Brighton and Hove City Council Renewable And

BRIGHTON AND HOVE CITY COUNCIL

RENEWABLE AND SUSTAINABLE ENERGY STUDY STAKEHOLDER WORKSHOP – 26th March 2013

“... a great opportunity to help shape the future of sustainable energy in Brighton & Hove.”

1. Overview

1.1 Background

Brighton & Hove City Council commissioned Environmental Consultants AECOM to produce a renewable and sustainable energy study for the city for the period to 2030. The study is the most thorough investigation ever undertaken into renewable and sustainable energy generation potential and carbon reduction in buildings in the city.

The primary purpose of the study is to investigate the potential for delivering local carbon reductions relating to buildings in Brighton and Hove and to provide an evidence base to support carbon reduction projects and policy.

The study has three focus areas:

Low and zero carbon energy generation identifying opportunity areas for low and zero carbon energy technologies and testing theviability of heat networks;

New buildings projecting emissions from new development over the period of the City Plan and testing draft City Plan policies relating to carbon reduction;

Existing buildings investigating the potential for energy efficiency measures and microgeneration in existing buildings.

The council is consulting on the findings of the study in order to prioritise action. A series of workshops are being held in the spring of 2013 to prioritise key actions and projects to take forward in the city.

The workshops include:

Key council officers March 1st 2013 City Stakeholders March 26th 2013 Elected Councillors May 1st 2013

Outcomes of the workshops will inform the Zero Carbon work for Brighton & Hove’s One Planet Living Plan.

1.2 Purpose of the workshop

The stakeholder workshop was promoted as “a great opportunity to help shape the future of sustainable energy in Brighton & Hove” allowing key stakeholders to:

offer feedback on the study and suggested options provide their expert views on what the next steps should be prioritise potential projects.

1.3 Workshop format

The stakeholder workshop was facilitated in two distinct sessions.

1. Methodology of the energy study and its key findings presented by Matthew Turner and Mary Livingstone, consultants and report authors from AECOM: PowerPoint presentation of the report and an opportunity for clarifications and brief questions from participants Main Council Chamber, Brighton Town Hall 2.00 to 3.20 pm

2. Participatory consultation on the study, key findings and suggested options facilitated by Ben Messer from Food Matters: Participatory ‘gallery’-style consultation on 5 key themes arising from the study Committee Rooms 2 and 3, Brighton Town Hall 3.30 to 5.00 pm

Appendix 1 gives a list of all workshop participants

2. Key Outputs

Following the energy study presentation in the Main Council Chamber participants moved to the committee rooms. Five questions were presented in the two rooms using five different participatory tools displayed on flip-charts on the walls. Each question dealt with a specific theme arising from the energy study. At each wall space work station the question was clearly displayed along with guidance on how to engage with the tool being used and printed out summaries providing additional information where needed.

The key outputs of the workshop are presented as a summary of the comments that were made either during group discussion or as written comments on post-it notes at each of the five work stations. The summary includes all different perspectives and opinions that were voiced but avoids duplication and reiteration where it occurs. Specific quotes or verbatim statements have been included to illustrate the particular issues or topics that are presented.

Participants considering their response to the five questions.

QUESTION A.

In 2030 Brighton and Hove emits 56% less CO2 than it did in 2005

What do you think ... how achievable is this target?

Tool: Continuum (line chart) and facilitated discussion.

What factors influence achievement of this target? What are the negative factors or barriers that make it difficult to achieve? What could be done to address the barriers? What are the positive factors or opportunities that make it achievable? What could be done to realise the potential of the opportunities?

Key comments:

The study received a positive and optimistic response from participants

The potential and opportunity is recognised and supported

The CO2 reduction target is accepted as being technically feasible

We are already on track to achieve the target – 12% reduction in CO2 emissions

between 2005 and 2010

However, reaching the target requires:

Strong leadership

Co-ordinated effort “The City Council needs Organised approach to raise its game” Finance and delivery mechanisms

The City Council is best placed to take a lead role but this requires a change in its mind-

set – needs to be decision making on plans and priorities now.

Key challenges:

How to generate the necessary political and cultural will to realise the potential

How to make the necessary action financially attractive to key stakeholders and investors

Questions:

Is it possible to answer this question (how achievable is the target?) when approx. 76% of the proposed target reduction results from de-carbonisation of the National Grid?

Positive factors: what makes the target achievable?

Really good brains people and practical partnership working exists already in this area and can be built on (Already) developing an Action Plan, engaging community groups, engaging the private sector to implement Renewable energy and energy efficiency make sense – this must be proven in commercial business plans for the city £10K per year (Green Deal type money) on 10,000 homes per year over 12 years = £120 million invested per year in the local construction business – local companies who spend money!! After grid-decarbonisation we only need to achieve 3% (reduction) per year – EASY! 18% over national grid de-carbonisation Technically feasible – they have been achieved elsewhere – need leadership, funding, ACTION! See: Birmingham Energy Savers – mass retrofit project and German example

Negative factors: what makes the target difficult to achieve?

Inertia and lack of leadership. It should be possible to take a bold step forward now – with a decent evidence base. We don’t need 100% accuracy of info to make decision. Learn as we go, occasionally get it wrong, but do build up a body of intelligence to inform continuous progress and move forward. Lack of leadership from BHCC – the main people are located in different council teams. People are addicted to their cars so cannot reduce car use by taking buses and building a light rail network People having to pay 7% interest on Green Deal – another way for banks to make money

Actions: what needs to happen?

Need large scale funding – 100s of millions should alter the mindset when considering energy solutions The Council should promote the Green Deal to its residents – either become a Green Deal provider or provide funds for a Green Deal provider to offer subsidised rates to Brighton and Hove customers Need a Task Force with clear remit from Council Leader to include key partners Need a co-ordinating group as a public/private partnership to bring funding to seed new projects There needs to be more joined-up policies – linking and balancing different policy agendas Use low cost loan – ESCO model BHCC can access very low borrowing rates – use this for investment in city energy projects Need determined joint work, political consensus and drive More financial support from Council - Lower interest loans Strong leadership and co-ordination from BHCC to produce business plans for different measures, prioritise and put organisational/partner and E packages in place. Mass retrofit should be a priority Utilising and supporting existing resources and helping development more resources in community groups Needs co-ordination and strategies for gaining public support – not looking too good at the moment. 5

QUESTION B.

Of the two scenarios for CO2 reduction in Brighton and Hove which do you think is the most achievable – and why?

Tool: Achievable/Not achievable charts for each scenario

Scenario 1: High Energy Efficiency Main focus on higher level of energy efficiency in existing stock Lesser focus on large scale energy projects (1 District Heating Scheme)

Scenario 2: High Renewable and Low Carbon Energy Generation Lesser focus on energy efficiency in existing stock Greater focus on large scale and decentralised energy projects (3 District Heating Schemes, 1 solar farm and 17 large scale wind turbines)

Key comments:

A number of comments asked why there has to be an either/or decision between the two scenarios

It would be preferable (ideally) to pursue the option of high energy efficiency AND large scale renewable energy generation

Or implement scenario 1 followed in the future by scenario 2.

Scenario 1: High Energy Efficiency Main focus on higher level of energy efficiency in existing stock Lesser focus on large scale energy projects (1 District Heating Scheme)

ACHIEVABLE NOT ACHIEVABLE 11 comments 4 comments

1. Achievable but I think we need to look at High 1. NOT enough balls to this scenario – got to be Energy Efficiency AND large scale low carbon. more ambitious on generation We do need to be more courageous. 2. Why not do large scale renewable energy 2. When BHCC works with private sector to generation AS WELL? 1-5 MW solar farms encourage retrofits, investment in training entirely possible! and job creation. 3. You can make building more efficient, but 3. Providing the right financial mechanism – an they are still using energy to heat/cool and ESCO or as a GD provider would offer BHCC all the consumption from appliances etc. chance to really pioneer the energy efficiency You need to also produce power. business – 10 years to retrofit 120K homes, 4. Can Green Deal really work? 12k a year spending up to £10K per home is a £120 million per year injected into Brighton 4. This is achievable but will take leadership, co- ordination and budget from the Council to make it happen. Perhaps set up special purpose vehicle? 5. Needs leadership from BHCC for a mass retrofit programme – commission a provider to deliver the programme using local SMEs and a community marketing approach. 6. Can be tackled in chunks. Co-ordinated focus will attract more funding 7. Achievable but doesn’t provide the steps for really large reduction 8. I still think it needs to be combined with the larger scale energy reduction systems – district heat, renewable – so scenario 1 and 2 together. 9. Yes – the health equality and job creation benefits make this a must. We cannot ignore energy hierarchy, fuel poverty, excess winter deaths and job creation potential. 10. This scenario could work very well and benefit the correct groups i.e. fuel poor. The Council would need to ensure the programme is delivered successfully. Additional comments: 1 comment 11. Scenario 1 is achievable and would leave Prioritise public transport with bus lanes and scope for a focus on scenario 2 in the future. cycle ways.

ACHIEVABLE NOT ACHIEVABLE 11 comments 2 comments 1. Community groups like Brighton and Hove 1. Up front high cost precludes very large scale Energy Services Co. (BHESCo) and Brighton projects – small “baby” steps more likely to Energy Co-op (BEC) need Council support to build a momentum. Large scale polarises develop. Letting specialists do their speciality opinion. allows the Council to save internal resources. 2. Energy hierarchy means it would be wasteful Outsourcing saves money. and wrong to de-prioritise energy efficiency. 2. We need scenarios 1 and 2! We must act to reduce fuel poverty, cold 3. Generation must encourage awareness homes, excess winter deaths and to create towards energy efficiency but can be taken more jobs. hand in hand  encourage a DIY energy efficiency programme 4. Aim high – Focus on projects that give big results – they need a lead-in time – so this option should also include smaller projects. 5. Why not use preferential borrowing and bidding for European money to seed fund projects and set up a special purpose vehicle. 6. Achievable long-term. Decentralised energy is essential but needs planning now – low interest loans needed from Council. This is big picture stuff that needs policy now. 7. These renewable energy projects are all achievable (just see what happened in Germany) but why not do this as well as the energy efficiency scenario? 8. Need retrofit and large scale LZC generation together. .. but needs a BHCC led TASK FORCE to produce a business plan with £ and payback detailed for each scheme and plan finance and delivery including structure of delivery partners 9. More challenging than scenario 1 as projects are larger scale. This would need greater input from all sectors of B and H and co- ordination with planning. Strong leadership is a MUST. 10. Achievable but not at expense of energy Additional comments: 2 comments efficiency. Demand reduction but plan in Rising energy prices should be used to drive investment skills, innovation and technology political will to make our energy supplies to build capacity for larger scale generation sustainable and not dependent on Russia 11. Achievable but you can make many individual and Middle East. and cheaper cost savings by better insulation Publicise that we don’t need planning as well. permission to put PV on our roof. 8

QUESTION C.

Which of these medium to large energy generation initiatives do

you support in principle?

Tool: Initiatives Bar Chart

Options to consider: Wind turbines on Downs Wind turbines elsewhere in the city including the urban fringe Wind turbines on seafront District Heating Schemes in city Solar farms on Downs Solar farms on urban fringe Others

Key comments:

Participants were keen to rule nothing out

Strongest support (with no negatives) was for District Heating Systems based on the

findings of the energy study and the feeling that this approach is most cost effective and

least controversial

Two DHS comments implied an urgent need to begin work on DHS: ‘let’s get on with it’

and ‘do it NOW!’

Planning problems and the protection of downland and the National Park were seen as a

major challenge to wind initiatives in particular but also for solar farms

The potential for roof-mounted solar farms could overcome some of the planning issues

Security and vandalism is also seen as an issues for ground-mounted solar installations

For both wind and solar choosing the right location is extremely important in terms of overcoming controversy and gaining community support.

Bar chart showing the number of comments given to each of the six different initiatives.

DONT SUPPORT 12

DO SUPPORT 10

MAYBE SUPPORT 8

7 6 6 12 5 4 4 Number of comments 6 2 3 3 3 3

-2 -2 Note: negative number -2 -4 denotes number of ‘Don’t support’ comments -4

-6 WIND TURBINES ON WIND TURBINES WIND TURBINES ON DISTRICT HEATING SOLAR FARMS ON SOLAR FARMS ON THE DOWNS ELSEWHERE IN THE THE SEAFRONT SCHEMES IN THE CITY THE DOWNS THE URBAN FRINGE CITY incl. urban fringe Suggested initiatives 10

Comments on each of the suggested initiatives:

INITIATIVE DO SUPPORT MAYBE SUPPORT DON’T SUPPORT Wind turbines on Lots of local We need to carry the Downs opposition – NIMBY local opinion with us Restricted due to Planning risks, planning politics, divided Depends on viability environmental (wind speed, movement and potential height) NIMBYs make this tho’ not top priority the wrong thing to Contain in 1 or 2 prioritise> Initial large farms exploration – no Focus on certain progress in 10 years selected locations – Visual amenity poor rather than dismiss in National Park – whole idea can’t be done Feel National Park National Park should be protected planning issue

Wind turbines Alongside A27 where Better out at sea NIMBYs may make elsewhere in the they should be If there is enough this tricky alongside wind. Private Big challenge. city infrastructure companies could Planning resistance, Avenues, high sites implement to make investment etc. It’s a (tho’ much of fringe is them look distraction from the Downs) environmentally easier solutions – Provides a good visual responsible great offshore. impression of what Depends on viability the Council wants to do Feasible – as Shoreham Port plan a number of turbines along their seafront

Wind turbines on Small flag size and Depends on viability the seafront array style Possible but need to Wind speeds and be selective of return lower. where – e.g. along Shoreham Harbour Marina wall and by has plans Madeira Drive Good but better out Good for raising at sea profile – publicity Small ones that look cool – artistic Most sensible of the 3 wind options Definitely for impact and symbolism

INITIATIVE DO SUPPORT MAYBE SUPPORT DON’T SUPPORT District heating Absolutely – much schemes in the more carbon reduction for the city investment Need a Task Force led by BHCC, develop a business plan for each investment delivery structure. LET’S GET ON WITH IT! DHS for Edward St. and Eastern Rd. More efficient than individual home boilers – can use CHP/biomass/biogas Great idea. Map ahead and lay pipes when road works are being done so communities are district heat ready This will help realise

large CO2 savings Leap to biogas/biomass not fossil fuels Well-networked. Costly and initially disruptive – need positive public opinion Go for it NOW. Edward St. And London Rd. A must with all the new developments

Key to make large CO2 savings Report suggests DHS would work well – needs good co- ordination, partners and investment and strong leadership to take that bold step to get it off the ground Entirely feasible – why not allocate some funding to pilot project / detailed feasibility and just start working on this

INITIATIVE DO SUPPORT MAYBE SUPPORT DON’T SUPPORT Solar farms on Yes – tho’ lean and Keep out of National Waste of pristine the Downs clean first (reduction Park areas – is there land of regional and payback for PV is any on the Downs. importance much lower than Would be a good use Is this a good use of other projects of farms but don’t our green space – Lower profile than want to reduce NP. food production, wind turbines so FIT? – which groups biodiversity, chalk should get more would benefit from downland. support the £ (income) – Would need to be in planning issues? right locations – 1 – 2 Really tough to see MW takes only 3 – 4 this happen on acres so entirely southern city-facing possible and sheep slopes can graze around them In particular areas where the community clearly benefits and works with the authorities /developers In hidden areas as they are protected Solar farms on Lean and clean first In the built the urban fringe A MUST – be servicing environments we the urban community have enough Think about rooftops to develop vandalism/theft It’s still mostly Can be done on many downland but we large site roofs shouldn’t be ruling around the city anything out before doing ground- Isn’t it more mounted practical to cover Very small farms with our roofs with solar direct public benefit PV? Beachfront solar? – trouble with pebbles and vandalism – Volks railway project – solar trees? Solar farms on roofs Offshore wind Off-shore wind = YES Rampion money Not within the Absolutely should be invested in Council’s control and Yes the city and off-shore scrapped – our view therefore not is our asset included in the Rampion should be a study. However, community-owned some comments project. Affects our were added to the seafront views so we chart. should benefit. 13

QUESTION D.

What do you think ... which types of energy project should be Brighton and Hove’s highest priority?

Tool: Sticky dot vote and comments

Options to consider: WIND - Onshore commercial, onshore small-scale BIOMASS - Energy crops, woodland, waste wood, agricultural arisings WASTE - Municipal solid waste, commercial and industrial waste BIOGAS - Wet organic waste, sewage gas HYDRO - Small scale SOLAR - Photovoltaic, solar thermal HEAT PUMP HEAT NETWORKS - Energy efficiency projects for domestic & non-domestic buildings

Key comments:

The strongest support (13 votes FOR with 0 votes AGAINST) was for Solar energy and Heat networks

One comment suggested that Brighton and Hove was ‘a perfect opportunity to drive a pilot district heating scheme’.

Comments also identified the significant challenges facing wind power generation in an area recognised nationally for its natural landscape value

The potential of using the corridors already developed as part of the transport system (A27 and A23 trunk roads) was recognised

Biomass was also popular (with 7 votes FOR and 2 AGAINST) with comments highlighting the need for sustainable sourcing

Biogas received support (5 votes FOR and 0 AGAINST) being perceived as a ‘free’ resource from waste streams and with potential to be used in DH schemes

Arguments against using waste focus on the need to reduce waste and not find ways to use it for energy generation

The strongest negative vote was for Heat pumps (3 votes AGAINST, 1 vote FOR) with questions regarding their technological efficiency.

Results of the prioritisation:

Type of energy Score Score generation project FOR AGAINST Comments

WIND 2 2 Important but South Downs national Park On-shore commercial and planning issues may reduce potential On-shore small-scale Risks are significant – planning, politics, NIMBYs (in spite of supporting them) Let’s develop YIMBYs (YES in my back yard) through neighbourhood plans – wind on city outskirts alongside A27/A23...

BIOMASS 7 2 Suspicious of guarantees that sources are Energy crops, sustainable woodland, waste wood, Not through energy crops – too much impact agricultural arisings on rural community and neighbours

WASTE 3 2 Re-use, recycle – biogas. Stop producing Municipal solid waste, waste that cannot be recycled commercial and Burning waste is not renewable energy industrial waste

BIOGAS 5 0 There is lots of free fuel – food waste, Wet organic waste, sewage etc. – use it instead of paying to sewage gas dispose District Anaerobic Digestion plants linking to heating schemes

HYDRO 0 0 Not enough drop in local rivers or indeed any Small scale rivers in Brighton and Hove And marine is not yet financially viable here

SOLAR 13 0 Photovoltaic, solar thermal

HEAT PUMP 1 3 Use electricity? V.high CO2 content/KWH. No evidence of competent installation in UK – in temperate climate COP (coefficient of performance = ratio of electricity in to electricity generated) of 1:3 not achievable.

HEAT NETWORKS 13 0 City provides a perfect opportunity to drive a Energy efficiency pilot district heating scheme projects for domestic Efficiency  the cheapest energy is energy and non-domestic we don’t use!! Pouring water into a colander buildings does not save water!

QUESTION E.

What existing projects are you involved with or do you know about under these different themes?

What projects do you think would have potential here?

Tool: Action planning charts:

What is the project doing? Who’s doing it? Where is it happening? When – what is the time scale?

Themes to consider: District Heating schemes Renewable Energy Existing Housing: energy improvements Other non-housing stock: energy improvements Council Housing: energy improvements Council Buildings: energy improvements

Key comments:

A number of comments highlighted the potential for financing projects through ESCOs (Energy Service Companies that pay for installation costs etc. through future savings on energy supply costs). Brighton and Hove’s ESCO (BHESCo) begins accepting customers from Sept. 2013

Offshore wind generation seen as too costly

Opportunity for awareness raising of good practise in housing sector through the Eco- th th open House Event June 14 and 15 2013

Potential for use of Shoreham Power Station waste heat in Hove should not be ignored even though costly in the short-term

Progress already being made in the installation of renewable energy generation capacity on large facilities (Brighton General Hospital, Brighton University) and through Brighton Energy Co-operative

University of Brighton represents a model of good practice on many of its initiatives.

DISTRICT HEATING SCHEMES – Existing initiatives

WHAT WHO WHERE WHEN What is the project doing? Who’s doing it? Where is it happening? What is the time-scale? Whole City CHP/District Heating – pre- Hove Civic Society (HCS) Hove We are trying to raise £40K feasibility study of utilising the waste heat Renewables Infrastructure for a proper pre-feasibility from Shoreham Power Station. Group (RIG) study This shows that – at a cost of £2 billion – it could: keep more than 100,000 home radiators hot save 2 billion KWh per annum save 20% CO2 emissions create 100,000 jobs over 15 years

DISTRICT HEATING SCHEMES – Potential initiatives

WHAT WHO WHERE WHEN What is the project doing? Who’s doing it? Where is it happening? What is the time-scale? Community Energy Companies like BHESCO B and H and Sussex From Sept. 2013 BHESCO that provide their OWN finance through being an ESCO offer the council a way to pay these projects off without having to pay up front

CHP and DH for University of Brighton University of Brighton Varley Halls – Coldean Lane Completed 2012 halls of residence. Circus Street, Brighton Circus Street development – under University of Brighton and Early stages of development discussion/early stages of planning BHCC in 2013

Communities Matter ready to engage with communities to encourage buy-in to 17

District Heating Schemes RENEWABLE ENERGY – Existing initiatives

WHAT WHO WHERE WHEN What is the project doing? Who’s doing it? Where is it happening? What is the time-scale? Brighton Energy Co-op has installed 137 BEC  40 members £230K Hove Enterprise Centre Solar panels installed in KWp of community owned PV and plans investment raised and 4% City Coast Church June – July 2012. another 150KWp this year interest to investors St. George’s Church More projects planned for Kemptown 2013

BHESCO – a community energy project www.bhesco.co.uk Brighton and Hove and First customers by Sept. Sussex 2013? First large scale investment in PV and SHW 2014 Communities Matter looking at developing local community energy plans – develop the YIMBY effect

50 KWp PV system spread across 3 Sussex Community NHS Trust Brighton General Hospital - Up and running Nov. 2012 buildings on the Brighton General Elm Grove (Hospital) site

PV University of Brighton Cockcroft Building – Lewes Completed March 2012 Rd

RENEWABLE ENERGY – Potential initiatives

WHAT WHO WHERE WHEN What is the project doing? Who’s doing it? Where is it happening? What is the time-scale? Rampion 700 MW 10 miles off Brighton is too expensive in deep water. Better to put onshore turbines on the South Downs

EXISTING HOUSING – Existing initiatives

WHAT WHO WHERE WHEN What is the project doing? Who’s doing it? Where is it happening? What is the time-scale? Eco-open houses –awareness raising BHCC, Brighton Permaculture City-wide Annual Trust or Low Carbon trust

Green Deal Pioneering Places Project Green Building All over B and H Completed May/June (2013) (GDPP): Partnership All houses to be open to the 100 assessments City Council public during Eco Open th 10 homes retrofit 10:10 House event June 14 and th Low Carbon Trust 15 .

Your Warm Home – focus on fuel poor Communities Matter B and H Up until April 2013 private homes

EXISTING HOUSING – Potential initiatives

WHAT WHO WHERE WHEN What is the project doing? Who’s doing it? Where is it happening? What is the time-scale? PV on every roof in the city , which could Home owners Over next 10 years supply about 30% of the energy demand (John Knapp)

Wind turbo-generators all over the South Downs, which could supply about 30% of the electricity demand at cost of about third that of Rampion offshore wind project Green Deal Assessments Green Building Partnership B and H April onwards

BHESCO will invest in refurbishing homes BHESCO Up to 2019 targeting 30,000 homes in 5 years 19

OTHER NON-HOUSING STOCK – Existing initiatives

WHAT WHO WHERE WHEN What is the project doing? Who’s doing it? Where is it happening? What is the time-scale? Lots of projects in the University of University of Brighton Brighton (Grand Parade, Now until 2015/2016 and Brighton Carbon Management Plan: Moulscomb, Falmer) ongoing Eastbourne LED lighting Hastings Low carbon data centre Behaviour change Power down software on all network computers BMS continuous commissioning Improvements in insulation

Waste House at Brighton University BBH and FREEGLE at Brighton Brighton University Now University

Energy Cafes – providing local community Communities Matter Brighton and Hove Now and ongoing based energy information

OTHER NON-HOUSING STOCK – Potential initiatives

WHAT WHO WHERE WHEN What is the project doing? Who’s doing it? Where is it happening? What is the time-scale? Retrofit of poor quality business (office) Not defined yet City centre mostly – key  2015? stock as part of wider upgrade to secure business areas more investment expansion etc. is part of emerging economic strategy

We need to work with the owners of Churchill Square Churchill Square Shopping Centre and The Brighton Marina Marina as they have the largest single buildings where big (huge) savings can be effected

Look at water storage off regency buildings

University of Brighton – Green Growth Platform – a 5-year £3million project funded (hopefully!) by HEFCE to support growth of environmental sectors with an initial focus on retrofit

COUNCIL BUILDINGS – Existing initiatives

WHAT WHO WHERE WHEN What is the project doing? Who’s doing it? Where is it happening? What is the time-scale? LEDs in brighton centre and pavilion – all Lightfoot LED B and H Now lighting changed over – electricity bills down 40% - pays for itself in less than 4 years.

Council is investing £250K + in energy and Council Energy and Water B and H Now until 2015 water AMRs and £60K in detailed energy Team studies for key/worst performing buildings

COUNCIL BUILDINGS – Potential initiatives

WHAT WHO WHERE WHEN What is the project doing? Who’s doing it? Where is it happening? What is the time-scale? Peterborough ESCO – delivering energy Peterborough City Council Now efficiency improvements to council stock

LEDs in all other buildings (as above)

BHESCO – an ESCO for B and H tenants – www.bhesco.co.uk B and H Now – first customers in already a community energy company an Sept. 2013 IPS with support from Carbon Leapfrog, Cooperative Enterprise Hub, Accountants BDO, Communities Matter, South Downs Solar, Brighton Energy Co-op.

COUNCIL HOUSING: Energy improvements – Existing initiatives

WHAT WHO WHERE WHEN What is the project doing? Who’s doing it? Where is it happening? What is the time-scale? Fuel Poverty – Local Authority Fund Communities Matter Council Tenants Now until end of March

COUNCIL HOUSING: Energy improvements – Potential initiatives

WHAT WHO WHERE WHEN What is the project doing? Who’s doing it? Where is it happening? What is the time-scale? £22.6 million indicatively allocated for City Council Across Council Estates and 2013/14 to 2015/16 insulation, boiler upgrades and PV blocks (photovoltaic) from HRA

BHESCO www.bhesco.co.uk Brighton and Hove and Now – first customers Sept. Sussex 2013

3. Headlines from the workshop

The final discussion allowed participants to say what they thought were the headlines arising from the event.

The City Council needs to change its mindset – it needs greater ambition and should lead the way on co-ordinating delivery of energy solutions

The City Council should have a co-ordinated Task Force of officers on this agenda – the time for talking is over

There needs to be an umbrella organisation for the variety of organisations involved to strengthen co-ordination and avoid fragmentation.

Addressing fuel poverty and reducing winter deaths must be addressed within this agenda – paramount importance of social objectives must be acknowledged

Engagement with the private rented sector is important (28% of B and H housing)

Further exploration of heat generation from power stations is necessary – DECC should be involved to advise on this

The targets aren’t anything that hasn’t already been achieved elsewhere – learn from others’ success

As a group we need to overcome the inertia that sometimes overwhelms us – the evidence is there, we now need to build up a body of opinion and the capacity to deliver

The group agreed to continue their involvement in the process – to act as a sounding board but NOT JUST A TALKING SHOP.

Ben Messer Food Matters 15.4.2013

Appendix 1: Workshop evaluation

Participants were asked to complete an evaluation of the workshop.

Something you liked: Workshop process was well run but we need to see, as ever, is ACTION coming out of the workshop – not just more documents A good format for everyone to have a say – do same for public consultation Great to see things moving forward Lots of interesting views captured Great – good to get outside views Positive Well-organised OK but not brilliant – lots of the usual suspects and missing other key players

Something you didn’t like: We didn’t do introductions and expectations at the beginning

Something you will take away and do: District Heating – to front of mind

Something that should happen: Take the energy plan and create an implementation plan engaging local community groups and businesses More clearly link this to Zero Carbon city plan and updating it. And sort out co- ordination/governance

Who’s missing – who’s not here who you think should be involved? Landlord groups – representatives of private sector housing Private landlords A representative sample of the public Local community leaders with energy plans Patrick Allcom – DECC BHCC Energy Manager University of Sussex Energy Manager AMEX NHS Hospital Trust

Appendix 2: Participants

Name Organisation Representing Attended

Damian Tow Brighton Energy Co-op Community Sector  Chris Todd FOE, City Sustainability Pp Chair Community Sector  Clare Tikely Hove Civic Society Community Sector  John Kapp Hove Civic Society Community Sector  Kayla Ente BHESCO Community Sector  Ollie Pendered Communities Matter Community Sector  Mischa Hewitt Low Carbon Trust Community Sector  Becky Ritchie NHS B&H Estates/Energy Management  Abigail Dombey Brighton University Estates/Energy Management  Maria Hawton-Mead Green Building Partnership Environmental Consultant  Helmut Lusser Global to Local Environmental Consultant  Lui Hepworth Environmental Consultant  Alex Hunt Green Building Partnership Builder  Zoe Osmond Brighton University Academic  Gillian Marston Brighton & Hove City Council Public Sector  Francesca Iliffe Brighton & Hove City Council Public Sector  Thurstan Crockett Brighton & Hove City Council Public Sector  Martin Reid Brighton & Hove City Council Public Sector  Flemmich Webb Brighton 10:10 Community Sector × Howard John Southern Solar Renewables Sector × David Porter Green Building Partnership Community Sector × Mari Martiskainen Sussex Uni SPRU Energy group Academic × Steve Sorrell Sussex Uni SPRU Energy group Academic × Jo Saady AECB Architect × Jake white AECB Architect × Tom Shute Brighton 10:10 Community Sector × Will Cottrell Brighton Energy Co-op Community Sector × Mike Timberlake City College Technical Services manager × Patrick Pica Sussex University Estates/Energy Management × Robert Brown Royal Susex County Hospital Estates/Energy Management × Des Weeden Royal Susex County Hospital Estates/Energy Management × Will Clark NHS B&H Estates/Energy Management ×