Only 2% of the 7.9m homes in Britain with solid walls have had them insulated. What stops people from taking up the offer of this highly effective measure and how can it transform the lives of those struggling to keep warm?

With Energy Company Obligation (ECO) subsidies and the Green Deal making solid wall insulation more affordable for households, it is important to look into factors that might dissuade people from taking up the offer. For example it is widely thought that the perception of the disruption caused by having this work done might be a major factor in putting people off.

This project, funded by the eaga Charitable Trust, provided a qualitative evaluation of householder experience, before, during and after installation of solid wall insulation. The 11 households studied took part in a pilot solid wall insulation scheme called ‘Freedom From Fuel Poverty’ which was funded by Bath & North East Somerset Council and ran from August 2009 to December 2010. This project built on the pilot study aiming to find out:

• How disruptive solid wall insulation installation really is to householders.
• How solid wall insulation transforms people’s behaviour in terms of keeping warm.
• The self-reported impact of solid wall insulation upon energy savings and house warmth.

Coping with the cold

The project began by exploring the ways in which people try to stay warm in cold and difficult to heat solid walled property. We found numerous strategies including not using several rooms of their houses, warming the body rather than the space and going to bed early. In one extreme case, someone stayed out of their home altogether as much as possible, finding it so expensive to keep the house warm.

The impact of insulation

The impacts of the measure were profound, immediately affecting all aspects of comfort and lifestyle. After solid wall insulation, all households noticed changes to their comfort and lifestyle. Homes were described as ‘warming up more quickly’, and ‘holding the heat’ for longer. Behaviours also changed significantly, with people reporting using the whole house, including rooms they used to avoid, and spending more time at home.

Some of the householders in the study had heated their home to comfortable levels before solid wall insulation. Amongst this group those with thermostatically controlled heating systems reported turning down the heating after installation.

This is a puzzling finding: why should the same thermostatically controlled air temperature become experienced as uncomfortably warm following the installation of the solid wall measure? On reflection it shows that comfort is determined by more than just air temperature; the solid wall insulation removed cold spots, reduced convection currents and drafts, and increased the temperature of walls.

All of this should result in energy savings as well as making the house much more comfortable.

Other homes had been deliberately under-heated to save money. The impact of solid wall insulation on these householders was more likely to be an increased level of comfort rather than a saving on energy bills. This has implications for Green Deal policy – the latter type of household will benefit from an improved standard of living but may not directly save money after solid wall insulation.

Other benefits reported by householders included:

• Improved health – fewer coughs and colds. 
• Quieter homes – less able to hear traffic noise from outside.
• Cooler indoors in the summer – which may reduce the use of fans etc. resulting in small energy savings.
• Big improvement in the house’s appearance – solid wall insulation gives the external or internal walls of the house a ‘facelift’. This aspect was largely unanticipated and was particularly praised.

Therefore, unlike many invisible efficiency measures, solid wall insulation  lends itself to being marketed as a ‘home improvement’. All of these benefits should be communicated to householders and considered when designing solid wall insulation schemes.

Was solid wall insulation as disruptive as people feared?

The 11 householders reported that they were all prepared for some level of disruption during installation, and the actual disruption caused fell within their expectations. In short, apart from some ‘mess’ left by contractors and a desire for better onsite management in some cases, having SWI installed was not as disruptive as people had feared. Any disruption caused was considered to be worth it for the benefits their new insulation delivered. If this is properly communicated, more households may be willing to invest in solid wall insulation.

Offering high levels of grants for solid wall insulation seemed to lead to many householders growing suspicious and thinking the offer must be ‘too good to be true’. The most successful marketing technique proved to be a doorstep flyer drop by a B&NES council officer, which added credibility and directness. People seeing the work being carried out on neighbouring properties was also key to uptake.

Was it a positive experience?

In the main, this qualitative study found uniformly positive attitudes to both the experience of installing solid wall insulation and its subsequent impacts on comfort and lifestyle. All but one of the householders in this pilot study said they would recommend solid wall insulation to others. If marketed appropriately, this type of home improvement has the potential to benefit many people living in fuel poverty.