Industry demands more detail on the Green Deal
While recognising that the government’s Green Deal energy efficiency initiative chimes well with the thinking of the lighting industry, many remain unconvinced it will deliver real and substantial benefits. The devil, as they say, is in the detail, and detail has not been forthcoming thus far. Nick Martindale reports
When the government finally releases its long-awaited consultation document on how it proposes the Green Deal scheme will work in practice, it should go some way to spelling out just what potential exists for the lighting industry to benefit from implementing more energy-efficient installations in domestic and commercial properties.
The basics of the scheme, which is due to launch late next year, have been known for a while: householders and commercial property owners will be able to apply for immediate funding to implement energy-efficient measures in buildings, which will be paid for through savings on energy bills over as much as 25 years.
The golden rule is that savings must at least cover the cost of the installation – although what would happen were this not the case is unclear – and, significantly, the loan would remain against the property itself, rather than against the current owner.
The lighting industry has broadly recognised the potential that could come from such a scheme. “Investing in refurbishing properties and installations to incorporate modern, energy-efficient lighting products and systems, generally speaking, leads to significant reductions in energy usage, carbon emissions and, as a result, lower costs,” says Eddie Taylor, chief executive of the Lighting Industry Federation. “The payback on investment in such lighting is often very quick and, in this context, lighting seems to fit very well into the Green Deal.”
Peter Hunt, chief executive of the Lighting Association, suggests the scheme could lead to more energy-efficient lighting being implemented in places where otherwise this would not have happened, with improvements being made as part of a wider programme. “The key thing here is that it’s being dressed up as an energy-efficiency package,” he says. “Perhaps most buildings might just look at insulation but, if it’s part of a package, then it might well open doors for lighting where it might not otherwise have had an opportunity.”
Just what will fall under the scope of the Green Deal is another moot point. “It all hinges on the definition that the Department of Energy and Climate Change applies as to what constitutes the fabric of the building,” says Hunt. “The intention is these measures will still be in the building when you sell it or move it on to another lessee. We don’t expect a lamp to be included, because you could take out the loan, install them and when you move out you could replace them with something less valuable and the new owner would continue to pay the loan.”
Downlighters pose something of a grey area, he suggests, although it’s easier to envisage control systems being included. Initially, it appears the biggest opportunity will come from the residential space, says Alex Gibbs, general manager, environment affairs, at Philips. “The domestic sector is a very large opportunity in its own right and the Green Deal could be a real kick-start to incentivise homeowners and landlords to consider energy saving with lighting as more than the provision of a replacement for traditional bulbs.”
The long-term nature of the payback proposed may also deter those in the commercial space from using this method, particularly where other schemes exist. Hunt, for instance, points to the lower cost of lighting installations compared with renewable energy projects, coupled with the fact that lighting refits rarely last 25 years anyway. “If you took a retail property and applied Green Deal lighting to that, then in five or 10 years that might be completely stripped out for another purpose, yet the loan remains with the property,” he says. “There is a danger that previous schemes saddle the property with an ongoing debt, even if the products aren’t there anymore.”
How installations will be assessed ahead of funding will play a crucial role in determining the overall success of the scheme, suggests Richard Forster, senior consultant at built environment consultancy BSRIA, and it is here where opportunities may exist for competent lighting professionals. “Lighting is more closely related with the occupants than the building,” he says. “Would you be happy to inherit and pay towards the lighting chosen by the previous occupant? Assessors must be qualified to judge whether the lighting enables the efficient activity of not just current, but future occupants.”
This is something that Hunt is also keen to highlight. “It appears the main assessor has to be a fully accredited Green Deal assessor and it’s likely these will be the energy performance assessors, trained for the Green Deal,” he says. “But whether they would bring in other specialists is not clear. The hope is that they would, because trying to suggest a lighting scheme is clearly outside their remit.” But, like much with the Green Deal, the government’s intentions around this remain unclear.
Designer perspective
The concern among lighting designers centres on whether the Green Deal will accelerate the push towards energy efficiency at the expense of more intelligent lighting designs.
“We want the best lit environment we can get for the least amount of power, but sometimes we do put in more energy than we would like for the sake of a better-lit environment,” says Dominic Meyrick, principal partner at Hoare Lea Lighting. “My fear is that it will be railroaded by unscrupulous luminaire suppliers, who have a vested interest in trying to get up-front money to buy their products.”
Mark Ridler, lighting director at BDP and vice-president, architectural lighting, at the Institution of Lighting Professionals, shares this concern. He says: “You can put too many efficient luminaires in and overlight the space and actually produce more carbon than if you had fewer, well-placed but slightly less efficient luminaires with good glare control. But that’s a more sophisticated argument, which is difficult to communicate.”
But Theo Paradise-Hirst, team leader at NDYLIGHT, suggests the scheme could lead to a tightening-up of the quality of products which claim to be energy-efficient. He says: “The notion and word ‘Green’ has been exploited quite improperly by governments and some suppliers for commercial, market or political gain. With any initiative like the Green Deal, it is important to be holistic and realistic in the true life-cycle, energy and cost comparatives.
“The market has seen many products or solutions introduced that just meet energy targets initially but quickly fail to match the criteria as lamp or luminaire degradation starts to occur. The Green Deal potentially offers consultants the opportunity to open up on these real issues.”
Manufacturer perspective
The Green Deal has been broadly welcomed by lighting manufacturers as a means of raising awareness of the potential energy savings that can be made through lighting refurbishments.
Nick Clark, sales director at Thorn Energy Solutions, however, has concerns that too much emphasis will be placed on LEDs and warns of the threat of substandard products being used by unwary customers. He says: “LED is singularly the greatest innovation that the lighting industry has seen but it is still a new and improving technology. Quality will come at a cost and my concern is that price will drive decisions, resulting in poor installations.”
There is disquiet, too, over the lack of information that has been forthcoming thus far from the government. “With just one year to go before implementation, there is a real need for clarity on the fundamentals of the proposals,” says Alex Gibbs, general manager, environment affairs, at Philips. “More details on products and at a technology level would give us a better idea of the opportunity.”
Alternative funding
A new business launched by the Carbon Trust in October aims to provide companies with a means of accessing finance for energy-efficient installations – including lighting – over a much shorter time frame.
Companies can borrow as little as £1,000 over a period between one and seven years and, like the Green Deal, funds will be paid back through savings derived from energy bills. “Businesses may be tempted to wait for the Green Deal but, for a lot of projects, we see payback of a year or less,” says Myles McCarthy, managing director of Carbon Trust Implementation Services.
He adds: “The lighting industry is moving very fast with new technologies and the saving opportunities, both through more efficient lights as well as controls, are significant, even for relatively new buildings.”
This is the route currently offered to customers by Thorn Energy Services, with finance ultimately provided by Siemens Financial Services and arranged in conjunction with existing energy suppliers.
Share
Have your say
You must sign in to make a comment.