Transcript Efficient Use of Council Resources

Sustainable Development
Consultation Event
Andy Nolan- Director of Sustainable Development
Monday 30th January 2012
Sustainable Development Team
Structure
Sustainable Housing and Affordable Warmth (SHAW) team
Eco-Team
Adaptation
Communications
Our team seeks to:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Reduce the emissions from council activities
Help others across the city to reduce their emissions by focusing on homes,
transport and businesses
Increase renewable energy across the city
Ensure all council services are effectively managing climate change risks
(adaptation)
Help the city adapt to future climate change
Provide leadership by supporting and showcasing innovation in low carbon
and adaptation solutions
Make homes warm, healthy and energy efficient
Reducing fuel poverty and
Sheffield's carbon footprint
Energy use, water use, transport and waste are the biggest producers of
carbon emissions and so by focusing on these areas we hope to make the
biggest savings.
Our current work includes:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Promoting energy efficiency and renewable energy
Developing our Environmental Management System (EMS)
Promoting and supporting our established Eco- Schools programme
Implementing the Sheffield City Council Corporate Travel Plan
Establishing District Energy Networks
Developing and managing Community Heating Schemes
Developing the Solar City project – installing photovoltaic (PV) installations
across council buildings, schools and social housing
Developing and supporting the Community Assembly Climate Change
Fund
Providing help and advice on affordable warmth
Delivering the Free Insulation Scheme- focus of today’s consultation
Sheffield City Council’s Free Insulation Scheme
Represents Sheffield’s single largest Carbon Reduction project.
Identified strongly during the Strategic Cores process, and contributes to
Corporate Plan:
• A Strong and Competitive Economy
Reductions in energy costs generate increased money into the local economyalmost £2.7 million annually.
• Better Health and Well-being
Warm, insulated homes counteract a range of health issues and reduce excess
winter deaths.
• Tackling Poverty and Increasing Social Justice
Fuel poverty is increasing nationally, with a key factor being the poor energy
efficiency of the UK housing stock. Households have been referred to benefit
advice agencies and other schemes aimed at reducing fuel poverty
• Great Places to Live
Environmental sustainability has been highlighted as a key factor in Sheffield’s
housing and community ‘offer’
• An Environmentally Responsible City
Carbon savings from the insulation, energy advice and heating improvement
referrals were assessed for the Review as generating 28,000 tonnes per year.
Sheffield City Council’s Free
Insulation Scheme
Robert Almond
Monday 30th January 2012
The scheme
Open to all owner occupiers, landlords and private
rented tenants across Sheffield
Free loft insulation
Free cavity wall insulation
• Top up if less than 200mm/ 8inches • Houses after about 1930s
• Insulate spaces in converted lofts
• Can do extensions
Aims of the scheme
• Significant impact on reducing fuel
poverty across the city (average
household saves £119 a year, every
year)
• Carbon savings and impact on
climate change
• Help the hard to reach - door to door
across Sheffield
• Health benefits (reduction in cold
related illnesses)
• Reduction in number of excess
seasonal deaths
• High level of customer satisfaction
Current eligibility
1) Area based scheme
Not means tested. Available to all homeowners,
landlords and private tenants.
16 out of 28 wards now covered
Aim to cover whole city, subject to funding
2) Priority groups- city wide
Fast tracking the most vulnerable residents, regardless
of where they live in the city:
•All householders and tenants aged 70 or over OR
•Householders and private tenants on qualifying income
and disability benefits
The process
Stage 1- sign up and referrals
• Signed up over 32,000
residents city wide since March
2009
• Sheffield City Council “Energy
Advisors”
• Form filled out on the door step,
over the phone or at events
• Offer services such as
translation and home visits for
the more vulnerable
• Photo I.D. and distinctive
Council uniforms
Stage 2- Carillion Energy
Services technical survey
• Carillion Energy Services
(formerly Eaga) is our only
contractor
• Contractors wear uniform, carry
ID and use passwords
Stage 3- installation of insulation
• Install insulation measures if
property suitable
• Cavity Insulation Guarantee
Agency (25 yrs)
Stage 4- customer satisfaction
survey
• 95 % happy or very happy
What else are we offering?
• Additional works funded (loft hatches, minor repairs and
scaffolding)
• Free loft clearances
• Insulation of hot and cold water tanks
Extra support:
• Council Tax and Housing Benefit checks
• Eco driving
• Fire safety checks
• Energy advice (priority services register and social
tariffs)
• Warm Front (heating/ draught proofing if eligible)
Before…and after
The current funding situation
• Complex funding package
• Backdrop of cuts in Sheffield
• Reduction in Sheffield City Council capital
funding
– Current proposal £250,000 for 11/12
• End to CERT funding December 2012
• Commitment to reduce fuel poverty AND
carbon emissions
• Transition into Green Deal and Energy
Company Obligation (ECO)
Options
In order to devise and assess the possible options, we
considered the following questions:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
How do we make best use of CERT funding and
resources? CERT funding ends December 2012.
How do we make best use of time?
How do we maximise the impact on carbon emissions and
fuel poverty?
How do we ensure we have a scheme that is fair?
How do we control costs and we keep in budget?
Should we take a ’supply- or demand-led’ approach?
Will it bridge the gap before Green Deal?
Flexibility: can it be scaled up or down depending on a
number of factors?: Sign-up rate, budget, staff numbers,
end date
Option 1: No change to existing
‘ward by ward’ approach
Whole wards declared one at a time, with priority
customers city-wide also eligible
• Focus on Fuel Poverty – able to choose wards with
high levels of fuel poverty, however, the large size of the
areas means that it is likely that more affluent areas will
also be targeted
• Efficient Use of Council Resources – reasonable
value for money in terms of reducing carbon emissions.
Less effective than options 3 and 4, however, as the
need to declare whole wards means it is harder to make
best use of the available budget (i.e. likely to have funds
left unspent)
• Budget Control – Larger areas make it harder to control
the budget. Likely to need to leave a large underspend
to avoid the risk of having to close the scheme part way
through a ward
Option 2: Priorities only
Close the area-based aspect of the scheme and focus on
(CERT) ‘priority’ customers across the city
• Focus on Fuel Poverty – strong focus on the fuel poor,
however not all priority customers will be fuel poor and
there’ll be households in fuel poverty that still do not
qualify. Identifying where the fuel poor live is not an
exact science.
• Efficient Use of Council Resources – effective at
bringing in the maximum CERT funding for the measures
installed, but the low number of customer makes the
proportion of the overall budget spent on measures
lower than the other three options. This is the least costeffective option in terms of cost per tonne of CO2 saved.
• Budget Control – Easy to avoid overspend as numbers
will be lower and each measure requires smaller SCC
input due to better CERT rates for these customers.
Option 3: Offer scheme to whole
city with set quotas
Open the scheme up to all private residents across the city, but
with limits set on applications from each ward and/or from
‘able to pay’ or ‘priority’ customers. Careful attention will have
to be paid to the communication strategy to ensure fair
access.
• Focus on Fuel Poverty – possibility of setting quotas to
ensure that fuel poor are more likely to benefit. With no/fewer
doorstep visits, it’s likely that hard-to-reach, fuel-poor
customers will not sign up.
• Efficient Use of Council Resources – likely to be able to
achieve a good price per tonne CO2 saved under this option,
depending on numbers of ‘priority’ customers reached. The
volume of customers trying to contact the scheme could
increase core costs.
• Budget Control – Alterations to the quotas to ensure that
sign-ups are maximised could make this the best option in
terms of budget control, however, the process is likely to be
complicated and will require close management.
Option 4: Target Lower Super
Output Areas (LSOA)
Preferred option. Replace the ward areas with LSOAs,
with priority customers city-wide also eligible.
• Focus on Fuel Poverty – able to concentrate on smaller
areas of fuel poverty across the city. Likely to be able to
target these customers more effectively than in option 1
by using available data on levels of deprivation.
• Efficient Use of Council Resources – effective use of
resources with a low cost per tonne of CO2 saved and
good CERT funding leverage, due to increased numbers
of priority customer when compared with option 1.
• Budget Control – Working in smaller areas will make it
possible to bring the scheme in much closer to the
prescribed budget than in options 1 and 2.
We want to hear your views!
• Do you broadly agree or disagree with our
proposals? Why?
• Do you have any other suggestions/
comments?
• How do you think our proposals will affect
different groups in Sheffield?
• Is there anything else you think we need to
consider in our proposals?
• Do you have any other concerns?