logo
Poor building standards add £1,000 to energy bills of new homes, analysis finds

Poor building standards add £1,000 to energy bills of new homes, analysis finds

The Guardian16-05-2025

People living in newly built homes are being hit with energy bills that are nearly £1,000 a year higher than need be because of the poor standards to which they have been constructed.
Occupants of homes built in the past seven years have paid about £5bn more in energy bills than they would have if regulations requiring new homes to be low-carbon had not been scrapped in 2016, according to analysis seen by the Guardian.
Equipping new homes with heat pumps, solar panels and high-grade insulation at the time of construction would have cost between £5,000 and £8,500 for most of the period since 2016. Housebuilders, however, have long claimed building to such standards would be prohibitively expensive.
Instead, most new homes have been built to lower standards of insulation, and with gas boilers instead of heat pumps. About six out of 10 new homes are still being built without solar panels. While the government has recently confirmed new regulations are likely to require renewable energy generation to be incorporated in most new homes, which is likely to mean solar panels in most cases, there are still questions over whether an adequate number of panels will be mandated.
Jess Ralston, energy analyst at the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit, the thinktank that produced the analysis, said: 'Governments giving in to housebuilder lobbying have left Britain with more poor-quality homes, more dependent on foreign gas, and more exposed to the highly volatile gas markets during the ongoing energy crisis. Unless we lower our gas demand by building better, warmer homes that run on heat pumps then we'll just have to import more from abroad, as the North Sea continues its decades-long decline in output.'
Banning gas boilers for new homes, which is an option the government is still examining, would have further benefits, according to separate research that found it would make the UK the second biggest market in Europe for heat pumps, after France. This could kickstart higher growth in the sector and spur more boiler manufacturers based in the UK to boost their heat pump businesses.
The MCS Foundation, a charity that certifies low-carbon technology, said the UK at present installed the lowest number of heat pumps per household in Europe. But if incoming standards on new homes were to require heat pumps, sales could quadruple from 100,000 a year to about 400,000, generating skilled jobs in manufacturing and installation.
However, Neil Jefferson, the chief executive of the Home Builders Federation, rejected the findings of the ECIU analysis. He said: '[The findings are] based on totally incorrect assumptions about the policy timeline, and the suggested savings are as a result completely wrong. New-build homes have become increasingly more energy efficient and now save owners thousands of pounds in energy bills compared with older homes. Significant progress continues to be made, with implementation timetables reflecting the complex requirements, rate that technologies develop and need to develop supply chains.'
The zero-carbon homes standard was first set out under the last Labour government in 2006, and housebuilders were given a decade to prepare before enforcement that was to be implemented from 2016. But under fierce lobbying from housebuilders, those regulations were scrapped under David Cameron in 2015, and nothing has since been put in place to replace them.
The last government started work on a 'future homes standard', but it was delayed several times. Energy efficiency standards for new homes were made more stringent from June 2022.
Labour is now planning to publish a revised regulation later this year to apply to the 1.5m homes the government has pledged to ensure are built by mid-2029, but campaigners and experts are worried that it will be weakened in response to housebuilder lobbying, and that it may not include heat pumps and battery storage, or rules for an adequate number of solar panels.
The government has also given way on wood-burning stoves, which will now be allowed in new homes, despite findings that even the government-approved 'eco design' stove standard results in high levels of air pollution.
A spokesperson for the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government said: 'The future homes standard will be published later this year, and will provide the country with homes that are future-proofed, with low carbon heating and high levels of energy efficiency. This will reduce reliance on fossil fuels and cut energy bills for consumers.'
The 1.35m homes built to poor standards since 2016 will eventually have to be refurbished to meet low-carbon standards at an estimated cost of about £20,000 per household.
The Conservative party derived about a tenth of its donations from housebuilding and property development companies from 2010 to mid-2023, according to analysis by the Guardian.
An 'uplift' to energy efficiency was made in the building regulations for England and Wales in 2022, requiring higher standards of insulation. The ECIU took this into account in its estimates. Only about 5% of new homes built in the UK last year were fitted with heat pumps, despite these being much cheaper to install during construction than to retrofit. Only about 13% of newly built homes were fitted with solar panels in 2023, and campaigners warn that some homes are being fitted with an inadequate small number of panels.
Work by the Royal Town Planning Institute has also shown that new homes are not being well served by public transport, and that only about half of the 'nature enhancement' measures supposed to be a condition of new developments – such as new trees, bird and bat boxes, hedgehog highways and invertebrate boxes – were implemented for new homes in England.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

UK MPs call for ban on bottom trawling in protected marine areas
UK MPs call for ban on bottom trawling in protected marine areas

The Guardian

time10 minutes ago

  • The Guardian

UK MPs call for ban on bottom trawling in protected marine areas

Ministers must ban bottom trawling for fish in marine protected areas, an influential group of MPs has said, because the destructive practice is devastating the seabed and marine life. The UK parliament's environmental audit committee called for a ban to encompass dredging and mining as well as the bottom trawling of fish in the 900,000 sq km covered by nearly 180 marine protected areas. Despite the name, these areas are open for many sorts of fishing, including bottom trawling – the practice of dragging immense and heavy nets across the seabed to scoop up all in their path, most of which is discarded while prized fish such as sole, cod and haddock are kept. 'Bottom trawling and scallop dredging are the most damaging forms of fishing,' said Jonny Hughes, senior policy manager at the Blue Marine Foundation thinktank and charity. 'They devastate the seabed and have amongst the highest rates of bycatch of any fishing method – most of this is simply thrown away. It is absurd and misleading to call any part of the ocean that allows these activities protected.' Campaigners have been calling for years for a ban, but public outcry has intensified since a film by Sir David Attenborough was released last month, to coincide with his 99th birthday. The film, Ocean – which was released in cinemas and will be available on streaming services in June – showed in detail some of the vital habitats raked by the massive nets that in effect plough up the seabed, leaving deep scars where it can take many years for marine life to recover. Toby Perkins, the chair of the Commons committee, said: 'Ministers must ensure that marine protected areas live up to their name. [They] have all the information they need to press ahead with banning bottom trawling in the offshore protected areas where it presents the most risk. Why the delay? Our oceans cannot afford any more prevarication. It is time to act.' The UK will send representatives to a UN oceans conference later this month. Ministers have previously indicated they could take action, and there are protections in place against damaging fishing practices in about 60% of the current marine protected areas but no full ban has yet been brought in. A spokesperson for the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs said: 'Our precious marine animals and habitats have been under threat for too long. This government is committed to protecting and restoring our oceans to good health.'

Survey of Labour Muslim MPs shows extent of disquiet over Gaza stance
Survey of Labour Muslim MPs shows extent of disquiet over Gaza stance

The Guardian

time10 minutes ago

  • The Guardian

Survey of Labour Muslim MPs shows extent of disquiet over Gaza stance

Labour is facing calls for action from a large group of its Muslim MPs, councillors and mayors, who believe Keir Starmer is mishandling the crisis in Gaza. In the first-ever survey of the party's Muslim representatives, 77% of respondents said they believed the government should end all UK arms exports to Israel and 84% supported sanctions against the Israeli government, the Labour Muslim Network (LMN) said. Nearly all respondents – 97% – said they supported the immediate recognition of the state of Palestine. The results are based on an online questionnaire circulated by the LMN between 2 April and 16 May. There were 221 respondents out of 477 eligible Labour Muslim MPs, councillors and elected mayors. The findings lay bare the political difficulties the government faces over its response to the war between Israel and Hamas and the continuing humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza. Starmer told the Commons on Wednesday that Gaza was facing 'dark days' and he vowed to consider 'further action'. Last month the government suspended free trade talks with Israel and hit West Bank settlers with sanctions. Ministers have come under pressure to recognise Palestine as a state jointly with France this month. More than 140 UN countries including Spain, Ireland and Norway recognise the Palestinian state, but the UK doing so would be of major significance given that the region was under British control until 1948. Labour committed in its manifesto to recognising a Palestinian state as part of a peace process resulting in a two-state solution. The government has also been considering imposing sanctions against two hard-right Israeli ministers, Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir. The third lever that ministers have at their disposal is the export of arms to Israel, although according to government figures less than 1% of Israel's defence imports come from the UK. In the autumn, David Lammy, the foreign secretary, suspended 30 arms export licenses, from a total of 350. Campaigners and charities have launched a judicial review over allegations that the government acted unlawfully in continuing to sell F-35 parts and components to a global pool, when some of those components might be used by Israel in Gaza in a way that the government regards as a breach of international law. Labour MPs on the left of the party called for stronger action in the Commons on Wednesday. Hamish Falconer, the minister for the Middle East, said Israel's newly introduced measures for aid delivery in Gaza were 'inhumane, foster desperation and endanger civilians'. He said: 'We are appalled by repeated reports of mass casualty incidents in which Palestinians have been killed when trying to access aid sites in Gaza. Desperate civilians who have endured 20 months of war should never face the risk of death or injury to simply feed themselves and their families. We call for an immediate and independent investigation into these events for the perpetrators to be held to account.' In March, Lammy told the Commons he believed Israel had broken international law by blocking aid to Gaza, but a day later he was contradicted by Downing Street. The war in Gaza cost Labour votes in areas with large Muslim communities in the election last summer, particularly after an LBC interview in which Starmer appeared to say Israel had the right to withhold water and electricity in Gaza. Sign up to First Edition Our morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters after newsletter promotion Pro-Gaza independents defeated Labour candidates in Dewsbury and Batley, Blackburn, Birmingham Perry Barr and Leicester South and came close in several other constituencies, including Wes Streeting's Ilford North. The LMN survey found that 58% of Labour Muslim representatives thought the government had represented British Muslims badly so far. The results also recorded dissatisfaction with the Labour party, with 66% of those surveyed saying they did not believe Muslim representatives were treated equally compared with others in the party. A third of Muslim Labour representatives said they had directly experienced Islamophobia and more than half said they did not believe the party took Islamophobia seriously. A spokesperson for the LMN said its report was a 'call to action' for 'a renewed commitment to Muslim representation, rooted in equality and justice'. 'Our Labour party cannot credibly claim to be an anti-racist movement while ignoring the testimonies and experiences of its own Muslim elected officials,' they said. A Labour party spokesperson said: 'The Labour party is proud of the diversity of our party, including the increase in the number of Muslim MPs in the parliamentary Labour party and having the first Muslim lord chancellor in Shabana Mahmood, and the first Muslim mayor of London in Sadiq Khan. 'We are the party of equality and we take any complaints of discrimination, including Islamophobia, seriously. All complaints are assessed in line with our complaints policies and procedures through our independent complaints system.'

Why is defence such a hard sell? The same reason Starmer is struggling in the polls
Why is defence such a hard sell? The same reason Starmer is struggling in the polls

The Guardian

time10 minutes ago

  • The Guardian

Why is defence such a hard sell? The same reason Starmer is struggling in the polls

Defence reviews and foreign policy resets seem to turn up almost as often as the Sussexes' lifestyle brand relaunches these days. Labour's strategic defence review this week comes less than two years after the Conservatives' hardly less detailed defence white paper in July 2023, which in turn was a 'refresh' of Boris Johnson's ambitious integrated review of defence and foreign policy of March 2021. By this measure, it must be doubtful if, come the 2030s, analysts will look back on Keir Starmer and John Healey's review and say it broke the mould. The Labour government was entitled to try to put its own stamp on defence policy, of course, and its review team of George Robertson, Richard Barrons and Fiona Hill did a good, reasonably independent job. Yet this 2020s pattern of repeated strategic adaptation and refocus feels like the new normal now. It is also true that grand strategy does not often survive prolonged contact with the real world. In wartime, as the US general, later president, Dwight Eisenhower once put it, plans are useless but planning is essential. Today, though, war is no longer an academic possibility. So defence policy must adapt afresh, and at pace. Labour's defence review does not always do this convincingly. Most of the imperatives and innovations of the day revolve around resisting the threat from Russia and adapting to the new weaponry of the drone and cyber age. At times, though, this is hard to reconcile with the review's dogged assumption that the transatlantic alliance will remain the bedrock of that resistance. Johnson's 2021 review aimed to recast British foreign policy in the light of Brexit. In some ways, like Johnson's delusional British tilt towards Asia, it represents a worldview that has gone with the wind. In others, especially on Russia, it describes a conflict that still confronts Starmer today. Yet Johnson's review came out as Covid was starting to upend the global economy and before Russia invaded Ukraine. The 2023 refresh took those newer convulsions on board but could not, in its turn, know about the most recent disruption: Donald Trump's return. It is pathetic and shameful that Trump's name does not appear once throughout the new defence review's 140 pages. Its absence reflects Labour's – and London's – bred-in-the-bone fear of offending the US president. Even so, it cannot disguise that this is a defence review for Britain in an age of greater US isolationism. Trump's unreliability and his administration's manifest contempt for Europe cast a long shadow over the whole document and over the government's determination, even in the context of next week's Whitehall spending review, to prioritise defence in line with Nato urgings. Since history never stops, this week's review may itself soon look out of date. Events may grab hold of the steering wheel at any time. China may invade Taiwan, for example, or Russia turn up the heat in the Baltic or against Moldova. Iran may finally test a nuclear weapon. Trump may annex Greenland. Even the ending of the Ukraine war, not just its continuation as before, would necessitate a big course correction and reshifting of priorities for British policy too. If there is a thread running through the document, it is that 21st-century Britain is a big, but not a global power, whose security priority lies in Europe, not elsewhere. The overriding goals for British defence policy are thus, as always, to defend the nation against direct threats, and to make the necessary contribution to the maintenance of peace, freedom and commerce on the European continent. Brexit did not change that. But it was a dramatic illustration of how easy it is to delude a nation that there are magic answers to grindingly difficult problems. It is a mistake, however, to seek blind refuge in the belief that the world has always been a conflicted and messy place, and therefore to assume that 2025 is merely another unfortunate iteration of it. This may indeed be true in a very long view sense. But it does not adequately explain why 21st century governments in many liberal democracies – not least in Britain – struggle to mobilise national support to bring about almost any big and effective change, not just in defence policy but domestically. It is not enough to blame Russia alone for the suffering in Ukraine, or to denounce the United States uniquely for turning its back on European security – even though both are hugely culpable. Part of the problem also lies closer to home. The issue is that while the liberal democratic nation state is the only meaningful game in town, it is no longer delivering what it once seemed uniquely capable of providing for its people. The run-down of defence following the end of the cold war is merely one example of this widely felt failure, albeit an important one. One can select others from most areas of national life. They range from not embracing the digital revolution sufficiently to help rebuild British industry and education, through the failure to prioritise the care of an increasingly ageing population and the cynical depletion of parts of the welfare state, to the shameful pollution of rivers and lakes, the disdain for localism and the wilful neglect of national culture. The results of this are inescapably wounding to politics itself. The most striking thing that has happened in the last 11 months is that Labour has managed to turn an election victory into what looks increasingly likely to be an election defeat when the time comes. Why has this happened? Not because Starmer and his ministers are bad people, or because they have bad values or even bad policies. Certainly not because voters want the Conservatives back. It has happened because liberal democratic governments are no longer able to command the necessary sustained public confidence, even through rocky times, to deliver what people once instinctively looked to them for. That was true of the defence review this week, which was launched on to a sea of scepticism about Labour's ability to pay for its plans. It will be even more true of the spending review in a few days' time. The strands that once meaningfully bound people together within a shared national framework are weaker now. They may not be irreparable. But repairing them requires a lot of humility as well as much determination and a sprinkling of genius. There are no quick answers and it is a massively hard task. Martin Kettle is a Guardian columnist

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store