Agenda item

The Director for Estates and Building Services submits a report on Energy efficiency schemes in private sector housing in the city.

Cllr Dawood arrived at the beginning of this item.

The Director for Estates and Building Services submitted a report on Energy efficiency schemes in private sector housing in the city.

The Service Manager for Sustainability attended the meeting to make the presentation and assist with discussion and the Team Leader for Energy Projects attended the meeting remotely to assist with discussion.

Slides were presented as attached in the agenda pack.

Key points included:

• A large percentage of housing within the city was terraced or semi-detached and 36%was built before 1929.  This meant that many of these had solid walls and as such were energy inefficient and needed work to bring up to standard, such as by applying external wall insulation with finishes that retained the character of the building.
• Co-benefits included:
  • Reducing fuel poverty and addressing the cost-of-living crisis – Vulnerable people in the UK spent a higher percentage of their income on energy than those in Europe.
  • Reducing damp and mould and improving internal air quality – Recent events as reported in the media had led to a big push on the issue.
  • Health benefits to residents – both physical and mental.
  • Climate justice – supporting vulnerable groups as climate change mitigation moved forward – lower carbon heating could mean higher costs, so there was a need to support the most vulnerable.
  • Creating local jobs in retrofit installation.
  • Improving the local economic buying power of residents – if residents had more disposable income as a result of lower energy bills, they could spend more in the local economy.
• There had not yet been much research into the impact on homes as the climate warmed, but a watching brief was being kept on research as it came in to ensure that retrofitting was appropriate.
• In a good retrofit, an assessment was undertaken both in needs of the physical aspects of the property and how the owners of the property were using that property.  Following this a whole-house plan was prepared.  Once that plan was complete, options were considered such as upgrading the fabric of the building, looking at heating options and looking at renewable technologies.
• Barriers to retrofit included:
  • Solid wall properties – these required internal or external insulation.
  • Inaccessible lofts.
  • Disrepair – such as loose gutters and pipes that would need to be fixed prior to external insulation being installed.
  • Homes in conservation areas – in these cases it was necessary to ensure that actions fitted the planning requirements.
  • The cost of redecoration following works.
  • Compliance with the requests of the occupant – some occupants may pay more for a brick-strip effect.
  • Overall costs – these had increased since the Covid-19 pandemic and the cost-of-living crisis.
  • Ensuring the availability of properly trained staff.
• If all retrofitting was completed as desired in the city, 86% of city properties  could be brought up to Energy Performance Certificate (EPC) level C or above, however, the cost of this would be prohibitive.
• In terms of grant schemes since October 2020 – Schemes had been difficult to administer and run and had taken time to get going.  Figures were relatively low for Phase 1.  Whist lots had been achieved in phase 2, this also covered social housing which was easier to achieve.  The Local Authority Delivery (LAD) 3 had been the most successful scheme in both Leicester and nationally.  This had been delivered well in the private sector.  The Home Upgrade Grant (HUG) scheme was only available for off-gas properties, and there was no national scheme from the government for vulnerable houses on gas.
• ECO was a government efficiency scheme funded through energy company obligation.  This was money from energy suppliers that installers could apply for and was not run by Local Authorities.
• In terms of achievements through the Green Homes Grant (GHG) and LAD schemes, LAD 3 had been the most successful.  All of the money given to them had been spent and a further £1.3m had been bid for at a later stage and then used.  Since it had been difficult to identify off-gas homes for the HUG scheme, the surplus money had been spent in LAD 3.
• Residents in New Parks who had benefitted from the schemes were happy, but it was recognised that there was more to do in terms of what was needed.
• The HUG 2 scheme was coming up, however, there were not many off-gas homes in the city.
• Schemes were promoted to landlords through libraries and neighbourhood centres. Stalls had been run in various locations and an email had been sent out showing the schemes available for Leicester residents.
• Warm Home Surveys would let householders know what needed to be done and would refer people to grant schemes.  This was being promoted through multiple channels including local radio.
• The Council were working with EON on retrofit schemes. In addition, currently creating a scheme with EON using ECO funding on particular streets. This will reduce number of rogue installers as LCC is confident that EON installers will work to PAS2035 standard. and in line with Planning policies.  Data would be obtained on what was being completed.
• Information on projects in progress, links and joined-up working, and how far was still needed to go, was presented in the slides as attached to the agenda pack.
• It was clarified that the figures had been updated since the slides had been produced.  There were now 59 homes that had applied for the HUG 2 grant and 38 homes that have applied for the Warm Homes Survey.  647 Homes had now registered under ECO 4.

The Committee were invited to ask questions and make comments. Key points included:

• The take-up of grants from landlords had not been high, and of those that had enquired many had not followed through when they were informed that they would need to contribute a third of the costs.  Despite this, the Council were still trying to promote the scheme.
• External wall insulation had proven difficult to deliver within costs, and many had not been in favour of internal wall insulation when external wall insulation had not been possible.  It was not thought that there would be much success in delivering internal wall insulation as it required lots of work with windowsills, shelves and sockets, which could be obstructions.  The Planning team had tried to be flexible where possible and were trying to come up with as many compromises as possible to have external insulation.
• Many buildings had detail on their facades and contractors were being engaged to influence activity prior to planning applications.  The Council led by example by demonstrating through council properties what could be achieved.
• A trial was being carried out by the Housing department retrofitting on a terraced house in a way that retained detail but also complied with the standard for retrofitting.  Since all retrofits needed to meet the standard, this was important to address.  Poor practice in other authorities had shown potential issues, such as water getting behind insulation that caused severe problems, therefore it was important to fully think retrofits through.
• In terms of property licensing, there was a condition for properties to be EPC level 3 or above to obtain a licence.
• Regarding concerns that landlords may have over losing more money than they got back, it was clarified that landlords only had to pay £3k before they could apply for an exemption.
• The slides laid out what would be achieved if all energy efficiency measures could be completed.  However, it was reiterated that the cost was prohibitive.  The exact figures would be obtained.
• In terms of barriers to retrofitting.  Funding was an issue, however, there were other barriers such as disruption to tenants.  However, as energy costs increased, people would not want to spend so much of their income on staying warm, therefore it was thought that retrofitting would rise up people’s agendas.  Even if all the desired funding was available, there would still be barriers, however there were ways of working with tenants to overcome them.
• The current level of EPC level C homes was 36% and the potential was 86% if all stock was retrofitted.  This was an aspiration rather than a target and it showed the nature of the challenge. 
• Some homes that had been upgraded early had been disqualified from future schemes.
• The figures were from the national data set and were not broken down by city.  The most relevant data therefore was the data for the East Midlands.
• It was suggested that it might be useful for officers to come to Ward Community Meetings to disseminate information to tenants and residents, perhaps with a brief presentation on what could be offered and what could be offered to that Ward in particular.
• Hydrogen-powered heating was not yet being considered as the technology was still in development, however the research was being followed closely.  Many people had not wanted to take part in trials due to safety concerns.  It was thought that the technology would not be available for a long time and as such heat pumps were unlikely to become obsolete in the near future.  At this time there were not many other options than heat pumps.
• The team were not involved in delivering district heating but would endeavour to find out whether metering would be a big burden on tenant’s budgets.
• Currently there were no schemes aimed at middle-income households.  However, National Energy Action had held a conference and there were loan schemes available whereby loan companies offered low-interest loans to private householders to take measures and make repayments.  There were currently no schemes from central government, however, it was thought that the Department of Energy were putting work into Green Finance and ‘green mortgages’ were offered by some banks.  Additionally, energy advice could help to save money on intervention.
• Staff (including front-line staff) across the Council were working to keep the community informed.  Part of the reason for the Warm Home Survey was to ensure that retrofits were done correctly, and advice could be given.
• Regarding issues with contractors conducting work before planning permission was granted, the Council were working closely with EON regarding where grants went and ensuring people had correct advice.  The Council tried to be as involved as possible so as to mitigate issues.  Installers were registered by the Council, but it appeared as though some had done work without informing tenants that planning permission was required.  Both the Council and EON were working to ensure that tenants were informed correctly.  If it became apparent that contractors were informing tenants incorrectly and including the Council logo on their leaflets, Trading Standards would be informed.
• The timeframe was to reach net zero by 2030, however, it was noted that the costs involved in reaching this would be high.
• It was not thought that all homes would be retrofitted by 2030, however, there was no alternative way of doing it as homes needed to be retrofitted.  It was important that the Council did all it could before 2030.
• The idea of heating a person rather than a house (i.e. with electric blankets etc.) had been discussed with energy firms and the national grid.  However, it was noted that to do so would risk damp, mouldy houses and the associated health risks.  All options were considered to address the heating issue.  It was requested that alternative options be laid out in future reports.
• It was difficult to obtain data on individual energy bills to assess the benefits of retrofitting and the relative benefits of different forms of retrofitting, however, modelling software appeared to favour external insulation over internal due to thermal mass (bricks retaining heat after heating had been switched off).  It was suggested that an attempt to gather such data could be made in relation to the works in New Parks.

AGREED:

1)    That the report be noted.

2)    That the comments of the Commission be noted.