Improve EPC by changing light bulbs (and back again)

[geester24]

I need an EPC for flat before I let it.
I heard that to get a good rating it is worthwhile changing all the bulbs to low energy ones. Then switch them back after the certificate is granted. Thus you have a more attractive rating set for 10 years at little outlay.
Thoughts?

[jta]

You asked for thoughts! Well I'm thinking you must be a penny pinching git.
No offence intended, you did ask! :D

[geester24]

Titter,
What I mean is, in my experience tenants often prefer the old fashioned bulbs anyway. So have a set of low energy ones to use before you get a cert to get a better rating. Obviously I would leave them there if I thought they would stay and be used. Its a Victorian house with no wall insulation although the boiler is fairly new and has DGL.Tis Gnd floor also so no roof to insulate.

[tom999]

I need an EPC for flat before I let it.
I heard that to get a good rating it is worthwhile changing all the bulbs to low energy ones.Yes, I did this, and kept them in for the tenants, so they would have lower leccy bills.


Then switch them back after the certificate is granted. Thus you have a more attractive rating set for 10 years at little outlay.Oh dear...


Thoughts?Miserly landlord. :eek:


in my experience tenants often prefer the old fashioned bulbs anyway.Ask 'em first to find out if they'd like to reduce their bills or not...

In my experience, tenants (and anyone else for that matter) likes lower bills.

[mind the gap]

Titter,
What I mean is, in my experience tenants often prefer the old fashioned bulbs anyway. So have a set of low energy ones to use before you get a cert to get a better rating. Obviously I would leave them there if I thought they would stay and be used. Its a Victorian house with no wall insulation although the boiler is fairly new and has DGL.Tis Gnd floor also so no roof to insulate.


Not waving, but drowning.

I am struggling to believe the sentence I have emboldened.:rolleyes:

It would be difficult to post a more cynical and less environmentally-friendly sentiment unless you were Jeremy Clarkson or Sportingdad.

[quarterday]

try sempatap thick latex wallpaper on a roll about quarter of an inch thick. good results. Not advertising it, just have found it excellent myself! EPC assessors should be shown the blurb so that they know what it is. Local authorities use it and call it magic wallpaper..

[Poppy]

Obviously I would leave them there if I thought they would stay and be used.
(Stroking chin thoughtfully) Will tenants require lit rooms when the sun goes down? Tough one.

[Rodent1]

LE bulbs are practically given away nowadays - FREE fron most energy suppliers for the sake of asking !

The effort and energy to change them all back again will probably cost you more in Weetabix to replace the mis-spent enegy than the bulbs cost !

I have occupancy PIR sensors fitted in most hallways, landings, bathrooms, toilets cupboards etc. Show me a T that doesn't like to save money !

That said, I do agree that the light given off is pretty bad, apparently causes many people to becomes drowsy and get headaches, so just leave the old incandescent bulbs in the cupboard.

In order to assist in your personal contribution to saving the planet stop eating beans.

[Poppy35]

also I believe from our EPC assessor that by using energy saving bulbs this only increase % by about 2% and a higher % increase is needed in order to change the rating to a higher value (i.e from C to B to example).

Why not just put them in anyway?

[jeffrey]

also I believe from our EPC assessor that by using energy saving bulbs this only increase % by about 2% and a higher % increase is needed in order to change the rating to a higher value (i.e from C to B to example).

Why not just put them in anyway?
Because they're less bright and slower?

[quarterday]

I think this is very unwise.

The T could argue that he was induced into the letting fraudulently in as much as the EPC did not correctly describe the relelvant energy usage profile. You are much better off to focus on how to make your tenants more comfortable and happy with the proposition you have available for rent.

The happier they are, the more likely they will be long term renters, which is much more important than the question of a fraction of a weeks' rent on new style lightbulbs.

You may be unaware that you can now write off against tax £1500 spent on energy improvements. Energy is likely to remain expensive. Go forth and insulate!

[subjecttocontract]

Landlords Energy Savings allowance limited to:


Loft insulation
Cavity wall insulation
Solid wall insulation
Draught proofing
Insulating hot water systems
Floor insulation

[mind the gap]

Landlords Energy Savings allowance limited to:


Loft insulation
Cavity wall insulation
Solid wall insulation
Draught proofing
Insulating hot water systems
Floor insulation

Limited to? That's a bit 'glass half empty'! Sounds pretty generous to me. It's all the energy-effciency measures which make the most difference, relative to their cost.

Make a joyful noise unto the Lord! :)

[subjecttocontract]

Limited to? That's a bit 'glass half empty'! Sounds pretty generous to me.

Yes, but I used the term 'limited' because it doesn't include the low energy light bulbs which was the subject of the orginal post.

I'm sorry my grammer didn't meet the standards required to avoid your sarcasm.

[mind the gap]

Limited to? That's a bit 'glass half empty'! Sounds pretty generous to me.

Yes, but I used the term 'limited' because it doesn't include the low energy light bulbs which was the subject of the orginal post.

I'm sorry my grammer didn't meet the standards required to avoid your sarcasm.
You misread the tone of my post: surprise rather than sarcasm, because, as others have pointed out, energy-saving light bulbs are not horribly expensive anyway. The other items on your 'limited' list would involve a greater outlay.

(You grammar seems fine to me BTW :))

[quarterday]

Although double glazing does not qualify for LESA the revenue are, I gather apparently more disposed nowadays toward treating double glazing as a revenue item than a capital item as double glazing is an efficacious means of "repairing/renewing" rotted timber or corroded metal single glazing systems which are beyond economic repair.

[subjecttocontract]

Its better than that.....double glazing IS a revenue item.

Part of the driver for this is that its virtually impossible to buy single glazed replacement windows.

[jeffrey]

Part of the driver for this is that its virtually impossible to buy single glazed replacement windows.
Yes. See my posts towards the end of this thread: http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=23968&highlight=glazing

[bullybantam]

I need an EPC for flat before I let it.
I heard that to get a good rating it is worthwhile changing all the bulbs to low energy ones. Then switch them back after the certificate is granted. Thus you have a more attractive rating set for 10 years at little outlay.
Thoughts?

Seems eminently sensible. I've only one LE bulb in my own house - that's a light which is never switched off.

LE bulbs are con, the energy they "waste" is heat which means lower heating bills. Plus of course the vast majority can't be dimmed.

If LE bulbs are so good why did government have to ban filament bulbs? Surely if they were so good market forces would ensure demise of them. I've got a stock of 150W bulbs, enough to last longer than I do:p

PS In a similar vein you can put Optimax (now V-power) petrol in your car prior to the emmissions test.

[Ericthelobster]

LE bulbs are con, the energy they "waste" is heat which means lower heating bills.
(a) The majority of light bulbs are at ceiling height; hot air rises; so any beneficial heating effect is going to be to a band of air above head height

(b) In this country most people switch off their heating for a goodly chunk of the year, so it can hardly be argued that 'lower heating bills' is a benefit then.

[jeffrey]

most people switch off their heating for a goodly chunk of the year, so it can hardly be argued that 'lower heating bills' is a benefit then.
No, some do- but they're probably a minority. Roll on so-called Global Warming!

[Rodent1]

(a) The majority of light bulbs are at ceiling height; hot air rises; so any beneficial heating effect is going to be to a band of air above head height

Underfloor lighting !

[jeffrey]

Underfloor lighting !
Provided by the Electricity (floor)Boards.

[mind the gap]

(a) The majority of light bulbs are at ceiling height; hot air rises; so any beneficial heating effect is going to be to a band of air above head height

(b) In this country most people switch off their heating for a goodly chunk of the year, so it can hardly be argued that 'lower heating bills' is a benefit then.
Yes. Relying on the heat from electric light bulbs to boost or provide space heating is always going to be more expensive than having energy-saving light bulbs and heating the space conventionally, e.g. by a gas central heating system. It is a silly suggestion.

[Cipher]

I read this thread every now and again - what is wrong with leaving the bulbs in?

[thevaliant]

I look low energy light bulbs.

When I moved into my own (rented) property nine years ago, the LL had kindly left only two bulbs in all the fittings in the flat (there were four fittings). I went out that day and bought four low energy bulbs.

When I moved to my present (long lease) flat I took them all, and replaced them with two 'older-type' bulbs, buying a couple more for the new larger flat.

I've only had to replace two blown bulbs in the last nine years.

[Wickerman]

Yes. Relying on the heat from electric light bulbs to boost or provide space heating is always going to be more expensive than having energy-saving light bulbs and heating the space conventionally, e.g. by a gas central heating system. It is a silly suggestion.

While I have no doubt what you are saying is correct in terms of heating (who, after all, would rely on their lights to heat a house???) I have to say that light bulbs are a reasonably efficient form of heating, because of the fact that they are inefficient as light bulbs (e.g., a large proportion of the electricity consumed is converted into heat (which is wasted), not light).

From wikipedia:

Some applications of the incandescent bulb make use of the heat generated, such as incubators, brooding boxes for poultry, heat lights for reptile tanks [1][2], infrared heating for industrial heating and drying processes, and the Easy-Bake Oven toy. In cold weather the heat shed by incandescent lamps contributes to building heating, but in hot climates lamp losses increase the energy used by air conditioning systems.

[Bel]

LE bulbs are poor at lighting.

[Mrs Mug]

LE bulbs are poor at lighting.

I’ve tried to find the report I read but I couldn’t, so this is just from memory.

Anyway, it said that the equivalent ratings given for low energy bulbs in Europe are much higher than that used in the USA. The ratio in Europe is 1:5, whereas in the USA it is 1:3.

So to achieve the equivalent of a 60W bulb in Europe, you are told to buy a 12W low energy bulb, whereas in the USA you would be told to buy a 20W low energy bulb. This is why everyone complains about the low light output.

Now when we buy low energy bulbs, we buy bulbs that are rated at a third of the incandescent bulb we are replacing.

[bullybantam]

LE bulbs are poor at lighting.

Indeed so.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/6110547/Energy-saving-light-bulbs-offer-dim-future.html


Plus of course most can't be dimmed, take ages to warm up and contain toxic chemicals.

BTW You can still buy proper light bulbs. The ban is for "domestic" use, many electrical wholesalers sell them for industrial use.

[jeffrey]

As they say, buy mow whilst stocks last!

[mind the gap]

As they say, buy mow whilst stocks last!

:confused:Buy mow?

[jeffrey]

Buymow is like flymo.

[mind the gap]

Buymow is like flymo.

That's a budget airline based in Walford, isn't it?

[jeffrey]

Old airline based in Walford: BEA(le).

[guy.raoul.smith]

It is a legal requirement for all domestic properties in the UK to have an Energy Performance Certificate (EPC) in place before a property is sold or rented out. All EPCs must be issued by an accredited Domestic Energy Assessor (DEA). This article describes what the DEA is looking at when they carry out an EPC inspection, and at what simple measures you can take to ensure your property gets the best possible rating.

In an EPC survey the DEA will be looking at 5 main elements as follows:

• How the property is constructed
• How the space is heated
• How the water is heated
• How the property is lighted
• What ventilation systems are in place

The DEA will collect data about all these elements; this data will then be fed into a piece of computer software which will generate the EPC. The methodology used by the software to produce the EPC is the Reduced Data Standard Assessment Procedure (RDSAP). RDSAP is a simplified version of the more rigorous Standard Assessment Procedure (SAP) which, along with the Simplified Building Energy Model (SBEM) is used for producing commercial and new build EPC. The simplified RDSAP methodology was chosen for domestic EPC production because the complexity of the other two methodologies results in the surveys costing much more to produce, something which was considered to be acceptable for the commercial market but not for domestic properties.

The RDSAP procedure entails the software making a series of assumptions in place of gathered data. This makes domestic EPC easier and quicker to produce, reducing the cost for landlords / vendors and therefore helping to increase compliance. This is all well and good, but does come at a cost, as the use of assumption in place of gathered data can result in some properties being given an arbitrary energy rating that does not properly reflect the buildings performance.

On top of the EPC software making assumptions the DEA may have to make some assumptions themselves when carrying out an EPC survey. When this happens they are obliged to always assume the worst; for example when a light fitting is found to be empty they will always have to assume that when the bulb is replaced it will be with an incandescent bulb rather than a low energy one.

There are several low cost measures the owner of a property can take to ensure that their building gets the best energy rating possible.

Access:

The first and most important thing to do is to make sure that the assessor can get access to all the parts of the property they need to inspect in the EPC survey, as any assumptions they are forced to make are likely to result in a worse EPC rating. For example if it is not possible for the assessor to access the loft area, either because the hatch is locked or access through under eves storage cupboards is blocked by stuff, then the assessor will have to assume no insulation is present. The same applies for the hot water cylinder, if the DEA cannot open the cupboard to see the cylinder then it will be assumed it has no insulation.

Have documentation ready:

If your property, or any part of it has been converted since 1996 then the DEA will be able to enter the date of conversion as the construction date for that element in the EPC, but only if you can show them the building regulations sign off sheet, otherwise the construction date will be entered as the same as the main buildings original construction date, resulting in a worse EPC rating.

Insulate your water tank:

As part of the EPC inspection the DEA will look at how well insulated your hot water tank is. Most tanks have 25mm of foam insulation or a jacket. Hot water cylinder jackets are cheap to buy, and adding an extra one, or putting one on over the foam insulation will make a noticeable difference to your EPC rating.

Remove portable heaters:

If whilst carrying out the EPC inspection the assessor finds any portable electric or propane heaters in the property then they will be entered as a secondary heating method. In most cases this will result in your property getting a lower energy rating, as they are likely to be a less efficient means of heating than your properties primary heat source. If you remove these heaters then only the primary heart source will be taken into consideration.

Change coal for wood:

If you have a fire place in your property then this will be entered in the EPC as either a coal or a wood heater. The DEA will make an assumption about what you burn in the fire based on what they see at the time of the inspection. If there is no visual evidence as to what fuel you use they will be forced to assume it is coal, as this gives a worse rating than using wood. It is therefore advisable to remove your coal scuttle, and replace it with a wood basket.

Block up unused flues:

Any open flue will result in a lower EPC rating, as they will be letting the heat rise out of your property. It is therefore advisable to block off any unused flues. This can be as simple as stuffing some spare loft insulation up there.

Low Energy Bulbs:

If you have any light fittings with missing bulbs then fit them with low energy light bulbs. It is not recommended to go around replacing all your incandescent bulbs with low energy units, but rather just to replace them as the old ones burn out. Whilst low energy bulbs do have an effect on the EPC rating, it is only a small one. For example, changing all the bulbs in a four bedroom hose from incandescent would make about a 2% difference to the properties EPC rating. Whilst this is only a small improvement, it is possible that it could make the difference to your rating if you are on the borderline between, for example, an E or a D rating.

Obviously there are many more expensive measures you could take to improve your EPC rating, such as replacing your boiler with a band A boiler, increasing your loft insulation and filling your cavity walls. However if you follow the above advice then you will have done everything possible to cheaply and easily improve your EPC rating before the DEA visits.

[jeffrey]

And your question was...?

[mind the gap]

Thanks to OP for some interesting and useful information.


And your question was...?

Jeffrey : Please stop being so defensive and grumpy!

Nobody asks what your question is when you reproduce indigestibly long chunks of legislation for our information. If someone takes the trouble to post relevant and useful information, there does not always have to be a question, does there?

At least OP has presented his information clearly and helpfully, and explained why the measures he suggests will affect an EPC rating.
My only suggestion would be that he clarifies the authorship of the 'article' he reproduces.

OP: as you have probably gathered, Jeffrey is politically averse to the concept of EPCs, so you'll have to excuse his rather mealy-mouthed comment.

[mind the gap]

Have documentation ready:

If your property, or any part of it has been converted since 1996 then the DEA will be able to enter the date of conversion as the construction date for that element in the EPC, but only if you can show them the building regulations sign off sheet, otherwise the construction date will be entered as the same as the main buildings original construction date, resulting in a worse EPC rating.


Perhaps this should be clarified : the conversion must have been from a non-domestic use, e.g. barn, shop (not just a renovation/refurb), and I do not think it has to be after 1996. EPCs for conversions undertaken pre-1996 can be based on the date of conversion, assuming it can be proven.

[jeffrey]

OP: as you have probably gathered, Jeffrey is politically averse to the concept of EPCs, so you'll have to excuse his rather mealy-mouthed comment.
OP was geester_24 almost a year ago.

[mind the gap]

OP was geester_24 almost a year ago.
Correction : not OP, but guy.raoul.smith is to be thanked for his advice.

[guy.raoul.smith]

Perhaps this should be clarified : the conversion must have been from a non-domestic use, e.g. barn, shop (not just a renovation/refurb), and I do not think it has to be after 1996. EPCs for conversions undertaken pre-1996 can be based on the date of conversion, assuming it can be proven.

What I was trying to say,and should have made clearer is:

If a property has been converted into flats during or after 1995 (on double checking this info with my accrediting body I realized the relevant date is 1995 not 1996), be it from a bigger flat / house, or from non domestic use, then the conversion will have been carried out to the standard required by building regs for a new build. As such the construction date can be entered as the date of conversion rather than the date of original construction, providing the landlord can produce the sign off sheet.

Older conversions can also be entered with the conversion date instead of construction date provided a sign off sheet demonstrates all elements (roof, floor and walls) have been upgraded, but often they have not, as building regs pre 1995 did not require this to be done.

Attic conversions can also have their conversion date recorded separately to the main property construction date, but again only if the landlord can produce the sign off sheet. This will often make a huge difference to your EPC rating.

I am the original author of the article I posted in this thread. I wrote it to publish in article marketing sites to promote / get links for my energy assessment business, but I just thought I should post it here as well as I am often asked by landlords how they can cheaply and simply improve their EPC rating.

[mind the gap]

Thanks for doing that! Appreciated.:)