Peter Chisnall

Compliance Manager

3rd September 2013

CAN - Fuel Poverty & ECO Workshop

Fuel Poverty Update

Fuel Poverty, England 2011

•The new LIHC measure differs slightly to Professor Hills’•The difference reflects changes following the Govt. consultation• A household is said to be in fuel poverty if:

• they have required fuel costs that are above average (the national median level)

• were they to spend that amount they would be left with a residual income below the official poverty line.

Headline Statistics on the new LIHC measure

In England 2011:

•2.39 m households were fuel poor under the new LIHC measure•Approx. 11% of the overall population. •This is a decrease of around 84,000 households since 2010. •Aggregate fuel poverty gap increased by £23m, to £1.05 billion in 2011. •Average fuel poverty gap increased by £24 to £438 in 2011.

DECC Fuel Poverty Report – Updated August 2013

Fuel poverty in England under the proposed LIHC measure

Aggregate and average fuel poverty gap under the proposed LIHC measure

Fuel poverty and associated average fuel poverty gaps by region, 2011

•115,723 measures installed under ECO up to the end of June •82,000 measures which were notified to Ofgem but not yet approved•30,000 have been sent back to suppliers for data correction or completion of missing information•27,000 are undergoing further checks to ensure that they are valid measures under ECO; the majority of which are hard-to-treat cavity measures in CERO. •The majority of these were for: •loft insulation, cavity wall insulation, and boiler upgrades.

ECO Update

Fuel Poverty and ECO

Workshop Questions

Thanks for participating

End of Workshop

Feedback

1. What have your experiences of delivering ECO to fuel poor households been so far?

• Stop – start• Low offers for boilers, gap is too much• Need to future proof houses, doing boilers first limits future funding eligibility• Needs more funding• Complexity of reporting, easier to do 1 measure, time allowed• Contribution based JSA/ESA missing out• Direct involvement in Pilot scheme• LAs should do the GDA, truly impartial• Ineligibility for households just a little above threshold• Good EPCs important• Whole house approach makes measures stack up but contribution required• Danger of cherry picking, boiler leads only makes property unviable for insulation• Energy Efficiency Reputational issues, free boiler promises• Junk mail, phone calls to numbers registered with TPS, as bad as PPI calls!• Some fuel poor households missing out by not having right passport benefit• Public misinformation/confusion, ineligibility due to small amount of insulation• Painful, HHCRO particularly, only for houses on mains gas, no good for rural areas• Huge matched funding required• Large gap between ECO and GD for private sector• Complexity compared to CERT and Warmfront• County and Regional Frameworks make it easier• Boarded lofts rule out ECO• Boilers only replaced not controls• Utility call centres not familiar with ECO, saying there is no grant funding anymore, need training

2. ECO barriers – how can we overcome them?

• Tenure blind• Not means tested benefit• Low income low efficiency area approach, target geographical areas street by street• Remove stigma• Lack of joined up working, restrictions by Govt, LAS being requested to apply for funding individually• Customer contribution is a real issue• Customers not interested in GD• Different levels of funding depending on different part of ECO• Difficult to promote, do not know offers or cost of measures• Difficult to get schemes running as Providers unwilling to give prices until EPCs done• Additional eligibility standards required, low income, poor health, other passport benefits• Simplify it, customer focussed• Early adopters , i.e. good news messages• National publicity and counter bad publicity• Need a statutory programme, the market won’t solve fuel poverty• Bring back Warmfront (but better)• Levy the energy companies and distribute to Las• Every customer has different issues, inability to guarantee who gets funding• ESAS not working, people disappear into the ether, • Different utilities have different offers• Some utilities just want to work with their own customers• Funding streams don’t match, ECO based on carbon reduction, GD based on financial savings• Good responses by utilities to requests, British Gas did survey within two working days

3. What mechanisms are in place or should be in place to enable householders to

benefit from advice and guidance?

• Local Advice services required• Gtr. Manchester Las working in partnership good examples of best practice• Network of impartial energy advice centres, link to financial advice• Providing advice alone needs to be an approved measure attracting a carbon/financial value• Advice will prompt fuel savings through behaviour change and ease beneficiaries into measure acceptance• On the ground, trusted guidance• Link advice/guidance to smart meter roll out• Baseload data, overnight energy usage• More information on the energy bill• Local agencies with local knowledge and relationships• Islington runs it own capital programme for heating and insulation• Need programme for flats, HHCRO providers not interested• Govt. need to realise that not everyone lives in a suburban 3 bed semi• DECC and Las have different priorities• Leicestershire has energy advisors giving advice on a house by house basis• Eligibility, what measures and first steps advice required• Information needs to be disseminated through community groups

4. What is the role if any for sustainable energy solutions in tackling fuel poverty? i.e. Passive Houses or other highly energy efficient dwellings and renewables?

• Change the vision • Keep GD finance separate,• Retrofit housing improvement schemes• Whole house approach, issues about funding• RSLs cannot afford 80% carbon reduction, not financially viable, does this mean more retrofitting within 50 years?• Where would new builds go?• Develop zero energy houses• Retrofit with technologies and super insulation • Do simple measures and solid wall insulation properties first before funding into Passivhaus• Cost effective solutions taking into account health treatment costs and savings• Strong links to Planning Policy• Train Planning Officers on new technologies• Fabric first• Not a priority