Hard to Treat or Hard to Fund?

Final ReportRetrofit Insulation pilot project

Calderdale Council September 2011

This study has broken new ground in piloting methods of making older stone properties more energy efficient. It challenges received wisdom and shows the way forward. It demonstrates that many older stone properties do have cavities suitable for insulation with products other than the traditional blown fibre. It also shows that attic rooms can be insulated with tried and trusted products. Hard to treat homes don’t exist. Affordable insulation and more affordable warmth is available for these types of homes. What’s missing is clear, accessible information for householders and subsidy to get the market going. Now that much of the traditional cavity wall insulation to brick built homes has been done, the next challenge is to address older stone built properties, mostly in private sector ownership. It’s vital that the Department for Energy and Climate Change, Ofgem and the wider industry recognise the need for local solutions and promote flexibility in the delivery of carbon subsidies. There are thousands of stone terraces that can be improved easily addressing both carbon reduction and fuel poverty issues. Now’s the time to improve our approach and make a difference.

Councillor Janet BattyeLeader, Calderdale Council

Contents

Executive Summary

Introduction

Context

Fuel poverty vs carbon reduction

Why is a home Hard to Treat?

The importance of insulation

Calderdale Housing Context

Calderdale’s Hard to Treat Pilot Project

Background

Methodology

Insulation measures

Results

Outcomes

Conclusions and observations

Recommendations

References

Appendix 1 – Supporting technical information

4

7

10

15

28

32

34

Executive Summary

4

In 2009 Calderdale Council set up an Economic Task Force to counteract the effects of recession in the Borough. The Economic Task Force recognised that Calderdale, like much of West Yorkshire, had a problem of thousands of houses being classed as Hard to Treat in terms of suitability for common forms of insulation to walls and lofts. Thousands of houses were built around 100-150 years ago, laid out in terraces constructed of the locally quarried stone.

During the course of this pilot study, it was discovered that the issue of Hard to Treat homes is much more widespread than was initially realised and that there are some 5.8 million homes in England falling into this category, around 40,000 in Calderdale. The issue in Calderdale is that many homes have rooms in the attics and that until now the stone exterior walls were considered to be unsuitable for cavity wall fill.

The project achieved its initial aims of insulating 40 Hard to Treat properties lived in by vulnerable households throughout the Borough by using different insulation methods. The findings will be used to inform future programmes of work and for the development of advice to local householders.

This report concentrates on the insulation of exterior walls and roofs of dwellings as these are the construction elements that make a property Hard to Treat locally. Other elements of energy reduction such as behavioural change, low energy light bulbs and appliances, efficient heating systems, draught-proofing and double glazing, although important, are not included as the issues are not unique to this type of property. Further reading and websites are suggested at the end of this report to explore those topics. Improving the energy efficiency of homes supports Government and Local Authority priorities such as narrowing the gap in terms of health and wealth inequalities, and carbon dioxide emission reduction. However, the presence of hard to treat homes threatens the achievement of these objectives.

The current multi-million pound national energy efficiency programmes such as Warmfront and Carbon Emissions Reduction Target (CERT) have concentrated largely on installing rolls of glass fibre insulation in lofts and installing blown fibre into cavity walls. Large scale improvements have been made to social housing as these are much easier to target than privately owned houses. Funds have been collected from all households via levies on energy bills (on average £88 per household per annum) and from taxes, and directed at the households living in properties suitable for fibre insulation measures. Where stone properties or houses with attic rooms were referred for fibre insulation schemes, they were turned down automatically and in many cases owners told that the property couldn’t be insulated.

5

This has caused a double blow to those vulnerable householders: they are helping to pay for measures in other people’s properties while not being eligible to benefit from it.Historic data has pooled together all homes with exterior walls that do not have smooth, empty cavities under the heading of solid walls. However, as this pilot study confirms, many properties that are not of standard modern construction are not solid walled. In fact, they have cavities which can be treated using alternative measures at a comparable cost to the blown fibre method currently mass funded through CERT.

Unfortunately this has had the effect of limiting the imagination and understanding of the industry, regulator OFGEM and the Government, and limiting the range of solutions that are subsidised by the national programmes. Tiny subsidies have been offered towards the cost of external and internal cladding of walls, products which this document shows are less practical, expensive and unpopular, whilst no subsidies are currently available for insulating attic rooms or alternative cavity fill methods. This document seeks to offer practical solutions to making much of the existing housing stock sustainable for the future.

This was a small pilot project to investigate the whereabouts, numbers and types of Hard to Treat homes in Calderdale, find practical measures to insulate the homes and make recommendations for how to start a programme of insulation for the rest of the Hard to Treat homes in the Borough. The implications, however are far more wide reaching and could be used to inform national emerging policy for the Green Deal and the Energy Company Obligation which will replace CERT in 2012.

‘Future work will include how to assist the owners of properties who are unable to pay for the works up front, identifying subsidies or funds for making loans to the vulnerable households of the Borough.’

6

The report describes some of the shortcomings and the difficulties encountered with the products, procurement and installation as well as the attitudes of customers towards the works and paying for improvements. The market is underdeveloped in some areas, a shortage of installers may well be affecting the quality and cost of installations and products. In order to address this, there is scope for contractors and social enterprises to expand into this market, particularly in the low tech installations such as attic dry lining.

Reliance in the past on national survey data has led to the mistaken belief that virtually all properties built prior to 1920 have solid walls (Ref 1). This has continued despite the borescopic surveys that have taken place prior to installations of cavity wall insulation via national programmes such as Warmfront. In practice, many of these surveys haven’t taken place where the walls were stone or built prior to 1920. Owners have been told that they haven’t got a cavity to fill and alternative products have therefore not been considered.The immediate outcome from the report will be the information that can be made available to the public via the Local Authority web site about the products and installations that are available to insulate particular local house types. This has been long awaited by many of the owner occupiers in the Borough who are ready and willing to carry out the works if they are given the information to enable them to make informed decisions and purchase with confidence.

The findings include:

• Householdsneedimprovedaccesstoimpartial information about how their properties can best be insulated.

• Vulnerablehouseholdsneedassistancewith procurement from trusted contractors.

• Around20%ofHardtoTreathomessurveyed had a cavity that could be filled with expanded polystyrene (EPS) bead or Polyurethane foam. They had all been previously surveyed and householders informed that their properties were unsuitable for fibre insulation, but were not offered an alternative solution.

• Propertiesbuiltafter1900aremorelikelyto have a fillable cavity, but others may be picked up from survey.

• Significantly,around25%ofpropertiesneeded essential repairs before insulation could be installed.

• Internaldryliningproductsareavailablefor walls, but they are difficult, disruptive and costly to install.

• Externalcladdingisunlikelytobesuitableas a common remedy locally because of the stone heritage.

• Atticscanbedrylinedeasilyandsuccessfully with composite phenolic foam boards.

• Insulationshouldbeconsideredwhencarrying out remedial or renovation works, preferably using subsidies as incentives.

• Takeupofinsulationincreasedwhenfullgrants were offered.

7

An example of a missed opportunity for carrying out insulation works is that no subsidy is available for insulation works carried out during renovations or reroofing. For retrofitting, this is the ideal time to carry out such works, but as no subsidy is made available it is often overlooked or not considered due to additional cost.

The existing housing stock can be insulated to make it sustainable. A more flexible approach is needed rather than the mass programme of blown cavity wall insulation and loose lay fibre loft insulation of the past. Local solutions can be found that are affordable for householders, attic rooms can be drylined, thousands of cavities can be filled, awareness raising carried out and good reliable sources of products and local contractors encouraged to deliver.

Future work will include how to assist the owners of properties who are unable to pay for the works up front, identifying subsidies or funds for making loans to the vulnerable households of the Borough.

There is funding available in the short term through CERT (Carbon Emissions Reduction Target) and CESP (Community Energy Saving Programme) and in the longer term through the new proposed Energy Company Obligation and the Green Deal, but lobbying will be needed in order to ensure that funds are directed towards local priorities rather than those dictated by one size fits all national programmes. The energy suppliers, OFGEM and DECC need to radically review their policies to allow more local flexibility. Funds are currently not available to insulate attic rooms or to install alternative cavity fill products in the private stock.

The funds distributed through the national energy companies are collected from every household that pays energy bills. The energy companies decide how this should be invested in the housing stock to achieve their obligated carbon savings as cost effectively as possible. Should they fail to achieve their carbon reduction targets, the financial penalties have been set at 10% of the company’s turnover. This approach tends to discriminate against areas such as Calderdale and similar areas in the Leeds City Region and the North of England, where nearly half of the existing housing stock is not suitable for standard fibre insulation products. If funds were directed locally, they could be targeted into a programme suitable for local conditions and priorities.

8

Introduction

In the past few years the linked issues of rising fuel bills, fuel poverty and threat of Climate Change have steadily increased in the nation’s consciousness. Households who would have to spendmorethan10%oftheirincome to heat their home to an acceptable standard are said to be fuel poor. Those who spend 20%oftheirincomeareseverelyfuel poor.

Climate change has forced the issue of targets for reducing the emission of ‘green house gases’. Domestic use of energy accounts for almost a third of the total UK carbon dioxide emissions and will need to be reduced if overall targets are to be achieved.

For some years there has been a growing concern about how the traditional stone built stock of West Yorkshire can be made sustainable for the future. The properties in the worst condition have been cleared over the last few decades leaving a legacy of (mostly) well built stone terraces offering family homes at reasonably affordable prices in and around the town centres.

This is the housing stock that defines the valleys of Calderdale and surrounding Local Authority areas, built 100-150 years ago to house the workers for the mills and other heavy industry. High density was achieved with this type of housing, making efficient use of the valleys and leaving the hill tops to the oldest

New homes are being built to much better standards of thermal efficiency. Eventually these will replace the existing housing stock, but at the current rate of new builds, that would take around 200 years. If further significant carbon dioxide emission reductions are to be found in the domestic market, the existing stock must be tackled.

Income

Energy Efficiency

Fuel Prices

Definition - A household is in fuel poverty if it would need to spend more than 10% of its income on fuel to maintain an adequate level of warmth (21°C in main living area, 18°C in other occupied rooms).

settlements and rural uses. Through and back to back terraces, under and over dwellings built in natural local stone are both attractive and practical. They can also be cold, damp, overcrowded and expensive to live in, if they are not adequately heated, ventilated and maintained.

Determinants of fuel poverty

9

Each year around £1.25 Billion is spent in the UK on a variety of Government schemes and grants intended to improve home energy efficiency. During that time individual householders have insulated their homes with the aim of reducing the amount of energy they use; making them better off and reducing the level of carbon emissions. These have been well received by the public as they are well organised and subsidised, and the economic benefits in the form of fuel bill savings become immediately apparent.

Calderdale’s Affordable Warmth Strategy has achieved considerable success through the Calderdale Home Insulation Scheme (CHIS) which has targeted the fuel poor. Providing staple fibre insulation has meant that their homes have become more fuel efficient and their heating costs less and the Borough’s carbon emissions from domestic properties have been reduced.

These programmes have rightly concentrated on the cheapest and easiest ways of saving carbon emissions, laying rolls of loose fibre products in loft spaces and filling cavity walls with blown fibre. The vast majority of properties that can be easily insulated by these measures have been treated. Unfortunately thousands of vulnerable private sector householders do not qualify for these subsidy programmes. Not because of their financial status, nor any reluctance to take action, but because of the way their house was built. These are the ‘Hard to Treat’ (HtT) homes that are the subject of this report.

What has become apparent locally, is that a gap is widening between the efficiency of the houses that have been insulated and those that have not, and the corresponding cost of household energy bills. Nationally, millions of houses have been excluded from the CERT and Warmfront programmes as they can’t be insulated with fibre insulation. In Calderdale some 40,000 traditional built stone houses fall into this category and in order to take both issues of fuel poverty and carbon reduction seriously these properties will now have to be considered.

‘Each year around £1.25 Billion is spent in the UK on a variety of Government schemes and grants intended to improve home energy efficiency.’

10

Surveys have categorised the existing stock as ‘solid walled’ when built prior to 1920 (Ref 1), this has been very unhelpful in developing intervention programmes as the assumption has been that the 5.8million properties nationally can only be insulated by exterior or interior wall cladding systems. This report gives a clear indication that this is incorrect and that other methods must now be considered.The local houses of the pre 1920 period, faced with coursed stone make up around 40% of the housing stock in Calderdale.

The construction of exterior walls includes a dressed outer surface and random cavity with an interior wall of either brick or stone. The cavity may be filled with rubble, may include through stones to tie the walls together or may be relatively free from obstruction. Another common feature of the stone terraces in Calderdale is the use of the roof space for attic rooms. Sometimes this was built in at the time of construction, sometimes conversion has followed later. In Calderdale the highest concentrations of fuel poverty are clustered in the terraces of poorer quality housing affecting both home owners and private tenants.

The Hard to Treat pilot project sets out to find the most efficient solutions to increasing the energy efficiency of the older stock. The findings will show that there are affordable solutions currently on the market although they may be more costly or difficult to diagnose and install. The findings also show that there are areas of the market that will need to develop, improving supply and the training of operatives.

Funding opportunities also need to be developed for subsidising some of the most effective products for the most vulnerable families. The limitations imposed on such programmes as CERT (Carbon Emissions Reduction Target) and CESP (Community Energy Saving Programme) need to be waived urgently to take advantage of the final year of investment. Future programmes such as the Green Deal and the Energy Company Obligation need to include the measures for insulating Hard to Treat properties.

Finally the report poses the question‘Hard to Treat or Hard to Fund?’

12

ContextReducing fuel poverty vs reducing carbon emissions

There is general recognition that both fuel poverty and carbon dioxide emissions are to be reduced for different and compelling reasons. Carbon dioxide is recognised as one of the major contributing gases to the greenhouse effect causing climate change and global warming. Fuel poverty is the ‘heat or eat’ social issue faced by many vulnerable households throughout the Country, families who need to spend more than 10%oftheirdisposableincomeon energy bills to ensure a reasonable level of warmth.

The UK has a legally binding target of reducing its carbon dioxide emissions by 80% in 2050; households account for 27% of total of total UK carbon emissions. The Government is facing a rising challenge in tackling household emissions. Due to increasing population and falling household size, by 2050 there could be 23% more households and, if nothing else changed, a 23% increase in energy consumption. To meet the 2050 objective domestic energy usage will need to reduce through a programme of insulation and behaviour change as well as changing the way that energy is produced.

The Government has a target to ensure that, as far as reasonably practicable, all households in England are not living in fuel poverty by 2016. Without intervention, fuel poverty across all property types is likely to increase significantly by the end of the decade. Ernest and Young have estimated that domestic energy bills will rise by 20% by 2020 purely due to the costs of decarbonising the UK economy. The Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) forecasts that the price of electricity will increase by a third and gas a fifth, increasing average household energy costs by £300. Other forecasters predicted even larger increases in the cost of energy.

Recent large scale investment through national programmes such as Decent Homes, Warmfront and the Carbon Emission Reduction Targets (CERT) have made thousands of homes more efficient, targeting low income households in particular. The cheapest way to insulate existing houses is to install fibre insulation (blown into cavity walls and rolled out in lofts). This has been subsidised or provided freely in properties where there is a standard 50mm cavity and/or a conventional loft space.

13

By subsidising insulation in the most efficient terms of tonnes of carbon per £ to install, reductions in carbon emissions will be maximised and by targeting the greatest levels of subsidy to elderly, disabled and benefits recipients fuel poverty is also reduced. In areas where the majority of properties can be included in a programme to install this simple type of insulation this dual purpose has indeed been achieved.

However, it can also be argued that the carbon subsidies have had an adverse effect on the insulation industry in that this grant funding became the product’s unique selling point. In contrast, the double glazing industry now sells itself on its green credentials, with people not realising that heat loss from windows is only 10% to 15%, in contrast to the 35% and 25% of heat lost through walls and roofs.

Much has been written by others about the effects of fuel poverty, excess cold and climate change and this report does not seek to repeat the arguments. The scale and incidence of fuel poverty within the Borough of Calderdale is, however relevant to this report as it highlights the increasing tension between tackling fuel poverty and reducing carbon dioxide emissions. The large scale improvement to social housing stock through the decent homes programme and other investment has changed the pattern of the incidence of fuel poverty in the Borough.

Much of the social housing stock is now more energy efficient than either privately owned or privately rented stock. The vast majority of households in fuel poverty are now within the private sector ie homeowners or those who privately rent. The groups who are over represented among the fuel poor are: • Olderpeople,particularlythose living alone

• Householdscontainingchildren(includinglone parents)

• Householdswithlargeadultpopulations

• Vulnerablegroups(including disabled people)

• Singlepersonhouseholds

14

What makes a home hard to treat?

The Hard to Treat subgroup of the ‘Energy Efficiency Partnership for Homes’ Fuel Poverty working group define ‘hard to treat’ properties as homes that, for a variety of reasons, cannot accommodate ‘staple’ energy efficiency measures. (Ref 2)

Hard to Treat homes include: homes with solid walls; homes with no loft space; homes without a connection to a low cost fuel such as gas; and homes where, for technical or practical reasons, staple energy efficiency measures cannot be fitted.

Within the definition of solid walls, however is a variety of structures including a large number of properties that have external walls with cavities which can be successfully insulated using alternative materials to blown fibre. Also, attic rooms can be successfully insulated using materials that have been on the market for many years. Generally funds for grants and subsidies are only available for blown fibre in cavity walls, external cladding to walls, rolled fibre to lofts.

The Energy Saving Trust estimates there are now only 2,000 suitable cavities and less than 4,000 lofts that could still benefit from being brought up to standard in Calderdale with blown fibre. Therefore in order to make a substantial impact on fuel poverty and carbon reduction the next step is to consider the thousands of properties constructed using coursed stone.

There is a good chance that the properties built after 1900 were built with a cavity in the external wall, many with brick inner leaf creating in many cases a thin, but fillable cavity. These cavities may be suitable for cavity infill with an Expanded Polystyrene (EPS) bead system or Polyurethane (PUR) foam following inspection using a borescope. The cavity below is typical of stone built properties and is not suitable for fibre cavity wall insulation; as can be seen the cavity is uneven.

If fibre is blown into this cavity the obstructions will prevent the fibre from evenly filling the cavity this often creates pockets of air.

Exterior wall, outer leaf, dressed coursed stone face.

Uneven surface of cavity will cause dragging if fibre injected.

Rubble: may cause dampness if cavity filledTypical coursed stone, cavity wall.

Photographed looking down into the cavity.

15

This can create issues of cold bridging and the possibility of condensation and damp patches inside the home. Because EPS bead and foam products are more able to flow around obstructions, cold bridging is less likely to occur. Through stone ties or rubble bridging the whole of the cavity generally procludes the use of any cavity insulation.

Although hard to treat properties are found across all tenures and council tax bands locally, the majority of the houses are smaller terraced properties occupied by some of the most vulnerable within our community. These homes cost more to heat and have a greater carbon footprint than comparable properties that have been insulated.

A full listing at Borough and Ward level showing the numbers of solid wall properties (including those that have cavities but have been classed as solid) and those off the gas network can be found at www.ruralfuelpoverty.org.uk. This shows that in England there are over 5.8M properties classed as Hard to Treat, around 27% of all homes. In West Yorkshire there are more than 250,000 Hard to Treat Homes.

The Importance of insulation

All insulation works on the same principal, which is to slow down the equalisation of temperatures between the inside and the outside of a property. The lower the value of the conductivity of the materials used in the walls, windows and doors, the slower the process is and the less energy is needed in order to maintain thermal comfort.

Refurbishing older properties to modern standards of carbon emissions is more challenging than building a low carbon home from new. Building Regulations did not include energy performance until 1975 and only since 2005 have properties been designed and built to minimise carbon emissions.

The diagram below illustrates the major contributions of carbon emissions (and energy use) within the home; the largest being space heating which accounts for over 60% of emissions. In order to make a building more efficient space heating issues and the retention of space heat and water heat must be addressed.

Energy use in typical UK Home

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

cooking appliances hotwater

space heating

16

All elements of the outer fabric of the building contribute to its overall thermal resistance. A calculation can be made for each element to give a U value measured in Watts per square metre. More information can be found about how U values are calculated and other measures of energy efficiency, see Appendix 1.

Calderdale: The Housing Context

Calderdale has a heritage of stone built terraces built 100-150 years ago to house the workers of the industrial revolution. Approximately 38,000-40,000 stone terraced houses in Calderdale have been left uninsulated as suitable methods of insulation for this house type have not been included in the national programmes for improvements. Funds from Warmfront and the Carbon Emission Reduction Target scheme are not available to insulate them; these are the houses occupied by owners or private sector tenants with the smallest incomes who now find they are the worst off in terms of fuel poverty.

National Energy Action stated that in 2006 that fuel povert affected 14.5% of houses in Calderdale. Estimated figures put the figure in December 2010 at 25% of all households.

Calderdale performs around the national average in terms of its unemployment, skill base and deprivation, however there are dramatic contrasts within the Borough. More affluent areas sit alongside 13 super output areas which are within the worst 10% ranked in the indices of multiple deprivation nationally.

Calderdale has a population of just over 200,000 which is expected to grow by 40,000 over the next 40 years. A particular trend will be the growth in the population of older people. The population aged 75 and over will rise by 25% by 2021, householders with fixed incomes such as pensioners and single person householders are more likely to suffer from fuel poverty and are more likely to be living in the older properties of the Borough.

New homes are being built to much better standards of efficiency, but at the current rate of replacement it is estimated that 80% of the current stock will still be in use in 2050. In order to reduce both carbon emissions and fuel poverty it is therefore essential not only to treat those properties with smooth cavities and uninhabited lofts, but the whole of the housing stock.

17

Estimated distribution of hard to treat houses in Calderdale by Ward.

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

Hard to Treat Properties

Illin

gwor

th

Ove

nden

Mix

end

en

Ella

nd

Hip

per

holm

e an

d L

ight

cliff

e

Nor

thow

ram

and

She

lf

Ras

tric

k

Brig

hous

e

Gre

etla

nd a

nd S

tain

land

War

ley

Ryb

urn

Sow

erb

y B

ridge

Tow

n

Lud

den

den

foot

Par

k

Ski

rcoa

t

Tod

mor

den

Cal

der

Val

ley

18

Calderdale’s Hard to Treat Pilot Project

Background

Calderdale Council’s Economic Task Force recognised the issues of Hard to Treat homes, their impact on fuel poverty and the contribution to carbon dioxide emissions. They commissioned a pilot study and provided a sum of £100,000 to:

• InvestigatethescaleandnatureoftheHard to Treat problem within Calderdale.

• Investigatealternativemethodsforinsulating Hard to Treat properties, sources of materials, fitters, costs

and subsidies.

• Insulate40houseslivedinbyvulnerablehouseholds across all parts of the Borough, testing different methods

of insulation.

• Investigateattitudestoinvestingininsulation among participants.

• Putforwardrecommendationsforthebest ways to insulate the common house types in Calderdale and recommendations for other areas.

Methodology

The initial survey work revealed a range of predominant house designs and construction types across the Borough. The most common house type is terraced properties constructed from stone built between 1890 and 1915. Earlier properties exist in the older settlements and are mostly stone built, often with rubble filled walls. Newer properties were also found falling into the hard to treat category, they most often had cavity walls suitable for fill.

Expert opinion was sought from National Energy Action (NEA), The Cavity Insulation Guarantee Agency (CIGA) and experienced contractors about the different methods of insulating external walls and attic rooms. This allowed a methodology and a suite of insulation methods to be developed that supported a bespoke solution rather than a one size fits all approach.

The project brief required that properties would be included from all areas of the Borough. This enabled an insight into the construction methods of the housing stock in order to develop future area based approaches. For example, although Todmorden has more ‘solid wall’ properties they are generally younger than those in Hebden Bridge. Properties built after 1900 are much more likely to have a suitable cavity than those constructed before this date.

The methodology was designed to gather as much information about the construction type of the property as possible. Each property inspection was made according to a specification drawn up by Council Officers with input from other technical teams such as NEA .

19

The survey was divided into three phases:

1. A visual survey and data analysis of likely Hard to Treat house types and numbers across the Borough. This work also allowed a wider brief for possible future community wide options to be identified.

2. Identification of suitable properties and vulnerable householders. Initial approaches were made to the owners to see if they were willing to take part in the project.

3. Survey and energy analysis work.

More than one of each house type was identified across the Borough and after an initial personal approach to householders, a letter explaining the project was sent to those provisionally agreeing to participate. The aim of the pilot was to insulate 40 properties occupied by vulnerable households across the Borough drawing on technological and behavioural lessons to develop a wider based solution. In order to do this, approaches were made to 126 vulnerable households.

To ensure it was possible to compare and contrast the outputs, the process was standardised for each property inspected. This meant that each property was inspected for its suitability for insulation for the exterior walls and roof. Where suitable, cavity wall insulation using non standard measures was offered, before considering suitability for internal dry lining or external cladding.

The purpose was to try and move away from solutions that were driven purely by the feasibility of installing fibre insulation and look at a whole house solution that fitted in with the requirements of the householder. In addition it meant that a mix of solutions could be used to keep costs manageable.

Around 35% and 25% of heat loss in a typical uninsulated semi-detached home is through the walls and loft respectively. The most cost effective way of reducing energy usage and CO2 emissions is to ensure that the property is insulated to current standards before other measures are installed. Generally loft and cavity insulation are measures which last over 30 years and will not need any maintenance or replacing. They offer much shorter payback periods than replacement boilers, windows or mircogeneration options.

20

Grant to subsidise the costs

Each householder was offered a grant of up to £2,500 toward the cost of the measures. Where the cost of the works was greater than the grant, assistance for the shortfall was offered via low cost repayment loans from Calderdale Credit Union, or an equity release loan.

In addition to insulation each property was also inspected for its suitability for other measures, which included:

• Referralsforenergyawarenessadvicethrough the Green Doctors programme.

• Draughtproofingandpipelagging.

• Warmfrontreferralsfornewboilers.

• Topupsforstandardinsulationmeasures.

• Remedialrepairs.

Othergrantsandprojectswereutilisedinorder to carry out these measures.

Insulation measures considered for Hard to Treat properties

See appendix 1 for technical commentary of the products referred to in this section.

Three types of system for insulating roofs were considered, loose lay insulation to all or part of roof (eaves), dry lining of attic rooms and insulation during a re-roof.

Three forms of insulation were considered for external walls, cavity wall insulation, internal cladding to walls (dry lining), external cladding to walls.

All households had been previously told that their roof or walls could not be insulated following a survey from Warmfront. The householders held various views about whether they believed this and some took a lot of persuasion that the energy efficiency of the fabric of their homes could be improved in any way.

A significant difference from previous grant offers was the consideration of using more than one solution for different parts of the building depending on what was best for each individual property. Subsidy was fixed at a maximum of £2,500 per property but further funds were offered as interest free repayment loans or equity loans. Many properties were found to need essential repairs prior to insulation being installed, particularly to roofs and pointing to walls.

21

Further measures were installed in properties with grants from other sources and advice given so that the best package of energy efficiency measures was installed.

The measures unique to HtT houses are those which were needed to insulate the external walls and attic rooms as these are the elements locally which put the properties in this category. The heating solutions for off gas network properties weren’t considered as a part of this pilot study.

Roof insulation

Where there was an accessible roof space to insulate, subsidised rolls of glass fibre were installed. Top–ups were identified and partial roof spaces where attic rooms were present with vertical walls towards the eaves. A good source of practical information can be found in the Energy Saving Trust good practice guide number 296 (Ref 4).

Atticbedroomdrylinedusingphenolicfoam Cost £1500

The cheapest and most effective way to insulate existing roofs with an attic room is to include insulation when re-roofing. There are many systems available to do this and any good roofer will be able to advise with a specification. No householder was offered this solution as no re-roofs were identified in this project.

The cheapest and most effective way to insulate existing roofs with an attic room is to include insulation when re-roofing.

For retrofitting lofts with attics, there are several suitable proprietary brands of composite boards, ranging from phenolic block foams to the more expensive areogel plasterboards. They can all be installed quite simply and effectively. There is a reduction in height when installed but as this is usually between purlins, the overall height is unaffected. Generally in attic rooms there are less fittings that need alteration e.g. electrical points, skirting boards etc.

22

Considering roofs have a life expectancy of 20-30 years, there is some merit in the inclusion of subsidy when a re-roof occurs. Part L of the Building Regulations sets out the minimum efficiency values to be achieved during this work. Perhaps a quarter of the homes will be planning to re-roof in the next 5 years, it may be better to either bring forward the work or to wait until the works happen than to dry line the attic.

Roof solutions were offered in order of:

Install costs of insulation during a re-roof (where re-roofing works are planned).

Loose lay insulation.

Dry lining of attics with phenolic foam boards.

Aerogel dry lining.

All householders who were offered support and estimates for attic dry lining accepted. Some of these were the same householders who had rejected the offer of whole house insulation. Householders were willing to accept the disruption associated with room in the roof insulation as the benefits are more visible and do not involve the greater disruption associated with dry lining walls.

All but one of the jobs were completed using phenolic foam due to its relatively low cost when compared to the aerogel product. Aerogel was used in a single installation as a filler product where loss of height was an issue. This approach supports the best practise of National Energy Action’s technical team who advocate the use of a mixture of measures to allow the most effective insulation solution for the home.

External Walls

External CladdingExternal cladding solutions have been very successful for some dwelling types, particularly where the external facing material can be either replicated or improved. This is useful for flats and houses with timber, concrete or rendered exteriors and plain brick. All systems are similar with insulation and a membrane attached to the external wall with a finishing material such as brick slips or render.

It is a relatively expensive solution but can provide the benefit of adding stability to the structure. Re-alignment of roof lines, above ground drainage and openings all add cost and complexity.

23

In Calderdale the majority of HtT properties are stone faced, therefore external cladding would have a detrimental affect on the heritage of the area if carried out on a large scale. For this pilot project, it was only considered where a gable wall was in such poor condition that it needed treatment to prevent penetrating damp as well as insulation.

Internal Cladding (dry lining)This can be done in several ways and includes attaching insulating material to the internal face of external walls and providing a decoratable finish. Products on the market vary in insulation value and therefore the thickness required to achieve the desired level of performance. The method of attaching insulation to the walls will also add varying thickness.

Complications are from the disruption to everything in contact with the wall including skirting boards, radiators, electrical outlets, plumbing, drainage and flues as well as door and window openings. Room space is reduced due the additional thickness to the walls being absorbed inwards, this can be very significant in small houses. It was a very unpopular method of insulation in this project due to the disruption in the home, the loss of floor space and the higher cost.

The best material which minimise the loss of floor space was aerogel, but this is very expensive. The best material in terms of cost was glass fibre between battons with plasterboard and skim, but this was the worst in terms of floor space loss. A compromise was from phenolic foam composite boards on battons.

All householders whose property was unsuitable for cavity wall insulation were offered internal dry lining as an alternative. Of the 70 householders offered internal insulation, 57 rejected the offer out of hand due to issues of disruption. Only two households went ahead with internal dry lining to the gable walls. Both of the owners are enthusiastic ‘green supporters’

This supports the Energy Saving Trust (EST) marketing campaign of insulating room by room on an opportunistic basis. For example, within the social housing sector it seems that when a property is void it represents the type of opportunity when such works could be carried out, in the private sector when a property is being renovated.

Aerogel was used in a single installation as a filler product where the loss of floor space was an issue. This approach supports the best practise of National Energy Action’s technical team who advocate the use of a mixture of measures to allow the most effective insulation solution for the home.

End terraced treated with phenolic foam insulation with a cement render finish.

24

Cavity Wall InsulationSeveral products were considered for cavity wall insulation: fibre, expanded polystyrene (EPS) bead, polyurethane (PUR) foam. The cheapest, blown glass fibre, was used in some cases where some of the external walls were suitable. The properties had previously been turned down for grants due to not all the walls being treatable.

Cavity walls were inspected to assess them for EPS bead and for Polyurethane foam. EPS bead can be successful installed in cavities as narrow as 40mm, Polyurethane (PUR) Foam in cavities as narrow as 10mm.

Both these solutions are not suitable to be installed where there are through-stone ties, no clear cavity or rubble present in the cavity. Although 80% of the properties surveyed couldn’t have the cavity walls filled, the data may be useful for future installations or for a programme of replacing stone ties with proprietary systems in the future.

EPS BeadEPS bead was by far the cheaper product, costing about £750 per property. This is a product that has been in use for many years and had developed a poor reputation due to early installations. The product is still treated with suspicion and hasn’t achieved an industry based guarantee where the cavity width is less than 50mm, or CERT funds. In all cases where properties were found suitable for this, the work

was carried out. EPS bead had an average cost of £6.50 per square meter. Currently there is no industry backed guarantee for this product for cavity widths down between 40-50mm which may be preventing the offer of subsidy; this is an issue the EPS bead industry is trying to address.

Polyurethane FoamPolyurethane (PUR) Foam is relatively new and the range of applications is still being explored. It was developed to add stability to old cavity walls and it has an advantage of providing a waterproofing effect, making it extremely useful in flood risk areas. The cost initially appeared high, but are likely to reduce as the product becomes more widely available. The cost in this project of Polyurethane (PUR) Foam was £36 per square meter.

Properties in photos 1,2 and 3 above are typical of the type of home found in and around West Yorkshire. They are constructed from coursed stone with a random width cavity wall and many have a room in the roof which makes them unsuitable for standard fibre insulation measures.

Treated with EPS bead. Cost £264.

Treated with EPS bead and attic dry lining. Cost £2150.

1 2

Cavity wall insulation has two main benefits when compared to dry lining solutions:• Itisinstalledfromtheoutsideofthe

property and does not cause any internal disruption.• Itisconsiderablycheaper.

25

Treated with EPS bead and attic dry lining. Cost £2300.

Treated with EPS bead. Cost £350.

Treated with EPS bead. Cost £380.

Treated with Polyurethane foam.Cost £6129.

The most cost effective wall solution is EPS bead cavity wall insulation which is also the most popular. Polyurethane (PUR) Foam, while offering the same technical advantages as EPS bead is more expensive. During this study no property was found to be suitable for Polyurethane foam and not EPS bead, however there will be properties that would benefit from the additional structural and water-proof properties of this product.

No property was dry lined using aerogel alone so it is not possible to give a comparative cost compared to phenolic boards, so the costing is based on the of type measure rather than the product used. Aerogel is currently too expensive and too specialised, yet it is eligible to receive CERT funding while phenolic foam for use in an attic insulation does not.

Due to the significant advantages of EPS bead and Polyurethane (PUR) Foam over internal and external cladding it is worth maximising the number of properties that can have their cavity walls insulated with these products.

For example within the pilot significant numbers of surveyed properties were identified with rubble within the cavity or stone tied. It is possible to remove rubble from the cavity, with a typical cost of £1,500 per property. The total cost of either form of cavity wall insulation (CWI) and cleaning the cavity would still be below that of internal or external insulation and with less disruption. Stone ties are more difficult to fully identify and remove, however, where only a few are present it may be worth doing.

3 4

5 6

Properties 4, 5 and 6 show a variety of post 1920 properties, suitable for alternative forms of cavity wall insulation but not blown fibre cavity wall insulation.

26

Solutions were offered in order of:

Cavity wall insulation – blown fibre.

Cavity wall insulation – EPS bead.

Cavity wall insulation – Polyurethane (PUR) Foam

Internal cladding with phenolic foam boards.

Internal cladding with Aerogel.

External cladding as a last resort for insulation unless remedial works needed and not aesthetically damaging.

Results

126 properties were surveyed which resulted in 41 properties completing insulation works. Properties insulated were situated in fifteen of the seventeen Wards of the Borough.

• Ofthepropertiessurveyed,20%hadcavities suitable for cavity wall insulation. Unsuitability was because of the presence of rubble, stone ties or solid walls.

• DifferentareasoftheBoroughhavedifferent construction methods. For example Hebden Bridge due to the age of its property being pre 1900 has very few suitable cavities. However, Todmorden, Park, Mount Tabor and Brighouse are more likely to be suitable.

• Eachpropertyisdifferent;inneighbouringproperties one may be suitable and the other may have a rubble filled cavity.

• 16propertiesofthe41requiredremedialrepairs. This could indicate a much wider problem in households where property maintenance hasn’t taken place due to lower incomes.

• Allpropertiessurveyedweresuitableforinternal wall insulation, but the cost and disruption was prohibitive.

• 9referralsweremadeforstandardloftfibretopupsand16homesreferredfordraught proofing even though they had been turned down previously.

27

• AtticRooms,oftenwithpartlyslopingceilings, had little or no insulation. Many properties were built with uninsulated attic rooms, but where conversions were installed they were built to varying standards.

• Allhouseholdersweregivenadviceabouthow to save energy.

Example of a bespoke solution

Where a single low cost measure was not possible due to construction type, a mix of different solutions was investigated. A three bed end terraced house constructed from coursed stone was surveyed, it was found that the front and rear elevations were suitable for cavity infill but the gable was stone tied. Estimates were obtained as follows:

Area to insulate Measures Cost Estimated payback in years

Front and rear elevation

Cavity Wall infill to front and rear elevation using EPS bead (35m2)

£341.27 3

Internal dry line front and rear elevations

£1710 8

External insulation to front and rear elevation

£3969 19

Gable Elevation Internal dry lining gable using phenolic board (55m2)

£2217 14

External Insulation to gable £6237 31

28

The householders proceeded with a mixture of cavity wall infill to the front and rear elevation using EPS bead and internal dry lining to the gable wall. The total cost was £2558 with an estimated payback period of 14 years. This is a clear example of how the accepted solutions of internal and external insulations may not represent the best value, solutions need to fit the individual circumstances of the property and the householder(s).

The breakdown of work on the 41 properties is:

• 17cavitywallinsulationmeasures (2 PUR foam and 15 EPS bead)

• 1Parkhomehasbeenexternallyclad

• 21atticbedroomsdrylined

• 1gableendexternallyclad

• 2propertieshadinternaldrylining to their gable walls

• 2propertieshavereceivedbothCWI and internal dry lining

Many householders dropped out of the project or only agreed to have some lower cost measures carried out to their properties. The level of grant appeared to be the most influential element for making decisions except for internal dry lining which was unacceptable to most households whether or not a grant was offered.

During the project more cost effective contractors were identified. This enabled more properties to be insulated within the £2,500 maimum subsidy and this prompted some of the reluctant householders to take part.

A flexible approach to whole house energy efficiency is likely to be most effective in Calderdale, as there isn’t one answer for all of the property types found within the Hard to Treat category.

The two most cost effective measures for the Hard to Treat stock in Calderdale were clearly alternative cavity wall fill (where possible) and dry-lining of attic rooms. These are both measures that can be carried out easily and effectively. Unfortunately, neither solution attracted subsidy through the current CERT programme.

Page 29 contains the Summary of Results:

NOTE: information on annual savings, carbon reduction and payback period are estimates only and will vary according to size of property, amount of fuel consumed and energy prices. Assumptions used to produce this table were based on Energy Saving Trust data. Property owners should commission their own independent Energy Performance surveys and certificates to calculate the potential energy and cost savings for their own properties.

29

Postcode House type Why unsuitablefor CWI

Measures installed

Cost(£) Estimated annual saving (£)

Estimate CO2 saving (KgCO2/yr)

Estimated Payback (yrs)

HD6 2BU Mid terraced Stone tied Attic dry line 2,340 200 1310 12

HD6 2PH End terraced EPS bead 341 120 1134 3

HD6 2PH End terraced Dry line attic & gable wall

2,217 150 2574 14

HD6 3NX Semi-detached Stone tied 3 bedrooms + 1 room dry line

2,156 170 2106 13

HD6 3TG End terraced Stone tied Attic dry line 3,340 200 1310 17

HD6 4HH Detached Polyurethane (PUR) Foam

6,129 438 3729 14

HX1 2EU Semi-detached EPS bead 398 120 1134 3

HX1 3PY Mid terraced Solid walled Attic dry line 2,330 200 1310 12

HX1 3QL Mid Terraced EPS bead 272 70 454 4

HX1 3QL Mid Terraced Random Cavity Attic dry line 1,187 200 1310 6

HX1 3XS Mid terraced Rubble Attic dry line 2,750 200 1310 14

HX1 4JQ Mid Terraced Random Cavity Attic dry line 1,746 200 1310 9

HX1 5NX End Terraced Stone tied External Insu-late Gable

2,260 170 1264 13

HX2 0HF Mid terraced EPS bead 288 70 454 4

HX2 0OG Semi-detached EPS bead 517 120 1134 4

HX2 0UG Semi-detached EPS bead 504 120 1134 4

HX2 6BG End terraced EPS bead 1,200 120 1134 10

HX2 8UL Mid terraced Stone tied Attic dry line 2,376 200 1310 12

HX2 9PE End Terraced EPS bead 521 120 1134 4

HX3 5ET End terraced EPS bead 615 120 1134 5

HX3 5PN Back to Back EPS bead 258 70 400 4

HX3 9BB End terraced EPS bead 969 120 1134 8

HX4 0DE Park Home External cladding

8,800 200 000.1 44

HX5 0EG Mid terraced Random Cavity Dry line attic 1,500 200 1310 8

HX5 9DU End Terraced EPS BEAD 562 120 1134 5

HX6 2LS End terraced Stone tied Attic dry line 2,500 200 1310 13

HX6 2PA Mid terraced Rubble Attic dry line 1,520 200 1310 8

HX6 2PB Back to Back EPS bead 282 70 400 4

HX6 4LL Mid terraced Solid walled Attic dry line 2,090 200 1310 10

HX7 5AT Mid Terraced Solid walled Attic dry line 2,700 200 1310 14

HX7 5DZ Mid terraced Stone tied Attic dry line 2,207 200 1310 11

HX7 6AH Mid terraced Rubble Attic dry line 1,710 200 1310 9

HX7 7DJ Mid terraced EPS BEAD 396 70 454 6

HX7 8SH Semi-detached System built Internal gable dry line

1,494 200 842 7

HX7 8SQ End terraced Solid walled Attic & stairs dry line

8,500 150 1100 57

OL14 5AT Mid terraced Rubble Attic dry line 2,443 200 1310 12

OL14 5JQ Mid terraced Random Cavity Attic dry line 1,360 200 1310 7

OL14 5JQ Mid Terraced Solid walled Attic dry line 1,210 200 1310 6

OL14 5RD Mid Terraced Solid walled Attic dry line 1,200 200 1310 6

OL14 6BE Mid terraced Solid walled Attic dry line 1,508 200 1310 8

OL14 6JR Semi-detached CW insulated Attic dry line 3,711 200 1310 19

OL14 7ER End terraced Solid walled Attic dry line 1,305 200 1310 7

OL14 8ET Mid terraced Polyurethane (PUR) Foam

2,236 254 1784 9

30

Monitoring

Monitoring was carried out at a selection of properties using data loggers which measure humidity and temperature and through comparison in energy usage pre and post installation. It is not possible to give a definitive measure for improvements in humidity, temperature and energy usage as a range of improvements were obtained depending on the property and the behaviour of its residents.

The installation of EPS bead cavity wall fill significantly improved the humidity in each of the monitored properties. It ranged from a 20% to a 30% reduction in overall humidity levels, there was also a reduction of between 15-20% in actual energy consumed.

The dry lining of properties saw a slightly lower reduction in humidity than for EPS bead with a range of reduction of 15-25%. There was little change in the overall temperature recorded pre and post measures and a reduction in the energy usage of 20%.

For both measures the actual energy usage reduction seems to be less than the accepted assumed figures used previously. This could be for a number of reasons including under heating of proprieties due to fuel poverty.

Comparison pre and post measures for EPS bead

Comparison Pre and Post Measures Dry Lining

Prior to measures Post measures

Prior to measures Post measures

Humidity

Temperature

Energy Usage

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

31

We compared energy usage in a number of homes before and after the improvements. It was clear that energy usage dropped following the improvements; however, they did not drop by as much as we had anticipated and the results varied significantly. The improvements ranged from 12% to 20%. Due to the difference in the price of energy over the periods we focused on energy use.

All of the householders reported that their energy usage and bills had reduced due to the measures that were installed. 35% also said that they had greater environmental awareness following the measures. It became clear that the householders we were working with had a particular set of issues that currently are not recognised by Energy Performance Certificates and by the proposed Green Deal.

Managing the payback is important as it forms part of the ‘golden rule’ for the Government’s Green Deal, where insulation measures reduce energy bills sufficiently so the cost of the work plus any interest can be repaid within a specified period. There has to be a financial incentive to the householder to take action ie through lower energy costs. The more expensive solutions such as external and internal cladding may fall out of the Green Deal because of the number of years they will take to pay for themselves.

Allofthehouseholdersreportedthat their energy usage and bills had reduced due to the measures that were installed. 35%alsosaidthattheyhadgreater environmental awareness following the measures.

32

Conclusions and Observations

Affordability

The initial estimates for the dry lining measures were significantly above the agreed maximum grant levels, particularly the treatment of external walls. Where householders were expected to make a financial contribution the application stalled even when interest free loans were offered to the householder from Calderdale Credit Union. The programme for dry lining attic bedrooms was only reinvigorated when a Social Enterprise was sourced who were able to complete works at lower cost, compared to the original contractors. This meant that the measures were fully paid for by the grant and works completed. It also meant that where any contribution was required, it was much lower and the work became more affordable.

It seems that vulnerable householders are very price sensitive, while they value thermal comfort and reduced energy bills they simply do not have the spare capital to complete the measures, even if the cost of this is minimised through an interest free loan.

It makes little sense to continue with a funding regime that does not allow the most cost effective measures to receive subsidy, nor, allow the part measures which will have the greatest impact on the quality of life of the householder to be installed without a subsidy.

Remedial repairs to allow the insulation to take place is a further necessary cost; 40% of the properties in this pilot needed repairs of some sort. Due to pressures on the public purse the support which allowed householders to access a wide range of financial support to facilitate these repairs is no longer available.

It is clear that an appetite exists within households to try and reduce their energy usage. The main barriers are cost (including repairs) and the disruption which householder face.

Demand for energy efficiency is a mixture of need or pull (due to thermal comfort and costs) and householder perception or push (disruption and hassle). Previous programmes have combined no or low cost with no hassle. Future programmes have to be able to do the same. Internal and external cladding solutions simply do not meet these basic requirements.

33

Funding Support

In seeking to reduce household emissions, the Government will focus its effort on two key priorities, which together are likely to have the greatest impact

• Increasingtheenergyefficiencyofourhousing stock. The largest difference will be made through efforts to retrofit existing housing, prioritising the most cost effective measures such as cavity wallandloftinsulation;thiswillbefinanced through the proposed Green Deal and the new Energy Company Obligation(ECO)etc.

• Helpingpeoplemakethechoicetomove away from a reliance on fossil fuel-based space and water heating and towardslowcarbonalternatives;thiswillbe financed through the Clean Energy Cashback, Renewable Heat Incentive, Feed in Tariffs etc.

The issue of alternative insulation needed for older and non traditional homes unsuitable forfibre insulation seems to have been recognised by the coalition government. Both the Energy Company Obligation Bill and the Green Deal make reference to the issue of hard to treat homes and vulnerable householders.

The new Energy Company Obligation will support delivery at scale of cost effective measures that require additional assistance to be taken up through the Green Deal, such as solid wall insulation. This will drive down costs but also promote investment and innovation within the energy efficiency industry.

Additionally the Energy Company Obligation will provide extra support for low income vulnerable households. This will enable people who might face more challenges to take advantage of the Green Deal.

The anticipated Green Deal is expected to start during 2012, offering all households up to £6,500 worth of energy efficiency work at no up front cost. The capital is repaid through the savings which a household is expected to make in its energy use-for this reason the Green Deal will be supported by the roll out of smart metering which can be used to calculate exact fuel consumption and cost, the savings forecast after measures have been installed and lifestyle change encouraged.

34

In addition the Energy Company Obligation could provide a further £3,500 for HtT vulnerable households. This means that a vulnerable householder living in a HtT home could have up to £10,000 worth of efficiency measures installed at no up front cost. This will be paid back through reduced levels of energy consumption and lower bills.

These schemes are funded by a levy on energy bills and through the tax system. In order to access the funds for the thousands of properties highlighted in this report, it is important that the measures suitable to insulate these properties most efficiently are included in the schemes. If they are not, there is a danger that once again the most vulnerable householders will be helping to pay for measures in other areas, while being left behind in the least efficient housing.

Both DECC and Ofgem have so far refused to confirm the detail of measures which will be included in the Green deal. It seems that the permitted measures are likely to be the same as are included in current schemes i.e. internal and external insulation.

Yet it is clear that these do not represent best value and often have significant barriers to be overcome.

Clearly, householder demand exists for measures such as attic room dry lining and alternative cavity insulation products, but the main barrier is cost. It reiterates the point that homes are not hard to treat but hard to fund. Unless DECC and Ofgem can be influenced the most cost effective and popular energy efficiency measures will remain on the periphery.

The challenge

Successful progress at a large scale will require coordinated working at individual property level between four very different sectors – the energy sector, the financial services sector, the public sector and the construction sector. Each of these is very powerful in its own sphere, is organised to operate very differently from the others, and has not previously engaged in building energy efficiency in ways which coordinate effectively with the others to any serious extent.

For every £1m invested in energy efficiency,8-14yearsofdirectemploymentand9-40yearsof indirect employment are estimated to be created.

35

Existing funding models are thin on the ground in the UK. Where countries have been more successful in making large scale progress in this sphere, it is often by coupling innovative national and local policy-making, effective energy market regulation, and existing local finance, construction and public institutions. It is hard to pull all these levers simultaneously, but anything less than an integrated approach risks suboptimal outcomes.

Using the figures contained from the Centre for Sustainable Energy’s Rural Fuel Poverty report it is possible to provide a best guess example of the likely costs of using alternative cavity infill products as opposed to internal and external insulation. The idea of HtT properties being insulated with alternative cavity wall insulation must now be main streamed.

For every £1m invested in energy efficiency, 8-14 years of direct employment and 9-40 years of indirect employment are estimated to be created. (Climate Change Capital, National Energy Efficiency Programme, 2009)

This report is not about funding one or two exemplars, it is about financing tens of thousands of technically-efficient, high quality, low carbon retrofits across the Borough, hundreds of thousand across the Region and 5.8 million across the UK, making a significant impact on reducing UK carbon emissions, saving households hundreds of millions of pounds currently spent on energy bills, reducing fuel poverty, and creating sustainable local economies. To achieve this will require a step change in both the way the market works and how works are funded.

Housing accounts for between 25% and 30% of UK carbon emissions, and has the greatest potential for carbon emission reduction against a backdrop of the UK’s commitment to reduce carbon emissions by 2050 by 80%.

District No of HtT homes

Homes suitable for CWI

Cost if using EPS bead

Cost if internally insulated

Cost if externally insulated

Calderdale 37,959 7,591 £4,454,000 £30,364,000 £60,728,000

West Yorkshire 256,044 51,208 £30,724,808 £204,832,000 £409,664,000

36

Previous reports have suggested that carbon emissions from housing can be reduced by 50-60% (i.e. reducing national total carbon emissions by 15%+) through “simple, tried and tested, interventions which are cost effective”. On paper, therefore, this is nationally a quick win offering a flying start to achieving challenging carbon targets in the coming decades.

This has been recognised by Department of Energy and Climate Change who commissioned a study of hard to fill cavity walls in domestic dwellings in Great Britain (ref 3) into the possibility of cavity wall infill for HtT properties. However, concern remains that the language of DECC and the energy companies continues to focus on solid wall insulation solutions for HtT to the detriment of the easier and cheaper EPS and PUR foam solutions.

The building traditions and environmental conditions in Calderdale and its surrounding neighbours make the HtT problem here different to that in the wider UK. As a result the work already completed in the wider UK for improving energy efficiency in HtT houses cannot be relied upon to provide local solutions. Recognising and mainstreaming cost effective solutions for Calderdale and West Yorkshire is required.

The main barriers of cost and technical difficulties can be overcome, which will reduce carbon, fuel poverty and create large numbers of green jobs. Many traditional building skills are transferable into hard to treat measures.

Many of these properties are not hard to treat, for many, the solutions are relatively easy. However, due to inertia to mainstream the alternative insulation methods together with a lack of understanding of local issues at regulatory level, the solutions are not receiving subsidies and so these homes may be more accurately termed hard to fund properties.

37

Observations

• Thehouseholdsincludedinthispilotproject were smaller than those assumed bySAPsurveys.SAPassumesenergyuse from 2.5 people per house, but some homes were occupied by smaller numbers than these. It has been previously noted that a causal factor of fuel poverty is the under occupation of the home. EPCs and the Green Deal need to recognise this fact.

• Householderswereusingtheirheating,cooking and lights less because they were trying to save money – the reduction in usage has meant that householders are no better off but their homes are warmer. Householders with the lowest savings were those that had the lowest usage prior to the improvements. This in turn will have an impact on whether the fuel poor who currently under heat their homes will be able to access the Green Deal. There is a danger that failure to meet the ‘golden rule’ will mean that the fuel poor in hard to treat homes will not qualify for the Green Deal.

• Inthisprojectthehouseholder’sperception that the environmental impact comes second to saving money is apparent from the take up of measures. Where access to energy efficiency measures is easy and funding is accessible households will complete

the measures.

If sustainable interventions are to be encouraged then sustainable behaviour must be made easy and the argument made for reducing payback periods

by subsidy.

• Withtheincreaseinenergycostshouseholders will still remain in fuel poverty following these works.

The works will limit those falling into severe fuel poverty but they are not a general panacea. Improvements need

to be supported through a programme of education and transactional

behavioural change which stimulates and encourages the uptake of insulation measures.

• Ifwearetoretrofitalargenumber of homes to eradicate fuel poverty and reduce carbon we need to be

realistic about our goals. We need to understand people’s needs and have measurement methods that are closer to reality which reflect different local housing construction types.

38

Recommendations

Develop the supply chain

It is clear that the supply chain needs to develop and will improve where it is possible to:

• Developatransparentprocess(e.g.astandard industry approach) to deal with Hard to Fill Cavities through: Survey, Design, Remediation, Installation, Warranty and Pricing.

• Provisionofqualityassuredsurveysand remedial building works through an independent system of pre-assessments using experienced surveyors and experienced works managers during works phase.

• Reducingfinancialshockofundertakingremedial building works, which can typically be many times the cost of the insulation works.

• Exploremeanstoacceleratetake-upfrom ‘early adopters’ and acknowledge, recognise and reward innovation and quality in the sector.

• Identifyasustainablefundingstreamspecifically for dealing with non mainstream measures particularly for local authorities

Awarenessraising

There are several action points to be taken up for raising awareness about the issue of Hard to Treat homes, these include:

• Dispelthemyths,locallyandwithhouseholders that all stone properties are unsuitable for cavity fill and that attic rooms can’t be insulated.

• Dispelthemyths,nationallythatall houses built prior to 1920 are constructed with solid walls.

• Raisingpublicawarenessandinterest,potentially through a national publicity scheme as has proved successful in

the past.

• Provisionandpromotionofqualityassured work for alternative fill for cavities and internal dry lining.

39

Make best use of funding

Within an environment of limited public subsidy the focus for insulation measures has to be on those which are most cost effective both for the insulation and any remedial repairs.

The industry needs to move away from language that is negative and become more inclusive. Hard to treat homes, in many instances are not solid walled and are not necessarily hard to treat.

Until alternative measures based on cost, less disruption and warranty provision are main streamed, the hard part of retrofitting the existing housing is likely to remain incomplete.

The opportunities for carrying out retrofitting of insulation during remedial works must be taken. This can only be done by awareness raising and subsidy. For example, when re-roofing takes place, the specification should include the fitting of insulation as the opportunity is unlikely to come again for that property for several decades. Building Regulations could be significantly strengthened and supported with subsidy whilst renovation work is being done.

Full cavity wall insulation is usually the most cost effective option where the cavity wall is confirmed as being in good overall condition, where the local exposure factors confirm its suitability for use and where external or internal access is not highly costly or otherwise problematic.

In instances where the existing wall finish or cladding has expired or in need of major refurbishment on a highly exposed site where an appearance change can be tolerated, external or internal wall insulation should be considered. Where cavity fill insulation is ruled out and appearance change cannot be tolerated, internal insulated dry lining should be considered, with the focus on minimising the loss of room volume. Whole house internal insulation will not have a large take up because of the issues of disruption (unless when carried out if the property is empty or being renovated).

Attic dry lining should be considered for subsidy, the measure proved popular and effective when grant aided, but unpopular when the full cost was being found by the householder.

It is recommended that decisions about subsidy should take place locally so that they can be closely aligned to local priorities and maximise the effect on sustaining the local economy.

40

References and further information

Ref 1 - Energy Saving Trust – Sustainable Refurbishment, Feb 2010

Ref 2 – Energy Efficiency Partnership for Homes - Opportunities to improve hard to treat homes with CERT, March 2009

Ref 3 – Study of Hard to fill cavity walls in domestic dwellings in GB – Davis, Longden and Inbuilt

Ref4 – Energy Saving Trust – Refurbishment site guidance for solid walled houses – roofs GPG 296, 2002

Local Information

Calderdale Private Sector Housing Stock Condition Report

Calderdale Affordable Warmth Strategy

West Yorkshire Housing Partnership Back to Back Terraced Housing Strategy

Further information from

www.calderdale.gov.uk/housing

www.eeph.org.uk

www.energysavingtrust.org.uk

www.lowenergyhouse.com

www.nationalinsulationassociation.org.uk

www.ruralfuelpoverty.org.uk

41

Appendix 1

Comparison of insulation materials included in Hard to Treat Pilot Project

There are many products on the market for insulating both roofs and walls and a good comparison site can be found at www.lowenergyhouse.com. The insulation products listed below were those considered during this pilot project but are typical for thermal values of a range of other products.Although Aerogel products were little used in this pilot project due to the cost, the values are listed as this is still an emerging technology which, if costs can be brought down, has great potential.

2011 Building Regulations Part L – Energy Efficiency

Energy efficiency targets are much higher for new buildings because it is much easier and cheaper to design and include these feature and materials at the time of construction. Building Regulations for improvements or retrofitting to existing buildings are not quite as stringent as any improvements can be limited by the existing structure such as the width of any cavity that might be present. However, it should be recognised that any improvement which makes an improvement to the building’s energy efficiency rating should be considered favourably, even if it does not quite reach the targets set out in the regulations.

The tables below set out the target U values for the works and what thickness of different insulation materials would be required to

achieve these. The data has been sourced from a number of different sources including the Energy Saving Trust and makes a number of assumptions about the size and condition of the property, the existing construction type and materials used, the energy used by the household, the energy prices, the cost of the works and subsequent repayment periods. The contents of the tables should be considered as rough guidance only as these factors are all subject to change, and more detailed survey of a property and assessment of the current and future needs of its occupants to determine the most effective solution.

Anexplanationofthetechnicaltermscanbe found at the end of this appendix.

42

Insulation of attic rooms:

Current Building Regulation U value target is 0.2 W/M2, uninsulated roof U value is typically 2.3W/M2.

Figures below based on a gas heated 3 bed semi detached house. Data sourced from the Energy Saving Trust (EST).

Material Thermal conductivity Watts /meter Kelvin (W/mK) “K Value”

Building Regulation Target U value for retrofit works

Overallthickness (mm) of application to reach target U value

Approximateinstalled £ cost/m2

Approximateannual saving in £/year

ApproximateCO2saving(kgCO2/year)

Approximatepayback period (years)

Aerogel at rafter level

0.018 0.18 30 250 140-170 2106 83

Phenolic foam at rafter level

0.022 0.18 80-95 25-30 140-170 2106 8

Mineral fibre – loft insulation ‘virgin loft’ where existing depth is 65mm or less

0.035 0.16 135-180 3 80-100 1309 2

Mineral fibre – loft insulation top up

0.035 0.16 70 - 115 3 20-30 313 8-12

43

Comments about the use materials

Material Pros Cons Comments

Aerogel The best thermal resistance of all the products found on the market. Means that good energy savings can be found with small loss of height.

Loss of clear height. Disruption to interior decoration. Cost of product is high and as it a petroleum based product it may well continue to rise in relative terms. Professional installation required.

Manufactured in USA. Price subject to $/£ exchange rate.

Phenolic foam Proprietary systems widely available. Product widely available. Low tech product, easily fitted. DIY possible.

Loss of clear height. Disruption to interior decoration

As installation is likely to be between purlins, height loss difference between Aerogel and Phenolic foam may not be relevant.

Mineral fibre Cheap. Can be installed without disruption. DIY possible

Not suitable for attic rooms Subsidy widely available through CERT.

44

Insulation of external walls:

The U value of an uninsulated solid wall is typically 2.1W/M2. Figures below based on a gas heated 3 bed semi detached house.

Material Thermal conductivity Watts /meter Kelvin (W/mK) “K Value”

Building Regulation Target U value for retrofit works

Overallthickness (mm) of application to reach target U value

Approximateinstalled £ cost/m2

Approximateannual saving in £/year

ApproximateCO2saving(kgCO2/year)

Approx.payback period (years)

Aerogel internal cladding

0.018 0.30 23 250 - 300 140-170 2106 Not available

Phenolic Foam internal dry lining

0.022 0.30 68 25-30 140-170 2106 9-11

Phenolic Foam external cladding

0.022 0.30 68 40-60 140-170 2106 13-14

Polyurethane (PUR) Foam cavity fill

0.022 0.55 65 36 100-120 1,134 12

Blown fibre cavity fill

0.040 0.55 80 6 100-120 1,134 2

EPS bead cavity fill

0.038 0.55 65 7 100-120 1,134 3

45

Comments about the use materials

Material Pros Cons Comment

Aerogel internal cladding / dry lining

The best thermal resistance of all the products found on the market. Means that good energy savings can be found with small loss of area.

Loss of internal floor area. Disruption to interior decoration. Costly to apply as all services attached to external walls need adjustment or removal. Cost of product is high and as it a petroleum based product it may well continue to rise in relative terms.

Internal cladding may be a solution to consider when the property is undergoing major renovation. Manufactured in USA. Price subject to $/£ exchange rate.

Phenolic Foam internal cladding / dry lining

Proprietary systems widely available. Product widely available. Low tech product, easily fitted.

Loss of internal floor area. Disruption to interior decoration. Costly to apply as all services attached to external walls need adjustment or removal.

Phenolic Foam external cladding

Proprietary systems widely available. Can be installed during occupation. External appearance will change.

External drainage, rooflines and openings will need adjustment adding to costs. External appearance changed.

External cladding is an expensive option and is only suitable where the external appearance will be acceptable e.g. brick or render finishes available but not stone. Long pay back periods.

Polyurethane (PUR) Foam cavity fill

Can be installed without disruption. Adds structural stability. Good thermal resistance. Can be used in cavities of varying widths down to 15mm min. Impermeable to water therefore useful in areas at risk from flooding.

Borescopic survey needed. More expensive cavity fill product. Not widely available. Specialist installers

An emerging product with potential use in stone properties with narrow cavities. Industry guarantee provided through the British Urethane Foam Contractors’ Association (BUFCA).

Blown fibre cavity fill Cheap. Can be installed without disruption.

Borescopic survey needed. Can only be used in clear smooth cavities greater than 50mm. Specialist installers.

Subsidy widely available. Comes with industry guarantee through the Cavity Insulation Guarantee Agency (CIGA).

EPS bead cavity fill Can be used in cavities of varying widths down to 40mm.

Borescopic survey needed. Not widely available. Specialist installers

No carbon subsidy. Comes with a manufacturer’s guarantee, but no industry guarantee like for random cavities <50mm.

46

Technical terms explained

Example: •ThethermalconductivityofAerogelinsulation0.013W/mK •Thethermalconductivityofabrickis0.077W/mK

Example: •Thethermalresistanceof9mmAerogelinsulation0.0009/0.013-0.69m2K/W •Thethermalresistanceofa220mmbrickwallis0.022/0.077-0.29m2K/W •Thetotalthermalresistanceofthetwomaterialstogetheris0.69+0.29-0.98m2K/W

Example: •Thethermaltransmittanceof9mmofAerogelinsulationona220mmsolidbrickwallis1/0.98+ convectionandradiationlosses+repeatingthermalbridginglossesfromfixings. •UsingU-valuecalculationsoftware,thethermaltransmittancewascalculatedas0.94W/m2K

A standardised measure of how easily heat flows through any specific material, which is independent of material thickness.• The lower the number, the better the thermal performance.• Provides a quick way to easily compare to thermal performance of different insulants.• Units are Watts per metre Kelvin W/mK

A measure of how much heat loss is reduced through a given thickness of any specific material.• The thermal resistance of a material is calculated from:

• To compare two insulants with different thicknesses and thermal conductivities, calculate the R-value for each.

• The higher the number, the better the thermal performance.• For materials in series, these thermal resistances (unlike conductivities) can simply be added to

give thermal resistance for the whole.• Units are metres squared Kelvin per Watt (m2K/W).

A measure of how much heat is lost through a given thickness of any specific material, whichincludes conduction, convection and radiation.• The U-value of a material (or several materials in series, e.g. brick and insulation in a wall) is

calculated by taking the reciprocal of the R-value (i.e. 1/R value), and adding convection and radiation heat losses.

• Repeating thermal bridging (e.g. wall ties) is also included.• In practice this is a complex calculation, and so using U-value calculation software (most SAP

software packages, e.g. Build Desk, have a U-value calculator included within them) is recommended.• The lower the number, the better the thermal performance.• Units are Watts per metre squared Kelvin (W/m2K).

AlsoknownasLambda [λ], or as k-value

ThermalConductivity

AlsoknownasR- value

ThermalResistance

Alsoknownas thermal transmittance

U-value

λR =

[where

[ is the thickness in metres and

λ is the thermal conductivity in W/mK

Calderdale CouncilHousing and Environment Service

Telephone: 08452456000Email: heat@calderdale.gov.uk Web: www.calderdale.gov.uk