Love Where You Live

Cllr Peter Hiller – Glinton and Castor ward The Cycle of Housing Target Policy

As I suggested within my article in Nov/Dec’s Tribune, the PM has reportedly now climbed down on key planks of his planning reforms in the face of rebellions by backbenchers. The Prime Minister apparently ditched compulsory housebuilding targets for local areas after a groundswell of MPs threatened to vote against his flagship Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill. This is potentially very significant for our Glinton and Castor ward residents as, many will remember, a few years ago a governmental ‘lifting’ of the then punitive house building targets for our area was the catalyst to enable me, as 48 villagetribune

ward councillor, together with members of the Protect Rural Peterborough group, to help prevent the onset of a massive new housing estate blighting the beautiful countryside north of Castor and Ailsworth. The climbdown on housebuilding saw Michael Gove, the Levelling Up Secretary, agree to change his Bill to make it clear that centrally-dictated targets are merely “advisory”. They become “a starting point, a guide that is not mandatory”. Importantly, the new rules will mean town halls will be allowed to build fewer homes than Whitehall believes are needed ‘if they can show that hitting the targets would significantly change the character of an area’ Also Mr Gove has pledged to make it clear that more homes will be built in urban areas and in the North and the Midlands as part of the Government’s vision to level up the country. An additional promise from government, and an anomaly I’ve lobbied-on for years, is Mr Gove agreeing to crackdown on developers keeping land unused even though it has been granted planning permission – a cynical lack of action that keeps prices high and puts pressure on councils like ours to find even more land to build on.

Planet v Pocket

Cllr Peter Hiller – Glinton and Castor ward

I think it’s generally accepted we are blessed with much flora and fauna in and around our Tribland villages; woodland abounds, fields and meadows proliferate.

As a Langdyke Countryside Trust trustee and Rural councillor I’m particularly aware that the quality of our environment and air quality is enviably high and, like many of us, I want to help keep it that way. However, the current energy prices increases and escalating cost of living has, it’s reported, affected people’s attitude to the importance of dealing with climate change as it relates to the cost to household budgets. With oil, gas, electricity, petrol and diesel prices rising, it is reported half of Brits are in favour of increasing the amount of energy generated from high-carbon sources, such as coal, to keep costs down, according to recent research by YouGov. Just a year earlier, over three-quarters were in favour of COP26 pledges to phase out coal. This suggests that immediate concerns about the rising cost of living are outweighing concerns about the environment. Indeed, 73% of individuals polled by YouGov agreed that the Government should prioritise spending to tackle the cost-of-living crisis. However, a quarter of Britons think that the UK Government has a great deal of scope to alleviate cost-of-living issues before it has to cut into the amount it spends on tackling climate change, while a further 30% believe it has some capacity to help out. Personally, I don’t think this is an either/or. Tackling climate change is often pitched headto-head with other issues such as the cost-of-living crisis; we are frequently made to believe that we must choose which issue to address. Perhaps it shouldn’t be quite as binary a choice as is often presented. Ultimately, both challenges have the same root cause – a reliance on expensive fossil fuels – and the same solution. Research by University College London (UCL) indicates that failing to act on climate change not only locks the country into higher energy prices in the medium term, but it will also have a long-term impact on the cost of living. The impact of climate-related events such as heatwaves and floods will be increasingly severe, taking the UK longer to recover from them.

Phasing out oil and gas would reduce bills, as well as improve energy security and improve the world for the next generation. As a result, UCL predicts that the cost of climate change could be as much as six times higher than previously believed, with the result that GDP could be 37% lower by the end of the century than it would be if we focus on reducing carbon emissions. A shift to renewable energy, focusing on better insulating Britain’s homes to reduce energy consumption and accelerating the adoption of alternative fuels and electric vehicles, would tackle both emissions and reduce fuel bills. I had many emails in response to my piece in September’s Tribune about the council’s now 100% use of low Co2 emission HVO fuel for their fleet of diesel-engine vehicles. Virtually all agreed that we shouldn’t be fixated just on expensive electric vehicles, rather perhaps facilitating our existing diesel-engine cars and trucks to be instantly cleaner without upfront expense. First though, economic support from the Government (through incentives and tax breaks) is needed for us as individuals to be able to make choices without the financial pressures. villagetribune 49

Air Source Heat Pumps – merely ‘hot air’ or a serious contender to keep us toasty?

As we are all too aware, the cost of fossil fuels is rising sharply.

Current figures suggest fitting a new A-rated gas or oil boiler today may be more cost effective in terms of annual savings (especially if replacing like for like) but this is likely to change with time as fuel costs rise further*. Heat pumps are expected to become the cheapest, ‘greenest’ source of domestic heating within the next decade or so**. In line with this, technology is advancing rapidly with better efficiency, quieter operation and sleeker design. Air Source Heat Pumps (ASHP) are already installed in thousands of homes in the UK and can be a viable option when replacing old heating systems*. Most ASHPs work by extracting heat energy from the air, concentrating it and transferring it to a circulating water system which in turn heats radiators, under-floor heating pipework and domestic hot water, etc. The amount of electricity used in this process is far less than the amount of heat produced. Most systems produce 3-4 units of heat for every 1 unit of electricity used*. Average cost of installation is £10,000. There are several different types of ASHP systems which vary in terms of installation References and for more information: *Energy Saving Trust: www.energysavingtrust.org.uk ** BEUC: The European Consumer Organisation: www.beuc.eu/press-releases/goodbye-gas-heat-pumps-will-be-cheapest-green-heating-option-consumers ***Peterborough City Council: www.peterborough.gov.uk/council/campaigns/local-energy-advice-partnership ****Government website: www.gov.uk/apply-boiler-upgrade-scheme

and running costs - the more complex the system and higher the water temperature, the higher the cost. Payback time in terms of annual savings depends on funding eligibility, system design, the system it is replacing, average air temperature (the colder the air temperature the more electricity consumed), your electricity tariff and home insulation efficiency. It’s advisable to get at least three different quotes before proceeding and request installer’s user reviews. Also request data from the potential installer including how many kilowatts (kw) heat is produced compared to kw electricity used. This should be specific to the design for your home and will tell you how efficient the system is*. It is worth noting, as with any heating system, you will save money and retain more heat with optimal home insulation. It may be worth having a thermal imaging survey carried out and seeking advice on enhancing home insulation when considering your options. Visit Peterborough City Council’s, Local Energy Advice Partnership page on their website for more information and to see if you are eligible for financial assistance with these services***.

Pros:

• Best option for reducing carbon emissions. • May lower annual fuel bills. Four times as efficient as conventional electric heating. • Great option in rural areas where gas is unavailable. • Can utilise existing central heating systems with minor changes**. • Grant available for £5,000 lump sum up front. Benefit recipients may be eligible for free installation****. • Compatible with other low carbon installations i.e., solar panels**.

Cons:

• Sufficient outdoor space allowing good air flow with a drainage point is required to install external unit (located on ground or fixed to a wall). Space locally can get very cold. Most systems feature an internal unit in addition. • Potentially large outlay cost with slow payback. • Space required for hot water storage. Can’t replace combiboilers. • Replacing with an ASHP is unlikely to be a realistic option for those whose existing systems fail unexpectedly – especially in the colder months. Planning ahead is required*.