Living in cold homes after heating improvements: Evidence from Warm-Front, England’s Home Energy Efficiency Scheme

Abstract

ObjectiveTo investigate explanatory factors for persistent cold temperatures in homes receiving heating improvements.

Housing improvements, fuel payment difficulties and mental health in deprived communities

“…Some people had adapted to living in cold homes and considered 'cool' conditions to be good for health; thereafter, they were slowly adjusting to the prospect of living in warmer homes. But living in cold homes post-intervention was also associated with poor psychosocial health due to reasons of dissatisfaction, stress and lack of control over the new heating system (Critchley et al 2007). This runs slightly counter to the argument that the greater mental health gains are derived from housing improvements where fuel poverty is combined with poor health in the prior period (Liddell and Morris 2010).…”

“…Contrarily, in a study of people who continued to live in cold homes after warm and heating improvements, the complicated nature of programming controls was cited as a major reason for this, indicating a lack of control for some households (Critchley et al 2007). However, this was not the entire explanation.…”

Thermostat Interface and Usability: A Survey

“…(Shiller, 2006) One of the barriers of using PTs to save energy is that users often fail to use these devices as they were designed. Indeed, several interviews pointed out that people find PTs difficult to program and to understand (Boait & Rylatt, 2010;Consumer Reports, 2007;Critchleya, Gilbertsona, Grimsleya, Greena, & Group, 2007;Karjalainen & Koistinen, 2007;Nevius & Pigg, 2000;Rathouse & Young, 2004a). Therefore, an investigation into human factors and usability (see next section) may provide insights into the design of future PTs to improve energy performance.…”

“…Among those, Boait and Rylatt reported the example of a thermostat that required a total of 28 steps to enter heating times, which were identical for each day of the week (Boait & Rylatt, 2010). Complexity is a barrier, especially for the elderly (Critchleya, et al, 2007;Freudenthal & Mook, 2003;Rathouse & Young, 2004b). Indeed, Freudenthal and Mook (2003) observed that PT owners do not use all functions, even the ones they find valuable, due to poor interface design.…”

“…PTs are too complicated to use (Boait & Rylatt, 2010;Consumer Reports, 2007;Critchleya, et al, 2007;Diamond, 1984aDiamond, , 1984bDiamond, et al, 1996;Freudenthal & Mook, 2003;Fujii & Lutzenhiser, 1992;Karjalainen, 2008;Linden, et al, 2006;Moore & Dartnall, 1982;Nevius & Pigg, 2000;Rathouse & Young, 2004b;Vastamaki, Sinkkonen, & Leinonen, 2005) Buttons/fonts are too small (Consumer Reports, 2007;Dale & Crawshaw, 1983;Diamond, 1984aDiamond, , 1984bRathouse & Young, 2004b) (Moore & Dartnall, 1982) Abbreviations and terminology are hard-to-understand; lights and symbols are confusing (Dale & Crawshaw, 1983;Diamond, 1984aDiamond, , 1984bKarjalainen, 2008;Lutzenhiser, 1992;Moore & Dartnall, 1982) The positioning of interface elements is illogical (Dale & Crawshaw, 1983;Diamond, 1984aDiamond, , 1984bMoore & Dartnall, 1982) PTs are positioned in an inaccessible location (Karjalainen, 2008;Rathouse & Young, 2004b …”