X Close

General Election

Home

Menu

The Big Question on… energy: Will the new government generate the evidence required to achieve the necessary step change in energy efficiency?

By ucyow3c, on 23 April 2015

The Big Question facing the next UK government on Energy is to achieve a step-change in the demand side management (DSM) of the electricity system and in the installation of energy efficiency measures in buildings.

The policy framework for low-carbon energy supply is now in place and needs to be allowed to bed in with no further major changes. But the same cannot be said for DSM or building energy efficiency, though for different reasons.

The new opportunities for DSM have arisen because of the bringing together of two network technology systems: the electricity network and the network related to information and communication technologies. The much older challenge of making buildings more energy efficient has been thrown into high relief because of the failure of the policies of the last government, despite some useful innovations, to generate building energy efficiency installations at anything like the necessary scale.

Making substantial progress in both DSM and building energy efficiency over the next five years will be crucial in the realisation of all three major energy policy imperatives facing the UK: reduction in carbon emissions from the energy system; increasing energy security; and ensuring that both households and businesses can afford to buy the energy they need, to keep warm in the former case, and to keep competitive in the latter.

Research has a major contribution to make in achieving both these objectives. For DSM the crucial issue is how smaller consumers (households and small businesses) will react to the new possibilities of DSM, including through the smart meters that are due to be installed in all households between now and 2020. Much progress in increasing knowledge about this subject has been made through the pilot projects on smart meters that have been carried out in recent years, but there is still much to learn to ensure that maximum benefit for all concerned is gained as a result of the very considerable expense involved in the smart meter roll-out.

On energy efficiency in buildings, especially residential buildings, there is still an enormous amount to be learned before it can be said with confidence that policy makers know how to realise the great benefits of increased energy efficiency in buildings without setting in train similarly large negative unintended consequences.

Of crucial importance is the need to monitor the actual energy performance of buildings in use, to see to what extent energy efficiency technologies actually do reduce energy use, how they interact with the behavior of occupants, and whether there are indeed any unintended impacts. Once the evidence on these subjects has been greatly increased above current levels, it should be more possible to design policies to increase energy efficiency in buildings with far greater assurance that they will deliver the intended beneficial outcomes.

Paul Ekins, UCL Institute for Sustainable Resources


 

UCL’s Big Questions sought contributions from academics around UCL to address the ‘big question’ facing the next UK government, and how research can provide an evidence base. It was devised by Clio Heslop (UCL Department of Science, Technology, Engineering and Public Policy) and Olivia Stevenson (UCL Public Policy), with the support of the Communications and Marketing team.

Have your say on the big questions by tweeting using #UCLGE2015, by leaving a blog comment, or by contacting the organisers.

Please join us on 27 May for the UCL’s Big Question Time event.

One Response to “The Big Question on… energy: Will the new government generate the evidence required to achieve the necessary step change in energy efficiency?”

  • 1
    Mike Fell wrote on 27 April 2015:

    People’s energy bills are a product of how much energy they use and the price that is charged. At the moment most politicians’ focus seems to be on the latter (i.e. price) rather than the former. So tying into Paul’s piece, I’d prefer to see more focus on helping people reduce the amount of energy they use, which could actually help people save money on an ongoing basis and protect then from the vagaries of the market.
    My big question would be: will politicians genuinely recognize the importance of energy demand, rather than just paying it lip service and continuing to devote most of their attention to supply? By this I mean giving speeches about energy that are mostly dedicated to demand, rather than dealing with it when the inevitable audience question forces them to.

Leave a Reply