- Email: [email protected]
Energy and economy
Communications on energy air handling recommendations exhibited the greatest unrealized estimated savings due to rejection of the recommendations. The primary reason for not implementing the air handling recommendations is a functional change in a room in the service area and a lack of resources. The lighting recommendations tend to be easy to implement and pay back in less than two years. Conversely, HVAC modifications tend to be costly and time consuming.
T. A. Vineyard Energy Division Oak Ridge National Laboratory Oak Ridge, TN, USA
This research was sponsored by the Office of Conservation and Renewable Energy, US Department of Energy, under contract DE-AC05-840R21400 with the Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc. 1US General Accounting Office, 'Millions can be saved through better energy management in federal hospitals', Report to the Congress, GAO/HRD-82-77, 1 September 1982. 295th Congress, National Energy Policy ConservationAct, PL 95-916, 9 November 1978. 3k = 103, M = 106, and G = 109. 4Electricity is treated in terms of primary energy (11 600 Btu/kWh) in this paper. SEric Hirst et al, Analysis of Energy Audits at 48 Hospitals, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN, ORNL/CONN-77, July 1981.
An energy efficiency programme for UK local authorities A direct comparison of energy conservation pr(ggrammes and initiatives adopted by US state governments and UK local authorities is limited by the existence of a variety of constitutional and institutional differences. Similarities, however, do exist. Applying a recent analysis of US state government programmes to the UK situation does reveal a fundamental difference in the orientation of energy conservation programmes. The implementation of an energy efficiency programme in the UK, similar in nature to the State Energy Conservation Programme in the USA, would be both timely and represent a significant evolution in pursuing energy conservation objectives. The US experience indicates that such an approach could also be successful. Keywords: Energy efficiency programmes; Local government; UK During the month prior to the establishment of the Energy Efficiency Office (EEO) within the UK's Department of Energy, the Secretary of State for Energy declared to a local authority audience his intention to lead a major campaign to improve the UK's position as one of the most apathetic nations in energy conservation to one of the best within two years. The launch of the EEO in October 1983 was marked by an intensive publicity campaign informing the nation that it could reduce its annual fuel expenditure by 20%, representing a financial saving of £7 billion on a total bill of £35 billion. The local authority contribution to this saving was to be £100 million. Although the EEO and the ministers have con-
ENERGY POLICY October 1985
tinued the promotion exercise since then, the timescale has been revised slightly to, by the end of this parliament. 1 To facilitate the realization of the local authority potential, the EEO has adopted a two pronged strategy: 1) The dissemination of information and better management practice through funding a series of initiatives, for example the development of an energy management system by local authority agency, the Value for Money review of energy conservation performance by the Audit Commission, the compilation of a good practice guide, and through demonstration projects. 2) Direct targetting of key personnel
(leading councillors and the Chief Executives) within local authorities through personal contact, letters and invitations to special events. Regardless of the cost effectiveness identified by the former initiatives, implementation incurs expenditure costs, at a time when local authority finance is tightly controlled. This situation has elicited the response that in many instances, they would be willing to invest in conservation measures if the Secretary of State would make more money available, or remove the grant penalties on such expenditure. The Secretary of State for Energy is not able, nor is it within his remit, to approve either option, as these are matters to be determined by the Secretary of State for the Environment. In Energy Conservation Programmes: A Review o f State Initiatives in the USA, Randolph presents the results of a survey of activities undertaken by the state governments - examining energy conservation-related tax incentives, grant and loan programmes, standards and regulations, and research and development. 2 Similar national survey research has been conducted on local authorities in the UK with reference to the existence of energy policies and programmes, the arrangements for financing, delegation of responsibility, the nature of programmes, the underlying structure of their involvement and the perception of their role with e n e r g y conservation. 3 Constitutional differences, such as the separately defined existence of state government and their independent powers to raise finance, prevent a direct comparison between the activities of the US state governments and the UK local authorities. Similarities, however, also exist - the responsibility and provision of local services and welfare programmes and, with regard to energy conservation, the primary focus on buildings and the characterization of centrallocal relations by an attitude of nonintervention. Within this context, experiences in the USA may provide valuable lessons for the UK in pursuing energy conservation (or efficiency) objectives.
485
C o m m u n i c a t i o n s on energy
A large degree of variability between local authorities exists within their involvement with energy conservation in UK. At one extreme, few activities are held in common by the great majority of local authorities while at the other (among a small group of authorities) their shared characteristics are quite extensive. 4 From within this variability, three separate orientations can be identified, centering on in-house, council dwelling, and educational building activities respectively (Figure 1). These orientations, while initially separate, do merge at higher levels of involvement, establishing links between the two extremes, but also b r o a d e n i n g the a u t h o r i t y ' s focus beyond the original strictures of each orientation. This underlying structure of involvement indicates that, given enough time, local authority involvement could evolve into a broad-based, comprehensive approach. That is, if a variety of financial and institutional obstacles can be overcome. 5 The focus of the E E O ' s exhortation campaign and various initiatives has been restricted to the consumption of fuel within the premises occupied by the local authorities. In contrast, the analysis of the US data takes as its starting point initiatives developed by the state governments, and orientated at a clientele other than themselves. Programmes targetted on state owned buildings are not mentioned, while state implementation of federal programmes and involvement with public utilities are taken for granted.
Institutional impact Adopting a similar framework of analysis in the UK situation would reduce the understanding of the institutional impact on the evolution of a local authority role. First, it would effectively ignore the utilization of the largest single element of finance allocated to conservation, ie the Homes Insulation Scheme (HIS). The HIS is administered by local authorities and variability in the promotion and takeup of the grants among authorities does exist. The type of scheme, conditions of eligibility and financial allocations are determined centrally. In
486
Local authority in-houseorientation
I
Basic orientation in-house
I
Y I c°mmitment I
"~
I=--n'H energy conservation intostructure management
Broadening of activities
I
Council dwelling orientation
council dwellings
H
insulation schemes
Recycling
' I
J
focus
I
Education orientation
!
I
educat!onal prem,ses I
-- J curriculum
I
Figure 1. Orientations identified in local authority involvement with energy conservation. 1985-86 the amount allocated to the local authorities was cut back by 15% (in real terms) on the previous year. 6 Second, a local authority's statutory involvement with the nationalized fuel industries is prescribed within the development control process - reacting to proposals to site new supply plant. Further, whatever decision a local authority takes can be overturned by the Secretary of State for the Environment. Attempts to extend strategic planning to encompass both energy supply and demand matters, by not foreclosing future options (such as CHP), making presumptions in favour of renewable energy sources, or explicitly incorporating energy conservation objectives, to date, have neither been successful nor encouraged. Energy conservation is not deemed by central government as an appropriate subject for land use plans, and statements have been deleted from structure plans. 7 The Central Electricity Generating Board is also antagonistic to what it perceives as encroachments on its functions, objecting to statements within the revised Greater London Development Plan (GLDP) on the grounds 'that the council presumes it is their responsibility to decide whether to permit the development of power stations in London and the type and design of plant that shall be used for electricity generation, as these
matters are clearly the responsibility of the Secretary of State and the Board respectively'.8 The Secretary of State for the Environment has yet to decide on the validity of the G L D P energy chapter. Finally, measures targetted on clientele groups other than their own personnel, or on their own premises, have been initiated by relatively few local authorities (Table 1). A comparison of similar activities and arrangements, differentiated only by the intended beneficiary (for example conducting energy audits on their own premises as opposed to council dwelli n g s - 79% and 15% respectively) demonstrates a significantly greater incidence of measures undertaken with an in-house orientation, than those externally targetted. This bias is reflected in both total figures and across all the individual tiers of local authorities. 9
Table 1. Externally targetted energy conservation measures adopted by local authorities (percentages).
Engaged in external publicity campaigns Sponsors community energy projects Provides domestic audits to council dwelling tenants on request Sponsored energy conservation research Designated individual to liase with fuel boards/Department of Health on fuel poverty matters Adopted fuel poverty policy
21 13 11 9 7 3
ENERGY POLICY October 1985
Communications on energy
Randolph has identified two strong influencing factors on those states taking actions: first, the dependence on outside sources of energy; second, the political nature of each state and its inclination for strong state government role. With the hegemony of the in-house orientation among local authorities, neither factor is particularly applicable in the UK. The existence of national distribution systems for natural gas and electricity eliminates general local authority concern about energy supplies, unless the siting of new plant is to occur in their locality. More important may be the extent of reliance on more expensive fuels (heating oil and diesel) as a result of the unavailability of natural gas and remoteness from coal fields. While local authorties have initiated boiler conversion programmes, sometimes complemented by insulation programmes to reduce their reliance on these fuels, the focus has remained fixedly on their own premises. The impetus to identify and develop alternative sources of generating power has come primarily from individuals (small scale) or large, private consortia and the electricity supply industry (large scale). Exceptions do exist. However, it has been more a case of local authorities capitalizing on a chance opportunity (such as geothermal, methane production and waste-derived fuel) than a coordinated attempt to reduce their energy dependency.
Crucial factor Reducing expenditure without cutting local services, the underlying objective for undertaking an in-house conservation programme, is supported acrosss the local authority party political spectrum in the UK. A more crucial factor in predicting the extent of involvement with energy conservation is the size of the authority's building stock, of which a significant determining element is whether or not it is responsible for local education services. The metropolitan authorities and shire counties have been shown to have larger, more comprehensive programmes and stronger management structure than the district coun-
ENERGY POLICY October 1985
cils. Among the district councils, the larger urban based authorities have been more involved than their smaller rural counterparts. Such an analysis does not extend to community orientated programmes, concentrated as they are among urban authorities, which are predominantly Labourcontrolled. Rather than a specific political commitment, this concentration is the consequence of a multitude of co-existing variables: •
• • • •
concentration of fuel hardship in such areas and burden on social services; responsibility for housing services; commitment of local leadership; presence of motivated community groups or individuals; availability of special finance, such as Inner City Partnership funds.
With central pressure to reduce local authority expenditure, the traditional stereotype that service provision expands under Labour administrations, and contracts under Conservative ones, would facilitate the extending of activities into newly identified priority areas, such as fuel hardship. R a n d o l p h i n c l u d e d within his second influencing factor the 'inclination of a strong state role'. This may assume greater significance in the UK context as local authorities become increasingly concerned about the impact of unemployment on their local economy, and the perceived failure of central government policies. Counteracting the outflow of money to meet fuel price rises, from the local economy to fuel industries and the Treasury, and potential employment creation have provided the impetus for a series of major initiatives by three authorities. 1° While central government may applaud such initiatives as examples of what local authorities can achieve, they would not necessarily endorse their underlying rationale. Both the US federal and UK central government have pursued a noninterventionist stance regarding state and local authority involvement with energy conservation programmes. The federal government does not dictate standards. In the UK, local authorities
are free to determine their own priorities regarding energy conservation. However, there would appear to be degrees of non-intervention. States are required to adopt minimum thermal and lighting standards, while retaining broad discretion on implementation of standards, to participate in the State Energy Conservation P r o g r a m m e u n d e r which federal money is made available to pursue local programmes. Innovation is encouraged. The result is that 72% of the states rely on federal funds for financing 50% of their programmes, and 30% of the states over 85% of their programmes. Randolph's assessment was that most states have gone well beyond federal directives. H In the U K the EEO objective is to have 50% of local authorities with an inhouse energy management system by 1986. Few local authorities could be described as going well beyond central directives.
Severest problems The establishment of an energy efficiency programme (EEP) has been advocated as an advance on the generally passive and ad hoc nature of present conservation policy in the UK. It could also be utilized as a method to target that segment of the domestic sector where the severest problems of inefficient energy use are concentrated, ie public sector housing. 12 Local authorities would prepare plans for action, submit them to the appropriate department for scrutiny, and receive an amount from a central allocation. Local authorities would not be obliged to participate in an EEP, and would retain the right to determine their own expenditure priorities. In format, it would be analagous to the existing Housing Investment Programme and Transport Policies Programme, and thus not r e p r e s e n t a r e t u r n to hypothecated grants. The present UK government has ruled out such a return, a position which has been supported in principal by the local authority associations. Pursuing the adoption of an EEP could prove timely for several reasons. First, local authorities have demonstrated a willingness to invest in energy
487
C o m m u n i c a t i o n s on energy
conservation measures in their domestic stock when the finance has been available - whether in hypothecated allocations, as with the 1978--80 Public Sector Programme (PSP), or when financial restrictions have been relaxed, as with the October 1982 removal of capital expenditure limits. Similarly, they have demonstrated that when finance is unavailable or tightly constrained, given competing priorities, energy conservation programmes will disappear. Subsuming the PSP allocation within the general block grant resulted in a dramatic decline in the number of dwellings insulated by local authorities after 1980. 13 Second, dissatisfaction with the existing HIS grant has been expressed both inside parliament by local authority associations, and by community group representatives. This dissatisfaction has encompassed the level of grant available, the limited nature of the existing schemes, and the reduction in the 1985-86 allocationfl4 Third, presently the EEO is engaged in promoting the establishment of community energy projects. The abolition of the Department of Health and Social Security single payments as part of the reform of the social security system represents a threat to many community energy project's major source of revenue and thus, their viability and the EEO objective. 15
Group partnership An EEP could be utilized to encourage local authority-community group partnerships, flexibility, continuity and innovation in establishing programmes, and to provide a basis of finance. Such characteristics have been identified as contributing to successful community orientated programmes. 16 'In the USA individual state governments are playing an increasingly important role in defining and providing clear national direction in energy'. 17 In the UK the reduction in the HIS allocation indicates an inconsistency in government words and deeds, at least with regard to energy conservation. The Secretary of State for Energy may want to improve the UK performance
488
with energy conservation but the local authority contribution would appear to be very narrowly prescribed. Rather than pointing to falling demand or declining requests, as a justification for reducing the HIS allocation, that may reflect a sector inc r e a s i n g l y i m m u n e to p a s s i v e approaches, it may be appropriate to revamp the nature of the grant system. The adoption of an EEP in the U K would encourage innovation and active programmes that could be tailored to local circumstances and contribute to national objectives. The US experience indicates that such an evolution can be successful. Bill Sheldrick School of Geography University of Leeds Leeds, UK
~These statements punctuated a series of U'K Department of Energy Press Releases, A £100 Million Reduction in the Rates 1983, No 114; £100 Million Rate Reduction 1983, No 130; Our Crusade to Save Cash 1983, No 1, EEO; Big Boost in Energy Efficiency 1984, No 27E; Department of Energy, London. 2j. Randolph, 'Energy conservation programmes: a review of state initiatives in the USA', Energy Policy, Vol 12, No 4, December 1984, pp 425-438. 3These survey results have been reported in several publications. B. Sheldrick, 'Local authority involvement with energy conservation', Applied Energy, Vol 19, No 2 1985, pp 129-158; B. Sheldrick, Energy Saving and Local Authorities, Association for the Conservation of Energy, London, 1984; and B. Sheldrick and S.M. Macgill, 'Local authorities and energy conservation: the structure of their involvement', Environment and Planning 'B', Vol 11, No 1, 1984. 4This structure was identified through the application of the Q-analysis methodology to the local authority survey data. The application of this methodology is set out in Sheldrick and Macgill, op cit, Ref 3. SB. Sheldrick, 'Local authority involvement with energy conservation', published in, The Proceedings of the Second International Consumer Behaviour and Energy Policy Conference, Centre Scientifique et Technique du B&timent, Paris, 1985. 6The total allocation for 1985-86 is £38 m, but only £31 m was allocated directly to local authorities, compared with £35 m in 1 9 8 4 - 8 5 - an 11% reduction. Inflation during 1984-85 was at least 4%, thus a 15% reduction in real terms. ZDetails of these deletions are provided in
B. Sheldrick, Local Authorities and Energy Conservation: The Institutional Environment, WP 374, School of Geography, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK, 1984; and S. Owens, Energy Planning and Local Authorities, paper presented to Energy and the Regions Conference, November 1984, University of London, London. 8Central Electricity Generating Board, Planning the Future of London - Draft Alterations to the GLDP, letter to the Greater London Council, 28 February 1984. 9Detailed comparisons are provided in B. Sheldrick, 'Local authority experience with energy conservation', paper presented to Local Power Conference, Manchester, UK, November 1984, forthcoming in conference proceedings and in Sheldrick, op cit, Ref 5. 1°In a social audit, the city of Newcastleupon-Tyne (UK) calculated an extra £10m per year, since 1979, as a result of central government's fuel pricing policies, has been taken from fuel consumers in the city. Newcaste-upon-Tyne, Social Audit, 197984, Policy Services Unit, Newcastle-uponTyne, UK, 1985. A list of Newcastle-uponTyne's initiatives can be found in Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Energy in Newcastle, Policy Services Unit, Newcastle-uponTyne, UK, 1984. Glasgow District Council has sponsored the Heatwise project, employing up to 200 people, insulating low income consumer dwellings in Glasgow. The Greater London Council has sponsored, through its Greater London Enterprise Board, the London Energy and Employment Network, the Energy Conservation and Solar Centre to create employment, develop products and initiate local programmes. 11Randolph, op cit, Ref 2, p 426 and p 436. ~2D. Green, Towards a Community Based Energy Efficiency Programme, Theme Paper presented at Energy Projects of Conference 1984, September 1984, University of London, London. ~3B. Sheldrick, Energy Conservation as a UK Government Policy- Up to Mid 1982, WP 354, School of Geography, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK. ~4House of Commons Debates, Standing Committee 'G', July 20, 1984, Homes Insulation Order, 1984, HMSO, London, Association of Metropolitan Authorities, An Energy Policy for Housing, AMA, London, 1985; G. Owen, 'Grants- poor need more not less'. Energy Action Bulletin, No 13, February/March 1985, p 2. ~SDepartment of Health and Social Security, Reform of Social Security, Cmnd 9517, HMSO, London, 1985. 16G. Gaskell, B. Jeorges, P. Ester, C. Midden and E. Monnier, 'Consumer energy conservation policies: a multinational study', paper published in The Proceedings of the Second International Consumer Behaviour and Energy Policy Conference, Centre Scientifique et Technique du B&timerit, Paris, 1985. ~ZRandolph, op cit, Ref 2, p 425.
ENERGY POLICY October 1985
T. A. Vineyard Energy Division Oak Ridge National Laboratory Oak Ridge, TN, USA
This research was sponsored by the Office of Conservation and Renewable Energy, US Department of Energy, under contract DE-AC05-840R21400 with the Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc. 1US General Accounting Office, 'Millions can be saved through better energy management in federal hospitals', Report to the Congress, GAO/HRD-82-77, 1 September 1982. 295th Congress, National Energy Policy ConservationAct, PL 95-916, 9 November 1978. 3k = 103, M = 106, and G = 109. 4Electricity is treated in terms of primary energy (11 600 Btu/kWh) in this paper. SEric Hirst et al, Analysis of Energy Audits at 48 Hospitals, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN, ORNL/CONN-77, July 1981.
An energy efficiency programme for UK local authorities A direct comparison of energy conservation pr(ggrammes and initiatives adopted by US state governments and UK local authorities is limited by the existence of a variety of constitutional and institutional differences. Similarities, however, do exist. Applying a recent analysis of US state government programmes to the UK situation does reveal a fundamental difference in the orientation of energy conservation programmes. The implementation of an energy efficiency programme in the UK, similar in nature to the State Energy Conservation Programme in the USA, would be both timely and represent a significant evolution in pursuing energy conservation objectives. The US experience indicates that such an approach could also be successful. Keywords: Energy efficiency programmes; Local government; UK During the month prior to the establishment of the Energy Efficiency Office (EEO) within the UK's Department of Energy, the Secretary of State for Energy declared to a local authority audience his intention to lead a major campaign to improve the UK's position as one of the most apathetic nations in energy conservation to one of the best within two years. The launch of the EEO in October 1983 was marked by an intensive publicity campaign informing the nation that it could reduce its annual fuel expenditure by 20%, representing a financial saving of £7 billion on a total bill of £35 billion. The local authority contribution to this saving was to be £100 million. Although the EEO and the ministers have con-
ENERGY POLICY October 1985
tinued the promotion exercise since then, the timescale has been revised slightly to, by the end of this parliament. 1 To facilitate the realization of the local authority potential, the EEO has adopted a two pronged strategy: 1) The dissemination of information and better management practice through funding a series of initiatives, for example the development of an energy management system by local authority agency, the Value for Money review of energy conservation performance by the Audit Commission, the compilation of a good practice guide, and through demonstration projects. 2) Direct targetting of key personnel
(leading councillors and the Chief Executives) within local authorities through personal contact, letters and invitations to special events. Regardless of the cost effectiveness identified by the former initiatives, implementation incurs expenditure costs, at a time when local authority finance is tightly controlled. This situation has elicited the response that in many instances, they would be willing to invest in conservation measures if the Secretary of State would make more money available, or remove the grant penalties on such expenditure. The Secretary of State for Energy is not able, nor is it within his remit, to approve either option, as these are matters to be determined by the Secretary of State for the Environment. In Energy Conservation Programmes: A Review o f State Initiatives in the USA, Randolph presents the results of a survey of activities undertaken by the state governments - examining energy conservation-related tax incentives, grant and loan programmes, standards and regulations, and research and development. 2 Similar national survey research has been conducted on local authorities in the UK with reference to the existence of energy policies and programmes, the arrangements for financing, delegation of responsibility, the nature of programmes, the underlying structure of their involvement and the perception of their role with e n e r g y conservation. 3 Constitutional differences, such as the separately defined existence of state government and their independent powers to raise finance, prevent a direct comparison between the activities of the US state governments and the UK local authorities. Similarities, however, also exist - the responsibility and provision of local services and welfare programmes and, with regard to energy conservation, the primary focus on buildings and the characterization of centrallocal relations by an attitude of nonintervention. Within this context, experiences in the USA may provide valuable lessons for the UK in pursuing energy conservation (or efficiency) objectives.
485
C o m m u n i c a t i o n s on energy
A large degree of variability between local authorities exists within their involvement with energy conservation in UK. At one extreme, few activities are held in common by the great majority of local authorities while at the other (among a small group of authorities) their shared characteristics are quite extensive. 4 From within this variability, three separate orientations can be identified, centering on in-house, council dwelling, and educational building activities respectively (Figure 1). These orientations, while initially separate, do merge at higher levels of involvement, establishing links between the two extremes, but also b r o a d e n i n g the a u t h o r i t y ' s focus beyond the original strictures of each orientation. This underlying structure of involvement indicates that, given enough time, local authority involvement could evolve into a broad-based, comprehensive approach. That is, if a variety of financial and institutional obstacles can be overcome. 5 The focus of the E E O ' s exhortation campaign and various initiatives has been restricted to the consumption of fuel within the premises occupied by the local authorities. In contrast, the analysis of the US data takes as its starting point initiatives developed by the state governments, and orientated at a clientele other than themselves. Programmes targetted on state owned buildings are not mentioned, while state implementation of federal programmes and involvement with public utilities are taken for granted.
Institutional impact Adopting a similar framework of analysis in the UK situation would reduce the understanding of the institutional impact on the evolution of a local authority role. First, it would effectively ignore the utilization of the largest single element of finance allocated to conservation, ie the Homes Insulation Scheme (HIS). The HIS is administered by local authorities and variability in the promotion and takeup of the grants among authorities does exist. The type of scheme, conditions of eligibility and financial allocations are determined centrally. In
486
Local authority in-houseorientation
I
Basic orientation in-house
I
Y I c°mmitment I
"~
I=--n'H energy conservation intostructure management
Broadening of activities
I
Council dwelling orientation
council dwellings
H
insulation schemes
Recycling
' I
J
focus
I
Education orientation
!
I
educat!onal prem,ses I
-- J curriculum
I
Figure 1. Orientations identified in local authority involvement with energy conservation. 1985-86 the amount allocated to the local authorities was cut back by 15% (in real terms) on the previous year. 6 Second, a local authority's statutory involvement with the nationalized fuel industries is prescribed within the development control process - reacting to proposals to site new supply plant. Further, whatever decision a local authority takes can be overturned by the Secretary of State for the Environment. Attempts to extend strategic planning to encompass both energy supply and demand matters, by not foreclosing future options (such as CHP), making presumptions in favour of renewable energy sources, or explicitly incorporating energy conservation objectives, to date, have neither been successful nor encouraged. Energy conservation is not deemed by central government as an appropriate subject for land use plans, and statements have been deleted from structure plans. 7 The Central Electricity Generating Board is also antagonistic to what it perceives as encroachments on its functions, objecting to statements within the revised Greater London Development Plan (GLDP) on the grounds 'that the council presumes it is their responsibility to decide whether to permit the development of power stations in London and the type and design of plant that shall be used for electricity generation, as these
matters are clearly the responsibility of the Secretary of State and the Board respectively'.8 The Secretary of State for the Environment has yet to decide on the validity of the G L D P energy chapter. Finally, measures targetted on clientele groups other than their own personnel, or on their own premises, have been initiated by relatively few local authorities (Table 1). A comparison of similar activities and arrangements, differentiated only by the intended beneficiary (for example conducting energy audits on their own premises as opposed to council dwelli n g s - 79% and 15% respectively) demonstrates a significantly greater incidence of measures undertaken with an in-house orientation, than those externally targetted. This bias is reflected in both total figures and across all the individual tiers of local authorities. 9
Table 1. Externally targetted energy conservation measures adopted by local authorities (percentages).
Engaged in external publicity campaigns Sponsors community energy projects Provides domestic audits to council dwelling tenants on request Sponsored energy conservation research Designated individual to liase with fuel boards/Department of Health on fuel poverty matters Adopted fuel poverty policy
21 13 11 9 7 3
ENERGY POLICY October 1985
Communications on energy
Randolph has identified two strong influencing factors on those states taking actions: first, the dependence on outside sources of energy; second, the political nature of each state and its inclination for strong state government role. With the hegemony of the in-house orientation among local authorities, neither factor is particularly applicable in the UK. The existence of national distribution systems for natural gas and electricity eliminates general local authority concern about energy supplies, unless the siting of new plant is to occur in their locality. More important may be the extent of reliance on more expensive fuels (heating oil and diesel) as a result of the unavailability of natural gas and remoteness from coal fields. While local authorties have initiated boiler conversion programmes, sometimes complemented by insulation programmes to reduce their reliance on these fuels, the focus has remained fixedly on their own premises. The impetus to identify and develop alternative sources of generating power has come primarily from individuals (small scale) or large, private consortia and the electricity supply industry (large scale). Exceptions do exist. However, it has been more a case of local authorities capitalizing on a chance opportunity (such as geothermal, methane production and waste-derived fuel) than a coordinated attempt to reduce their energy dependency.
Crucial factor Reducing expenditure without cutting local services, the underlying objective for undertaking an in-house conservation programme, is supported acrosss the local authority party political spectrum in the UK. A more crucial factor in predicting the extent of involvement with energy conservation is the size of the authority's building stock, of which a significant determining element is whether or not it is responsible for local education services. The metropolitan authorities and shire counties have been shown to have larger, more comprehensive programmes and stronger management structure than the district coun-
ENERGY POLICY October 1985
cils. Among the district councils, the larger urban based authorities have been more involved than their smaller rural counterparts. Such an analysis does not extend to community orientated programmes, concentrated as they are among urban authorities, which are predominantly Labourcontrolled. Rather than a specific political commitment, this concentration is the consequence of a multitude of co-existing variables: •
• • • •
concentration of fuel hardship in such areas and burden on social services; responsibility for housing services; commitment of local leadership; presence of motivated community groups or individuals; availability of special finance, such as Inner City Partnership funds.
With central pressure to reduce local authority expenditure, the traditional stereotype that service provision expands under Labour administrations, and contracts under Conservative ones, would facilitate the extending of activities into newly identified priority areas, such as fuel hardship. R a n d o l p h i n c l u d e d within his second influencing factor the 'inclination of a strong state role'. This may assume greater significance in the UK context as local authorities become increasingly concerned about the impact of unemployment on their local economy, and the perceived failure of central government policies. Counteracting the outflow of money to meet fuel price rises, from the local economy to fuel industries and the Treasury, and potential employment creation have provided the impetus for a series of major initiatives by three authorities. 1° While central government may applaud such initiatives as examples of what local authorities can achieve, they would not necessarily endorse their underlying rationale. Both the US federal and UK central government have pursued a noninterventionist stance regarding state and local authority involvement with energy conservation programmes. The federal government does not dictate standards. In the UK, local authorities
are free to determine their own priorities regarding energy conservation. However, there would appear to be degrees of non-intervention. States are required to adopt minimum thermal and lighting standards, while retaining broad discretion on implementation of standards, to participate in the State Energy Conservation P r o g r a m m e u n d e r which federal money is made available to pursue local programmes. Innovation is encouraged. The result is that 72% of the states rely on federal funds for financing 50% of their programmes, and 30% of the states over 85% of their programmes. Randolph's assessment was that most states have gone well beyond federal directives. H In the U K the EEO objective is to have 50% of local authorities with an inhouse energy management system by 1986. Few local authorities could be described as going well beyond central directives.
Severest problems The establishment of an energy efficiency programme (EEP) has been advocated as an advance on the generally passive and ad hoc nature of present conservation policy in the UK. It could also be utilized as a method to target that segment of the domestic sector where the severest problems of inefficient energy use are concentrated, ie public sector housing. 12 Local authorities would prepare plans for action, submit them to the appropriate department for scrutiny, and receive an amount from a central allocation. Local authorities would not be obliged to participate in an EEP, and would retain the right to determine their own expenditure priorities. In format, it would be analagous to the existing Housing Investment Programme and Transport Policies Programme, and thus not r e p r e s e n t a r e t u r n to hypothecated grants. The present UK government has ruled out such a return, a position which has been supported in principal by the local authority associations. Pursuing the adoption of an EEP could prove timely for several reasons. First, local authorities have demonstrated a willingness to invest in energy
487
C o m m u n i c a t i o n s on energy
conservation measures in their domestic stock when the finance has been available - whether in hypothecated allocations, as with the 1978--80 Public Sector Programme (PSP), or when financial restrictions have been relaxed, as with the October 1982 removal of capital expenditure limits. Similarly, they have demonstrated that when finance is unavailable or tightly constrained, given competing priorities, energy conservation programmes will disappear. Subsuming the PSP allocation within the general block grant resulted in a dramatic decline in the number of dwellings insulated by local authorities after 1980. 13 Second, dissatisfaction with the existing HIS grant has been expressed both inside parliament by local authority associations, and by community group representatives. This dissatisfaction has encompassed the level of grant available, the limited nature of the existing schemes, and the reduction in the 1985-86 allocationfl4 Third, presently the EEO is engaged in promoting the establishment of community energy projects. The abolition of the Department of Health and Social Security single payments as part of the reform of the social security system represents a threat to many community energy project's major source of revenue and thus, their viability and the EEO objective. 15
Group partnership An EEP could be utilized to encourage local authority-community group partnerships, flexibility, continuity and innovation in establishing programmes, and to provide a basis of finance. Such characteristics have been identified as contributing to successful community orientated programmes. 16 'In the USA individual state governments are playing an increasingly important role in defining and providing clear national direction in energy'. 17 In the UK the reduction in the HIS allocation indicates an inconsistency in government words and deeds, at least with regard to energy conservation. The Secretary of State for Energy may want to improve the UK performance
488
with energy conservation but the local authority contribution would appear to be very narrowly prescribed. Rather than pointing to falling demand or declining requests, as a justification for reducing the HIS allocation, that may reflect a sector inc r e a s i n g l y i m m u n e to p a s s i v e approaches, it may be appropriate to revamp the nature of the grant system. The adoption of an EEP in the U K would encourage innovation and active programmes that could be tailored to local circumstances and contribute to national objectives. The US experience indicates that such an evolution can be successful. Bill Sheldrick School of Geography University of Leeds Leeds, UK
~These statements punctuated a series of U'K Department of Energy Press Releases, A £100 Million Reduction in the Rates 1983, No 114; £100 Million Rate Reduction 1983, No 130; Our Crusade to Save Cash 1983, No 1, EEO; Big Boost in Energy Efficiency 1984, No 27E; Department of Energy, London. 2j. Randolph, 'Energy conservation programmes: a review of state initiatives in the USA', Energy Policy, Vol 12, No 4, December 1984, pp 425-438. 3These survey results have been reported in several publications. B. Sheldrick, 'Local authority involvement with energy conservation', Applied Energy, Vol 19, No 2 1985, pp 129-158; B. Sheldrick, Energy Saving and Local Authorities, Association for the Conservation of Energy, London, 1984; and B. Sheldrick and S.M. Macgill, 'Local authorities and energy conservation: the structure of their involvement', Environment and Planning 'B', Vol 11, No 1, 1984. 4This structure was identified through the application of the Q-analysis methodology to the local authority survey data. The application of this methodology is set out in Sheldrick and Macgill, op cit, Ref 3. SB. Sheldrick, 'Local authority involvement with energy conservation', published in, The Proceedings of the Second International Consumer Behaviour and Energy Policy Conference, Centre Scientifique et Technique du B&timent, Paris, 1985. 6The total allocation for 1985-86 is £38 m, but only £31 m was allocated directly to local authorities, compared with £35 m in 1 9 8 4 - 8 5 - an 11% reduction. Inflation during 1984-85 was at least 4%, thus a 15% reduction in real terms. ZDetails of these deletions are provided in
B. Sheldrick, Local Authorities and Energy Conservation: The Institutional Environment, WP 374, School of Geography, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK, 1984; and S. Owens, Energy Planning and Local Authorities, paper presented to Energy and the Regions Conference, November 1984, University of London, London. 8Central Electricity Generating Board, Planning the Future of London - Draft Alterations to the GLDP, letter to the Greater London Council, 28 February 1984. 9Detailed comparisons are provided in B. Sheldrick, 'Local authority experience with energy conservation', paper presented to Local Power Conference, Manchester, UK, November 1984, forthcoming in conference proceedings and in Sheldrick, op cit, Ref 5. 1°In a social audit, the city of Newcastleupon-Tyne (UK) calculated an extra £10m per year, since 1979, as a result of central government's fuel pricing policies, has been taken from fuel consumers in the city. Newcaste-upon-Tyne, Social Audit, 197984, Policy Services Unit, Newcastle-uponTyne, UK, 1985. A list of Newcastle-uponTyne's initiatives can be found in Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Energy in Newcastle, Policy Services Unit, Newcastle-uponTyne, UK, 1984. Glasgow District Council has sponsored the Heatwise project, employing up to 200 people, insulating low income consumer dwellings in Glasgow. The Greater London Council has sponsored, through its Greater London Enterprise Board, the London Energy and Employment Network, the Energy Conservation and Solar Centre to create employment, develop products and initiate local programmes. 11Randolph, op cit, Ref 2, p 426 and p 436. ~2D. Green, Towards a Community Based Energy Efficiency Programme, Theme Paper presented at Energy Projects of Conference 1984, September 1984, University of London, London. ~3B. Sheldrick, Energy Conservation as a UK Government Policy- Up to Mid 1982, WP 354, School of Geography, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK. ~4House of Commons Debates, Standing Committee 'G', July 20, 1984, Homes Insulation Order, 1984, HMSO, London, Association of Metropolitan Authorities, An Energy Policy for Housing, AMA, London, 1985; G. Owen, 'Grants- poor need more not less'. Energy Action Bulletin, No 13, February/March 1985, p 2. ~SDepartment of Health and Social Security, Reform of Social Security, Cmnd 9517, HMSO, London, 1985. 16G. Gaskell, B. Jeorges, P. Ester, C. Midden and E. Monnier, 'Consumer energy conservation policies: a multinational study', paper published in The Proceedings of the Second International Consumer Behaviour and Energy Policy Conference, Centre Scientifique et Technique du B&timerit, Paris, 1985. ~ZRandolph, op cit, Ref 2, p 425.
ENERGY POLICY October 1985