£50m fuel plans could save cash and create 760 jobs

Daily Echo: Southampton from the air Southampton from the air

IT COULD save Hampshire families hundreds of pounds on fuel bills and create up to 760 new jobs.

An ambitious new scheme to plough up to £50m of funding into tackling fuel poverty across the county could be launched later this year.

Southampton City Council is coordinating an Energy Company Obligation (ECO) initiative, which could lead to huge improvements to council homes in the city as well as Fareham, Winchester and the New Forest.

With many council properties thermally inefficient and expensive to heat, Southampton housing boss Warwick Payne says the new scheme would cut fuel bills and “put money back into the pockets of residents who need it most.” The ECO scheme was introduced by the Government earlier this year, and has introduced new responsibilities for major energy companies to improve the energy efficiency of homes across the UK, as well as reducing carbon emissions.

The Government has estimated that £1.3bn of funding for ECO initiatives is available nationwide, with the vast majority of the cost of new projects funded by the energy companies.

Southampton City Council is coordinating the bid to secure £50m of funding, which could be spent in Hampshire over the next two to three years.

Further funding is likely to be available until at least 2020.

Fareham Borough Council, Winchester City Council, New Forest District Council and Portsmouth City Council have all expressed an interest in being included in the scheme.

If an energy company is chosen to fund the improvements, about 21,000 homes in Hampshire could have major work carried out.

Improvement works could include replacing concrete housing panels with low thermal performance, improving insulation or introducing new, more efficient heating systems.

A city council report says between 590 and 760 new jobs would be created and 300 current posts safeguarded if the scheme goes ahead, while saying it would also provide investment to local businesses and allow for skills development in colleges.

City council officers are expected to be given approval on May 8 to start the process to find an energy company to secure ECO funding.

It is expected an agreement with a preferred bidder may be agreed in the early autumn.

Cllr Payne said: “We’re keen to seize the opportunity that ECO is presenting to Southampton with both hands.

“Energy efficiency isn’t just good for the environment but it’s also good for peoples’ pockets as well, by reducing their fuel bills.

“For example, with the £15m project we’re just completing at Weston Shore to make five tower blocks more energy efficient, which includes £10m of outside grants, we estimate that residents will see their heating bills fall by around £5 per week, or £250 per year.

“As a result, we’re putting money back into the pockets of residents who need it most, and also making Southampton’s housing fit for the future.”

The scheme has been welcomed by people living in council housing. Maureen Simmons, block representative for Millbrook Towers, said some flats had already been upgraded through the council’s Stop the Cold initiative, which provided tenants with help and grants to get home improvements.

Of the new scheme, she said: “I think it is a good idea, anything that improves people’s bills is a good thing.

“I would love it to be done, people are saying what a difference it makes to their bills at the flats that have been done through Stop the Cold.”

Louis Slack, block representative for York Close in Northam, said: “I think this a good thing.

“Anything that can improve your property and make it more energy efficient is good and I am sure residents will be happy about this.”

Comments (19)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:36am Sat 4 May 13

loosehead says...

he ECO scheme was introduced by the Government earlier this year, and has introduced new responsibilities for major energy companies to improve the energy efficiency of homes across the UK, as well as reducing carbon emissions.
so another good thing to come from our Government?
he ECO scheme was introduced by the Government earlier this year, and has introduced new responsibilities for major energy companies to improve the energy efficiency of homes across the UK, as well as reducing carbon emissions. so another good thing to come from our Government? loosehead
  • Score: 0

7:40am Sat 4 May 13

FoysCornerBoy says...

This looks like an exciting and imaginative solution to some of our local challenges in terms of employment, reducing fuel bills and conserving energy. A win-win-win for all concerned.

I don't know if we would have got as far as we have with this scheme had it not been for former Southampton City Council leader Richard Williams and I think he deserves some credit for this.

Notwithstanding the reasons for Williams' resignation his skills and knowledge in this area will be sorely missed.
This looks like an exciting and imaginative solution to some of our local challenges in terms of employment, reducing fuel bills and conserving energy. A win-win-win for all concerned. I don't know if we would have got as far as we have with this scheme had it not been for former Southampton City Council leader Richard Williams and I think he deserves some credit for this. Notwithstanding the reasons for Williams' resignation his skills and knowledge in this area will be sorely missed. FoysCornerBoy
  • Score: 0

7:57am Sat 4 May 13

hulla baloo says...

So we sell many of our power ( and water) companies to other countries, and the UK prices rise higher than the other countries.
We then have fuel poverty and throw more tax payers money at it to resolve
So we sell many of our power ( and water) companies to other countries, and the UK prices rise higher than the other countries. We then have fuel poverty and throw more tax payers money at it to resolve hulla baloo
  • Score: 0

9:09am Sat 4 May 13

southy says...

FoysCornerBoy wrote:
This looks like an exciting and imaginative solution to some of our local challenges in terms of employment, reducing fuel bills and conserving energy. A win-win-win for all concerned.

I don't know if we would have got as far as we have with this scheme had it not been for former Southampton City Council leader Richard Williams and I think he deserves some credit for this.

Notwithstanding the reasons for Williams' resignation his skills and knowledge in this area will be sorely missed.
not so much his idea more of his Uni prof friend.
[quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: This looks like an exciting and imaginative solution to some of our local challenges in terms of employment, reducing fuel bills and conserving energy. A win-win-win for all concerned. I don't know if we would have got as far as we have with this scheme had it not been for former Southampton City Council leader Richard Williams and I think he deserves some credit for this. Notwithstanding the reasons for Williams' resignation his skills and knowledge in this area will be sorely missed.[/p][/quote]not so much his idea more of his Uni prof friend. southy
  • Score: 0

9:29am Sat 4 May 13

Lone Ranger. says...

loosehead wrote:
he ECO scheme was introduced by the Government earlier this year, and has introduced new responsibilities for major energy companies to improve the energy efficiency of homes across the UK, as well as reducing carbon emissions.
so another good thing to come from our Government?
I bet the government have got a Costco card ............. Loser
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: he ECO scheme was introduced by the Government earlier this year, and has introduced new responsibilities for major energy companies to improve the energy efficiency of homes across the UK, as well as reducing carbon emissions. so another good thing to come from our Government?[/p][/quote]I bet the government have got a Costco card ............. Loser Lone Ranger.
  • Score: 0

9:41am Sat 4 May 13

good-gosh says...

It seems ridiculous to me, to spend £10m just to reduce heating by £5 pw in a few hundred flats. It would take best part of a century just to break even.
It seems ridiculous to me, to spend £10m just to reduce heating by £5 pw in a few hundred flats. It would take best part of a century just to break even. good-gosh
  • Score: 0

11:10am Sat 4 May 13

loosehead says...

Lone Ranger. wrote:
loosehead wrote:
he ECO scheme was introduced by the Government earlier this year, and has introduced new responsibilities for major energy companies to improve the energy efficiency of homes across the UK, as well as reducing carbon emissions.
so another good thing to come from our Government?
I bet the government have got a Costco card ............. Loser
Loser? one day you'll get a pair & print your name or with all the insults you throw at posters you don't agree with are you scared they might come & make you say it to their face?
Words like wimp or loser are the level you are & just shows how low Labour have gone to argue their case as we the people know we have to get rid as soon as possible.
As with Costco the title is Retail Giant opening store?
How is it opening a store to the public when only certain people & low lifes like you can useb it?
[quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: he ECO scheme was introduced by the Government earlier this year, and has introduced new responsibilities for major energy companies to improve the energy efficiency of homes across the UK, as well as reducing carbon emissions. so another good thing to come from our Government?[/p][/quote]I bet the government have got a Costco card ............. Loser[/p][/quote]Loser? one day you'll get a pair & print your name or with all the insults you throw at posters you don't agree with are you scared they might come & make you say it to their face? Words like wimp or loser are the level you are & just shows how low Labour have gone to argue their case as we the people know we have to get rid as soon as possible. As with Costco the title is Retail Giant opening store? How is it opening a store to the public when only certain people & low lifes like you can useb it? loosehead
  • Score: 0

11:53am Sat 4 May 13

Terry_Nutkins says...

I saw the headline "fuel" & instantly took the suspicious view due to a historically corrupt energy industry. However, a small part of me hoped there was some positives being passed to the little man.

Reading between the lines, it seems very little. £5/week saving for sunstantial investment seems a poor payback. £250/year. What is the overall sum of energy extraction offset against consumption? My guess, substantially less than current methods or the corporations sniffing around would not touch it. This is logical business ethics ( sustainability) but not to the extent of the obscene profits the industry make with a pittance cascaded to the the consumer. Pure greed I expect.

I'd be keen to see the technical figures & fuel efficiency. My guess is, tax payers money in the form of government grants is, yet again, going into the industry & the greedy energy corporations investing are reaping the majority of the financial savings.

These reports on the surface purport to offer a benefit to the the consumer - which they no doubt do, to the lowest common denominator - but people need to question the economical viability & politics behind the glitzy slogans.

Like all modern day politics, it is generally the authorities pandering to the huge power of the banks & energy corporations who illicitly dictate policy. Policy which benefits the rich elite & their vested, mutual interests. More often than not, in favour of capitalism with social welfare at the bottom of the priority list.

Sorry if this opinion seems over the top. I may have over-reacted but I think, reading between the lines, this is yet another white elephant. Authorities prevaricating yet again.
I saw the headline "fuel" & instantly took the suspicious view due to a historically corrupt energy industry. However, a small part of me hoped there was some positives being passed to the little man. Reading between the lines, it seems very little. £5/week saving for sunstantial investment seems a poor payback. £250/year. What is the overall sum of energy extraction offset against consumption? My guess, substantially less than current methods or the corporations sniffing around would not touch it. This is logical business ethics ( sustainability) but not to the extent of the obscene profits the industry make with a pittance cascaded to the the consumer. Pure greed I expect. I'd be keen to see the technical figures & fuel efficiency. My guess is, tax payers money in the form of government grants is, yet again, going into the industry & the greedy energy corporations investing are reaping the majority of the financial savings. These reports on the surface purport to offer a benefit to the the consumer - which they no doubt do, to the lowest common denominator - but people need to question the economical viability & politics behind the glitzy slogans. Like all modern day politics, it is generally the authorities pandering to the huge power of the banks & energy corporations who illicitly dictate policy. Policy which benefits the rich elite & their vested, mutual interests. More often than not, in favour of capitalism with social welfare at the bottom of the priority list. Sorry if this opinion seems over the top. I may have over-reacted but I think, reading between the lines, this is yet another white elephant. Authorities prevaricating yet again. Terry_Nutkins
  • Score: 0

12:05pm Sat 4 May 13

Terry_Nutkins says...

good-gosh wrote:
It seems ridiculous to me, to spend £10m just to reduce heating by £5 pw in a few hundred flats. It would take best part of a century just to break even.
You've got it in one. Sadly, the comments on this thread seen to be currying favour or there's a bit of political posturing going on.

The first poster must truly have a loose head if he/she thinks this is a good incentive. Most state incentives, while not all, only benefit one body & it's not the hard working, honest & decent people whom built the fabric of our country. It's the big businesses that evade our democratic process but worryingly seem to dictate policy.
[quote][p][bold]good-gosh[/bold] wrote: It seems ridiculous to me, to spend £10m just to reduce heating by £5 pw in a few hundred flats. It would take best part of a century just to break even.[/p][/quote]You've got it in one. Sadly, the comments on this thread seen to be currying favour or there's a bit of political posturing going on. The first poster must truly have a loose head if he/she thinks this is a good incentive. Most state incentives, while not all, only benefit one body & it's not the hard working, honest & decent people whom built the fabric of our country. It's the big businesses that evade our democratic process but worryingly seem to dictate policy. Terry_Nutkins
  • Score: 0

12:06pm Sat 4 May 13

likewatchingbrazil says...

hulla baloo wrote:
So we sell many of our power ( and water) companies to other countries, and the UK prices rise higher than the other countries. We then have fuel poverty and throw more tax payers money at it to resolve
too true, this country is run by fools, time for a change, UKIP the only worth while party left.
[quote][p][bold]hulla baloo[/bold] wrote: So we sell many of our power ( and water) companies to other countries, and the UK prices rise higher than the other countries. We then have fuel poverty and throw more tax payers money at it to resolve[/p][/quote]too true, this country is run by fools, time for a change, UKIP the only worth while party left. likewatchingbrazil
  • Score: 0

12:28pm Sat 4 May 13

Terry_Nutkins says...

Ground source heat pumps or geo-thermal heating investment would offer worthwhile saving. Curious if that is amongst the energy saving measures?
Ground source heat pumps or geo-thermal heating investment would offer worthwhile saving. Curious if that is amongst the energy saving measures? Terry_Nutkins
  • Score: 0

12:32pm Sat 4 May 13

Terry_Nutkins says...

I totally miss read this article. Sincere apologies. I scanned through & assumed it was funding energy companies as in utility. Who's the **** now? For once, my cynical view is misplaced so I apologise to all concerned as I jumped on my worn out soap box!

Funding insulation & energy improvements to the fabric of homes is a good thing. As long as the insulation offers no asbestos related diseases in the future, everyone's a winner! Apologies.
I totally miss read this article. Sincere apologies. I scanned through & assumed it was funding energy companies as in utility. Who's the **** now? For once, my cynical view is misplaced so I apologise to all concerned as I jumped on my worn out soap box! Funding insulation & energy improvements to the fabric of homes is a good thing. As long as the insulation offers no asbestos related diseases in the future, everyone's a winner! Apologies. Terry_Nutkins
  • Score: 0

1:35am Sun 5 May 13

Pikey Pete says...

good-gosh wrote:
It seems ridiculous to me, to spend £10m just to reduce heating by £5 pw in a few hundred flats. It would take best part of a century just to break even.
Agreed. It would be better to spend money on PV solar Panels. Cover the roofs of the buildings.

Use the NEW Micro inverters which mean the electric is used direct in the home(not sold to the grid) reducing the energy bills by up to 90%

Bulk purchase of the panels means they cost very much below market prices.
[quote][p][bold]good-gosh[/bold] wrote: It seems ridiculous to me, to spend £10m just to reduce heating by £5 pw in a few hundred flats. It would take best part of a century just to break even.[/p][/quote]Agreed. It would be better to spend money on PV solar Panels. Cover the roofs of the buildings. Use the NEW Micro inverters which mean the electric is used direct in the home(not sold to the grid) reducing the energy bills by up to 90% Bulk purchase of the panels means they cost very much below market prices. Pikey Pete
  • Score: 0

7:15am Sun 5 May 13

derek james says...

like all green scams (sorry schemes) the money is funded from our gas and electrickery bills (funded by energy companies! where do you think they get the money from?), whilst extra insulation can be a good thing filling up cavities with the cheapest insulation causes damp in 20% of properties (a fact not advertised by the goverment) in which case the insulation value of the wall will be worse than if not filled.
with regards the tower blocks 60 years is the design life of reinforced concrete after which the reinforcing steel/ prestressing tendons rust and expand breaking off the concrete cover, so those blocks built in the early 60's when concrete standards were inferior to now are reaching the ends of their design lives, one wonders at the wisdom of spending vast amounts of cash on something that will need demolishing in the not too distant future.with regards insulating the loft everything has to be shifted out for about 350-400mm of mineral wool insulation to be placed,this makes the loft virtually unuseable unless boarded as you cannot see where the joists are, it would be interesting to see how many people have fallen through the ceiling as a result
like all green scams (sorry schemes) the money is funded from our gas and electrickery bills (funded by energy companies! where do you think they get the money from?), whilst extra insulation can be a good thing filling up cavities with the cheapest insulation causes damp in 20% of properties (a fact not advertised by the goverment) in which case the insulation value of the wall will be worse than if not filled. with regards the tower blocks 60 years is the design life of reinforced concrete after which the reinforcing steel/ prestressing tendons rust and expand breaking off the concrete cover, so those blocks built in the early 60's when concrete standards were inferior to now are reaching the ends of their design lives, one wonders at the wisdom of spending vast amounts of cash on something that will need demolishing in the not too distant future.with regards insulating the loft everything has to be shifted out for about 350-400mm of mineral wool insulation to be placed,this makes the loft virtually unuseable unless boarded as you cannot see where the joists are, it would be interesting to see how many people have fallen through the ceiling as a result derek james
  • Score: 0

3:39pm Sun 5 May 13

loosehead says...

derek james wrote:
like all green scams (sorry schemes) the money is funded from our gas and electrickery bills (funded by energy companies! where do you think they get the money from?), whilst extra insulation can be a good thing filling up cavities with the cheapest insulation causes damp in 20% of properties (a fact not advertised by the goverment) in which case the insulation value of the wall will be worse than if not filled.
with regards the tower blocks 60 years is the design life of reinforced concrete after which the reinforcing steel/ prestressing tendons rust and expand breaking off the concrete cover, so those blocks built in the early 60's when concrete standards were inferior to now are reaching the ends of their design lives, one wonders at the wisdom of spending vast amounts of cash on something that will need demolishing in the not too distant future.with regards insulating the loft everything has to be shifted out for about 350-400mm of mineral wool insulation to be placed,this makes the loft virtually unuseable unless boarded as you cannot see where the joists are, it would be interesting to see how many people have fallen through the ceiling as a result
derek I have Solar Panels on the lease your roof scheme I've now got my bill down to £20 a month from £40 & I'm still getting rebates.
If I could afford to pay for the New Dimplex/SEE Electric heating system I would as it would take energy from the panels store it & give me free heating.
I cannot see why this council would not allow the Council tenants to go ahead & have these panels when one of the schemes Williams kept money for was Solar Panels?
[quote][p][bold]derek james[/bold] wrote: like all green scams (sorry schemes) the money is funded from our gas and electrickery bills (funded by energy companies! where do you think they get the money from?), whilst extra insulation can be a good thing filling up cavities with the cheapest insulation causes damp in 20% of properties (a fact not advertised by the goverment) in which case the insulation value of the wall will be worse than if not filled. with regards the tower blocks 60 years is the design life of reinforced concrete after which the reinforcing steel/ prestressing tendons rust and expand breaking off the concrete cover, so those blocks built in the early 60's when concrete standards were inferior to now are reaching the ends of their design lives, one wonders at the wisdom of spending vast amounts of cash on something that will need demolishing in the not too distant future.with regards insulating the loft everything has to be shifted out for about 350-400mm of mineral wool insulation to be placed,this makes the loft virtually unuseable unless boarded as you cannot see where the joists are, it would be interesting to see how many people have fallen through the ceiling as a result[/p][/quote]derek I have Solar Panels on the lease your roof scheme I've now got my bill down to £20 a month from £40 & I'm still getting rebates. If I could afford to pay for the New Dimplex/SEE Electric heating system I would as it would take energy from the panels store it & give me free heating. I cannot see why this council would not allow the Council tenants to go ahead & have these panels when one of the schemes Williams kept money for was Solar Panels? loosehead
  • Score: 0

9:08pm Sun 5 May 13

S Pance says...

Vote UKIP.
Vote UKIP. S Pance
  • Score: 0

9:13pm Sun 5 May 13

loosehead says...

S Pance wrote:
Vote UKIP.
seriously considering joining & standing for UKIP
[quote][p][bold]S Pance[/bold] wrote: Vote UKIP.[/p][/quote]seriously considering joining & standing for UKIP loosehead
  • Score: 0

9:17pm Sun 5 May 13

derek james says...

loosehead wrote:
derek james wrote:
like all green scams (sorry schemes) the money is funded from our gas and electrickery bills (funded by energy companies! where do you think they get the money from?), whilst extra insulation can be a good thing filling up cavities with the cheapest insulation causes damp in 20% of properties (a fact not advertised by the goverment) in which case the insulation value of the wall will be worse than if not filled.
with regards the tower blocks 60 years is the design life of reinforced concrete after which the reinforcing steel/ prestressing tendons rust and expand breaking off the concrete cover, so those blocks built in the early 60's when concrete standards were inferior to now are reaching the ends of their design lives, one wonders at the wisdom of spending vast amounts of cash on something that will need demolishing in the not too distant future.with regards insulating the loft everything has to be shifted out for about 350-400mm of mineral wool insulation to be placed,this makes the loft virtually unuseable unless boarded as you cannot see where the joists are, it would be interesting to see how many people have fallen through the ceiling as a result
derek I have Solar Panels on the lease your roof scheme I've now got my bill down to £20 a month from £40 & I'm still getting rebates.
If I could afford to pay for the New Dimplex/SEE Electric heating system I would as it would take energy from the panels store it & give me free heating.
I cannot see why this council would not allow the Council tenants to go ahead & have these panels when one of the schemes Williams kept money for was Solar Panels?
well good for you' the point i was trying to get across is that it is not practical to insulate some old properties and the money for funding is not free it comes out of our energy bills
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]derek james[/bold] wrote: like all green scams (sorry schemes) the money is funded from our gas and electrickery bills (funded by energy companies! where do you think they get the money from?), whilst extra insulation can be a good thing filling up cavities with the cheapest insulation causes damp in 20% of properties (a fact not advertised by the goverment) in which case the insulation value of the wall will be worse than if not filled. with regards the tower blocks 60 years is the design life of reinforced concrete after which the reinforcing steel/ prestressing tendons rust and expand breaking off the concrete cover, so those blocks built in the early 60's when concrete standards were inferior to now are reaching the ends of their design lives, one wonders at the wisdom of spending vast amounts of cash on something that will need demolishing in the not too distant future.with regards insulating the loft everything has to be shifted out for about 350-400mm of mineral wool insulation to be placed,this makes the loft virtually unuseable unless boarded as you cannot see where the joists are, it would be interesting to see how many people have fallen through the ceiling as a result[/p][/quote]derek I have Solar Panels on the lease your roof scheme I've now got my bill down to £20 a month from £40 & I'm still getting rebates. If I could afford to pay for the New Dimplex/SEE Electric heating system I would as it would take energy from the panels store it & give me free heating. I cannot see why this council would not allow the Council tenants to go ahead & have these panels when one of the schemes Williams kept money for was Solar Panels?[/p][/quote]well good for you' the point i was trying to get across is that it is not practical to insulate some old properties and the money for funding is not free it comes out of our energy bills derek james
  • Score: 0

6:52am Mon 6 May 13

loosehead says...

derek james wrote:
loosehead wrote:
derek james wrote:
like all green scams (sorry schemes) the money is funded from our gas and electrickery bills (funded by energy companies! where do you think they get the money from?), whilst extra insulation can be a good thing filling up cavities with the cheapest insulation causes damp in 20% of properties (a fact not advertised by the goverment) in which case the insulation value of the wall will be worse than if not filled.
with regards the tower blocks 60 years is the design life of reinforced concrete after which the reinforcing steel/ prestressing tendons rust and expand breaking off the concrete cover, so those blocks built in the early 60's when concrete standards were inferior to now are reaching the ends of their design lives, one wonders at the wisdom of spending vast amounts of cash on something that will need demolishing in the not too distant future.with regards insulating the loft everything has to be shifted out for about 350-400mm of mineral wool insulation to be placed,this makes the loft virtually unuseable unless boarded as you cannot see where the joists are, it would be interesting to see how many people have fallen through the ceiling as a result
derek I have Solar Panels on the lease your roof scheme I've now got my bill down to £20 a month from £40 & I'm still getting rebates.
If I could afford to pay for the New Dimplex/SEE Electric heating system I would as it would take energy from the panels store it & give me free heating.
I cannot see why this council would not allow the Council tenants to go ahead & have these panels when one of the schemes Williams kept money for was Solar Panels?
well good for you' the point i was trying to get across is that it is not practical to insulate some old properties and the money for funding is not free it comes out of our energy bills
Is it true some types of insulation/property builds can cause mould/condensation/D
amp?
[quote][p][bold]derek james[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]derek james[/bold] wrote: like all green scams (sorry schemes) the money is funded from our gas and electrickery bills (funded by energy companies! where do you think they get the money from?), whilst extra insulation can be a good thing filling up cavities with the cheapest insulation causes damp in 20% of properties (a fact not advertised by the goverment) in which case the insulation value of the wall will be worse than if not filled. with regards the tower blocks 60 years is the design life of reinforced concrete after which the reinforcing steel/ prestressing tendons rust and expand breaking off the concrete cover, so those blocks built in the early 60's when concrete standards were inferior to now are reaching the ends of their design lives, one wonders at the wisdom of spending vast amounts of cash on something that will need demolishing in the not too distant future.with regards insulating the loft everything has to be shifted out for about 350-400mm of mineral wool insulation to be placed,this makes the loft virtually unuseable unless boarded as you cannot see where the joists are, it would be interesting to see how many people have fallen through the ceiling as a result[/p][/quote]derek I have Solar Panels on the lease your roof scheme I've now got my bill down to £20 a month from £40 & I'm still getting rebates. If I could afford to pay for the New Dimplex/SEE Electric heating system I would as it would take energy from the panels store it & give me free heating. I cannot see why this council would not allow the Council tenants to go ahead & have these panels when one of the schemes Williams kept money for was Solar Panels?[/p][/quote]well good for you' the point i was trying to get across is that it is not practical to insulate some old properties and the money for funding is not free it comes out of our energy bills[/p][/quote]Is it true some types of insulation/property builds can cause mould/condensation/D amp? loosehead
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree