Low carbon housing for people on low incomes

The transition to low-carbon housing is crucial, but are we tackling the right challenges? We’ve brought together three retrofit experts to explore some of the biggest questions, from the role of central government to house building and tenant experiences. Tina Gandhi has over a decade of experience working on retrofitting for a Combined Authority in the Northwest of England. Emily Barr and Antoine Pellet, from the Housing Association Charitable Trust, have developed an innovative new approach to funding retrofit measures.

How can we ensure that reducing carbon emissions in housing also creates fairer, more comfortable and affordable homes? What should the government, developers, and landlords be doing to support people through this transition? Our experts share their insights.

What role should national government play in decarbonising homes?

Tina Gandhi (TG):  Decarbonisation of homes should be devolved from central government to local or combined authorities. We know the fabric of our homes; we understand our residents and we have links with local industries as well as research hubs.

The Government to date has failed to link decarbonisation work with other key industry players, skills, education or health teams. Central government could encourage larger companies in this sector to actively work with research and development teams in universities, so that they go on to use some of the innovative methods/products that are out there.

Central government now needs to start thinking outside of the box and look at how collaboration can be encouraged.

I actively work with the NHS to promote decarbonisation schemes to residents who have illnesses that are exacerbated by living in cold and damp homes. Central government should do more to facilitate this kind of work. For example, it would be great if health practitioners could have prompts that come up when a patient is registered with a cardiovascular, auto immune, or long-term illness. The prompts could give those patients contact details of how to access local/national retrofit schemes that will keep their home warmer and assist their health and so on. This could potentially save the NHS millions of pounds in reduced hospital admissions and treatment.

Emily Barr (EB) and Antoine Pellet (AP): Tina is right to suggest that the UK Government needs to work in collaboration with local stakeholders and play a greater role in coordinating delivery.

But there’s also a significant skills shortage that central government has not yet adequately addressed. Local government and social housing providers have had to step in to fill the gaps. Our organisation is currently running a grant funded project in Bournemouth alongside local housing associations, colleges, the local authority, and employers to provide employment and training to social housing residents to fill gaps in the local green economy. This type of project brings multiple benefits – not only are we increasing the available workforce to help meet our net zero targets, but we are also supporting people who are generally in low-income households into good-quality, skilled employment. Central government should be jumping at initiatives like this.

Are new homes to address the housing crisis a climate risk?

TG: Building new homes does pose several climate-related risks, but there are also opportunities to mitigate these risks through thoughtful planning and construction practices.

Importantly the Government needs to get domestic new builds to be energy efficient. New builds should have an EPC rating of at least a B, ideally an A. By not making this a requirement sooner, the Government are allowing properties to be built that will then need retrofitting in the future. That is hardly building for the future. It will also delay my retirement plan! I don’t intend to still be retrofitting properties in my 90s!

The construction process itself is energy-intensive and often relies on materials like concrete and steel, which have high carbon footprints.

There is cutting-edge technology out there, often in our neighbouring universities, which can help make a significant difference on this issue. I was recently fortunate enough to visit Dr Mithila Achintha, a Senior Lecturer at the University of Manchester, and his team of students. He leads research focused on enhancing the performance and sustainability of construction materials, particularly concrete. I was shown their current work around using eggshells, and even rice husks, to make concrete - it was impressive stuff!

At the Combined Authority where I work, we endeavour to include specifications on materials as advised by researchers at the University when devising framework tender opportunities, to ensure that future contractors use sustainable and/or low-carbon materials.

EB and AP: We agree with Tina that building homes with the latest sustainable technologies and energy-efficient designs can help, but there are significant risks if these projects are not carefully managed, alongside risks of not upgrading existing homes in favour of building new ones.

The demand for new housing can lead to the expansion of urban areas into green spaces and natural habitats, resulting in biodiversity loss and increased surface runoff, which can exacerbate flooding.

As we move further into an era of unpredictable and extreme weather patterns, it’s imperative that any new homes built try to plan for climate we will be living in 50 years from now.

This urban sprawl can also create dependencies on cars which in turn can increase transport emissions, and without considered planning and engagement with local people we run the risk of building disconnected homes rather than communities.

We were lucky to recently visit the Ebbsfleet Development Corporation (EDC), a non-profit driving forward ambitions for regeneration in Ebbsfleet and the creation of the first garden city in 100 years. The EDC are building on brownfield land, updating existing homes alongside building new, are investing heavily in updating or creating new infrastructure, and are involving local people at every stage – all the key ingredients for socially and environmentally conscious regeneration!

Perhaps most importantly, the EDC are very conscious of the impact that this investment will have on neighbouring communities and are working hard to mitigate underinvestment in these more deprived communities. While their primary focus is Ebbsfleet, they want to ensure that existing residents living in the surrounding towns are benefiting from this significant investment, rather than suffering the consequences of gentrification.

Why hasn’t the upgrading work happened?

EB and AP: There are lots of reasons progress in upgrading houses in the UK has been slow.

The sheer scale of the task is daunting. According to the UK Green Building Council, an estimated 29 million homes will need improvements by 2050 and a further 15 million more by the end of this decade to meet energy efficiency standards. This is a significant undertaking requiring substantial investment and coordination.

Financial barriers play a crucial role. We know that many homeowners, especially those in lower income brackets, struggle to afford the upfront costs of renovations.

HACT and our partners, PNZ Carbon, have developed a carbon crediting scheme to try and address some of the financial barriers facing households.

At the minute, we can raise a small amount of additional income for individual homes on an annual basis for decarbonisation work, but we are looking at solutions that would allow us to provide a larger amount of income upfront, as people are facing financial barriers now.

Alongside funding issues, complex regulations and convoluted guidelines also hinder progress. Homeowners often find the planning process confusing, with varying local regulations, insufficient information about available incentives, and lack of confidence about the quality of work. Horror stories of badly installed retrofit, such as inappropriate or incorrectly installed cavity wall insulation leading to cold spots, damp and mould, has undoubtedly damaged the reputation of the retrofit sector which is taking time to rebuild.

TG: The Government’s biggest flaw is the stop start approach they take to retrofit, almost every other year a new policy or scheme is launched, closing off a previous one. I have seen so many great people in the industry lose their job when a scheme has ended only to be replaced by a new scheme, and a fresh round of recruitment. There is already a dire lack of adequate skills in this sector. I have worked on numerous schemes where there have been delays in installs and completions of installs due to a shortage of skilled labour. On one scheme that I managed, the installers came over from Ireland, imagine the carbon footprint on that project! Retrofit/low-carbon training needs to be given in colleges if we are to even make a dent towards solving this issue.

How can we prevent disruption and rent increases?

TG: I feel that we can generally classify private landlords into 2 camps: the good and the bad (ignoring the ugly!). Often the government energy efficiency schemes that are rolled out include a provision for private landlords. The Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards (MEES) regulations came out in 2018 to enhance the quality of privately rented homes and boost energy efficiency, particularly in lower-performing properties. MEES regulations require privately rented properties to achieve a minimum EPC rating of E before renewal or renting to new tenants, effectively prohibiting rental of properties with ratings of F or G. The Government has recently pledged to upgrade these regulations to demand a higher level of energy efficiency. However, what I’m seeing on the ground is that there is no one available to enforce this or do the checks. Local authorities are now extremely under resourced and understaffed. 

Through the current ECO4 scheme in Greater Manchester we are seeing on average an annual fuel-bill saving of £500 for households who have gone through the scheme. It’s important these savings aren’t cancelled out by rent increases.  

Work to any property, retrofit or non-retrofit, causes some form of disruption, but the key here is clear communication. Installers need to be clear and realistic with private tenants as to when and how long the works will take. Based on my experience of working on the ECO4 scheme, the bulk of resident complaints are due to failure or lack of communications. Resident engagement is important. 

EB and AP: Improving energy efficiency in homes can pose challenges for residents, particularly in social housing and the private rented sector who have less control over the fabric of their homes. There are, several strategies that could be used to help prevent disruption.

Government policies can focus on funding and supporting energy efficiency upgrades. By offering grants or incentives to landlords for implementing improvements, the financial burden can be subsidised, reducing the likelihood of rent increases to cover costs. HACT and PNZ Carbon’s Retrofit Credits scheme is an example of an innovative model that subsidises the cost of energy efficiency upgrades to homes, thereby reducing the costs being passed onto residents. Over a 20-year period, we estimate that Retrofit Credits could cover up to 20% of the cost of a whole house retrofit. While this won’t solve the funding problem on its own, it can make up part of the solution, that means those who are least able to afford decarbonisation work aren’t left to cover the bulk of the cost.

Tenant protection measures should also be strengthened. This could include regulations that prevent landlords from increasing rents for a certain period after making energy-efficient upgrades, ensuring that residents reap the benefits without facing immediate financial strain. Another option could be a share reward for a home upgrade where both landlord and tenant could benefit from measures being installed on a home, increasing the rent by half of the energy bill saving following upgrades, for example.

How can we ensure people on low incomes don’t feel ‘done to’?

TG: The funds for schemes such as ECO4 still sit with large cooperate entities - energy companies who are still after lining their own pockets. In some schemes when I have worked with them (I shall refrain from naming them) they have stipulated the use of their own in-house installers, however, the rates their in-house installers have charged for installs have been significantly higher than competitive rates.

Power is often with those who hold the money strings.

Fuel poverty funds should not be kept with energy companies but dished out to local authorities/combined authorities so that they can do with it as they see fit to help vulnerable residents in their locality; central government needs to enforce this change. This would be the first step in helping low-income residents have agency on the schemes that they access.

It would also make a positive impact to create a regulatory body that actually does something! Some of the guarantees and warranties that come with the installs are inadequate/useless. This whole sector could be better regulated, the recent requirements around PAS 2035 are a step in the right direction but the industry needs to be trained up on it. Currently low-income residents who go through central government retrofit schemes struggle when it comes to making a complaint, often unable to do so due to lack of clear procedures and governance. This leaves them frustrated and makes their experience of retrofit negative.

Low-income residents should not be treated differently to their high-income counterparts when it comes to quality and service. The overall customer journey needs to be improved from start to finish, placing power in the customer’s hand. One size does not fit all.

EB and AP: People on low incomes are more likely to live in rented accommodation and as a result have less control over decarbonisation work done to their homes.

These households are also likely to have a much smaller carbon footprint compared to higher-income households but face far more of the consequences of climate change, from inability to heat their homes through to being less able to prepare for, respond to and recover from climate events.

All of this is completely unjust.

While significant systemic changes are needed to address these issues, in the here and now the least that can be done is ensuring low-income households have a say in the work carried out on their homes. As Tina says, this should include what measures are introduced, who does the work and when it’s carried out.

For the social housing sector, a more concerted effort can and should be made to actively involve residents in decision-making and design processes. One way of doing this is to encourage the formation of tenant associations or community groups. These can provide low-income residents with a platform to advocate for their interests in the decarbonisation process.

Illustrations by Emily Rand