Cold climate countries are making significant efforts to transition from fossil fuels, such as oil and gas, to sustainable heating sources, such as heat pumps or district heating to cut greenhouse gas emissions. But fossil-fuel-based heat demand is expected to increase over the next few decades due to population growth.
Most strategies focus on technology and economic incentives. This hampers the transition in some countries such as the UK where uptake remains very low (at less than 5%, so gas heating remains the norm.
The green transition could be sped up by better understanding what motivates people to change their heating systems at home and what obstacles stand in their way.
For our study, published in June, of people’s willingness to adopt sustainable heating technologies, we interviewed 70 households in two relatively deprived areas (Aspley and Clifton) of Nottingham, England.
Our findings reveal the low public awareness of these more sustainable technologies and a lack of willingness to adopt them. It also shows the crucial need to win over consumers to ensure a successful green transition. Only around 39% of participants were aware of sustainable heating systems – most of them knew about heat pumps (61%), with only 17% aware of district heating, and 17% aware of both.
A district heating network channels excess or waste heat from power stations or other industrial sources to homes and businesses, usually in dense urban areas where people live close to large sources of heat. Although a district heating system has existed in St. Ann’s neighbourhood in Nottingham for over 40 years, awareness of it was only found among participants who had family members or friends living there.
Despite knowing about climate change and the contribution of fossil fuel-based heating to it, most people are unwilling to change the gas-based heating systems they are familiar with. Reasons given by participants included affordability, cost effectiveness and efficiency of gas-based heating.
Environmental concerns were not considered a priority by most people we spoke to – even though energy price increases led most of them to implement measures to reduce their energy usage and cost last winter, including switching off heaters, wearing more clothes to stay warm or using alternative fossil fuel heating sources, such as oil and coal.
However, the environmental and health risks (including cancer, respiratory and cardiovascular diseases associated with the burning of fossil fuels did not stop interviewees from strongly believing that the heating transition should not be enforced by the government. Many would prefer this shift to be optional. People often see policy measures enforcing the uptake of low-carbon heating as disruptive to their finances, home, autonomy and comfort. One woman in her mid-30s outlined:
There is mixed information about the efficiency of district heating as some people like it and others do not, while heat pump installation is very expensive, way more than the available government funding. Thus, the adoption should be optional, otherwise it would add more burden to the lives of those who are energy poor and can’t afford to top up the funding provided.
Interviewees were often reluctant to change to a sustainable heating technology. Many of them were renting their properties, making changes to their heating system unfeasible. But when asked about their willingness to switch to more sustainable heating systems if given the choice or if the government enforced it, most remained reluctant and wanted any change to be optional.
Many emphasised their other daily environmentally friendly actions such as recycling or taking buses instead of driving – some said they’d drive an electric car if they could afford to. Strong public campaigns around recycling and electric cars may have contributed to the idea that people are responsible for addressing climate change through these actions – so people’s minds can be changed through public awareness campaigns, but it takes time.
The disruptive nature of low-carbon heating uptake, along with misinformation and myths about the effectiveness of the technology may contribute to households’ resistance to adopting it.
People are more likely and more motivated to engage in behaviour that is familiar and perceived as feasible, achievable, immediately beneficial to them, and that will lead to the expected outcome. More complex choices such as installing a heat pump are disregarded regardless of the negative future consequences of not taking them now.
This perception that some choices are just too complex to be realistic will slow progress in energy transition. In our view, the perception that changing towards climate-neutral choices is “just too difficult” deserves just as much study and attention as denial and scepticism of climate change.
Our study shows that a shift to sustainable heating technologies will require more than providing financial and legal incentives. It needs a demystification of the technologies, and a strong public awareness campaign to not only highlight the environmental benefits of sustainable heating but also prove this choice is affordable and realistic for ordinary households.
In addition to financial support, such as the £7,500 government subsidy for the uptake of heat pumps, it’s crucial to optimise running costs by keeping electricity prices lower than gas prices.
Existing policies prioritise changes in owner-occupied properties. Landlords, both social and private, need incentives to choose sustainable heating technologies. As well as more focus on heating solutions for rented properties, our research suggests that barriers such as perceived complexity and costs must be dealt with to speed up the UK’s transition to green energy.
Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?
Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 35,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.
This research was supported by UK Engineering, Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC), under Grant Ref: EP/V041452/1. Grant holder: Professor Jo Darkwa
This research was supported by UK Engineering, Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC), under Grant Ref: EP/V041452/1.
Ed Turner does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
