To think low take up of heat pump grants is due to more than just poor advertising.

[overitt]

There's a BBC story today about low take-up of the £5k grants available for heat pump installation: www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-64710225. The criticism focuses on poor marketingnof the scheme and difficulties in funding installers, both of which are true. But I think there's more to it than that. I managed to find a potential local installer and had a telephone conversation with him. He told me about the size of the pump, the restrictions on where it could be installed in relation to neighbouring properties, and the internal infrastructure that would be needed. The picture on the BBC article illustrates it well. I would need to rebuild my kitchen to accommodate it. He also said that for the system to work effectively I would need to install interior or exterior wall insulation on my solid brick house, plus either underfloor heating or bigger radiators in all the rooms. All of thus would cost many £££££. The installer told me that for these reasons he was mostly installing heat pumps in new build homes or complete refurbishments.

Aibu to think these factors are probably a much bigger part of the reason why the scheme has low take-up than "poor advertising"?

Yep. Is despicable. They cost more to install so it would be less profitable for them.

It doesn't "heat your home". It heats the stagnant air that is trapped inside your sealed box of a home.

These will be responsible for a huge increase in chest infections and other diseases. Twenty years from now people will be discussing WHY they were told to get them, and looking for someone to blame.

We have windows and doors, both of which function well. Even in the depths of winter we have some of the window vents open.

Well insulated does not equal stagnant perma-sealed box.

I mean technically all heating actually heats the air...

We've had a heat pump in for a year.
We've not put in any further insulation or new radiators. No new pipes or windows.
They replaced the water tank so ideally you have an airing cupboard if not that would take space.
The heat pump is exactly where the boiler was but on the outside of the wall so we gained a cupboard inside.
It works, we were warm over winter.
We have solar panels and with those over the whole year it's cheaper (not accounting for the set up costs but the boiler needed replacing). It does appear expensive in the winter but we rarely pay to heat the water over summer so it balances out.
I think the issues are-
Lack of suitable outdoor space in most houses.
Internal pipes not suitable in lots of houses.
No space for a water tank in many houses.
Houses not insulated well enough.
But I think a major problem is company's overselling. They tell you you need new radiator's etc that just aren't necessary. It puts people off and the prices up.
Another issue is cowboys who don't set them up to work efficiently and they are more expensive to run than they need to be.

I would add if anyone's considering getting one think about child proofing it. Little fingers could get in. We've put a trellis round ours but can't put plants up them because it needs a clear air flow.

I always wonder if I live on a different planet when I see threads like this. I lived in a quite big house in Sweden for 10 years. It had been retro fitted with a heat pump (originally an oil boiler). No change to the original radiators and certainly not super insulated.

This worked fine. We had winters where the temperature was minus 20. Once in February, so still proper winter, there was a problem with the regulator which meant it was stuck on max for a while. The temperature in the house was 27 for a couple of days.

The one issue was ensuring the water created by the pump was deposited away from the foundations.

Nail on the head there. It's exactly what we've done over the years. Replaced all windows with the highest efficiency rated ones, replaced plastic/pvc conservatory roof with high efficiency glass. Replaced all external doors with high efficiency rated ones. Cavity wall insulation, loft insulation. Finally a modern, energy efficient boiler with plenty of thermostats. That's more than enough for us and our energy use is a lot less than it used to be.

This thread is hilarious! There's so much misinformation - "oh my mate's brother says they're not as warm as a boiler" - total rubbish. Where I live it's regularly -15 in the winter and my heat pumps still blow hot air. Not to mention that when it's 30 degrees outside in the summer (like today) they also keep the house lovely and cool.

It's a real shame because the UK has a literal perfect climate for air source heat pumps - rarely ever below -10 or above 30 - yet many people are stuck in old ways of thinking.

I totally agree older UK houses are not well suited for heat pumps, but new builds should definitely be using them and reduce the reliance on fossil fuels. It's far more efficient to burn gas to generate electricity than it is to burn gas in a boiler for heating. Generating your own electricity for free with solar is just the icing on the cake.

Future Homes Standard (FHS) will become mandatory for new developments. I agree with everyone here that the barriers to uptake are a huge problem, cost, disruption e.t.c

You don't need to be Passivhaus standards to get full benefits but I understand the running costs with electricity aren't great (solar PV isn't an option for two many) however the efficiency of it compared to gas is really significant.

Its so frustrating that something we are all going to have to eventually move too is so inaccessible to so many, but as they say about planting trees today..its too late we should have done it 50yrs ago.

Please be open minded, incentives are needed legislation changes are needed to make it work, tariffs to make electricity cheaper. I blame this government entirely for not taking it seriously, driving innovation, tax incentives to retrofit VAT exemption, stamp duty exemption, green mortgages should be cheaper than normal mortgages, inheritance tax exemption on greener homes.

Look where we are now, unable to actually install the right thing, unable to see its value even though it is the right thing. We are at a tipping point and need to swing quickly. We cannot shut the door on it, but have to try and figure this out quickly!

Honestly, I suspected this On its website WPR said it aimed to “spark outrage” around heat pumps. This wording, along with other phrases, has since been altered to read “spark conversations” following a request for comment on this article from DeSmog.

https://www.desmog.com/2023/07/20/revealed-media-blitz-against-heat-pumps-funded-by-gas-lobby-group/ (https://www.desmog.com/2023/07/20/revealed-media-blitz-against-heat-pumps-funded-by-gas-lobby-group/)

Looks like conversations have been succesfully started. Good to see this on the BBC News app today.

BBC News - The truth about heat pumps and the power needed to run them
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-66359093

They won't ever force people onto heat pumps without altering the cost differential between mains electricity and mains gas. The cost of the installation isn't reflected in the energy saving.

Which is why you can subtly see it referenced in that article - electricity is 3x the cost of gas and the undercurrent is we need to do something about this.

And when they apply that tax, either a boiler tax or a tax on usage as usual it will be the poor that suffer the most, exactly like the ULEZ.

I have never heard of a heat pump, no idea what it is...let alone a grant, so maybe it is an advertising issue.

We have more time to get these changes in place, whether tariffs on gas, we need considerable more financial incentives such as lower interest green mortgages, VAT free on retrofitting our homes, no inheritance tax, stamp duty on more energy efficient homes. But we also need to stop seeing it entirely as return on investment, its a false narrative a bit like buying an electric car