Event: Heat is a hot topic

Heating accounts for a huge amount of energy use, yet policymakers largely ignore it. Jane Gray reports from a House of Commons roundtable debate on the future of heat.

It is now fairly well reported that the vast majority of our national energy use is expended on heating buildings, and that plans mooted to decarbonise this energy pathway by electrifying heat are unfeasible – mainly due to the huge variability in seasonal demand for heat and the redundancy this would require in the electricity system.

So if widespread electrification is not the answer, then how do we define the future of heat? This was the question addressed by a group of industry and policy leaders at a recent roundtable debate hosted by Utility Week and the Energy Networks Association in Westminster. Responses to invitations for this event were overwhelming and the number of senior individuals around the table is a reflection of just how hot a topic heat has become.

A high proportion of those present came from the gas distribution industry and they were keen to articulate that a transformed gas distribution network could and should continue to play an important role in the future of heat. Several chief executives of gas distribution network companies attended to communicate how innovation schemes trialling the introduction of new gas compositions and sources of green gas could provide reliable low carbon heat, both directly to consumers’ homes and to district heating schemes.

Crucially, though, none of those present argued that gas is likely to remain as dominant as it is today as the primary source of heat for buildings in the UK. A much more blended future, including greater deployment of district heating, was agreed to be both inevitable and desirable. The challenge lies in ensuring that the blend is both cost effective and practical. It was also observed that heat pathways should be developed in tandem with other aspects of energy and that synergies should be sought between gas, power, heat and transport challenges.

Policy has a role to play here, and it was acknowledged by MPs at the table that political attention for heat has been lacking. Industry criticised the abandonment of the Zero Carbon Homes initiative and said that any scope the Energy Company Obligation might have had to support clarity on the future of heat has disappeared with the scheme’s increasing focus on fuel poverty.

Alongside criticism, however, it was also widely acknowledged that developing effective policy for the future of heat infrastructure is complicated. It must support significant retrofit as well as simple solutions for new development, and it must appreciate that – to a far greater degree than electricity – heat is a “user-led” energy vector.

Policy must therefore find a way of supporting consumers in making informed decisions about their heating options – all the while acknowledging that the options available are dependent on individual circumstances. The most likely way of achieving this flexibility, it was broadly agreed, will be by devolving more powers for local energy planning and decision-making to local authorities. This, however, would bring its own challenges in terms of building necessary skills and expertise.

Finally, it was clear that those around the table thought more independent information is needed about the cost and practicality of implementing different heat solutions. Some GDNs have produced significant findings in this arena as a result of government-funded initiatives. But nonetheless, the evidence base for the cost implications of a variety of heat scenarios is thin.

Chris Train, director of gas distribution, National Grid

“Now when people talk about the future of gas there’s a tendency to talk about decarbonisation of generation and what that means for gas as a fossil fuel. But of course the primary use of gas is for domestic heat.”

Dr Keith Maclean, industry chair, Energy Research Partnership

“Design of the system is really important. We need to look at heat as part of the wider system – not treat it in isolation as we have done with electricity. And whatever we design needs to be able to deal with the challenge of seasonal heat demand.”

John Morea, chief executive, SGN

“Our latest Ofgem-funded innovation projects in Oban and Kent I think, go a long way in securing gas as a primary fuel in the UK’s energy mix.”

James Heappey MP, member of the Energy and Climate Change Committee (Conservative)

“In Denmark heat is seen as a utility in its own right. That is not the case here but it is a cultural shift that needs to be achieved by industry and government.”

Graham Edwards, chief executive, Wales and West Utilities

“District heating is clearly viable and appropriate in certain areas. But our research shows that of the district heating schemes around the UK today, most of them are sourced from gas, so this is not a question about moving away from gas as the primary source of heat.”

Tim Rotheray, chief executive, Association for Decentralised Energy

“There’s no investment framework for heat networks. If we are going to build the right network in the right place and accept that we are likely to have a multiplicity of networks and approaches, then we need to make sure that there is a level playing field on which investors can decide which infrastructure options are best for them.”

Angus MacNeil, chair, Committee for Energy and Climate Change

“There are different energy approaches and it depends on which levers government wants to pull whether certain markets will be a successful as they could be. So is there a desire in government for this?”

Five key points to take away

1. No silver bullet. It’s likely that supply of heat in the future will involve a range of approaches that combine marginal gains in efficiency and decarbonisation for a better overall solution.

2. Peaks and troughs. The seasonality of heat demand is one of the biggest challenges to the creation of fit for purpose technical and policy solutions.

3. Locality matters. Local decision making is likely to play a pivotal role in the future of heat.

4. Knowledge needed. More independent evidence about the cost and practicality of different heat/energy solutions is needed to support informed decision-making.

5. Don’t throw the gas network away. We have significant existing infrastructure for the provision of heat – a cost-effective and efficient approach to the provision of heat in the future should include the optimisation and adaptation of this infrastructure.