The Green Entrepreneur

Let's give the UK the close shave it needs

You may remember Victor Kiam, the US entrepreneur of television fame who “liked the product so much he bought the company”.  In fact he bought the Remington Shaver Company out of collapse and turned what was a $30m dollar loss into a $47m profit.  Now, isn’t that what our chancellor is currently trying to do? Turn a huge loss into a profit?  But Victor’s motto was somewhat different to our Government’s: Blood, sweat and a 50% bonus if you win.  What we are getting from our Government is a soft, overcomplicated and frankly ineffective approach to energy policy and the wider economy.

I guess you’ve all heard the expression, ‘the simplest strategy is usually the best’. This is an idea which has its roots as far back as Aristotle and has been applied to all manner of human endeavour for centuries, including developing the scientific method, politics, religion and business. I would encourage you to read more about Occam’s Razor and the KISS principle of design for some good examples of this approach.

However, this approach seems to be distinctly lacking in our government and public sector.  Our current energy policy is a mess of overcomplicated, EU imposed regulations that stifle innovations in the energy efficiency sector, ignoring simple approaches that could actually help the UK, whilst promoting a “carbon savings” policy that only really benefits the energy companies and the sales of less than efficient consumer energy products.

Head of BusinessEurope Markus Beyrer recently said that the EU “doesn’t have an energy policy. It has a climate policy”. This is something I wholeheartedly agree with, and it seems that the longer the EU (and therefore the UK) continue this approach the further behind the US we will slide.

The simplest answer is usually true, and this applies to our energy policy. We do not need to promote costly, complex policies and technologies, as we are currently doing with our renewables-centric, carbon saving policy. Instead we should look to simple, proven strategies such as improving energy efficiency of our current infrastructure, and reducing our energy usage. There is a tendency for societies and even humanity at large to seek out complex, flashy answers to problems, to be seen as a success and making progress, when the boring, simple or even ugly solution is actually the best option.

Going back to the Occam’s Razor principle, I like to think that Victor Kaim’s success represents a more modern approach to the razor; “the closest shave you can get, or your money back”.  So what is Victor’s razor?  Well, you can think of it as the nearest statement to truth that can be pared down to its absolute minimum, and what Professor Robert Winston calls ‘tat for tit’, that is, how we can better separate fiction from fact.  So often in our society, subjective conclusions, for example, what the Government might want us to believe, are presented as objective truth, especially when collectively it suits those in charge to accept it as such. Take DECC’s recent announcement as an example. They have stated that Green policies will put bills up £280 in the short term, but bring them down by £450 in 2020. To me this seems like a self-congratulatory statement, one which they cannot claim with any certainty and which goes against the reality that rising energy bills are linked primarily to our failing climate policy, rather than global gas prices, and others agree.

From a human perspective, empirical objectivity is always applied subjectively. As in Heisenberg’s principle of uncertainty, we can choose to know what we know only to a degree of certainty, and there is always a balance to be struck.  As I described earlier, humans often take the optimistic view, especially when it comes to wanting to ‘cross the bridge’ and appear a success. Subjectivity enables us to present the multi faceted dimensions required of objective problem solving into a single dimension so as to help us come to a conclusion, this is what Victor’s Razor really is, the ability to reduce uncertainty, the subjective application of objectivity.

Personally, when I hear the government tell us how well we’re meeting this target or the next I can only ask myself what do they really know?

When putting our current Climate Change policies to the measure of this Victor’s razor principle, it may surprise you to find the extent of the distortions applied through subjective meddling. Our current policy focuses our attention not on the matter of reducing the impact of Climate Change through reduced energy consumption but rather ‘carbon savings’ that are deemed through the sale of products.  Money lies at the heart of our purchase led economy and its influence is often used to present the subjective as an objective truth as in the case of short-term political will.

Given that there is a total lack of objectivity in Climate change policies, and the political establishment is locked in a spiral of subjective policies that are designed to fool, rather than fix, then I think it’s about time we got out Victor’s razor and gave the UK the close shave it needs.

80% more people die in winter in the UK than in Germany. Why is this?

Following the recent shocking headlines of over 1000 preventable deaths occurring at Stafford hospital, I had a thought. Whilst of course any loss of life is tragic, the number of deaths involved in this scandal pale in comparison to the 24,000 excess winter deaths the UK faced last winter. Yet, this massive figure seems to be somewhat ignored by the media, MPs, and most importantly Government legislation, in favour of perhaps more “interesting” or, dare I say newsworthy stories.

You could argue that increased deaths in winter are unavoidable, and it is true that death rates do rise in winter for a majority of developed nations. However, the UK (with its average of 18% more deaths) is lagging substantially behind much of Europe, and this is even when compared to countries with similar or even colder climates than ours such as Germany and Finland (average of 10% more deaths).

Therefore, UK Citizens who are currently at risk from the cold weather are nearly twice as likely to die as our European neighbours.

Given that a minimum of 10% of winter deaths can be directly attributed to fuel poverty (DECC’s Hill Report, 2011), tackling fuel poverty is clearly vital in reducing needless winter deaths, improving the living situation for millions of vulnerable people in the UK (1.6 million children are now in fuel poverty), and helping the country to address the spiralling domestic energy market.

Improving the energy efficiency of UK homes strikes me as perhaps the best way for us to do this, particularly in the short term, when we need simple, low cost options to help stabilise the situation, which in light of soaring energy prices, looks like it will only get worse. Improved energy efficiency will ensure fewer people die as a result of being unable to heat his or her home, a fate that no UK citizen should face.

This is not to mention the wider economic benefits that improving energy efficiency will have for the UK. Housing benefit currently represents the highest portion of UK benefit spending, at around 16%. By improving the environmental and financial sustainability of our current housing stock, we can provide substantial savings for the UK welfare bill. Furthermore, supporting energy efficiency will improve the UK’s balance of trade and improve our debt situation, particularly important in light of our recent credit rating downgrade. If we reduce the amount of energy we use and therefore need to import, and also increase our exports (as we can export our energy efficient technologies and expertise around the world), the effect on the UK economy could be profound.

Our economy, social wellbeing and environment are all interconnected. By making even one small change, such as improving the energy efficiency of UK homes, we can have a positive knock on effect on the whole nation.

One such action that we can take as individuals is to pressure our local MPs, and let them know we care. Early Day Motion 841: Energy Efficiency and Reduction of Energy Costs bill, currently doing the rounds amongst MPs, represents a clear step forward for the government in addressing this issue, and needs further support.

Currently only 1 in 5 MPs has signed the motion, and you have to ask yourself why this figure is so low. To my mind there is simply no reason not to support the bill. Is it that MPs don’t know about it? Do they not think fuel poverty is an issue worth addressing? Or do they just simply not care? I would urge readers to contact your MP and let them know they should not be ignoring this issue. The more signatures the bill receives, the more likely it is to be debated at the House of Commons and hopefully enter the political agenda, to the benefit of the UK and it’s vulnerable citizens.

The full list of MPs who have signed the motion is available here. Please, write to your MP if they haven’t signed and let them know they need to take note, to support fuel poverty reduction and help their constituents, and the wider UK. After all, it’s now a matter of life and death.

Back in 2011, David Cameron vowed to “get Britain building”. This has been supported with a variety of schemes, most recently the Green Deal and the Government backed online self-build portal. However, the UK now has the oldest housing stock in the developed world, with 8.5 million properties over 60 years old, and with the current energy pressure the UK is facing, there is more that can be done. Self-build, both in building new homes and refurbishment of our existing ones, has a key role to play in ensuring the UK housing stock is able to adapt to future changes in the global energy situation.

Currently there are around 100,000 new homes built in the UK every year. There are many factors that motivate people to build their own home; the cost is generally much less than buying an existing home, and you have better control over the location and design of your property. However, what I wish to focus on are the benefits self-build can provide for the UK energy sector and environment as a whole.

The key advantage of a new build from an energy perspective is that you are not constrained by a pre-existing physical structure, heating system, or even energy source. As such, there is the opportunity to utilise innovative technologies and ensure improved energy efficiency for your building, and a lower lifetime cost for your home heating. The benefits of this are clear to see. With energy costs rising every year, and 5 million UK homes now in fuel poverty, improving energy efficiency in any scenario represents a way for the UK to tackle its energy issues and achieve short and long-term stability.

In fact, newly built homes often lead the way in energy efficient design. According to the British Building and Social Housing Foundation, “low-energy self-build houses are among the best national examples of environmentally sound building, with high NHER (National Home Energy Rating) scores of 9 or 10 (out of 10”.

However whilst the benefits of building a new home are all well and good, it is clearly not an option for a majority of current homeowners. For the UK to make real progress towards future energy use and emissions targets, existing homes will need improvements. Fortunately, self-build is not limited to new homes. The refurb sector represents a considerable opportunity for the UK to improve the energy efficiency of our domestic buildings through a variety of self-build projects.

Incorporating simple, new or retrofitted energy efficiency measures into our existing homes, such as heating insulation, super condensing gas boilers with flue gas heat recovery, or new lighting controls are a means for the UK to tackle it’s energy problems and save money. Self-build projects and home renovations do not have to be complicated, long-term projects; the nature of self-build means you can tailor a project to your needs and situation, something as simply as upgrading your boiler will be of great benefit. Furthermore, the Government’s Green Deal, despite its much publicised problems and perhaps misguided approach, has the key issues of promoting energy efficiency at it’s heart, and I believe will eventually benefit UK consumers. The improvement of domestic energy efficiency also ensures you will be financially rewarded from any project you undertake, especially with rising energy costs projected for the future.

It is clear that the potential that self-build represents for the UK economy and energy landscape cannot be ignored. Both new and existing homes can benefit from a range of self-build improvements, and the Government clearly knows this, having acted to promote adoption of this approach, through the Green Deal, CERT and other funding. Whilst there are problems with their methods, the positive intent is there. It is up to us, the public, to take advantage of this, and ensure our homes can be as energy efficient as possible. This will benefit not only ourselves as homeowners, but also the UK and Government as a whole.

For those interested in finding out more about Self-Build or the issues surrounding an energy efficient renovation, and the use of innovative energy saving products, I would recommend you check out the National Self Build and Renovation Centre (http://www.nsbrc.co.uk/). They are a non-profit, community interest company and a great resource for anyone looking for advice and support on all aspects of self-build. They also have an upcoming free event The National Self Build and Renovation Show running from the 12^th – 14^th April 2013 (9:30am – 5pm).

Across the three days you will have the opportunity to attend seminars, listen to educational talks, visit example life size houses, take informative audio tours and meet a raft of experts – all on hand to answer any questions.

Advanced registration is recommended and the website will also provide more details on each day’s programme.

Households forced to fund £7.6b ‘green’ levy and no end to fuel poverty in sight

Over a week later and I am still stunned, bemused and concerned by the Government’s so-called energy policies. It was always my understanding that a Government is elected by the people to look after the good of the people in a socialist society, but recent announcements are forcing me to rethink my view. The ‘green’ levy, for example, is a case in point; how can the Government justify the introduction of additional taxes which will push households’ fuel bills up still higher?

The bill has been presented as an attempt to encourage investment in low-carbon power production. Funding will come from the levy which will rise from £3bn to £7.6bn a year by 2020 to support nuclear and renewable energy production. The big, energy-intensive companies may be exempt from any additional charge, however, because that might slow down progress. Instead, it’s the consumer who’ll bear the brunt, with energy companies licensed to increase household bills by about £100 a year on average by 2020. Sorry, but I fail to see the logic in this. Has the Government chosen to forget the very real problem that is fuel poverty, or its responsibilities and obligations to the whole of society?

In case anyone needs reminding, there are now reportedly one in four households in England and Wales in fuel poverty, who will be forced this winter to choose between heat and food. The Government has a statutory duty to eliminate fuel poverty by 2016, yet the number affected has risen this year to over 5m households in England alone, all spending 10% or more of their income on warmth and light. Earlier in the year, rather than putting pressure on the energy firms or promoting affordable energy efficient measures that would greatly reduce fuel bills, the DECC instead proposed adopting a new definition of fuel poverty that would conveniently halve the number of households defined as being in fuel poverty. Isn’t that called massaging the figures – and isn’t that the same approach they took to tackling unemployment? And now, as temperatures drop sharply and the long winter and its associated hefty fuel bills lie ahead of us, the Government chooses to announce its new system of taxes upon taxes that yet again will hit hardest the most vulnerable in our society.

What vexes me most is that there are simple ways to help families cope with winter fuel bills – and that approach is called energy efficiency. My company is just one British organisation that has been designing energy efficient heating solutions for years in the knowledge that energy efficiency is the cost-effective, affordable route to energy savings. It’s the practical, pragmatic approach that will bring important savings fast. Take the boiler as an example. Most homes still use a boiler to heat not just their homes but their water. If you were to add an energy saving device like the Zenex GasSaver to A-rated boilers, your now ‘super condensing’ boiler could also preheat the water for your washing machine or dishwasher. So, in real terms, for every kWh of energy saved through an energy efficiency measure like this, you reduce by around 5kWhs the need to generate the energy from a power station.

David Cameron talks of the need for entrepreneurs to take this country forward and assure us of a seat at the world table. Well, as far as energy efficiency is concerned, we already have world-leading, ground-breaking British technology that brings proven energy savings. What we don’t have is the Government’s support to make it mainstream.

What about the Green Deal, I hear you ask. Well, interestingly enough, there wasn’t a rush from householders to buy into this complicated scheme. Unsurprisingly, October’s shambolic attempt at a launch resulted in zero take up. Perhaps it was a deliberate fudge on the part of the Government, a deliberate ploy to go for a ‘soft launch’. After all, no one could describe the Green Deal as exactly well thought through. Worryingly, the Government seems no clearer as to how it should address the lack of interest its Green Deal has aroused, although it is keen to assure of the momentum it is building ahead of its full launch on 28 January and the taxpayers’ money it has put aside for publicity purposes.

As for the Government’s energy policies, Greg Barker spoke of the Energy Bill as “the most ambitious approach to demand reduction we’ve ever seen in the UK” but was there is a worrying absence of details as to how they will go about encouraging energy efficiency.

At the risk of repeating myself, the technology already exists to rescue the millions now in fuel poverty. It’s time for the Government to consult with the people who understand the industry. It’s time to support instead of block the entrepreneurs and innovators who, with Government support, can bring about real change. It’s time for Government to act in the interest of the whole of society.

After all, 2016 is not that far away.

On 25 October, at a reception hosted by Zenex Technologies in the Jubilee Room at the House of Commons, Greg Barker, Minister of State for Energy and Climate Change, John Hemming MP, fellow MPs and key figures in the energy industry showed their support both for John Hemming MP’s Family Justice (Transparency, Accountability and Cost of Living) Bill and for Passive Flue Gas Heat Recovery (PFGHR) technology as a means of achieving lower fuel bills without public subsidy, decarbonisation, and an end to fuel poverty.

The reception took place on the eve of the second reading of John Hemming’s Ballot Bill. The Family Justice Bill has three parts. Part 1 deals with transparency and accountability in connection with cases concerning children and proceedings in the Court of Protection; Part 2 contains other provisions relating to the administration of justice; and Part 3 deals with the cost of living and measures to achieve lower fuel bills.

Opening the event, John Hemming MP underlined the relevance of PFGHRD to his Bill.

“Families are at the heart of Government and politics. This technology is an important part of Family Justice, concerned as it is with families and the cost of living.”

As part of Family Justice, John Hemming MP is seeking the mandatory inclusion of PFGHRDs in new heating systems for greater energy efficiency and savings on energy bills.

Dave Sowden, Chief Executive of the Micropower Council, the second speaker of the evening, described the versatility and energy saving benefits of PFGHRDs.

“The Zenex GasSaver is a more cost-effective way of producing renewable energy and saving carbon than many things the Government is doing now to reduce energy and emissions,” commented Mr Sowden. “Tax payers and bill payers will save money. If the Government is serious about its ‘green’ policies, it should make PFGHRDs compulsory.”

Chris Farrell, MD of Zenex Technologies and inventor of the PFGHR device known as the Zenex GasSaver, spoke next of an urgent need to make current heating technology more efficient in order to remove the high percentage of UK households from fuel poverty and reduce the number of fuel poor. He called for strategies to be put in place for households regarding payment of winter fuel bills and for affordable heating without recourse to subsidies.

Referring to Tim Yeo MP’s paper on national security, Mr Farrell observed that energy efficiency could bring more output and capacity and, ultimately, sustainability to the nation. He claimed that PFGHRD, a British invention now recognised in Building Regulations and the Green Deal, could help bring wealth to the nation and re-establish its position as a leader amongst nations.

Recalling the Longitude Act of 1714 which offered a monetary award for anyone who could find a simple and practical method for the precise determination of a ship’s longitude, Mr Farrell threw down a gauntlet to the Government:

“The same policy is needed here and now – there should be an award for the first person to halve the winter gas bill with an affordable technology!”

In 2005 it became mandatory to fit only high efficiency condensing boilers in England and Wales. Passive Flue Gas Heat Recovery Devices (PFGHRDs) are a proven, cost-effective way to maximise still further the efficiency of condensing boilers to bring greater energy savings and lower fuel bills. PFGHRDs work by capturing recovered waste heat from condensing boiler flues to pre-heat the cold water supply for domestic hot water production. Fitting a PFGHRD to a boiler can bring gas savings of up to 40% for hot water generation in addition to significant water savings. PFGHRDs are recognised in Building Regulations, recommended by the Energy Saving Trust and Waterwise, and recognised in the Green Deal.

Mr Farrell described the GasSaver as a technology that frightened industry and legislators and the EC as it does not fit into any existing categories.

“The GasSaver can help reduce fuel poverty by affordably saving £1b currently wasted on consumer gas and water bills each year,” he said. “Those same gas savings could run the gas-fired power stations that are being built now.”

Drawing the evening to a close, John Hemming concluded:

“Not only does PFGHRD deliver savings on energy bills, it is a great way to compete globally as well.”

The Family Justice Bill had gained substantial cross party support but was voted down at the second reading highlighting concerns that MPs of all parties are not aware of the plight of millions of families who are looking to the leadership of the Government in helping them meet their daily responsibilities.

Mr Farrell commented:

“As the energy giants put up their prices one by one, it is blatantly clear that the Government needs to address the issue of fuel bills as a matter of urgency. We must urge our MPs to end this unnecessary waste of energy and bring about a much-needed reduction in gas bills. We need to bring focus to the needs of Family Justice.”

Fuel poverty hit the headlines again this week with This is Money amongst others reporting that the Government is seeking to change the definition of the key measure of ‘fuel poverty’. The number of ‘fuel poor’ households could rise to 8.1million by 2016, according to the DECC consultation document. Using the new measure for fuel poverty, this figure would be cut to 2.9million households.

Is this yet another example of the Government’s seeming inability to tackle the problem of fuel poverty head on? Rather than another attempt to massage the figures, why not do something practical, like doing away with harmful initiatives that are causing consumer heating bills to soar rather than fall. Energy labelling standards is a case in point.

NIBE heating system being removed from a Runcorn housing estate

A recent exposé by the BBC’s Rip-Off Britain series revealed how vulnerable residents on two UK housing developments saw their energy bills escalate as a result of the energy standards approved heating system in place.

According to the BBC report, the residents had been advised that energy bills would be lower due to the NIBE exhaust air source heat pump system in place, a renewable technology that works by pumping waste air back into the heating and hot water system.

The programme showed how residents across the two estates soon received energy bills four times the predicted amount which they struggled to pay. During the investigation, the manufacturers insisted that the blame lay not on the product but on poor specification, installation and usage.

The air source heat pump was backed by an Energy Performance Certificate. And there’s the rub. The energy labelling of this product had misled the housing associations as to its real life energy saving benefits in a new build development. The air source heat pump was insufficiently large to heat the houses, which meant that it needed to rely on the immersion heater backup to provide the heat. So instead of providing adequate energy efficient, affordable heating by itself, the heat pump system depended on the support of expensive electricity, hence the astronomically high bills. Rather than taking vulnerable residents out of fuel poverty, the energy standards approved heat pump was placing people in deeper financial difficulties. For one resident the situation became so severe that she was reduced to making a stark decision between buying food or keeping warm.

The question the BBC and we should be asking is, why bother creating an energy efficiency standard if the product will not be capable of operating to a high efficiency level in real life, real world situations? If the standard promotes idealised rather than real world efficiencies, then it’s of no benefit to the consumer; it’s skewed to work in the interest of the manufacturer. The silver spoon it appears to offer might well turn out to be wooden after all.

Back on the housing estates, the solution reached by one of the housing associations was to rip out the air source heat pumps and replace them with gas condensing boilers. Fuel bills went down immediately. The condensing boiler is a tried and tested heating solution. Fitting a boiler with a passive flue gas heat recovery device like the Zenex GasSaver reduces bills still further.

Yet from 2016, Government legislation will make it illegal to fit a gas boiler into a new build property. And many London boroughs in control of local authority district housing schemes are already blocking gas boilers in favour of air source heat pumps. According to Rip-off Britain, an estimated 15,000 of these systems have been fitted across the country to date, as developers seek to make new build developments ‘greener’ in line with Government targets.

Someone should advise them to watch Rip-off Britain as a matter of urgency.

The UK Government knows that energy labels are misleading the public. It’s not just heat pumps, but all manner of ‘renewable’ or low carbon products that on one hand achieve the highest energy efficiency rating, but on the other are penalised in UK Building Regulations for being, well, less efficient. How is the consumer or, for that matter, the professional employed in the building industry supposed to deal with this? It seems that as long as the Government keeps on subsidising and promoting these misleading positions then both the consumer and the industry will be virtually powerless to change tack.

Tackling the Government over these issues isn’t easy as the standard response is to state the fact that energy labels are the responsibility of European legislation. From my experience, the European Commission is more interested in claiming carbon savings than energy savings, conveniently focusing on idealised test standards that operate outside of the frame of reference for standard efficiency products or that of consumer needs.  Take for example gas boilers that under newly proposed European test standards Lot1, ERP, (Energy Related Products) will be tested at between 30 and 36°C when the boiler is at low gas/fan rates, effectively showing the boiler at its highest possible efficiency but not one that a consumer can benefit from. The inevitable result from this sort of situation is that the science of fact eventually creeps in, in this case, SAP (Standard Assessment Procedure) where currently A rated gas boilers are de-rated to band B and in reality should be a C. Perhaps this is a step too far for the Government and regulators to defend…

At some point there will need to be a correction, just as in the case of the recent GCSE exams. However, as we have seen, changing the marking system mid stream can be extremely unpopular with voters and the industry alike.

Consumers face real world experiences such as the conflict between the misleading energy labelling and unnecessarily high energy bills. Isn’t it time that the government took a serious look at what the European Commission is trying to impose on the UK?  Unless we get this sorted we will never be able to revert the course of rising fuel poverty.

Rather than changing the goal posts on fuel poverty to make the statistics look better, the Government should make a stand and address energy labelling standards as a matter of urgency, changing them to benefit consumers. And we too must act now and respond to the DECC consultation by 30 November.

It’s time to stop this UK Rip-off energy business now.

Is the Green Deal in trouble? Many questions remain about how it could help those in fuel poverty, and recent amendments to the deal are not helping the situation. The new ECO funding scheme means that only 41% of green deal money will be allocated to the fuel poor, and a lack of marketing and public awareness for the deal is a real concern – the DECC has recently cut its communications budget by 95%. However on a simpler level, the problem with the green deal is that the costs involved are unrealistic and unattractive to homeowners.

First of all, a 7.5% interest rate is simply too high. Will customers actually want to take out loans against their property at this rate? Someone taking out a £10,000 loan for efficiency improvements would have to repay at a rate of around £1000 a year for the next 20 years! With figures such as these, it would be better for homeowners to simply extend their mortgages and obtain cheaper finance than the Green Deal can provide.

However, homeowners are not doing this either. What are the reasons for this? Is it apathy? Or are there other factors? I would argue that many homeowners, particularly those in fuel poverty, do not have the confidence to take on any kind of debt, even if it is paid for through energy bills. And also, do consumers have faith in the government to prevent the energy giants from simply increasing energy prices, counteracting any decline in energy use? Recent examples show that this might not be the case!

Furthermore, there is the practicality of home efficiency improvements to consider. For example, solid wall insulation might cost circa £8000 and require you to move out of your home while the work is being done. Does this sort of disruption sound appealing to a person living in fuel poverty?

To me it appears that consumers view the deal as an argument of cost over confidence. The Green Deal is an example of Darwinian selection. That is, if the scheme is good for homeowners, they will do it, and vice versa. The consumer does not yet know ‘what is in it for them’. One thing is for sure; the Green Deal is not the great “unfair tax” giveaway that was feed in tariffs, which provided a 15% ROI, not a 7.5% cost!

Consumers are much more likely to engage in low cost, less disruptive measures to improve their home energy efficiency; those that offer relatively high savings and shorter payback periods. Using such measures, for example GasSaver products, will provide simple bolt on savings at a much more reasonable rate for those in fuel poverty. Faster. Better. Cheaper. This is the message that will attract consumers to take up the Green Deal challenge.