Large proportions of households in Wakefield live on low incomes, and cannot keep warm at a reasonable cost.
Research by Wakefield Council has estimated that the
number of people living in fuel poverty had risen to 26.2% of the city’s population.
This investigation aims to discover the barriers to the
micro-generation of domestic solar energy in Wakefield. Additionally, solutions to these barriers will be uncovered and be used to form a proposal for the future installation of micro-generation in Wakefield.
The main findings of the research showed that research
participants performed passively towards the adoption of
solar micro-generation. This indicated that deployment through an existing energy supplier, or ESCo would have high prospects for acceptance. Research also identified a lack of information regarding solar technologies amongst
respondents, which can be addressed with a successful
marketing and advertising campaign directed towards the cost and potential returns to customers.
Introduce Trauma-Informed Design to Your Organization - CSUN ATC 2024
Dissertation Simon Taylor
1. 1
Barriers to and Prospects for
Domestic Solar Micro-Generation in
Wakefield.
Simon Taylor
2. 2
Large proportions of households in Wakefield live on low
incomes, and cannot keep warm at a reasonable cost.
Research by Wakefield Council has estimated that the
number of people living in fuel poverty had risen to 26.2% of
the city’s population.
Micro-generation is defined as ‘the small-scale production of
heat and/or electricity from a low carbon source. Solar panels
applied to domestic buildings, to achieve micro-generation
has the potential to further improve access to affordable
energy for low-income households. It has been estimated
that micro-generation could meet 30-40% of UK electricity
demand by 2050. The most widespread method of
domestic micro-generation is solar PV and thermal with
70.8% of solar energy capacity been installed on small scale
domestic buildings. Yet, barriers to the widespread adoption
of solar micro-generation currently exist.
This investigation aims to discover the barriers to the
micro-generation of domestic solar energy in Wakefield.
Additionally, solutions to these barriers will be uncovered
and be used to form a proposal for the future installation of
micro-generation in Wakefield. Methodologically the paper
reviews survey data from previous studies on the barriers
and prospects to solar micro-generation, and compares these
with primary data gathered using a conjoint analysis method.
Members of the community were approached to participate
in a personally administered questionnaire.
Abstract
3. 3
The main findings of the research showed that research
participants performed passively towards the adoption of
solar micro-generation. This indicated that deployment
through an existing energy supplier, or ESCo would have high
prospects for acceptance. Research also identified a lack of
information regarding solar technologies amongst
respondents, which can be addressed with a successful
marketing and advertising campaign directed towards the
cost and potential returns to customers.
However, the success of prospects outlined in this
investigation relies largely on Wakefield Council playing an
active role in prioritising micro-generation developments.
This should be done through fiscal and policy commitments
directed towards solar micro-generation development.
I would like to thank all the residents of Wakefield who
participated in this investigation and gave their thoughts,
without whom this research would not have been possible. I
also wish to thank Zaid Alwan for his guidance and feedback
throughout the writing of this paper.
Acknowledgements
4. 4
DECC – Department of Energy and Climate Change
EE – Energy Efficiency
EER – Energy Efficiency Rating
EPC – Energy Performance Certificate
EU – European Union
ESCo – Energy Services Company
FIT – Feed In Tariff
GHG – Greenhouse Gases
kWh – Kilowatt hour
MCS – Micro-generation Certification Scheme
MW - Megawatt
NPV- Net Present Value
OSI – Oxford Solar Initiative
PV - Photovoltaic
RE - Renewable Energy
TW - Thameswey
UK – United Kingdom
WDC – Wakefield District Council
Abbreviations
5. 5
Abstract
Acknowledgements
Abbreviations
Table of Contents
List of Figures
1 Introduction
1.1 Context
1.2 Solar Micro-Generation
1.3 Wakefield
1.4 Role of the Architect
1.5 Research Question
2 Literature Review
2.1 Prospects & Barriers
2.2 Government Policy
2.3 Consumer Economics
2.4 Micro-Generation
2.5 Community Microgrid
2.6 Energy Service Companies
2.7 Consumer Acceptance
2.8 Willingness to Pay
3 Methodology
3.1 Research Approach
3.2 Data Collection
3.3 Data Analysis
3.4 Methodology Limitations
Table of Contents 2
3
4
5
7
11
12
16
17
20
20
22
23
24
26
28
30
32
34
36
41
42
43
45
45
6. 6
3.5 Results Briefing
4 Results
5 Discussion
5.1 Barriers and Prospects
Economic & Fiscal
5.2 Barriers and Prospects
Information Related
5.3 Barriers and Prospects Social
Acceptance
5.4 Barriers & Prospects
Consumption Behaviour
5.5 Barriers and Prospects Policy
& Legislation
5.6 Prospects Accreditation Schemes
6 Conclusion
7 References
7.1 Text References
7.2 Image References
8 Appendix
46
47
67
68
72
74
78
80
82
88
91
92
102
104
7. 7
List of
Figures
9
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
21
25
25
27
27
29
31
33
33
34
35
37
38
42
44
48
49
50
Fig. 1 - Bungalow Solar Panel Installation (Ecoinnovations, 2013)
Fig. 2 - Predicted Surface Temperatures (IPCC, 2007)
Fig. 3 - Global Temperature Rise (IPCC, 2007)
Fig. 4 - Installed Global PV (Solar Power Portal, 2013)
Fig. 5 - Renewable Energy Growth (DECC, 2013)
Fig. 6 - Public Solar Approval (London Renewables, 2003)
Fig. 7 - Hepworth Gallery Wakefield
Fig. 8 - Wakefield Deprivation Figures (DECC, 2011)
Fig. 9 - Wakefield Aerial Photograph (Google Earth Pro, 2014)
Fig. 10 - Wakefield Location Map
Fig. 11 - Energy Consumption by Sector (GB Housing Energy Fact File, 2012)
Fig. 12 - Public Micro-generation Awareness (UK Microgeneration Strategy, 2011)
Fig. 13- Micro-generation Adoption Strategy (UK Microgeneration Strategy, 2011)
Fig. 14 - Solar Panel Prices - 4kWh System (Compare My Solar, 2013)
Fig. 15 - UK Photovoltaic Demand (Solar Power Portal, 2013)
Fig. 16 - Westmill Solar Park (Ben Cavanna, 2012)
Fig. 17 - Potential Consumer Roles (Watson, J., Sauter, R., et al., 2006)
Fig. 18 - Esco Structure - End-User Borrower (US Department of Energy, 2012)
Fig. 19 - Esco Structure - Esco Borrower (US Department of Energy, 2012)
Fig. 20 - Solar Panel Concerns (London Renewables, 2003)
Fig. 21 - Solar Panel Infographic (Arjan De Raaf, 2012)
Fig. 22 - Community Energy Scheme (Brighton Energy Co-operative, 2013)
Fig. 23 - Consumers WIllingness-to-Pay (Element Energy, 2008)
Fig. 24 - Research Wordle
Fig. 25 - Survey Response Rates (Oxford Solar Inititative, 2002)
Fig. 26 - Question 1 Results
Fig. 27 - Question 2 Results
Fig. 28 - Question 3 Results
11. 11
The issue of global warming as a result of human greenhouse
gas production, and the subsequent change it is bringing upon
our climate has become an increasingly contentious matter in
recent years, the topic has also become more apparent and
discussed amongst the general public.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
recently released a landmark assessment report titled ‘Climate
Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis’, in this report it is
stated that with ’95 percent confidence’ that it is
extremely likely more than half of the observed increase in
global average surface temperature from 1951 to 2010 was
caused by the anthropogenic increase in greenhouse gas
concentrations and other anthropogenic forcings together
(IPCC, 2013). Evidence presented by the IPCC indicates that
by 2099 the global temperature is likely to have risen by 0.3-
4.0 degrees (IPCC,2007) (Fig. 2 & 3).
In responding to an issue which will affect the climate we
live in, the way in which GHG’s are reduced and by what
method, could not be more pertinent. Policy changes around
the world are reflecting this as the EU’s aims to increase the
amount of energy produced from renewable sources to
reduce the amount of greenhouse gases by 20% (EU, 2013),
tied in with this is the UK’s Department of Energy and
Climate Change’s (DECC) plan, establishing the world’s first
legally binding climate change target to reduce the UK’s
greenhouse gas emissions by at least 80% by 2050 (DECC,
2013).
Context
Fig. 2 - Predicted Surface Temperatures
(IPCC, 2007)
1900 2000 2100
Surface
Warming
(o
C)
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
-1
Predicted
Scenarios
1.1
12. 12
Fig. 3 - Global Temperature Rise
(IPCC, 2007)
(o
C)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Projected surface temperature changes for the late 21st century (2090-2099). The map shows the average projection for temperature
scenarios. Temperatures are relative to the period 1980-1999.
1.1
13. 13
The implementation of such targets has seen the production
of solar photovoltaics1 for the generation of electricity, and
solar thermal panels for the heating of hot water increase
rapidly. The installed capacity of solar energy in the UK in
2010 sat at 94 MW, since then capacity has increased to a
staggering 2,413 MW at the end of June 2013 (DECC, 2013).
This rapid growth has seen the UK reach a new high of the
6th highest capacity of installed PV1
globally (Solar Power
Portal, 2013) (Fig. 4).
Gregory Barker MP, the minister of the department of energy
and climate change (DECC) stated in October 2013 that, “
Solar PV has now taken its rightful place as a mainstream
renewable energy technology and at the centre of the
Government’s policies to achieve our 2020 renewable
energy targets (DECC, 2013) (Fig. 5).”
This is having a positive social and economic effect on the
people of the UK as solar panel manufacturing companies
such as ‘Anesco’ that has lifted 40,000 people out of fuel
poverty, has been announced as the fastest growing private
company in the country over the last 3 years (Solar Power
Portal, 2013).“Solar PV has now taken its
rightful place as a mainstream
renewable energy technology
and at the centre of the
Government’s policies”
6
Fig. 4 - Installed Global PV
(Solar Power Portal, 2013)
- Gregory Barker MP
5
4
3
2
1
11
109
8
7
12
13
Fig. 4 -
1. China 2. United States 3. Japan 4. Germany 5. India 6. United Kingdom 7. Greece 8. Italy
9. Romania 10. South Africa 11. Other 12. Rest of World 13. Rest of Europe
1.1
15. 15
The removal of people from fuel poverty and the savings
afforded to them by the installation of solar thermal2
or PV
makes solar technologies immensely beneficial. It is unique to
the general public as it is the only form of renewable energy
that is applied mostly to domestic buildings. As of June 2013,
1.7GW of the 2.4 GW installed capacity in the UK was small
scale domestic micro-generation3
, a majority of 70.8%, com-
pared with the 29.2% applied to industrial and commercial
buildings (DECC, 2013).
A recent DECC Public Attitudes Tracker, ‘Wave 5’ has
highlighted solar PV as the most accepted renewable
energy technology, with a public approval of 85% (DECC,
2013) (Fig. 6). The popularity of solar micro-generation is
understandable amongst domestic home owners, while an
offshore wind farm may provide clean energy to the national
grid, an installed micro-generation system supplies clean
decentralised energy direct to the home owner. From an
average sized 3.5-4KWh PV installation costing £7,000 a
home owner could expect to pay back the investment in 12
years, and make a further £12,085 (Which, 2012).
Solar Micro-Generation
Good Idea
Bad Idea
Solar Wind CHP
Anaerobic
Digestion
Organic
Matter
Fig. 6 - Public Solar Approval
(London Renewables, 2003)
4%
13%
9%7%
11%
81%
52%
46%
75%
56%
1.2
17. 17
The benefits of the savings on a household fuel bill through
the installation of solar PV are highly relevant to the place I
was born and call home. A metropolitan district of West
Yorkshire, Wakefield; was a former market town and inland
trading port, known for its spinning mills and more
recently the Hepworth Gallery designed by David
Chipperfield (Fig. 7).
Wakefield has a population of 325,600 of which 40,700
(12.5%) live in neighbourhoods that are in the 10% most
deprived in England. Furthermore, research in 2009/10
estimated that the number of people living in fuel poverty had
risen to 26.2% (DECC, 2011); these figures are linked to the
districts high level of excess winter deaths in Wakefield, with
210 in the period 2008-09 (ONS, 2011) (Fig. 8).
On a medium annual domestic energy bill of £1034 (Ofgem,
2011), the annual saving of £84 and income of £525 from
an average PV system would do more than half the costs of
providing energy for a home, which would be a big step in
tackling the problem and in many cases, would bring
families out of fuel poverty. I have seen first-hand the
restorative effects of improving the energy efficiency in social
housing in Wakefield, particularly amongst the elderly who no
longer have the worry of a choice between ‘eating or heating.
The implementation of solar PV/ thermal in domestic homes
would address the issue of fuel poverty as well as help to
reduce the greenhouse gas emissions of the housing sector;
exporting energy back to the national grid would also allow
other sectors to benefit from renewable energy.
Wakefield
12.5%
26.2%
Most deprived
in England
Fuel Poverty
Fig. 8 - Wakefield Deprivation Figures
(DECC, 2011)
1.3
20. 20
The wider personal implications when discussing renewable
energy, is the impact of the construction industry has on the
environment, in particular domestic buildings, as 29% of the
UK’s CO2 emissions are generated by housing (GB Housing
Energy Fact File, 2012, p.5) (Fig. 11).
During my Part I RIBA placement, I worked heavily in the
design of domestic buildings, and as the largest contributor
of greenhouse gas emissions in the construction industry
(DECC, 2012), the role of the architect in reducing that figure
through sustainable design as well as research is a crucial
one. By carrying out research into the adoption of solar
micro-generation in Wakefield I hope to contribute to a field
which has the ability to reduce the CO2 emissions of the UK
drastically, as well as a benefit Wakefield by moving its
domestic buildings towards a sustainable method of
generating energy.
This investigation aims to discover the barriers to the
micro-generation of domestic solar energy in Wakefield and
state them clearly, this is done using a quantitative analysis
method, but also seeks to derive qualitative conclusions from
research data.
Data will be used to develop solutions to existing barriers, as
well as form a proposal for future developments by Wakefield
council. The aim of this investigation is that the proposal put
forward displays prospects for the future installation of solar
micro-generation in Wakefield.
Role of the Architect
Research Question
1.4
21. 21
To answer these questions, a personally administered
questionnaire was generated, using mostly multiple choice
questions. This method was chosen to reach a larger
proportion of the community, and attain a high response rate
to the questionnaire. A personally administered questionnaire
also allowed for home owners to be specifically selected to
gain relevant data.
The investigation aimed to discover resident’s attitudes
towards solar micro-generation. It also covered the current
energy efficiency of their home, energy usage and
willingness-to-pay for solar technologies Questionnaires
were handed out to domestic hold owners in Wakefield over
a period of 90 days, when requested by the respondent, the
questionnaire was also able to be filled out online. In total 58
questionnaires were completed, with a response rate of 81.1%.
This response rate is significantly higher than the average
response rate experienced when distributing e-mail or postal
questionnaires.
Footnotes
1 Solar Photovoltaics or PV are a method of generating electrical power by
converting solar radiation into direct current electricity.
2 Solar Thermal is a system that converts solar radiation into heat. This does not
include Concentrated Solar Power, Solar Cookers or Concentrated Solar Thermal
.
3 Micro-generation is defined in Section 82 of the Energy Act (2004) as ‘the
small-scale production of heat and/or electricity below 50-100 kW from a low
carbon source’’.
Fig. 11 - Energy Consumption by Sector
(GB Housing Energy Fact File, 2012, p.5)
(TWh)
452
Residential
149
Air Travel
316
Industry
463
Road Transport
30
Other Travel
29
Other
101
Non
Energy
171
Commercial &
Admin
1.5
23. 23
Barriers and prospects to the uptake of domestic solar
micro-generation in the UK are outlined by Allen et al.
(2008). The writing concurs that micro-generation could
provide a significant proportion of energy supply, citing
examples of solar thermal systems capable of supplying 33%
of hot water requirements, and typical solar PV installations
able to provide 51% of electricity demand (Energy Saving
Trust, 2007).
It is concluded that this will lead to reduced carbon emissions
associated with energy supply, reduced dependence on fossil
fuels and increased energy security’. The validity of a
decentralised energy system as a benefit to fuel poor
households is underpinned by Walker (2008, p.4517) who
adds that ‘micro-generation has future potential to further
improve access to affordable energy for low-income
households.’
However, while it is agreed that there are a number of
advantages to micro-generation, there are also a number of
disadvantages and barriers that can be broadly categorised
as technical, economic and information-related. Allen et al,
(2008, p. 541) state that ‘over and above all these economic
changes, it is apparent that a consistent and long-term
framework is required from governments’, qualifying this
by concluding that while UK policy and legislation ‘indicate
positive intentions’ they have ‘varying appropriateness and
success’ leaving ‘substantial barriers’ to the use of micro-
generation in the UK.
Prospects &
Barriers
2.1
24. 24
Alongside other related literature, (Williams, 2010, p.7604)
also identifies the UK’s apparent lack of coherent policy,
noting ‘it has adopted a less interventionist approach’ and
instead relies largely on the markets and industry to bring
about economic change.
The stern report also echoes the attitudes of current
literature; it outlines the need for current policy to send clear,
investment-including signals to business such as firm targets
for renewables out in the future, as political aspirations are
not seen as sufficiently bankable by industry (Allen et al.,
2008).
The UK’s current commitment to reducing GHG’s and
increasing renewable energy generation (DECC, 2013) does
not include the provision of micro-generation, as a result
tangible energy policy measure have been directed almost
exclusively towards centralised generation, the government
policy which does exist (DBERR, 2007) requires a more
comprehensive incentive mechanism from energy
companies to home owners to meet EU targets (Wolfe, 2007).
The paper by Allen et al. (2008) effectively evaluates relevant
literature relating to micro-generation in the UK and suggests
prospects and barriers to a variety of renewable technologies,
however there is an evident lack of primary empirical data
drawn upon to reach the conclusions.
Government Policy
2.1
25. 25
An over-reliance upon government data (DECC) is most
likely due to the scale and resources required to conduct
research on a national scale. Furthermore, the paper selects a
theoretical framework which centres on the implementation
of domestic solar micro-generation in large, through
government policy.
This negates sociological research assessing the role of the
home owner in the social acceptance of micro-generation
technologies. Further research to the field of solar
micro-generation would benefit the use of empirical data in
its findings, as data collection on a national scale is likely to be
unfeasible, the data collection should be relevant to a
specific location (Fig. 12). It would also be advantageous for
additional research to develop a more holistic approach to
domestic micro-generation, which draws upon
ethnographic data to develop suitable proposals (Fig. 13).
Fig. 12 - Public Micro-generation Awareness
(UK Microgeneration Strategy, 2011, p.39)
Fig. 13- Micro-generation Adoption Strategy
(UK Microgeneration Strategy, 2011, p.45)
Solar PV Solar
Thermal
20%
0%
10%
40%
30%
Unaware ContemplatingPre-
Contemplation
Installed
Unaware Pre - Contemplation Contemplation Preparation/ Installation
Mass Media
Increasing awareness
through TV, radio,
newspapers internet,
magazines and local radio.
Decreasing Cost
Plus decreasing pay
back period. Ideal cost is
around £5/6K and
payback period 5 years.
Providing Information
Info on FIT’s and RHI. Local
Authority involvement.
Demonstration
installations.
Make more
affordable
Independent advice
people
can trust.
2.2
26. 26
A reoccurring barrier in existing literature to the barrier of
domestic solar PV and thermal acceptance is the upfront
costs to consumers. Allen (2008, p. 540) evaluates the high
upfront costs to consumers through an average UK
household electricity bill of £338 against a domestic solar PV
system costing £10,400 (DECC, 2013) and concludes
customers would face an approximate payback period of 48
years, this is supported by the assertion that even with the aid
of government grants, micro-generators are uncompetitive
under current UK market conditions (Butcher OM,
Hammond GP, Jones CI, 2006).
Comparable primary research by J. Watson et al. (2006) also
corroborates the then understanding of payback times’
concluding that for a 1.5kW PV panel, ‘payback times vary
between 35 and 48 years, depending on the share of output
that is consumed on-site’. However it is stated in the case of
Allen et al. (2008) that the comparison does not take
buy-back into consideration and the associated financial gains.
The argument presented against the upfront cost of solar PV
fails to present relevant information; furthermore much of
the contributing research is currently outdated as the cost of
an average domestic PV system today costs around £5,500
(The Eco Experts, 2013) considerably lower than £10,400.
This is reflected in the dramatic decrease in solar PV prices as
a result of the solar market popularity worldwide; it is often
assumed that with every doubling of the global capacity, there
is an 18% reduction in costs (Environmental Change Institute,
2005) this is evidenced in Fig.14 and 15.
Consumer Economics
2.3
27. 27
The financial backing to support and stimulate the market is
yet to be forthcoming, and it is unlikely the amount of
funding will stimulate the market sufficiently to lower the
capital costs of micro-generators in the near future (Allen et
al., 2008, p. 542).
This hypothesis was in line with current government
subsidy between the period of 2002-11 an average of £1.43
Billion was spent in subsidising renewable energy (Full Fact,
2011), however it is estimated funding for solar technologies
alone will receive £1 Billion a year in 2013 until 2020
(Renewable Energy Foundation, 2013). This is mirrored by
the rise in installations of solar domestic micro-generation,
as the installed capacity of the UK has risen from 26MW to
1300MW in the period of 2010-13 (The Guardian, 2013) (Fig.
15).
While economic barriers may be amongst the most
important impediments to micro- generation uptake by
consumers (e.g. Energy Saving Trust, 2005b). A lack of
accurate statistics, as well as contradicting hypothesis
concerning the adoption of domestic solar micro-
generation indicates that existing literature concerning the
upfront financial cost of solar PV/ thermal to consumers is
outdated, further up-to-date research it needed to ascertain if
upfront costs to consumers present a barrier to the
adoption of solar micro-generation.
Fig. 14 - Solar Panel Prices - 4kWh System
(Compare My Solar, 2013)
Fig. 15 - UK Photovoltaic Demand
(Solar Power Portal, 2013)
2011 20132012
£5k
£15k
£10k
Roof
Mounted
Ground
Mounted
2010 20132011 2012
0.0
3.0
1.0
2.0
Gigawatts
2.3
28. 28
The paper by (Walker, 2008) asserts that any contribution
seeking to address fuel poverty using micro-generation as the
source has to be subsequent to improving the energy
efficacy of the housing in question. This hypothesis is
supported by (Allen et al., 2008) adding that demand
reduction and energy efficacy measures are highly
recommended alongside any micro-generation installation;
in addition, such measures are likely to reduce demand from
the average UK household. Continuing research which aims
to assess the prospects and barriers to micro-generation in a
site-specific location should first outline the existing energy
efficiency measures in domestic properties, as any
development of solar micro-generation will be dependent
upon the level of existing energy efficiency measures.
Watson et al. (2008) summarises the models for deployment
of micro-generation into two different consumer-supplier
roles, ‘Plug and Play’ and ‘Company Driven’ however it is
noted that a third relationship exists by which customers and
organisations in a specific locale, pool resources to develop
a ‘Community Microgrid’ of energy (Watson, J., Sauter, R., et
al., 2006) (Fig. 16) Community owned energy schemes have
been recognised by current UK policy by a commitment to
encourage community-owned renewable energy schemes
however research in community energy is limited (Coalition
Agreement, 2010). Current literature outlines the need for
power output to be supplied via private networks to avoid
system charges and network losses (Jones, 2005) but that the
‘model would require a more complex analysis’ (Watson et al.,
2008).
Micro-Generation
2.4
29. 29
Fig. 16 - Westmill Solar Park
(Ben Cavanna, 2012)
30. 30
The choice of community energy schemes requires a high
level of consumer involvement. This occurs at two levels
due to the primary control the consumer has over their unit.
Additionally the ownership of shares in a community energy
scheme will lead to consumers becoming more active
participants in the energy generation system (Watson et al.,
2006, p.6) (Fig. 17).
Yet, the risk in the required high level of consumer
involvement is lessened by public opinion research showing
that support for renewable energy projects, increases
considerably if they are owned by local communities. (DECC
Community Energy Strategy, 2013). Further research on the
viability of community ‘microgrid’ energy is required, as
existing writings are being contributed to by a limited
number of authors which could lead to a one-sided bias in the
field (Watson and Sauter, 2008).
Given that the adoption of community energy schemes are
dependent upon localised consumer involvement, additional
research should investigate the acceptance of community
energy as a viable alternative to isolated micro-generation in
a specific neighbourhood or city. As writing on the topic is
restricted, and only established in very recent history, barriers
and prospects to community energy will not be advanced in
this paper.
Community Microgrid
2.5
31. 31
Fig. 17 - Potential Consumer Roles
(Watson, J., Sauter, R., et al., 2006)
Community
Microgrid
Plug & Play
Company Driven
Co-provider
Company
Driven
Passive Consumer
Company
Back-up
2.5
32. 32
One of the most effective methods of assessing barriers to
homeowners adopting micro-generation is through
research of Energy Service Companies (ESCo’s). Under the
description given by the UK DTI Energy Services Working
Group (2003), an energy service contract can include the full
upfront financing by the energy services provider (Fig. 18 &
19). ESCo’s address the risks professed by consumers such as
imperfect information, bounded rationality and a lack of
access to capital, (Chesshire, 2003; Sorrell, 2004) such
contracts could increase the acceptance of micro-generation
technologies by many consumers (Sauter and Watson, 2007).
Williams (2008) carried out research investigating the barriers
to decentralised renewable energy systems (DRES) in UK
housing by sourcing primary data from interviewing ESCo
representatives. Data indicated that funds available to
households for installation were very limited and difficult to
access’, furthermore constant changes to the funding
programme created confusion amongst potential customers.
Williams’ (2008) findings are in agreement with a survey of
ESCO activity around Europe, which showed 20 operating
ESCo’s in the UK, whilst in Germany there were 500-1000
(Vine, 2003), this is due in large to the long-term economic
encouragements (capital grants and FiT) offered to generators
in Germany (Bertoldi et al., 2006) furthermore the German
policy is secure for a long-term period of around 20 years,
this offers greater security to investors. In contrast the UK
FiT since its introduction in 2010, at a rate of £43p/kWh has
been revised and reduced annually to a rate of £14.9p/kWh.
Energy Service
Companies
2.6
33. 33
Williams (2008, p.7609) concludes that due to the
aforementioned barriers to DRES, ‘the onus was entirely on
the public to adopt new technologies, which without a major
cultural shift was unlikely to lead to rapid deployment’.
The lack of consistency in UK policy with regards to capital
investment and FiT may be a substantial barrier to the
adoption of solar micro-generation. Further reading
highlights consumer involvement ranges from a passive
role to a ‘co-provision’ role (van Vliet, 2004), further current
research have shown the complexity of consumer behaviour
when it comes to domestic energy use furthermore
individuals rarely behave as rational economic agents and no
not consider future savings or revenues fully (Oxera, 2005)
this is referred to a bounded rationality and suggests that
nationwide oversimplifications regarding solar PV consumers
can be limited in drawing accurate hypothesis.
The complexity of consumers and whether they choose to
have a passive or co-provisional role will vary by location and
consumer, as will the perceived barriers to uptake. As the
extent to which consumers are actively involved, directly
determined the diffusion of micro-generation technologies
into the market (R. Sauter, J. Watson, 2007, p.2771),
supplementary study to ascertain the level of desired
consumer involvement in a specific location will demonstrate
the suitability of implementing a variety of schemes to
overcome adoption barriers, in particular the viability of
contracts with ESCo’s.
Fig. 18 - Esco Structure - End-User
Borrower
(US Department of Energy, 2012)
Fig. 19 - Esco Structure - Esco Borrower
(US Department of Energy, 2012)
End-User
ESCo
Financial
Institution
Capital
Finance
Payments
Project
Payment
Energy
Agreement
Energy End-User
ESCo
Financial Institution
Payments
Based on
Energy, Value
or Services
Debt Service
Payments
& Project
Security
Energy
Agreement -
ESCO owns
System
Loan
Investment
Agreement &
Installation
2.6
34. 34
Consumer
Acceptance
Sauter and Watson (2007) draw together current writing to
identify barriers to the adoption of solar technologies with
respect to social acceptance. Existing research identifies the
main deterrent to investment was installation costs, as 19% of
people asked were concerned that costs were perceived to be
too high. Alongside financial concerns, 19% of respondents
identified solar energy as not been a reliable source/ there is
not enough sun in the UK (Renewables London, 2003) (Fig.
20).
Ellison (2004) attributes this to ‘lack of information’ while,
prospects to the adoption of solar technologies draw
attention to the acceptance of solar energy, with 43% of
people stating they had no concerns with solar panels been
installed in their area. Similar deductions are drawn in
(Department of Trade and Industry, 2006, p.122) stating that
the key barriers to remain costs and a limited amount or lack
of end user information, elaborating that while the level of
user acceptance is very high, there is a clear lack of
understanding how they work and might impact on their
daily routine and electricity costs.
Prospects to overcoming consumers apparent lack of
knowledge, have identified to be largely marketing based by
papers such as (Ellison, 2004) who determined companies
marketing and involvement in the decision making process is
‘considerably more important than mere financial incentives’.
Furthermore, based on a local survey accompanying a solar
grant programme, (Faiers and Neame, 2006) argue that ‘
marketing’ could overcome some of the barriers for
investment.
Fig. 20 - Solar Panel Concerns
(London Renewables, 2003)
19%-Cost
19%-Reliability/NotEnoughSun
7%-Safety
5%-Aesthetics
5%-Inefficient
3%-LackofSpace
3%-ResidentConsultation
43%-None
2.7
35. 35
Research published by the Energy Saving Trust (2005, p.33)
has shown that accreditation schemes have a great influence
on household investment decisions.
Numerous writings have advocated the use of improved
information services and direction on technology options,
mostly through campaigns to raise public awareness,
simple easy to understand hand outs (Fig. 21) and certification
schemes. (Energy White Paper, 2007; DTI, 2006; DTI, 2007)
Though, unorthodox methods such as mainstream
media (e.g ‘How to make home a powerhouse’ The Observer,
23/10/2005, p.11) have written on the potential
micro-generation has to reduce domestic fuel bills, which
resulted in one energy supplier receiving 2500 enquiries for
information regarding micro-generation.
Issues exist within current summative research which
principally employs the use of secondary data. Studies
researching the attitudes of consumers in London such as
(Renewables London, 2003) are used as a representative
sample in current works (Watson et al., 2006) to develop
conclusions on the barriers to solar micro-generation in the
UK. Sauter and Watson (2007) add that investment decisions
and behavioural changes are influenced by cultural context
and will therefore differ considerably between regions
within a nation. It is also recognised that only a few studies
have examined the issue of social acceptance and micro-
generation technologies such as PV (Faiers and Neame, 2006).
Further non-representative studies around the UK would
generate a greater depth of understanding of the barriers to
social acceptance of solar micro-generation technologies.
Fig. 21 - Solar Panel Infographic
(Arjan De Raaf, 2012)
2.7
36. 36
Walker, 2008; Allen (2008) references the importance of
energy efficacy measures in domestic buildings as a precursor
to micro-generation technologies. Scarpa and Willis, (2010)
address this further in relation to the consumers’
willingness-to-pay (WTP) for energy saving measures and
renewable energy solutions. The importance of research into
consumers’ WTP is introduced by Banfi (2008, p. 504) as
detailed information on the factors which influence
homeowners’ investment decisions and on their willingness
to pay for the resulting improvements, directly influences
effective policy measures to induce investment in building
energy efficiency.
Findings suggest that consumers WTP for both solar
electricity (£2831) and solar thermal (£2903) are lower
than the average installation costs of a 2kWh solar PV unit
(£10,638) and solar hot water unit (£3904)4
. Equally the
desired time horizon for the cost of solar technologies is
generally less than 3-5 years (Element Energy, 2008b) (Fig.
23) which is considerably shorter than the estimated payback
period of 10-25 years. To overcome these barriers in disparity
it is suggested that substantially larger grants will have to be
made available, along with a substantial fall in the price of
micro-generation technologies (Scarpa and Willis, 2010).
Prospects in regards to energy saving measures are more
evident as it is noted that consumers were WTP £2.91 in
capital costs to reduce annual fuel bills by £1.00. (Banfi et
al., 2008) substantiates this finding noting that the WTP of
consumers is generally higher than the cost of implementing
energy saving measures.
Willingness-to-pay
(WTP)
2.8
37. 37
Fig. 22 - Community Energy Scheme
(Brighton Energy Co-operative, 2013)
38. 38
The observed lack of investment on the part of homeowners
is due to a lack of information regarding the advantages,
particularly how these advantages can be quantifies in
economic terms. Simple advertising and information
campaigns supported by government should see the share of
energy efficient buildings grow considerably.
However, there are only a few studies that address the
consumer’s appraisal of energy saving measures in domestic
buildings (Banfi, Farsi, Filippini and Jakob, 2008, p. 504); and
cited studies such as Cameron (1985) are outdated.
Furthermore, Poortinga et al., 2003; Sadler, 2003; Ott et al,
2005; S. Banfi et al., 2008 form hypotheses based on data
collected in the Netherlands, Canada and Switzerland
respectively, all of which experience a differing cultural
context than the UK, to rectify this further UK based current
research is required.
Studies such as Poortinga et al. (2003) and Sadler (2003)
carried out comparable investigations to discover consumer
preferences towards various energy saving measures. They
applied a conjoint analysis methodology which was judged
to be a useful method to examine the acceptability of energy
saving measures and identify the characteristics influencing
the choices (Banfi, Farsi, Filippini and Jakob, 2008, p. 505).
The success of existing research undertaken using choice
experiments provide an excellent structure within which to
frame further research, however data collection via telephone
interviews resulted in a response rate of 24% and 26% overall
(S. Banfi at al. 2008, p.509).
Fig. 23 - Consumers WIllingness-to-Pay
(Element Energy, 2008)
Willing-to- Pay Actual Cost
SolarPVSolarThermalPaybackEnergySaving
£2831 £10,638
£2903 £3904
3-5
Years
10-25
Years
£2.91 £1.00
2.8
39. 39
Personally administered choice experiments (Scarpa and
Willis, 2010) displayed much higher response rates5
,
employing a similar personally administered questionnaire
method should bring about similarly successful results.
To conclude, while the extensive sum of existing literature
suggests and addresses numerous key barriers to the
adoption of solar micro-generation, there is evidence to
suggest that gaps in the consensus between these publications
give credence to further research concerning barriers and
prospects in localised areas of the UK. The understanding of
existing energy efficiency measures in domestic buildings in
this area is also vital to any further investigation, while
addressing the impact of upfront cost to the consumer and
the home owner’s willingness-to-pay is an area of research
which requires addition.
Footnotes
4 Figures based on the average cost of a 2 kWh solar PV unit and 2kWh solar hot
water unit accurate as of 2010 (Element Energy, 2008a, p. 11)
5Although TNS was not asked to record response rates, for a random probability
sample with return visits to households, TNS estimates its response rates are
generally between 60% and 70%.
2.8
40. 40
Key Literature Review
Papers
Williams, Jo. “The deployment of decentralised energy systems as part of
the housing growth programme in the UK.” Energy policy 38.12 (2010):
7604-7613.
Allen, S. R., G. P. Hammond, and Marcelle C. McManus. “Prospects for
and barriers to domestic micro-generation: A United Kingdom perspec-
tive.” Applied Energy 85.6 (2008): 528-544.
Watson, J., Sauter, R., Bahaj, B., James, P.A., Myers, L., Wing, R., 2006.
Unlocking the Power House: Policy and System Change for DomesticMi-
cro-Generation in the UK. SPRU, Brighton.
Poortinga, Wouter, et al. “Household preferences for energy-saving meas-
ures: A conjoint analysis.” Journal of Economic Psychology 24.1 (2003):
49-64.
Sorrell, S., 2005. The contribution of energy service contracting to a low
carbon economy, Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research
Technical Report 37. The Carbon Trust, 2006.
Van Vliet B., Southerton, Dale, Heather Chappells, eds. Sustainable
consumption: The implications of changing infrastructures of provision.
Edward Elgar Publishing, 2004.
Chesshire, J., 2003. Energy efficiency projects and policies for step changes
in the energy system: developing an agenda for social science research,
ESRC Seminar, Policy Studies Institute, March.
Faiers, Adam, Charles Neame, and Matt Cook. “The adoption of domestic
solar-power systems: Do consumers assess product attributes in a stepwise
process?.” Energy Policy 35.6 (2007): 3418-3423.
Scarpa, Riccardo, and Ken Willis. “Willingness-to-pay for renewable ener-
gy: Primary and discretionary choice of British households’ for micro-gen-
eration technologies.” Energy Economics 32.1 (2010): 129-136.
2.8
42. 42
- The aim of this investigation is to discover the barriers to
the adoption of solar micro-generation in Wakefield homes.
- In addition the investigation will outline how future
acceptance will be achieved by seeking to develop proposals
for the future acceptance of solar micro-generation in the
area.
- In seeking to overcome current barriers, the investigation
will draw upon gathered research data, existing secondary
data and current literature to inform proposals.
Initial research questions in the questionnaire were formed
based on a survey conducted in 2002 as part of a feasibility
study by the Oxford Solar Initiative (OSI) to discover
prospects for the installation of domestic solar units. The
study received a low response rate of 16.6%; (Fig.25) however
the resources of the OSI and research time period still
yielded 100 responses from 600 distributed questionnaires.
A personally administered questionnaire was selected, as this
investigation would have neither the time scale nor the
resources of the feasibility study by OSI and would require a
higher response rate, to develop meaningful sample size.
Furthermore, the chosen method of a personally
administered questionnaire was selected so that more
members of the community could be reached. The use of
multiple choice questions were chosen so that the complexity
of the questionnaire could be modified to bring about a higher
response rate.
Research
Approach
3.1
43. 43
Respondents that were able to give information as the owner
of a domestic building were also able to be targeted to obtain
relevant data. Research questions were developed through
the examination of existing literature to develop questions
which would gauge the current barriers to the adoption of
solar micro generation and possible prospects for its future
implementation.
The use of multiple choice questions were chosen so that the
complexity of the questionnaire could be modified to bring
about a higher response rate. Multiple choice questionnaires
can also be adapted to take a respondent a specific amount
of time to complete, whereas the time taken to complete
open-ended questions can often vary based on reading and
cognitive ability (Herzog & Bachman, 1981 p. 558). The
number of questions was limited to 19 to limit the average
time taken to finish the questionnaire, as a questionnaire
which typically takes longer than 8-10 minutes shows a
lower response rate and higher dropout rate. Additionally,
analysis of high numbers of questionnaires could be achieved
in a relatively short period of time.
Data for this investigation was collected using a structured
questionnaire which contained mixed questions, both close
ended multiple choice questions and open ended. Specifical-
ly, prior to the use of open ended questions a dichotomous
contingency question would be asked to guarantee the quality
of response. Respondents were be given an ‘I don’t know’
option if the information was not available to them or their
opinion was undecided or neutral.
Data Collection
Fig. 24 - Research Wordle (Left)
3.2
44. 44
The questionnaires were only distributed to people, who are
residents of a domestic building in the district of Wakefield; a
large number of questionnaires were distributed in the suburb
villages of Stanley and Outwood to guarantee a larger number
of respondents. All respondents were over the age of 18 and
able to give informed consent on the information they were
providing, in addition no vulnerable parties were approached
to provide data.
The purpose of the questionnaire was not disguised from
the recipient and was explained clearly using Northumbria
University’s exemplar questionnaire participant information
sheet. This was followed by an opportunity to raise any
queries before completing an informed consent form.
Every participant was required to complete the same
participant information sheet, informed consent form and
questionnaire. No time limit was imposed on the participants
for the completion of the questionnaire and personally
administered paper questionnaires were collected on request.
The questionnaire was live from the 1st July 2013 until the 1st
October 2013, during that time 53 questionnaires were
personally administered to recipients of which 43 were
completed and returned, giving a response rate of 81.1% (Fig.
25). The questionnaire ran online between 1st July 2013 – 1st
October 2013 live on www.simontaylorarchitecture.co.uk the
survey was hosted by the online survey website 123 Contact
Form and delivered 15 responses.
16.6%
81.1%
Fig. 25 - Survey Response Rates
Above - (Oxford Solar Inititative, 2002)
Below - (Barriers to and Prospects for Domestic
Solar Micro-generation in Wakefield, 2014)
Postal
Questionnaire
Personally
Administered
Questionnaire
3.2
45. 45
Copies of the participant information sheet, informed consent
form, questionnaire and debriefing sheet can be found in the
Appendix (Fig. 54, 55 & 56).
Data gathered from online surveys was collated into a series
of tables and figures by the host website, this was then
imported into the data analysis from paper surveys, which
was generated using Microsoft Excel as it is an industry
recognised format for data analysis. Infographics, tables and
figures formed from the primary data have been displayed in
the results using a mixture of Adobe Photoshop CS6 and
InDesign.
The data collected provides both qualitative and quantitative
solutions to the research question; however there are
qualitative limitations to the chosen methodology as the use
of questionnaires can be insufficient to understand the
behaviour and feelings behind the data. This could be rectified
by the inclusion of further open ended questions in the
questionnaire to allow for a lengthier, more in depth
response, alternatively an additional method of primary data
collection such as semi-structured interviews would also
allow interviewees to explore their attitudes in more detail.
However, there are shortfalls to the use of semi-structured
interviews and further open ended questions as the process of
data collection and analysis becomes resource intensive and
time consuming, which would limit the number of responses
able to be collected. Additionally, the time taken to complete
the questionnaire would increase along with its complexity,
Data Analysis
Methodology
Limitations
3.3
46. 46
Copies of the participant information sheet, informed consent
form, questionnaire and debriefing sheet can be found in the
Appendix.
Fig. 54 - Participant information sheet
Fig. 55 – Informed consent form
Fig. 56 – Questionnaire
3.5
48. 48
1. What is your
current external wall
construction? (Fig. 26)
Do not know
Other
Solid brick/
stone
Cavity wall/
insulated
Cavity wall/
not insulated
7.7%
0.0%
13.5%
67.3%
11.5%
Cavity wall/ not insulated (6), Cavity Wall/ Insulated (35), Solid brick/ stone (7), Other (0), Do not know (4)
(The number of respondents to each question is stated in a
footnote below each result)
49. 49
2. Does your home
use draught proofing?
(Fig. 27)
All (12), Most (9), Some (21), None (7)
All
24.5%
Most
18.4%
Some
42.9%
None
14.3%
50. 50
3. Does your home
use low-energy
lighting? (Fig. 28)
All (7), Most (20), Some (16), None (9)
All
13.5%
Most
38.5%
Some
30.8%
None
17.3%
51. 51
4. - What type of
heating does your
home use? (Fig. 29)
Condensing boiler (6), Non-condensing boiler (0), Standard boiler (27)
Standard combi (19), Other (0)
Before 1990 (7), 1990-2000 (19)
2000-2010 (11), After 2010 (11)
Type of Home
Heating
Date Installed
(Standard or Combi)
Before 1990
1990-20002000-2010
After 2010
Condensing
Boiler
Standard
Combi
Standard
Boiler
52. 52
5. How is your hot
water cylinder
insulated? (Fig. 30)
Jacket Rigid Foam None
Jacket (12), Rigid Foam (19), None (21)
23.1%
36.5%
40.4%
53. 53
6. - How much loft
insulation does your
home have? (Fig. 31)
50mm (2), 75mm (2), 100mm (11), 150mm (17),
200mm (6), 250mm (5), None (3), Do not know (7) None - 5.7% Do not know - 13.2%
200mm - 11.3% 250mm - 9.4%
100mm - 20.8% 150mm - 32.1%
50mm - 3.8% 75mm - 3.8%
54. 54
7. How many of your
windows have
secondary/ double
glazing? (Fig. 32)
All (42), Most (3), Some (3), None (3)
All
82.4%
Most
5.9%
Some
5.9%
None
5.9%
55. 55
8. - What is the
orientation of your
home? (Fig. 33)
East-West (9), Northeast-Southwest (10),
North-South (22), Southeast-Northwest (12),
Do not know (2)
East
16.4%
West
16.4%
North
40.0%
South
40.0%
Northeast
18.2%
Southwest
18.2%
Southeast
21.8%
Northwest
21.8%
56. 56
9. Would you consider
ways of saving energy
to your home? (Fig. 34)
If yes, what price would you be
prepared to pay for ways of saving
energy? (Top Right)
If no, please select one of the
following to describe the reason
behind your response. (Below Right)
Agree
70.4%
Agree Strongly
13.0%
Do not know
13.0%
Disagree
3.7%
£250
6.3%
£500
18.8%
£1,000
25.0%
£2,000
14.6%
£3,000
6.3%
Do not know
29.2%
Agree (38), Agree Strongly (7), Do not know (7), Disagree (2)
Not persuaded (3), Cost (4), Location (0), Time to return investment (2),
Appearance (2), Not enough information (5), Do not know (0), Other (0)
£250 (3), £500 (9), £1000 (12), £2000 (7), £3,000 (5), Do not know (14)
31.3%
12.5%
12.5%
25.0%
18.8%
Not persuaded by technology
Cost too high
Time taken to return investment
Appearance
Not enough information
57. 57
No (12), Yes (35), Do not know (6)
Not persuaded (3), Cost (5), Location (2), Time to return investment (8),
Appearance (2), Not enough information (5), Do not know (0), Other (0)
10. - Would you
consider using solar
energy to power your
home? (Fig. 35)
If yes, what price would you be
prepared to pay for solar panels?
(Top Right)
If no, please select one of the
following to describe the
reason behind your response.
(Below Right)
Do not know
11.3%
No
22.6%
Yes
66.0%
16.7%
Not persuaded by technology
Cost too high
Time taken to return investment
Appearance
Not enough information
Home location
8.0%
32.0%
11.4%
20.0%
12.0%
£1,500
25.0%
£2,500
19.4%
£3,500
8.3%
£4,500
8.3%
£7,500
2.8%
Do not know
36.1%
£1,500 (9), £2,500 (7), £3,500 (3), £4,500 (3), £7,500 (1), Do not know (13)
58. 58
11. - Would you
consider using solar
energy to heat your
hot water? (Fig. 36)
If yes, what price would you be
prepared to pay for solar hot water?
(Right)
No (12), Yes (37), Do not know (4)
£1,000
21.1%
£1,500
13.2%
£2,000
21.1%
£3,000
2.6%
Do not know
42.1%
No
22.6%
Yes
69.8%
Do not know
7.5%
£1,000 (8), £1,500 (5), £2,000 (8) £3,000 (1), Do not know (16)
59. 59
12. Do you pay more
than 10% of your
household income on
heating your home? (Fig. 37)
If yes, please select one of the
following to describe the main reason
for your expenditure. (Below Right)
Income
Related
27.3%
Energy
Prices
18.2%
Economic
Factors
36.4%
Energy
Usage
9.1%
Other
9.1%
Yes
17.3%
No
76.9%
Do not know
5.8%
Yes (9), No (40), Do not know (3)
Income related (3), Energy prices (2), Economic factors (4), Energy
usage (1), Other (1)
60. 60
13. - Has your home
energy usage fallen in
the past 5-10 years? (Fig. 38)
If yes, please select one of the
following to describe the main reason for
your expenditure. (Below Right)
Energy
Prices
17.4%
Economic
Factors
17.4%
Energy
Saving
43.5%
Renewable
Energy
8.7%
Energy
Usage
13.0%
Yes
43.6%
No
41.8%
Do not know
14.5%
Yes (24), No (23), Do not know (8)
Income related (0), Energy prices (4), Economic factors (4), Energy
saving (10), Renewable energy (2), Energy usage (3), Other (0)
61. 61
14. Would you
consider investing
with neighbours/
locals in solar panels
to provide shared
energy for your
neighbourhood? (Fig. 39)
Yes (22), No (24), Do not know (8)
Yes
40.7%
No
44.4%
Do not know
14.8%
62. 62
15. - If you invested
£4,000 in solar panels,
how long do you
expect it would take
you to recoup that
investment? (Fig. 40)
Timescale (Years)
%ofRespondents
5 years (7), 10 years (17), 15 years (16), 20 years (7), 25 years (3)
Actual Payback
Period
7 Years
5 years
14%
10 years
34%
15 years
32%
20 years
14%
25 years
6%
63. 63
16. - If you invested
£4,000 in solar panels,
how much profit would
you expect to make
from selling your power
over a 20 year period? (Fig. 41)
Expected Profit (£)
%ofRespondents
£500 (2), £1,000 (10), £2,500 (13) £5,000 (16), £10,000 (7) £15,000 (2)
£500
4%
£1,000
20%
£2,500
26%
£5,000
32%
£10,000
14%
£15,000
4%
Actual Profit
£15,000
64. 64
17. - If you invested
£4,000 in solar
panels, how much of
that would you
reasonably like the
government to
subsidise? (Fig. 42)
£400
(10%)
8.0%
£1,000
(25%)
28.0%
£2,000
(50%)
48.0%
10.0%
£3,000
(75%)
£3,600
(90%)
6.0%
£400 (4), £1,000 (14), £2,000 (24) £3,000 (5), £3,600 (3)
65. 65
18. - How would you
describe your homes
contribution to
reducing your impact
on the environment?
(Fig. 43)
I do as much as possible (14), I do a lot (4), I do enough (12), I could
do more (23), I do nothing (1), Do not know (0)
“I do as much as possible
25.9%
I do enough
22.2%
I do nothing
1.9%
I do a lot
7.4%
I could do more
42.6%
Do not know
0%
66. 66
19. - At what level, do
you believe a change
towards renewable
energy should occur?
(Fig. 44)
National (34), Regional (5), Local (6), Personal (12), Do not know (1), None (0)
National
58.6%
Regional
8.6%
Local
10.3%
Personal
20.7%
Do not
know
1.7%
68. 68
Barriers
Economic & Fiscal
Various writings have examined the topic of financial barriers
to the adoption of solar micro-generation in the UK (S.R
Allen et al., 2008; S. Banfi et al., 2008; J. Watson et al., 2008;
Sauter and Watson, 2007) there is evidence to suggest that
economic barriers are amongst the most important
impediments to micro-generation uptake by consumers
(e.g Energy Saving Trust, 2005b), however many inferences
describe a pre commercial solar market in requirement of
technology subsidies (Fig. 46).
Significant growth in the global solar market motivated by
new developing markets such as Japan, China and the U.S has
led to cheaper prices for solar PV and thermal and
consequently a greater number of installations (PV Magazine,
2013) (Fig. 12 & 13).
Ellison (2004) highlights that a lack of up-to-date information
in existing writings is also applicable to consumers, as almost
50% of respondents projected costs of a solar thermal device
to be £5,000 or higher, compared to actual costs of £2,500.
The opposite is discovered with solar PV, where over half of
respondents estimated a cost of £5,000 for a typical system,
the real cost been closer to £9,000 (Fig.45). Results suggested
by Scarpa and Willis (2010, p.135) suggest that when
consumers are asked a price that they are Willing to pay
(WTP), the resulting figures for solar PV are reduced below
the market value, but still displaying discrepancy, as
respondents are WTP £2831 for solar electricity, but £2903
for solar hot water. Inconsistencies in information could also
be explained by differing information campaigns. (Fig. 41)
Estimated Cost Actual Cost
SolarPVSolarThermal
£9,000
£5,000+ £2,500
Fig. 45 - Consumer Estimated Solar Costs
(Scarpa and Willis, 2010, p.135)
£5,000+
5.1
69. 69
Results from Wakefield show that 36.1% of respondents who
would consider using solar PV, ‘Do not know’ what price they
would pay for solar panels (Fig. 31) while 44.4% of
responders replied that they would be prepared to pay
between £1,500-2,500 (Fig. 31). Similar results were returned
for solar thermal, with 42.1% of respondents who would
consider using solar thermal, ‘Do not know’ what price they
would be prepared to pay (Fig. 32), and 55.4% of responders
replied that they would be prepared to pay under £2,000 (Fig.
32). The desired capital investment WTP by consumers is
lower than the current average cost of a 1kWh solar PV and
thermal system, which indicates that without a dramatic fall in
unit price, or forthcoming substantial grants, the WTP for the
upfront capital costs of solar technologies remains a barrier to
the adoption of micro-generation by fuel poor households in
Wakefield.
Willingness-to-pay amongst consumers in Wakefield also
sits noticeably below the national average (Scarpa and Willis,
2010) most likely due to above average levels of depravity and
fuel poverty. G. Walker (2008, p. 4517) adds that if a model of
development focused on households paying for and installing
solar systems is pursued, the potential of micro-generation
technologies will not be realised. Williams (2010, p.7611-12)
determines from interviews with local authorities that the
decision on micro-generation developments largely rests on
how the local politicians priorities the different development
objectives, and that energy ‘tends to be lower on the list’.
To overcome these barriers Wakefield Council and energy
suppliers must actively take up the provision of
micro-generation. If Wakefield Council were to pursue solar
Fig. 46 - Roles of Innovation Chain Actors
(Allen et al., 2008)
Investments
Government
Consumers
Business
R & D
Demonstration
Pre-
Commercial
Supported
Commercial
Fully
Commercial
Prospects
Economic & Fiscal
5.1
70. 70
micro-generation development as a priority the most
common method to access funding required for large scale
micro-generation developments is through applications for
funding. Kirklees Council in West Yorkshire, which serves
areas less than 10 miles from Wakefield, is a successful
example of this manner of funding. Kirklees Council
currently accounts for 5% of the UK’s installed solar PV
capacity, and has installed 350 solar PV systems and 63 solar
thermal systems (Kirklees Council, 2008), the installations
were aimed at reducing the fuel bills of occupants, the
majority of which were disabled or elderly and currently in
fuel poverty. This was achieved through the application for
funding from various sources amounting to £1.95 million; of
that figure £530,000 was invested by various bodies
associated with Kirklees Council, such as the Kirklees
Renewable Energy Fund, Neighbourhood Housing,
Community Association and Single Regeneration Budget.
To implement a similar method of solar micro-generation
adoption, it is recommended that Wakefield Council explore
avenues of funding such as the UK Dti Major PV Programme,
which supplied 50% (£970,000) of the total capital.
Opportunities for investment such as the UK DTi ClearSkies
programme, EU SunCities, Yorkshire Housing Limited and
the Lowry Renaissance should also be explored. An initial
fact-finding programme by SunCities, put together a
successful submission for funding from the EU 5th
Framework Programme, which allowed applications for
further funding possible. The EU 7th Framework Programme
is currently running and should be applied for, this would
reduce WDC’s upfront capital costs.
5.1
72. 72
The quantity of consumers unable to state a price WTP
indicates an underlying lack of information regarding all
solar technologies. Concerns for consumers in Wakefield are
shown in (Fig. 31), chief of which is the time taken to return
the initial investment. Additional major apprehensions
identified are the high costs and the lack of information
present to consumers regarding solar technologies.
In the Wakefield questionnaire 86% of respondents expected
an investment of £4,000 in solar PV to have a payback period
of over 10 years (Fig. 36), compared to an average payback
period of around 7 years (Direct Solar, 2013). A consumer’s
time horizon for cost is generally less than 3 to 5 years
(Element Energy, 2008b) which indicates that while the
payback period for solar PV is noticeably lower than the
consumers perceived payback period, it is still higher than the
desired time horizon for consumers.
In the long-term this should be overcome by falling unit
prices, short-term adoption could be realised through the
addition of subsidised grants for consumers choosing to pay
for and install a ‘Plug & Play’ system, as decisions in
micro-generation are likely to be based on implicit discount
rates of up to 30% (Hausman, 1979; Train, 1985). The lack of
knowledge also applied also to the profit expected from the
same investment over a 20-year period, only 4% of
responders expected a profit of £15,000 or more with 82%
expecting a profit of £5,000 or less (Fig. 37), compared to an
average profit of around £16,000.
Barriers
Information Related
5.2
73. 73
In contrast to outcomes suggested by S.R. Allen et al. (2008,
p.533) the prospects to existing information-related barriers
in Wakefield do not stem from a lack of market development
policies, but have identified to be largely information based.
Companies marketing and involvement in the decision
making process is ‘considerably more important (Ellison,
2004).
To overcome significant information-related barriers to the
adoption of solar micro-generation in Wakefield, a
marketing campaign is needed which in plain English,
delivers easy to understand information to consumers (DTI,
2006). This information should be easily accessible and
be hosted online as well as distributed to homeowners by
Wakefield Council, as an information campaign at a local level
will be considered as more trustworthy (Sauter and Watson,
2005, p. 2777). The delivery of information through local
printed media such as the Wakefield Express and
Yorkshire Evening Post has also shown to generate positive
interest in micro-generation (e.g ‘How to make a home a
powerhouse’ The Observer, 23/10/2006, p. 11) as local and
well-known mediators are more likely to have an impact on
behavioural changes (Næsje, 2005).
A successful marketing campaign for Wakefield will address
consumers concerns towards the time taken to return the
initial investment in solar technologies, highlighting realistic
return times against the amount of investment. As well as
seek to clarify the disparity in knowledge regarding the actual
costs of solar systems (Solar PV and thermal).
Prospects
Information Related
Fig. 48 - Solar Information Campaign
(Gamecocksonline, 2013)
5.2
74. 74
A potential information campaign should also target the
probably costs and likely savings associated with additional
loft insulation as well as hot water cylinder jackets (Centre for
Sustainable Energy, 2013) (Fig. 26 & 27).
When discussing the level of consumer involvement outlined
by Fleiß and Kleinaltenkamp (2004, p.392) ranging from the
active co-production of a service to passive consumption,
the findings demonstrate that while consumers in Wakefield
broadly ‘agree’ with energy saving measures (70.4%), only a
small proportion ‘agree strongly’ (13.0%) (Fig. 30) indicating a
lack of desire to play an active role in producing public goods
and services of consequence to them (Ostrom, 1996, p.1073).
Further prospects would be found in pursuing methods of
implementation which require a somewhat, but not
completely passive role for the consumer. Customers
applying a co-provision method usually have services
provided by private firms as oppose to government utility
service, an option which is becoming increasingly possible
(Devine-Wight, H. Devine-Wright, P., 2004).
However, when the consumer was asked if they would
consider using solar energy to power their home (Fig. 31)
66.0% of respondents replied positively, this points toward a
co-provision role been more adequate for consumers.
Co-provision is a broader term and is argued to be more
useful as it allows for a broader examination of how services
should be provided to citizens. It is defined as the ‘
voluntary involvement of citizens in the provision (financing)
of publicly provided services’ (Ferris, 1984).
Barriers
Social Acceptance
5.3
75. 75
This also encompasses demand side management such as
low-energy lighting, for which voluntary involvement is also
high amongst residents, with only 17.3% of responses
selecting ‘none‘’when asked ‘Does your home use
low-energy lighting?’ and 38.5% selecting ‘most’ (Fig. 24).
Only a few studies have examined the issue of social
acceptance and micro-generation technologies such as PV
(Faiers and Neame, 2006), these take the form of two studies
(London Renewables, 2003; Ellison, 2004) and Oxera (2005).
They were conducted with differing methodologies,
choosing to gather data via telephone interviews, focus
groups and mail surveys.
When asked to identify two or three actors who should force
the market up-take of renewable technologies, London
Renewables (2003) discovered that 75% see the responsibility
with the government, 43% with local councils, as opposed to
8% with individuals. When queried with a comparable
question, data gathered from Wakefield reveals 58.6% agreed
that a change towards renewable energy should occur at a
national level. Only 10.3% viewed the local council as the
driver, while an increased 20.7% saw it as a personal
responsibility (Fig. 40). When asked to select a phrase which
best describes their homes contribution to reducing their
impact on the environment, 48.1% of respondents stated that
they ‘do enough‘, however 42.6% selected ‘I could do more’
(Fig. 39)’. This shows a large proportion of respondents which
recognise an ability to do more for the environment, but do
not see it as their personal responsibility.
Fig. 49 - Community Energy Scheme
(Brighton Energy Co-operative, 2013)
5.3
76. 76
The data indicates that the majority of respondents are
passive and are ideally suited to a Company Control’ role in
which they only provide the site for an existing energy
supplier or ESCo to deploy the micro-generation unit; this is
in agreement with (Dobbyn and Thomas, 2005) whose study
indicated a general attitude of disempowerment in individual
households with respect to energy reduction.
A notable number of respondents believe it to be the
individual’s responsibility to incur a change towards
renewable energy; this combined with the high level of
investment in energy efficiency technologies such as
double-glazing (Fig. 28) displays a proportion of potential
consumers (82.4%) who are more aligned with attitudes of
existing high-income solar PV users. (Fisher, 2004, p.326)
As a result any policy adopted by Wakefield Council should
incorporate both ‘Company Control’ and ‘Plug & Play’
models of deployment. A ‘Plug & Play’ model of deployment
is when the micro-generation unit is owned and financed by
the homeowner. As the likeliness of fuel poverty in this
consumer is low, the implementation of higher export
rewards will increase the attraction of a capital investment
and minimise the payback period.
Prospects
Social Acceptance
5.3
78. 78
The degree to which fuel poverty can be reduced, and energy
savings can be achieved, is dependent upon the visibility of
the technology and changes to consumption behaviour within
the household (James, 2006; Keirstead, 2007). When
homeowners in Wakefield were asked if their home energy
usage has fallen in the past 5-10 years, 19% responded that it
had been reduced due to energy saving (Fig. 34)
however 41.8% of respondents identified that it had not. The
new more active ‘co-provision’ role which consumers will
perform using a micro-generation system requires a
greater awareness of energy related issues and an alteration to
a household’s current energy consumption trend.
Should any ‘company control’ method of deployment be
implemented, it is noted that a behavioural change amongst
passive consumers is aided by the accompaniment of
continuous information about how their system works; this
raises awareness and has shown that most households will
then adapt their consumption to consume as much
micro-generated electricity on site as possible. (Dobbyn and
Thomas, 2005, p.53)
Continuous information supplied to households to instigate
behaviour change could come through appropriate
performance displays to replay information about prices and
consumption to the consumer in real time (Keirstead, 2007)
This is agreed upon by field trials of domestic solar units,
which demonstrated a clear lack of understanding of how
they work and how they impact on their daily routine (DTI,
2006).
Barriers &
Prospects
Consumption Behaviour
5.4
79. 79
Advanced ‘smart’ meters have undergone field trials and are
expected to be in UK homes before 2017 (DTI, 2007a)
however this would require a major initiative by the
government and Ofgem. Such measures are likely to
overcome barriers which behavioural changes represent to
reducing fuel poverty in households entering ESCo contracts
for solar micro-generation units.
Fig. 51 - Home Smart Meter
(British Gas, 2014)
5.4
80. 80
Many of the barriers to domestic solar micro-generation in
Wakefield can be addressed at a national policy level.
Modifications to the UK governments present RO
(Renewables Obligation) which currently requires energy
suppliers to source a proportion of their supply from
renewable sources, should incorporate an obligation to source
a quota of their supply using domestic solar micro-generation.
Ideally this would involve the deployment of domestic
micro-generation units based on local ability and demand;
this would result in areas with available roof space,
deprivation and high fuel poverty such as Wakefield receiving
greater support. Additionally the implementation of higher
bands of FiT rates for ESCo’s and energy suppliers generating
renewables from domestic sources would provide a financial
incentive to suppliers to choose solar micro-generation as an
alternative over concentrated solar power. These measures
along with adopting a German FiT model (Wustenhagen and
Bilharz, 2006) to fix the long-term export rate which
homeowners receive for their energy7
, should offer greater
security to potential investors. It will also send strong
investment indicators through a stable long-term framework.
Energy service contracts for micro-generation could help to
overcome barriers for individual household investments, such
as lack of access to capital or risk aversion about new
unproven technologies (J. Watson et al., 2008 p. 3096).
However a contribution by the homeowners to the upfront
costs might be necessary to make an energy service contract
economically viable for companies. Wakefield homeowners
when asked to state their desired level of government subsidy
towards a solar PV unit, 76% of respondents selected
Barriers
Policy & Legislation
Prospects
Policy & Legislation
5.5
81. 81
between £1000-2000 (Fig. 38), we can infer from this that a
contract provided by an ESCo requiring an up-front financial
contribution from the homeowner of around £1,000-2,000
would have the best prospects for adoption.
Current government regulations allow customers of energy
companies to switch their energy supplier every 28 days.
Given the capital investment made by both the consumer and
the energy supplier or ESCo, this presents a risk. Amending
government regulations to allow provisions for contracts to
extend beyond this period will provide greater security and
incentive to energy suppliers. The most common ESCo
contract adopted is a guaranteed savings contract. These
contracts are characterized by a fixed term with a fixed
payment schedule in which the ESCO ensures the savings
will meet or exceed a minimum level (U.S Department of
Energy, 2011). To avoid exploitation of fuel poor households,
the DECC and Wakefield Council should ensure the contracts
offered by energy suppliers are correctly regulated.
Woking Council achieved controlled regulation while
implementing an ESCo to generate solar power by
setting up its own competing utility, to provide the borough
with sustainable forms of energy. The company, Thameswey
Energy, which is operated by Woking Council, is a non-profit
company which has produced savings of around £250,000,
which was invested in further renewable energy projects.
Woking Borough Council achieved a 49% reduction in energy
consumption and a 77% reduction in CO2 emissions between
1991 and 2004 (DTI, 2006). By 2004 it had also installed 10%
of the UK’s solar PV capacity.
Fig. 52 - Woking Solar Roof
(Woking Borough Council, 2013)
5.5
82. 82
Thameswey Energy is owned by a majourity of 81% by a
Danish ESCO (Hedeselskabet Miljo og Energi A/S)
(Woking Borough Council, 2001). If Wakefield were to pursue
this method of implementing solar micro-generation units
through its own privately owned ESCo, Wakefield Council
will need to attract the investment of existing ESCo
companies. The success of attracting investment will rest
largely on how local energy policy is prioritised, existing
financial commitments made by Wakefield Council to
overcome barriers to the adoption of micro-generation along
with micro-generation policy which reflects that commitment
(such as firm targets for reducing energy consumption and
CO2) (Allen et al., 2008, p. 530). A joint venture would
permit WDC to avoid regulations that would be imposed on
a local government projects. This means they can promote
large scale projects through private finance while still
retaining an element of governance over the most suitable
solutions for households.
The conclusion presented by (Williams, 2008, p.7613)
suggests that accreditation schemes and systems for
knowledge transfer within and between industries is essential
to the deployment of a decentralised renewable energy
system, further to this skills in the areas of installation, repair
and maintenance remain underdeveloped (Micropower
Council, 2007), these are issues which along with pressure
selling are being addressed by the Renewable Energy
Assurance Listed (REAL). However, the introduction of an
accreditation system localised to the Wakefield area and
overseen by Wakefield Council to which installers must be
register and prove certifiable.
Prospects
Accreditation Schemes
5.6
83. 83
An online website in addition to published and distributed
printed material would allow home owners to have an
independent resource by which solar PV/ thermal installers
can be likened, the criteria met by each installer can also be
tailored by WDC to be equal to or above the UK government
Micro-generation Certification Scheme’s1 (MCS)
requirements to further protect vulnerable home owners.
Knowledge transfer within the industry is also crucial for
innovation (Halse, 2005) as information is often not
communicated within organisations themselves, let alone
between agents in the supply chain (Ørstavik, M., Bugge, T.
and Pedersen, T., 2003). The generation of a platform for
solar PV/ thermal information in the community would also
allow for knowledge transfer in the industry.
5.7
84. 84
Footnotes
6 Solar Installers are only required to be approved by the MSC if the solar panels
are for the purposes of Feed in Tariff eligibility. All solar products and companies
must achieve MSC accreditation before being able to sell and install solar panels
that can earn homeowners cash.
7 A fixed length contract for 20 years and price differentiation depending on the
scale of the technology and stage of market penetration. (DIW et al., 2008)
5.7
86. 86
Key Discussion Papers
5.7
Allen, S. R., G. P. Hammond, and Marcelle C. McManus. “Prospects for
and barriers to domestic micro-generation: A United Kingdom perspec-
tive.” Applied Energy 85.6 (2008): 528-544.
Watson, J., Sauter, R., Bahaj, B., James, P.A., Myers, L., Wing, R., 2006.
Unlocking the Power House: Policy and System Change for DomesticMi-
cro-Generation in the UK. SPRU, Brighton.
Scarpa, Riccardo, and Ken Willis. “Willingness-to-pay for renewable ener-
gy: Primary and discretionary choice of British households’ for micro-gen-
eration technologies.” Energy Economics 32.1 (2010): 129-136.
Næsje, P. C., Andersen, T. K., Sæle, H., 2005. Customer response on price
incentives, in: eceee 2005 Summer Study ‘Energy Savings: What Works&
Who Delivers?’, 30 May—4 June, Mandelieu La Napoule, France,vol. 3,
pp. 1259–1269.
Watson, J., 2004. Co-provision in sustainable energy systems: the case of
micro-generation. Energy Policy 32, 1981–1990.
Keirstead, James. “Behavioural responses to photovoltaic systems in the
UK domestic sector.” Energy Policy 35.8 (2007): 4128-4141.
Sauter, Raphael, and Jim Watson. “Strategies for the deployment of
micro-generation: Implications for social acceptance.” Energy Policy 35.5
(2007): 2770-2779.
Attitudes to renewable energy in London: public and stakeholder opinion
and the scope for progress. Greater London Authority, 2003.
Energy Saving Trust, Econnect, and Element Energy 2005. Potential for
microgeneration: study and analysis full report [online].
Available from: <http://www.gnn.gov.uk/environment/detail.asp?Re-
leaseID=181382&NewsAreaID=2&NavigatedFromDepartment=False>
[accessed 22.12.13].
88. 88
This investigation aimed to discover the barriers to the
micro-generation of domestic solar energy in Wakefield.
Additionally, solutions to these barriers should be developed,
and incorporated into a proposal for the future installation of
micro-generation in Wakefield. Current financial barriers to
the adoption of solar micro-generation exist in the
consumers’ perception of solar technologies. The desired
‘passive’ role of consumers in Wakefield presents a further
barrier to adoption; as such a ‘Company Control’ method of
deployment would be best suited to bring about widespread
acceptance. At present, current government policy regarding
micro-generation requires evaluation, and could inhibit
acceptance. A number of prospects which have the
opportunity of been applied by Wakefield Council have been
outlined, citing positive and negative results from other local
authorities.
The papers methodology could be furthered by the inclusion
of further open ended questions in the questionnaire to allow
for a lengthier, more in depth response, alternatively an
additional method of primary data collection such as
semi-structured interviews would also allow interviewees to
explore the attitudes of consumers in more detail.
Nevertheless, the process of data collection and analysis
would become resource intensive and time consuming, which
would limit the number of respondents.
Few studies have examined the issue of social acceptance and
micro-generation technologies (Faiers and Neame, 2006),
continuing research undertaken by organisations (e.g. Energy
Saving Trust or Wakefield Council) with the resources and
Conclusion
6
89. 89
time-scale to collect a larger sample size should focus on the
issue of social acceptance amongst consumers. Following any
implemented scheme, it is recommended that a secondary
questionnaire be carried out. Assessing behavioural changes
and technical problems should be done more than 6 months
after connection, as few problems arise during the
honeymoon’ phase of an installation.
While this investigation aimed to demonstrate a
representative view of households in Wakefield, data
uncovered displays that 17.3% of respondents identified
themselves as been fuel poor indicate a slight
over-representation of high-income and educated individuals,
further work may research the social acceptance and
energy consumption behaviours present in exclusively fuel
poor households to more accurately determine the most
effective ‘Company Control’ method of deployment.
For the purposes of this paper it is assumed that micro-
generation has future potential to further improve access to
affordable energy for low-income households, and contribute
to reduced carbon-emissions associated with energy supply,
reduced dependence on fossil fuels and increased energy
security,’ yet the primary way of making households more
energy efficient and reducing fuel poverty should be energy
efficacy measures. Further research examining the various
methods by which fuel poverty might be removed has the
potential to reinforce conclusions formed in this investigation;
as a result the validity of micro-generation as the most
effective method of alleviating fuel poverty must be
questioned.
6
90. 90
Existing studies on the impact of micro-generation
technologies have delivered ambiguous results; an
evaluation of 1000 German households did not show a clear
trend towards lower energy consumption, while a similar
study on Austrian households only displayed a change in
behaviours in households with above-average consumption
levels (Haas et al., 1999). The advancement of UK based
research on the effectiveness of micro-generation as a
catalyst to raise awareness of energy related issues is required
to determine if the role of passive consumers has the
capacity to adapt. Supplementary research, if successful, has
the potential to overcome the barrier that passive consumers
currently present to adoption in Wakefield.
Policy at a national level is central to overcoming barriers
defined in this paper; incentives such as the current RO
scheme should be extended to incorporate an obligation to
source a quota of their supply using domestic micro-
generation. However, the obligation to deploy solar over
differing renewable technologies must be based upon local
microclimate.
The real-world success of the prospects outlined in this
investigation relies largely on Wakefield Council playing an
active role in prioritising micro-generation developments. If
fiscal and policy commitments are directed by WDC towards
solar micro-generation, methods of development outlined in
this investigation have the latent ability to reduce fuel poverty,
energy consumption and GHG emissions amongst
homeowners in the area.
6
Word Count - 9670
(Word count does not include bibliography, image
references, text references, .)
92. 92
Stocker, Thomas F., Q. Dahe, and Gian-Kasper Plattner. “Climate
Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis.” Working Group I Contribu-
tion to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change. Summary for Policymakers (IPCC, 2013). [Accessed 10
October 2013].
European Union, 2013. Renewable Energy Aims [online] Available at:
<http://ec.europa.eu/energy/renewables/index_en.htm> [Accessed 20
December 2013]
The Guardian, 2013. Global warming: why is IPCC report so certain
about the influence of humans? [online]
Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-con-
sensus-97-per-cent/2013/sep/27/global-warming-ipcc-report-humans
[Accessed 21December 2013]
DECC, 2013. Reducing the UK’s greenhouse gas emissions by 80% by 2050
[online] Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/policies/reduc-
ing-the-uk-s-greenhouse-gas-emissions-by-80-by-2050 [Accessed 15
December 2013]
BBC News, 2013. IPCC cliate report: humans ‘dominant cause’ of warm-
ing [online] Available at: <http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environ-
ment-24292615> [Accessed 19 December 2013]
IPCC, 2007. Working Group I: The Physical Science Basis [online]
Available at: http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/
spmsspm-projections-of.html [Accessed 20 November 2013]
DECC, 2013. UK solar PV roadmap and the energy economy [online]
Available at: <https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-solar-pv-
roadmap-and-the-energy-economy> [Accessed 13 December 2013]
DECC, 2013. Annual domestic energy bills [online] <https://www.gov.uk/
government/statistical-data-sets/annual-domestic-energy-price-statis-
tics> [Accessed 27 November 2013]
Text References
7.1
93. 93
Solar Power Portal, 2013. Anesco named UK’s fastest growing private
company [online] Available at: <http://www.solarpowerportal.co.uk/
news/anesco_named_uks_fastest_growing_private_company_2356>
[Ac-cessed October 30 2013]
DECC, 2013. UK Renewable Energy Roadmap Update 2013 [online]
Available at: <https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/
attachment_data/file/255182/UK_Renewable_Energy_Roadmap_-_5_
November_-_FINAL_DOCUMENT_FOR_PUBLICATIO___.pdf>
[Accessed 20 December 2013]
DECC, 2013. DECC Public Attitudes Tracker – Wave 5 Summary of
key findings [online] Available at: <https://www.gov.uk/government/
uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/198722/Summary_of_
Wave_5_findings_of_Public_Attitudes_Tracker.pdf> [Accessed 27
November 2013]
Which Reviews, 2012. Feed in tariffs explained [online] <http://www.
which.co.uk/energy/creating-an-energy-saving-home/guides/feed-in-
tariffs-explained/feed-in-tariff-savings-and-earnings/> [Accessed 20
December 2013]
DECC, 2011. Fuel poverty regional statistics [online] <https://www.gov.
uk/government/collections/fuel-poverty-sub-regional-statistics> [Ac-
cessed 17 December 2013]
Office for National Statistics, 2011. National Population Projections
[online] <http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/npp/national-population-pro-
jections/2010-based-projections/index.html> [Ac-cessed 17 December
2013]
Solar Power Portal, 2013. UK enters glocal PV top six with record-break-
ing half year- part one [online] Available at: http://www.solarpowerpor-
tal.co.uk/guest_blog/uk_enters_global_pv_top_six_with_record_break-
ing_half_year_2356 [Accessed 20 November 2013]
7.1
94. 94
Ofgem, 2011. Typical domestic energy consumption figures [online]
<https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/ofgem-publications/64026/domestic-ener-
gy-consump-fig-fs.pdf> [Accessed 21 December 2013]
Speedlight Research, 2010. Impact of questionnaire length [online]
Available at: <http://www.lightspeedresearch.com/white-papers/im-
pact-of-questionnaire-length/> [Accessed 21 December 2013]
DECC, 2012. United Kingdom housing energy fact file [online] Available
at: <https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attach-
ment_data/file/201167/uk_housing_fact_file_2012.pdf> [Accessed 21
December 2013]
The Oxford Solar Initiative, 2004. The Ozford Solar Debate Does Oxford
really have a solar future? [online] Available at: <http://oxfordsolar.ener-
gyprojects.net/links/The_Oxford_Solar_Debate_VF1.pdf> [Accessed 27
No-vember 2013]
Energy Saving Trust, 2013. Roof and loft insulation [online] Available at:
<http://www.energysavingtrust.org.uk/Insulation/Roof-and-loft-insula-
tion> [Accessed 23 December 2013]
University of Reading Statistical Services Centre, 2001. Approaches to
the Analysis of Survey Data [online] Available at: <http://www.reading.
ac.uk/ssc/n/resources/Docs/Approaches_to_the_analysis_of_survey_
data.pdf> [Accessed 23 December 2013]
Keyoung Information, 2013. Survey Processing[online] Available at:
< http://www.data-processing.hk/survey-processing> [Accessed 23
December 2013]
The Exo Experts, 2013. Compare Solar Quotes [online] Available at:
<http://www.theecoexperts.co.uk/mcs-suppliers-and-solar-panel-in-
stallers-uk> [Accessed 23 December 2013]
Keirstead, James. “Behavioural responses to photovoltaic systems in the
UK domestic sector.” Energy Policy 35.8 (2007): 4128-4141.
7.1
95. 95
Wikipedia, 2013. Photovoltaics [online] Available at: <http://en.wikipe-
dia.org/wiki/Photovoltaics> [Accessed 23 December 2013]
Wikipedia, 2013. Solar thermal energy [online] Available at: <http://
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_thermal_energy> [Accessed 23 December
2013]
Compare my solar, 2013. Solar panel prices: Compare prices from local
installers [online] Available at: <http://www.comparemysolar.co.uk/
price-of-solar/> [Accessed 23 December 2013]
Full Fact, 2011. How much have renewable energy subsidies cost house-
holds? [online] Available at: <http://fullfact.org/factchecks/renewable_
energy_bills_environment_cost-3187> [Accessed 27 December 2013]
Renewable Energy Foundation, 2013. Solar Photovoltaic Generation in
the United Kingdom [online] Available at: <http://www.ref.org.uk/pub-
lications/297-solar-photovoltaic-generation-in-the-united-kingdom>
[Accessed 27 December 2013]
The Guardian, 2013. Surge in solar panel installations on UK household
roofs [online] Available at: <http://www.theguardian.com/environ-
ment/2011/apr/28/solar-panel-installations-surge-uk> [Accessed 28
December 2013]
Solar Power Portal, 2013. UK domestic installations hit 1.3GW [online]
Available at: <http://www.solarpowerportal.co.uk/news/uk_domestic_
solar_installations_hit_1.3gw_23876> [Accessed 28 December 2013]
Wakefield Council, 2013. Wakefield Energy Savers Loan [online] Avail-
able at: <http://www.wakefield.gov.uk/Environment/EnergyAdvice/
GrantsAndSchemes/EnergySaversLoan.htm> [Accessed 28 December
2013]
PV Magazine, 2013. Global solar installations to hit three-year high in
2014, says HIS [online] Available at: <http://www.pv-magazine.com/
news/details/beitrag/global-solar-installations-to-hit-three-year-high-
in-2014--say-ihs_100012928/> [Accessed 29 December 2013]
7.1
96. 96
Centre for Sustainable Energy, 2013. Hot water cylinder insulation
[online] Available at: <http://www.cse.org.uk/advice/advice-and-sup-
port/hot-water-cylinder-insulation> [Accessed 29 December 2013]
The Guardian, 2009. 10:10 How Woking is really working [online]
Available at: <http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2009/
sep/01/10-10-woking-borough-council> [Accessed 2 January 2014]
Woking Borough Council, 2001. Thameswey Joint Venture Project
[online] Available at: <www.woking.gov.uk/environment/climate/
Greeninitiatives/.../jointv.pdf> [Accessed 2 January 2014]
Direct Solar, 2013. System 2 Solar PV SAP 3KW System [online] Avail-
able at: <http://www.directsolar.co.uk/3kw-solar-system/> [Accessed 3
January 2014]
Forbes, 2013. Could The Cost Of Solar Power Fall By 75% By 2020?
[online] Available at: <http://www.forbes.com/sites/williampent-
land/2013/08/21/could-the-cost-of-solar-power-fall-by-75-by-2020/>
[Accessed 3 January 2014]
EU Research & Innovation, 2014. The 7th EU Framework Programme
[online] Available at: <http://ec.europa.eu/research/energy/eu/index_
en.cfm?pg=funding-fp7> [Accessed 4 January 2014]
Yin, R. K. (2008), Case study research: design and methods. 4th edn.
London: Sage.
Yin R.K. (2003), Application of case study research. 2nd edn. London:
Sage.
Energy Saving Trust. Domestic solar water heating information; 2007
[online]. Available from:http://www.est.org.uk/myhome/generating/
types/solarwater/ [accessed 10.08.13].
Woking Borough Council 2005. Climate-change strategy, Woking Bor-
ough Council, Woking.
7.1
97. 97
BERA (2004) Revised Ethical Guidelines for Educational Research.
Available at: http://www.bera.ac.uk/publications/pdfs/ETHICA1.PDF
(Accessed December 2013)
Northumbria University (2009) Research Ethics and Governance Hand-
book. Available at:
http://www.northumbria.ac.uk/static/5007/respdf/ethics_handbook_2.
pdf (Accessed January 2014)
Devine-Wight, H. Devine-Wright, P., 2004. From demand side manage-
ment to demand side participation: tracing an environmental psychology
of sustainable electricity system evolution, Paper for the IAPS Annual
Conference, Vienna, 7–10 July.
Dobbyn, J., Thomas, G., 2005. Seeing the Light: the Impact of Micro
generation on Our Use of Energy. Sustain-able Consumption Roundtable,
London.
DTI, 2006, Domestic photovoltaic field trials – final technical report.
London: Department of Trade and Industry; 2006.
Stern N, 2006, The economics of climate change: The Stern review.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
OFGEM, 2006, Ofgem and microgeneration – next steps. London: OF-
GEM.
Energy Saving Trust, Econnect, and Element Energy 2005. Potential
for microgeneration: study and analysis full report [online].Avail-
able from: <http://www.gnn.gov.uk/environment/detail.asp?Re-
leaseID=181382&NewsAreaID=2&NavigatedFromDepartment=False>
[accessed 22.12.13].
DTI. Energy Statistics. P/2007/1, 4 January 2007 [online]. Available
from www.gnn.gov.uk/environment/mediaDetail.asp?Media-Detail-
sID=189590&NewsAreaID=2&ClientID=201&LocaleID=2 [accessed
07.10.13].
7.1
98. 98
DEFRA, 2006, Climate change – The UK Programme, London: DEFRA;
2006.
Energy Saving Trust. 2007, Domestic solar PV information; [online].
Available from: http://www.est.org.uk/myhome/generating/types/so-
larpv/ [accessed 06.11.13].
Wakefield Council, 2011. Greener Homes, Healthier Homes: An Action
Plan for Affordable Warmth. Wakefield: The Affordable Warmth Partner-
ship
Woking Borough Council, 2005, Energy Services: Case Study 2, Woking:
Energy Services
Energy Saving Trust, 2013, Feed-in-tarrifs scheme (FITs) [online] Avail-
abile at: <http://www.energysavingtrust.org.uk/Generating-energy/Get-
ting-money-back/Feed-In-Tariffs-scheme-FITs>
Chesshire, J., 2003. Energy efficiency projects and policies for step changes
in the energy system: developing an agenda for social science research,
ESRC Seminar, Policy Studies Institute, March.
Sauter, Raphael, and Jim Watson. “Strategies for the deployment of
micro-generation: Implications for social acceptance.” Energy Policy 35.5
(2007): 2770-2779.
Sorrell, S., 2004. Understanding barriers to energy efficiency. In: Sorrell,
S., O’Malley, E., Schleich, J., Scott, S. (Eds.), The Economics of Energy
Efficiency. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp. 25–93.
Sorrell, S., 2005. The contribution of energy service contracting to a low
carbon economy, Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research
Technical Report 37. The Carbon Trust, 2006.
Van Vliet B., Southerton, Dale, Heather Chappells, eds. Sustainable
consumption: The implications of changing infrastructures of provision.
Edward Elgar Publishing, 2004.
7.1
99. 99
Environmental Change Institute, 2009, Change for Domestic Micro-Gen-
eration in the UK. SPRU, Brighton.
Oxera, 2005. Policies for energy efficiency in the UK household sector
(unpublished report prepared for Defra for the CCPR).
Fischer, Corinna. “From consumers to operators: the role of micro cogen-
eration users.” Micro Cogeneration. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2006.
117-143.
Praetorius, Barbara, and Lambert Schneider. “MICRO COGEN-
ERATION: TOWARDS A DECENTRALIZED AND SUSTAINABLE
GERMAN ENERGY SYSTEM?.” 29th IAEE International Conference,
Potsdam. 2006.
Ferris, J. M., 1984. Coprovision: citizen time and money donations in
public service provision. Public Administration Review 44.
FlieX, S., Kleinaltenkamp, M., 2004. Blueprinting the service company,
managing service processes efficiently. Journal of Business Research57,
392–404.
Erge, Th, V. U. Hoffmann, and K. Kiefer. “The German experience with
grid-connected PV-systems.” Solar Energy 70.6 (2001): 479-487.
Næsje, P. C., Andersen, T. K., Sæle, H., 2005. Customer response on price
incentives, in: eceee 2005 Summer Study ‘Energy Savings: What Works&
Who Delivers?’, 30 May—4 June, Mandelieu La Napoule, France,vol. 3,
pp. 1259–1269.
Watson, J., 2004. Co-provision in sustainable energy systems: the case of
micro-generation. Energy Policy 32, 1981–1990.
Stern Review: The economics of climate change. Vol. 30. London: HM
treasury, 2006.
7.1
100. 100
Watson, J., Sauter, R., Bahaj, B., James, P.A., Myers, L., Wing, R., 2006.
Unlocking the Power House: Policy and System Change for DomesticMi-
cro-Generation in the UK. SPRU, Brighton.
Williams, R., Mills, S., 1986. Introduction. In: Williams, R., Mills,
S.(Eds.), Public Acceptance of New Technolo-gies: An InternationalReview.
Croom Helm, London, pp. 1–18.
London Renewables, 2003. Attitudes to renewable energy in London:pub-
lic and stakeholder opinion and the scope for progress. A reportcommis-
sioned by London Renewables and carried out by BrookLyndhurst Ltd in
association with MORI and Upstream. Greater London Authority.
Jones, H., 2003. Achieving Energy Efficiency through Domestic CHP:
ananalysis of market barriers in the UK. A report submitted in partialful-
filment of the requirements for the MSc and the DIC. Imperial College of
Science, Technology and Medicine. unpublished.
Energy Saving Trust. Domestic solar water heating information; 2007
[online]. Available from: http://www.est.org.uk/myhome/generating/
types/solarwater/ [Accessed 29 November 2013].
Walker, Gordon. “Decentralised systems and fuel poverty: Are there any
links or risks?.” Energy Policy 36.12 (2008): 4514-4517.
Young, William, et al. “Sustainable consumption: green consumer behav-
iour when purchasing products.” Sustainable Development 18.1 (2010):
20-31.
Williams, Jo. “The deployment of decentralised energy systems as part of
the housing growth programme in the UK.” Energy policy 38.12 (2010):
7604-7613.
Poortinga, Wouter, et al. “Household preferences for energy-saving meas-
ures: A conjoint analysis.” Journal of Economic Psychology 24.1 (2003):
49-64.
7.1