Energy Talks

Are We Retro-Fit?

• Elmhurst Energy • Season 1 • Episode 3

Share episode

Andrew Parkin is joined by Josh Wakeling, Head of Training, and Simon Flint, Retrofit Support Team Leader and Trainer, to discuss everything in the world of Retrofit. Listen now to hear all the latest on ECO4, the Great British Insulation Scheme (GBIS), RdSAP 10, Old and Traditional Buildings and much more!

Funded Energy and Retrofit Training
For more information and to register your interest, click the following link: https://www.elmhurstenergy.co.uk/funded-energy-and-retrofit-training-register-of-interest/ 

Andrew Parkin: Hello to all our listeners. Welcome to episode three of the Energy Talks podcast and on today's third episode, we're going to be talking about all things retrofit. We've called it ‘Are We Retro-fit’, which I'm sure nobody will find amusing? I think I've used that plenty of times in various articles that I've written, but it is still fit for purpose to coin the phrase to make a joke out of it. 

We are sort of three, I would say three years into what I would consider retrofit now. We've seen PAS 2035 arrive and implemented. We're now seeing another version of PAS 2035 coming through.

We'll talk about that in a second. So, it is a good time for us to be sort of looking back and figuring out where we've gone from, where we've got to. And what does the future look like? So, to help me with this, it is a great pleasure to welcome my colleagues Josh Wakeling and Simon Flint. Hello, gentlemen.

How are you doing? 

Josh Wakeling: Hello, very good, thank you. 

Simon Flint: Afternoon. Yeah, all good thank you. 

Andrew Parkin: Excellent. We're all in different places. I'm from home today. Josh, you’re in one room in the office. And Simon, you're in another. So, this is a brave new world for all of us. So, we've got quite a loose agenda. I think we're going to make this very conversational, like we do with all these podcasts, but we want to sort of explore all the angles of what's happening in Retrofit at the moment.

And it is such a busy, fast-moving environment. There's lots going on. It's hard to keep on top of things. So the challenge is really as a scheme, how do we communicate that to our members? So very excited to be doing a podcast and I'm sure we'll do more on this subject, but as we go through this, we'll be signposting you to where you can get more information or what's coming down the line.

And obviously we're here to help support all our members in what's happening in this area and beyond. So I'm going to start off with, I suppose, the big news really, apart from Rishi's comments the other week, which have been, I'm sure, very badly received by our industry, and we'll probably come back to him at some point.

We've had an update to the PAS. So PAS 2035 is the overarching process for doing whole house retrofit in the UK. It's been in place since 2020 I think maybe slightly before that. It is designed to be updated on a regular basis. And we just had a new version land, and I'm going to bring in Josh at this point because Josh, you've been quite well involved in this in probably earlier this year into sort of the back part of last year.

That's how long these things take. Do you want to give us a bit of an update on what's been happening with the PAS? 

Josh Wakeling: Yeah, definitely. I think it's pretty much taken over my and Simon's life for the past 2 to 3 years as well. So we are in the thick of it, but yeah, recently we were asked to attend the PAS 2035 steering group, which is the sort of industry leading group that looks at all the changes and how to update the document, and the plan is to update it once every year and allow that then to be implemented into the schemes and into the funding groups. 

So yeah, so the past nine months pretty much is what we've been working on this latest update and some of the key items, I think the biggest one really is the risk pathways. So, they've been removed. So we just have one, basically one, root for all retrofit, and then depending on the complexity of the project, you then add on extra requirements for each project, 

Andrew Parkin: So, that’s going from A, B, and C to a singular risk pathway with bolt-ons, basically. 

Josh Wakeling: Yeah. So for example, for high rise, there are specific requirements that will be for high rise rather than it being specifically Pathway C is only for high rise. So it's kind of similar processes, but just made it simpler to understand rather than having the different pathways really. 

Andrew Parkin: Good. Okay, so that's one of the big changes. What else is going on? 

Josh Wakeling: Yeah, I think one of the big changes, which is sort of needed but is a big cost implication, is really the retrofit coordinator site visit requirement. So the document talks about the fact that retrofit coordinators will be required to visit site on at least one of the projects on one of the measures at certain points, we had lots of discussions around the fact that when does a coordinator actually visit site because in reality you might have multiple measures being installed and so they can't be there for every single one because that is quite costly obviously.

And but we've come to the reality of a situation where you go, okay, depends on how they interact, how the measures are interacting, so the measures interact with each other, then the coordinators should be available to go to site to ensure that the two different measure installers are able to interact with the measures at the certain point because there's more higher risk there.

So that's sort of where the basis is going for the coordinators, but obviously, it does add a lot of cost in and I think we probably will see a higher demand for coordination services and more training and yeah, lots of things on the horizon for that I imagine. 

Andrew Parkin: Yeah, Yeah. And yeah, so I mean there's the concept of it being upgraded every year I think is a good one. What a what you said there is you've been at that first sort of nine months, does that, that mean you start for three and you start again and you start reviewing the, the next version of PAS, even though the current one hasn't was only just been released, it hasn't been implemented yet. 

Josh Wakeling: Yeah. So the process, from what I understand, and I could be completely misunderstanding or misinterpreting this, is we create a scope rather beginning of what is, what do we want to discuss for this session, i.e. for the next year and what is out of the scope. I.e., it is possibly too big or too much to deal with or we're not/we don't know enough information about it at the minute or we need to do a bit more work on this area, etc. So you create a scope of what you want to discuss first and then that allows you to then say complete yes or no, we're not discussing these things and you completely you just ignore those things that aren't in scope and only concentrate what is in scope. And so the items that were in scope were what was changed recently and those were what was discussed. And then it goes out of consultation and that's a sort of process. So I assume we’ll go at some point in the next few months will start to build up another scope of what do we change next based on industry issues and items and  key areas to look at.

Andrew Parkin: Really, that's quite interesting. Oh, Simon, I'll bring you in now. You know, you're the sort of the main contact, really, or one of the people that do speak to our retrofit members on a very regular basis. And I can imagine you've got quite a lot of feedback and in some cases frustration. So I think what is in the PAS at the moment and thinking about the current PAS and the new PAS, is there anything in there you think that probably needs to be focused on next? Or is it just that we should review the whole thing as a whole? 

Simon Flint: Yeah, I think that any good retrofit starts with a good retrofit assessment. So I think probably the assessment and I know there are working groups and steering groups and a standard being discussed and worked on for the retrofit assessor elements of the PAS in the first place. I don't think that could come quick enough, to be honest with you. I think if we start with a good, solid foundation, you've got a much better chance of success. 

I think, in terms of what's been published now. I think the industry reaction at the moment is, well, how and when is this going to be implemented? Because obviously, we're midway through ECO 4, we're about to start some new funding in terms of GBIS, we've got other funding strands that are in Midway, social housing, Debarb, and these sorts of things and how a TrustMark, who are obviously the quality mark for this standard really, how are they going to expect it to be implemented?

I think we're still waiting for a lot of answers to those sort of questions. On change that I would point out that I was quite surprised to see they've actually made it free of charge, now, though, the PAS documents can be downloaded for free from the BSI website, whereas the last version was 130 odd pounds. So, if you do want to get yourselves a copy of it, it is really easy to do. You have to register, but it is then free of charge. So, anyone who is even vaguely interested, I would urge you to download your own version of it and have a good read through because there are some subtle changes in there that will impact on your role, whether there's an assessor or more probably more largely as a coordinator with the PAS changes and the site visits, as Josh is alluded to. 

Josh Wakeling: I think I can help on some of the delivery points from, again, from what I understand on it, this is necessarily sort of out there publicly, but the 30th of March of 2025 is sort of a full transition deadline for the new PAS. But what that really means to the current schemes and then new schemes, I think the reality is all new schemes will adopt the latest version.

Simon Flint: Yeah, I think that's likely to be… it would be very difficult to see how you could swap from one version of PAS to another mid-way through a delivery of a scheme. One other thing that is changing though, that I know we haven't mentioned yet and that's the inclusion of the requirement for a traditional build qualification. At the moment in the old version as it is now PAS that was only required for listed buildings, conservation area, that type of property - the more extreme end of the market, if you like. This is now going to be a requirement for that traditional build qualification if you want to work on anything that is classed as traditional. So essentially any solid brick property, any stone property, anything built pre-1990. So there is an up-skill there as most (let's be honest), most of the retrofit professionals won't hold that qualification and to work on what is essentially millions of properties you will need that. So certainly I know Elmhurst are about to launch their own version of that qualification. And not only that, but we’ve also secured some government funding to be able to provide that at a discounted rate which we will be announcing details of shortly as well. So that's really good news. 

Andrew Parkin: Yeah, I was going to say that. I'm not going to say you stole my thunder because, you know, but you know, Josh, that's I mean, huge news really. For a long time that qualification has been delivered by one or two professionals in the industry very well. But obviously, the scale and the ability to deliver at scale for that training has been somewhat limited. But we're getting involved now. Do you want to expand upon that a little bit?

Josh Wakeling: Yeah, definitely. I think when we were talking about it, everyone agreed that more understanding of traditional buildings and solid brick properties pre 1900s and all, all of these areas are critical that we get retrofit right in those properties that we don't cause ongoing damage or we think about the longevity of the buildings rather than just continue as normal because they're not a listed building and so a lot of discussion was/we debated a lot on this. One of the key points, though, was that we should ensure that the retrofit assessor qualifications and training and the coordinated training actually incorporate it. But in the meantime, what was decided was that we implement this as a requirement for any/for the wider definition that Simon explained. 

And so yeah, initially you've got a small proportion of providers and what we've seen actually the government did release their sort of successful winners for the funding, the home decarbonisation funding and there are quite a few now providers that will be delivering the traditional buildings. So, it's definitely worth registering interest like Simon mentioned, Elmhurst do have ours all available. So yeah, do register your interest for that. 

But yeah, it's going to definitely be something that all retrofit assessors require. Otherwise, it's going to stop you from working. You're going to go to a housing estate and you might have some properties solid and the other side of the street will be cavity and you will only be able to work on the cavity ones if you've not got this qualification. And TrustMark will be sort of managing the compliance on that. So it sounds like quite a change for the industry really.

Andrew Parkin: I think. I think it's probably a step in the right direction and I'll try and caveat that a little bit. Anytime you put a new requirement in place, there's a challenge and there is cost and there is time and an impact. But I think anything that makes or helps improve the general knowledge of the assessment team in a workforce in the field, or whether that's coordinators who already have a good level of competence. But this sort of just adds an extra layer on the specifically for listed and traditional, you know, significant buildings I think is good. 

I think a point that I will make on this is that the requirements of a retrofit assessor or coordinator or designer is to understand the relevant British standard or, you know, designing or assessing or working on these traditional or historically significant buildings. Really, what we're looking for is them to identify, A that they are there and B, what is significant and what isn't significant so that when designs are put together, that historical significance is maintained and isn't lost. It's a really interesting part of the job. So I think it's going to be a really good thing. But you need to have that level of knowledge and understanding in order to do what is quite a simple assessment. But you should be doing it with a lot of knowledge behind you. So I do welcome it. I'm looking forward to seeing Elmhurst members going through the training. 

So yeah, sort of a call to action there is if you're an assessor or coordinator or even a designer and you want that qualification, you need that qualification to continue to do your job, the expression of interest form is out there. Get in touch and we'll be back in touch when we're ready to roll it out. 

We talked about ECO 4, Simon. It's obviously one of the schemes that implement and use PAS 2035. Can we just have a little talk around how it’s going, what's it looking like at the moment, volumes, etcetera?

Simon Flint: It's certainly looking better now than it was, I think volumes are increasing. There was/ it was in initially it was it was very slow. There was a lot of reluctance from installers to get involved. I don't think they understood what was going to be required. It was quite a long transition period from ECO 3 to ECO 4. Trustmark changed a lot of their requirements in terms of the level of data that they wanted lodging with them and changed that sort of project lodgement process.

All those things seem to have settled down now and volumes are increasing. I mean we're into the thousands per month now and I think one common factor we have noticed, and this has almost been evident from day one, really because of how ECO 4 is driven, it is more driven with a whole house retrofit in mind. So, a bit more ethically how PAS was written for the improvements at the whole property.

So the byproduct of that is the number of measures per project has actually gone up. So whilst the total number of projects may be lower than during ECO 3, we're now seeing an average of maybe four or five measures per property, whereas in previous iterations of ECO, that's probably been, you know, two or three measures, so less properties being improved, but they are generally being improved to a higher standard, I would say, and they are getting more measures for each project.

Definitely, definitely building. I think there's still some work to be done. I think we’ll probably go on to talk about the great British insulation scheme (GBIS) in a few minutes as well, but that I think will satisfy the sort of single measure elements of the market. ECO 4 is really going after those properties that can benefit from multi-measure improvements.

So yeah definitely getting busier but still quite a long way and a lot of room for improvement still, but certainly volumes are definitely picking up. 

Josh Wakeling: I do think it highlights that when changes happen they need to be done well and effectively and governed well by all the stakeholders. 

Simon Flint: Yeah, absolutely. 

Josh Wakeling: Yeah, all the departments, because I've seen graphs where just the implementation slows the whole industry down. And that's not just us as an industry delivering it, it’s then homeowners that can't get the upgrades and it's then all the bills that aren't being reduced by having the insulation. So I think it's critical that we do a good job. 

Simon Flint: You’re right. You only need one element of that wheel to sort of break and the whole wheel stops turning essentially. So yeah, absolutely. 

Andrew Parkin: I think there are two sides to it isn't there? The PAS 2035 which is the overall process, but buried in there/incorporated in there is PAS 2030 which is the installer standard. And obviously there were degrees of that depending on the measures that had been installed and all of those things, those component parts are subject to change. And when they changed, there’s an impact. I do remember when PAS 2035 was launched and there were two standards in place at one point, there was a transition between PAS 2030/2017 and the 2019 variant, and there was a lot of unintended consequences there. And that was that was obviously a big change to the process that was taking ECO 3 into ECO 4 broadly in the same time period. 

And obviously, an overarching standard coming into place and a standard change for the installation. And I don't think will make those same, I don't want to call them mistakes, but we probably went in with our eyes, one of our eyes closed, and we weren't prepared for some of the consequences as an industry, and I think we've learned a lot from that. So I am sort of heartened by some of the conversations around thinking in a bit more of a joined-up way. TrustMark being more involved in those processes as well BEIS (they’re not called BEIS anymore, they’re called DESNZ – they don’t like that name, so I’ll just call them the Department for Energy). There does seem to be more joined up conversation and it is getting more complicated still because you just mentioned it, GBIS is coming down the line (the Great British Insulation Scheme) and that's going to change the world as well. I was going to ask you Simon, quite a leading question, do you think PAS works with ECO, given that ECO is very much, we already know what we're going to do to the property and PAS 2035 is a whole house view of the property. Do you think they work or do you think there are odds with each other? 

Simon Flint: I think that when it's done well, yes, I think it works. I think there is still, unfortunately, an element of industry out there where, wherever that might be, who is forcing ECO into the PAS compliance process because they have to, as opposed to the two working, you know, hand in hand. PAS wasn't written specifically for ECO, let's be fair. PAS is a standard of its own. A whole house retrofit. It sets out an entire process. ECO has then come along and is being, I won't say shoehorned into that process, but it is a means of compliance to ensure the ECO 4 is done in a compliant manner. And I don't think they're necessarily the best of bedfellows at all times.

You mentioned GBIS. That's an interesting one because GBIS is obviously the process behind/ or the theory GBIS is it is only going to be single measures, single insulation measures, which you then look at the PAS process and you think actually is that really going to be cost effective? You know, by the time you've added all the layers of complexity of, of a full assessment to coordinator involvement, design, a visit to site… are all of these really going to be/are they all appropriate if at the end of the day, the home is simply going to get loft insulation. It's a worthwhile measure to put into the property, don't get me wrong. It absolutely is. But is full PAS compliance really the appropriate measure to ensure that's done properly? I'm not sure it is. 

Josh Wakeling: It's a really difficult dilemma isn’t it, because really you want PAS to be separate from funding. You don’t want PAS to be involved, but the whole point is we need to be able to have funding for us to properly insulate properties that are for people that are on lower incomes, that are on benefits, that are either in fuel poverty, ultimately. So it's really hard not to have that influence when you're discussing PAS 2035. But, at the same time, you also don't want to make PAS 2035 too costly. As soon as you make it too costly, it then won't actually work. 

Simon Flint: Yeah, and that’s where GBIS might fall down if we're not careful. I mean, it's been republished again, we've got some criteria and it's not so driven on or by income if you like, the main drivers are EPC rating and council tax banding of the property. So it's targeted at the poorer performing EPC properties banded D to G and the lower council tax banding, A to D in England, A to E in Scotland and Wales.

Don't get me wrong. I mean there is still some means testing in there as well, in addition, but essentially anybody in an old poorly performing property would be entitled to some funding under GBIS to get some insulation, whether that be cavity, loft, solid wall, flat roof, underfloor. They're all in that pot. But as I said, I'm not sure that the financial calculations, once you've put all the PAS costs on top of that, will make some of those practical. So I think we do need a route to market for that scheme that maybe has the assessment elements in it, because I think that's where, you know, we need to understand what's actually happening at the property now and then need some sort of balance at the end to make sure we've achieved the aims we wanted. So maybe a pre and post assessment, but whether it needs that full PAS compliance I think may well just make it simply too expensive if we're not careful.

Andrew Parkin: I think you've summarised it really well there. I was going to come in and say I'm, I've been on some steering groups around the scheme and how it's going to be the framework that's going to sit behind it, whether that's going to be PAS or something else. And I can't say too much on it because I'm not allowed to, mainly because we haven't made any hard and fast decisions yet and it would be unfair to do so. But I think it's right. 

You know, I see a real opportunity around GBIS, there is still a lot of low hanging fruit. There's properties out there that are poorly performing and to require them to go through quite a lot of disruption to improve them or you know, to overlook them because you can only do a particular measure would leave these properties behind. And I think the people who live in them are in, highly likely, scenarios of being in fuel poverty. And wall insulation, loft insulation, you know, would make a huge amount of difference to them and they wouldn't otherwise get it. So, I think it's very well targeted. I mean, there are always, always problems and people on the wrong side of the lines that have been drawn. But I think in principle it's good. 

Cost is a key consideration and having the same amount of cost to do whole house versus pretty much the same cost to do a single measure just doesn't seem to work. And I know this is what the department has spent some time thinking about. So what we will commit to doing is obviously working to the best of endeavors for our industry to get the right results out of those steering groups and then commit to letting our members know what's coming down the line.

And there is there has been a consultation response and you've summarised it very well, Simon. And we will probably need to do another small consultation on the back of this. But, you know, we'll see how that comes out, comes out in the wash. But I think you're right, assessment is key, getting the assessment right, how far that assessment then needs to go depending on how they change the process? Well, you know, we shall see. But I'm very much looking forward to it. 

And I know there's a lot of go-early stuff going on at the moment. Obviously, that's very much at the risk of anybody getting involved in that. They tend to be doing that through the PAS process. So, you know, that's all got to go into the mix as well. But I think a very, very welcome amount of funding, extra billion quid over the next couple of years, certainly to the end of ECO 4, which is 2026. We are you know, we're looking forward to seeing that being implemented successfully and our members being involved and benefiting from it as well. I'm going to come on to RdSAP 10 very shortly, but I just wanted to touch on the other funding available and then just come back to Rishi, the Prime Minister.

There is still lots of pots of funding out there at the moment that the Conservatives in this Parliament committed to. I think, something in the region of £6-£7 billion worth of funding. And it was never clear where all that money was coming from or what pots of it was being taken from and given to. But, you know, we have ECO 4 and that is £1,000,000 a year until the end of the period of 2026. We're not seeing that being spent at the moment and delivery will have to ramp up. And GBIS is a billion quid over a shorter period of time. And then you've got social housing, decarbonisation, LADS, and all in different places and different phases at the moment, but it’s still there. What is crucial is that whilst we've had the Prime Minister pull back on some of the timescales and the future commitments that have been laid out around things like MEES and cars and electrification of transportation and heat, there's still a commitment to funding this sort of work that's being done and that hasn't been pulled back. So I think I just wanted to sort of major on that point that nothing has happened there and there's no impacts there. And then just going on to, I suppose, the other side of the equation, which is, you know, landlords now don't have to achieve EPC C by 2028 or at all going forward. I still think there's an awful lot of that focus going on out in the industry.

I have spoken to a lot of people and I know you guys have had conversations with members and other stakeholders and there's still a lot of focus on EPC C. Going forward, I think it's a line in the sand that people have got used to and have got and can work with. Not every property can get a C and I think everybody accepts that. But that doesn't mean you shouldn't push forward to improve the energy efficiency of buildings. I think if you don't do that, we're in a very sticky situation and I think enough people in enough key positions and enough companies that are key stakeholders recognise that as well and are pushing forward with it. So, I just wanted to cover that. I don't know if you guys have got any thoughts on that or any further points. 

Simon Flint: Just one thing I will add, actually. I mean, there was a lot of negativity around Rishi Sunak's speech last week, but one thing that did creep out of it that has gone pretty much under the radar is obviously there's a £5,000 grant out there to upgrade to an air source heat pump and that was actually increased up to £7,500. So that's I mean, that can make a big difference to somebody, you know, that that will go a long way now towards covering the cost. And if you haven't applied for that grant yet, then any new grant, I think it's from last week, virtually from the day after the announcement was made will be at the new rate. So, I mean, that's gone from 5,000 to 7,500. So I think we've all got to be a little bit pragmatic about this. I mean, I don't think any government in this day and age can afford to ignore climate change. I think let's be perfectly honest about this. This is this is a pre-election gamble. And he's kicked the climate change count down the road to the other side of an election. I don't think any of his beliefs or plans have necessarily changed. I think they've been delayed, certainly, and I think that was that was well and truly came through in his statement. But are they all still required? Yeah, absolutely. Of course, they are. I think he's you know, he's just trying to get the conservatives in for another five years when the whole, you know, outlook will change again. I'm sure. 

Josh Wakeling: Yeah, the industry can't wait for general elections to happen. So, I think the key point you mentioned, Andy, was that obviously the industry itself is sort of proceeding anyway. I think if you're a conscientious landlord, then you know that the environment issues exist and you're going to want to do what you can do your bit. And I think there are a lot of landlords out there that want to do that. And having that target, I'd say was quite good for an investment plan and knowing what to do over the next five years or long-term investment in how to improve their building and ultimately the landlord might get better rates if they install better, more efficient equipment because the tenant gets a cheaper bill ultimately. So all of it is sort of positive and going in the right direction. The big sort of carrot, or stick sorry, is then the government forces you to do it. So I think most landlords are most conscientious landlords are doing it anyway and want to. And I think definitely in that sort of non-domestic space, we've seen a lot of organisations doing that because it also is an image thing as well isn’t it. You attract better tenants because you've got a more economical or environmentally friendly building. 

Simon Flint: It’s absolutely the right thing to do isn’t it just. Yeah, they’ve almost made it a moral obligation on the landlords to do it now rather than them, as you said, rather than a stick telling them they've got to do it. They're relying on the goodwill of people to actually do it now for a while, I think.

Andrew Parkin: Yeah, I think you're right. I mean, I think the Prime Minister's gone out on record, maybe not, but certainly the noises that have come out, sort of he's looking for carrots and not sticks at this moment in time and we're leading up to our election. So put two and two together. But I think you need both. I think we've said this for a long time.

You definitely need carrots. You need to incentivise people to do the right things, make the right choices, and reward them for making those right choices. You know, if you actually look at the way that the PRS sector currently is at the moment, you know, landlords are leaving in droves. It isn't because of minimum energy efficiency standards. It might be one of the things that concerned about. But I think landlords understand why that's there. The tax incentives and the tax breaks and all those things have been removed from the industry for a long period of time. 

And I think landlords would definitely be interested in those coming back, especially if you could tie that into better energy performance. So, if you could get yourself up to a C, you will get ‘X’ tax break. I know that for a long time people have started looking at or talking about incentivising improvements in buildings from stamp duty. So, in the first six months, 12 months, if you improve the rating of your property, you get some stamp duty back. And that's doubly delicious for a landlord because they pay more stamp duty if you know, they own more than one property.

So it is... There are other ways of achieving the result. But I still think you need that backstop of: if you don't do this, this is what's going to happen and just being clear with people but having fairness in the system as well. And there was always fairness built into minimum energy efficiency standards, you know because we know that every property can't get there.

And there were other tools in the armoury as well. So I think it will come back. I think you're right. I think we have to move forward on the basis that this will come at some point and we don't know what the result of the election will be. But it will be interesting to hear in a bit more of an affirmative way what the Labour Party will bring to the table around this and whether they will make this a point for the electorate to decide upon or whether they will just steer clear of it until after the election.

Josh Wakeling: It's quite interesting that a week later, Chris Skidmore and his report, Mission Zero, it's called, which went back, I think it was last year, there was a sudden rush that we needed four months of let's do a net zero review and what the cost implications are, when I think Rishi came in and we've had that report released this week and I don't think there's been much news about it, but it does counter some of the points that Rishi announced to say we need to implement MEES by 2030 and 2035 to ensure we meet our net zero targets. And so it is kind of like this is someone who is in the Conservative Party who's now  produced a report from industry with industry meetings and steering groups to say we need to do these things. But the Prime Minister has gone, ‘Oh no, we need to step away’. So it is not very much, not very good collective thinking, haven't taken them in any way.

Andrew Parkin: I think we could do a podcast on this and in its entirety. It probably is one for a future podcast. As we move into an election year, let's just touch upon RdSAP 10 very quickly and I think we've covered everything I wanted to cover for the day. Obviously, but I'll sort of lead on this and then bring you in, Simon, because, you know, this is a bit more of your day-to-day.

RdSAP 10: we've now had, I think, all the information that's needed in order to begin the process has been received by schemes. Whether that's information we could work with, remains to be seen. But we are now on that sort of road map to updating our software, the methodology, and the engines and, you know, the training, the guidance that we've all got to put together ready for a certain date next year.

Where are you on that one, Simon? What's your or your understanding? 

Simon Flint: Yeah, you're absolutely right. We've got everything we need. It's the start of a probably a six month ish journey. I think we've got to accept should everything go well. So I think we're looking at a spring introduction of it in 2024. The development work has already started. We've started writing the training material. I know there's already training courses, awareness courses out there, some of which I think are already fully booked. So there's a lot of industry interest in it from our members, which is, which is really good to hear. There are some key things in there we know are coming. One that certainly retrofits assessors will be used to anyway and that's measuring all windows or glazing. It'll give you a better indication of what's happening in that property. So, we know that's on the horizon. The ability to enter battery storage, if you've got a PV system that will benefit the property. The ability to enter air pressure tests specifically for the property, especially in the retrofit arena, that'll really help as well. 

Andrew Parkin: Absolutely crucial, isn't it, really.

Simon Flint: Yeah, absolutely. So that's a really big use. Originally it was left out and I know industry, particularly Elmhurst, felt quite strongly that, that we felt that was quite a serious omission and they've gone back on that, and they put it back in. It won't you know, you won't have that data at all, you know, for every property. Of course you won't. But where you have got it you will be able to use it and the property will benefit from those sorts of numbers. 

And so at the end of the day, it's 10 years it's been updated. You know, it wants to refresh it, it wants some extra fields in there. We need the fuel prices brought up to date that's reflected in the in the energy rating. And certainly from a CO2 emissions perspective as well. Just imagine how much electricity is generated as a result of renewables now compared to 10, 12 years ago when 9.94 was was originally being drafted and the software developed. So there will be some key changes in it. It is it is going to be a very busy six months-ish. Don't hold me to that timeline. But I think that's the so those are the sorts of numbers that that industry been asked to work towards and it could be a long road to get there in terms of developments in the testing of the software and training all the members, you know, it's not as it's not as big as the sort of upskill that we had back in the day, if you like, where there was exams required and all DEAs had to requalify.

But I would strongly urge all domestic energy assessors that they will need to attend a course, and get themselves up to speed with the changes, not because they will be quite fundamental and there's going to be a need for us to put on lots of training and for members to attend that training just so they're really ready for when that switch on does come.

Andrew Parkin: Josh, any thoughts on that from a training perspective? 

Josh Wakeling: Yeah, we'll be delivering lots of training. We've got the course already and I'm sure that the people might be listening that are already booked on it, writing ready to go. I know the existing dining scene will be training documents and guidance, but realistically, the training course is going to be the one that allows you to ask your questions to someone who's looked through the detail, someone who's developed content, who can provide guidance. You can obtain the discussion between everyone. But yeah, we have really good opportunity. We're hopefully getting some get some on demand stuff as well for people that want to look at it in their own time as well. So all on the horizon.

And one of the things that Simon mentioned actually was air tightness testing and going back to the first point around the PAS 2035 updates, one of the big changes was that, so previously air tightness testing was only required in pathway C, but what they've actually changed is that there will be an air tightness strategy requirement for all projects, all retrofit projects. I think this is really critical, especially with now the ability to put in an air tightness test into RdSAP. You're going to be able to get better results and understand more about the building at the assessment stage, pre and post, especially post now and the evaluation of making sure that everything's been done correctly. And I think that's a really big thing that was missed that we managed to get back in.

And again, it gives more opportunities for DEAs to sort of spread, get more bows to their string - more strings to their bow sorry – it’s the other way round, so much so for air tightness testing, why couldn't you do air tightness testing as part of your day to day?

Simon Flint: It starts to join those dots up, doesn't it? It just starts to, you know, these little changes here and that you think the implications, it's almost like a ripple effect, isn't it? You know, you might want change to a bit of software and suddenly that can have multiple benefits to it, all sorts of groups of people. 

Andrew Parkin: Absolutely. I think that's a microcosm, probably is a message to take away that the dots are now being joined up. Things that happen over one side impact somewhere else. And just to sort of finish this point off is that we know the ECO4 and GBIS are coming down the line when GBIS lands, and the regulations are set then that will impact on ECO4 and whichever methodology is in place at that time there will be will have to be used.

And so there's some real sort of debate and confusion going on around well RdSAP 10 is coming in the same timeline. Oh, hack what, what does that mean? And we know that RdSAP 10 is going to have impacts on what would the result of the calculation. Any time you change the methodology there is some impact that because there's quite a lot of change here, particularly those fuel prices, Simon, that you were mentioning and the carbon emissions tables, which are going to be different from full SAP as well. We didn't expect that, but that's what's happening. The fuel prices are going to be different. They're going to be more up-to-date. And we could spend probably half an hour talking about that particular topic. But all of that means that if you were to do a calculation on 9.9 for all your pre-upgrade assessments and then you have the measures installed in the properties being upgraded and then do it on 10, you're not comparing apples with apples.

So there's an awful lot of sort of debate over what that needs to look like and that's all culminated in a consultation which closed last month and now we're waiting on the response to be published there. Just for everyone's sort of awareness, Elmhurst did put a consultation response together, as they always do for all of these consultations and that's available on our website. But we've clearly gone down the line of we need option two, which is you can use the two different methodologies together. What we don't want to do is, we don't want to have to keep two methodologies running concurrently because it's certainly expensive. We've never done it before. It could be chaotic. We don't want that chaos in our industry. We'd rather have the ability to have the pre and the post calculation done in the methodology that's available at that time when the project is started. And then just review things in the latest methodology if and when that applies. 

So let’s just sort of say I did my assessments in the, you know, the end of February next year, and then everything's been installed at the end of March or early April. The methodology has changed at that point. What, what do I do? Well, I do my pre and my post calculations on the 9.94, that’s submitted to TrustMark. At least we've got certainty on what's going to happen at the property and what the scoring is going to be. That's cool. And then once the installs happened, I just do an assessment based on 10 and whatever the score is, is whatever the score is. All we're looking for those, those two, three, four measures that have been installed, that should have been installed have been installed, and you can see that in the data.

So that's what we've asked for and we've been really clear on that for the reasons I've set out and everything else is just quite difficult. Option one was to keep the two methodologies running at the same time. As I say, costly, never done it before, don't know what the impacts are going to be or the other ones is a cliff edge, basically, where you say on this day you just stop using 9.94 and move to 10. Okay, that kind of works because that's how we do things in EPC world. But we also know that there are projects ongoing and that could impact on projects. So I think that's in summary, our response there and we will see what comes back from the government and we're expecting a response very shortly and we will be communicating that to our members, which I think brings us to the conclusion we've only got a couple of minutes left.

That's been a really interesting discussion. Guys. Thank you so much for joining us. And I think there's going to be more to unpick here on many of these things, GBIS, when it comes along, RdSAP 10, when it comes along and what is going to happen politically. What do our members need to do now? We mentioned training, Josh, particularly around the traditional buildings, and RdSAP 10. What's the message there? 

Josh Wakeling: Well, first to mention is that the government has released the funding/released successful winners for funding. So the first thing is if you're not a DEA and your listening then there’s potentially going to be funding to become a DEA. If you're a DEA and not a retrofit assessor and you're interested in understanding all this that we've talked about now then that we funding for that as well. And then the final one is the traditional buildings. So ultimately, if you're going to be working on projects that we've talked about today that are now triggering this new definition of traditional buildings, that isn't historic, it's opened up a wider scope, then you do need to do the traditional buildings and all of those will be available, funded, partially funded, sorry, over the next few months and to the end of end of March is the plan. 

The RdSAP 10 update. Simons covered that pretty nicely. It's a critical art, critical training CPD that you need to do to understand what the impact is of RdSAP. And what that means is it allows you to understand what you need to charge, because the key thing here is you're going to have to spend more time on site. You're going to have to think about how much you're charging. And we, as Elmhurst, will be and are advocating for that. And we've put it in plenty of news articles. And Stuart Fairlie, the Managing Director, has talked about it a lot. And it needs to be aware that you are going to spend a bit more time on site. What does that mean to your costs? Explain that to our clients, but you need to know that. And if you don't know that, then you need to go on a course. 

Andrew Parkin: And we will be putting information out to that extent in the months ahead of us. Simon, let's assume people are trained now. Why Elmhurst? Why join our retrofit schemes?

Simon Flint: I think we've got the best software and the best support package collectively that the industry can provide. I mean, if you're a retrofit assessor, you can use our RdSAP online or you can use our Go app for Android or Apple/Android or iOS devices. From a condition report, we've now been out to release condition report Go for Android as well. Those of you waiting for that that's now out in live and running. So we've got a good suite of tools for a retrofit assessor.

 For a coordinator we've got a really good improvement option evaluator tool. Now it's a critical piece of work you have to do currently for all risk Path Bs and Cs. But once we get into new PAS, it's required for all measures. You have to do an improvement evaluation for all projects regardless of the size and scale of it. So that's going to become a really useful tool. It integrates with assessments completed through Elmhurst and we've also got the integration with our partners at ECO Surv as well. You know, if you're a coordinator and you want that end-to-end process that works with an installer-led sort of platform, if you like, then you can submit all your work and you can use that ECO Surv process. Likewise, if you're an assessor, you can link it to that as well. You can do your assessment through ECO Surv. 

And, since the merger, the retrofit teams are now fully integrated. So, we've got, you know, we've got a good resource to help and support our members, whatever the query might be. I'm sure we can, we can help you out and, and get you to be, you know, a full and active member of whichever scheme it is.

Andrew Parkin: Yeah. No, I think that's a really good point. Simon. You know, the merger has brought a bigger team together. We've looked at the best of both. Also, we have made a decision on the software, but that that, you know, some of the points that were strong in the Stroma platform are coming over to the Elmhurst platform, including that Android release, sort of pushed along by that and obviously the ECO Surv integration that was with the Stroma side is now available through the Elmhurst side and it will continue to support that and push and improve that that level of integration because, you know, the software is really good. In fact, it won an award on Friday because it is that good at the energy efficiency awards. So we're really happy with the situation there and what they're doing with that platform. And I think between us, we're giving you almost like the best of both isn’t it? Their brilliant software, our brilliant support structure and schemes and the Elmhurst retrofit suite as well- Condition report Go, RdSAP Go and all the integrations within the Elmhurst platforms. So I think it's a very exciting time. It's moving very quickly. And again, you need a good scheme behind you to help you stay on top of all of those changes and we are the biggest, best, brilliant scheme. So yeah, thank you very much, gentlemen.

I thought was a really good conversation. I knew there was a lot to cover and we needed probably a little bit more time than the standard podcast, but I think you've covered it really well. I look forward to having you back here in the future. As long as you'll put up with me. 

Josh Wakeling: No, thank you very much. 

Simon Flint: Absolutely no problem at all, Andy. Really glad to contribute. Thank you.

Andrew Parkin: Okay. Well, thank you very much to you guys. Thanks to the listeners for listening through to the end there. We hope you have enjoyed this podcast. Obviously, if you've got any suggestions for future podcasts, get them over to us and we'll take them into consideration. We've got some more of these to come – one before the end of the year and then going into next year. So I look forward to doing more of these and hope that you enjoy them. You continue to subscribe. If you're not a subscriber yet, please do subscribe to the podcast and I look forward to seeing you out and about at various conferences over the next couple of months as well. 

So, all the best, and thank you for listening. Goodbye.