1

Barriers to and Prospects forDomestic Solar Micro-Generation in Wakefield.

Simon Taylor

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

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

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

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

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

List of Figures

9111213141516171819212525272729313333343537384244484950

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 ResultsFig. 27 - Question 2 Results Fig. 28 - Question 3 Results

8

Fig. 29 - Question 4 ResultsFig. 30 - Question 5 ResultsFig. 31 - Question 6 Results Fig. 32 - Question 7 Results Fig. 33 - Question 8 ResultsFig. 34 - Question 9 Results Fig. 35 - Question 10 ResultsFig. 36 - Question 11 Results Fig. 37 - Question 12 ResultsFig. 38 - Question 13 Results Fig. 39 - Question 14 ResultsFig. 40 - Question 15 Results Fig. 41 - Question 16 ResultsFig. 42 - Question 17 ResultsFig. 43 - Question 18 Results Fig. 44 - Question 19 ResultsFig. 45 - Consumer Estimated Solar Costs (Scarpa and Willis, 2010)

Fig. 46 - Roles of Innovation Chain Actors (Allen et al., 2008)

Fig. 47 - Kirklees Social Housing (Kirklees Council, 2006)

Fig. 48 - Solar Information Campaign (Gamecocksonline, 2013)

Fig. 49 - Community Energy Scheme (Brighton Energy Co-operative, 2013)

Fig. 50 - Solar PV Installation (Emotion Energy, 2013)

Fig. 51 - Home Smart Meter (All About Savings, 2014)

Fig. 52 - Woking Solar Roof (Woking Borough Council, 2013)

Fig. 53 - Roof Insulation Fitting (GSPC Property, 2013)

Fig. 54 - Participant Information Sheet Fig. 55 - Informed Consent Form

Fig. 56 - Questionnaire

51525354555657585960616263646566686971737577798185

105

107

108

9

Fig. 1 - Bungalow Solar Panel Installation(Ecoinnovations, 2013)

10

Introduction 1

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 (oC)

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

-1

Predicted Scenarios

1.1

12

Fig. 3 - Global Temperature Rise (IPCC, 2007)

(oC)

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

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

11109

87

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

14

Fig. 5 - Renewable Energy Growth (DECC, 2013)

10%

45%

- Coal & Oil - Combi Gas - Nuclear - Renewables - Other

2000 20302015 2020 20252005 2010

1.1

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 CHPAnaerobic Digestion

Organic Matter

Fig. 6 - Public Solar Approval (London Renewables, 2003)

4%

13%9%7%

11%

81%

52%46%

75%

56%

1.2

16

Fig. 7 - Hepworth Gallery, Wakefield (Simon Taylor, 2013)

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

18

Fig. 9 - Wakefield Aerial Photograph(Google Earth Pro, 2014)

Fig. 10 - Location Map

Wakefield

1.3

19

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

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)

452Residential

149Air Travel

316Industry

463Road Transport

30Other Travel

29Other

101Non

Energy171

Commercial & Admin

1.5

22

Literature Review 2

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

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

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 awarenessthrough TV, radio,

newspapers internet, magazines and local radio.

Decreasing Cost

Plus decreasing payback period. Ideal cost is

around £5/6K andpayback 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

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

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

RoofMounted

GroundMounted

2010 20132011 20120.0

3.0

1.0

2.0

Gigawatts

2.3

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

Fig. 16 - Westmill Solar Park (Ben Cavanna, 2012)

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

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

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

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

ESCoFinancial

Institution

Capital

Finance Payments

Project Payment

Energy Agreement

Energy End-User

ESCo

Financial Institution

PaymentsBased on

Energy, Value or Services

Debt Service Payments & Project Security

Energy Agreement - ESCO owns

System

Loan Investment

Agreement & Installation

2.6

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%

- C

ost

19%

- R

elia

bilit

y/ N

ot E

noug

h Su

n

7% -

Saf

ety

5% -

Aes

thet

ics

5% -

Ine

ffici

ent

3% -

Lac

k of

Spa

ce

3% -

Res

iden

t Con

sulta

tion

43%

- N

one

2.7

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

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

Fig. 22 - Community Energy Scheme(Brighton Energy Co-operative, 2013)

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

Sola

r P

VSo

lar

The

rmal

Pay

back

Ene

rgy

Savi

ng

£2831 £10,638

£2903 £3904

3-5 Years

10-25 Years

£2.91 £1.00

2.8

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

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

41

Methodology 3

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

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

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

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

Copies of the participant information sheet, informed consent form, questionnaire and debriefing sheet can be found in the Appendix.

Fig. 54 - Participant information sheetFig. 55 – Informed consent formFig. 56 – Questionnaire

3.5

47

Results 4

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

2. Does your home use draught proofing?(Fig. 27)

All (12), Most (9), Some (21), None (7)

All24.5%

Most18.4%

Some42.9%

None14.3%

50

3. Does your home use low-energy lighting? (Fig. 28)

All (7), Most (20), Some (16), None (9)

All13.5%

Most38.5%

Some30.8%

None17.3%

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

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

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

7. How many of your windows have secondary/ double glazing? (Fig. 32)

All (42), Most (3), Some (3), None (3)

All82.4%

Most5.9%

Some5.9%

None5.9%

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)

East16.4%

West16.4%

North40.0%

South40.0%

Northeast18.2%

Southwest18.2%

Southeast21.8%

Northwest21.8%

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)

Agree70.4%

Agree Strongly13.0%

Do not know13.0%

Disagree3.7%

£2506.3% £500

18.8%

£1,00025.0%

£2,00014.6%

£3,0006.3%

Do not know29.2%

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

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 know11.3%

No22.6%

Yes66.0%

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%

£1,50025.0%

£2,50019.4%

£3,5008.3%

£4,5008.3%

£7,5002.8%

Do not know36.1%

£1,500 (9), £2,500 (7), £3,500 (3), £4,500 (3), £7,500 (1), Do not know (13)

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)

£1,00021.1%

£1,50013.2%

£2,00021.1%

£3,0002.6%

Do not know 42.1%

No22.6%

Yes69.8%

Do not know7.5%

£1,000 (8), £1,500 (5), £2,000 (8) £3,000 (1), Do not know (16)

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 Prices18.2%

Economic Factors36.4%

Energy Usage9.1%

Other9.1%

Yes 17.3%

No 76.9%

Do not know5.8%

Yes (9), No (40), Do not know (3)

Income related (3), Energy prices (2), Economic factors (4), Energy usage (1), Other (1)

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 Prices17.4%

Economic Factors 17.4%

Energy Saving43.5%

Renewable Energy8.7%

Energy Usage13.0%

Yes 43.6%

No 41.8%

Do not know14.5%

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

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)

Yes40.7%

No44.4%

Do not know 14.8%

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)

% o

f Res

pond

ents

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

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 (£)

% o

f Res

pond

ents

£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

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

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 nothing1.9%

I do a lot 7.4%

I could do more 42.6%

Do not know0%

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)

National58.6%

Regional8.6%

Local10.3%

Personal20.7%

Do not know1.7%

67

Discussion 5

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

Sola

r P

VSo

lar

The

rmal

£9,000

£5,000+ £2,500

Fig. 45 - Consumer Estimated Solar Costs(Scarpa and Willis, 2010, p.135)

£5,000+

5.1

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)

Inve

stm

ents

Gov

ernm

ent

Consumers

Business

R & D

Demonstration

Pre-Commercial

Supported

Commercial

Fully Commercial

Prospects Economic & Fiscal

5.1

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

71

Fig. 47 - Kirklees Social Housing(Kirklees Council, 2006)

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

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

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

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

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

77

Fig. 50 - Solar PV Installation(Emotion Energy, 2013)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

85

Fig. 53 - Roof Insulation Fitting(GSPC Property, 2013)

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].

87

Conclusion 6

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

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

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, .)

91

References 7

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

101

7.2

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.

Walker, Gordon, et al. “Harnessing community energies: explaining and evaluating community-based localism in renewable energy policy in the UK.” Global Environmental Politics 7.2 (2007): 64-82.

Wolfe, Philip. “The implications of an increasingly decentralised energy system.” Energy Policy 36.12 (2008): 4509-4513.

Jones, Anthony E., Marty Irwin, and Afshin Izadian. “Incentives for Microgeneration Development in the US and Europe.” IECON 2010-36th Annual Conference on IEEE Industrial Electronics Society. IEEE, 2010.

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.

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.

Attitudes to renewable energy in London: public and stakeholder opinion and the scope for progress. Greater London Authority, 2003.

102

Firefly The Solar Generation, 2013. 5kWh Hundai Install [image online] Available at: http://blog.gspc.co.uk/2013/02/06/the-green-deal-whats-not-to-like/ [Accessed 4 January 2014]

Ashden Awards, 2006. Ashden Award Winner, 2005[image online] http://www.flickr.com/photos/ashdenawards/4306445152/ [Accessed 4 January 2014]

Centrica, 2013. Engineer Installing Loft Insulation [image online] Availa-ble at: http://www.centrica.com/index.asp?pageid=1046&resource=im-ages&startrow=1&category=44&display=26 [Accessed 5 January 2014]

Emotion Energy, 2010. Solar PV Installation [image online] Available at: http://www.emotionenergy.co.uk/products/solar-pv/ [Accessed 4 January 2014]

Brighton Energy Co-Operative, 2013. The Westmill energy Coop is the largest in the UK. Together the local community has raised more than £20 million for 5 wind turbines and a ground-mounted solar array. Members receive an average of 8% return on their investment. [image online] Available at: http://www.brightonenergy.org.uk/2013/09/20000-grant-to-kick-start-your-own-community-energy-scheme/ [Accessed 2 January 2014]

Ecoinnovations, 2013. Rooftop Solar [image online] Available at: http://www.eco-innovations.co.uk/domestic-solar-pv-case-studies/sunpow-er-solar-panel-installer/ [Accessed 2 January 2014]

Arjan De Raaf, 2012, Solar Panels Infographic [image online] Available at: <http://infographiclist.com/2012/06/24/solar-panels-infographic/> [Accessed 3 February 2014]

South Carolina Gamecocks, 2012, Men’s Tennis Gathering at Russell House Attracts Students [image online] Available at: <http://www.game-cocksonline.com/blog/2012/02/mens-tennis-at-russell-house.html> [Accessed 5 February 2014]

Image References

103

Nick Hider, 2009, Solar Panels at Woking Railway Station [image online] Available at: <http://www.flickr.com/photos/nickhi/4155707491/> [Ac-cessed 5 January 2014]

Ben Cavanna, 2012, Visitors at a Westmill Solar Co-operative Open Day at Westmill Solar Park [image online] Available at: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_solar_farm> [Accessed 5 January 2014]

Ecoinnovations, 2013. Rooftop Solar [image online] Available at: http://www.eco-innovations.co.uk/domestic-solar-pv-case-studies/sunpow-er-solar-panel-installer/ [Accessed 2 January 2014]

Solar Power Portal, 2013. UK domestic installations hit 1.3GW [image online] Available at: <http://www.solarpowerportal.co.uk/news/uk_do-mestic_solar_installations_hit_1.3gw_23876> [Accessed 28 December 2013]

British Gas, 2014, Smart savers: 9 out of 10 smart meter customers now take simple daily steps to reduce energy use in the home [image online] Available at: < http://britishgas.presscentre.com/content/default.aspx-?NewsAreaId=2&SubjectId=57> [Accessed 1 January 2014]

GSCP Property Blog, 2013, The Green Deal will fund energy saving work such as installing insulation with the coosts repaid through your electricity bill [image online] Available at: < http://blog.gspc.co.uk/2013/02/06/the-green-deal-whats-not-to-like/> [Accessed 25 January 2014]

Sustainable Energy Solutions, 2006, 1 kWp photovoltaic arrays at Fern-side, Huddersfield [image online] Available at: < http://www.ashden.org/media/uk_photos/2006> [Accessed 10 January 2014]

Watson, J., Sauter, R., et al., 2006, Consumer Alternative Deployment Models, [image online] Available at: https://www.sussex.ac.uk/webteam/gateway/file.php?name=unlocking-the-power-house-report.pd-f&site=264 [accessed 17.12.13]

104

Appendix 8

105

Participant Information Sheet Fig. 54

(Simon Taylor, 2013)

106

107

Informed Consent Sheet Fig. 55

(Simon Taylor, 2013)

108

Questionnaire Fig. 56

(Simon Taylor, 2013)

109

110

111