FuelForThoughtDean Crosley

Exploring a model for eradicating UK fuel poverty

| 3

Table of Contents

Definitions 4

Timeline 5

Assumptions 6

Fuel For Thought Introduction 8The Scenarios 9Process & Limitations 9

Typology 13Facilitating social cohesion and high performance

Factors 14Underheating Projected fuel price rises Projected Feed-In-Tariff rates Photovoltaics as an income generator Government committal to carbon reduction

Findings of the study 15General Observations

Fuel Poverty and the Affordable Homes Programme 17

‘Fabric First’ or Microgeneration? 17

Microgeneration - The Variable Month 19The social implications of a highly variable fuel bill

Passivhaus 20Ultra high performance building fabric - is it enough?

Addressing the existing housing stock 21

Summary 22

Bibliography 23

4 | | 5

DefinitionsFuel Poverty Fuel poverty can be defined as a household that needs to spend more than 10% of their income on fuel to maintain a satisfactory heating regime as well as meeting their other fuel needs.1 The Government have set a legally binding target to eradicate fuel poverty by 2016. Rising fuel prices will continue to exasperate the issue, with almost a quarter of homes currently classified as ‘Fuel Poor’.2 The government advisory body FPAG (Fuel Poverty

Advisory Group) has suggested that newly developed, high performance yet affordable housing stock will be key to ending fuel poverty.3

Carbon Price FloorThe EU Emissions Trading System and Carbon Price floor will see the cost of carbon steadily rise in GB to £30/tonne by 2020, compared to circa £6.50/tonne at present. This will see an average income of £4bn/year, lifting the market price for energy. This will add £63bn to consumers’ bills over the next

15 years, with no current plans to recycle these carbon revenues back to fuel poor households.4

2016 Code for Sustainable Homes (CSH)The Government’s stringent legislation which will govern the requirement for all new homes to be ‘net zero carbon’ by 2016. Whilst developers will now be able to offset any carbon generated by the ‘Allowable Solutions’, this could end up costing the developer more than a considered, affordable, truly zero carbon development. It has already been identified that the Allowable Solutions could undermine the credibility of achieving zero carbon homes

and it is therefore expected that opting for Allowable Solutions will penalise a developer financially.

Affordable Homes Programme (2011-2015)£4.5bn invested along with existing commitments from the previous ‘National Affordable Housing Programme’. Majority of the new programme for ‘Affordable Rent’, for a total delivery of 80,000 new ‘affordable homes’. The programme is also allowing £10bn of debt to Providers through the Affordable Homes Guarantees Programme, using the Government’s fiscal credibility to reduce the cost of borrowing for Providers. The Housing Association has

stipulated that all homes built for the programme must meet the Code for Sustainable Homes Level 4.

Over half of the homes are currently programmed to be built in the final year of the programme, meaning that the target is unlikely to be achieved. 5

The Green Deal Intended to help to improve the current housing stock through improvements with no up-front costs to the consumer, but it is questionable whether or not the improvements will be enough to reduce energy consumption by a factor enough to end fuel poverty. In lower income households it will be difficult to achieve a cost saving as they often cannot afford to keep the heating on for long enough to properly heat their homes. Whilst they may enjoy warmer homes, they may not enjoy a cost saving on their bills. In addition to this, the high 7% interest rate on the loan will dissuade many consumers from opting for the Deal .Since much social housing is ‘affordable rent’, use of the Green Deal will ultimately be in the hands of private landlords.Participating companies must also offer a ‘full range’ of Green Deal services, meaning that smaller companies are essentially excluded from any

benefits of the deal.

Feed-In-Tariff By using renewable energy generation such as wind and photovoltaic, the homeowner gets paid a notional amount of money for each unit of energy they produce (Generation Tariff), even if they consume that energy. Any surplus energy can be sold back to the grid (Export Tariff) at a lower rate. The feed-in-tariff will be explored as a viable financial model to help reduce or eradicate fuel poverty.

PassivhausA high performance building standard originally developed in Germany in the 1990’s. The standard pertains to a ‘Passive House’, one that is primarily heated through solar gain and mechanical heat exchange meaning that orientation, amount of glazing, insulation, air tightness and an elimination of thermal bridging become of prime importance. The important criteria which is interesting in the subject of fuel poverty is that the heating demand of a

certified Passivhaus must be below 15kWh/m2A, far below the CHS Level 6 of 36kWh/m2A for a mid terrace.

Kilowatt Hour (kWh)A unit of energy equivalent to a 1000W appliance operating for one hour, used to determine energy consumption.

MacroMicro StudioAn energy autonomous Passivhaus standard studio designed and built by the MacroMicro Studio Masters unit. Whilst initially exploring the notion of an ‘off-grid’ passivhaus, the large scale energy generation systems and high performance building fabric presented a strong economic model to offset the substantial initial capital cost of the studio. By producing all of its own energy and selling excess back to the grid, the cumulative savings and income across the design life make the studio a test bed for an ‘affordable’ high performance building which may form some solution to the fuel poverty crisis.

1 http://www.statistics.gov.uk/hub/business-energy/energy/fuel-poverty 2 Annual Report of Fuel Poverty Statistics 2012 (2012)3 Fuel Poverty Advisory Group (2012): Tenth Annual Report4 Fuel Poverty Advisory Group (2012): Tenth Annual Report5 HCCPA (2012-13): Financial viability of the social housing sector: introducing the Affordable Homes Programme

Building Regs set minimum u-value1

Oil Crisis2

Building Regs tighten u-values3

Building Regs tighten u-values4

First Passivhaus5

Standard Assessment Procedure (SAP) Introduced6

BEDZED' Completed7

SAP becomes standard for checking compliance with Building Regs8

First US Passivhaus9

Energy Performance Certificates Introduced10

Climate Change Act11

First UK Passivhaus12

Electricity Market Reform' White Paper published13

All new homes to be 'zero carbon'14

19651966

19671968

19691970

19711972

19731974

19751976

19771978

19791980

19811982

19831984

19851986

19871988

19891990

19911992

19931994

19951996

19971998

19992000

20012002

20032004

20052006

20072008

20092010

20112012

20132014

20152016

20172018

20192019

2020Private

Level 3Level 4

Level 6Code for Sustainable H

omes

PublicLevel 3

Level 4Level 6

Carbon Price FloorFeed In TariffN

ational Affordable H

ousing Programm

eA

ffordable Hom

es Programm

eThe G

reen Deal

Timeline

6 | | 7

Assumptions

SIZE - 80m2

‘English House Condition Survey 2007’ - Average size across mid-terrace typology, social sector and lower income decile (2 AHC).

TYPOLOGY - Mid Terrace Townhouse‘Friedman, A, Town and Terraced Housing: For Affordability and Sustainability (2012), Routledge’

RENT - £79/week medianNational Housing Survey Headline Report 2011https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/6735/2084179.pdf

HEATING -15,146kWh (required) 9,264 (actual)1

POWER -2500kWh Note: Ofgem stats show average UK power to be 3300kWh/annum, suggesting that the income

bracket identified for the study also under consume in terms of electricity.Hirch, D et al. Understanding Fuel Expenditure : Fuel Poverty and Spending on Fuel

HOUSEHOLD INCOME - Lower Decile (2 AHC) £150/week - This represents a median selection of the fuel poor category with 83% of households earning £100-£199 a week considered fuel poor.2

Scottish House Condition Survey - Key Findings 2010http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2011/11/23172215/0

NOTIONAL ENERGY COST - £60/month minimum ACTUAL ENERGY COST - £35.51/month gas + £31.52/month electricity = £67.03 totalPercentage of household income - 11.17%

BENEFITS - 63% of social renters receive housing benefits National Housing Survey Headline Report 2011https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/6735/2084179.pdf

LOCATION - Dundee Allows for direct comparison to MacroMicro autonomous Passivhaus

www.pvgis.com

PROFILESingle adult (w/children) - This represents the highest proportion of fuel poor households with 35% of households classed as ‘fuel poor’ and 10% of households classed as ‘extremely fuel poor’Scottish House Condition Survey - Key Findings 2010

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2011/11/23172215/0

1 For the lower income brackets, the annual heating demand to maintain a comfortable 21oC is often not met. For a household which will require 25,000kWh/annum to maintain this temperature, users will typically under-consume to approximately 14,000kWh/annum - less than half. What is interesting is that this under-consumption trend remains constant proportionally, regardless of dwelling size, type, tenure etc. Users are generally more willing to inhabit a cold property than heat adequately and reduce expenditure elsewhere. Is predicted annual heat demand an

accurate measure of actual heat demand?http://www.consumerfocus.org.uk/files/2011/10/Understanding-fuel-expenditure.pdf2 To be classified ‘fuel poor’, this would represent a minimum fuel expenditure of £60/month or £720/annum. Ofgem’s statistics show that the median expenditure on gas is £608/annum and £424/annum on electricity respectively, totalling £1032/annum.http://www.ofgem.gov.uk/Media/FactSheets/Documents1/domestic%20energy%20consump%20fig%20FS.pdf

The Observer 20th January, 2012

BBC Online17th December, 2012

Guardian21st January, 2013

The Observer28th January, 2013

BBC Online1st December, 2011

The Times1st April, 2013

The Telegraph17th May, 2012

[fig 1.] Headlines from around the UK highlight the extent of the problem

8 | | 9

Fuel For Thought

Introduction

Fuel poverty is now rife throughout the UK, with almost a quarter of homes currently being bracketed under the definition of ‘fuel poor’, increasing to almost a third of homes in Scotland.1 Unable to heat their homes sufficiently due to the current poor performance housing stock and escalating energy prices, households are often faced with the dilemma of rationing the rest of their essential expenditure or fuelling their home insufficiently. With energy prices continuing to soar and the government’s committal to both the Carbon Price Floor and the EU Emissions Trading System, an additional £63bn will be added to consumers’ energy bills over the next 15 years. The Hill’s Report (2012) predicts that an additional 700,000 households will slip into fuel poverty by 2016. The problem is set to continue to escalate.

Thermal comfort is an essential commodity towards living a good quality life. Whilst people in hotter climates often struggle to seek this comfort in shaded spots and air conditioned homes, the often harsh UK winters and temperate climate mean that space heating often becomes the only method of obtaining comfort within our homes. Whilst comfort is certainly an important facet to justify living in an adequately heated property, there are a number of studies which have identified the serious health implications of living within a cold property, namely respiratory infections, arthritis,

rheurnatisms, mental health, asthma and even excess winter mortality.2

“The annual cost to the NHS of treating winter related disease due to cold private housing is £859 million. This does not include additional spending by social services, or economic losses through missed work. The total costs to the NHS and the country are unknown. A recent study showed that investing £1 in keeping homes warm saved the NHS 42 pence in health costs...” -Chief Medical Officer Report, 2009

Electricity consumption also makes a major contribution towards consumers bills, costing almost 3 times the amount of gas energy per kilowatt hour. Lighting, cooking, white goods and increasingly, laptops and televisions all contribute to this energy consumption. For many fuel poor households, the poverty trap reinforces itself through the inability to afford energy efficient appliances or lightbulbs, resulting in a higher energy consumption even if living a similar lifestyle to a higher income household. Despite this, fuel poor households are often frugal with their energy consumption, with the typical fuel poor household using 25% less electricity than the UK average3.

The basis of this thesis stems from the potentially enticing economic model developed and researched through the MacroMicro studio project. For the MacroMicro project, a high specification ‘autonomous Passivhaus’, buying energy from the grid is eliminated completely through high performance building fabric and renewable energy systems and the occupants are paid for producing their own energy through the Feed In Tariff. This does, however, come at a substantial initial capital cost4. Whilst the MacroMicro studio currently achieves a large repayment of this through the Feed-In-Tariff and savings on energy which would usually be purchased from the grid, an overall lower cost mechanism for those households on lower income brackets is worth exploration as a means to reducing or eliminating fuel poverty.

Using the MacroMicro research as a starting block as a built construction and developed economic model, the thesis will attempt to ratify the zero energy model, beyond the 2016 legislation as a valid solution to the fuel poverty crisis.

Controversial legislation, the Code for Sustainable Homes, has governed the energy efficiency of homes up to the 2016 ‘zero carbon’ target. Whilst the code has strived to stage the road to zero carbon homes in order to allow the construction industry to prime themselves for delivery of increasingly high performance buildings, the scenarios have shown that even if a typical5 fuel poor household was to inhabit a CSH Level 4 home, of which the ‘Affordable Homes Programme’ intends to build 80,000 homes, the typical fuel poor household would still be considered to be fuel poor even at current market fuel prices. [fig. 7] Whilst the Affordable Homes Programme is set to provide a large quantity of housing stock to

1 Fuel Poverty Advisory Group (2012): Tenth Annual Report

2 The Health Impacts of Cold Homes and Fuel Poverty: Marmot Review Team 2011 3 Ofgem: Typical domestic energy consumption (2011), comparison with Hirch, D et al. Understanding Fuel Expenditure : Fuel Poverty and Spending on Fuel4 It should be noted that whilst the MacroMicro studio project had a significant capital cost, the project is a demonstrator research project funded entirely by the industry. Inevitably, companies involved opt to use their highest performance and usually most expensive products as both a showcase and testing ground. See Appendix A for further details.5 See ‘Assumptions’

the affordable market, it conveniently establishes itself for completion before the stringent 2016 legislation for net zero carbon housing comes into effect, with many households living in new homes potentially remaining fuel poor.

Whilst the government recently introduced the Green Deal in order to put consumers at ease, allowing homeowners to upgrade the efficiency of their homes through a variety of measures, it has not been without criticism even before it’s launch. Fuel poverty of course affects those on the lowest of the income brackets, where 7% interest rates, 25 year repayment plans, initial assessment costs and annual operating charges will turn off all of the worst affected households. Exasperating the problem is the issue of rented tenancies where the decision to upgrade a property will ultimately be under the control of the landlord.

“It is essential that we improve the energy efficiency of the whole housing stock. But those on low incomes and in the worst housing can neither afford the immediate investment needed nor afford later repayments without additional help.”

-Professor John Hills, Fuel Poverty Review 2012

The Scenarios

In order to establish a means for testing each of the potential models for eradicating fuel poverty it was important to first develop a detailed profile which would establish the effect of the proposals on a notional fuel poor household. This data is extrapolated from a variety of sources including various government surveys and third party consultancies to provide a realistic insight into the income, spending, energy use and current housing condition of a household bracketed under the definition of ‘fuel poor’, spending more than 10% of their income on energy bills.

Note that the data was chosen not to reflect a household which would be considered to be ‘extremely fuel poor’, spending more than 20% of their income on energy bills as these households form a smaller proportion of households and are usually situated in the lowest of income brackets. It was important to take an approach and identify a typical fuel poor household to assess what effect projected future energy prices and housing models would have on their expenditure, with the possibility that more households on higher incomes and in higher performance housing would be pushed into the same definition.

Process & Limitations

The scenarios will focus on a number of options and as stated previously a number of assumptions have been made in order to provide a constant scenario for the household’s internal floor area, typology and profile. For the purposes of the scenarios, it will also be assumed that the building is grid connected and the primary heating source is a gas fired boiler. This represents the most common method of heating for homes throughout the UK.6 The limitations of this is that beyond 2016 developers may be required to install district heating or distributed CHP which would help to reduce costs as a part of the ‘Allowable Solutions’ within the Code for Sustainable Homes.7

From the existing housing stock identified in the English House Conditions Survey for a ‘fuel poor’ household, typically be a period property, the heating demand of which has been calculated from dwelling size and actual recorded energy input. The heating demand for these properties are particularly high however due to the cost of electricity there is an even split in terms of expenditure on both gas and electricity. Following on from the MacroMicro model discussed above, the most effective way out of fuel poverty may be to invest in photovoltaics; reducing fuel costs whilst providing a small income via the feed-in-tariff.

Due to the criticisms of the Affordable Homes Programme discussed in the introduction, the scenarios will test the CSH Level 4 against the profiled household to determine if this standard of home will bring a family out of fuel poverty through it’s increased building fabric performance. Whilst CSH Level 4 does not stipulate that a certain heat demand is met, various studies8 have indicated that a typical performance gain over a solid wall period property can be expected to be 11-15%, the higher of which has been used for modelling.6 Communities and Local Government (2007): English House Condition Survey 2007 London: EHCS 7 Zero Carbon Hub (2012): Allowable Solutions for Tomorrow’s New Homes London, Ofgem8 Energy Savings Trust (2008): Energy Efficiency and the Code for Sustainable Homes: Level 4 Energy Savings Trust, London

10 | | 11

PV Area : 37.7m2 constant

Rel

ativ

e Ex

tern

al A

reas

Floor Area : 50m2 constant

Autonomous Studio 175.82sqm external surface

area

Volume179.4m3

Volume186.0m3

Volume158.7m3

Volume158.7m3

Mid TerraceMatched Void Area

74.7sqm external surface area57.52% less

fabric than Autonomous Studio

80.5sqm external surface area54.22% less

fabric than Autonomous Studio

53.2sqmexternal surface area

69.8% lessfabric than Autonomous Studio

Mid TerraceMatched GIFA

30% reduction in footprint

FlatMatched GIFA

41% reduction in footprint

28% reduction in footprint

[fig 2.] Typology - A major contributor to build cost, Authors Own

[fig 3.] Suburbia, Chris Wiewiora (2012)

“The pseudo country house sits uneasily in its shrunken countryside, neither quite cheek by jowl with its neighbour nor decently remote, its flanks unprotected from prying eyes and penetrating sounds. It is a ridiculous anachronism. (...) The bare unused islands of grass serve only the myth of independence. This unordered space is neither town nor country; behind its romantic facade, suburbia contains neither the natural order of a great estate nor the man-made order of the historic city. (...) The suburb fails to be countryside because it is too dense. It fails to be city because it is not dense enough. Countless scattered houses dropped like stones on neat rows of development lots do not create an order, or generate community. Neighbour remains stranger and the real friends are most often quite far away, as are school, shopping and other facilities. (...) In spite of growing decentralisation, and the fact that more and more people with more and more cars live in the never-never land of Suburbia, most of the money continues to be earned and spent in the city proper.”

Serge Chermayeff, Christopher Alexander, Community and Privacy. Toward a New Architecture of Humanism. (New York: Anchor Books, Boubleday, 1963), pp.62

0.98form factor form factor form factor form factor

0.43 0.36 0.33

[fig 4.] Typology established - The Mid Terrace, Author’s Own Key parameters to test : Reducing heat demand through enhanced fabric performance Reducing electricity consumption through microgeneration

12 | | 13

[fig 5.] High performance townhouses designed for maximum solar generation and minimal heat loss, based on MacroMicro studio principles, Authors Own, Isover Mannheim Competition, UK First Prize

J F M A M J J A S O N D

10

,948

kWh

16,9

92kW

h

27,1

68kW

h

37,3

76kW

h

37,4

38kW

h

38,5

16kW

h

37,0

98kW

h

35,6

18kW

h

29,4

20kW

h

21,0

32kW

h

11,9

66kW

h

9,46

8kW

h

177,000kWh / annum€42,072.90

savings per year

€208.49savings per year

€11,219.44savings over 40 years

€1,682,916savings over 40 years

€ 0.

249

/ kW

h

North block

South block

percentage of energy demand met

5.2kWh / day

2340 kWh / day avg 3 persons per dwelling

Based on BEDZED post occupancy survey for people living in an energy aware community.

43.7sqm - 6.1kW(p) - 30 arrays

30.8sqm - 4.4kW(p) - 32 arrays

Solar data from PVGIS calculator - location at Mannheim, Germany, optimised at 36 degree pitch.

Cur

rent

ene

rgy

pric

e in

Ger

man

y

15.6

%

24.2

%

38.7

%

53.3

%

53.2

%

54.9

%

52.8

%

50.7

%

41.9

%

30.0

%

17.1

%

13.5

%

Energy BalanceBy taking into account photovoltaics within the overarching conceptual design in terms of orientation and massing, the infographic above demonstrates the reduction in overall energy demand of the proposal, providing over 50% of the electricity demand during summer and a huge saving across a 40 year period.

Shared Systems | Energy Tariff Rather than the photovoltaic panel energy being earmarked for the top level apartments a more holistic approach is to take the roofscape as being shared amongst the entire community. By sharing the capital cost of the PV across all apartments, the whole community can benefit from halving their energy bills.

Super insulatedTo achieve Passivhaus standard a u-value of 0.1W/m2K is required in order to minimise heat loss and capitalise on the benefits of using an MVHR system. The use of cross laminated timber as the structural frame and deep panels of insulation board achieve beyond this, as low as 0.08 W/m2K for the walls and roof.

Apartment types and percentage of overall massingA distributed range of 1-4 bedroom apartments, many with private external terraces.

Specific Heat DemandAchieves below 15 kWh/(m2a)Calculation performed for a full terraced block of five apartments to the South.

Section A

Modelling and calculations using THERM software

Achieving high quality architectural expression and finishes whilst mitigating fabric heat losses. Designed to achieve full height floor-to-ceiling glazing whilst eliminating thermal bridging.

As above, with 2016 fast approaching the scenarios will test the short and long term implications for a fuel poor household inhabiting a CSH Level 6 property which stipulates a low heat demand of just 39kWh/m2A for a mid terrace property. The stipulated heat demands for CSH Level 6 have been unique from any other building standard in that a sliding scale is used to specify differing specific heat demands for different typologies of buildings, for example in a detached or end terrace property where it would be difficult to achieve 39kWh/m2A, only 46kWh/m2A is required to be met.

The MacroMicro project is built to Passivhaus standard which is quickly gaining popularity in the UK as an optional high performance building standard, requiring that a heat demand of just 15kWh/m2A is met. Bere Architect’s have already displayed that an ‘affordable’ Passivhaus is within scope of the UK market and the scenarios will therefore test this standard as another solution by greatly reducing required gas heating.9

Typology Facilitating social cohesion and high performance

Typology becomes an important factor when developing a model for efficient and low cost, high performance building fabric as a means to achieving a high form factor or surface area to volume ratio. The townhouse or terrace typology fits into this model perfectly, greatly reducing the external surface area of each dwelling when compared to a semi detached or detached property of the same volume.

Friedman (2011) speaks in depth about the social, economic, environmental, architectural and future proofing advantages of the townhouse typology against others in ‘Town and Terraced Housing’. As well as being the most efficient form factor outwith high-rise flats, for multiple units the townhouse typology capitalises on the advantages of shared infrastructure costs and efficient land use. For repetitive identical units, standard components can be designed and utilised, drawing upon the economies of scale. Whilst the scenarios detailed in this thesis analyse an isolated mid-terrace unit, the savings and advantages of building in multiple adjoining units are vast, especially when localised energy production forms a holistic part of the design. [fig. 5]

As an urban planning strategy the townhouse or terrace is much more economically and socially sustainable than detached properties in their faux-isolation of suburbia [fig. 3]. From an affordable homes and fuel poverty perspective, achieving a high performance building at low cost becomes much more viable as a solution when adopting a terrace typology, and it is no coincidence that the vast numbers of period social housing schemes conform to this system. It achieves a high enough density to properly justify land use and create local communities, without the social problems inherent in very high densities of high rise flatted developments where many lessons in the 1940-70’s were learnt with a number of schemes recognised as some of the worst social housing schemes in British history.10

Bere Architects have produced a Passivhaus accredited building, the Larch House, at just £1482.35/m2, just 13.5% more than the equivalent Part L building. This was for a detached property, and the following page illustrates just what savings can be achieved solely through adopting the townhouse typology. It is worth noting that for both the Part L and Passivhaus standard buildings described in the study, the external wall buildup contributed majorly to the overall costs, 45.1% and 47.7% respectively and therefore reducing the requirement for fabric will help to achieve an ‘affordable’ model. Reducing fabric costs by a factor demonstrated by transforming the isolated MacroMicro studio to a mid terrace typology (57%) in the Bere study would reduce overall costs significantly, reducing the overall build cost to £1361.41/m2, just 5.8% more than the detached Part L example.

Whilst these costs may still appear initially fairly substantial in comparison to other recently completed social housing schemes such as the Angell Town Estate (Brixton, 2006) at a mere £850/m2 11, the Larch House cannot be directly compared. As a private, detached house, the construction does not capitalise upon the potential savings through form, typology, economies of scale and procurement route which could begin to flatten the price gap between high performance buildings and the current Part L regulations further.

9 Newman. N (2012): Passivhaus cost comparison in the context of the UK Regulation and prospective market incentives London, Bere Architects10 Jephcott. P (1971): Homes in high flats : some of the human problems involved in multi-storey housing Edinburgh, Oliver and Boyd11 Waltham Forest Council (2009): High Density Housing : Qualitative Study Urban Initiatives

14 | | 15

Underheating

It is perhaps somewhat obvious that fuel poor households would, on average, underheat their homes in order to cut back on fuel expenditure. Hirch (2011) concludes that even across all home types and income levels, users are generally quite frugal when it comes to heating their properties, with most users in the study underheating by approximately 40% of the total required energy to reach the notional optimum of 21 degrees Celsius. For the purposes of the thesis, the data for the required and actual heating will be taken from Hirch’s research, whilst the scenarios themselves will assume that the property is being heated to 21 degrees Celsius, disregarding this trend for underheating in order to model an adequately heated dwelling.

Projected fuel price rises

The scenarios will initially assess the effect of potential savings at current market energy prices at the time of writing. Energy prices have more than trebled in the last eight years, having an enormous effect on consumers fuel bills and pushing more and more households into fuel poverty. The inconvenient truth however, is that energy prices are predicted to continue to rise and therefore the scenarios will also take into account a 10 year strategy to project the potential of slipping back into fuel poverty as energy prices rise further. The National Grid paper ‘UK Future Energy Scenarios’ (2011) takes into account potential market, political and environmental influences and contains detailed predicted data for the next 10 years. The paper projects towards 2040 and beyond however states that the data beyond the next 10 years is difficult to accurately forecast and will therefore be omitted from this study.

Projected Feed-In-Tariff rates

For models which include renewable sources of energy, income at generation and export rates are correct as per tables published by the Energy Saving Trust. The Trust also provide rates over the next 10 years which shows a gradual reduction in the feed-in-tariff as more consumers begin to install these system, which are reflected in the 10 year forecasts.

Photovoltaics as an income generator

Research through the MacroMicro economic model showed that over the life of the building, the feed in tariff income from renewables generation could amount to a substantial cumulative sum. Whilst the government strive to achieve carbon reduction targets, electricity energy use can usually only be reduced through energy efficient appliances which are often outwith the scope of the expendable income of fuel poor households. It was therefore prudent to explore renewable energy sources as a valid cure to the fuel poverty issue. If electricity, a major component of household bills, is reduced or eliminated and the capital cost offset by the feed in tariff, there may be scope to safeguard against the projected huge increase in electricity prices over the forecasted 10 year period.

Dependant upon the payback period detailed within each scenario, households may quickly reach a stage where the capital cost of their renewable energy has been offset and the energy system then becomes a net generator of income for the household, offsetting any other expenditure required for space heating.

Government committal to carbon reduction

The UK government is the first to set a legally binding carbon reduction target of 80% from 1990 baseline levels by 2050 through the Climate Change Act of 2008. The Code for Sustainable Homes will hope to contribute towards this goal through the 2016 target for ‘zero carbon homes’, though the integrity of the standard has arguably already been compromised through the use of ‘Allowable Solutions’ whereby developers can meet their net zero carbon target in a number of ways, including investing in off-site renewable energy development.

The CSH Level 6 guidelines at present are to achieve a maximum carbon output of 11kg/m2A of CO2 per dwelling and each of the scenarios has been benchmarked against this to see how they fare against the 2016 levels. This will help to determine whether or not the scenarios represent realistic solutions against the CSH criteria in the case of new build homes, which will form a regulatory requirement from 2016.

£20.00

£40.00

£60.00

£80.00

£100.00

£120.00

£0.00

������

2013

2020

2013

2020

2013

2020

2013

2020

2013

2020

2013

2020

2013

2020

2013

2020

2013

2020

2013

2020

2013

2020

Gas

Electricity

Fuel Poverty Threshold

Fuel Expenditure

Carbon Emissions

2016 Carbon Threshold - 11kg/m2A

Comparison of current and future fuel bills for each scenario against carbon output

40.0kg/m2A

36.5kg/m2A

33.7kg/m2A

30.2kg/m2A

27.0kg/m2A

23.8kg/m2A

25.1kg/m2A

21.5kg/m2A

20.7kg/m2A

21.1kg/m2A

17.5kg/m2A

Affordable Homes Programme

[fig 6.] Authors Own

16 | | 17

7,874kWh

98kWh/m2A2500kWh

5.0% of expenditure

5.2% of expenditure

£30.19/month

£31.52/month

£600

/mon

th5.0% of expenditure£30.19/month

£31.52/month 5.2% of expenditure2020

£47.92/month 7.9% of expenditure

7.6% of expenditure£45.58/monthincrease of £15.39/month

increase of £16.40/month

extreme fuel poverty

fuel poverty line

FUEL POOR?

YESFUEL POOR?

YES

80m

2Energy Requirements

Expenditure

total heating requirements

total power requirements

Scenario 3CSH Level 4

per annum

per annum

7,874kWh

98kWh/m2A2500kWh

5.0% of expenditure£30.19/month

£600

/mon

th

5.0% of expenditure£30.19/month£9.96/month 1.1% of expenditure

2020£15.40/month 2.5% of expenditure

7.4% of expenditure£45.58/month

extreme fuel poverty

fuel poverty line

FUEL POOR?

NOFUEL POOR?

NO

1710kWh offset by PV

790kWh shortfall£9.96/month 1.1% of expenditure

PV Income - £22.00/month

£22.00/month income

PV Income - £14.86/month

80m

2

Energy Requirements

Expenditure

total heating requirements

total power requirements

Scenario 3.3CSH Level 4 + 1.8kWp PV

per annum

per annum

[fig 7.] Affordable Homes Programme - Fuel Poor even at current fuel prices,Authors Own

[fig 8.] Affordable Homes Programme - Microgeneration as solution?Authors Own

Findings of the study

Fuel Poverty and the Affordable Homes Programme

As discussed in the introduction, the Affordable Homes Programme will aim to build 85,000 new affordable homes before the 2016 zero carbon legislation comes into effect. Whilst nationally the Level 4 does not need to be achieved by developers of private lettings, the Homes and Communities Agency will require all housing under the programme to meet Level 4.

As Scenario 3 demonstrates, the Level 4 home does not bring the household out of fuel poverty even within the first year of occupation, with only a 15% reduction in heating demand from the equivalent period property with solid walls. This should be seen as worrying from the perspective of potential tenants and local authorities, as once future potential fuel price rises are factored in for 2020, the homeowners approach 16% of their income being on fuel bills, quickly approaching the definition of ‘extremely fuel poor’, spending 20% of their income on bills.

What quickly became apparent at this stage is that a substantial improvement in heating demand does not necessarily equate to vastly lower fuel bills. The fact that per kWh, electricity is almost three times more expensive than gas means that a saving on electricity is worth three times that of a saving on gas consumption. Whilst the government may not necessarily subscribe to this view as the largest carbon savings can be made through reducing heat demand, it is important to view the issue from the initial problem of ‘eradicating fuel poverty’.

A photovoltaic system was added to the CSH Level 4 scenario in order to gauge the effect that renewables generation may have on a household’s bills. Whilst this may result in a significant initial capital cost, the benefits are that as stated previously. Each kWh saved through on site electricity generation equates to 3 kWh saved through fabric means and since the energy is generated through renewables, forms a carbon offset. In addition to this, the feed-in-tariff would begin to add to the household’s overall income, allowing the fuel poverty threshold to increase slightly if required.

The photovoltaic system was increased in power incrementally, beginning at 0.5kWp until the scenario displayed that the household would not be fuel poor in 2020. Identified was that a minimum 1.8kWp system would need to be deployed in order to reap the necessary savings required. Whilst this brought the household out of fuel poverty over the next 10 years, providing cumulative savings and FITs income of £5227.47, after 10 years the household is back to being dangerously close to being ‘fuel’ poor, albeit with a small supplemental income from the Feed-In-Tariff.

‘Fabric First’ or Microgeneration?

The previous scenario suggests that a ‘fabric-first’ approach eventually becomes a prerequisite for eliminating fuel poverty, even with a substantial addition of PV.

To test this theory, the initial period property with an enormous heating demand of 189kWh/m2 was fitted with enough PV to completely eliminate the requirement for buying electricity. A 3kWp system was added to the model, resulting in a substantial monthly income of £38.19, reducing to £23.12 in 2020. Whilst this meant that the household was comfortably above the fuel poverty threshold, even in 2020, this was simply an extreme example of highlighting the benefits of adding renewables over increasing fabric performance.

Whilst the 3kWp system would pay for itself over 9 years with the cumulative income and savings, the initial capital cost of £7,500 would be an expensive addition to any affordable home development when factored into each household, though for those in the higher income brackets experiencing fuel poverty it could be seen to be a worthwhile investment. What is interesting is that of all the scenarios modelled, the carbon offset of producing all required electricity through microgeneration actually means that this scenario produced the lowest carbon emissions of any of the scenarios, even when coupled with a poor performance building fabric and therefore high heating demand.

To test this further, both the CSH Level 6, mandatory from 2016, and the Passivhaus standard were modelled in order to quantify the effects of greatly reducing heating demand, compared to using the microgeneration method as the sole means of reducing the household’s fuel bills.

18 | | 19

2,880kWh36kWh/m2A2500kWh1.84% of expenditure

5.2% of expenditure

£11.04/month

£31.52/month

£600

/mon

th

1.8% of expenditure£11.04/month

£31.52/month 5.2% of expenditure2020

£47.92/month 7.9% of expenditure

2.7% of expenditure£16.67/monthincrease of £5.63/month

increase of £16.40/month

extreme fuel poverty

fuel poverty line

FUEL POOR?

NOFUEL POOR?

YES

80m

Energy Requirements

Expenditure

total heating requirementstotal power requirements

Scenario 4CSH Level 62

per annumper annum

[fig 9.] CSH Level 6Authors Own

As shown below, although the CSH Level 6 [fig. 6] dwelling reduces the heating demand from Level 4 significantly, bringing the household below the fuel poverty threshold, by 2020 the household slips back into fuel poverty, the main culprit being the expense of electricity which represents a 7.8% expenditure of income by itself. The assumed household would have to increase it’s income by at least £1200 per annum in order to edge above the fuel poverty line.

In order to test this further, the Passivhaus standard is modelled in order to see if a non-fuel poor scenario can be achieved through reduced heating demand alone [fig. 7].

It is worth noting that as per the assumptions, the total electricity requirements for the identified income bracket is much lower than the UK average of 3,300kWh, which would represent a 10.5% expenditure on electricity alone for a household without any renewable offset source by 2020. Clearly, the predicted rise in electricity prices warrant that microgeneration should form at least some component of the on-site standard for the CSH, as the Allowable Solutions currently dictate that the ‘net zero carbon’ status can be achieved through off-site measures, which do not contribute directly to the development.

Whilst the Affordable Homes Programme is earmarked for project completion on all 85,000 homes by 2015, the government has already predicted that this is unlikely to be achieved due to over half of the projects set to be completed in the final year of the programme. From the initial findings of the scenarios, unless the CSH Level 4 is supplemented heavily by on-site renewable energy sources, the government can expect the majority of homes within the lower income deciles to be fuel poor, even from year one. What may be essential is to ensure projects which are not completed by 2016 actually adhere to the CSH Level 6 criteria in order that the vastly lower heating demand is capitalised upon in order to help those homes most likely to be affected.

The investment in a high performance building fabric becomes a worthwhile investment when the design life of these products are taken into account. Whilst most modern insulated wall systems are typically designed to a 60 year life, the relatively new influx of domestic based photovoltaic systems means that there is not yet a precedent for long term performance of these systems, though a 20-25 year design life can be typically expected with a 1% efficiency drop over each year.

Microgeneration - The Variable MonthThe social implications of a highly variable fuel bill

Using photovoltaics as both a source of energy and a small source of income, whilst eliminates fuel poverty in many of the scenarios over the course of each year, comes with an added responsibility from the point of an income-expenditure variable from month to month. Solar energy cannot be guaranteed and is output greatly affected by both the weather and the seasonal changes in the sun’s zenith.

From the adjacent graph [fig. 10] illustrating the monthly income-expenditure cycle for Scenario 4.2, we can see that whilst in the summer months the occupants would receive a net profit from the system, the winter months result in electricity bills in excess of £20. Balancing this from month to month will ultimately be the responsibility of the occupants and an awareness of the predicted bills for the winter months will help them to take advantage of the decreased expenditure in the summer to compensate.

For photovoltaics, the fluctuating changes of energy production throughout the seasons are somewhat of a peak and trough scenario. Whilst in the summer a household can expect to completely null their energy bills through high electricity offset and increased income, the opposite can be said of winter where both a decreased offset and overall lower FITs income provide two extremes which financially may be difficult to mange for a fuel poor household which may see their additional expendable income spent elsewhere during the summer months whilst continuing to behave as a ‘fuel poor’ household in winter. The danger with this model is that it may have a detrimental effect to the ambitions on the model by modifying user behaviour. Due to the presumption that if the household is heated adequately during winter the occupants may experience a series of high bills over these months, the users may opt to underheat their homes instead, effectively rendering the energy model put in place redundant.

£20.00 20kWh

£30.00 30kWh

£40.00 40kWh

£50.00 50kWh

£60.00 60kWh

£70.00 70kWh

Monthly Electricity Expenditure

Monthly Fuel Expenditure

���������

£0.00

£10.00 10kWh

������PV OutputkWh/month

Fuel Poor Month

Fuel Poor Month

Fuel Poor Month

Fuel Poverty Threshold

J F M A M J J A S O N D

[fig 10.] The variable month - monthly fuel expenditure plotted against varied photovoltaic production.Authors Own

20 | | 21

The graph below [fig. 11] describes these monthly cycles for Scenario 4.1 whereby a small PV system (0.5kWp) is incorporated. A smaller system exhibits the variation most notably and results in the winter months to be considered ‘fuel poor’ months, even though the net result over the year can be considered to be a non-fuel poor household.

Passivhaus Ultra high performance building fabric - is it enough?

Whilst Passivhaus manages to scrape under the fuel poverty threshold at 2020, it is questionable whether or not the increased performance and subsequent heating demand of Passivhaus is worth the additional capital expenditure. It is clear that Passivhaus helps to greatly reduce expenditure on gas fuel but the significance of electricity expenditure in 2020, forming more than 8% of the household’s total income, warrants that the additional capital cost could be well spent on attempting to reduce this. The scenario’s electricity consumption is some 25% lower than the national average12

and a typical energy consumption would exasperate the large cost of electricity even further. An electricity demand at the national average, plus the additional energy consumption of an MVHR unit would represent an 11.4% of expenditure for the household, resulting in a fuel poor situation at 2020 even without space heating. It should be noted that for the scenario modelled, the primary energy consumption for both electricity and heating still came in at a mere 3962kWh/year, far below the Passivhaus criteria of 9600kWh (120kWh/m2A).

Although the Passivhaus presents a clear long term investment for ultra-low energy homes, it seems evident that for the fuel poor market the Code for Sustainable Homes Level 6 will present stringent enough criteria for local authorities targeting fuel poor households.

Accreditation for Passivhaus is notoriously expensive and many projects in the UK now opt to build to the standard without seeking accreditation. From a standards perspective it will be interesting to see how Passivhaus fares once 2016 comes into effect. The Passivhaus standard does not meet the carbon limit for new homes by reducing heating demand alone and therefore renewables will form have to form at least part of any new Passivhaus development, providing a much more robust model for preventing fuel poverty; although perhaps obfuscating the need to achieve an ultra low heating demand.

12 Ofgem: Typical domestic energy consumption (2011)

-£10.00

-£5.00

£0.00

£5.00

£10.00

-£25.00

-£20.00

-£15.00

Net Monthly Income

+£

-£Net Monthly ExpenditureJ F M A M J J A S O N D

[fig 11.] Income-expenditure cycle for Scenario 4.1Authors Own

Addressing the existing housing stock

Clearly, the fact that a CSH Level 4 home is unable to bring the typical fuel poor household out of fuel poverty warrants that more than simple loft or cavity wall insulation is required. Whilst a short term solution would be to invest in small scale, on-site renewable electricity generation, the retrofit to a more stringent standard will become paramount to the vast existing housing stock in order to prevent thousands of more households falling into fuel poverty in light of the anticipated fuel price rises.

Of all the modelled scenarios, with exception to Passivhaus, those which did not exhibit fuel poverty by 2020 were supplemented by PV of various sizes dependent upon fabric performance. Therefore, a priority should be placed on reducing the amount of grid bought electricity within households whilst continuing to improve the thermal efficiency of both new and existing housing stock as a longer term solution.

Despite photovoltaics being a relatively expensive addition to any household, the 3:1 ratio described earlier whereby even pound spent on reducing electricity consumption is worth three times that spent on reducing gas expenditure makes the option of renewables a valid short term solution to the fuel poverty crisis, which on average paid for themselves within the first 8 years.

If homeowners and landlords are convinced, the Green Deal may be an option to achieve this, although there have already been a number of criticisms made in regards to why consumers may be turned off in regards to the high interest rate and initial assessment costs, especially for those within the lower income brackets.

The Fuel Poverty Advisory Group’s 2012 report suggests that a formidable way of funding these improvements is to recycle a proportion of the Carbon Tax Revenue back to fuel poor consumers through insulation measures, which France and Estonia have already agreed to implement.13 It also recognises that upgrading the full refurbishment of fuel poor properties could provide up to 71,000 semi-skilled construction jobs by 2015. Eradicating fuel poverty would help to alleviate strain on the NHS through illness brought on by underheated homes and would form a long term solution to those currently claiming either Winter Fuel, Warm Home or Cold Weather benefits. The Chief Medical Officer’s Report

13 Fuel Poverty Advisory Group (2012): Tenth Annual Report

15kWh/m2A2762kWh 0.8% of expenditure£4.60/month

£600

/mon

th

5.0% of expenditure£30.19/month

£34.82/month 5.8% of expenditure

2020£52.98/month 8.8% of expenditure

1.2% of expenditure£6.95/month

extreme fuel poverty

fuel poverty line

FUEL POOR?

NO

5.8% of expenditure£34.82/month 262kWh MVHR Consumption

1,200kWh

FUEL POOR?

NO

80m

Energy Requirements

Expenditure

total heating requirementstotal power requirements

Scenario 5Passivhaus2

per annumper annum

[fig 12.] Passivhaus

22 | | 23

from 2009 states that winter related illness due to cold private housing costs the NHS an estimated £859m and that investing £1 in keeping homes warm saved the NHS 42 pence in health costs.

Summary

It is evident that there is a shift in priorities required in order to achieve a correct balance between fabric and microgeneration led approaches to cater to the requirements of fuel poor households rather than the wider housing markets’. In cases of extreme fuel poverty and those living in minimally insulated period properties it may be prudent to invest in microgeneration immediately to prevent the household from rapidly falling back into fuel poverty as electricity prices rise; increasing fabric performance by a small factor is financially illogical. Achieving an air tightness and envelope performance to at least that of CSH Level 6 will be essential to ensure a long term solution as the heating demand achieved by CSH Level 4 does not represent a viable method of preventing fuel poverty, costing the occupants an enormous £45.58 per month at 2020 forecast rates.

For new build homes, it is clear that the CSH Level 4 criteria does not present a robust case for new homes hoping to tackle fuel poverty. The CSH Level 6 criteria however, do begin to tip the balance into the right direction. Whilst stipulating a specfic heating demand, increasing the capital cost by a small amount over an equivalent Level 4 home, the low level of heating demand achieved means that gas bills in 2020 represent just 2% of the household income (£16.67), allowing the savings on gas to be invested in providing solar energy once grid parity has been achieved or the price of solar energy greatly reduced. According to the Swanson effect, photovoltaics are both increasing in efficiency and decreasing in cost exponentially14. The cost of producing electricity is quickly approaching parity with grid produced electricity, with the EPIA predicting that grid parity may be achieved as near as 2020 in the UK.15

“Solar power will be able to compete without subsidies against conventional power sources in half the world by 2015”16

-Shi Zhengrong

This may come as a long term reassurance and actually swing favour towards the ‘fabric first’ approach, with photovoltaics becoming a more desirable solution once prices drop further and efficiencies increase. However, the benefit to fuel poor households in the current economic climate is that the Feed In Tariff becomes an often significant net source of income relative to current income. Justification for a ‘fabric first’ led approach is that high performance building fabric and airtightness are generally difficult and more costly to retrofit, especially when compared to the plug and play nature of solar generation installations.

Both short term and long term, the installation of photovoltaics becomes a viable option and in the long term may actually be required to eradicate fuel poverty in the income group identified, regardless of heat demand, due to forecast electricity costs. What is clear is that whilst 2016 stipulates a stringent enough standard of fabric performance, the fuel market is difficult to predict and solutions will need to be tailored to current market conditions to provide a solid enough buffer against worst case scenario fuel prices; to both deal with the existing fuel poverty crisis and safeguard against other homes falling into the same poverty trap.

Ultimately, the funding of such improvements will determine the sucess or failure of the goal to eradicate fuel poverty. The recycling of the Carbon Tax revenue into subsidising such improvements will be paramount as current subsidised improvements are simply not enough to pull the worst affected households out of the poverty trap.

Whilst the forecast energy prices and current housing stock are usually discussed with an air of pessimism and gloom, the future of new housing and the potential for solar generation for all, with proper support, provide a very real solution to the fuel poverty crisis.

-14 The Economist Online: http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2012/12/daily-chart-19 [Accessed 14/4/13]15 European Photovoltaic Industry Association (2012) - Solar Photovoltaics Competing in the Energy Sector

16 Mark Clifford (2012). “China’s visible solar power success”. MarketWatch

Scenarios

No Action

Scenario 1 - 3kWp PV 2013: Not Fuel Poor2020: Not Fuel Poor

Scenario 2 - 1kWp PV2013: Not Fuel Poor2020: Fuel Poor

Scenario 3 - CSH Level 42013: Fuel Poor2020: Fuel Poor

Scenario 3.1 - CSH Level 4 + 1kWp PV2013: Not Fuel Poor2020: Fuel Poor

Scenario 3.2 - CSH Level 4 + 1.5kWp PV2013: Not Fuel Poor2020: Fuel Poor

Scenario 3.3 - CSH Level 4 + 1.8kWp PV2013: Not Fuel Poor2020: Not Fuel Poor

Scenario 4 - CSH Level 62013: Not Fuel Poor2020: Fuel Poor

Scenario 4.1 - CSH Level 6 + 0.5kWp PV2013: Not Fuel Poor2020: Not Fuel Poor

Scenario 4.2 - CSH Level 6 + 1kWp PV2013: Not Fuel Poor2020: Not Fuel Poor

Scenario 5 - Passivhaus2013: Not Fuel Poor2020: Not Fuel Poor

24 | | 25

No Action

15,1

46kW

h

9,26

4kW

h

actu

al h

eatin

g18

9kW

h/m

2A

tota

l pow

er re

quire

men

ts

2500

kWh

5.6%

of e

xpen

ditu

re

5.2%

of e

xpen

ditu

re

tota

l hea

ting

requ

irem

ents

to re

ach

21 d

egre

es C

elci

us

£35.

51/m

onth

£31.

52/m

onth

£58.

05/m

onth

9.67

% o

f exp

endi

ture

unde

rhea

ting

per a

nnum

per a

nnum

per a

nnum

FUE

L P

OO

R?

£600/month5.

6% o

f exp

endi

ture

£35.

51/m

onth

£31.

52/m

onth

5.2%

of e

xpen

ditu

re20

20£4

7.92

/mon

th7.

9% o

f exp

endi

ture

8.94

% o

f exp

endi

ture

£53.

62/m

onth

incr

ease

of £

18.1

1/m

onth

incr

ease

of £

16.4

0/m

onth

extre

me

fuel

pov

erty

fuel

pov

erty

line

Ene

rgy

Req

uire

men

ts

No

Act

ion

Exp

endi

ture

YE

SFU

EL

PO

OR

?

YE

S

80m2

No

Act

ion

Ass

umpt

ions

Ener

gy P

rice

s

Size

80m

2G

as0.

046

£/kW

hRe

nt£7

9.00

/wee

kEl

ectr

icity

0.15

13£/

kWh

Hea

ting

Req

15,1

46kW

h£6

96.7

2Pe

r A

nnum

Hea

ting

Act

ual

9,26

4kW

h£4

26.1

4Pe

r A

nnum

2020

Gas

0.06

946

£/kW

hPo

wer

2500

kWh

£378

.25

Per

Ann

um20

20El

ectr

icity

0.23

£/kW

hIn

com

e£1

50.0

0/w

eek

Curr

ent P

rice

s10

Yea

r Ca

rbon

Out

put

Co2

(ton

nes)

kgkg

/m2 A

Gas

(Req

)£6

96.7

2pe

r an

num

£58.

06pe

r m

onth

Gas

9264

018

.818

8123

.512

5G

as (a

ctua

l)£4

26.1

4pe

r an

num

£35.

51pe

r m

onth

Elec

tric

ity25

000

13.2

1318

16.4

75El

ectr

icity

£378

.25

per

annu

m£3

1.52

per

mon

thTo

tal

32.0

39.9

875

Ref:h

ttp:

//w

ww

.car

boni

ndep

ende

nt.o

rg/

Fore

cast

(202

0)G

as (R

eq)

£1,0

52.0

4pe

r an

num

£87.

67pe

r m

onth

Gas

(act

ual)

643.

4774

4pe

r an

num

£53.

62pe

r m

onth

Elec

tric

ity£5

75.0

0pe

r an

num

£47.

92pe

r m

onth

Gas

(Req

)£2

9.61

incr

ease

G

as (a

ctua

l)£1

8.11

incr

ease

El

ectr

icity

£16.

40in

crea

se

Prev

ious

Fore

cast

Mon

thly

Inco

me

£600

.00

Mon

thly

Inco

me

£600

.00

Elec

tric

ity C

ost

£31.

525.

25%

Elec

tric

ity C

ost

£47.

927.

99%

Gas

Cos

t (A

ctua

l)£3

5.51

5.92

%G

as C

ost (

Act

ual)

£53.

628.

94%

Bala

nce

£532

.97

Bala

nce

£498

.46

-11.

17%

-16.

92%

FUEL

PO

OR

FUEL

PO

OR

and

unde

rhea

ting

and

unde

rhea

ting

26 | | 27

Ass

umpt

ions

Ener

gy P

rice

s

Size

80m

2G

as0.

046

£/kW

hG

ener

atio

n Ta

riff

£0.1

544

per

kWh

Rent

£79.

00/w

eek

Elec

tric

ity0.

1513

£/kW

hEx

port

Tar

iff£0

.046

4pe

r kW

hH

eatin

g Re

q15

,146

kWh

£696

.72

Per

Ann

um20

20G

ener

atio

n Ta

riff

£0.1

043

per

kWh

Hea

ting

Act

ual

9,26

4kW

h£4

26.1

4Pe

r A

nnum

2020

Gas

0.06

946

£/kW

h20

20Ex

port

Tar

iff£0

.046

4pe

r kW

hPo

wer

2500

kWh

£378

.25

Per

Ann

um20

20El

ectr

icity

0.23

£/kW

hIn

com

e£1

50.0

0/w

eek

Scen

ario

13k

Wp

PV S

yste

m in

stal

led

FITs

Inco

me

Savi

ngs

10 Y

ear

Carb

on O

utpu

tCo

2 (t

onne

s)kg

kg/m

2 APV

GIS

Dat

a fo

r D

unde

e st

ates

pro

duct

ion

at28

60kW

h£4

41.5

8Pe

r A

nnum

£378

.25

PAG

as92

640

18.8

118

8123

.512

5Ex

cess

360

kWh

£16.

70Pe

r A

nnum

Savi

ngs

plus

inco

me

Elec

tric

ity-3

600

-1.9

-190

-2.3

75 (a

ppro

x, h

ttp:

//w

ww

.the

ecoe

xper

ts.c

o.uk

/how

-muc

h-do

-sol

ar-p

anel

s-co

st-u

k) C

ost

£7,5

00.0

0£4

58.2

9Pe

r A

nnum

£836

.54

PATo

tal

16.9

121

.137

5Re

f:htt

p://

ww

w.c

arbo

nind

epen

dent

.org

/PV

Off

set

Cum

ulat

ive

inco

me

+ sa

ving

sCu

mul

ativ

e in

com

e on

ly28

6015

1018

.875

1£8

36.5

41

£458

.29

new

tota

l2.

2625

2£1

,673

.08

2£9

16.5

83

£2,5

09.6

13

£1,3

74.8

64

£3,3

46.1

54

£1,8

33.1

55

£4,1

82.6

95

£2,2

91.4

46

£5,0

19.2

36

£2,7

49.7

37

£5,8

55.7

77

£3,2

08.0

28

£6,6

92.3

08

£3,6

66.3

09

£7,5

28.8

4PV

PA

ID F

OR

9£4

,124

.59

PV P

AID

FO

R10

£8,3

65.3

810

£4,5

82.8

8

Prof

it ov

er 1

0 ye

ars

(inco

me

+ sa

ving

s - P

V co

st)

£865

.38

Hea

ting

cost

s ov

er 1

0 ye

ars

(at c

urre

nt p

rice

s)£6

,967

.16

(Req

)£4

,261

.44

(Act

ual)

Hea

ting

cost

s ov

er 1

0 ye

ars

(+11

% r

ise

in p

rice

s)£7

,663

.88

(Req

)£6

96.7

2m

ore

£4,6

87.5

8(A

ctua

l)£4

26.1

4m

ore

Econ

omic

s10

Yea

r Fo

reca

stPr

evio

usM

onth

ly In

com

e£6

00.0

0£6

23.1

2M

onth

ly In

com

e£6

00.0

0El

ectr

icity

Cos

t£0

.00

Elec

tric

ity C

ost

£31.

52G

as C

ost (

Act

ual)

£35.

515.

92%

plus

fore

cast

£53.

628.

40%

Gas

Cos

t (A

ctua

l)£3

5.51

Mon

thly

Inco

me

from

PV

£38.

196.

37%

plus

fore

cast

£23.

123.

85%

Mon

thly

Sav

ings

from

PV

£31.

52Ba

lanc

e£6

34.2

0in

clud

ing

savi

ngs

Bala

nce

£532

.97

5.70

%-1

1.17

%

Bala

nce

£602

.68

excl

udin

g sa

ving

sBa

lanc

e£5

69.5

00.

45%

-5.0

8%

Fuel

poo

r af

ter

year

1N

OFu

el p

oor

afte

r ye

ar 1

0N

O

Scenario 13kWp PV

Ass

umpt

ions

Ener

gy P

rice

s

Size

80m

2G

as0.

046

£/kW

hG

ener

atio

n Ta

riff

£0.1

544

per

kWh

Rent

£79.

00/w

eek

Elec

tric

ity0.

1513

£/kW

hEx

port

Tar

iff£0

.046

4pe

r kW

hH

eatin

g Re

q15

,146

kWh

£696

.72

Per

Ann

um20

20G

ener

atio

n Ta

riff

£0.1

0pe

r kW

hH

eatin

g A

ctua

l9,

264

kWh

£426

.14

Per

Ann

um20

20G

as0.

0694

6£/

kWh

2020

Expo

rt T

ariff

£0.0

464

per

kWh

Pow

er25

00kW

h£3

78.2

5Pe

r A

nnum

2020

Elec

tric

ity0.

23£/

kWh

Inco

me

£150

.00

/wee

k

Scen

ario

20.

5kW

p PV

Sys

tem

inst

alle

dFI

Ts In

com

eSa

ving

s10

Yea

r Ca

rbon

Out

put

Co2

(ton

nes)

kgkg

/m2 A

PVG

IS D

ata

for

Dun

dee

stat

es p

rodu

ctio

n at

476

kWh

£73.

49Pe

r A

nnum

£72.

02PA

Gas

9264

018

.81

1881

23.5

125

Shor

tfal

l20

24kW

h£0

.00

Per

Ann

umSa

ving

s pl

us in

com

eEl

ectr

icity

2024

010

.67

1067

13.3

375

(app

rox,

htt

p://

ww

w.t

heec

oexp

erts

.co.

uk/h

ow-m

uch-

do-s

olar

-pan

els-

cost

-uk)

Cos

t£1

,250

.00

£73.

49Pe

r A

nnum

£145

.51

PATo

tal

29.4

836

.85

Ref:

http

://w

ww

.car

boni

ndep

ende

nt.o

rg/

offs

et47

625

03.

125

Cum

ulat

ive

inco

me

+ sa

ving

sCu

mul

ativ

e in

com

e on

lyne

w to

tal

33.7

251

£145

.51

1£7

3.49

2£2

91.0

32

£146

.99

3£4

36.5

43

£220

.48

4£5

82.0

54

£293

.98

5£7

27.5

75

£367

.47

6£8

73.0

86

£440

.97

7£1

,018

.59

7£5

14.4

68

£1,1

64.1

18

£587

.96

9£1

,309

.62

PV P

AID

FO

R9

£661

.45

10£1

,455

.13

10£7

34.9

411

£808

.44

Prof

it ov

er 1

0 ye

ars

(inco

me

+ sa

ving

s - P

V co

st)

£205

.13

12£8

81.9

3H

eatin

g co

sts

over

10

year

s (a

t cur

rent

pri

ces)

£6,9

67.1

6(R

eq)

13£9

55.4

3£4

,261

.44

(Act

ual)

14£1

,028

.92

Hea

ting

cost

s ov

er 1

0 ye

ars

(+11

% r

ise

in p

rice

s)£7

,663

.88

(Req

)£6

96.7

2m

ore

15£1

,102

.42

£4,6

87.5

8(A

ctua

l)£4

26.1

4m

ore

16£1

,175

.91

Shor

tfal

l Ele

ctri

city

Cos

ts£3

,062

.31

17£1

,249

.40

18£1

,322

.90

PV P

AID

FO

R

Econ

omic

s10

Yea

r Fo

reca

stPr

evio

usM

onth

ly In

com

e£6

00.0

0£6

04.1

4M

onth

ly In

com

e£6

00.0

0U

nuse

d Fi

eld

£0.0

0El

ectr

icity

Cos

t£3

1.52

Gas

Cos

t (A

ctua

l)£3

5.51

5.92

%£5

3.62

8.88

%G

as C

ost (

Act

ual)

£35.

51M

onth

ly In

com

e fr

om P

V£6

.12

£4.1

4M

onth

ly S

avin

gs fr

om P

V£6

.00

Shor

tfal

l Ele

ctri

city

Cos

ts£2

5.52

4.25

%£3

8.79

6.42

%Ba

lanc

e£5

51.0

9in

clud

ing

savi

ngs

Bala

nce

£532

.97

-8.1

5%-1

1.17

%

Bala

nce

£545

.09

excl

udin

g sa

ving

s£5

11.7

2-9

.15%

-14.

71%

Fuel

poo

r af

ter

year

1N

OFu

el p

oor

afte

r ye

ar 1

0YE

S

Scenario 1.10.5kWp PV

28 | | 29

Ass

umpt

ions

Ener

gy P

rice

s

Size

80m

2G

as0.

046

£/kW

hG

ener

atio

n Ta

riff

£0.1

544

per

kWh

Rent

£79.

00/w

eek

Elec

tric

ity0.

1513

£/kW

hEx

port

Tar

iff£0

.046

4pe

r kW

hH

eatin

g Re

q15

,146

kWh

£696

.72

Per

Ann

um20

20G

ener

atio

n Ta

riff

£0.1

0pe

r kW

hH

eatin

g A

ctua

l9,

264

kWh

£426

.14

Per

Ann

um20

20G

as0.

0694

6£/

kWh

2020

Expo

rt T

ariff

£0.0

464

per

kWh

Pow

er25

00kW

h£3

78.2

5Pe

r A

nnum

2020

Elec

tric

ity0.

23£/

kWh

Inco

me

£150

.00

/wee

k

Scen

ario

21k

Wp

PV S

yste

m in

stal

led

FITs

Inco

me

Savi

ngs

10 Y

ear

Carb

on O

utpu

tCo

2 (t

onne

s)kg

kg/m

2 APV

GIS

Dat

a fo

r D

unde

e st

ates

pro

duct

ion

at95

2kW

h£1

46.9

9Pe

r A

nnum

£378

.25

PAG

as92

640

18.8

118

8123

.512

5Sh

ortf

all

1548

kWh

£0.0

0Pe

r A

nnum

Savi

ngs

plus

inco

me

Elec

tric

ity15

480

8.16

816

10.2

(app

rox,

htt

p://

ww

w.t

heec

oexp

erts

.co.

uk/h

ow-m

uch-

do-s

olar

-pan

els-

cost

-uk)

Cos

t£2

,500

.00

£146

.99

Per

Ann

um£5

25.2

4PA

Tota

l26

.97

33.7

125

Ref:

http

://w

ww

.car

boni

ndep

ende

nt.o

rg/

offs

et50

06.

25Cu

mul

ativ

e in

com

e +

savi

ngs

Cum

ulat

ive

inco

me

only

952

new

tota

l27

.462

51

£525

.24

1£1

46.9

92

£1,0

50.4

82

£293

.98

3£1

,575

.72

3£4

40.9

74

£2,1

00.9

64

£587

.96

5£2

,626

.19

PV P

AID

FO

R5

£734

.94

6£3

,151

.43

6£8

81.9

37

£3,6

76.6

77

£1,0

28.9

28

£4,2

01.9

18

£1,1

75.9

19

£4,7

27.1

59

£1,3

22.9

010

£5,2

52.3

910

£1,4

69.8

911

£1,6

16.8

8Pr

ofit

over

10

year

s (in

com

e +

savi

ngs

- PV

cost

)£2

,752

.39

12£1

,763

.87

Hea

ting

cost

s ov

er 1

0 ye

ars

(at c

urre

nt p

rice

s)£6

,967

.16

(Req

)13

£1,9

10.8

5£4

,261

.44

(Act

ual)

14£2

,057

.84

Hea

ting

cost

s ov

er 1

0 ye

ars

(+11

% r

ise

in p

rice

s)£7

,663

.88

(Req

)£6

96.7

2m

ore

15£2

,204

.83

£4,6

87.5

8(A

ctua

l)£4

26.1

4m

ore

16£2

,351

.82

Shor

tfal

l Ele

ctri

city

Cos

ts£2

,342

.12

17£2

,498

.81

18£2

,645

.80

PV P

AID

FO

R

Econ

omic

s10

Yea

r Fo

reca

stPr

evio

usM

onth

ly In

com

e£6

00.0

0£6

12.2

5£6

08.2

7M

onth

ly In

com

e£6

00.0

0U

nuse

d Fi

eld

£0.0

0El

ectr

icity

Cos

t£3

1.52

Gas

Cos

t (A

ctua

l)£3

5.51

5.80

%£5

3.62

8.82

%G

as C

ost (

Act

ual)

£35.

51M

onth

ly In

com

e fr

om P

V£1

2.25

£8.2

71.

36%

Mon

thly

Sav

ings

from

PV

£31.

52Sh

ortf

all E

lect

rici

ty C

osts

£19.

523.

19%

£29.

674.

88%

Bala

nce

£588

.74

incl

udin

g sa

ving

sBa

lanc

e£5

32.9

7-1

.88%

-11.

17%

Bala

nce

£557

.22

excl

udin

g sa

ving

s£5

24.9

8-7

.13%

-12.

50%

Fuel

poo

r af

ter

year

1N

OFu

el p

oor

afte

r ye

ar 1

0YE

S

Scenario 21kWp PV

30 | | 31

Scenario 3 - CSH Level 4

7,87

4kW

h

98kW

h/m

2A25

00kW

h

5.0%

of e

xpen

ditu

re

5.2%

of e

xpen

ditu

re

£30.

19/m

onth

£31.

52/m

onth

£600/month5.

0% o

f exp

endi

ture

£30.

19/m

onth

£31.

52/m

onth

5.2%

of e

xpen

ditu

re20

20£4

7.92

/mon

th7.

9% o

f exp

endi

ture

7.6%

of e

xpen

ditu

re£4

5.58

/mon

thin

crea

se o

f £15

.39/

mon

th

incr

ease

of £

16.4

0/m

onth

extre

me

fuel

pov

erty

fuel

pov

erty

line

FUE

L P

OO

R?

YE

SFU

EL

PO

OR

?

YE

S

80m2

Ene

rgy

Req

uire

men

ts

Exp

endi

ture

tota

l hea

ting

requ

irem

ents

tota

l pow

er re

quire

men

ts

Sce

nario

3C

SH

Lev

el 4

per a

nnum

per a

nnum

Ass

umpt

ions

Ener

gy P

rice

s

Size

80m

2G

as0.

046

£/kW

hRe

nt£7

9.00

/wee

kEl

ectr

icity

0.15

13£/

kWh

Hea

ting

Req

15,1

46kW

h£6

96.7

2Pe

r A

nnum

Hea

ting

Act

ual

9,26

4kW

h£4

26.1

4Pe

r A

nnum

2020

Gas

0.06

946

£/kW

hPo

wer

2500

kWh

£378

.25

Per

Ann

um20

20El

ectr

icity

0.23

£/kW

hIn

com

e£1

50.0

0/w

eek

61.1

6%

Scen

ario

3ht

tp:/

/ww

w.s

usta

inab

leho

mes

.co.

uk/b

log/

bid/

1041

36/C

ode-

for-

Sust

aina

ble-

Hom

es-le

vel-4

-ene

rgy-

bill-

savi

ngs

Hea

ting

dem

and

redu

ced

to C

SH L

evel

4Co

sts

Savi

ngs

10 Y

ear

Carb

on O

utpu

tCo

2 (t

onne

s)1

Year

Car

bon

Out

put

kgkg

/m2 A

Requ

ired

hea

t dem

and

98.4

3kW

h/m

2A£3

62.2

2Pe

r A

nnum

£63.

92Pe

r A

nnum

Gas

7874

415

.99

7874

.41.

599

1599

19.9

875

Per

Year

7874

.4kW

h£3

0.19

Per

Mon

th£5

.33

Per

Mon

thEl

ectr

icity

2500

013

.18

2500

1.31

813

1816

.475

Tota

l29

.17

36.4

625

Ref:

http

://w

ww

.car

boni

ndep

ende

nt.o

rg/

Cum

ulat

ive

savi

ngs

1£6

3.92

2£1

27.8

43

£191

.76

4£2

55.6

95

£319

.61

6£3

83.5

3

7£4

47.4

58

£511

.37

9£5

75.2

910

£639

.22

Prof

it ov

er 1

0 ye

ars

(inco

me

+ sa

ving

s - i

nsta

llatio

n co

st)

N/A

Hea

ting

cost

s ov

er 1

0 ye

ars

(at c

urre

nt p

rice

s)£3

,622

.22

(Req

)(A

ctua

l)H

eatin

g co

sts

over

10

year

s (+

fore

cast

ris

e)£5

,469

.56

(Req

)£1

,847

.33

mor

e£1

84.7

3m

ore

per

year

£0.0

0(A

ctua

l)£0

.00

mor

eEl

ectr

icty

Cos

ts (c

urre

nt)

£3,7

82.5

0El

ectr

icity

Cos

ts (r

ises

)£5

,750

.00

£1,9

67.5

0m

ore

£196

.75

mor

e pe

r ye

ar

Econ

omic

s10

Yea

r Fo

reca

stPr

evio

usM

onth

ly In

com

e£6

00.0

0M

onth

ly In

com

e£6

00.0

0El

ectr

icty

Cos

ts£3

1.52

5.25

%£4

7.92

7.99

%El

ectr

icity

Cos

t£3

1.52

Gas

Cos

t (A

ctua

l)£3

0.19

5.03

%£4

5.58

7.60

%G

as C

ost (

Act

ual)

£35.

51M

onth

ly In

com

e fr

om P

V£0

.00

Mon

thly

Sav

ings

from

PV

£0.0

0

Bala

nce

£538

.29

Bala

nce

£506

.50

Bala

nce

£532

.97

-10.

28%

-15.

58%

-11.

17%

Fuel

poo

r af

ter

year

1YE

SFu

el p

oor

afte

r ye

ar 1

0YE

S

32 | | 33

Scenario 3.1 CSH Level 4 + 1kWp PV

Scenario 3.2 CSH Level 4 + 1.5kWp PV

Ass

umpt

ions

Ener

gy P

rice

s

Size

80m

2G

as0.

046

£/kW

hG

ener

atio

n Ta

riff

£0.1

544

per

kWh

Rent

£79.

00/w

eek

Elec

tric

ity0.

1513

£/kW

hEx

port

Tar

iff£0

.046

4pe

r kW

hH

eatin

g Re

q15

,146

kWh

£696

.72

Per

Ann

um20

20G

ener

atio

n Ta

riff

£0.1

0pe

r kW

hH

eatin

g A

ctua

l9,

264

kWh

£426

.14

Per

Ann

um20

20G

as0.

0694

6£/

kWh

2020

Expo

rt T

ariff

£0.0

464

per

kWh

Pow

er25

00kW

h£3

78.2

5Pe

r A

nnum

2020

Elec

tric

ity0.

23£/

kWh

Inco

me

£150

.00

/wee

k61

.16%

Scen

ario

3.1

Hea

ting

dem

and

redu

ced

to C

SH L

evel

4 (A

ffor

dabl

e H

omes

Pro

gram

me)

Cost

sSa

ving

s10

Yea

r Ca

rbon

Out

put

Co2

(ton

nes)

kgkg

/m2 A

Requ

ired

hea

t dem

and

98.4

3kW

h/m

2A£3

62.2

2Pe

r A

nnum

£63.

92Pe

r A

nnum

Gas

7874

415

.99

1599

19.9

875

Per

Year

7874

.4kW

h£3

0.19

Per

Mon

th£5

.33

Per

Mon

thEl

ectr

icity

1548

08.

1681

610

.2To

tal

24.1

530

.187

5Re

f:ht

tp:/

/ww

w.c

arbo

nind

epen

dent

.org

/of

fset

500

6.25

1kW

p PV

Sys

tem

inst

alle

dFI

Ts In

com

eSa

ving

s95

2ne

w to

tal

23.9

375

PVG

IS D

ata

for

Dun

dee

stat

es p

rodu

ctio

n at

952

kWh

£146

.99

Per

Ann

um£1

44.0

4PA

Shor

tfal

l15

48kW

hSa

ving

s pl

us in

com

e (a

ppro

x, h

ttp:

//w

ww

.the

ecoe

xper

ts.c

o.uk

/how

-muc

h-do

-sol

ar-p

anel

s-co

st-u

k) C

ost

£2,5

00.0

0£1

46.9

9Pe

r A

nnum

£291

.03

PA

Cum

ulat

ive

savi

ngs

Cum

ulat

ive

savi

ngs+

inco

me

Cum

ulat

ive

inco

me

Cum

ulat

ive

Savi

ngs

+ In

com

e PV

Onl

y1

£207

.96

£354

.95

£146

.99

£291

.03

2£4

15.9

2£7

09.9

0£2

93.9

8£5

82.0

53

£623

.88

£1,0

64.8

4£4

40.9

7£8

73.0

84

£831

.84

£1,4

19.7

9£5

87.9

6£1

,164

.11

5£1

,039

.80

£1,7

74.7

4£7

34.9

4£1

,455

.13

6£1

,247

.76

£2,1

29.6

9£8

81.9

3£1

,746

.16

7£1

,455

.71

£2,4

84.6

4£1

,028

.92

£2,0

37.1

88

£1,6

63.6

7£2

,839

.58

£1,1

75.9

1£2

,328

.21

9£1

,871

.63

£3,1

94.5

3£1

,322

.90

£2,6

19.2

4PV

PA

ID F

OR

10£2

,079

.59

£3,5

49.4

8£1

,469

.89

£2,9

10.2

6

PV P

rofit

ove

r 10

yea

rs (i

ncom

e +

savi

ngs

- ins

talla

tion

cost

)£4

10.2

6H

eatin

g co

sts

over

10

year

s (a

t cur

rent

pri

ces)

£3,6

22.2

2(R

eq)

(Act

ual)

Hea

ting

cost

s ov

er 1

0 ye

ars

(+fo

reca

st r

ise)

£5,4

69.5

6(R

eq)

£1,8

47.3

3m

ore

£184

.73

mor

e pe

r ye

ar£0

.00

(Act

ual)

£0.0

0m

ore

Elec

tric

ty C

osts

(cur

rent

)£2

,342

.12

Elec

tric

ity C

osts

(ris

es)

£3,5

60.4

0£1

,218

.28

mor

e£1

21.8

3m

ore

per

year

Econ

omic

s10

Yea

r Fo

reca

stPr

evio

usM

onth

ly In

com

e£6

00.0

0£6

12.2

5£6

08.2

7M

onth

ly In

com

e£6

00.0

0El

ectr

icty

Cos

ts£1

9.52

3.19

%£2

9.67

4.88

%El

ectr

icity

Cos

t£3

1.52

Gas

Cos

t (A

ctua

l)£3

0.19

4.93

%£4

5.58

7.49

%G

as C

ost (

Act

ual)

£35.

51M

onth

ly In

com

e fr

om P

V£1

2.25

£8.2

7M

onth

ly S

avin

gs fr

om P

V£1

2.00

£18.

25

Bala

nce

(incl

udin

g sa

ving

s)£5

74.5

5Ba

lanc

e £5

51.2

7Ba

lanc

e£5

32.9

7-4

.24%

-8.1

2%-1

1.17

%

Bala

nce

(exc

ludi

ng s

avin

gs)

£562

.55

Bala

nce

£533

.02

-6.2

4%-1

1.16

%

Fuel

poo

r af

ter

year

1N

OFu

el p

oor

afte

r ye

ar 1

0YE

S

Ass

umpt

ions

Ener

gy P

rice

s

Size

80m

2G

as0.

046

£/kW

hG

ener

atio

n Ta

riff

£0.1

544

per

kWh

Rent

£79.

00/w

eek

Elec

tric

ity0.

1513

£/kW

hEx

port

Tar

iff£0

.046

4pe

r kW

hH

eatin

g Re

q15

,146

kWh

£696

.72

Per

Ann

um20

20G

ener

atio

n Ta

riff

£0.1

0pe

r kW

hH

eatin

g A

ctua

l9,

264

kWh

£426

.14

Per

Ann

um20

20G

as0.

0694

6£/

kWh

2020

Expo

rt T

ariff

£0.0

464

per

kWh

Pow

er25

00kW

h£3

78.2

5Pe

r A

nnum

2020

Elec

tric

ity0.

23£/

kWh

Inco

me

£150

.00

/wee

k61

.16%

Scen

ario

3.2

Hea

ting

dem

and

redu

ced

to C

SH L

evel

4 (A

ffor

dabl

e H

omes

Pro

gram

me)

Cost

sSa

ving

s10

Yea

r Ca

rbon

Out

put

Co2

(ton

nes)

kgpe

r m

2 ARe

quir

ed h

eat d

eman

d98

.43

kWh/

m2A

£362

.22

Per

Ann

um£6

3.92

Per

Ann

umG

as78

744

15.9

915

9919

.987

5Pe

r Ye

ar78

74.4

kWh

£30.

19Pe

r M

onth

£5.3

3Pe

r M

onth

Elec

tric

ity10

700

5.64

564

7.05

Tota

l21

.63

27.0

375

Ref:

http

://w

ww

.car

boni

ndep

ende

nt.o

rg/

offs

et75

09.

375

1.5k

Wp

PV S

yste

m in

stal

led

FITs

Inco

me

Savi

ngs

1430

new

tota

l17

.662

5PV

GIS

Dat

a fo

r D

unde

e st

ates

pro

duct

ion

at14

30kW

h£2

20.7

9Pe

r A

nnum

£216

.36

PASh

ortf

all

1070

kWh

Savi

ngs

plus

inco

me

(app

rox,

htt

p://

ww

w.t

heec

oexp

erts

.co.

uk/h

ow-m

uch-

do-s

olar

-pan

els-

cost

-uk)

Cos

t£3

,750

.00

£220

.79

Per

Ann

um£4

37.1

5PA

Cum

ulat

ive

savi

ngs

Cum

ulat

ive

savi

ngs+

inco

me

Cum

ulat

ive

inco

me

Cum

ulat

ive

Savi

ngs

+ In

com

e PV

Onl

y1

£280

.28

£501

.07

£220

.79

£437

.15

2£5

60.5

6£1

,002

.15

£441

.58

£874

.30

3£8

40.8

4£1

,503

.22

£662

.38

£1,3

11.4

54

£1,1

21.1

2£2

,004

.29

£883

.17

£1,7

48.6

05

£1,4

01.4

0£2

,505

.36

£1,1

03.9

6£2

,185

.76

6£1

,681

.68

£3,0

06.4

4£1

,324

.75

£2,6

22.9

17

£1,9

61.9

6£3

,507

.51

£1,5

45.5

4£3

,060

.06

8£2

,242

.24

£4,0

08.5

8£1

,766

.34

£3,4

97.2

19

£2,5

22.5

3£4

,509

.65

£1,9

87.1

3£3

,934

.36

PV P

AID

FO

R10

£2,8

02.8

1£5

,010

.73

£2,2

07.9

2£4

,371

.51

PV P

rofit

ove

r 10

yea

rs (i

ncom

e +

savi

ngs

- ins

talla

tion

cost

)£6

21.5

1H

eatin

g co

sts

over

10

year

s (a

t cur

rent

pri

ces)

£3,6

22.2

2(R

eq)

(Act

ual)

Hea

ting

cost

s ov

er 1

0 ye

ars

(+fo

reca

st r

ise)

£5,4

69.5

6(R

eq)

£1,8

47.3

3m

ore

£184

.73

mor

e pe

r ye

ar£0

.00

(Act

ual)

£0.0

0m

ore

Elec

tric

ty C

osts

(cur

rent

)£1

,618

.91

Elec

tric

ity C

osts

(ris

es)

£2,4

61.0

0£8

42.0

9m

ore

£84.

21m

ore

per

year

Econ

omic

s10

Yea

r Fo

reca

stPr

evio

usM

onth

ly In

com

e£6

00.0

0£6

18.4

0£6

12.4

3M

onth

ly In

com

e£6

00.0

0El

ectr

icty

Cos

ts£1

3.49

2.18

%£2

0.51

3.35

%El

ectr

icity

Cos

t£3

1.52

Gas

Cos

t (A

ctua

l)£3

0.19

4.88

%£4

5.58

7.44

%G

as C

ost (

Act

ual)

£35.

51M

onth

ly In

com

e fr

om P

V£1

8.40

£12.

43M

onth

ly S

avin

gs fr

om P

V£1

8.03

£27.

41

Bala

nce

(incl

udin

g sa

ving

s)£5

92.7

5Ba

lanc

e £5

73.7

5Ba

lanc

e£5

32.9

7-1

.21%

-4.3

8%-1

1.17

%

Bala

nce

(exc

ludi

ng s

avin

gs)

£574

.72

Bala

nce

£546

.34

-4.2

1%89

.21%

10.7

9%

Fuel

poo

r af

ter

year

1N

OFu

el p

oor

afte

r ye

ar 1

0YE

S

34 | | 35

Scenario 3.3 - CSH Level 4 + 1.8kWp PV

7,87

4kW

h

98kW

h/m

2A25

00kW

h

5.0%

of e

xpen

ditu

re£3

0.19

/mon

th

£600/month5.

0% o

f exp

endi

ture

£30.

19/m

onth

£9.9

6/m

onth

1.1%

of e

xpen

ditu

re

2020

£15.

40/m

onth

2.5%

of e

xpen

ditu

re7.

4% o

f exp

endi

ture

£45.

58/m

onth

extre

me

fuel

pov

erty

fuel

pov

erty

line

FUE

L P

OO

R?

NO

FUE

L P

OO

R?

NO

1710

kWh

offs

et b

y P

V

790k

Wh

shor

tfall

£9.9

6/m

onth

1.1%

of e

xpen

ditu

re

PV

Inco

me

- £22

.00/

mon

th

£22.

00/m

onth

inco

me

PV

Inco

me

- £14

.86/

mon

th

80m2

Ene

rgy

Req

uire

men

ts

Exp

endi

ture

tota

l hea

ting

requ

irem

ents

tota

l pow

er re

quire

men

ts

Sce

nario

3.3

CS

H L

evel

4 +

1.8

kWp

PV

per a

nnum

per a

nnum

Ass

umpt

ions

Ener

gy P

rice

s

Size

80m

2G

as0.

046

£/kW

hG

ener

atio

n Ta

riff

£0.1

544

per

kWh

Rent

£79.

00/w

eek

Elec

tric

ity0.

1513

£/kW

hEx

port

Tar

iff£0

.046

4pe

r kW

hH

eatin

g Re

q15

,146

kWh

£696

.72

Per

Ann

um20

20G

ener

atio

n Ta

riff

£0.1

0pe

r kW

hH

eatin

g A

ctua

l9,

264

kWh

£426

.14

Per

Ann

um20

20G

as0.

0694

6£/

kWh

2020

Expo

rt T

ariff

£0.0

464

per

kWh

Pow

er25

00kW

h£3

78.2

5Pe

r A

nnum

2020

Elec

tric

ity0.

23£/

kWh

Inco

me

£150

.00

/wee

k61

.16%

Scen

ario

3.3

Hea

ting

dem

and

redu

ced

to C

SH L

evel

4 (A

ffor

dabl

e H

omes

Pro

gram

me)

Cost

sSa

ving

s10

Yea

r Ca

rbon

Out

put

Co2

(ton

nes)

kgkg

/m2 A

Requ

ired

hea

t dem

and

98.4

3kW

h/m

2A£3

62.2

2Pe

r A

nnum

£63.

92Pe

r A

nnum

Gas

7874

415

.99

1599

19.9

875

Per

Year

7874

.4kW

h£3

0.19

Per

Mon

th£5

.33

Per

Mon

thEl

ectr

icity

7900

4.11

641

1.6

5.14

5To

tal

20.1

0625

.132

5Re

f:ht

tp:/

/ww

w.c

arbo

nind

epen

dent

.org

/1.

8kW

p PV

Sys

tem

inst

alle

dFI

Ts In

com

eSa

ving

sof

fset

900

11.2

5PV

GIS

Dat

a fo

r D

unde

e st

ates

pro

duct

ion

at17

10kW

h£2

64.0

2Pe

r A

nnum

£258

.72

PA17

10ne

w to

tal

13.8

825

Shor

tfal

l79

0kW

hSa

ving

s pl

us in

com

e (a

ppro

x, h

ttp:

//w

ww

.the

ecoe

xper

ts.c

o.uk

/how

-muc

h-do

-sol

ar-p

anel

s-co

st-u

k) C

ost

£4,5

00.0

0£2

64.0

2Pe

r A

nnum

£522

.75

PA

Cum

ulat

ive

savi

ngs

Cum

ulat

ive

savi

ngs+

inco

me

Cum

ulat

ive

inco

me

Cum

ulat

ive

Savi

ngs

+ In

com

e PV

Onl

y1

£322

.64

£586

.67

£264

.02

£522

.75

2£6

45.2

9£1

,173

.34

£528

.05

£1,0

45.4

93

£967

.93

£1,7

60.0

1£7

92.0

7£1

,568

.24

4£1

,290

.58

£2,3

46.6

7£1

,056

.10

£2,0

90.9

95

£1,6

13.2

2£2

,933

.34

£1,3

20.1

2£2

,613

.74

6£1

,935

.87

£3,5

20.0

1£1

,584

.14

£3,1

36.4

87

£2,2

58.5

1£4

,106

.68

£1,8

48.1

7£3

,659

.23

8£2

,581

.16

£4,6

93.3

5£2

,112

.19

£4,1

81.9

89

£2,9

03.8

0£5

,280

.02

£2,3

76.2

2£4

,704

.72

PV P

AID

FO

R10

£3,2

26.4

5£5

,866

.69

£2,6

40.2

4£5

,227

.47

PV P

rofit

ove

r 10

yea

rs (i

ncom

e +

savi

ngs

- ins

talla

tion

cost

)£727

.47

Hea

ting

cost

s ov

er 1

0 ye

ars

(at c

urre

nt p

rice

s)£3

,622

.22

(Req

)(A

ctua

l)H

eatin

g co

sts

over

10

year

s (+

fore

cast

ris

e)£5

,469

.56

(Req

)£1

,847

.33

mor

e£1

84.7

3m

ore

per

year

£0.0

0(A

ctua

l)£0

.00

mor

eEl

ectr

icty

Cos

ts (c

urre

nt)

£1,1

95.2

7El

ectr

icity

Cos

ts (r

ises

)£1

,817

.00

£621

.73

mor

e£6

2.17

mor

e pe

r ye

ar

Econ

omic

s10

Yea

r Fo

reca

stPr

evio

usM

onth

ly In

com

e£6

00.0

0£6

22.0

0£6

14.8

6M

onth

ly In

com

e£6

00.0

0El

ectr

icty

Cos

ts£9

.96

1.60

%£1

5.14

2.46

%El

ectr

icity

Cos

t£3

1.52

Gas

Cos

t (A

ctua

l)£3

0.19

4.85

%£4

5.58

7.41

%G

as C

ost (

Act

ual)

£35.

51M

onth

ly In

com

e fr

om P

V£2

2.00

£14.

86M

onth

ly S

avin

gs fr

om P

V£2

1.56

£32.

78

Bala

nce

(incl

udin

g sa

ving

s)£6

03.4

2Ba

lanc

e £5

86.9

2Ba

lanc

e£5

32.9

70.

57%

-2.1

8%-1

1.17

%

Bala

nce

(exc

ludi

ng s

avin

gs)

£581

.86

Bala

nce

£554

.14

-3.0

2%90

.12%

9.88

%

Fuel

poo

r af

ter

year

1N

OFu

el p

oor

afte

r ye

ar 1

0N

O

36 | | 37

Scenario 4 - CSH Level 6

2,88

0kW

h36

kWh/

m2A

2500

kWh

1.84

% o

f exp

endi

ture

5.2%

of e

xpen

ditu

re

£11.

04/m

onth

£31.

52/m

onth

£600/month1.

8% o

f exp

endi

ture

£11.

04/m

onth

£31.

52/m

onth

5.2%

of e

xpen

ditu

re20

20£4

7.92

/mon

th7.

9% o

f exp

endi

ture

2.7%

of e

xpen

ditu

re£1

6.67

/mon

thin

crea

se o

f £5.

63/m

onth

incr

ease

of £

16.4

0/m

onth

extre

me

fuel

pov

erty

fuel

pov

erty

line

FUE

L P

OO

R?

NO

FUE

L P

OO

R?

YE

S

80mE

nerg

y R

equi

rem

ents

Exp

endi

ture

tota

l hea

ting

requ

irem

ents

tota

l pow

er re

quire

men

ts

Sce

nario

4C

SH

Lev

el 6

2pe

r ann

umpe

r ann

um

Ass

umpt

ions

Ener

gy P

rice

s

Size

80m

2G

as0.

046

£/kW

hRe

nt£7

9.00

/wee

kEl

ectr

icity

0.15

13£/

kWh

Hea

ting

Req

15,1

46kW

h£6

96.7

2Pe

r A

nnum

Hea

ting

Act

ual

9,26

4kW

h£4

26.1

4Pe

r A

nnum

2020

Gas

0.06

946

£/kW

hPo

wer

2500

kWh

£378

.25

Per

Ann

um20

20El

ectr

icity

0.23

£/kW

hIn

com

e£1

50.0

0/w

eek

61.1

6%

Scen

ario

4H

eati

ng d

eman

d re

duce

d to

CSH

Lev

el 6

Cost

sSa

ving

s10

Yea

r Ca

rbon

Out

put

Co2

(ton

nes)

1 ye

arkg

kg/m

2 ARe

quir

ed h

eat d

eman

d36

kWh/

m2A

£132

.48

Per

Ann

um£2

93.6

6Pe

r A

nnum

Gas

2880

05.

8528

8058

57.

3125

Per

Year

2880

kWh

£11.

04Pe

r M

onth

£24.

47Pe

r M

onth

Elec

tric

ity25

000

13.1

825

0013

1816

.475

Tota

l19

.03

23.7

875

Ref:h

ttp:

//w

ww

.car

boni

ndep

ende

nt.o

rg/

Cum

ulat

ive

savi

ngs

1£2

93.6

62

£587

.33

3£8

80.9

94

£1,1

74.6

65

£1,4

68.3

26

£1,7

61.9

87

£2,0

55.6

58

£2,3

49.3

19

£2,6

42.9

810

£2,9

36.6

4

Prof

it ov

er 1

0 ye

ars

(inco

me

+ sa

ving

s - i

nsta

llatio

n co

st)

N/A

Hea

ting

cost

s ov

er 1

0 ye

ars

(at c

urre

nt p

rice

s)£1

,324

.80

(Req

)(A

ctua

l)H

eatin

g co

sts

over

10

year

s (+

fore

cast

ris

e)£2

,000

.45

(Req

)£6

75.6

5m

ore

£67.

56m

ore

per

year

£0.0

0(A

ctua

l)£0

.00

mor

eEl

ectr

icty

Cos

ts (c

urre

nt)

£3,7

82.5

0El

ectr

icity

Cos

ts (r

ises

)£5

,750

.00

£1,9

67.5

0m

ore

£196

.75

mor

e pe

r ye

ar

Econ

omic

s10

Yea

r Fo

reca

stPr

evio

usM

onth

ly In

com

e£6

00.0

0M

onth

ly In

com

e£6

00.0

0El

ectr

icty

Cos

ts£3

1.52

5.25

%£4

7.92

7.99

%El

ectr

icity

Cos

t£3

1.52

Gas

Cos

t (A

ctua

l)£1

1.04

1.84

%£1

6.67

2.78

%G

as C

ost (

Act

ual)

£35.

51M

onth

ly In

com

e fr

om P

V£0

.00

Mon

thly

Sav

ings

from

PV

£0.0

0

Bala

nce

£557

.44

Bala

nce

£535

.41

Bala

nce

£532

.97

-7.0

9%-1

0.76

%-1

1.17

%

Fuel

poo

r af

ter

year

1N

OFu

el p

oor

afte

r ye

ar 1

0YE

S

38 | | 39

Scenario 4.1 - CSH Level 6 + 0.5kWp PV

2500

kWh

476k

Wh

offs

et b

y P

V

£600/month20

20

extre

me

fuel

pov

erty

FUE

L P

OO

R?

NO

FUE

L P

OO

R?

NO

PV

Inco

me

- £6.

12/m

onth

1.8%

of e

xpen

ditu

re£1

1.04

/mon

th

PV

Inco

me

- £4.

14/m

onth

2.8%

of e

xpen

ditu

re£1

6.67

/mon

th

2024

kWh

shor

tfall

£25.

52/m

onth

4.2%

of e

xpen

ditu

re

4.2%

of e

xpen

ditu

re£2

5.52

/mon

th£3

8.79

/mon

th6.

4% o

f exp

endi

ture

2,88

0kW

h1.

84%

of e

xpen

ditu

re£1

1.04

/mon

th

80mE

nerg

y R

equi

rem

ents

Exp

endi

ture

tota

l hea

ting

requ

irem

ents

tota

l pow

er re

quire

men

ts

Sce

nario

4.1

CS

H L

evel

6 +

0.5

kWp

PV

236

kWh/

m2A

per a

nnum

per a

nnum

Ass

umpt

ions

Ener

gy P

rice

s

Size

80m

2G

as0.

046

£/kW

hG

ener

atio

n Ta

riff

£0.1

544

per

kWh

Rent

£79.

00/w

eek

Elec

tric

ity0.

1513

£/kW

hEx

port

Tar

iff£0

.046

4pe

r kW

hH

eatin

g Re

q15

,146

kWh

£696

.72

Per

Ann

um20

20G

ener

atio

n Ta

riff

£0.1

0pe

r kW

hH

eatin

g A

ctua

l9,

264

kWh

£426

.14

Per

Ann

um20

20G

as0.

0694

6£/

kWh

2020

Expo

rt T

ariff

£0.0

464

per

kWh

Pow

er25

00kW

h£3

78.2

5Pe

r A

nnum

2020

Elec

tric

ity0.

23£/

kWh

Inco

me

£150

.00

/wee

k61

.16%

Scen

ario

4.1

Hea

ting

dem

and

redu

ced

to C

SH L

evel

6Co

sts

Savi

ngs

10 Y

ear

Carb

on O

utpu

tCo

2 (t

onne

s)kg

/ann

umkg

/m2 A

Requ

ired

hea

t dem

and

36kW

h/m

2A£1

32.4

8Pe

r A

nnum

£293

.66

Per

Ann

umG

as28

800

5.85

585

7.31

25Pe

r Ye

ar28

80kW

h£1

1.04

Per

Mon

th£2

4.47

Per

Mon

thEl

ectr

icity

2024

010

.67

1067

13.3

375

Tota

l16

.52

20.6

5Re

f:htt

p://

ww

w.c

arbo

nind

epen

dent

.org

/0.

5kW

p PV

Sys

tem

inst

alle

dFI

Ts In

com

eSa

ving

sof

fset

250

3.12

5PV

GIS

Dat

a fo

r D

unde

e st

ates

pro

duct

ion

at47

6kW

h£7

3.49

Per

Ann

um£7

2.02

PA47

617

.525

Shor

tfal

l20

24kW

hSa

ving

s pl

us in

com

e (a

ppro

x, h

ttp:

//w

ww

.the

ecoe

xper

ts.c

o.uk

/how

-muc

h-do

-sol

ar-p

anel

s-co

st-u

k) C

ost

£1,2

50.0

0£7

3.49

Per

Ann

um£1

45.5

1PA

Cum

ulat

ive

savi

ngs

Cum

ulat

ive

savi

ngs+

inco

me

Cum

ulat

ive

inco

me

Cum

ulat

ive

Savi

ngs

+ In

com

e PV

Onl

y1

£365

.68

£439

.18

£73.

49£1

45.5

12

£731

.37

£878

.35

£146

.99

£291

.03

3£1

,097

.05

£1,3

17.5

3£2

20.4

8£4

36.5

44

£1,4

62.7

3£1

,756

.71

£293

.98

£582

.05

5£1

,828

.41

£2,1

95.8

9£3

67.4

7£7

27.5

76

£2,1

94.1

0£2

,635

.06

£440

.97

£873

.08

7£2

,559

.78

£3,0

74.2

4£5

14.4

6£1

,018

.59

8£2

,925

.46

£3,5

13.4

2£5

87.9

6£1

,164

.11

9£3

,291

.15

£3,9

52.5

9£6

61.4

5£1

,309

.62

PV P

AID

FO

R10

£3,6

56.8

3£4

,391

.77

£734

.94

£1,4

55.1

3

PV P

rofit

ove

r 10

yea

rs (i

ncom

e +

savi

ngs

- ins

talla

tion

cost

)£205

.13

Hea

ting

cost

s ov

er 1

0 ye

ars

(at c

urre

nt p

rice

s)£1

,324

.80

(Req

)(A

ctua

l)H

eatin

g co

sts

over

10

year

s (+

fore

cast

ris

e)£2

,000

.45

(Req

)£6

75.6

5m

ore

£67.

56m

ore

per

year

£0.0

0(A

ctua

l)£0

.00

mor

eEl

ectr

icty

Cos

ts (c

urre

nt)

£3,0

62.3

1El

ectr

icity

Cos

ts (r

ises

)£4

,655

.20

£1,5

92.8

9m

ore

£159

.29

mor

e pe

r ye

ar

Econ

omic

s10

Yea

r Fo

reca

stPr

evio

usM

onth

ly In

com

e£6

00.0

0£6

06.1

2£6

04.1

4M

onth

ly In

com

e£6

00.0

0El

ectr

icty

Cos

ts£2

5.52

4.21

%£3

8.79

6.42

%El

ectr

icity

Cos

t£3

1.52

Gas

Cos

t (A

ctua

l)£1

1.04

1.82

%£1

6.67

2.76

%G

as C

ost (

Act

ual)

£35.

51M

onth

ly In

com

e fr

om P

V£6

.12

£4.1

4M

onth

ly S

avin

gs fr

om P

V£6

.00

£9.1

2

Bala

nce

(incl

udin

g sa

ving

s)£5

75.5

7Ba

lanc

e £5

57.8

0Ba

lanc

e£5

32.9

7-4

.07%

-7.0

3%-1

1.17

%

Bala

nce

(exc

ludi

ng s

avin

gs)

£569

.57

Bala

nce

£548

.67

-5.0

7%-8

.55%

Fuel

poo

r af

ter

year

1N

OFu

el p

oor

afte

r ye

ar 1

0N

O

40 | | 41

Scenario 5 - Passivhaus

15kW

h/m

2A27

62kW

h0.

8% o

f exp

endi

ture

£4.6

0/m

onth

£600/month5.

0% o

f exp

endi

ture

£30.

19/m

onth

£34.

82/m

onth

5.8%

of e

xpen

ditu

re

2020

£52.

98/m

onth

8.8%

of e

xpen

ditu

re

1.2%

of e

xpen

ditu

re£6

.95/

mon

th

extre

me

fuel

pov

erty

fuel

pov

erty

line

FUE

L P

OO

R?

NO

5.8%

of e

xpen

ditu

re£3

4.82

/mon

th

262k

Wh

MV

HR

Con

sum

ptio

n

1,20

0kW

h

FUE

L P

OO

R?

NO80m

Ene

rgy

Req

uire

men

ts

Exp

endi

ture

tota

l hea

ting

requ

irem

ents

tota

l pow

er re

quire

men

ts

Sce

nario

5P

assi

vhau

s

2pe

r ann

umpe

r ann

um

Ass

umpt

ions

Ener

gy P

rice

s

Size

80m

2G

as0.

046

£/kW

hRe

nt£7

9.00

/wee

kEl

ectr

icity

0.15

13£/

kWh

Hea

ting

Req

15,1

46kW

h£6

96.7

2Pe

r A

nnum

Hea

ting

Act

ual

9,26

4kW

h£4

26.1

4Pe

r A

nnum

2020

Gas

0.06

946

£/kW

hPo

wer

(Not

e: 2

62kW

h ad

ded

for

30W

MVH

R Ru

nnin

g co

nsta

ntly

)27

62kW

h£4

17.8

9Pe

r A

nnum

2020

Elec

tric

ity0.

23£/

kWh

Inco

me

£150

.00

/wee

k

Scen

ario

5H

eati

ng d

eman

d re

duce

d to

Pas

sivh

aus

Cost

sSa

ving

s10

Yea

r Ca

rbon

Out

put

Co2

(ton

nes)

kgkg

/m2 A

Requ

ired

hea

t dem

and

15kW

h/m

2A£5

5.20

Per

Ann

um£3

70.9

4Pe

r A

nnum

Gas

1200

02.

4424

43.

05Re

quir

ed h

eat d

eman

d15

kWh/

m2A

£55.

20Pe

r A

nnum

£370

.94

Per

Ann

umG

as12

000

2.44

244

3.05

Per

Year

1200

kWh

£4.6

0Pe

r M

onth

£30.

91Pe

r M

onth

Elec

tric

ity27

620

14.7

314

7318

.412

5To

tal

17.1

721

.462

5Re

f:ht

tp:/

/ww

w.c

arbo

nind

epen

dent

.org

/

Cum

ulat

ive

savi

ngs

1£3

70.9

42

£741

.89

3£1

,112

.83

4£1

,483

.78

5£1

,854

.72

6£2

,225

.66

7£2

,596

.61

8£2

,967

.55

9£3

,338

.50

9£3

,338

.50

10£3

,709

.44

Prof

it ov

er 1

0 ye

ars

(inco

me

+ sa

ving

s - i

nsta

llatio

n co

st)

N/A

Hea

ting

cost

s ov

er 1

0 ye

ars

(at c

urre

nt p

rice

s)£5

52.0

0(R

eq)

(Act

ual)

Hea

ting

cost

s ov

er 1

0 ye

ars

(+11

% r

ise

in p

rice

s)£6

07.2

0(R

eq)

£55.

20m

ore

£0.0

0(A

ctua

l)£0

.00

mor

eEl

ectr

icty

Cos

ts (c

urre

nt)

£4,1

78.9

1El

ectr

icity

Cos

ts (r

ises

)£6

,352

.60

£2,1

73.6

9m

ore

Econ

omic

s10

Yea

r Fo

reca

stPr

evio

usM

onth

ly In

com

e£6

00.0

0M

onth

ly In

com

e£6

00.0

0El

ectr

icty

Cos

ts£3

4.82

5.80

%£5

2.94

8.82

%El

ectr

icity

Cos

t£3

4.82

Gas

Cos

t (A

ctua

l)£4

.60

0.77

%£6

.95

1.16

%G

as C

ost (

Act

ual)

£35.

51G

as C

ost (

Act

ual)

£4.6

00.

77%

£6.9

51.

16%

Gas

Cos

t (A

ctua

l)£3

5.51

Mon

thly

Inco

me

from

PV

£0.0

0M

onth

ly S

avin

gs fr

om P

V£0

.00

Bala

nce

£560

.58

Bala

nce

£540

.12

Bala

nce

£529

.66

-6.5

7%-9

.98%

-11.

72%

Fuel

poo

r af

ter

year

1N

OFu

el p

oor

afte

r ye

ar 1

0N

O

42 | | 43

Gen

erat

ion

Mon

thly

Con

sum

ptio

n20

8.33

Gen

erat

ion

Inco

me

Jan

58.1

150.

23£2

2.73

£8.9

7-£

13.7

6In

dica

tes

expe

nditu

reFe

b93

.711

4.63

£17.

34£1

4.47

-£2.

88In

dica

tes

inco

me

Mar

ch16

048

.33

£7.3

1£2

4.70

£32.

02A

pril

196

12.3

3£1

.87

£30.

26£3

2.13

May

229

-20.

67£0

.96

£35.

36£3

6.31

June

199

9.33

£1.4

1£3

0.73

£32.

14Ju

ly20

62.

33£0

.35

£31.

81£3

2.16

Aug

ust

188

20.3

3£3

.08

£29.

03£3

2.10

Sept

embe

r15

157

.33

£8.6

7£2

3.31

£31.

99O

ctob

er10

810

0.33

£15.

18£1

6.68

£1.4

9N

ovem

ber

75.1

133.

23£2

0.16

£11.

60-£

8.56

Dec

embe

r49

.715

8.63

£7.3

6£7

.67

£0.3

1£1

7.12

-£20

.00

-£10

.00

£0.0

0

£10.

00

£20.

00

£30.

00

£40.

00

JanFeb

MarchAprilMayJuneJuly

AugustSeptember

OctoberNovemberDecember

Seri

es1

Scenario 3.3 -

Income-Expenditure Cycle

Scenario 4.1 -

Income-Expenditure Cycle

Gen

erat

ion

Mon

thly

Con

sum

ptio

n20

8.33

Gen

erat

ion

Inco

me

com

bine

d to

tal

Jan

16.2

192.

13£2

9.07

£2.5

0-£

26.5

7£2

6.57

£62.

08Fe

b26

182.

33£2

7.59

£4.0

1-£

23.5

7£2

3.57

£59.

08In

dica

tes

expe

nditu

reM

arch

44.3

164.

03£2

4.82

£6.8

4-£

17.9

8£1

7.98

£53.

49In

dica

tes

inco

me

Apr

il54

.415

3.93

£23.

29£8

.40

-£14

.89

£14.

89£5

0.40

Indi

cate

s 'F

uel P

oor'

mon

ths

May

63.7

144.

63£2

1.88

£9.8

4-£

12.0

5£1

2.05

£47.

56Ju

ne55

.315

3.03

£23.

15£8

.54

-£14

.62

£14.

62£5

0.13

July

57.2

151.

13£2

2.87

£8.8

3-£

14.0

3£1

4.03

£49.

54A

ugus

t52

.115

6.23

£23.

64£8

.04

-£15

.59

£15.

59£5

1.10

Sept

embe

r41

.816

6.53

£25.

20£6

.45

-£18

.74

£18.

74£5

4.25

Oct

ober

30.1

178.

23£2

6.97

£4.6

5-£

22.3

2£2

2.32

£57.

83N

ovem

ber

20.9

187.

43£2

8.36

£3.2

3-£

25.1

3£2

5.13

£60.

64D

ecem

ber

13.8

194.

53£2

9.43

£2.1

3-£

27.3

0£2

7.30

£62.

81

44 | | 45

Gen

erat

ion

Mon

thly

Con

sum

ptio

n208

.333

333

Gen

erat

ion

Inco

me

Jan

32.3

176.

03£2

6.63

£4.9

9-£

21.6

5In

dica

tes

expe

nditu

reFe

b52

156.

33£2

3.65

£8.0

3-£

15.6

2In

dica

tes

inco

me

Mar

ch88

.711

9.63

£18.

10£1

3.70

-£4.

41A

pril

109

99.3

3£1

5.03

£16.

83£1

.80

May

127

81.3

3£1

2.31

£19.

61£7

.30

June

111

97.3

3£1

4.73

£17.

14£2

.41

July

114

94.3

3£1

4.27

£17.

60£3

.33

Aug

ust

104

104.

33£1

5.79

£16.

06£0

.27

Sept

embe

r83

.612

4.73

£18.

87£1

2.91

-£5.

96O

ctob

er60

.214

8.13

£22.

41£9

.29

-£13

.12

Nov

embe

r41

.716

6.63

£25.

21£6

.44

-£18

.77

Dec

embe

r27

.618

0.73

£8.3

9£4

.26

-£4.

12-£5.71

-£25

.00

-£20

.00

-£15

.00

-£10

.00

-£5.

00

£0.0

0

£5.0

0

£10.

00

Jan

March

May

July

September

November

Seri

es1

Poly

. (Se

ries

1)

Scenario 4.2 -

Income-Expenditure Cycle

Appendix AMacroMicro Economic Model

��������

Captial Cost~£140,000

Solar FIT£19,192.26

Turbine FIT£15,524.51

Energy Savings £30,498.60

Rentable Income £200,000

£65,215.37

£74,784.63

£0

£50,000

£100,000

£150,000

£200,000

The Macro Micro Studio, a 5th Year

M a r c h D e s i g n U n i t w i t h i n t h e

Department of Architecture at the

University of Dundee, together with

students from the Department of Physics

and Civil Engineering and in collaboration

with The Wood Studio at Edinburgh

Napier UniversityNapier University’ s Forest Products

Research Institute, are conducting

pioneering research into building an

energy autonomous live/work unit at the

University’s Botanical Gardens.

The project is designed to mainstream

solut ions for very low energy and

zero-carbon building design and will

demonstrate ways in which innovative

design integrating new and emerging

technologies can have relevance to the

wider Scottish construction sector. The

aim is to provide alternative solutionsaim is to provide alternative solutions

that address the future s t r ingent

environmental legislation that wil l

govern the energy efficiency of buildings

beyond 2016. As an applied research

p r o j e c t , t h e s t u d i o ’ s d e s i g n a n d

construction will be further enabled with

in-kind support and expertise fromin-kind support and expertise from

industry stakeholders.

ENERGY AUTONOMOUS LIVE WORK STUDIOSupervisors: Dr Neil Burford Joseph Thurrott (Architecture) Dr David RodleyDr Stephen Reynolds (Electronic Engineering, Physics Renewable Energy) Dr Ian Mackie (Civil Engineering)Dr Ian Mackie (Civil Engineering)

Architecture Students: Min ChenDean CrosleyMichael FindlaterCiaran GoldenRuaridh NicolJoanne PotterJoanne PotterRyan WatsonGabriella Da Cruz Welsh

Engineering & Physics Students:Michael HeilbronnSteven JeansKuan XingJulian TissotJulian Tissot

The building has been designed towards Passivhaus

standards in response to recent and forthcoming

changes to Scottish domestic building standards

46 | | 47

Photovoltaic Data - 0.5kWp

Source: PVGIS

Appendix BPhotovoltaic Data

Photovoltaic Data - 1kWp

Source: PVGIS

48 | | 49

Photovoltaic Data - 1.5kWp

Source: PVGIS

Photovoltaic Data - 1.8kWp

Source: PVGIS

50 | | 51

Photovoltaic Data - 3kWp

Source: PVGIS

Bibliography

Alexander. C, Chermayeff. S (1965): Community and Privacy: Toward a New Architecture of Humanism

Buxton, P (2012): A Passivhaus for EveryoneBuilding Design March 2012 pp.9-11

Communities and Local Government (2007): English House Condition Survey 2007London: EHCS

Department of Energy & Climate Change (2013): The Green Deal: A summary of the Government’s proposalsLondon [online: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/47978/1010-green-deal-summary-proposals.pdf Accessed 2/2/13]

The Economist Online: The Swanson Effecthttp://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2012/12/daily-chart-19 [Accessed 14/4/13]

Energy Savings Trust (2008): Energy Efficiency and the Code for Sustainable Homes: Level 4Energy Savings Trust, London

Energy Saving Trust (2012): Refurbishment: House ComparisonLondon, Energy Saving Trust

EPIA (2013) - Solar Photovoltaics Competing in the Energy Sector Accessed Online 12/4/13 [http://www.epia.org/publications/photovoltaic-publications-global-market-outlook/solar-photovoltaics-competing-in-the-energy-sector.html]

Friedman. A, Cammalleri.V (1997): Cost reduction through prefabrication: A design approachHousing and Society, Volume 24, No.1, 1997

Friedman. A (2012): Town and Terraced Housing: For Affordability and Sustainability London, Routledge (2012)

Fuel Poverty Advisory Group (2012): Tenth Annual ReportLondon: Department of Energy & Climate Change

Hills. J (2012): Getting the Measure of Fuel Poverty: Final Report of the Fuel Poverty ReviewLondon, CASE (2012)

Hirch. D, Preston.I, White. V (2011): Understanding Fuel Expenditure: Fuel Poverty and Spending on FuelLoughborough University, Centre for Research in Social Policy

House of Commons Committee of Public Accounts: Financial viability of the social housing sector: introducing the Affordable Homes Programme London, Thirteenth Report of Session 2012-13

HMRC (2007): Stamp Duty Land Tax Relief for New Zero Carbon HomesLondon: HMRC

Holmans. A, Monk. S,Whitehead. C (2008): Homes for the future - A new analysis of housing need and demandLondon, Shelter

Homes and Community Agency (2013): Affordable Homes Programme [online]Accessed 2/2/13 http://www.homesandcommunities.co.uk/affordable-homes

52 |

Jephcott. P (1971): Homes in high flats : some of the human problems involved in multi-storey housing Edinburgh, Oliver and Boyd

Marmot Review Team (2011): The Health Impacts of Cold Homes and Fuel PovertyLondon, Marmot Review Team

National Grid (2011): UK Future Energy ScenariosLondon, National Grid

Mark Clifford (2012): China’s visible solar power successMarketWatch

Newman. N (2012): Passivhaus cost comparison in the context of the UK Regulation and prospective market incentivesLondon, Bere Architects

Ofgem (2011): Factsheet 96: Typical domestic energy consumption figuresLondon, Ofgem

Palmer. J, Cooper. I (2011): Great Britain’s Housing Energy Fact FileLondon: Department of Energy & Climate Change

Proskiw. G (2010): Identifying Affordable Net Zero Energy Housing SolutionsProskiw Engineering Ltd

Sassi, P (2013): A Natural Ventilation Alternative to the Passivhaus Standard for a Mild Maritime Climate [online]Oxford Brookes University, Accessed 13/3/13 www.mdpi.com/2075-5309/3/1/61/pdf

UKTFA (2009): Comfort and CostAlloa: The UK Timber Frame Association

Waltham Forest Council (2009): High Density Housing: Qualitative StudyUrban Initiatives

Zero Carbon Hub (2012): Allowable Solutions for Tomorrow’s New HomesLondon, Ofgem

Zero Carbon Hub (2012): Fabric Energy Efficiency for Zero Carbon HomesLondon: Zero Carbon Hub