Last week the Energy Revolution Integration Service (ERIS), part of the wider Energy Systems Catapult we’ve been working with, invited me to speak about Bromford’s experience with smart energy systems at one of their events.
Having presented my slot, fully admitting I was more an enthusiastic amateur than an authority on energy systems, I had the pleasure of hearing the perspectives of two other housing associations. While my slot proposed more questions than answers, another showcased a highly evolved strategy, while the other covered a boggling array of technology that had been deployed in recent programmes.
In terms of how progressive or mature our environmental approach was – I looked like a toddler thrown in the Olympic pool.
But then, isn’t that part of the problem?
I pondered on this for a couple of days. The grant funding meant to accelerate sustainability programmes – like the new BEIS decarbonising fund or renewable heat incentives – is typically allocated to local authorities and housing associations who are willing to apply. The chance of discovering, applying for and being successful in securing such grant funding is basically zero without the expertise of a dedicated in-house sustainability team, role or consultant.
The unintended consequence of such, is X number of new sustainability teams with X number of new, organisation-specific sustainability strategies, designed in silo. If the world is genuinely going up in flames around us, how much of a waste of time, money and energy is this?
Suddenly, the swimming pool is full of enthusiastic amateurs in sponsored speedos, splashing around - making a right mess.
Let us apply only the thinnest veneer of problem definition to this conundrum. We need to make big improvements, reasonably fast. That requires solutions to scale across the UK, not only across individual Housing Association/Local Authority stock. What’s getting in the way? It’s difficult to see which approach to adopt through all the noise and uncertainty – not least of which comes from the incessant hammerings from tech providers, all promising salvation (for a price). We are in Obeng’s proverbial ‘Fog’ .
Add to the swimming pool (if it still resembles that), a bunch of suited businessmen loafing around on blow up flamingos, dolphins and crocodiles, getting in the way and blinding the swimmers with the glare off their Rolexes.
Picture of a polar bear underwater
Polar bears are already pretty great swimmers - but if the ice caps melt, what’s to stop them paddling over to our metaphorical swimming pool? It doesn’t look particularly impressed by that thought…
Hard to swim now. isn’t it?
If swimming, in this tortured metaphor, is meant to represent the efficiency of UK housings progress towards becoming truly decarbonised by 2050, then we need to be questioning why we - local authorities and housing associations - are even in the pool at all?
This is a wicked problem. Perhaps the most wicked. If we wan’t to make sure our grand-children aren’t reared in old subway tunnels with too many or too few radiation gifted appendages, we need to keep the pool free. The only swimmer needs to be UK housing. A comprehensive strategy that extends beyond offering £5k grants to put roof insulation in. One that takes the best of new technology, the best learning around whole home and fabric first approaches - and scales it successfully - and globally.
Get out of the pool.
Let’s think about it. Why aren’t we targetting grant funding towards academic institutions and innovation accelerators (like Energy Systems Catapult for example) who, with their scientific rigour and strategic oversight can find, test and sift new technology for the red herrings and golden goose eggs? Why can’t these insights be readily shared with housing providers and consortiums formed to take promising approaches and deploy them over scale, plugging specialist skill gaps from the outside, rather than requiring them from the housing sector?
Funding Housing providers and Local Authorities directly circumvents the need and use of this (freely available) collective of experts. It undermines the accuracy, validity and reliability of the findings as housing providers trip over the same issues, nationwide, that experts are already familiar with.
So what can we do? When looking at that next funding application, honestly appraise your ability or need to deliver this independently. Consider instead whether someone else is best placed to support positive strategic outcomes (learning to inform future policy), more than just getting a contractor to install piecemeal technology that could be riddled with issues.
We’re not the Olympic swimmers here. We are the coaches, trainers, nutritionists, physiotherapists and behaviourists on the bleachers.