Search with Wattson

Notifications

Clear all

Joining the Renewable Heating Hub forums is completely free and only takes a minute. By registering you’ll be able to ask questions, join discussions, follow topics you’re interested in, bookmark useful threads and receive notifications when someone replies. Non-registered members also do not have access to our AI features. When choosing your username, please note that it cannot be changed later, so we recommend avoiding brand or product names. Before registering, please take a moment to read the Forum Rules & Terms of Use so we can keep the community helpful, respectful and informative for everyone. Thanks for joining!

Heat Geek Zero Disrupt: Are We Sleepwalking Into Another Race to the Bottom?

Mars · 2025-10-04T10:35:00Z

When I first came across Heat Geek, I was always under the impression (based on their branding, positioning and messaging) that it stood on a platform of quality. Take your time. Do the calculations properly. Understand the property, the heat loss, the emitters. Design a system that works, that lasts, that delivers comfort and efficiency for decades. That philosophy cut through a sector that was plagued by bodged installs, incorrectly sized units and undersized radiators, leaving homeowners with cold rooms, high running costs and a sense of disillusionment. In many ways, Heat Geek helped professionalise an industry that desperately needed it. They raised expectations. They told us that quality mattered more than speed. That was my perception. Which is why their latest initiative, ZeroDisrupt, has left me scratching my head. According to their own launch announcement, this is an AI-powered design system that can make heat pump installs up to 60% cheaper, 50% faster and with far less disruption. To homeowners weary of quotes in the £12,000-£15,000 range (even after the Boiler Upgrade Scheme), it must sound like manna from heaven. Faster, cheaper, less disruptive... who wouldn’t want that? But my question is simple: have we not already seen how this story ends time and time again in the very recent past? We know exactly what happens when you throw heat pumps into homes with minimal radiator upgrades, with flow temperatures cranked up to compensate, with pipework that can’t cope and emitters that can’t deliver. It works beautifully on paper. The numbers look fine. The sales pitch is compelling. But the reality? Cold rooms, spiralling electricity bills, SCOPs that collapse under real-world use and homeowners who regret ever making the switch. That, in turn, fuels the anti-heat pump narrative and sets back public confidence. My concern with ZeroDisrupt is that “less disruption” often translates to no radiator upgrades, no system improvements and designs that lean on higher flow temperatures to make things “work”. That’s a guaranteed route to higher electricity bills. With tariffs unlikely to fall significantly any time soon, what looks like a cheaper install upfront can quickly become a financial haemorrhage... hundreds, even thousands of pounds a year lost to inefficiency. I don't see that as innovation. In my opinion, that’s shifting the cost burden from the installer to the homeowner. It's a creative way to move the bill from capex to opex. The real danger here is that the market is being seduced by volume (and perhaps by the expectations of shareholders). Octopus, British Gas and Aira are already throwing thousands of heat pumps into homes, often at a loss. Their installation arms are haemorrhaging tens of millions of pounds, but because Octopus and British Gas sell energy, they can claw it back later. So what happens next? To survive, the model must shift toward scale with more installs, done faster, for thinner margins. It becomes a numbers game. And we all know who loses in that scenario: the homeowner. They’re left with a “cheap” system that’s supposed to last twenty years but ends up inefficient, underperforming and ultimately a liability. I don’t claim to fully understand the workings of the AI modelling behind ZeroDisrupt. According to Heat Geek’s own video, it has been “trained” on thousands of installs. But no matter how clever the algorithm, AI cannot model the chaos of British housing stock. It cannot know what’s hidden behind the walls of a Victorian terrace, how poorly insulated an Edwardian semi might be or what decades-old cowboy pipework lies beneath floorboards. British homes are messy, idiosyncratic and unpredictable. There are too many variables. AI can assist a designer. It cannot replace one. Even among Heat Geek’s own elite installer network, unease is growing. Several have told me privately they’re uncomfortable with the direction of travel. They joined Heat Geek because of its founding ethos: slow down, design carefully, educate the homeowner, deliver systems that actually work as efficiently as they can. Now they feel the message has flipped on its head. SME installers are already operating on wafer-thin margins. And let’s not gloss over the language now being thrown around. “ZeroDisrupt might work on smaller homes,” I’ve been told by an installer. Might. That is not a word any homeowner wants to hear when committing thousands of pounds to the system that will heat their family home for decades. Might is not acceptable. It must be must. Heat pumps are not disposable tech, and they are fundamentally not cheap. They are the beating heart of a home’s heating system... something expected to perform reliably for 15 to 20 years. When the industry starts using words like might, maybe and probably, what it’s really saying is we’re not sure. And that’s truly terrifying. Experimenting on people's homes that are paying a lot of money for the privilege is not OK! This is where I fear the industry...

Page 9 / 9 Prev

Government Schemes, Regulations, Training, Planning & Organisations

Last Post by JamesPa 36 minutes ago

98 Posts

17 Users

47 Reactions

12.4 K Views

RSS

L8Again

(@l8again)

Estimable Member Member

Joined: 9 months ago

Posts: 63

07/10/2026 3:13 pm

@Editor is correct. Under MCS, installers are required to provide a flow temperate and an ESTIMATED SCOP as part of the survey. However,……

A key difference here is that the Heat Geek SCOP is not estimated - it is a minimum performance guarantee. The actual installation design work is done by Heat Geek HQ after it has received the survey results and the customer’s selection of one of three performance options. One of the outcomes of the design work is the calculation of the system’s maximum flow temperature. This is the reason why there is no flow temperature in the survey, and why it appears along with the SCOP on the MCS Certificate. This may be complete rubbish but it is what my research is suggesting.

Space and HW heating calculations appear both in the survey and on the MCS Certificate.

👍

ReplyQuote

JamesPa

(@jamespa)

Illustrious Member Moderator

Joined: 4 years ago

Posts: 5496

07/10/2026 3:22 pm

@editor

In principal I agree with most of what you say, most particularly the bit about the nature of the guarantee being key. However there is one possible (but key) exception/subtly to my agreement:

There are two possible and legitimate scenarios where it might not be possible, or at least where there is an understandable and arguably legitimate reluctance, to provide a specified flow temperature etc namely:

1) the design is done by a demonstrably good tool that does not reveal its inner workings (AI/machine learning)

2) the design has a degree of uncertainty, or even risk, associated with it

I suspect that #1 applies in many cases, including Heat Geeks. Number 2 definitely applies to all heat pump installations. Of course #2 is only truly acceptable from a customer point of view if the supplier is prepared to cover that risk/uncertainty by means of a guarantee, making retrospective changes if necessary. Note that most installers, and the MCS rules instead deal with this risk by insisting on specifying lots of design detail, ie transferring the risk to the customer!

There is a third possible scenario which may also apply namely

3) the design may risk violating one or more arbitrary rules imposed by MCS notwithstanding the satisfactory performance, and providing design details would reveal that thus 'incriminating' the supplier.

Im not saying that this scenario exists in Heat Geek's case, but it very likely did with my (successful) installation.

Finally there are possibly commercial reasons. At present HG has a commercial advantage with intelligence it has gained from monitoring its past installations. This allows it to 'trim' specifications (and thus its own costs) whilst offering a performance guarantee. That commercial advantage is diluted if it reveals too much detail.

Any or all of the above may explain a reluctance to provide the design detail which the customer shouldn't need.

Im should be clear that I am neither defending nor attacking Heat Geek, just looking at it another way! I personally think we should be spending time understanding (and critiquing, albeit with a realistic hat on) the nature of the guarantee rather than worrying too much about design detail.

This post was modified 33 minutes ago 2 times by JamesPa

This post was modified 23 minutes ago by JamesPa

4kW peak of solar PV since 2011; EV and a 1930s house which has been partially renovated to improve its efficiency. 7kW Vaillant heat pump.

👍

ReplyQuote

Page 9 / 9 Prev