Industry Viewfinder
“What do you believe will be the main benefi t of the decarbonisation of social housing?”
Just over one in three believed the Government is doing well (5% very, 32% well) in informing the social housing sector on upcoming effi ciency changes. Similarly, when asked how it was performing legislating on energy effi ciency measures, just 5% said very well, 23% well, 45% not well, and 25% very badly. Continuing this trend, when it came to educating tenants, 1% said very
well, 25% well, 40% not very and 33% very badly, and on funding green social housing, 4% said very well, 12% well, 56% not well, and 26% very badly. Focusing on the Government’s controversial u-turn on legislating all
social homes in the UK to reach EPC C by 2030 – this survey being conducted before the latest election was called – respondents continued to show disappointment.
One user commented that the reversal had “sadly slowed down the urgency
of improving standards,” and another said, “it needs to happen, and further fi nancial assistance from the Government needs to be provided to get the stock up to EPC C and above”.
FUNDING In 2023, the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero, alongside the HM Treasury, announced that £6bn of funding had been allocated to cut energy use and bills in UK homes. It reported this included ‘targeted support’ for 200,000 low income, cold
and social homes, an extra £1.5bn for its boiler upgrade scheme, as well as assurances that these changes would help meet its net zero targets. T roughout, it has continued to encourage the use of heat pumps as a greener alternative for heating homes and reducing emissions. Forming a signifi cant portion of this support is the Social Housing
Decarbonisation Fund. Despite its prominence, however, this research has revealed a real lack of awareness of the funding available. Despite the majority of this survey’s respondents being eligible for the
funding, and the fund’s fi rst wave occurring in 2021, 46% had never heard of it– with 21 having heard of it, but not planning to apply, 15% applied and were accepted, 5% were rejected, and 13% had not applied, but planned to in the future. Of those who had been accepted, experiences were mixed – with some saying
it was “extremely time consuming,” “not straightforward, we had to abandon it,” and “its timescales for applying are too short and to carry out the work with delays being informed is hard. Applications should last fi ve years to enable supplies and contractors to have certainty of work.” Muddying the waters however, others reported that “it was straightforward,” and that they were “heavily involved” in each wave of funding so far.
“Is your company currently looking to improve the energy performance of your housing stock?”
AGEING STOCK Without intervention, a home’s effi ciency degrades over time, with some homes built to poor standards in the fi rst place. In either case, retrofi tting older
26 | HMMJune/July 2024 |
www.housingmmonline.co.uk
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44
