible across the counrty.
The moment we have an open, reliable way of understanding energy performance in the home. A can link it to an (ideally digital) EPC held by a trusted, local retrofit service - is the moment we link 'green' recovery investment with the efforts to decarbonise our built environment
