Gold-plated DEC

I spent a couple of days recently responding to a government consultation, which will seriously effect the work that I do and could leave me looking for a new job. Improving the Display Energy Certificates Regime for Public Buildings is a consultation from the Department of Communities and Local Government (CLG), with the objective to simplify and "reduce the burden of compliance" of energy certificate legislation.

Display Energy Certificates, known as DEC, provide an energy rating for public building such as schools and hospitals over a certain size. This A to G rating is based on the actual energy consumption for the building, so if the energy consumption decreases, the rating will improve. For the DEC shown above, the graphs on the right show that the energy rating has improved significantly each year for this building, from a G in 2012 to an E in 2014.

The DEC need to be displayed in a prominent place, so that if you walk into your local town hall or hospital you can see how much energy they consume compared to the average for that building type. They are a good way of raising awareness, and staff walking past these ratings on a daily basis may become more active in reducing their energy waste.

At the same time Leicestershire County Council's newsletter dropped through the door and the extent of cuts they are facing over the next few years as a result of austerity measures is horrendous. The cost of DEC is only a very small slice of the budget, but the focus is clearly going to be on keeping essential services going.

Whatever the responses were to the consultation document, it was already clear that there was a very negative slant towards DEC in the document, referring to them as a 'burden'. DEC have been a large part of my work for the last 7 years, but the picture painted was that they no longer had a future. I was left feeling rather gloomy, that I would inevitably have to find an alternative way to make a living.

Then some of my old colleagues kicked me back into touch. (Thanks Phil, Nick and Bryony!)

In 2008 the legislation forced DEC onto reluctant building managers. Gathering all the data needed was a pain the first few years, because in many cases energy wasn't being managed. Where energy was being managed well, the DEC seemed somewhat superfluous. But over the last 7 years building managers have adapted to using DEC as a tool. The DEC is an independent, annual energy review resulting in a visible, clearly understandable, and easily comparable energy rating. It provides useful information to help building managers make decisions on maintenance, justify investment in efficiency projects and target awareness campaigns.

I know of County Councils who use the DEC energy ratings to help them monitor the energy consumption of their buildings and to target their improvement measures - improvement measures that save them money on energy bills. They want to keep using the DEC as they are a valuable tool.

Headteachers, who have far more to worry about than tracking their complicated energy bills, can see at a glance how their school performs compared to an average school. And yes - they do check out the DEC rating in other schools that they visit! Displaying the energy rating in reception means that a poor G rating cannot be ignored, and is visible for parents, governors and teachers to see. It is a powerful motivation for making improvements.

Back in 2009 I compared how the DEC ratings I had produced had changed from the previous year. You can see that in general there was a shift towards the higher A, B and C rated certificates. The graphs above show that even in just one year there was an improvement in energy ratings, which means my clients actually reduced their energy consumption.

The above DEC is for a leisure centre, where the CHP (combined heat and power unit) was old and the efficiency was deteriorating. The effect of replacing it for a new CHP unit and additional improvements can be seen with the increase in the energy rating for the building from a D to a C. The cost saving was over £20,000 the following year, even after allowing for the effect of weather. What part the DEC played can't really be quantified, but raising the awareness and priority of energy efficiency improvements can have some significant financial benefits.

DEC aren't a financial burden, they are a money saving tool. Evidence from the Department of Energy and Climate Change, shows significant energy efficiency improvements between 2008 and 2012, which outweighs the cost of providing DEC. Shame that CLG, sees DEC as a 'burden' and wants to reduce or eliminate DEC requirements. Many of the proposed changes in the consultation would undermine DEC and make them almost useless as a tool for encouraging energy efficiency. CLG must understand that, yet they continue to push for dismantling them.

 

All the options DCLG provide in the consultation (my summary above) are to cut corners, whilst trying to stay just within the boundaries of the mandatory EU Directive. If the intention was to save money rather than reduce the 'burden', there could have been several options for improving the DEC to make an even bigger impact on reducing energy consumption. This would be a win-win for public bodies looking for efficiency savings, and also the government who has a legally binding carbon reduction target to meet. I get the impression this has all been tossed aside in favour of protecting energy company profits instead, as they are the only ones to lose out from further energy efficiency measures.

Well, if you have been following for a while, you may know that I am not a 'cut and run' type of person. If I can't make a stand and act when it is about DEC, which I am an expert on, then when will I ever make a stand on anything? So......... I have made a decision. I am not waiting for any of these bad outcomes to be enforced by people who are really rather ignorant about energy certificates.

Saving energy is hard. It is an uphill struggle, with investment seen as the lynch pin. My clients want things that are easy and that work to reduce energy consumption, and for this the current DEC aren't good enough. With some small tweaks, they could be so much better - Gold-Plated in fact, but with little to no change to the clients 'burden'.

For example, the value on the current energy certificates is a carbon ratio, quite meaningless to most people. But in the process of gathering all the energy data, I end up with all the cost data too. Displaying the cost of energy consumption as well would help understanding. As in the leisure centre example above, a £20k saving has a much bigger impact on people than seeing a C rating. Equating that cost into something real, like how many nurses or teachers that money could employ if it wasn't spent on energy, would help to hit the message home. For an individual, using the stairs instead of the lift may seem like a tiny insignificant amount of energy in a large hospital, but when that energy is equated into real people and jobs saved (or climate change and lives) it is energy that is well worth saving.

I can't change the actual DEC certificate, but I can change how it is presented and provide additional information with it. I can't change the legal requirements of DEC, but I can demonstrate the benefits of having them, and encourage voluntary DECs. Already I have clients who have decided to go beyond the minimum requirements. And as an energy assessor I always strive to provide more value than the basic energy certificates require, with advice on energy bills and added details for recommendations.

Working with my regular clients I will be setting up some trials to see what improvements to the DEC give the best results for the least additional burden. My target is that within 3 years, every DEC I produce will be a Gold-Plated. I will also make all the results and Gold-Plated DEC templates freely available for everyone to benefit from. So if you are a disenchanted energy assessor, accreditation body or building manager and want more than CLG are offering, spread the word - Gold-Plated DEC will be coming your way soon!

EPC rant

Finally I have finished the project I have been working on for a few months. Yes I know that on the 11th January I said I had "at least another week" and it has been nearly 4 weeks, but I am sure you know how wishful thinking goes.

I have been working on an energy performance certificate for a hospital building. Members of the EU will know something about this - it is where you determine an A to G energy rating for buildings. There is an example below. Great for new buildings, but not so easy for existing ones.

I spent 4 days on surveys, looking at almost every room. This was followed by over a month pouring over my notes, the 700 photos I had taken and drawings of the building. This was just to work out the information I needed to enter into the calculation software. Then it has taken me 3 weeks to enter all that data into the software and get an energy rating for the building. The final task of producing the recommendations, that the occupier will receive and could help them to improve the building and reduce their carbon emissions, took.......30 minutes.

It is appalling really how distorted this legislation is. It would make so much more sense to simplify the calculation for large buildings and to put more emphasis on providing decent recommendations, that are specific and contain all the facts and figures, so that someone might actually read them and consider it worthwhile to implement them. I could do that if I didn't have to spend so long on the calculations and providing evidence of every single step.

Truthfully, I did spend a couple of days running some additional calculations for the recommendations, because I would just be too ashamed to give my client the standard bunch of one-liners that is all I legally have to provide. But really I know that it could be sooo much better.

Anyway the project and my rant are now over. I have something fun for my next post. It is called "Tastes better than Bear's" and will be posted very soon ;-)

Low Energy Event

I have been baking today, lots of lovely cakes for the Transition Energy Event tomorrow. Below are my delicious cookies and Nigella's famous clementine cake from the 'Green & Blacks Chocolate Recipes' book. It hadn't occurred to me before, but the clementine cake is gluten free, so must be totally healthy despite being coated in Green & Blacks chocolate ;-) I have also made a carrot cake and Mrs Thrifts Chocolate Courgette Traybake, although I was low on some ingredients by then so there was a bit of substitution involved.

If you are near Loughborough and don't have any plans for Saturday afternoon, why don't you drop in to the Transition Loughborough Energy Event at St Peters Community Centre. There will be free homemade cakes and refreshments! If that isn't enough to entice you, there will be advice on how to save energy without spending money, and also examples of some low cost solutions. With talks from Dr Tina Holt the super-insulated refurbishment guru, and Caroline Harmon local expert on energy efficiency measures and grants there is bound to be something of interest for everyone. This informal event is open from 1 - 4pm, so if there is anything you want to ask about energy bills, draught-proofing, grants, solar panels or insulation then come along for a chat and some cake :-)

Ashby Castle and Resilience

It has been the summer holidays and we have had our share of nice days out. Last week I visited Ashby Castle with my youngest daughter and her friends. You may be able to make them out at the top of the tower.

 

Ashby Castle is an English Heritage site. It is basically a ruin, but what remains is immensely fun for kids. There are the grassy slopes of a sunken garden and lake, which are great for rolling down or running around.

There are ruins with grand doorways and hidden stairways, brilliant for hide and seek or toy sword battles. The 6 storey tower with it's spiral staircase gives a grand view of the surrounding area too.

But absolutely the best feature is a secret underground passageway running from the base of the tower to the old kitchen cellars. It just gives an extra element of authenticity and fun to imaginative battle games to storm the castle.

 

Now some of the visitors will be wandering round with an audio guide, but we just spread out a picnic and let the kids imaginations run wild.

When my youngest daughter was about 2, we came with some friends - about 13 kids in total. The boys were all dressed up as knights and kings with swords and shields, and the younger girls as princesses. It was the most amazing day! It is such a shame that they have grown up.

This time was a much quieter affair and I sat looking at the walls of the tower. They are incredibly thick. The wall above is twice as thick as the doorway.

The tower was built in 1470 and designed to withstand attacks. The thick walls were a big investment of labour and resources, but the intention was to build something that was resilient and would last for generations. As it was, the tower was blown up in 1648, but it was so well built that the remaining half of the tower that you see above, has stood for another 360 years and could well last another 360 more.

I was sitting on a picnic blanket reading a section from Green Wizardry by John Michael Greer on 'Sustainability and Resilience'. His point was that efficiency is about getting the most from the least resources, whereas resilience is the opposite. Resilience is about having spare capacity or using extra resources to make things that are stronger, longer lasting, and can absorb shocks. In the case of Ashby Castle the time, energy and resources invested in those strong walls, was intended to protect the people inside and is the main reason that they are still standing for us to enjoy today.

Here is an example of some homes built in the last couple of years. To me they are so ugly. But they are very efficient. Look at the shape - they are almost square. This gives the biggest internal area for the smallest area of external walls. In other words it uses less bricks than a fancier shaped house. The ceilings inside are low to reduce unnecessary height and brickwork. And the roof has virtually no overhang to save on tiles, which would otherwise provide some shelter from rain to the brickwork and shade upper windows in hot weather. It is also a very shallow roof slope, again being efficient with materials, but not allowing for any deviation in the weather that could bring a heavy snowfall.

The buildings are 3 storeys high to minimise on the footprint, and in addition the garden is tiny, so being very efficient with land. Just in case you don't realise how short the garden is, I was walking along the path one day, when the occupant opened their back door and threw a burnt slice of toast over the back fence. Just a toast toss between backdoor and fence!

 

 

There was really no need to be so efficient with space in Loughborough. This is the edge of a small town, not a city centre, but then maybe it is better to squeeze all the ugly buildings in tightly so as not to spoil the view too much.

The council negotiated an 11 acre open park area as part of the development deal, which is great for me to walk my dog round, but it adjoins an existing park area of a similar size, and it is not widely known about. So these ugly houses have been built with virtually no space to grow their own food, dry their washing, or room for their kids play. Yet the open playing areas are too far from the houses and too empty of people to be safe from stranger danger, so it seems the kids stay at home instead.

There is no large lawn to mow for weekly exercise, or flowerbeds to attract bees and insects. No room for trees or ponds to encourage wildlife and back garden ecosystems. Yet the council, with their funds becoming tighter, now has the burden of an additional large open space with grass to cut, bins to empty and borders to maintain on a regular basis. There are no allotments in this ward either!

The really wasteful thing is that these houses probably won't be here at the turn of the next century, so it is a false sense of efficiency. It is not just because they seem flimsy compared to a large part of the UK's building stock which is built pre-1940. But because they are ugly, and who wants to maintain and care for an ugly house?

The homes below are cheap and cheerful houses from 100 years ago. Efficient terraced housing with small gardens. They were built to save space and be close to amenities, as people walked most places in those days. However the little attractive features, such as the decorative trim at the eaves, the curves around the windows and doors, and the symmetry all add to making them more appealing and helping them survive. The rooms have additional height to make them feel more spacious and the bay window makes them feel less 'square' and brings in more light. They may not have un underground tunnel, but were built with cellars.

It is funny because even the 1950's council houses were solid and built to last, and they provided a reasonable garden. During a time when the country had a large war debt to pay off we were building with some resilience. At some point since then resilience has gone out the window. There is clearly a lack of balance between 'lean manufacturing' efficiency (otherwise known as cheap and cheerful 'Noddy' homes) and a need to build in resilience so that homes are fit for the future.