Is the EPC a smokescreen?

[moggy1968]

The cynic inside me says (possibly hopefully) that the EPC is a smokescreen. That doesn't come in until April, after the consultation period finishes, so will they decide 'after due consultation' to abandon that and we all breathe a grateful sigh of relief that it's just the tariff that has been dropped to 21p when in reality this is also unacceptable.
It is, I think you will find, historically a standard Government tactic to make unpopular change popular.

 

[SRE]

I've been coming to that conclusion but then wondered if I was just deluding myself. It surely should be part of our argument and response to the consultation. I think we could maybe live with a C rating for post 1930 houses where cavity loft and decent boilers are installed, that should be standard anyway. I'd argue for an E rating for hard to treat houses where solid wall insualtion would be a requirement. When I worked on this sort of stuff a couple of years ago renewables were seen as the only viable option for sorting out hard to treat homes.

 

[solarsavings]

I doubt it's a smokescreen. I think they want to **** the job up for real.

 

[itty]

Posted this on another thread - sorry for repitition but I think it is relevant and hasn't been considered yet.

I agree the EPC is the main issue but I don't agree it is a smokescreen. PV will have to have some sort of energy performance assessment so that it can sit alongside the green deal next year. My issue is, why should PV be assessed by EPC which is heavily focused on heat retention and insulation which has nothing to do with PV (except the few that use storage heaters).

I proposed to MP's and the PM that they should implement a new type of EPC for PV that assesses the properties efficiency in electricity usage. No reply, surprise surprise.

I also think the government are being badly advised to use the current EPC because it makes at least 3/4 of the UK property stock ineligible. This in my book is discrimination.

If they continue as planned then they are essentially ending retrofit installs for most, and will be leaving themselves open to accusations of discrimination (after they have performed a judicial review following all the disputes they will have caused between installers and clients that didn't quite make the cut off)

 

[moggy1968]

How is it more environmentally friendly to stop people reducing their carbon footprint by installing PV because their house cannot (and will never) reach a grade C
The goverment has already signed up to the green deal and as far as I am aware there is nothing in that which prevents people having a FiTS tariff of 21 p just because their house doesn't have a cat C.
'

Under the Green Deal, bill payers will be able to get energy efficiencyimprovements without having to front up the cash. Instead, businesseswill provide the capital, getting their money back via the energy bill. Atthe heart of the offer is a simple rule: estimated savings on bills will​

always equal or exceed the cost of the work.'
this has nothing to do with paying for PV to be installed. The green deal is about customers offsetting the cost of improvements against their energy bill.
much is made in the green deal of helping those on low incomes and in fuel povert, but isn't that what fee solar and solar on social housing stock did, which has now been made uneconomic?
The green deal is all about reducing carbon emissions from leaky homes, and reducing energy demand. It is nothing to do with the production of energy through renewable resources (although the two may of course be linked). In otherwords, insulation.

'The Green Deal is focused on energy efficiencymeasures which meet the golden rule, that is,the expected financial savings must be greaterthan the costs attached to the energy bill. Weintend that Green Deal finance could extendto other low carbon energy technologies infuture, such as microgeneration and combinedheat and power technologies, should theymeet the golden rule. Initially, we expect suchmeasures to be funded through alternativefinance mechanisms that are already in placeor under development, such as the RenewableHeat Incentive or Feed-In Tariffs. As this is notGreen Deal finance, the energy bill repaymentmechanism would not be used. However,aspects of the broader Green Deal framework,such as the in-property assessment, are likely to​

extend to cover microgeneration technologies'
In other words, whilst the use of renewable technology may be counted as part of a properties energy rating, The use of renewables is not an intrinsic part of the green deal. NO the other way round, which is propsed, where the qualification for renewable incentives is linked to compliance with the green deal.
Unless the Government is going to fund the installation of PV either upfront or as an ofset against energy bills, with no upfront cost to the consumer then it is not part of the green deal.
'

The Green Deal provider would consider thepackage of measures and make an offer whichstipulates the total cost, the charge to beattached to the energy meter, and the length of​

the repayment period'

So. in summary the payment of FiTS is not linked to the green deal initiative and neither is the level of tariff
sorry if that is a bit long, but I hope that clarifies the situation with the Government trying to justify this as part of the green deal, when it very clearly isn't!!! The only way ever could be is if the Government or other approved institutions loaned the money for improvements under the terms of 'the golden rule' it should cost the customer nothing
​

 

[AIM]

Visited Lux Live at Earls Court today. ECA made presentation 100% following the Party line. No point doing any enegy efficiency measures if home is not C or above. The logic of that argument is continue producing tons of CO2 heating/lighting an energy in-efficient house.

This madness is held together by the UK plc cartel who will be the big winners in the Green Deal. The greenest part of the deal will sadly be the money made by National Companies like Tesco et al, who now offer PV at £8500ish.

 

[itty]

So. in summary the payment of FiTS is not linked to the green deal initiative and neither is the level of tariff
sorry if that is a bit long, but I hope that clarifies the situation with the Government trying to justify this as part of the green deal, when it very clearly isn't!!! The only way ever could be is if the Government or other approved institutions loaned the money for improvements under the terms of 'the golden rule' it should cost the customer nothing
​

Don't wish to enter debate and sorry if green deal is not clearly linked to FITs but RHI is. RHI has to meet EPC so PV will. My point is that current EPC is not really relevant to PV and therefore discriminatory to those that will be ineligible.

 

[t4sltd]

I fear that level C EPC will stay and we are approaching the situation where most PV installations will be done as part of the Green Deal by Tesco etc. I wonder if government assume all small companies are cowboys.

 

[AIM]

Maybe most small Companies are not bank rolling the Tory Party!

 

[moggy1968]

that probably hits the nail on the head
we'll see how green all this really is by the number of installations April2012-April2013.
I suspect not many

 

[TedM]

My feeling is that EPC of some description will stay as a condition - even if it is not Level C.

The EPC will be changing to align with the Green Deal but no details on it yet. There are many details of Green Deal that are still to be sorted and it is expected to be open for 'consultation' within a week or two.

My main issue with the EPC requirement is the discouragement to improve for someone currently in a Level G house (the bottom level) who may be able to improve to a D. If they are still not eligible for the full PV FiTs then why are they going to bother. It is these houses that are the most urgent to improve and should be done first but they are effectively being discouraged.

 

[TedM]

Thinking about it a bit more, perhaps a better approach would be to require a 2 level improvement - a relative improvement rather than an absolute one. So if a house that is currently a Level F could improve to a Level D then they would qualify for the 21p rate.

This is still likely to be difficult and expensive for some houses - but at least it should be possible.

 

[moggy1968]

not a bad idea Ted
I can't fathom for the life of me how it is green to discourage people from fitting solar.
I also can't believe the ECA are backing this, bunch of traitors

 

[SRE]

Moggy who are ECA?????

It's not green to discourage people from installing solar but it's expensive and that's what the government are trying to discourage. There's always been a hierarchy of measures staring with insulation and finishing with renewables. The ones at the top are the least expensive and most effective and the ones at the bottom are more expensive and less effective.

For example if you live in a house built after 1930 (some before then) it costs about £400 to have cavity wall insulation installed, subsidised in most areas by the utility companies through CERT down to between £99 and free (costing the utility a one off payment of about £300 - £400). Install this and you'd save about £300 a year off your fuel bills and save about a tonne of CO2 a year. Compare that to solar pv which costs the customer 10 - 12k, saves them maybe £150 if they are lucky, reduces CO2 emissions by about 1/2 a tonne a year and costs the utilities maybe £1,000 a year to provide it.

You can see where they are coming from and for houses with clean cavities it's a relatively simple job to insulate, improve on a boiler and heating controls and then put solar pv in but anything built before then will need serious money from the custmoer to improve it and that's where the problem lies.