Scientists from the United Kingdom have evaluated the impact of heat pumps on fuel poverty in England and Scotland. Their analysis considered pre- and post-energy crisis prices using levels from 2019 and 2022, which were shaped by the pandemic and the Russia-Ukraine war.
“Fuel poverty is a state where households struggle to afford the energy needed to heat their homes comfortably. The far-reaching consequences include physical and mental health issues, increased financial demands on national health systems, and environmental implications due to the energy inefficiency of fuel-poor homes,” the researchers explained. “This study uses the ‘10% definition:’ A household is considered to be in fuel poverty if its necessary fuel cost is more than 10% of the household adjusted net income.”
The researchers based their analysis on housing surveys from Scotland and England and considered net income, energy consumption, and fuel type. They found that, in pre-crises times, the fuel poverty rate in Scotland was 35.55% and 17.38% in England. This value increased in crisis time to 67.26% in Scotland and 47.68% in England.
“The Pearson correlation coefficient between the off-gas proportion and the pre-crisis fuel poverty estimation is 0.81,” the researchers said.
Heat pumps have lower running costs than off-gas, which the scientists believe is enough to lift people above the fuel poverty line. However, users have to face high up-front installation costs, which were reduced in the United Kingdom with policy support of GBP 5,000 ($6,340) during the research period. The researchers said that policy support can lead to fuel poverty reduction in at least 90.2% of regions in normal periods and in 97.6% of regions during crises in England and Scotland . Without government support, the numbers drop to 51.2% in normal times and 65.9% during crises.
The network upgrade cost is another burden to the heat pump adoption, which trickles down to household bills. It is expected that 457 out of 3,891 primary substations in England and Scotland will require upgrades to support the additional heat-pump demand. The total estimated cost of these upgrades is GBP 715.4 million, divided over a lifespan of 45 years.
“Aberdeenshire has the highest average network upgrade cost due to its relatively high proportion of off-gas homes (41.2%),” the academics explained. “In particular, the two archipelagoes in the north (the Orkney and Shetland islands) with almost 100% off-gas homes still see relatively low upgrade costs. This counterintuitive result comes from the fact that more than half of households have used electric heating. Replace these electric heaters with [heat pumps] can be less burdensome on the network due to the high [heat-pump] efficiency.”
The researchers then shifted to a cost-benefit analysis and found that certain regions such as Shetland and the Orkney Islands exhibit low costs and relatively high benefits in pre-crisis periods. In times of crisis, these areas also experience low costs and high benefits.
“In contrast, few regions, such as Aberdeenshire and East of England, see fewer benefits and high associated costs,” the group said. “These results can help policymakers design and prioritize regional [heat-pump] support mechanisms and deployments.”
The researchers presented their analysis in “Evaluating the Social Benefits and Network Costs of Heat-Pumps as an Energy Crisis Intervention,” which was recently published on iScience. The research group included academics from the University of Edinburgh and the University of Oxford.
“Our findings demonstrate that [heat-pump] benefits endure in both normal and crisis periods,” they said. “This means that even if the crisis ends before [heat-pump] adoption reaches a substantial level of impact, adopting [heat pumps] can still yield long-term benefits, particularly considering the possibility of future energy crises.”
This content is protected by copyright and may not be reused. If you want to cooperate with us and would like to reuse some of our content, please contact: editors@pv-magazine.com.
The assessment fails to take in to account the flexibility of existing systems. Instant water heating or small hot water tank and the ability to heat one or two rooms only for a few hours. The use of large volume hot water tanks as heat sinks and design based on whole house heating makes ASHP much more expensive to run than the bare minimum achievable with gas, oil or even electric room heaters.
this sounds more like the limitation of the current ASHP design rather than the maximum capability of ASHP. Theoretically ASHP has a 300% efficiency for sure, so why it is not possible to have a ASHP+small hot water tank or ASHP with a well insulated large-volume hot water tank, so that the economic advantage of ASHP can still be maintained?
Thank god there not lying!
Ns
That’s one big mfcking BS. What do you think these pumps run on? If the price of the kWh doubles or quadruples you think people will run the pumps more or less often?
The pumps run on electricity with a 2-3x efficiency. If the price of the kWh doubles, pumps can still be cheaper than other options. Now pumps are expensive to run because of the 2/3x higher electricity or gas prices. Every heaters are way more expensive since the crisis. Having a pump does not mean a forever cheap, but cheaper than other expensive off-gas heaters.
I had a heat pump fitted as part of a council scheme 3 years ago and have gone from spending £15 a week to over £60+ a week. They are very expensive to run. I am disabled and now I’m struggling to heat my home and have to live without heating as I’ve had to completely switch it of . I cannot afford to run it and have been left like this by my council.
This is none other than more pro heatpump propaganda. Countless horror stories of hest pumps failing miserably to effectively heat homes. Our housing stock is not designed and insulated for utilising heat pumps. What you will have is a cold property and a high electric bill as the heat pump will run non stop. Progress indeed being legislated from energy statvation to energy stavation.
What an irresponsible article !! Pure propaganda
I totally agree that heat pumps as a new heating technology can be cheaper. BUT, am improperly applied technology can lead to badness instead of goodness.
I heard lots of guys saying their heat pumps are very expensive to run, no cheaper or even more expensive than the old technologies. This is mainly due to the improper housing stock design that does not fit heat pumps. Instead of saying heat pumps are bad technology, I would rather attribute these to the improper installation or assessment prior to installations! It is very miserable to see bad things happening in using new technologies that SHOULD BE GOOD. Actually the government should make a more careful/stricter assessment before the heat pump installation, and restrict the misleading and irresponsible sellers!
Makes sense to me. But why comments so negative towards heat pumps??? Heat pumps are proved to work well even in Sweden and Finland, where there are also badly insulated houses and the temperature is even lower!