Section 1: About you Your name: Organisation (if applicable): Job title: Email: Cllr John Powell Powys County Council Portfolio Holder for Environment and Sustainability cllr.john.powell@powys.gov.uk Contact telephone: 01597 8266558 Your address: County Hall Llandrindod Wells Powys LD1 6NT Responses to consultations are likely to be made public, on the internet or in a report. If you would prefer your response to remain anonymous, please indicate here by putting a cross (X) in the bo: To help us analyse the responses, please put a cross (X) in the relevant boes: Sector you are representing: Private Sector business Public Sector organisation Third Sector / Social Enterprise Individual respondent Type of projects of interest to you (tick all that are relevant): Resource efficiency (including energy efficiency) Renewable energy Energy from waste Other (if other, please specify here): Your role in project development & delivery Project sponsor / proposer / client Installer / developer Investor Other (if other, please specify here):
Section 2: Your response Please respond in the space below the relevant question. You may choose to respond to some or all of the questions. Question 1: Do you agree with the focus on renewables, resource efficiency (including energy efficiency) and waste infrastructure projects? In general we would agree with the focus, although there are some areas which we consider needs greater focus, such as: Infrastructure Infrastructure needs capital investment and political will for improvement, specifically relating to: Electrical infrastructure there are grid capacity issues in Brecknockshire and Radnorshire which are restrictive to the amount of photovoltaics which can be installed on buildings. Smart infrastructure, energy usage and metering needs consideration, and is a growing market. Gas Infrastructure - Powys has a high level of properties which don t have access to mains gas, and alternatives forms of heating (such as LPG and electric can be epensive to run). Whilst oil prices have reduced during recent years, there is uncertainty for the future. A combination of gas infill and improved insulation / heating financial models which address the hard to heat homes could reduce energy bills and carbon emissions. Waste While the Council is looking at energy from waste options, in partnership with other authorities. Economies of scale and having a market for the energy produced may be an issue. Demand reduction In accordance with the energy hierarchy there needs to be a greater focus on energy efficiency and avoiding energy usage in the first place. Likewise the need to avoid waste (e.g. by insulating properties or physical wastage of water due to a percentage of water being lost in the infrastructure through leaks). Similarly waste is about waste disposal, rather than waste reduction which is a more sustainable and long term solution.
Question 2. Do you agree or disagree with our assessment of the barriers stated? Please provide evidence to support your answer. We generally agree with the provision of the support barriers but more emphasis could be placed on the project initialisation. Infrastructure issues which limit the amount of PV on buildings have been mentioned but have not really been addressed. Also, timeliness of resolving grid capacity issues is slow. We would disagree that the electrical capacity grid issue has been resolved. Heating infrastructure schemes (e.g. community / district heating) are often applied for urban environments. Consideration should be given to poorly insulated off-gas properties, which are hard to heat and therefore provide greater potential for increased carbon savings per property. In Powys it is difficult and epensive / substantial cost incurred to bring hard to heat rural properties up to an efficient standard. However that does allow for innovation with other, more conventional, solutions being unavailable. A strategic funding strategy needs to look at the opportunity to generate the greatest carbon savings, running costs, reduce energy bills etc. rather than just numbers of properties treated. There is an issue with the way poverty is reported as it has the potential to miss the hidden poor is more apparently affluent areas. Reporting needs to be specific not just for general areas to ensure that those in most need are not missed through a statistical anomaly. Lack of learning from others/collaborative working new projects would benefit from skills and replicability from other projects (training and education), shared resources, collaborative working There could better identification of the links with the aims and requirements of other legislation would help to put this in the wider Welsh contet. This would support a more holistic approach and assessment of how you improve the wellbeing of people (e.g. linking in with the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act). There is a lack of funding schemes available that target the market the Green Deal was aimed at. We need an investment strategy that works better. Trial of new investments required. Being such a large rural Authority, we don t have such a competitive market, or widely available skills and resources in the local vicinity as other Authorities. Specialist Contractors often have to travel, which can partly negate positive environmental impacts of innovative technologies due to the carbon emissions occurred in transportation.
Question 3. Are you aware of other barriers related to provision of support and improving access to finance that we should be aware of? Funding eligibility There are opportunities for public service to access loans for joint projects, around collaborative working (e.g. with Healthboards) Assessment criteria - Criteria for assessing projects should be given, consideration should be given to the amount of carbon saved, as well as people helped. For private sector housing provision is often made for capital costs, but no provision is made for the revenue costs in delivering the schemes. Sustainability and availability of zero / low interest loans We are not aware of schemes which will cover the delivery of revenue funding for local authorities, or whole life costs incurred. Changing energy markets the stop start nature of funding / financial incentives, changing energy prices (e.g. oil), needs to be managed correctly (solar farms etc.), to ensure that those who benefits are as intended (e.g. landlords etc.). Revenue resources required for identification and initiation of projects, resources, skills, funding etc. for feasibility studies. Without this initial funding it is unlikely that projects will progress. There are issues around awareness and public engagement. It is not clear what the impacts of climate change are for Powys so there is no specific business case for Powys to put climate change, costs and impacts higher on people s agenda and to understand the reasons behind why Green Growth is required. Public bodies lack the capacity, resources and officer time to deliver bids. They are often too risk adverse, and need to be more commercially minded. They often look at solution of process rather than the outcome. Many are lacking the bigger, wellresourced teams needed to bring in the bids for funding and projects. Due to local government cuts, European funding teams have been cut which impacts further on the capacity to bid for funds. We would question whether public bodies have the skills and resources to put in a significant funding proposals The assessment methodology for the allocation of funds is often poverty related, for which Powys does not score highly. Suggest that the scoring should also be in terms for the greatest carbon savings (and checked by an independent consultant to ensure the carbon savings forecast are realistic)
Question 4. Are there particular project stages i.e. development, construction or operation - where accessing finance is problematic? Please describe any issues. The business case is critical to accessing the capital funding, both in terms of the financial and technical epertise. If the funding is not available and the business case suitably robust and the project plan is flawed, then additional costs / risks could be incurred later on in a project, or projected savings could never materialise. Funding for revenue elements for projects and feasibility studies can be difficult to access, especially for more innovative, and therefore, risky projects. As mentioned previously staff resource is a big issue. Question 5. To what etent would you / your organisation wish to access funding from any of the above sources? If so which and why? Please provide supporting evidence where possible. Accessing finance through RE:FIT is attractive, as its low risk. A non-repayable direct grant, we think that for a small percentage of projects, this could be required to deliver projects where high levels of innovation and high levels of risk are required. Where schemes have to repay, energy efficiency programmes (e.g. Invest to Save) aren t that helpful because the savings we are required to make as an authority are immediate. We think that a hybrid scheme where some is grant and some is an invest to save loan could be useful, so that the authority can benefit from immediate savings to help the revenue position and repay the loans perhaps over a longer period Opportunities for collaborative working for joint funding bids with organisations who can t access loans (e.g. Health Boards). Zero / low interest loans. Question 6. Which of the following options should be included in any intervention and why? Please provide supporting evidence where possible. Repayable grant invest to save or similar (public bodies only). Welsh Government direct loans. Working with / encouraging the commercial market on a project by project basis. [Includes creating a Welsh loan framework product or draw down investment facility that invests in a portfolio of local energy investment vehicles]. Leveraged funding creating a new investment vehicle
Using an eisting fund. Please see above answer Question 7. Ecluding non-repayable grant, what other funding options should we consider? Hybrid loans, part invest to save, part capital paid part repayment of loan part revenue saving for the authority Community loan schemes RE:FIT model - models which reduce the risk for investors/ building owners with commercial partner funding, co-working guaranteeing return and minimizing risk Question 8. If your organisation is deterred from accessing funding from eisting sources, why is that? - Invest to Save, because the pressure for Local Government is to achieve revenue savings now - Greater transparency of funding available, limited information available on funding available, greater knowledge on who can apply and what is eligible - Lack of knowledge transfer from organisations who have already delivered similar schemes - Timeframes for applying for and submitting bids are unrealistic Question 9. What would make your organisation more likely to access funding? (Please take into account regulatory etc. constraints around the structure of the funding.) Increased capacity, time, skills and resources to deliver bids. We would like to see more collaborative funding for the whole of Wales, potentially led by the Welsh Government, in seeking European funding (such as ELENA) and delivering projects centrally, sharing knowledge and resources. More detailed projects including financial modelling, taking into account anticipated changing energy prices to provide more accurate forecasting. Not just for large projects but smaller projects (e.g. boiler replacement projects) which can be easily replicated. Information such as this could be included in the Future Trends report.