The Debate around Low-Carbon Heating Systems: Part 2

Governments need to provide a clear policy and strategy for low-carbon heating so implementation can gather momentum.

Engineer Chris Twinn (Twinn Sustainability Innovation and LETI member) argues that the urgency of decarbonisation means that UK (and other countries) must make clear decisions about a heating system strategy and its implementation. Prevaricating will make the transition slower and risk missing important climate commitments.

There is much to agree with Jon Saltmarsh’s recent essay about the debate of hydrogen versus heat pump strategy. As Saltmarsh notes, the urgency and scale of the task facing the UK is the delivery of a zero-carbon ready home every 30 seconds between now and 2050. The use of hydrogen, and its decarbonised version, is decades away. The technology for delivering it at scale and for a realistic market price is far from proven. However, his essay he falls into the same trap of preserving the status quo by reinforcing the do-nothing approach that he rails against.

What is desperately needed now in the UK is a clear decision on the long-term choice for a low carbon heating system. The messaging must also be clear: not more of the “yes, but” rhetoric so prevalent in the media, or the 15-years’ “no regrets” advice that opens the way for a future policy reversal. The messaging of the decision needs to come from all directions. Not only unambiguously from top-down politicians and successive governments, but also bottom-up and middle-out: word of mouth on the streets, the public service media, and the whole repair, maintenance and improvement (RMI) sector. Relying on the commercial vested interests of certain equipment suppliers or influencers simply does not provide the credibility.

Sufficient information now exists to enable that decision for the vast majority of homes. We urgently need clear direction now, and it must be presented unequivocally to the public.  France and Scandinavia already provide clear, unambiguous advice for heat pumps. This has underpinned rapid rollouts as part of their coherent decarbonisation strategies.

First and foremost, it is this public that needs this clarity of direction and will benefit from it. Without the public’s participation in its role as a client it will be impossible to start this decarbonisation transition. They are the key component in the ‘whole system’ thinking that Saltmarsh refers to.

The building industry and its supply chains are equally important. They were previously stung by the repeated reversals of national policy. Here the majority of firms will not embrace change unless the message is absolutely clear and unambiguous, particularly as the vast majority are micro-organisations.  The notion that there may be alternative solutions in 15 years’ time is a negative message and implies companies will need to retrain all theirr staff yet again. In the meantime, doing home efficiency improvements to deliver household real bill reductions would be sidelined yet again.     

This may be a relatively early-stage strategic decision, but in real life rarely is information at all levels fully available for such decision making, particularly where it involves mass engagement and mobilisation. Instead, one has to extract the strategic knowledge and separate it from the detail. The fog of incomplete information has to be cleared to allow decisive direction-of-travel decision making.   

But what about the claim that “it is complex”? No, that is not what the public or our industry wants or deserves to hear any longer. For those being dragged along in this debate, it is no more complex than buying a car. Every family is different. But cars are largely all the same; four wheels and an engine, with a range of size, performance, seating and colour detail tweaks. We should not confuse strategic direction-of-travel decisions with the detail.   

The technology conflict between 2 rival videotape formats (Betamax and VHS) provides a useful insight. It was not the technical issues that influenced which one prevailed. Indeed, the least technically able one dominated. For a mass rollout it is issues such as providing added value in return for the disruption; neighbourhood level reassuring feedback; accepting local varying adoption rates; flexibility to provide variants; using volume and competition to reduce costs; etc.

Hydrogen may have a role in future but not as a fuel in domestic heating appliances. Instead, hydrogen may be used for peak-load power stations, or as energy storage. This kind of arcane discussion is not of interest to the public and to the construction (RMI) industry, although clearly it warrants discussion within government and the energy supply side.  The obtuse and often vested arguments about making use of the existing (gas) network need to be countered. There is also an existing electrical network that can be utilised and evolved.

Whole life cost discussions on all-electric options for individual homes is just another irrelevance at this strategic decision stage. In the real world those end-users tempted to go for the cheaper upfront option are just as likely to be those in fuel poverty and unable to pay the subsequent higher bills. This is applicable to both options, so is yet another distraction. What is needed is a social policy to assist the most vulnerable to ensure they are not adversely affected.

District heating is likely to be a similar non-option. It works in Copenhagen because it has a base load of vast numbers of relatively poorly insulated existing homes generating high heat revenues. Most UK heat networks are now going into new thermally-efficient properties generating low heat revenues. They are largely driven by commercial vested interests who have massaged the evidence for attracting large flows of subsidies. LETI did a quick reality check and found that currently less than 1% of UK homes are on a district heating network. They will simply not be available for the vast majority of existing homes for decades, if ever.

This fogging of strategic options works both ways, for instance by suggesting mechanical cooling will be needed for foreseeable UK climate change. This is likewise being propagated largely by commercial vested interests. Instead, it is easier and cheaper for end-users to retrofit ceiling mounted fans, as evidenced by countries that already have these levels of summer peak temperatures. Besides, putting cooling into existing radiators creates some major difficulties. This is but more fog that needs clearing away to allow the strategic decision making.

Fundamentally, for space heating and hot water in the vast proportion of the UK housing stock, heat pumps are the viable solution for today and for the foreseeable next few decades. If that decision can be made, then a roll out programme can be delivered. Engagement with end-users can focus on  which variant of heat pump and combination of energy efficiency measures might be best suited to their needs.

Share:

Previous article

Where are Women of Colour in Urban Planning?

Next article

Social Value: An Architect’s Perspective