Getting to the CoRE

A Centre for Refubishment Excellence has been opened in Stoke. On the face of it this looks like a great initiative - the country is in desperate need of skilled craftsmen who are capable of properly refurbishing our building stock. I wish it well but worry that this will tackle just the tip of an enormous iceberg while leaving the large, lower-skilled cohort untouched.

When I was involved in up-skilling the domestic heating installation trade ahead of the 2007 Building Regulation changes it was noticeable that those volunteering to spend a day on training and acquiring the new qualification were few and far between. It was a case of preaching to the converted. We only tackled the bulk of the trade (over 30,000 trained in a year) when being accredited became more or less mandatory.

I do worry that the Green Deal will turn out to be a damp squib, and fail to be a catalist for the massive building upgrading that is actually required.

It's the Cost of Gas..............................Mainly

The CCC has recently published an analysis of domestic energy bills which clearly shows that the rise in domestic energy bills has been mainly driven by the cost of gas. Of course, this won't surprise those of us in the industry but it may, just a little, reduce the clamour for reversing those charges related to CO2 reduction. I say "just a little" because much of the popular press appears incapable of rational thought and analysis.

Anyway, the CCC's headline numbers are as follows:
Comparisons were made between 2004 and 2010 when the "typical" household bill rose from £605pa to £1060. So that's a rise of some 75% over a period when general price inflation was about 16%. The CCC suggests that about £290 of the rise was attributable to the wholesale cost of sale, £75 to C-emissions reduction policies (£30 for low-C generation and £45 for EE policies), £70 to increasing transmission and distribution costs and £20 due to VAT.

The CCC goes on to look at the possibile situation in 2010 when it suggests that a further £110 will be added for low-C measures, perhaps £175 for gas costs and £15 for transmission and distribution. The CCC goes on to argue that consumption will fall as the boiler park becomes more efficient and to reflect the severe winter of 2010. So, all-in-all it suggests a typical bill in 2010 will be £1250 (sounds low to me) of which £190 will be for low-C and EE measures.

Is 15% for environmental action justified? I think so but I guess many won't.

And Another One!

EU Crisis and the Paradigm of Loss Model

It has recently been pointed out to me that the EU crisis is playing out along the lines of Elizabeth Kubler Ross's Paradigm of Loss model. This model suggests that there are five stages of grief at a loss: Denial, Anger, Bargaining, Depression, Acceptance.
EKR
Well, we've certainly had our fill of denial - a good two years of it! And the recent spats over Cameron's (admittedly mishandled) use of the so-called veto suggest that the anger stage is now in full swing. In many ways Cameron has just replaced Papandreou and Berlusconi as the principle target. However, sooner or later the German fiscal union protagonists and the French nation stage champions must realise that the whole mess is basically a result of them not sorting out that particular dichotomy in the first place. I bet they blame each other first before they eventually get down to some serious bargaining.

As to what the depression stage will look like - heaven help us. And acceptance is going to come with a very different looking Euro Zone. Will it retain all the current members? Possibly. Any country falling out of the Zone will have a particularly hard time. But will the Franco-German big boys be happy to bail out the profligate southerners, potentially accepting the likelihood of ongoing north to south value movement?

Hooray for the CCC

Yesterday the CCC finally said what a lot of have been thinking. There is a big risk of the Green Deal failing to deliver. The criticism focusses particularly on the remaining unfilled lofts and cavities, suggesting that leaving the task entirely to the market will provide only a small fraction of the required action. Anyone who has worked in the sector knows that insulation is not sexy and that the implicit hurdle rate for many householders to invest is very high (certainly very much higher than that associated with taking a foreign holiday instead). Why, after years of experience through SoP, EEC and CERT, should the higher hanging fruit suddenly be ripe for a market-led picking? It's nuts.

"Just tell us what you aim to do and for god's sake don't change your mind."

These are the reported words of Diana Montgomery, CIA commercial and policy director, castigating the Government for its inconsistency in approach to green issues and record of flip-flop policy changes. Hear, hear!

The recent furore over the FITs review is just one example of this flabby stance. That's not to say that the solar PV boys are not overstating their case. Talk of destroying the "UK solar PV industry" is a bit rich when that "industry" is mainly a bunch of installers putting in foreign produced technology. However, without a consistent line from government how can anyone bring inward investment to the country anyway?

Well, Well, Fancy That

Dyson has recently commissioned MIT to carry out a life cycle assessment of the global warming potential of a number of hand drying systems. And, guess what? Standard warm air dryers came out worst, followed by paper towels with the Dyson Airblade being the best performer. Woop-de-doop!

Cynicism aside, the study does remind us that careful thought about contributing factors is very important when comparing impacts. Paper towels, for instance, obviously have no energy-in-use impact but do, according to the study, have a whacking great embodied energy component. Traditional warm air dryers, by contrast, are the heaviest in-use energy users.

A Step Too Far

Edie recently reported that GreenBottle, the company behind the paper milk bottle (actually lined with plastic), is in talks about a paper wine bottle. Now, I'm all for CO2 reduction, and the promise is for a 10% lower footprint, but somehow wine in a paper bottle seems a step too far. Is it just that I'm influenced by the dreadful muck that is sold in bag-in-a-box form? Perhaps, a bit, but I am reconciled to the Stelvin capsule so I'm not a total Luddite.

And another thought. We still have our milk delivered to the door in glass bottles that are returned for cleaning and refilling. What are the economics and energy characteristics of doing that on a wider scale? A very quick internet search (and I mean very quick) yielded no robust argument. I guess it works in the milk bottle case because there is a single bottle configuration to work with, minimal transport on-costs and only the actual cleaning and steralising costs to compare with new bottle purchase. Does anyone know of some good research in this area?