With local authorities under pressure to contribute to the UK’s carbon reduction targets, finding a more efficient method of heating the built environment has emerged as a key challenge.

According to the Digest of United Kingdom Energy Statistics (DUKES) 2017, domestic properties account for 30% of total UK fuel consumption, with around 80 per cent of this being used for water and space heating. District heating schemes have quite rightly emerged as a viable means of improving the efficiency of these systems and reducing their overall carbon footprint.

District heating uses a network of underground pipes to deliver heat from one centralised source to multiple buildings, creating economies of scale which can reduce energy spend by as much as 30%.

The UK need only look to the Nordic countries, where the district energy market is mature, to see the potential. Currently, just 2% of UK homes and buildings are connected to a district heat network, in stark contrast to countries like Sweden and Denmark where the figure is above 60% and even 90% in some cities.

Funding is being made available to local authorities to increase their adoption. The Heat Network Development Unit (HNDU), for example, provides funding and specialist guidance to local authorities who are developing heat network projects. It is already supporting over 200 new schemes and feasibility studies. The Heat Networks Investment Project (HNIP), which currently has £320m in grant funding available to support investment in district heating is expected to draw up an additional £2bn of private funding over the next five years.

Bringing more heat networks to fruition will not only help meet sustainability goals but will also benefit local communities through lower heating costs. When you also consider the potential to offer business occupiers low-carbon and lower cost energy bills, successful district heat schemes could also provide a compelling argument for inward-investment.

However, a lack of due diligence at the planning stage is preventing many viable networks from being realised. If errors are made during feasibility studies, potential schemes may be incorrectly flagged as unviable, meaning that they are not incorporated into as many new-build developments as they could. Despite the amount of funding available, councils are frequently commissioning feasibility studies as cheaply as possible, using generic specifications that are not tailored to the project in question.

The results that come back from these studies frequently do not accurately depict the full benefits that the scheme can deliver, or the hurdles that need to be addressed to make sure it operates efficiently. As a result, schemes that could potentially bring great savings to councils are not being considered and those that are built are not always optimised, leaving them unable to reach their full potential. These poorly delivered studies are also uneconomical, draining time and resource which would be better invested in identifying more networks.

This waste cannot continue. District heating represents too large an opportunity to reduce energy spend for it to be hindered by what are essentially, problems in paperwork.

There must be a step change in approach towards developing new schemes, with active collaboration between councils and delivery partners encouraged from the very beginning. Feasibility studies need to be specified, commissioned and developed in partnership, with both sides prepared to adjust the scope as the study progresses. This flexible approach will tailor studies to individual projects and properly evaluate strengths and weaknesses to ensure the best and most efficient networks are built.

These feasibility studies are essential to increase the number of district heating networks in operation across the UK. Taking a more considered, collaborative approach will lead to councils saving far more in the long run and truly achieving the carbon reduction benefits that district heating can deliver.

Peter Bense is director of heat and power at engineering consultancy Sweco UK