Ever since the bombshell of the FiT cut and the 12th December deadline there has been a barrage of articles, virtually all highly critical.  We believe that much of these have been written with a lot of (mostly well intentioned) passion but few people have tried to do their own analysis. There has been some cherry picking of figures to meet their arguments. We stuck our neck out and wrote a blog that tried to give some dispassionate figures (see below). We've decided to give a bit more opinion on some of the areas of thought and analysis that have in the main been lacking in most articles we have seen........

1. There is therefore obviously a need for a big cut. Virtually everyone acknowledges that. But for those that don't....
If the ramp up before any proposed cuts in tariff is so big that it will cause a serious problem, with containers full of panels and thousands of new jobs at risk, then that is precisely why a cut is needed. It's almost the same old 'too big to fail' excuse being used.  Well it can't be 'too big' and and at the same time not have a projected 'too big' impact on everyone's bills.  The month-on-month increases through July, August and September far surpassed projections - and November just published has led to a 27% increase in overall retrofit capacity in 1 month!  And November was not a month when serious ramp up could occur due to the short lead in time.

2.What everyone is ignoring is that a big cut with a 6 month lead-in time will cause an avalanche greater than the one we have experienced in November/early December.  None of DECC's figures oft quoted are for the scenario where there is an announced six month window before any cut is given. If a 50% cut was proposed for April there is a good chance every container of PV panels heading anywhere in the world would be redirected to our shores along with anyone who knows a earth from a live wire.  Another way of saying this is that a big cut necessitates a very short lead in time - short enough that non-one can actually react to it.

3. The £26 figure for what it would cost everyone if the current situation continued has been quickly latched onto by everyone with little info on where it comes from. DECC's impact assessment clearly shows on page 17 that under a 'do nothing scenario' the cost by 2020-21 is £2,140 million per year or around £82 per house (although that appears to assume an average Feed in Tariff of 17.5p).  Even their 'Lower tariffs with 12 December eligibility date shows around £4 for 2011/12.  But Greg Barker said the £26 figure? Why would he understate the impact when he should be trying to tell people why it is necessary? You make up your own mind on that.  Most commentators should be aware that what politicians say is based on what message they want/need to give. A high figure would have far more people up in arms about current tariffs, would jeopardise any future tariffs and would also lead to serious accusations of why no-one acted sooner.  A lower figure just ends up with the PV industry and lots of people who mean well but might not have done the calculations up in arms.  He probably decided that the latter was easier to handle.

4. Other figures seem to be under-cooked too.  DECCs impact assessment had a projected GWh installation for 2011/2012 under the current scenario of 270GWh. Figures released for installations up to the end November are 407MW.

5. The is some consternation about social housing tenants missing out on free electricity.  The total proposed installations will effect around 2% of the social housing households. We are slightly uncomfortable with an argument that claims helping 2% of social housing save some money on their bills while 98% have higher bills!  If over 50% of social housing households get PV (i.e. more are helped than suffer) then there will need to be 2.24million installations. We would be very interested to see how that effects fuel bills!

6. There is some talk that the £26 figure mentioned above (in our opinion a low estimate if nothing had been done, or very low if a 6 month window had been given) is a small price to pay.  Comments like this would suggest that most installations and most comment is from the wealthy middle classes. £26 may not be much to those with disposable income but for those with none or negative disposable income it's £26 too much. And every penny that that is an underestimate makes it hurt more.

It's a strange fact that private clients don't ask us about how our Home Energy Masterplan (HEMP) compares to analyses based on EPCs or SAP.  Perhaps they are very astute or they just don't know the connection.

Contrary to this, organisations who should know better are constantly comparing our HEMP price to the price of an EPC or SAP assessment.  In this blog I'll seek to show whey our HEMP, starting at £290, is great value and why advice based on EPCs or SAP is not good value for money whatever the price - even free.

Blunt Instruments?
I'll start by getting a few things straight - and explaining and apologising for my title.  It's important to realise that EPCs (based on RdSAP) and SAP were never designed to be used to offer advice to individual households. They are supposed to be cost effective ways of benchmarking buildings and we believe they are often unfairly denigrated for not being good at something they aren't meant to do.  We also believe they are pretty good at what they are supposed to do. Why apologise for my title?  Well its falling into the same trap - EPCs and SAP are only blunt instruments when used for something other than their purpose - similar to criticising a cold chisel for not carving wood very well!

Below I'll highlight the reasons why a HEMP is what you need and why you shouldn't compare cold chisels to wood chisels.

How you use your building
As already pointed out RdSAP and SAP are used to be benchmark buildings. They necessarily apply a number of rules about how the buildings are used - especially the heating systems and controls.  Day-in, day-out, we survey properties and each and every one is used differently from how RdSAP and SAP would model them. Often it's the heating times, often the bits of the house that are heated, sometimes it  is secondary heaters, very often its the thermostat settings....the list goes on. Suffice to say if you are heating your house very differently from how it is modelled, the results of any analysis are going to reflect a situation other that yours.

The same thing applies to hot water, lights and appliances.  Whereas these are based on floor area for RdSAP and SAP we actually model how much hot water you actually use and what appliances and lighting you have. We find there is a really big range of hot water use and very wide normal range for electricity use - 3-bedroom houses often range from 2,000kWh pre annum to 9,000kWh (these also effect the heating calcs which is something we also take into account). Its important to add that this detail cannot be carried out in SAP or RdSAP.

Calibration
Even with the best surveying (and customers who try and tell you the truth) bills sometimes tell a different story from what has been modelled. Our process includes collecting annual bills so we can check that the modelling is correct.  50% of the time this highlights something that has been missed - hidden electric underfloor heating or fridge freezers in the shed - so is a good sense check. We then use this data to calibrate the model, partly making informed adjustments, partly adding additional miscellaneous items and party by adjusting the overall losses.  This all helps us get as close as possible to your real situation.

Lights, Appliances and Products
We've packed out software with a wide range of different lights, appliances and products so that firstly your home can be accurately 'built' with what it actually contains and party so that we can analyses lots of different options for you.  Xbox360 in gaming mode - we've got it, woodfibreboard insulation 40mm thick - yep, and also fishtanks, Celcon blocks, recycled cotton insulation......

Fuel prices, tariffs and subsidies
Fuel prices are constantly changing (usually upwards) and at different rates.  We change our prices to match the prices you are actually experiencing (or what you want to guess what prices might be). If British Gas raises its prices 18% - we can reflect that. The inability to model actual prices changes can mean that any calculations can be very inaccurate.

One of the biggest things to impact paybacks at the moment are Feed In Tariffs and the proposed Renewable Heat Incentive.  We model both.  We don't know anyone else who can accurately model what you might expect to get from the Renewable Heat Incentive.  Why not?  Well the payments will be based on your actual use not your use deemed by SAP or RdSAP.  Because we model your building and how you use it really really accurately we therefore are in a great position to model your potential RHI payments too!

If you aren't able to do all this then your analysis is severely limited.

How much will measures cost?
We've packed a database full of prices for a very wide range of measures, and we are constantly updating them.  Prices we provide are based on the surveyed data, not just huge static ranges.  An example is solid wall insulation.  The price will be based on the material, the thickness and the area to be covered.  Another is windows - prices dependent on the number of windows, the size of each and the type of window to be installed.  We can, and often do, override our prices either because you already have a quote or we want to take into account additional information about your situation.

This goes to the heart of what makes our process different.  It has been designed from its inception to offer advice rather then being shoe-horned into attempting to give advice.

There are other aspects too which set the Home Energy Masterplan apart and lead us to get feedback such as 'This is amazing', but I think you probably get the idea.

Just to finish, its worth reflecting that whilst each of the areas above in their own right firstly set the HEMP apart and secondly show weaknesses in using RdSAP and SAP, in reality all of them apply and those weaknesses add up. 

Today at Parity Projects we have launched, in collaboration with Keepmoat and Sustainable Homes, a new guide for Registered Providers and Local Authorities on the practical steps they should be taking to prepare for the Green Deal. The guide includes a summary of both the Green Deal and Energy Company Obligation, along with information on financing the Green Deal, preparing supply chains, and becoming Green Deal provider.

The idea of writing the guide came about following a series of workshops that we held with the partners for RPs and LAs where it became clear that many across the industry were desperate for answers on what the scheme would mean for their organisations. The argument for publishing a no-nonsense guide was strengthened by last week launch of the Green Deal and ECO consultation documents, which totalled many hundreds of pages of detailed information.

Launching the document, Richard Griffiths - our Business Development Manager - said:

“After attending so many events where Registered Providers were clearly concerned about the implications of the Green Deal but overwhelmed by the policy detail, it has been great to work with Keepmoat and Sustainable Homes – first in putting on the practical workshops, and then in developing this guide. We hope that the guide proves as helpful for Registered Providers as hearing their issues and concerns have been for us when thinking about the support we can offer them with the Green Deal.”

You can download a copy of  the guide here: "The Green Deal A summary guide to the big decisions for Registered Providers and Local Authorities"

More details on our CROHM stock assessment service - a key step in preparing for the Green Deal.