The introduction of the Heat Network (Metering and Billing) Regulations 2014 meant that owners of properties operating district heating schemes were subject to new obligations. It has been assumed that such schemes deliver benefits to residents through reduced energy consumption and lower bills, thus helping to alleviate fuel poverty, but the actual dynamics of tenants’ awareness, knowledge and engagement with the practical and financial aspects of these systems are not fully understood.

The use of photovoltaic (PV) systems in domestic properties boomed after the introduction of the Feed-in Tariff (FIT) in 2010. The deployment of solar technologies should see a decline in energy users’ fuel costs (and thus fuel poverty), while property owners (including landlords) should benefit from the income generated by the FIT. The wider context of rising fuel poverty acts as a spur to implement the energy efficiency measures with the greatest impact on consumption.

Domestic energy consumption continues to generate a significant proportion of the UK’s carbon emissions. Since the start of the century, considerable investment has been made in increasing household energy efficiency and promoting energy conservation. Despite this, emissions from gas heating sources remain unchanged, and energy consumption is rising in some areas.

Although solid wall insulation (SWI) is known to have a positive impact on domestic energy efficiency, its installation is technically demanding and, in practice, disruptive to residents. The introduction of the national ‘Green Deal’ and Energy Company Obligation schemes from 2012 brought significant emphasis on the installation of energy efficiency measures in domestic properties, particularly where the household was at risk of fuel poverty or the building was eligible for improvement.

The introduction of national programmes such as the Feed-in Tariff (FIT) and Renewable Heat Incentive (RHI) was aimed at encouraging the installation of domestic microgeneration systems. Their primary aim was to reduce fossil fuel consumption and thus carbon emissions, but they have the potential to have a positive impact on fuel poverty by reducing expenditure and generating income for households.

Determining whether households are fuel poor has often been reduced to a quantitative exercise based on income calculations. While some form of benchmark is undoubtedly necessary in order to target activity effectively, the actual experience of living in cold homes requires more recognition in the debate. Recognising people’s strategies for using energy and keeping warm and understanding their own opinions and knowledge of the choices open to them are important because this information is vital in fully maximising the potential of scheme design. 

It is widely accepted that tackling fuel poverty is likely to have positive health benefits for households that receive practical interventions to make their homes warmer or more energy-efficient. In mapping the exact nature of that association, it is important to understand in detail the drivers and how such benefits are manifested. Being able to observe a process from start to finish offers valuable opportunities to catalogue the relationship and inform future policy, practice and research.