Where do you get the requirements  for EPC rating above or below from? Nothing mentioned on the OFGEM website, to show a house EPC rating affects suitability.

Are you sure you are talking about the BUS scheme and not ECO4 scheme?

I would go to the OFGEM website and read all the eligibility requirements, read the home owner and installer sections.

@johnmo

Hi, looks like i might be getting the schemes mixed up..... but then again i googled 'BUS scheme' and got: The £7500 grant is available with the Government's Boiler Upgrade Scheme (from the EON-Next website). So could it be the same scheme but different name?

The ECO4 scheme mentions it applies for Energy Performance Certificate (EPC) rating of D or lower.

Bus and eco4 are totally different schemes. 

There is no EPC rating requirement for bus

Eco4 has, I believe, both an EPC requirement and a means test.

@jamespa 

Thanks James, think that's answered my question.

I know i won't qualify for the Eco4 scheme, good to know that there's no restrictions on BUS apart from just needing a valid cert.

Think i was hearing a combination of info from both schemes and thinking there was just 1 scheme.

Cheers 🙂

Posted by: @stuchi

↑

I know i won't qualify for the Eco4 scheme, good to know that there's no restrictions on BUS apart from just needing a valid cert.

EPC no longer necessary 

Here is the link to the part of the regulation that previously specified such a requirement and in addition some insulation requirements.

I find source legislation, which is pretty accessible from gov.uk if you know the title or part of the title and year, a very good source of information, and of course it has the advantage of being definitive. 

Perhaps I'm just a nerd though!

@jamespa That sounds as though the govt. are getting very keen to raise the take-up on heat pumps to me. I’ve nothing against that as such as I would hope that, in the future, with improved ‘public information office’ type education, pump owners will realise that there is still improvements to be made in the insulation / heat conservation in their property. Should this happen, then this would be a win-win! Regards, Toodles.

Posted by: @toodles

↑

@jamespa That sounds as though the govt. are getting very keen to raise the take-up on heat pumps to me. I’ve nothing against that as such as I would hope that, in the future, with improved ‘public information office’ type education, pump owners will realise that there is still improvements to be made in the insulation / heat conservation in their property. Should this happen, then this would be a win-win! Regards, Toodles.

I have seen it argued that 'fabric first' is favoured by the fossil industries as a great way to delay material action. 

The carbon dioxide savings from my many fabric improvements pale into insignificance compared to that from my heat pump, and I strongly suspect this is generally the case.  I'm not saying that fabric first is wrong, but the mantra risks indefinite delay.

Distractions like led bulbs and other minor changes are even smaller in their real contribution in a domestic environment. IMHO all of the fluff (and there is lots of it) is just to encourage us to avoid doing the things that make a real difference to carbon emissions and the fossil industry, whilst giving us a warm and cosy feeling that we are doing our bit.  I therefore think the government was right to drop the EPC rules in relation to heat pumps.

Until we understand that, to make big changes to domestic carbon emissions, we need (in most, not necessarily all, cases) to:

• Fit a heat pump (in countries where heating is necessary) or, where load is relatively small (perhaps<2-3kW at design OAT, other electric heating, preferably with some sort of energy storage)
• Eat a largely plant based diet
• Buy a lot less stuff
• Travel by public transport, or if you must EV.  Travel by train in Europe and rarely if ever fly long haul (except for essential business which can't be done remotely)

we are collectively still 'playing' rather than taking concerted action such as one might take in response to an emergency.

Nobody can be expected to be perfect on all of these (or indeed any except the first) nor to do them all at once, the infrastructure isn't there and it takes considerable time to develop new habits and find ways to enjoy a slightly different life.  However I don't think there is any way to avoid these four realities which make up the major personal carbon contributions for many, if not most, people in 'first world' countries. 

I dont personally believe that a transition is impossible or necessarily negative to our enjoyment of life, provided we are determined to do it over a period of time and mitigate the transition costs for the poorer members of society. 

My fear is that it is in the interests of the richest (and thus most influential) people (who I will not describe as 'members of society') to oppose rather than embrace the transition, because their wealth is significantly dependent on the tendency of people to buy stuff, use fossil fuels, and avoid any expenditure by the majority on transition, in favour of buying their current products or services.  Alternatively (or in addition) their power (and hence wealth/influence) is dependent on whipping up hatred for 'other' in order to garner personal support, and combating climate change is just another convenient 'other'.

The irony is that it is inevitably the poor (or their children) who will suffer most from the negative effects of climate change, whilst the rich (and their children) will be sitting pretty by profiting from the disruption/misery.  I guess that's just a combination of the selfish genes that have powered technological advancement, and the gullibility of many, perhaps most, towards being persuaded that it is in their own interests to act (or vote) against their own interests.

The only ways out if this I can see are a benevolent dictatorship, a concept I personally doubt is sustainable, or rigorous pursuit and promulgation of truth by media that have the remit/guts to do so, combined with good education for all.   Both of the latter are also the subject of coordinated attack by an influential sector of both society and the ruling class, albeit (at present) more noticeably in the US than in the UK.

@johnmo there is no rating upper level for the BUS grant. you would still be entitled to it after solar

Posted by: @ashp-bobba

↑

@johnmo there is no rating upper level for the BUS grant. you would still be entitled to it after solar

Never said there was, bus grant just needs an EPC that is valid, zero criteria for a specific ratings.

@johnmo - Sorry Johnmo my response was meant for @stuchi I pressed reply to that post and for some reason it added it here. Forgive me as I am only an expert in ASHP's and not and good at forums and blogging how ever basic it may be.

Posted by: @jamespa

↑

Posted by: @stuchi

↑

I know i won't qualify for the Eco4 scheme, good to know that there's no restrictions on BUS apart from just needing a valid cert.

EPC no longer necessary 

Here is the link to the part of the regulation that previously specified such a requirement and in addition some insulation requirements.

I find source legislation, which is pretty accessible from gov.uk if you know the title or part of the title and year, a very good source of information, and of course it has the advantage of being definitive. 

Perhaps I'm just a nerd though!

I apologise that I must correct the above.  Clause 5 of the regulations still requires a valid EPC.  Clause 6 which previously specified that the epc must not include certain recommendations in relation to insulation was deleted in 2024.  In summary EPC needed, but it doesn't matter what it says.