Back in the 2000's part of my work included helping eligible vulnerable people to access 'Warm Front' grants that, after an initial survey, could entitle people to wall and loft insulation, and even a new boiler and radiators to be supplied and fitted in their homes. Our experience on the ground was, sub contractors were coming from all over the country (as the govt would only work with business with a very high minimum turnover) that excluded local (and accountable) fitters, the work that was identified in a home wasn't prioritised in terms of biggest impact so the grant would often be used up on the easiest to supply and fit items that left gaping holes (no pun intended) in the homes efficiency, things like loft insulation would often be supplied but not fitted because contractors wouldn't move items that older people often had stored in loft spaces but were no longer accessible to them through frailty so the rolls of rock wall were just left in a pile in the roof space and because of the way the procurement for equipment worked the radiator packs came a standard of 7 rads - so some homes had rooms with no heat (again, those rooms with easy access were prioritised regardless of the occupants usage) and some smaller home owners were left with brand new unfitted rads to dispose of. My personal experience in my home was that, being on a low income, a survey identified that we would benefit from some free fitted loft insulation. We were given a date for installation that we couldn't commit to yet no alternative was offered (i had said that i could fit it myself but that wasn't allowed) and after a few months we received a parcel of two energy saving lightbulbs and a note confirming our 'grant' had been spent, so presumably the contractor just kept the money/materials assigned to our property? The note also advised that as we had had a grant we wouldn't be able to apply for any other grants to improve our homes efficiency. I was on a low income, we had 3 very young children and lived in an ex-council property that while being very well built (1949) had very old Crittal windows (but fortunately the previous owner had fitted good secondary glazing) and draughty wooden external doors - We were very fortunate to have a local 'energy advice centre' staffed by very helpful and well informed staff, i had just started on my 'permaculture' journey as our library had a copy of 'The Permaculture Way' by the late, great, Graham Bell and i had signed up for a weekly PDC with the amazing Aranya (his first one as lead tutor)and took to heart Bill Mollison's comment (in one of his global gardener films i think) about in a cool temperate climate 50% of design should be about buildings and i had gained a CD Rom of 'The Yellow HouseGuide to Eco-Renovation' by George Marshall. Being poor but concerned i think our situation meant we had an attitude that felt we could do somethings ourselves. My Mother in Law very generously lent us the money to purchase enough reflective rolls of Rockwell insulation (not the best stuff i know but B&Q had it on a 50% off offer) to massively improve the depth of loft insulation. I cannot recall who said it but, 'Having an eco home is easy, stop all of the draughts, insulate it to the hilt and fill it with antique (second hand)furniture' this attitude would need to be tempered by some knowledge of air flow, condensation and access to experts that care or information that can be understood before it is applied. I dont know if the illustration you gave Chris is a lack of competence or just not caring about the future impacts?
Thanks for the very informative and telling comments, Gary. Yes, your experiences have been reflected by several of my friends in the past, notably older folk who were too frail to get up into their loft space. In some instances, sub-contactors simply threw unopened bags of insulation up there. Often this wasn't discovered until several years later when a younger friend went up to have a look. In fact, some of the insulation in our barn came from a friend who had workers turn up to fit insulation only to find he didn't have an accessible loft so they just dumped a score of big bags of insulation with him and went.
I think you're right on both counts regarding the reasons, lack of competence and just not caring about the future impacts plus I would add just wanting to make as much money as possible from the scheme. Being paid a set amount per household encourages an unscrupulous contractor to do the job as quickly as possible.
I see a general problem here which has two main causes, the first being a government scheme arising from good intentions but basically rushed in an attempt to make a difference quickly and the second being that the installation work by the contractors employed to do it is not adequately scrutinised before payment is made. We could also say that not offering competent homeowners the opportunity to do the work themselves is a missed opportunity as they are the ones who are most likely to do a really good job!
I like "Having an eco home is easy, stop all of the draughts, insulate it to the hilt and fill it with antique (second hand) furniture", bang on. Sounds like home!
When I asked my mate Jo from Dulas and the Centre for Alternative Technology what heat source I should use in our barn, he said, "forget about that for now, just stuff in as much insulation as you can, then think about heating." We did; good advice.
A final point, as I raised in an earlier piece, is not taking sufficient account of the individual dwelling's opportunities. Here, for example, a low head, pica-turbine would cost less than an ASHP and would provide energy in the winter months, when it was needed, unlike solar panels.
Back in the 2000's part of my work included helping eligible vulnerable people to access 'Warm Front' grants that, after an initial survey, could entitle people to wall and loft insulation, and even a new boiler and radiators to be supplied and fitted in their homes. Our experience on the ground was, sub contractors were coming from all over the country (as the govt would only work with business with a very high minimum turnover) that excluded local (and accountable) fitters, the work that was identified in a home wasn't prioritised in terms of biggest impact so the grant would often be used up on the easiest to supply and fit items that left gaping holes (no pun intended) in the homes efficiency, things like loft insulation would often be supplied but not fitted because contractors wouldn't move items that older people often had stored in loft spaces but were no longer accessible to them through frailty so the rolls of rock wall were just left in a pile in the roof space and because of the way the procurement for equipment worked the radiator packs came a standard of 7 rads - so some homes had rooms with no heat (again, those rooms with easy access were prioritised regardless of the occupants usage) and some smaller home owners were left with brand new unfitted rads to dispose of. My personal experience in my home was that, being on a low income, a survey identified that we would benefit from some free fitted loft insulation. We were given a date for installation that we couldn't commit to yet no alternative was offered (i had said that i could fit it myself but that wasn't allowed) and after a few months we received a parcel of two energy saving lightbulbs and a note confirming our 'grant' had been spent, so presumably the contractor just kept the money/materials assigned to our property? The note also advised that as we had had a grant we wouldn't be able to apply for any other grants to improve our homes efficiency. I was on a low income, we had 3 very young children and lived in an ex-council property that while being very well built (1949) had very old Crittal windows (but fortunately the previous owner had fitted good secondary glazing) and draughty wooden external doors - We were very fortunate to have a local 'energy advice centre' staffed by very helpful and well informed staff, i had just started on my 'permaculture' journey as our library had a copy of 'The Permaculture Way' by the late, great, Graham Bell and i had signed up for a weekly PDC with the amazing Aranya (his first one as lead tutor)and took to heart Bill Mollison's comment (in one of his global gardener films i think) about in a cool temperate climate 50% of design should be about buildings and i had gained a CD Rom of 'The Yellow HouseGuide to Eco-Renovation' by George Marshall. Being poor but concerned i think our situation meant we had an attitude that felt we could do somethings ourselves. My Mother in Law very generously lent us the money to purchase enough reflective rolls of Rockwell insulation (not the best stuff i know but B&Q had it on a 50% off offer) to massively improve the depth of loft insulation. I cannot recall who said it but, 'Having an eco home is easy, stop all of the draughts, insulate it to the hilt and fill it with antique (second hand)furniture' this attitude would need to be tempered by some knowledge of air flow, condensation and access to experts that care or information that can be understood before it is applied. I dont know if the illustration you gave Chris is a lack of competence or just not caring about the future impacts?
Thanks for the very informative and telling comments, Gary. Yes, your experiences have been reflected by several of my friends in the past, notably older folk who were too frail to get up into their loft space. In some instances, sub-contactors simply threw unopened bags of insulation up there. Often this wasn't discovered until several years later when a younger friend went up to have a look. In fact, some of the insulation in our barn came from a friend who had workers turn up to fit insulation only to find he didn't have an accessible loft so they just dumped a score of big bags of insulation with him and went.
I think you're right on both counts regarding the reasons, lack of competence and just not caring about the future impacts plus I would add just wanting to make as much money as possible from the scheme. Being paid a set amount per household encourages an unscrupulous contractor to do the job as quickly as possible.
I see a general problem here which has two main causes, the first being a government scheme arising from good intentions but basically rushed in an attempt to make a difference quickly and the second being that the installation work by the contractors employed to do it is not adequately scrutinised before payment is made. We could also say that not offering competent homeowners the opportunity to do the work themselves is a missed opportunity as they are the ones who are most likely to do a really good job!
I like "Having an eco home is easy, stop all of the draughts, insulate it to the hilt and fill it with antique (second hand) furniture", bang on. Sounds like home!
When I asked my mate Jo from Dulas and the Centre for Alternative Technology what heat source I should use in our barn, he said, "forget about that for now, just stuff in as much insulation as you can, then think about heating." We did; good advice.
A final point, as I raised in an earlier piece, is not taking sufficient account of the individual dwelling's opportunities. Here, for example, a low head, pica-turbine would cost less than an ASHP and would provide energy in the winter months, when it was needed, unlike solar panels.
Thanks again Gary. Hwyl! Chris.