Ole P. Steen | BA Hons. Architecture Dissertation by Ole Petter Steen

Sustainable Social Housing Performance and Adoption of Energy Efficient Technologies Empirical evaluation of occupant behaviour and home energy use in low-carbon affordable housing schemes in South Tyneside and Hebburn in the United Kingdom

A dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of BA Hons Architecture

Author Student Number Module Year Word Count

Ole Petter Steen 120353448 ARC3010 2014-2015 8622

Cover Photography by Ole Petter Steen

Abstract In recent years several new low-carbon social housing projects are being constructed across the UK in an ongoing endeavour to significantly reduce domestic greenhouse gas emissions in the nation. Despite the increasing interest in sustainable homes and energy performance, the occupantsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; behavioural patterns and its effect on energy consumption is seldom taken into consideration. This paper reflects on the dependant interactions between consumption and human behaviour in their material, cultural and social context. The present study examines the findings of a post-occupancy evaluation conducted at two low-income housing estates in the North-East of England, both Code 4 and above. The emerging findings from the survey indicate that there is significant correlation between building performance and occupantsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; behaviour, as energy-consumption seem to reflect previous habits and levels of comfort. Most occupants were generally dissatisfied with the information provided, further preventing the competent adoption and use of energyefficient technology. The aim is to carefully assess these factors that obstruct the effective use of sustainable communities, in order to provide areas of recommendations for future low-carbon developments.

Keywords Sustainable design, social housing schemes, building performance, energy-efficient technology, occupant behaviour, energy consumption, household adoption 3

TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract

Chapter 1

Introduction

Chapter 2

Literature Review and Research Context

2.1 2.2 2.3

Chapter 3 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 Chapter 4

10 11 12

Research Methodology Research Aim and Design Case Study, Four Housing Questionnaire Design The Sample Data Collection and Analysis

14 15 20 22 24

Survey Results

4.1 4.2 4.3

Unit Type and Privacy Thermal Comfort and Habits Energy-Efficient Technology and Information Provided

25 28 32

4.4

Living in a Sustainable Community

Chapter 5 5.1 5.2 5.3

Photography (left) by Ole Petter Steen

Home Energy Use and Sustainable Behaviour Performance Gap and Social Barriers Social housing Schemes as Test Sites for Sustainable

Discussion and Conclusion Building Performance and Home Energy-Use Sustainable Adoption and Behaviour Conclusion and Recommendations

Acknowledgment Bibliography Illustration Credits Appendix

41 42 46 48

39 39

List of Figures

Figure 1

Location of Sinclair Meadows and High View

Map

Figure 2

Tenants’ Eligibility for ‘Rent-to-Homebuy’

Information Box

Figure 3

Solar Photovoltaic Panels

Information Box

Figure 4

High View: Passing Main Road

Photograph

Figure 5

High View: Typical Floor Plan

Floor Plan

Figure 6

High View: Master Plan of High View

Master Plan

Figure 7

High View: Artistic Rendering

Drawing

Figure 8

High View: Sectional Drawing

Computer Render

Figure 9

Sinclair Meadows CO2 Emissions

Information Box

Figure 10

Sinclair Meadows: Estate layout

Master Plan

Figure 11

Sinclair Meadows: 3 Bed Terraced House

Floor Plan

Figure 12

Sinclair Meadows: 2 Bed Apartment (A)

Floor Plan

Figure 13

Sinclair Meadows: 2 Bed Apartment (B)

Floor Plan

Figure 14

Table of Questionnaire Sections

Table

Figure 15

Example of Check Box Questions

Questionnaire

Figure 16

Example pf Ranking Questions

Questionnaire

Figure 17

Example of Scaled Satisfaction Question

Questionnaire

Figure 18

Questionnaire Responses

Bar Chart

Figure 19

Number of each unit type

Bar Chart

Figure 20

Interview Responses

Pie Chart

Figure 21

Age Groups

Pie Chart

Figure 22

Years of Residency

Pie Chart

Figure 23

Gender

Pie Chart

Figure 24

Pearson’s Correlation Explained

Information Box

Figure 25

Sinclair Meadows Public Space

Photograph

Figure 26

Correlation: Privacy and Layout Satisfaction

Scatter Graph

Figure 27

Correlation: Privacy and Overall Comfort

Scatter Graph

Figure 28

Open Window Communal Space

Photograph

Figure 29

Correlation: Thermal and Energy Efficiency

Scatter Graph

Figure 30

Heating Habits

Bar Chart

Figure 31

Bio-Mass Communal Boiler

Photograph

Figure 32

Sinclair Meadows: Solar PV Panels

Photograph

Figure 33

Sinclair Meadows: Complex Plumbing

Photograph

Figure 34

Occupant Identification of Technology

Bar Chart

Figure 35

Energy Consumption Monitoring System

Photograph

Figure 36

Correlation: Information and Thermostat

Scatter Graph

Figure 37

Average Value and ‘Top Priority’ trend

Bar Chart

Figure 38

Average values of occupant satisfaction

Table

Photography (right) by Ole Petter Steen

Steen

Photography (right) by Ole Petter

CHAPTER 1 Introduction

Domestic energy use is liable for 21 per cent of global CO2 emissions, while in the United Kingdom, the residential housing stock is responsible for approximately 29 per cent of the total national energy consumption in 20121. Estimations today show that, annually, an average household in the UK is responsible for 5.5 tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions2, in which 83 per cent is utilised for heating purposes3. The UK government has in later years implemented, with varying success, several policies and incentives to stimulate residential improvement and increase energy efficiency. Perhaps most noteworthy is the UK government’s target to reduce the residential carbon dioxide (CO2) emission by 80 per cent by 2050. One way of achieving this is to implement strict national policies on the new build housing stock. Using the Standard Assessment Procedure (SAP) and Code for Sustainable Homes as a benchmark rating system, all new domestic development in the UK will in 2016 be required to fulfil the specifications of ‘zero carbon’ dwelling standard by law 4 . While government programmes undeniably limits domestic energy consumption, the Sustainable Development Strategy suggest that emphasis should be shifted from solely economic incentives towards the effect the residents’ behaviour has on energy efficiency5. In the UK, the social housing stock is in many cases on the forefront of change, functioning effectively as test sites to understand how sustainable technology is adapted and used in the household. It has been well documented that a large number of the low-carbon

Will Swan, Phil Brown and Richard Fitton, 'Managing Behavioural Risks in Large-Scale Social Housing Sustainable Retrofit Projects in the Uk', ECEEE Summer Study Proceedings (2013) 661-669.

Energy Saving Trust, 'Save Energy, Money and the Environment', Energy Saving Trust E&OE (2009). 3

Department of Energy & Climate Change, 'Energy Consumption in the United Kingdom', DECC (2014).

Advances in Building Energy Research, 'Empirical Assessment of Indoor Air Quality and Oveheating in Low Carbon Social Housing Dwelling in England, Uk', Advances in Building Energy Research (2014) (p.3). Stewart Barr, Environment and Society (Cornwall: Ashgate, 2008).

building schemes fail to meet the anticipated energy-efficiency performance6. While build quality and installation may act as influencing factors, most shortcoming in terms of building performance can be contributed to the occupants’ energy consumption behaviour 7 . Most households consume energy in response to their lifestyle and unconscious habits, and research indicate that few are willing to adjust their way of life in order to accommodate for sustainable technology8.

explore the effect the occupants’ lifestyle and habits have on energy-consumption. The aim is to identify factors that prevent the successful use of sustainable communities, in order to provide recommendations for future developments.

The concept of evaluating buildings and residents was introduced already in 1963 by the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA), but still today most architects and developers don’t go back to assess the performance of their buildings once they have been successfully constructed and occupied9. Accurate assessment of buildings in use is critical when ensuring that sustainable development hit their envisioned target. A Post-Occupancy Evaluation (POE) focuses on user satisfaction and comfort10 in regards to the dwelling and its services, to determine if the building performs at projected11. This paper examines the important and interdependent relationship between occupant behaviour and home energy use in the domestic sector in the UK. By carefully evaluating building performance in relation to the adoption of energy-efficient technologies in two sustainable social housing schemes, this study intends to 6

Worthing Homes, 'Phase 1: Year 1 Results', Relish: Worthing Homes, (2010) <http://www.relish.org/downloads/RELISH_12_MONTH_R EPORT.pdf>[Date accessed 6 January 2015].

Feedback Techniques', Building Research & Information, 33 (2005) 347-352 (p.347). 10

Therese Peffer and others, 'How People Use Thermostats in Their Homes: A Review', Building and Environment, 46 (2011) 2529-2541.

Suleiman Aliyu Shika and others, 'Developing Post Occupancy Evaluation Sustainability Assessment Framework for Retrofitting Commercial Office Buildings: A Proposal ', Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 65 (2012) 644– 649.

David Neal and Wendy Wood, 'Habits: A Repeat Performance', Current directions in Psycological Science, 15 (2006) 198-202.

Zafer Ozturk, Yusuf Arayici and Paul Coates, 'Post Occupancy Evaluation (Poe) in Residential Buildings Utilising Bim and Sensing Devices: Salford Energy House Example', Retrofit 2012 (2012).

Bill Bordass and Adrian Leaman, 'Making Feedback and Post-Occuoancy Evaluation Routine 1: A Portfolio of

CHAPTER 2 Literature Review and Research Background

2.1

Home Energy Use and Sustainable Behaviour

Even though government policy initiatives have shown to have some effect on lowering CO2 emisasion when it comes to various building retrofit programmes12, other studies show that these policies have a minimal effect on changing the way energy is consumed within the individual households 13 . In the domestic sector, the occupants’ behaviour and lifestyle play a pivotal role when determining the energy use 14 . As several studies have made clear, these energy consumption variables are in most cases interdependent15, and can range from habits, lifestyle and a variety of other sociodemographic characteristics16. The adoption of a certain lifestyle is in most cases related to the occupants’ level of comfort and personal privacy, and as a result distinctive habits are formed based on unconscious decisions and repeated behavioural patterns in the day-to-day routine17. Inevitably, some habits involve a degree of energy consumption, whether it is for transportation, food preparation, thermal comfort or personal entertainment 18 , depending on the adopted lifestyle of a particular household. As several studies have pointed out, it is these underlying behavioural components forming everyday decisions that dictate whether or not 12

Birgitta Gatersleben, '21st Century Living Project: Analyses of Second Value Survey and Comparative Analyses Examining Change', RESOLVE, University of Surrey (2011) 49.

P.C. Stern and others, Consumption as a Problem for Environmental Science (Washington: National Academy Press, 1997), . 16

Pedro Guertler and Jacky Pett, 'User Behaviour in Energy Efficient Homes', Association for the Conservation of Energy (2004). 13

Patrik Södeholm, Environmental Policy and Household Behaviour: An Introduction to the Volume (London: Earthscan, 2010). Wokje Abrahamse, 'Energy Conservation through Behavioral Change: Examining the Effectiveness of a TailorMade Approach', (Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, 2007). 14

Heba Elsharkawy, Peter Rutherford and Haitham Rashed, 'Energy Consumption Behaviour and Home Performance: Community Energy Saving Programme in Aspley, Nottingham', PLEA2013 (2013) (p.1).

Abrahamse..

G.M. Huebner, J. Cooper and K. Jones, 'Domestic Energy Consumption: What Role Do Comfort, Habit, and Knowledge About the Heating System Play?', Energy and Buildings, 66 (2013) 626–636. 17

Tim Jackson, 'Motivating Sustainable Consumption: A Review of Evidence on Consumer Behaviour and Behavioural Change', Sustainable Development Research Network, Centre for Environmental Strategy, University of Surrey (2005). 18

Elsharkawy, Rutherford and Rashed, (p.1).

individuals choose to adopt sustainable features19. Several studies have shown that energy use within a household also depend on a range of social factors, including income, gender and age 20 . For instance, as Lusamhili argues, older people have a tendency to generally struggle with new technology, especially in terms of how they are operated and programmed resulting in improper use of new energy efficient fittings21. Furthermore, it has been observed that norms, beliefs and other culturally related factors 22 , which may require individuals to behave a certain way, also has direct effect on the amount of energy used by households. Research suggest that when it comes to energy use and how well new sustainable technologies are adopted, other factors regarding social barriers needs to be taken into consideration. In 2010, the UK government conducted an opinion poll in relation to the installing of cavity wall insulation in old houses 23 , and they discovered several explanations as to why occupants were reluctant to participate in the retrofit programme. As highlighted by Brown et al24, these included lack of knowledge and understanding and overall cost. Another 19

Doug McKenzie-Mohr, Fostering Sustainable Behavior: An Introduction to Community-Based Social Marketing (Gabriola Island: New Society Publishers, 2011).

study performed by Peleneur and Cruickshank in 2012 concluded that many occupants were reluctant to adopt new sustainable features if it entailed changes in their patterns of everyday life 25 . What is evident is that new energy efficient technology itself have a great potential to minimise domestic CO2 emissions, but the adoption barrier seems to lie within the dynamic of the household and how the occupants understand and engage with the installed technology.26.

2.2

Performance Gap and Social Barriers

In the UK there is a well-documented performance gap between the project design predicted by the construction industry and the actual building performance once occupied27. In some cases this is arguably due to poor workmanship, such as incorrectly installed sustainable systems or deficient construction quality, but recent studies indicate that occupants’ lifestyle and energy consumption behaviour can, to a certain extent, be contributed a large portion of the difference28. To better assess the performance of buildings Learning and Everyday Lives', ECEEE Summer Study Proceedings (2013) (p.2168). 25

Wokje Abrahamse and Linda Steg, 'How Do SocioDemographicand Psychological Factors Relate to Households Direct and Indirect Energy Use and Savings?', Journal of Economic Psychology, 30 (2009) 711–720. 21

M. Peleneur and H. Cruickshank, 'The Social Barriers Towards Adopting Energy Efficiency Measures and Behaviours in the Home: A Manchester and Cardiff Case Study', Proceedings of Retrofit 2012 (2012) 24th–26th January, Salford.

A. Lusambili and others, 'Keeping Warm: Social Connectedness and Technology (a Case Study of Rotherham (England): Technology and Health in the Elderly', The International Journal of Health, Wellness and Society,, 1 (2011) 27–42.

through Refurbishment?', Research Students’ Conference on Domestic Energy Use and CO2 Emissions in Existing Dwellings, Bath: Centre for Alternative Technology (011).

McKenzie-Mohr.

HM Government, 'Warm Homes, Greener Homes: A Strategy for Household Energy Management', DECC (2010). 24

Philip Brown, Will Swan and Richard Fitton, 'Energy Efficient Technologies in the Uk - Installing, Adopting,

A.J. Summerfield and others, 'Changes in Energy Demand from Low Energy Homes', Building Research and Information,, 38 (2010) 42–49. 27

S. Wetherell and J. Hawkes, 'Are Sap Based Assessments an Accurate Way of Predicting the Energy Savings Made

Summerfield and others.

models such as the Standard Assessment Procedure (SAP) have been developed, but the complexity of the home environment is particularly hard to predict, especially for new built homes29. Crocker and Lehmann have stated 30 ‘Governments and industries have wasted considerable resources in communication programmes trying to 'individualise' the problem of 'excess' consumption in an attempt to change behaviours’, emphasising how government incentives alone as tool for motivating for behavioural change will continue to fail until the underlying social barriers are acknowledged. Indeed, research completed by Bahaj and James shows that increasing provision of information about sustainable technology (in their case information about photovoltaic technology) does not automatically correlate to a decrease in home energy-use31.

allows for higher consumption levels while keeping energy costs at previous tariffs 33 . Study shows the rebound effect also extends beyond the domestic sphere, as occupants of sustainable dwellings tend to purchase ‘fuelhungry’ cars and travel more frequently 34 . Estimations concluded by the UK Energy Research Centre show that the Jevons Paradox could cancel out between 10-30 per cent of total domestic energy savings 35 . However, the implementation of energy efficient technologies in the housing stock does not automatically result in higher consumption, and focus should be placed not only on building efficiency, but at consumption behaviour as well36.

2.3

Social Housing Schemes as Test Sites for Sustainable Design

One of the behavioural factors that have the potential to influence energy consumption in low-energy housing projects is known as the Jevons Paradox, a phenomenon in which a person, when faced with greater efficiency, excessively overcompensates resulting in greater consumption32. The rebound effect, as it is more commonly referred to, is in many ways linked to most occupants’ focus on cost savings rather than excess energy use, as improved energy efficiency in the house

Compared to the private housing stock, the Social Housing sector in the UK have several benefits which makes it easier to successfully implement and adopt energy efficient technology in homes. Social housing schemes generally aim to aid people in housing needs through the initiative of local city councils, and are normally rented on a long term basis making them highly suitable

J. Wingfield and others, 'Lessons from Stamford Brook: Understanding the Gap between Designed and Real Performance', Leeds: Leeds Metropolitan University. (2008). 30

Robert Crocker and Steffen Lehmann, Motivating Change: Sustainable Design and Behaviour in the Built Environment (Abingdon, England: Earthscan from Routledge, 2013),(p.2). 31

A.S. Bahaj and P.A.B. James, 'Urban Energy Generation: The Added Value of Photovoltaics in Social Housing', Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 11 (2007) 2121–2136. 32

Harry D. Saunders, 'A View from the Macro-Side: Rebound, Backfire, and Khazzoom-Brookes', Energy Policy, 28 (2000) 439-449.

B. Vale and R. Vale, 'Domestic Energy Use, Lifestyles and Poe: Past Lessons for Current Problems', Building Research and Information, 38 (2010) 578–588. 34

Horace Herring and Steve Sorrell, 'Introduction', in Energy Efficiency and Sustainable Consumption: The Rebound Effect, ed. by Horace Herring and Steve Sorrell (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009), ( 35

Will Swan, Matthew Wetherill and Carl Abbott, 'A Review of the Uk Domestic Energy System', SCRI Research Report, 5 (2010). (2010). 36

R. Diamond and M Moezzi, 'Revealing Myths About People, Energy and Buildings', Proceedings of the 2000 ACEEE Summer Study on Energy Efficiency in Buildings, Asilomar, California (2000).

test sites for new sustainable technology37. As opposed to privately owned or rented properties, affordable housing estates have access to government programmes and funding, effectively diminishing the economic barriers concerning the cost of sustainable technology 38 . Jenkins further argues that social housing estates are especially susceptible to large-scale sustainable deployment due to competent project management and the potential to administer changes across a substantial number of dwellings39.

family and the overall financial benefit 42 . This misconception is not necessarily a problem — it merely highlights the need move away from the climate change as the sole trigger for sustainable improvement, and rather put increasing emphasis on the occupants’ behaviour 43 . Social housing estates don't experience the many barriers commonly observed by owner-occupiers and provide an impeccable opportunity to fully evaluate other elements that might obstruct future energy efficient development44.

Residents of social housing schemes tend to, but are not necessarily limited to, be part of a less fortunate group of society and are often accompanied by various economic and social issues. Brown et al 40 argues that by testing new energy efficient technologies within the households of these typically challenging circumstances, providers will procure vital knowledge ensuring a higher success rate for other less demanding domestic projects in the near future. Arguably, living in an energy efficient community might promote a more sustainable approach to everyday-life as a consequence of occupants’ inclination to adopt norms and behaviours of others around them41. In a case study carried out by Chahal of 250 social housing residents it was recognised that conserving energy to lower CO2 emissions was not the dominant driving force behind adopting new sustainable technologies, but rather the well-being of the 37

Brown, Swan and Fitton, (p.2167).

Will Swan, Phil Brown and Richard Fitton, 'Managing Behavioural Risks in Large-Scale Social Housing Sustainable Retrofit Projects in the Uk', ibid.661-669. 39

D. P. Jenkins, 'The Value of Retrofitting Carbon-Saving Measures into Fuel Poor Social Housing', Energy Policy, 38 (2010) 832–839. 40

Brown, Swan and Fitton, (p.2168).

P.W. Schultz and others, 'The Constructive, Destructive and Reconstructive Power of Social Norms', Psychological Science, 18 (2007) 429–434. 42

Sharon Chahal, Will Swan and Philip Brown, 'Tenant Experiences of Retrofit', Proceedings of Retrofit 2012, 24th– 26th January, Salford (201). 43

Swan, Brown and Fitton, (p.663).

Philip Brown, Will Swan and Richard Fitton, 'Energy Efficient Technologies in the Uk - Installing, Adopting, Learning and Everyday Lives', ibid. (2013), (p. 2168).

CHAPTER 3 Research Methodology

3.1 Research Aim and Design The present research investigates the relationship between domestic energy consumption and behavioural patterns amongst the occupants. The objective is to understand the effect human behaviour and level of comfort has on home energy use, and to further recognise the underlying factors that cause certain lifestyles. The study looked at two, cutting-edge sustainable low-income housing schemes located in the North-East of England with the objective to understand the occupants’ engagement with the building and identify issues and barriers with low-carbon housing. The primary aim is to establish the occupants’ satisfaction with the housing scheme in relation to energy use and present areas of improvement for future developments. In order to accurately assess how well the building performs for those who occupy it, the research developed a Post-Occupancy Evaluation design for the two housing schemes. Set out in accordance with the guidelines explained in the HEFCE/AUDE45, the POE aimed to systematically study the building and the residents’ lifestyle to identify where the behaviour either undermines or contributes to the optimal function of the sustainable dwelling. The approach of the POE was first to establish the user satisfaction of the dwelling in different areas, and then to look at the occupants’ home energy use and habits, with the intention to observe indicators that deviate from the expectations of the design team and what is required to effectively use a sustainable building. The POE was conducted through a set of face-to-face interviews of different households from both housing schemes, alongside a questionnaire handed out to the majority of the houses to cover a broader sample. The questionnaire was also used as a

Higher Education Funding Council for England, 'Guide to Post Occupancy Evaluation', HEFCE, AUDE, University of Westminster (2006).

template for the interviews, making sure that the areas of interest the research intended to explore was covered. By combining both a quantitative and qualitative method of collecting data, the study was able to reveal a broader context and ensured a solid basis for analysis46.

3.2

Case Study of Dwellings: Four Housing

The research was carried out at two sustainable low-income housing estates located near Newcastle, both constructed and owned by Four Housing Limited. Consisting of Berwick Borough Housing Ltd. and Three Rivers Housing Association Ltd.47 and with their head office located in the city of Durham, they provide affordable homes and sustainable communities in the North East48. The two housing schemes are titled “High View” and “Sinclair Meadows” and are located in Hebburn and South Tyneside respectively, in an ongoing support to regenerate the region (See Figure 1 below).

Figure 1: Location of Sinclair Meadows

and High View

Elsharkawy, Rutherford and Rashed, (p.3). Four Housing Group, 'Our Structure' <http://www.fourhousing.co.uk/Extended_Content.aspx?pg= 11> [Accessed 14 December 2014]. 47

Four Housing Group, 'About Us' <http://www.fourhousing.co.uk/Extended_Content.aspx?pg= 9> [Accessed 14 December 2014].

High View was built in 2012 and consists of thirty-five new houses and bungalows, all part of a “Rent-to-Homebuy” and “SharedOwnership-Schemes” giving the tenant the opportunity to get involved in the real estate market in the future. This is a Government funded initiative and enables eligible49 (see figure 2) tenants to rent a home to approximately 20 per cent under its market value for up to five years, and through a Shared Ownership scheme the tenant have the option to buy the full property or part of the property through monthly instalments. All houses exceed Level 4 of the Code for Sustainable Homes50, by using a sustainable features such as photovoltaic panels51 (see figure 3) on the roof, high levels of insulation, A-rated boilers and rainwater collection, resulting in a 44 per cent reduction in CO2 emissions. The estate consist of a combination of two-storey houses with three bedrooms mainly suited for families with children, and several twobedroom bungalows aimed more directly for the elderly and for the mobility impaired. The three-bedroom houses are either terraced or semi-detached houses placed in rows of varying lengths, with designated parking spaces for each property at the back of the house (see figure 6 for more details). The building layout consists of sitting room, kitchen and a small WC on the ground floor, and three bedroom and shared bathroom on the first floor (see figure 5 for details). Oddly enough, the front door, in this case meaning the door with the letterbox, opens straight from the main road into the sitting room (see figure 4). Similarly, for the bungalows, the front door opens directly into the kitchen rather than in the hallway.

Home Owners Alliance, 'Rent to Buy: How the Government Can Help You Buy a Home' <http://hoa.org.uk/advice/guides-for-homeowners/i-ambuying/rent-to-buy/> [Accessed 14 December 2014]. 50 Four Housing Group, 'High View, Hebburn', <http://www.fourhousing.co.uk/uploads/Development/Devel

According to the Home Owners Alliance You are eligible if: i) Your household earns £60,000 a year or less (or £64,300 if you are looking at homes in London). A household can be one person, or you and a partner or you and a friend. ii) you are a first time buyer, or you used to own a home but can’t afford to buy one on the open market now iii) You have a good credit history”. Figure 2: Tenants’ Eligibility

Quoted from NASA: “When light energy strikes the solar cell, electrons are knocked loose from the atoms in the semiconductor material. If electrical conductors are attached to the positive and negative sides, forming an electrical circuit, the electrons can be captured in the form of an electric current”. Figure 3: Solar Photovoltaic Panels

opments/HighView/High%20View.pdf>[Date accessed 15 December 2014]. 51 Gil Knier, 'How Do Photovoltaics Work?', (2002) <http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-atnasa/2002/solarcells/> [Accessed 14 December 2015].

Figure 4: High View (3 bedroom houses) with main road passing by directly outside their front door

Figure 6: Master plan of High View

Figure 5: Typical floor plan of 3 bedroom house at High View. Notice how the front door opens into the sitting area

Figure 7: Artistic rendering of High View

Figure 8: Sectional drawing of High View. Notice the close proximity to the Metro line 17

Also unveiled in 2012, Sinclair Meadows was the first low-income housing estate in the UK to be fully carbon negative. The entire scheme surpasses Level 6 of the Code for Sustainable Homes52 and exceeds the current carbon zero definitions 53 by 20 per cent 54 based on the 2010 Building Regulations Part L. Not only does this building scheme greatly contribute to South Tyneside City Council’s promise to cut CO2 emission by 2020, but also sets a nationwide standard in order to meet the earlier mentioned government’s 2016 carbon zero standard. Sitting on the outskirts of a planned regeneration of South Tyneside, where 400 new homes and other local facilities will be built, this carbon zero social housing scheme will act as an encouragement for further sustainable development in the area. Sinclair Meadows consists of 21 units in total, comprised of 9 three-bedroom houses and 12 two-bedroom apartments, all constructed with high attention to building fabric and building layout. To minimise heat loss, the building envelope was designed with an air tightness of 1.6m3/m2/hr@50pa and it achieves Uvalues ranging from 0.7W/m2K in the windows to 0.097W/m2K, resulting in a 75 per cent more sealed building compared to an ordinary dwelling 55 . The estate layout is completed with the large apartment block along the Northern edge of the site and all the three-bedroom houses at a slightly offset from the next to expose as much south facing façade as possible, and hence maximise solar gain (see figure 10). Internally, this results in a building layout for both the apartments and the houses where all the main habitable rooms are placed along the south facing wall, whereas kitchen and bathrooms are placed

along the northern walls (See figure 11-13). Most materials used the construction of the buildings achieved a rating of A+ from the British Research Establishment (BRE) Green Guide to Specification 56 , and ranged from sustainable timber, lime render, cedar roof shingles and hemp insulation 57 . The entire energy demand of the estate is met on site, coming from both a large array of PV panels on all south facing roof pitches 58 and a communal biomass boiler using wood pallets as fuel. A mechanical ventilation with heat recovery (MVHR) system is installed in the ceiling above the kitchen and the bathroom in every residence, taking advantage of 93 per cent of the heat in the excess ventilated air .To minimise water usage from the mains by approximately 70 per cent 59 , each unit has installed its own rainwater harvesting system used for toilets and gardening.

Sinclair Meadows: Case study:

“According to Ian Larnach Associates, the scheme exceeds the 2013 zero carbon definition by 10.66Kg/CO2/m2 per year, the equivalent of 16.96 tonnes of CO2, meaning it is 20 per cent beyond zero carbon”. Figure 9: Sinclair Meadows CO2 emissions

Figure 10: Sinclair Meadows Estate Layout 52

Four Housing Group, 'Sinclair Meadows: A Case Study', Technology Strategy Board, (2012) <http://www.fourhousing.co.uk/uploads/Sinclair%20Meadow s/Four%20Housing%20Sinclair%20Meadows%20case%20st udy.pdf>[Date accessed 9 October 2014]. 53

HM Government, 'L2a: Conservation of Fuel and Power in New Buildings Other Than Dwellings', Approved Document L - Conservation of fuel and power, The Building Regulations (2013).

Case Study, Four Housing (p.4) Case Study, Four Housing. (p.4) 56 Case Study, Four Housing. (p.5) 57 Four Housing Group, 'Sinclair Meadows' <http://www.fourhousing.co.uk/uploads/Sinclair%20Meadow s/Sinclair%20Meadows.pdf> [Accessed 15 December 2014]. 58 Case Study, Four Housing. (p.6) 59 Case Study, Four Housing. (p.7) 55

Figure 11: Sinclair Meadows: 3 Bed Terraced House

Figure 12: Sinclair Meadows: 2 Bed Apartment (B)

Figure 12: Sinclair Meadows: 2 Bed Apartment (A) 19

3.3

Questionnaire and Interview Design

In the planning of this questionnaire several other studies 60and guides were consulted in order to achieve a comprehensive and analytical set of questions aimed to underline trends and correlation between behaviour and home energy use. Based on the guide set out by the Association of University Directors of Estates (AUDE), the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) and Berkeley Center for the Built Environment (CBE) 61 the questions were organised into eight different categories (see figure 13) and focused primarily on user satisfaction and habits in order to fully understand the occupants engagement with the dwelling. Most questions asked the respondent to tick either one box or, if appropriate, all that apply to a given response (see figure 14), resulting in an extensive quantitate collection of data. In order to better understand the occupants’ priorities of various choices, some question required the respondent to rank the provided responses from one to eight, where one was the top priority (see figure 15). In each section of the questionnaire, a scaled question from 1 to 7 was adapted to give an indication of occupants’ satisfaction or comfort, where 1 represented ‘Very Satisfied’ and 7 indicated ‘Very Dissatisfied’ (see figure 16). At the end of each section, an open comment field was implemented to allow the respondent to contribute individual thoughts and suggestions. The face-to-face interviews were conducted at several households within the two lowincome estates and were designed to last no 60

Bordass and Leaman.

Mark Way and Bill Bordass, 'Making Feedback and PostOccupancy Evaluation Routine 2: Soft Landings – Involving Design and Building Teams in Improving Performance', ibid.353-360. Bill Bordassa and Adrian Leamana, 'Making Feedback and Post-Occupancy Evaluation Routine 3: Case Studies of the Use of Techniques in the Feedback Portfolio', Building Research & Information 33 (2007) 361-375.

longer than twenty minutes. Although the questionnaire functioned as a template for the interviews, a much looser agenda was adopted in order to investigate a broader range of issues. Throughout the initial interviews various unforeseen aspects surfaced, providing key feedback for a revised version of the questionnaire to be handed out to all the houses later. It is a wellknown fact that interviews do not necessarily give an accurate representation of general opinions as biased responses are very likely62, but this approach does allow for a greater detailed insight into individual concerns, as well as indicate areas of trending issues for further analysis.

Ozturk, Arayici and Coates. Higher Education Funding Council for England. 61

Berkeley Center for the Built Environment, 'Building Occupant Satisfaction Survey for Healthcare (Pilot)', CBE, (2009) <http://www.cbe.berkeley.edu/healthcare/> [Accessed 11 November 2014]. 62

Higher Education Funding Council for England.

Figure 13: Table of Questionnaire Sections SECTION

TITLE

PAGE NUMBER

NUMBER OF QUESTIONS

SECTION 1

Background

SECTION 2

Building Use and Layout

2-4

SECTION 3

Thermal Comfort

4-6

SECTION 4

Air Quality

7-8

SECTION 5

Acoustic Quality

SECTION

Building Energy Performance and Sustainable Features

9 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 12

SECTION 7

Energy Monitoring System

12 - 13

SECTION 8

Living in the Estate

14 - 16

Figure 14: Example of check box questions

Figure 15: Example of ranking questions

Figure 16: Example of scaled satisfaction question

3.4

The Sample Later, a revised and better phrased questionnaire was handed out to the majority of the houses to ensure a higher response rate and greater anonymity. At the end of the two phases, a total of 30 responses was accounted for (see figure 17 and 18) resulting in a total response percentage of 53.6 out of the total number of dwellings built by Four Housing at both High Views and Sinclair Meadows.

In order to ensure a balance in opinions and issues, the research targeted a variety of residents of the two social housing estates aiming to represent largely all dwelling types, age groups and family sizes (see figure 20 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 22 for more details). Both estates are newly built and all occupants have applied through the City Council to obtain one of the residences, giving them relatively equal background in terms of how long they have lived there and previous experience with sustainable dwellings. As demonstrated in figure 19 eleven door-todoor interviews (also including eleven questionnaires) were conducted in total, covering all the four different types of dwellings.

Figure 17: Questionnaire Responses out of total number of units

Sinclair Meadows

High View

Response

No Response

Figure 18: Number of each unit type

2 Bedrooms

3 Bedroom

Sinclair Meadows 22

High View

Figure 19: Interview Responses

18% (2)

27% (3)

36% (4)

Figure 20: Age Groups

7 23%

10 33%

18% (2)

13 44%

High View: 3 Bed High View: 2 Bed Sinclair Meadows: 3 Bed

30 or under 31-50 Over 50

Sinclair Meadows: 2 Bed

Figure 21: Years of Residency 5 17%

2 6%

23 77% 1 Year/Less 1-2 Years 3-5 Years

Figure 22: Gender

6 20%

24 80%

Female Male

3.5

Data Collection and Analysis

The first set of interviews and questionnaire was conducted with the researchers present, and the discussion was digitally recorded on a voice recorder, in addition to hand written notes, while the remaining questionnaires in the second phase was completed in the occupants own time. Even though the two housing estates are of different level of the Code for Sustainable Homes, they both have sustainable technology installed and requires the occupant to engage with the house. For this particular reason, the similar occupancy profiles, dwelling size and number of bedrooms were emphasised, as opposed to specific estate location and building type, when analysing the responses recorded in the questionnaires. All the data was manually entered into IBM’s Statistical Software (SPSS) to ensure accurate analysis, while the interviews and comments was transcribed into a computer for easy access and reference.

Each question represented a variable in SPSS and each variable was subsequently coded to match the corresponding answers given in the questionnaire. The completed sets of data was then thoroughly analysed to find correlations and comparative statistics between the variables. Especially for ordinal variables, such as the questions concerning scale of satisfaction, a close examination of mean values and frequencies gives a clear indication of the level of comfort in the dwellings. Regarding the ranked questions, each individual response was looked at separately and then comparing the mean values to establish the average top priority amongst the occupants. For the rest of the questionnaire the Pearson moment 63 correlation coefficient measurement was used to investigate potential associations between various variables, including the occupants’ behaviour and energy use.

Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient: When comparing two variables X and Y in statistical terms, the Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient can be used to accurately measure the linear relationship between the two variables. The Pearson’s Correlation coefficients, also known as the ‘r-value’, will always be between -1 and +1. Achieving either these two values indicate a perfect correlation, meaning that all data points are along the line of best fit. The more variation in the dataset, the closer the value of r approaches 0. A correlation between two variables generally means that a decrease or increase in one variable significantly contributes to either a decrease or increase in a second variable. This is best demonstrated through the Sig (2-tailed) variable, p; if a value less than or equal to .05 means that there is a statistical significant relationship, whereas any value greater than .05 concludes no statistical correlation. Figure 23: Pearson’s Correlation explained

Kent State University, 'Spss Tutorials', (2014) <http://libguides.library.kent.edu/SPSS/PearsonCorr> [Accessed 5 December 2014].

CHAPTER 4 Survey Results

4.1 Unit Type and Privacy To establish a foundation for a systematic evaluation, the first sections of the survey focused on the different unit types and the various residents that occupy them. Examining the data, it appears that age plays a significant role when determining the occupant profile for each unit type. People under the age of 50 tend to live in the 3 bedroom houses, while occupants above 50 live in the two bedroom apartments or bungalows. In fact, out of all the responses received everyone aged 50 or older lived in a two bedroom unit. This is almost certainly linked to the fact that the younger occupants of the sample tended to have stay-at-home children and naturally require more space, while the qualities of flats and bungalows, such as reduced unit size and easy access, is more lucrative for the older generation. This trend is further confirmed when looking at average number of occupants per unit type, where the houses was normally inhabited by three or four people (Îź = 3.62) as oppose to mean value of less than two inhabitants (Îź = 1.76) per two bedroom unit. Through the initial interviews it became evident that level of privacy was an issue for a number of occupants at both social housing schemes. At Sinclair Meadows all occupants of the four ground floor apartments criticised the level of privacy through exterior windows, referring to a poorly designed community layout where public spaces are placed directly adjacent to the sitting rooms (see figure 25 p. 27).

Similarly, some occupants of the three bedroom houses at High View were also dissatisfied with the building layout. One of the residents stated that they: ‘Would’ve preferred a porch rather than the front door leading straight into the sitting room. Also would’ve suited my large family to have a larger kitchen and smaller sitting room’ This was a common opinion amongst the interviewees of the houses, stressing how the living room was located parallel and poorly shielded from the main road passing by outside, with the front door opening directly into the same space (see figure 5, p. 15) As a result, most of these occupants at both estates were compelled to keep blinds constantly drawn and thus preventing maximum exploitation of solar gain. However, when asked about acoustic privacy between units hardly any complaints surfaces and most occupants were relatively content with the current situation: ‘I like the fact that there is not any noise when windows and doors are closed’ This notion was reinforced by the questionnaire results as 70 per cent reported that they were either satisfied or very satisfied with the level of noise privacy between houses, indicating that the increased airtightness of the building fabric functions effectively as a sound isolator as well. Homes with this positive perception of acoustic quality also appeared to be more satisfied with the building layout (figure 26, r = 0.7, p < 0.01) and the overall comfort of the unit (figure 27, r = 0.6, p < 0.01).

Figure 25: Sinclair Meadows public space. All occupants in the ground floor apartments complained about lack of visual privacy. Blinds always drawn (left side of photograph).

Figure 26: Correlation between sound privacy and unit layout satisfaction

Figure 27: Correlation between sound privacy and overall unit comfort

4.2

Thermal Comfort and Heating Habits

One of the leading focuses of the study was to use thermal satisfaction amongst the occupants to identify factors concerning energy use and the indoor temperature environment. Due to the increased airtightness of the building fabric, it’s a wellknown consensus that sustainable dwellings are more prone to overheating and poor indoor air quality 64 . The dwellings at both housing estates were not fitted with properly designed natural shading, and the delivery of fresh air relied merely on mechanical ventilation, causing displeasure amongst a large portion of the occupants regarding overheating. Nearly half (48.3 per cent) of the sample stated that their homes were ‘often too hot’ during warm and hot weather, with 46 per cent of these occupants also reporting a strong dissatisfaction when asked about overall indoor temperature comfort (μ = 5.7). Findings from several of the interviews confirmed this rather comprehensive view about the thermal conditions of the house: ‘Too hot in summer, and having windows open makes no difference’

Guide A of Environmental Design 65 states that during warm weather, buildings without air-condition should have a maximum indoor temperature 25 degrees Celsius 66 . Many residents, particularly at Sinclair Meadows, reported temperatures reaching well above 30 degrees Celsius during summer months despite having external windows open (see figure 28), indicating a serious discomfort in regards to overheating. Interestingly, a total of 87 per cent of the respondents were content with the indoor temperature during colder periods of the year, strongly indicating highly sufficient thermal specifications of the building’s fabric. Cross-referencing and exploring the responses regarding occupants’ satisfaction with the temperature in the unit further, it becomes evident that occupants who are generally satisfied with the temperature of their unit also consider their building to be energy efficient (figure 29, r = 0.6, p < 0.001). Furthermore, there is similarly significant correlation between thermal comfort and overall unit comfort (r = 0.457, p < 0.05). These findings indicate that appropriate temperature in the indoor environment is fundamental for occupant satisfaction.

‘In the summer months my house can reach 30 degrees and at the same time windows are open and fans are on’ ‘Terrible heat in the summer due to lack of ventilation and the way the rooms are designed’

Andy Dengel and Michael Swainson, 'Overheating in New Homes: A Review of the Evidence', NHBC Foundation (2012).

Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers, Cibse Guide A: Environmental Design (London: CIBSE, 2006). 66 Advances in Building Energy Research, (p.10).

Figure 28:

Window always left open in the Communal staircase in the Apartment block, but still issues of overheating.

Figure 29:

Significant correlation between thermal satisfaction and how energy efficient the unit it in the opinion of occupant.

When considering building performance and energy-efficiency in terms of thermal qualities, it is important to evaluate the heating habits of the occupants and how their lifestyle affects energy consumption (see figure 30). In response to heating behaviour, the sample appeared to be divided into two distinct groups. The first group can be classified as ’reactive occupants’, representing 57 per cent of the respondents. They had their heating systems totally switched off and only re-activated it depending on the need for additional heat in the household. The second group however, consisting of 37 per cent of the sample, seemed more driven by habits from previous – perhaps less sustainable – residencies, as they had their heating system come on either in the morning or the evening, or both, on a regular basis. On the contrary, the remaining 6 per cent claimed they never used their heating system at all. While this normally indicates issues of fuel poverty, further analysis quickly dismissed it as these occupants reported the highest satisfaction in both thermal and overall unit comfort. Noteworthy, findings from the interviews and the survey revealed that hardly any seemed to have their automatic thermostats activated. When asked how much they engaged with the thermostats, 63 per cent responded that they have ‘no experience’ or ‘some experience’ with it, while a staggering 97 per cent admittedly stated that they use operable openings to control the temperature in the unit. As a consequence, many households experienced fluctuating indoor temperatures potentially resulting in a higher energy consumption.

Further findings from Sinclair Meadows revealed issues regarding the communal boiler (see figure 31), and thus the heating for the entire estate: ‘In the past heating system could not cope with demand from houses and flats. Had to use electric heaters’ Poor commissioning of the bio-mass boiler, or in some cases shortage of fuel (wood pellets), have resulted in longer periods with no heating at all. In response to multiple complaints from the occupants, Four Housing have been forced to provide portable electrical heaters to all units. Not only is this an easily avoidable issue, but it also undermines the ‘zero-carbon’ ethos of the estate, resulting in a substantial energy consumption.

18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Only in the morning

Only in the Both morning Only at night Depending on All the time evening and evening the need

Never

Figure 30: Heating habits

Figure 31:

Bio-Mass Communal Boiler at Sinclair Meadows. Reported to cause dissatisfaction among a large portion of the occupants.

4.3

Energy-Efficient Technology and Information Provided

To accurately assess the awareness towards domestic energy-efficient technology, the study asked the residents to identify which sustainable features their respective house have fitted from a list consisting of both installed and fictitious sustainable technologies (see figure 34). Frequencies from the questionnaire demonstrated that amongst the most identified features present at both estates was solar PV panels and rainwater collection, with 93 per cent and 83 per cent respectively. Despite being the most familiar technologies, feedback from numerous residents suggested that these also were the most troublesome of them all:

Figure 32:

Solar PV Panels mounted on south facing roof of the terraced houses at Sinclair Meadows

Figure 33:

Complex plumbing where rain water harvesting systems is connected to main water

‘Fault in all rainwater systems – I have been on mains water since moving into property. Other residents have the same problem’ ‘Convinced solar panels are not even switched on’ The rainwater collection system proved problematic amongst most households, especially at Sinclair Meadows where it was connected to the mains, as filters and pipes had a tendency to congest resulting in higher water bills. Several occupants proclaimed that the PV panels had little or no effect on energy bills, and very few had changed their energy consumption behaviour to better take advantage of the solar generated electricity. Additionally, only 23 per cent of the respondents identified that their home had a significantly air-tight building envelope in the survey. This lack of understanding amid the occupants is arguably contributed to inadequate information provided, and could induce serious side-effects on the indoor environment, such as poor air-quality and overheating. 32

Figure 34:

Occupant Identification of Installed Sustainable Technology

Structural Insulated Panels

Solar Tubes 0

Roof Water Heating (Solar)

Bio-Mass Communal Boiler

Thermal Mass

Rainwater Collection

Energy Monitoring System

Low Thermal Bridging 0

Tripple-Glazed Windows

Automatic Thermostat

High Air-Tightness

Sun Oriented Housing Layout

Ground Heat Pumps 0 Mechanical Ventilation with Heat Recovery (MVHR) Air and Moisture Barriers

Solar Panels (PV)

28 0%

Identified

20%

Not Identified

40%

2 60%

80%

100%

Not Installed

With regards to Sinclair Meadows, less than three quarters (71 per cent) of the residents successfully identified the energy consumption monitoring system (ECMS) as additional sustainable systems installed in their household (see figure 35). However, from this specific sample 55 per cent reported that not only did they consult the ECMS on a daily basis to better understand their consumption, they’ve also seen a reduction in electric energy bills. On the contrary however, findings from the interviews revealed that three households had completely deactivated the system, as they: ‘Uses electricity to use it so little point in saving money’ When asked about the advantages of having an ECMS, the same group of occupants marked that they ‘don’t see the benefit’, further commenting that they consume less energy either way from simply living in a low-carbon house. It is noted that two of them also claimed they had seen a higher energy bill since moving in, possibly indicating a higher consumption as a result of the Jevons Paradox. There appears to be a substantial difference between the occupants and their engagement with the systems, along with perceived benefits of doing so. In response to knowledge about the sustainable technology and how much material and assistances they had received from Four Housing upon moving in, 48 per cent marked their response at the lower end of the scale, indicating a considerable dissatisfaction in terms of the information given. It is noted that all occupants was handed a building guide outlining the systems and services, but several occupants claimed that it was too technical and only intended for maintenance personnel. Homes commenting that they were not well-informed also seemed to be less satisfied with the thermostats (figure 36, r = 0.392, p < 0.05). This, 34

combined with fact that 63 per cent of the residents failed acknowledge that they had a thermostat installed, clearly indicates that adequate information is much needed in order to ensure proper occupants consumption behaviour and successful adoption of energyefficient systems in the household.

Figure 35:

Energy Consumption Monitoring System installed at Sinclair Meadows

Figure 36:

Correlation between information given and satisfaction with thermostat

4.4

Living in a Sustainable Community

The last section of the survey aimed to evaluate changes in energy-use in response to living in a low-carbon social housing community. In order to assess the primary motivation for choosing to live at either of the social housing estates, the study asked the residents to rank their responses according to their personal priorities (see figure 37). ‘Proximity to Family’ received the lowest mean value (μ = 3.00), indicating that on average this was the most commonly chosen reason amongst the occupants key priorities. This was indeed documented through the interviews, as a number of occupants mentioned that they either moved there based on recommendations from other family member already residing at the estate, or to move closer to family in the area. However, only 24 per cent of the respondents put this as their number one reason, while most people, representing 38 per cent of the sample, put ‘Sustainable Features’ at the top of the list. It appears that both proximity to family and the opportunity to live in a more eco-friendly community was deciding factors when occupants applied for new accommodation. It is noted that ‘Proximity to Workplace’ was the least important factor (μ = 5.83), possibly correlating to the fact that 76.6 per cent of the units are occupied on an all-day basis. In response to energy expenditure since moving in, 80 per cent of the respondents reported either a significant or slight reduction in the energy bill, while three houses said that it had remained the same. Oddly enough, one occupant experienced an increase in energy spending. When asked about change in behaviour, more than a quarter (27 per cent) of the residents claimed they had ‘totally changed lifestyle with focus sustainability’ while 60 per cent had either ‘taken small steps towards a more sustainable way of life’ or just ‘more aware about sustainability in general’, leaving only 36

four houses as ‘same as before’. Whilst this indicates that the majority of the occupants are generally more conscience about energy behaviour, the study also wanted to explore if the experience of living in a sustainable community had influenced their attitudes and priorities for future settlement. A staggering 79 per cent asserted that if they moved, they would chose a dwelling with matching features as where they live now. These findings, combined with the high overall satisfaction levels (see figure 38), give a strong indication that living in a sustainable community enhances, and in many cases, changes the lifestyle of the occupants in regards to sustainable behaviour.

Top Priority 9

MEAN VALUE

5.83

5.45

4 3

5.47 4.4

4.14 3.27

Figure 37:

1 0

Average values and ‘top priority’ trend

QUESTION

MEAN VALUE

How has living here influenced your life in general?

1.96

Overall, does this unique zero carbon building project enhance or interfere with your comfort?

2.03

All things considered, how satisfied are you with your unit?

1.83

Figure 38:

6 5

3.38

NUMBER OF 'TOP PRIORITY'

Ranking

Average values from overall occupant satisfaction level, Scale from 1 to 7, where 1 corresponded to ‘Very Satissfied’

CHAPTER 5 Discussion and Conclusion

5.1

Building Performance and Home Energy-Consumption

One of the key objectives of the study was to carefully assess the performance of the sustainable social housing estate in order to understand the influence occupants have on energy-use. Emerging findings from the previous chapter indicate that a number of tenants found the community layout and, in some cases, also the building layout to be dissatisfactory in terms of visual privacy. Due to the placement of communal areas and passing roads, some of households kept external windows covered, undermining the intended performance of solar gain during the heating season. As result of the increased airtightness and insulation of the building envelope, occupants were generally pleased with the acoustic privacy between units, however, almost half of the houses reported issues of overheating during warm weather. As internal temperatures rose to above 30 degrees Celsius, many households resorted to portable electrical fans in an attempt to control their indoor-environment – ultimately leading to a greater energy consumption. As stated in previous studies67, it is also noted that not all households shared this view, indicating that the perception of thermal comfort among occupants vary greatly. With regards to heating habits, the findings divided the sample into two groups; the ‘reactive occupants’ (57 per cent) only activated the heating system when needed, whereas the ‘habitual occupants’ (37 per cent) had the heating come on at predetermined intervals of the day. Even though the first group gives evidence of a highly effective building performance, the energyefficiency of this approach is solely determined by the user’s thermal preference and responsiveness, while the second group might consume excessive energy as result of a previously adopted lifestyle. By not 67

Advances in Building Energy Research, (p.10).

effectively taking use of the automatic thermostats (63 per cent), the occupants were reported using operable windows (97 per cent) to control the indoor-climate, resulting in a ‘yo-yo’ effect of the internal temperatures and minimised energyefficiency. Interviews also revealed that poor commissioning of the communal of bio-mass boiler in Sinclair Meadows, forced the landlord to distribute electric heaters to ensure satisfactory thermal levels across the households, further diminishing the intended performance of the scheme.

5.2

Sustainable Adoption and Behaviour

To better identify underlying barriers that prevents the successful adoption of sustainable behaviour, the study investigated the tenants’ knowledge and engagement with energy-efficient technology after living in a sustainable community and the amount of information Four Housing had provided. Despite being the two most familiar sustainable features according to the survey, the PV panels and the rainwater harvesting system also seemed to be – in the opinion of the occupants – among the least effective of them all. Several households experienced no difference in water bills as rainwater collection tanks were often out of order, and only very few had adapted a lifestyle to best utilise electricity from the solar panels. The survey demonstrated that a large portion of tenants claimed they had not received adequate information on how to correctly operate the sustainable systems in order to conserve energy. As a consequence, occupants were generally not aware of the energy-reducing benefits of some of the installed fittings, such as the ECMS. Numerous other studies have concluded that 68

Elsharkawy, Rutherford and Rashed. Advances in Building Energy Research.

appropriate and legible information is crucial for successful adaptation of sustainable technology and proper occupant control over the household energy consumption68. Findings from the survey revealed that proximity to family and eco-friendly ethos of both estates was the two primary sellingpoints for most occupants when they initially moved. The study indicate that living in sustainable social housing estate contributes positively towards energy consumption behaviour, as 80 per cent of the tenants reported a reduction the households’ energy spending and increasing awareness about CO2 emissions, in addition to high overall satisfaction of their unit.

5.3

Conclusion and Recommendations

The main objective of the research was to investigate domestic energy consumption through a pragmatic assessment of two sustainable social housing estates, in order to achieve a deeper understanding of the effects occupants’ behaviour and adopted lifestyle has on energy-efficiency. Energy-use in the UK housing stock is responsible for more than a quarter of the nations combined CO2 emissions, making it an essential sector to improve in order to meet the governments’ environmental goals of 2050. Already by next year, all new housing development are required to meet the ‘zero-carbon’ standard, as outlined in SAP and Code for Sustainable Homes. Numerous studies have concluded that in order for such government regulations and other programmes to succeed, the occupants’ behaviour and the way sustainable technology is adopted and engaged with needs to be thoroughly assessed 69 . As 69

Heba Elsharkawy and Peter Rutherford, 'Retrofitting Social Housing in the Uk: Home Energy Use and Performance in a

sustainable social housing estates are considered pioneers when it comes to implementing new energy-efficient 70 technology , the study aimed to evaluate the building performance and the residents’ behaviour of two social housing communities, using a mixed-method approach. The post-occupancy evaluation of the sustainable dwellings seemed to underline a performance gap between intended project design and actual building performance once occupied. The air-tight building enveloped caused issues of overheating during hot weather, minimising the energy-efficiency of the scheme as a result. Interestingly, only half of the sample experienced this as discomforting, which raises the question as to what can be contributed to poor commissioning, as oppose to the occupants’ own varying level of thermal satisfaction and the lack of competent use of heating systems. The poor adoption could also be a result of sustainable technology and systems being created without carefully taking the end-users needs and habits into consideration71. Social housing estates are normally rentbased, and even though both these communities are comprised of generally long-term tenants, it is possible that occupants might not have the same sense of ownership over the property leading to less engagement with the installed technology. The survey demonstrated that applicants prioritised the idea of living in an ecofriendly community – possibly to reduce energy bills – but it seemed that most occupants had a ‘fit-and-forget’72 approach to most of the sustainable features, expecting to

Pre-Community Energy Saving Programme (Cesp)', Energy and Buildings, Vol. 88 (2014) 25-33. Ozturk, Arayici and Coates. Brown, Swan and Fitton. Will Swan, Phil Brown and Richard Fitton, 'Managing Behavioural Risks in Large-Scale Social Housing Sustainable Retrofit Projects in the Uk', ibid.661-669.

see a significant reduction in the energy bill without personal involvement. Another important aspect of this research was the influence of living in sustainable community as tool for behavioural change. Social norms are powerful forces of influence, and by being surrounded by equally sustainable houses, occupants might adopt behaviours of others. In this study, the majority occupants reported that they had embraced a greater sense of awareness regarding sustainability since moving in. Ultimately, the successful adaptation of energy efficient-technology in household relies on sufficient information provided. It was clearly noted that a large portion of the sample was dissatisfied with the material provided by the landlord, possibly explaining the occupants’ minimal knowledge about the sustainable technologies installed in each house and the correct operation of them. The study recommends a revised building guidebook for the two housing estates, appropriately considered from the bottomup73 with the end-user in focus, as oppose to construction industry. It needs to be intuitive and easy-to-understand, specifically outlining programming and operation of sustainable fittings in order to reduce energy cost and CO2 emissions in the household. The author recognises that this is a highly developing field that requires further research, and that there will always be teething problems when implementing modern energy-efficient technology in the household. The occupants’ behaviour is undoubtedly correlated to home energy use, and a comprehensive understanding of this relationship is crucial if we are ever going to meet future sustainable aspirations.

Philip Brown, Will Swan and Richard Fitton, 'Energy Efficient Technologies in the Uk - Installing, Adopting, Learning and Everyday Lives', ibid. (p.2168). 71 Philip Brown, Will Swan and Richard Fitton. (p.2174). 72 Advances in Building Energy Research, (p.18). 73 Elsharkawy and Rutherford, (p.17).

Acknowledgment The author would like to thank Dr Neveen Hamza for excellent supervision throughout this dissertation and for facilitating the conducted survey. Her time and analytical input is much appreciated. A sincere thank you is extended to the occupants at both High View and Sinclair Meadows for their time and helpful responses, as without their contribution this study would not have been possible.

Bibliography

Abrahamse, Wokje, 'Energy Conservation through Behavioral Change: Examining the Effectiveness of a Tailor-Made Approach', (Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, 2007)

Bordass, Bill and Adrian Leaman, 'Making Feedback and PostOccuoancy Evaluation Routine 1: A Portfolio of Feedback Techniques', Building Research & Information, 33 (2005), 347352

Abrahamse, Wokje and Linda Steg, 'How Do Socio-Demographicand Psychological Factors Relate to Households Direct and Indirect Energy Use and Savings?', Journal of Economic Psychology, 30 (2009), 711–720

Bordassa, Bill and Adrian Leamana, 'Making Feedback and PostOccupancy Evaluation Routine 3: Case Studies of the Use of Techniques in the Feedback Portfolio', Building Research & Information 33 (2007), 361-375

Advances in Building Energy Research, 'Empirical Assessment of Indoor Air Quality and Oveheating in Low Carbon Social Housing Dwelling in England, Uk', Advances in Building Energy Research (2014)

Brown, Philip,Will Swan and Richard Fitton, 'Energy Efficient Technologies in the Uk Installing, Adopting, Learning and Everyday Lives', ECEEE Summer Study Proceedings (2013)

Alliance, Home Owners, 'Rent to Buy: How the Government Can Help You Buy a Home' <http://hoa.org.uk/advice/guidesfor-homeowners/i-ambuying/rent-to-buy/> [Accessed 14 December 2014]

Chahal, Sharon,Will Swan and Philip Brown, 'Tenant Experiences of Retrofit', Proceedings of Retrofit 2012, 24th–26th January, Salford (201)

Bahaj, A.S. and P.A.B. James, 'Urban Energy Generation: The Added Value of Photovoltaics in Social Housing', Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 11 (2007), 2121–2136 Barr, Stewart, Environment and Society (Cornwall: Ashgate, 2008) Berkeley Center for the Built Environment, 'Building Occupant Satisfaction Survey for Healthcare (Pilot)', CBE, (2009) <http://www.cbe.berkeley.edu/he althcare/> [Accessed 11 November 2014] 42

Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers, Cibse Guide A: Environmental Design. Vol. 7 (London: CIBSE, 2006) Crocker, Robert and Steffen Lehmann, Motivating Change: Sustainable Design and Behaviour in the Built Environment (Abingdon, England: Earthscan from Routledge, 2013)pp. xxxi, 434 pages Dengel, Andy and Michael Swainson, 'Overheating in New Homes: A Review of the Evidence', NHBC Foundation (2012)

Department of Energy & Climate Change, 'Energy Consumption in the United Kingdom', DECC (2014) Diamond, R. and M Moezzi, 'Revealing Myths About People, Energy and Buildings', Proceedings of the 2000 ACEEE Summer Study on Energy Efficiency in Buildings, Asilomar, California (2000) Elsharkawy, Heba and Peter Rutherford, 'Retrofitting Social Housing in the Uk: Home Energy Use and Performance in a Pre-Community Energy Saving Programme (Cesp)', Energy and Buildings, Vol. 88 (2014), 25-33 Elsharkawy, Heba,Peter Rutherford and Haitham Rashed, 'Energy Consumption Behaviour and Home Performance: Community Energy Saving Programme in Aspley, Nottingham', PLEA2013 (2013) Energy Saving Trust, 'Save Energy, Money and the Environment', Energy Saving Trust E&OE (2009) Four Housing Group, 'About Us' <http://www.fourhousing.co.uk/E xtended_Content.aspx?pg=9> [Accessed 14 December 2014] ———, 'High View, Hebburn', <http://www.fourhousing.co.uk/u ploads/Development/Developme nts/HighView/High%20View.pdf >[Date accessed 15 December 2014] ———, 'Our Structure' <http://www.fourhousing.co.uk/E xtended_Content.aspx?pg=11> [Accessed 14 December 2014]

———, 'Sinclair Meadows' <http://www.fourhousing.co.uk/u ploads/Sinclair%20Meadows/Sin clair%20Meadows.pdf> [Accessed 15 December 2014] ———, 'Sinclair Meadows: A Case Study', Technology Strategy Board, (2012) <http://www.fourhousing.co.uk/u ploads/Sinclair%20Meadows/Fo ur%20Housing%20Sinclair%20 Meadows%20case%20study.pdf >[Date accessed 9 October 2014] Gatersleben, Birgitta, '21st Century Living Project: Analyses of Second Value Survey and Comparative Analyses Examining Change', RESOLVE, University of Surrey (2011), 49 Government, HM, 'Warm Homes, Greener Homes: A Strategy for Household Energy Management', DECC (2010) ———, 'L2a: Conservation of Fuel and Power in New Buildings Other Than Dwellings', Approved Document L - Conservation of fuel and power, The Building Regulations (2013) Guertler, Pedro and Jacky Pett, 'User Behaviour in Energy Efficient Homes', Association for the Conservation of Energy (2004) Herring, Horace and Steve Sorrell, 'Introduction', in Energy Efficiency and Sustainable Consumption: The Rebound Effect, ed. by Horace Herring and Steve Sorrell (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009) Higher Education Funding Council for England, 'Guide to Post Occupancy Evaluation', HEFCE, 43

AUDE, University of Westminster (2006) Huebner, G.M.,J. Cooper and K. Jones, 'Domestic Energy Consumption: What Role Do Comfort, Habit, and Knowledge About the Heating System Play?', Energy and Buildings, 66 (2013), 626– 636 Jackson, Tim, 'Motivating Sustainable Consumption: A Review of Evidence on Consumer Behaviour and Behavioural Change', Sustainable Development Research Network, Centre for Environmental Strategy, University of Surrey (2005) Jenkins, D. P., 'The Value of Retrofitting Carbon-Saving Measures into Fuel Poor Social Housing', Energy Policy, 38 (2010), 832– 839 Kent State University, 'Spss Tutorials', (2014) <http://libguides.library.kent.edu/ SPSS/PearsonCorr> [Accessed 5 December 2014] Knier, Gil, 'How Do Photovoltaics Work?', (2002) <http://science.nasa.gov/sciencenews/science-atnasa/2002/solarcells/> [Accessed 14 December 2015] Lusambili, A. and others, 'Keeping Warm: Social Connectedness and Technology (a Case Study of Rotherham (England): Technology and Health in the Elderly', The International Journal of Health, Wellness and Society,, 1 (2011), 27–42

McKenzie-Mohr, Doug, Fostering Sustainable Behavior: An Introduction to CommunityBased Social Marketing. 3 edn (Gabriola Island: New Society Publishers, 2011) Neal, David and Wendy Wood, 'Habits: A Repeat Performance', Current directions in Psycological Science, 15 (2006), 198-202 Ozturk, Zafer,Yusuf Arayici and Paul Coates, 'Post Occupancy Evaluation (Poe) in Residential Buildings Utilising Bim and Sensing Devices: Salford Energy House Example', Retrofit 2012 (2012) Peffer, Therese and others, 'How People Use Thermostats in Their Homes: A Review', Building and Environment, 46 (2011), 25292541 Peleneur, M. and H. Cruickshank, 'The Social Barriers Towards Adopting Energy Efficiency Measures and Behaviours in the Home: A Manchester and Cardiff Case Study', Proceedings of Retrofit 2012 (2012), 24th–26th January, Salford Saunders, Harry D., 'A View from the Macro-Side: Rebound, Backfire, and Khazzoom-Brookes', Energy Policy, 28 (2000), 439-449 Schultz, P.W. and others, 'The Constructive, Destructive and Reconstructive Power of Social Norms', Psychological Science, 18 (2007), 429–434 Shika, Suleiman Aliyu and others, 'Developing Post Occupancy Evaluation Sustainability Assessment Framework for

Retrofitting Commercial Office Buildings: A Proposal ', Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 65 (2012), 644–649 Södeholm, Patrik, Environmental Policy and Household Behaviour: An Introduction to the Volume. ed. by Patrik Södeholm, Environmental Policy and Household Behaviour: Sustainability and Everyday Life (London: Earthscan, 2010) Stern, P.C. and others, Consumption as a Problem for Environmental Science. ed. by et al. P.C. Stern (Ed.), Environmentally Significant Consumption: Research Directions (Washington: National Academy Press, 1997) Summerfield, A.J. and others, 'Changes in Energy Demand from Low Energy Homes', Building Research and Information,, 38 (2010), 42–49 Swan, Will,Phil Brown and Richard Fitton, 'Managing Behavioural Risks in Large-Scale Social Housing Sustainable Retrofit Projects in the Uk', ECEEE Summer Study Proceedings (2013), 661-669

Evaluation Routine 2: Soft Landings – Involving Design and Building Teams in Improving Performance', Building Research & Information, 33 (2005), 353360 Wetherell, S. and J. Hawkes, 'Are Sap Based Assessments an Accurate Way of Predicting the Energy Savings Made through Refurbishment?', Research Students’ Conference on Domestic Energy Use and CO2 Emissions in Existing Dwellings, Bath: Centre for Alternative Technology (011) Wingfield, J. and others, 'Lessons from Stamford Brook: Understanding the Gap between Designed and Real Performance', Leeds: Leeds Metropolitan University. (2008) Worthing Homes, 'Phase 1: Year 1 Results', Relish: Worthing Homes, (2010) <http://www.relish.org/download s/RELISH_12_MONTH_REPO RT.pdf>[Date accessed 6 January 2015]

Swan, Will,Matthew Wetherill and Carl Abbott, 'A Review of the Uk Domestic Energy System', SCRI Research Report, 5 (2010) Vale, B. and R. Vale, 'Domestic Energy Use, Lifestyles and Poe: Past Lessons for Current Problems', Building Research and Information, 38 (2010), 578–588 Way, Mark and Bill Bordass, 'Making Feedback and Post-Occupancy 45

Illustration Credits Figure 2, Alliance, Home Owners, 'Rent to Buy: How the Government Can Help You Buy a Home' <http://hoa.org.uk/advice/guides-forhomeowners/i-am-buying/rent-tobuy/> [Accessed 14 December 2014]

Figure 10, Fitz Architects, 'Sinclair Meadows – Carbon Negative Code Level 6 Social Housing Completed,' (2012) <http://www.fitzarchitects.co.uk/ blog/sinclair-meadows-carbonnegative-code-level-6-socialhousing-completed/> [Accessed 10 December 2015]

Figure 3, Knier, Gil, 'How Do Photovoltaics Work?', (2002) <http://science.nasa.gov/sciencenews/science-atnasa/2002/solarcells/> [Accessed 14 December 2015]

Figure 11, Four Housing Group, 'Property Details ', (2011), [Floor Plan] <http://www.fourhousing.co.uk/uplo ads/Development/Developments/Sin clair/HOUSE.jpg> [Accessed 8 November 2014]

Figure 4, Steen, Ole Petter, (2014), [Photography]

Figure 12, Four Housing Group, 'Property Detail', (2011) <http://www.fourhousing.co.uk/u ploads/Development/Developme nts/Sinclair/APARTMENTtypeA .jpg> [Accessed 8 November 2014]

Figure 5, Steen, Ole Petter, (2014), [Photography], in courtesy of Four Housing Group, ‘Property Guide’ Figure 6-8, Davison, Peter, 'High View School Street Hebburn, ' (2011) <http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa =t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&s ource=web&cd=2&ved=0CCcQ FjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fww w.southtyneside.info%2Fapplicat ions%2F2%2Fcouncillorsandco mmittees%2Fviewdocument.aspx %3Fid%3D20709&ei=RAi3VL WPB8PDOdbKgcAD&usg=AFQ jCNHFEGl3r8IzHHc0q6qe6XEYKvstw&sig2=0oJWuTWpc9Ve44SOvw8XQ> [Accessed 8 November 2014] Figure 9, Four Housing Group, 'Sinclair Meadows: A Case Study', Technology Strategy Board, (2012) <http://www.fourhousing.co.uk/uplo ads/Sinclair%20Meadows/Four%20 Housing%20Sinclair%20Meadows %20case%20study.pdf>[Date accessed 9 October 2014]

Figure 13, Four Housing Group, 'Property Detail', (2011) <http://www.fourhousing.co.uk/uplo ads/Development/Developments/Sin clair/APARTMENTtypeB.jpg> [Accessed 8 November 2014] Figure 24, Kent State University, 'Spss Tutorials', (2014) <http://libguides.library.kent.edu/ SPSS/PearsonCorr> [Accessed 5 December 2014] Figure 25, Steen, Ole Petter, (2014), [Photography] Figure 28, Steen, Ole Petter, (2014), [Photography] Figure 31, Steen, Ole Petter, (2014), [Photography]

Figure 32, Fitz Architects, 'Sinclair Meadows - Carbon Negative Housing Development,' (2011) <http://www.fitzarchitects.co.uk/ residential-reedstreet> [Accessed 10 December 2015] Figure 33, Steen, Ole Petter, (2014), [Photography] Figure 35, Steen, Ole Petter, (2014), [Photography] All tables, graphs, bar charts and pie charts made by the author in response to questionnaire and SPSS statistical analysis.

Appendix