Iona Norton: from private to Public Practice, new-build to retrofit, heat pumps to… heat pumps!

As is customary, we are delighted to introduce our newest member of the team, Iona Norton, on our blog. Iona is Housing Energy & Sustainability Manager at the Royal Borough of Greenwich, and has been working with us at DG Cities on decarbonisation projects. Here, she tells us about her background, the experience of moving from the private to public sector, and her reflections on their different challenges and priorities.

It has been six months since I became a Public Practice Associate. This is the programme that led me to the position of Housing Energy and Sustainability Manager at the Royal Borough of Greenwich, and incidentally, into DG Cities…

Public Practice recruits placemaking professionals to forward-thinking local authorities. The programme aims to increase built environment skills in the public sector, while easing the transition for private sector professionals that want to work in a local authority. They match applicants with positions in local authorities that best match their skills, and then organise a learning and development programme that runs alongside day-to-day work in the new role.

I’m a chartered mechanical engineer, with a background in energy strategy, building physics, building services engineering, and specifically, in heat network and heat pump design. In my previous role, I undertook detailed design of energy centres for large masterplans, contributed to best practice heat pump design guidance and worked as a resident engineer during construction.

I wasn’t at all sure how this experience would translate to my new role, or really, what the new role would turn out to be! But I was hoping that the programme would teach me more about the political, economic and social context in which my designs were being built.

In Greenwich, we have approximately 22,000 social rent homes, approximately 13% of which are considered to be in fuel poverty (and this figure is increasing). My role is to develop and deliver a strategy to decarbonise these homes to meet the Borough’s carbon neutral targets, drawing on my private sector experience. It has therefore been interesting to consider some of the differences between my previous and current role – some of these are perhaps obvious, but have really hit home…

1. As an engineer, a typical project existed inside a red-line boundary set by the client (what building, where, how big, how much). We then had the freedom to design the buildings and systems however we thought best to achieve the perfect outcome within that boundary. As a client in the public sector, the problem is ‘how to spread limited jam across a lot of toast’ (while trying to understand exactly what kind of toast you have, and trying to stop the toast being too cold, too hot, or get mouldy). The focus must be less on the perfect solution for one site, and more on the best outcome for a whole Borough.

2. The time for a design process is a luxury, but it is increasingly important – especially for existing buildings. Council housing asset management has historically been focused on reactive repairs and maintenance, and much of this work hasn’t required the need for the iterative design process I’m used to. However, the issues of sustainability, fuel poverty, overheating and damp and mould present a complex set of challenges that can’t be solved without simultaneous consideration of building fabric, heating systems and behaviour change. This requires a significant change in asset repair and maintenance programmes, and puts pressure on programmes, supply chains and cost.

3. Many decisions are not just about the right design, or the right technology, but in what order they should be implemented, and when. A new boiler can make short term carbon savings, reduce fuel bills and solve an immediate repair problem, but doesn’t make a home heat-pump ready and probably isn’t the right long-term climate solution.

“As a client in the public sector, the problem is ‘how to spread limited jam across a lot of toast’ (while trying to understand exactly what kind of toast you have, and trying to stop the toast being too cold, too hot, or get mouldy). ”

— Iona Norton

It feels like I have entered this sector just as it is being reinvented and is making a huge shift - not just in technology and design, but also in outlook and strategic priorities, while set against an uncertain economic climate and cost of living crisis. Hopefully we can work out how to get at least a few bits of toast just right.

Refurb, redevelop or dispose?

Should we be reframing the challenge of decarbonising the UK’s homes? Just as post-war necessity prompted a golden age of social housing, can today’s climate emergency lead to more than incremental improvements – could it be the catalyst for wider transformation across housing; the development of new systems, partnerships and technologies, along with growth in retrofit jobs and skills, to change the way social housing is conceived and managed?

Today, our Head of Research and Service Design, Ed Houghton is in Brighton to speak at the Chartered Institute of Housing conference. He’s joining an expert panel asking: ‘Refurb, Redevelop or Dispose?’ The session will consider what to do with those homes that are hard to insulate or switch to low-carbon heating. Is the answer to replace them with more energy-efficient buildings? Or to commit to finding and implementing new solutions to the challenge?

This is more than a technical equation. While the panel discusses the embodied carbon of existing buildings, equally important is the less tangible metric of ‘home’ and what that means to individuals. As we see from campaigns to save council estates from demolition, it is vital to work with the people that live in these ‘difficult’ buildings, and to understand the emotional and cultural significance of the neighbourhoods they are part of.

Hard to Treat Homes

The UK’s housing stock is uniquely diverse, encompassing buildings of almost every era and type, from timber-framed Tudor mansions to brutalist concrete towers. Our ‘hard to treat homes’ project for the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (formerly BEIS) is developing an evidence base of approaches to homes that are hard to decarbonise by conventional means. Working with The Bartlett School of Architecture at UCL, our team has been conducting interviews with a range of specialists in different fields, from architects and construction firms to housing trusts, community groups and manufacturers, to gain the broadest possible perspective. The research is ongoing, but it’s clear that given the breadth of stakeholders across the sectors involved in the study, there is undoubtedly a need for holistic thinking and deep collaboration

While there are no ‘one size fits all’ solutions to decarbonise social housing, there are common themes. One is the age of properties. The majority of today’s council housing was built between 1945 and the late 1970s, [1] so there are ongoing repair and preservation issues to consider, alongside the challenges of insulation and home heating. As our projects with local authorities on different aspects of net zero show, the balance between capital projects and routine maintenance can be hard to simultaneously address.

This is where our role is particularly useful. DG Cities works as a council’s innovation partner, developing strategies, trialling, implementing and evaluating new solutions and technologies that can save money, energy and make a positive difference to people’s lives. At the moment, we’re working on a range of net zero projects across housing, transport, energy and services for a local authority. They include identifying where to install electric vehicle chargers, designing a new generation of green mobility hubs, and an innovative pilot to share renewable energy across an estate.

“the residents of these ‘hard to treat’ homes are not passengers on the route to net zero; we all play an active role through our individual choices in the way we travel, recycle waste or use energy”

People-centred innovation

Technology has a role to play in every aspect of retrofit, from insulation and smart heating systems, to renewable energy sources. However, technological solutions alone are not enough – they must be designed with people in mind. It's important to recognise that the residents of these ‘hard to treat’ homes are not passengers on the route to net zero; we all play an active role through our individual choices in the way we travel, recycle waste or use energy in the home. Work by our partners at UCL shows that social factors and behaviour play a critical role in shaping how hard-to-treat or hard-to-decarbonise properties can be transitioned to net zero. [2]

At DG Cities, we are particularly interested in the potential benefits of combining new technology with a carefully designed behaviour change programme. An example of this is our trial with Sense energy monitors in Greenwich, where we are helping residents understand and reduce their own energy use. An IoT smart monitor allows them to see the relative energy consumption of different devices and activities. The residents are then supported by an Energy Saving Community, where they can get advice on energy reduction and share tips. One of the social challenges of decarbonisation is to ensure that the most vulnerable and low-income households are part of a just transition. This applies equally to the public and private sector, where the costs of retrofitting homes can be significant, and those who are already struggling to make ends meet may be left behind without adequate support.

A new golden age for social housing?

When we look at the numbers, the scale of the retrofit challenge can seem daunting, but it also represents a huge opportunity. If we approach the issue holistically, the UK can deliver more than upgraded buildings – today’s urgent imperative of climate change can be the spur to strengthen communities and create better, healthier places to live and work. There are also economic opportunities; the government has committed to creating thousands of green jobs, and retrofitting homes can play a crucial role in this effort. If we can conjure a little of the vision of that golden age of social housing, this necessary transition could make a positive impact on the lives of millions.

The heart of the net zero challenge, then, is a simple but powerful idea: that everyone deserves a safe, energy efficient and comfortable place to call home. By sharing best practice across local authority boundaries, harnessing technology and the power of communities, we can create a future in which the UK’s council housing is low carbon, high quality and accessible to all.

Read more about our research project on ‘hard to treat homes’.

[1] Municipal Dreams, John Boughton: https://www.versobooks.com/en-gb/products/332-municipal-dreams

[2] http://shura.shu.ac.uk/30320/

"Trust me, I'm a robot” - Why asking isn’t enough

Trust is complicated. It can be hard to define why we trust certain people or information, as so much of that decision-making process is instinctive. How do those human cues and feelings translate to our interactions with robots? It’s not such a far-fetched issue to consider, as Head of Research and Service Design, Ed Houghton explains.

Midjourney AI urban robot

Increasingly, we are being asked to consider trusting new and emerging technologies in our towns and cities. AI and machine learning have a range of urban applications, from connected self-driving vehicles to smart refuse systems and IoT-based security cameras. But, however inventive, well intentioned or well-funded the technology, the major limiting factor in its successful rollout and adoption is trust. Are we prepared to trust these systems that have been designed to support us? If we don’t, the technological solution could fail – and when trust is broken, reputational damage can be difficult to shake.

“Are we prepared to trust these systems that have been designed to support us? If we don’t, the technological solution could fail – and when trust is broken, reputational damage can be difficult to shake. ”

— Ed Houghton

DG Cities approaches projects by putting people at the centre of any innovation, and making sure services are useful, accessible and could improve people’s lives. That’s why, before we get carried away with the many potential benefits and uses of AI, we need to start from first principles and consider what makes us trust (or distrust) a new technology.

Research shows that to build trust, it’s important to think about five connected concepts:  

Reliability

Robots are seen as more trustworthy if they are reliable and present. In one study, a virtual and physical AI model were tested together to understand which was deemed more reliable when presenting the same information. The study found that physical robots are considered more intelligent than virtual systems such as chatbots, even when sharing the same information. [1]

Transparency

Seeing how technology works can help to build trust. Research shows that explaining how AI-based processes work can help to improve trust in their use, but only for simple procedures. One military wargame example showed that experienced staff developed trust when they could understand how AI-based decisions were being made, and were able to interrogate it. [2]

Personality

Appealing to the user and their unique needs can help to build trust, so tailoring more unique, personalised information can produce greater trust in a system. However, too much ‘personality’ can have a negative effect on trust in the tech, particularly for virtual AI. We like to see our own characteristics reflected. One experiment with virtual AI showed that mirroring different AI personalities (e.g., extrovert vs introvert) elicited positive trust outcomes when they matched the characteristics of the user [3], and these personalised responses were considered more persuasive.

Presence

AI systems with a physical presence, for example a robot based on an AI model, tend to garner higher levels of trust than virtual AI systems, like chatbots. Physical characteristics like human forms and characteristics can build trust, but it can be a hard balance to strike – too similar and they can create feelings of unease. [4]

Demonstrating trust is key, so simple design changes that take into account these principles can help to build valued services. It could mean creating a physical presence, such as a robot assistant instead of a digital chatbot, or simply ensuring that new tools and services are completely reliable before they hit the shelves.

Building trust will be an important outcome for technology developers, as well as those looking to use their services, like local authorities and developers. Whether designing a chatbot service to make customer services more efficient, or trialling a sophisticated self-driving system, evidence shows that it isn’t enough to simply ask people to trust you. Instead, it’s important to demonstrate that you can be trusted – because even in the fast-paced world of AI, trust can only be earned.

To find out how we have been exploring trust in the context of smart city tech and AI, take a look at some of our research into public attitudes to self-driving technology.

---

[1] Bainbridge et al, 2011. [Bainbridge, W.A., Hart, J.W., Kim, E.S., & Scassellati, B. (2011). The benefits of interactions with physically present robots over video-displayed agents. International Journal of Social Robotics, 3(1):41–52.]

[2] Fan et al, 2008. [Fan, X., Oh, S., McNeese, M., Yen, J., Cuevas, H., Strater, L., & Endsley, M.R. (2008). The influence of agent reliability on trust in human-agent collaboration. ECCE’08: Proceedings of the 15th European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics: The Ergonomics of Cool Interaction, ACM International Conference ProceedingSeries,vol.369:1–8.]

[3] Andrews, 2012. [Andrews, P.Y. (2012). System personality and persuasion in human-computer dialogue. ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems, 2(2):1–27.]

[4] Chattaramanetal, 2014. [Chattaraman, V., Kwon, W.-S., Gilbert, J.E., & Li, Y. (2014). Virtual shopping agents. Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing,8(2):144–162.]

Networked heat pumps: a primer

To meet net zero goals, local authorities are looking for innovative solutions to decarbonise transport, housing, waste, energy and a range of other services. For our latest blog, we want to focus in on the benefits, potential barriers and opportunities of one solution to low carbon heating – networked heat pumps. Balazs Csuvar, DG Cities’ Head of Delivery and Wouter Thijssen, Managing Director of Kensa Utilities, a leading UK heat pump manufacturer, explain.

What are networked ground source heat pumps?

Networked heat pumps replicate the gas grid model, whereby you have an individual heating appliance in your home (in this case, a ground source heat pump instead of a gas boiler), connected to a shared communal loop of pipework in the ground that supplies energy to this appliance (an ambient temperature heat network, as opposed to the gas grid).

Low-temperature heat can be sourced from the ground all year round. Networked heat pumps absorb this sustainable and constantly replenished heat source through pipework under the street. In each home, there is a heat pump, which is connected to this ground loop. The heat pump uses electricity to upgrade the heat from the ground and provide heating and hot water to homes.

“Compared to various air source, electric, gas and combined heat and power configurations, shared ground loop arrays are the most efficient and lowest carbon heating and hot water solution currently available for homes.”

— DG Cities & Kensa

How efficient are they?

On average, the overall energy efficiency of this system is four times greater than using direct electricity for heat, and five times more when compared to gas boiler efficiencies – for every 1kWh of electricity consumed to power the heat pump, approximately 3-4kWh of free energy is gained from the heat stored in the ground.

In effect, the system creates a district heating network. As generations of district heating systems have evolved, the temperatures circulating the district network have also been reduced, further improving efficiency – in networked heat pump systems (often called fifth generation district heating), an ambient temperature flow of below 20°C is possible. This enhances efficiencies and reduces heat losses, whilst still delivering the heating and hot water the end user needs. Ambient temperature loops are also an excellent source to capture waste heat and further improve the efficiencies of networked heat pumps.

The feasibility of a networked heat pump system has been proven; they have been rolled out commercially across the UK in a range of new developments, multi-storey social housing blocks and other, non-domestic, building types. The next boundary is to implement this system at scale in medium density urban areas, such as the residential terraced streets that make up a large proportion of the country’s towns and cities. These are areas likely not dense enough for traditional high-temperature district heating, but in lots of places, too dense for individual air-source (due to noise issues) or individual ground-source heat pumps (due to limited external space).

As part of a recent project, DG Cities and Kensa looked into the feasibility of such a system for a residential neighbourhood – here are some of the key takeaways from our study:

1. Do they work on terraced streets?

Yes. The technical and financial feasibility of the system depends, to a great extent, on the density of homes that will be connecting to the ambient temperature heat network. With a utility provider funding the ground array infrastructure, costs to householders are the same, if not lower, than for air source heat pump installations. Clustered sign-ups over time make this solution viable for the utility provider.

2. How do you design a consumer journey?

The scale of the challenge is massive. To meet 2050 targets, we need to decarbonise 28 million homes in 27 years. That is more than one million per year, or 20,000 homes per week. With that in mind, we need a scalable approach that tackles streets and regions at a time, rather than individual houses one-by-one. Clustered solutions like heat networks and networked heat pumps are great for this. The key, therefore, is to design a consumer journey that engages whole neighbourhoods at a time – a locally-driven transition. This is what DG Cities, Kensa, SELCE and the rest of the Heat Pump Ready Greenwich consortium developed together.

Initial surveys showed what we suspected: heat pump awareness in the UK remains low, with less than half (42%) of survey respondents knowing about heat pumps to varying degrees. Heat pump installation can also be a technical and unfamiliar process for homeowners, as with any new technology.

To address this, we built a ‘funnel’ approach to the consumer journey. This focused on engaging locally and starting very wide; first building up an awareness and understanding of the technology, before giving more specifics and detail about the system to enable people to make an informed decision.

 The diagram highlights the phases of the marketing funnel:

• awareness: making consumers aware of the energy debate, net zero and potential solutions, including networked ground source heat pumps. This includes site visits to existing heat pump sites where residents can talk to those who already have heat pumps, as well as demonstration heat pumps in the local area that they can see and ask questions about.

• consideration: providing consumers with more information to help them decide which technology offers are right for them. This is through 1:1 discussion (e.g. through scheduled ‘coffee hours’) where residents can ask all their questions.

• conversion: allowing people to deploy new technologies in their homes – if a networked heat pump is relevant, providing them with guidance on how to sign up to a scheme. This starts with surveys and quotes specific to their home and situation, giving them the specific details they need to make a decision.

• loyalty and advocacy: once customers have enrolled in the heat pump scheme, the focus moves to making sure customer service is positive, then using their experiences as a success story to recruit more consumers.

3. How can policy accelerate progress?

While we coordinated the key industry players to deliver the best possible consumer journey, we see several policy tweaks that could help fast-track this journey to much more rapid decarbonisation. First, rebalancing electricity and gas levies to avoid unfairly taxing the cleaner fuel of electricity. Second, going from heat network zoning to heat zoning, so that each local authority has the power to designate streets and regions ‘most suitable’ for a certain heat decarbonisation solution, based on local conditions. Third, granting statutory rights to ambient temperature heat networks to enable easier in-road deployment; matching the rights granted to electricity, gas and water utilities.

We believe these three tweaks can significantly speed up coordinated solutions, and would be a great example of a successful partnership between industry and policy to achieve decarbonisation.

Are you a local authority looking to trial a networked heating system?

Our feasibility study showed that current technologies can already make a huge difference to the decarbonisation of many terraced homes. However, for this to work, it will take significant commitment and large-scale behavioural change, along with trials and further evaluation. We are looking for local authorities that are interested in starting this journey with us – to harness a transformative, UK-leading innovation to deliver on decarbonisation goals. Please get in touch if you’d like to discuss this further.

DG Cities in Westminster: presenting self-driving research to the Transport Select Committee

Last week, our Head of Research & Service Design, Ed Houghton was invited to give evidence to the Government’s Transport Select Committee on self-driving vehicles. There are significant consumer barriers to be overcome to shift gear from car ownership to usership, let alone to new self-driving models. For our latest blog, Ed suggests we consider what driving means to people – and how evolving trends and technologies could shape this in the future, but only if the public are at the heart of developing any new service.

Last week, I had the honour of presenting DG Cities’ research to the UK Parliament Transport Select Committee’s investigation into self-driving vehicles. Over several years, the team at DG Cities has been working hard to help government and industry better understand how self-driving services can be designed around the needs of diverse communities, and exploring if and how acceptance of self-driving services can be made more likely. Our work has looked closely at the major barriers facing the technology, and last week we were able to share and explain in more detail some of the key findings from our evidence submission in 2022. In a field of significant hype and excitement, our research has looked to ground technology in the realities of people’s daily lives, and to make what is often the preserve of sci-fi films more tangible.

“In a field of significant hype and excitement, our research has looked to ground technology in the realities of people’s daily lives, and to make what is often the preserve of sci-fi films more tangible.”

— Ed Houghton

Self-driving services are expected to deliver many benefits, including safer roads and a shift towards shared, more sustainable mobility. But direct engagement with consumers over several years has shown us there are several significant barriers that are likely to slow the pace of the technology’s adoption. Safety, trust, and accessibility all top the list of concerns for consumers – only a quarter (26.8%) say they would use a self-driving car tomorrow if they could. Consumers don’t yet see self-driving as part of their mobility.

Why is this important?

We know that mobility, and driving in particular, is an important aspect of many peoples’ lives. It might be the way they get to work – for some, it might be needed to unlock opportunities for better paid work. For those in the countryside with little or no access to buses due to impoverished public transport, driving might be the only way a family can get their children to school.

Not only is driving often economically beneficial, whether we like it or not, it also forms a large part of many people’s identity. Whether it’s the freedom that comes from learning to drive at 17, buying a car to accommodate a growing family, or losing the opportunity to drive due to ailing health, the act of driving, and the feelings related to it, can be associated with key stages in our lives. The 20th century saw the UK’s cities and wider society become increasingly car-centric, and research has shown that people place significant financial and non-financial value on their cars.[1] This makes moving from human-driven to AI-driven vehicles, and shifting away from single or even multiple car ownership, incredibly challenging to advance.

Ed Houghton, Head of Research & Service Design

Where do we go from here?

This sets the stage for a difficult, but potentially transformative, transition for communities. We already see the concept of vehicle usership increasing in popularity, as young urban dwellers change their spending habits and look to micro-mobility and public transport to get about, with the occasional option of renting a shared vehicle. Car ownership declined for the second year running in 2022 – the first time this has happened in over a century.[2] And many expect this to continue.

The systems in which self-driving technologies are being deployed are complex. Infrastructure, regulation, public attitudes, insurance, data security and connectivity – all these components must be managed and maintained to enable acceptance and safe use of self-driving technology.

To overcome the many challenges ahead for industry and government, we will need to continue deep engagement with the public. We need to fully understand their perspective, and then design technologies and services around their needs. For a technology that plays such a central role in people’s lives, it would be hugely negative to not take account of the public’s ideas in developing new services. Failure to do so won’t just limit the chances of services being successfully adopted – at stake are also the many potential benefits of autonomy, which would remain unrealised.

Watch DG Cities’ formal submission to the UK Parliament Transport Select Committee.

[1] Haustein, S. (2021). The hidden value of car ownership. Nat Sustain 4, 752–753.

[2] SMMT (2022) UK Motorparc Data 2021. Accessed online: https://media.smmt.co.uk/uk-motorparc-data-2021/

International Women’s Day 2023: “What we do is really valuable – I wouldn't let anyone be put off, by anything.”

For International Women’s Day this year, we want to focus on the sectors we know and work in, which are still, to a great extent, dominated by men. What’s it like to make your voice heard on transport infrastructure or technology as the only woman in a meeting? Watch our EV Infrastructure Specialist, Ash Burton explain her role and the net zero projects she’s involved in, and read our blog on urban innovation, and why it’s vital for women to be at the heart of shaping policy, services and the places we live and work.

In many of our projects, DG Cities acts as the glue that brings together different groups – public and private, tech firms and local communities – to turn a great idea or innovation into something that works in practice, for people. This means that day to day, we collaborate with specialists in a range of industries, from the built environment to transport and technology. Most of these sectors are still male-dominated.  

“One impact of this underrepresentation is the absence of visible role models, which contributes to an unvirtuous cycle of training and career progression: “78% of students can’t name a famous female working in tech.” ”

In the UK, the percentage of women across all levels in the construction workforce, for instance, is just 14%. In architecture, the figures are slightly better but still low, with women making up around 35% of the profession. The situation is similar when it comes to technology. According to PwC’s Women in Tech report, 23% of the people working in STEM roles across the UK are female, with only 5% of leadership positions held by women. One impact of this underrepresentation is the absence of visible role models, which contributes to an unvirtuous cycle of training and career progression: “78% of students can’t name a famous female working in tech.”

We see evidence of these statistics in our own projects. We’re currently working with the government and UCL to develop an evidence base of housing that is hard to decarbonise. As part of this study, we’ve been conducting interviews with a wide range of experts in the built environment, heating engineering and energy sectors. Stakeholder research has given us an insight into the gender balance across many of these organisations.

Our Economist, Leanne Kelly has been looking at the data: “Anecdotally at least, we’re seeing that those in influential positions to deliver retrofit work are quite male dominated, especially on the practical delivery side. But in policy, academia and roles with a sustainability focus, it does seem more mixed and there are key female leaders.” While this reinforces the headline statistics, sustainability roles represent a vital, influential and growing area of expertise - the trend toward greater parity here is a reason to be hopeful when it comes to identifying new paths into these industries for women.

To meet people’s needs, we need to understand them

Ash Burton, DG Cities

At DG Cities, the approach to urban innovation is people-centred; our aim is to make places and services work better for everyone. To do this, we draw on a wide range of perspectives, in our research and in our own team. It’s vital that women’s voices are heard in the development of any new technology or service, particularly when it comes to issues such as safety. As Head of Research, Ed Houghton explains: “When it comes to self-driving cars, for example, the analysis we did for Project Endeavour highlighted a difference in perceptions of trust between men and women. Men were, statistically, significantly more likely to state that they believed self-driving cars were more trustworthy, whilst women were more cautious either for or against.”

Through surveys and workshops, we went on to explore related issues: how perceptions of safety in a self-driving car change according to the time of day or location, for example, or whether the vehicle is in the city or a rural area. In developing behavioural interventions, we also need to understand the extent to which safety is the driver for a particular transport choice. With this in mind, how do we develop safe, accessible ride-sharing services? How might we harness the potential of IoT to make a housing estate feel safer? What spaces do teenage girls want to see in a city? These are just a few of the questions that highlight the vital role of women in developing any policy, place or service.

(From left) Hiba Alaraj, our expert in the management of net zero, social sustainability and mobility projects; Economist, Leanne Kelly; and Communications Lead, Sarah Simpkin

International Women’s Day 2023

There are two things we want to do to mark International Women’s Day this year. First, we want to celebrate the fantastic women of DG Cities who are leading the way in their fields. Our small but mighty team bucks the trend of the industries we work in – our female/male ratio is currently 50:50. We also bring together a range of disciplines: transport, planning, engineering, behavioural science, communications, economics, project management and research.

It isn’t always easy to be the only woman in an all-male meeting, whether you’re discussing the tech behind self-driving cars or calculating the electricity needed to charge a council’s vehicle fleet. We’re proud of those in our team that go out there and do it, regularly and fearlessly – not least our leader in Smart Mobility, Kim Smith, who has been working on transport planning, project delivery, policy and high-level strategy for more than twenty-five years.

Second, by continuing to support and encourage women to enter these arenas, we can create a more diverse and inclusive industry that benefits everyone. We want to play our part in that. So, if you’re a woman thinking of a career in urban innovation, we’re always open to a chat. And as for making role models more visible, here’s an interview with one of the inspiring women in our team working to help deliver Net Zero, our Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Specialist, Ash Burton: “Every day is exciting, it's new, and what we do is really valuable. I wouldn't let anyone be put off, by anything.”

Launch of Digital Greenwich Connect: “We are a progressive, innovative council with big ambitions for our borough.”

Last week saw the launch of Digital Greenwich Connect, a new partnership set to deliver next generation connectivity in the Royal Borough of Greenwich. Teams from DG Cities, our technology partner, ITS and the Council, led by Councillor Anthony Okereke, joined residents, business leaders, community groups and media to inaugurate the £2m joint venture to deliver ultrafast digital infrastructure within the borough.

Leader of the Royal Borough of Greenwich, Councillor Anthony Okereke gives the inaugural speech

Almost every technological innovation, from electric vehicle charging to smart energy meters, relies on fast, reliable and affordable digital connectivity. A new partnership has been launched that aims to make the Royal Borough of Greenwich one of the most digitally connected areas in the country.

The new company, Digital Greenwich Connect Ltd, has been incorporated to design, build, maintain and commercialise a 21 km full-fibre, gigabit-capable network infrastructure. The venture was formally launched by Leader of the Royal Borough of Greenwich, Councillor Anthony Okereke at a packed event in Woolwich Works in south-east London on Thursday 23rd February.

This new digital highway is a £2m joint venture between DG Cities and full-fibre provider ITS Technology Group. Each company has invested £1m into the programme. Digital Greenwich Connect will substantially improve connectivity in the area, at an affordable price, while enabling public service transformation and an improvement in digital skills. This aligns to the Council’s ambitious new corporate strategy: ‘Our Greenwich’.

“This is one of a number of innovative steps we are taking to ensure our residents and businesses have access to fast, reliable and affordable digital connectivity and to support the delivery of modern Council services. It underpins our ambition for our communities set out in ‘Our Greenwich’ and reinforces our position as a forward-thinking, innovative council.”

— Councillor Anthony Okereke

Innovative new deployment techniques are being used as part of the network, minimising the impact on the environment and on local residents and transport users by utilising existing public infrastructure wherever possible. Internet service providers using the network will be able to offer speeds of 1,000mbps and beyond, providing a highly reliable service for businesses, public services and residents.

In its initial launch phase, the network will cover a 21km area within Woolwich, with further expansion planned. It will provide a full-fibre, ultrafast, gigabit-capable network infrastructure and will equip businesses, schools, residents and students with access to internet speeds that underpin modern working and modern living. It is conceived in a true area-wide, inclusive approach, for residential and business users. It has been designed to ensure that social housing and community centres are included in the strategy, so that those on the front line of providing support and care in the community will not be held back by connectivity issues.

Tony Hughes, Daren Baythorpe and Trevor Dorling

“Fast, reliable connectivity is vital to businesses, attracting investment, supporting innovation and improving services for local residents - particularly as many more people now rely on high-speed broadband to work at home. ”

— Daren Baythorpe, CEO of ITS Technology Group

After the launch speeches came two lively panel discussions, one focusing on business, the other on the opportunities for residents. President of the South East London Chamber of Commerce, Helen McIntosh highlighted the diversity of businesses of all scales and industries in Greenwich, from submarine telecoms to international names in film production. The panel underscored the importance of fast connectivity across sectors, and its role in building economic resilience, growth and attracting investment.

In the residential discussion, the panel looked at connectivity as the cornerstone of achieving digital inclusion aims. Jamie Carswell, Director of Housing and Safer Communities in Greenwich made a valuable point about embracing the wider, less direct benefits of digital inclusion initiatives, such as the opportunities to bring different generations together. Guests also had the chance to see some of the technology close-up, thanks to a display of the fibre and junctions by the ITS team.

“Today is the culmination of many years’ work to ensure that Greenwich has the digital infrastructure that is essential to a modern economy – one that reflects the needs and aspirations of businesses and residents, and supports the delivery of the next generation of public services. ”

— Trevor Dorling, Managing Director DG Cities

Find out more: digitalgreenwichconnect.com

More cupboards, fewer orbs: visualising the smart city

For our latest piece, we’re looking at the way we communicate aspects of our work – specifically, the images we use to illustrate the smart city and the applications of IoT tech. Communications Lead, Sarah Simpkin, proposes we move away from waves of light and flying numbers and focus instead on showing the tangible difference an innovation could make to a place, and to the lives of people that live and work there.

Smart city images suggested by Midjourney AI

What comes to mind when you think of a smart city. A web of blue and white orbs against an evening sky? Maybe some icons floating above the rooftops, or a wave of binary superimposed on a cityscape? A turquoise infographic or two? Search ‘smart city’ and you can see just how uniform this visual shorthand has become.

Motion blurs and flying numbers over the city are supposed to signify an efficient flow of systems, data, energy and information. According to colour theorists, blue is the colour of trust and clarity, as opposed to red, used in a similar context to signify risk or data security. The web or net symbol is a very literal way of making visible the idea of connectivity, of linking nodes. But technology has moved on from the telephone line – it isn’t so linear. In a way, these images are drawing on analogue concepts to try and visualise today’s dispersed, wireless networks. They pretend to map sensors and data points of various city systems, but are mostly sci-fi really.

Early ideas of the smart city didn’t draw on the same visual references. In 2008, IBM launched their Smarter Planet vision, which proposed exploiting the interconnectivity of power grids, food, water, traffic and healthcare systems, enabled by “sophisticated analytics and algorithms that could make sense of it all.” The concept was by Ogilvy & Mather and IBM, and the visual language was developed by San Francisco agency, Office. There were no webs of light, but instead, colourful motifs that illustrated the project’s objectives. As Office wrote in their case study, it was “a graphic language that could illustrate these complicated solutions in a way that was visually arresting and distinctive, yet simple and approachable enough to be easily understood around the world.”

IBM Smarter Planet advert in an airport © Office: “Inspired by the creative vision that designer Paul Rand developed for IBM several decades ago, we adopted his boldness and “wink” in a way that’s unusually approachable for big tech.” https://visitoffice.com/work/ibm

Somehow, from the singular idea that connected technologies could improve urban life, tech firms ended up with a much more nebulous way of expressing this connectivity. You could argue that the resulting imagery has distanced useful technological advances from their purpose, and from the people that could stand to benefit. And just as these illuminated webs are a bit of a turn-off, so are many visualisations of future transport - I’m thinking of the ones that show beatific couples spirited around in shuttles between futuristic towers in a perpetual golden hour. There is a lie in their two-dimensional promise of the future, because it doesn’t see the city as a holistic, complicated whole. A world with self-driving services may not be so far away, but they won’t necessarily be the defining element of our streets. Some of us will probably still ride old bikes, there will be people walking, wheeling, signposts, deliveries, litter, trees – all the chaotic, unplanned details that give a city life.

What do the components of a smart city really look like?

For a while now, I’ve been asking the DG Cities team to send me site photographs of any new installations – “no image too boring” – and they have delivered. IoT, ultrafast connectivity, damp monitors: none of these announce themselves with a beam of light, the reality is much more prosaic. In fact, much of the action is buried underground or in a cupboard. A camera on a lamppost, a small white box on the side of a brick wall, easily mistaken for a meter cabinet. But what that box represents is the ability to easily switch broadband supplier – the contents of that box help council tenants get a better deal. And that camera, connected to a monitoring app that alerts the maintenance team to issues, makes life harder for fly-tippers, gathers evidence more efficiently and helps to improve the neighbourhood.

There’s perhaps a reason why mobile masts and boxes aren’t overtly shown – in my view, much could be done to improve their urban presence. But picturing technology as an ominous urban forcefield can’t do much for public engagement either, particularly when it comes to connecting with those sceptical of big data, 5G and most recently, the idea of the 15-minute city. What’s more, the sophisticated new AI imaging tools we have at our disposal may just generate more of the same. As these models learn from existing visual references, we could find ourselves bathed in binary, in an echo chamber of ever more clichéd imagery.

But it’s easy to grumble. What should we be trying to show instead? I think we should be focusing on the outcome, on what we anticipate a new service or solution could deliver. Not to oversell it, but to illustrate what it’s supposed to do. If we’re looking at the potential impacts of some of our IoT, electrification or connectivity projects, for example, the picture is very different.

It might just look like a child doing their homework, or streaming a game. It could mean interviewing for a job without the screen freezing awkwardly. It might be the quiet rounds of an electric bin lorry, a safe journey home from a night out in a shared mobility service, or a new way to gather a community’s views on local issues. Or it could be a lifeline – a health alarm, a home free of mould and damp, an accessible link to vital services. Technology touches so many aspects of life, from the mundane to the extraordinary, and it is these human interactions that DG Cities is most interested in.

So, when we’re choosing an image for our own communications, we’re going to try not to default to the industry standard. No more retro futuristic webs of light, because for DG Cities, the future of the smart city is about people – and understanding what technology can do to make their lives better. Even if that really looks like a box in a cupboard.

Where would you charge an EV? Taking a holistic look at mobility across Greenwich housing estates

We have talked a lot about decarbonising buildings and heating in our recent blogs, so now some news of a transport project we’re excited to be getting started on. Our Head of Smart Mobility, Kim Smith introduces our latest work with the Royal Borough of Greenwich on the next generation of mobility hubs, assessing the impact of new transport solutions on the shared spaces of a housing estate.

For some time now, DG Cities has been working on projects that seek to understand the decarbonisation challenges that transport, in all its forms, brings. Transport is more than a service, it is the glue that binds together social cohesion and complex aspects of people’s lives; it facilitates access to life’s necessities, from work and admin to recreation and education. Whether you live in a city with good public transport links, or in a car-dependent rural spot, there are nuanced decisions to be made about getting from a to b.

With the phasing out of the sale of new petrol and diesel vehicles getting rapidly closer, a large part of our mobility work has been looking at the infrastructure required to support the transition to electric vehicles, whether for individuals or industry. In all our research, a primary concern flagged by those we have interviewed and surveyed has been access to a reliable and fairly priced charging network.

Work done with some of our partners, including Field Dynamics as part of Project REME, has helped us look at charging solutions for the large number of people who lack access to off-street parking in rural locations. Our latest work with the Royal Borough of Greenwich (RBG) takes us back to an urban environment, looking at the complexities of parking and charging on the Borough’s housing estates, and exploring ways to support residents in their transition to zero-carbon vehicles.

We have benefited from the insight gained through our work with developers, particularly where we have helped them future-cast transport trends and understand the changing wants and needs of their residents over a 15 or 20 year phased build out. This helped us create a picture of changing behaviours and the flexible approach which can be applied to supporting transport requirements.

Initially, our discussions with RBG Housing were centred around supporting the transition to electric vehicles for council tenants by identifying opportunities and delivery models for siting charge points on housing estates. DG Cities takes a whole-city approach to understanding the diversity of needs – and understanding that change in one area can impact many others. The project has now developed into a more holistic look at modal choices and offers on different estates, and what could be delivered to widen access, not just to electric vehicles, but to other sustainable and active travel solutions.

Would residents want to look at identifying space in the estate for cycle schemes, e scooter trials, car club vehicles? How does this impact on the public realm and shared spaces around the estate? From these lines of enquiry, we began thinking about a bespoke mobility hub designed with the specific wants and needs (and physical limitations and opportunities) of the borough’s differing types of estate and its residents.

We’re at the very beginning of this exciting piece of work. Initially, we’re looking at different estate typologies, spread across the Borough, to develop pilot designs. Working with colleagues from Greenwich Council, we have identified five estates which fit one or other of these categories. Our research and project development approach is always human-centric, and the estate mobility hub pilots is no different – over the next three months we’ll be working with residents and Council officers to create a template for a model which could then be rolled out across Greenwich.

Watch this space…

To develop safe, trustworthy self-driving services, we need to bring people on board

This week, DG Cities is at the IoT Solutions World Congress in Barcelona. Head of Research and Service Design, Ed Houghton will be presenting lessons from our work on projects such as Endeavour and DRisk. For more than five years, we have been helping people imagine the ‘self’ in self-driving and envision what a future service could look like; and in doing so, deepening our understanding of the public’s needs and concerns. We have become a UK leader in attitudes to self-driving technology, and we’re excited to be in beautiful Barcelona to share our insights, as Ed explains...

Barcelona; Torre de Collserola on the Tibidabo hill

Imagine, for a second, what you would do if your taxi turned up at your doorstep with no driver. It still turned up – in fact it turned up on time, doors opened, and invited you to get inside to drive to your destination. Would you get in, sit back and relax, or would you ride on the edge of your seat, anxious for the journey to end?

This experience isn’t necessarily too far in the future. Self-driving vehicle trials have been underway across the UK for several years, with projects exploring how to ensure the technology is ready to offer this type of service. Just last week, the CAVForth project in Scotland trialled a self-driving bus on a real-life route across the Forth Bridge. Not quite a taxi, and there are still safety personnel involved, but the tech being tested is always improving.

The barriers to successful delivery aren’t necessarily tech-based, however (though there are still plenty of tech barriers to overcome!) In fact, we know from our research that there are key barriers among consumers, in their attitudes to self-driving services, and to AI more generally. Decision-making systems which support, or even remove the need for a person to make decisions, are often viewed with considerable mistrust. For example, DG Cities research on trust in AI-based self-driving services shows that almost a quarter (23.6%) of the public are yet to be convinced, neither trusting nor mistrusting self-driving services.

That is why, at DG Cities, we focus on bringing the public into the process of designing and developing AI-based transport. To build trust, we must incorporate diverse perspectives and needs into the service design approach. We cannot design new services without first understanding what the people that will ultimately benefit from them need and want.

We also need to make sure that we go to the public to meet them where they are. This means physically (and digitally) convening discussions in ways which are inclusive and accessible, and making sure that participants are able to fully engage with discussions about their visions for the future of AI-based mobility, such as self-driving cars.

“We need to make sure that we go to the public to meet them where they are. This means physically (and digitally) convening discussions in ways which are inclusive and accessible.”

— Ed Houghton

A good example of this in action is the delivery of the national roadshow for project D-RISK, which is a project designed to develop a driving test for AI based self-driving services. By crowd sourcing the most unexpected, bizarre and unpredictable driving experiences, the public can help to train vehicles to deal with the most complex and unique scenarios (‘edge cases’). As part of our roadshow we travelled across the UK, to museums, universities, and outdoor markets, to meet people and hear their stories. As well as contributing edge cases to our research, this gave us a unique perspective on wider attitudes to emerging technologies.

What these projects brought into view is that a key issue with current approaches to AI tech, and IoT innovation in general, is that there isn’t enough dialogue and discussion with the public about what they want or need. If we are to build services that are trusted, valued and most importantly adopted, we have to get much better at listening, learning and building them with the people we hope will use them in the future.

Ed Houghton is speaking at the IOT Solutions World Congress on January 31st and February 1st 2023.

Do you know how clever a smart electric vehicle charger can be? Launch of our BEIS-funded smart charging research

Some of the barriers that deter consumers from making the switch from petrol and diesel to electric vehicles include anxiety around charger availability and range. There are a number of technologies available to mitigate these concerns. But are the public aware of the smart capabilities of home charging, for example? To better understand perceptions of EV charging, the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) asked DG Cities to conduct a national survey. The results shed light not only on consumer attitudes, but also on areas where improvements are needed to accelerate EV adoption. On the day of the report’s publication, Head of Research and Service Design, Ed Houghton introduces the findings.

Exploring how consumers understand EV smart charging

Transport is the largest contributor to UK domestic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, responsible for 27% in 2019. As such, it is an area requiring rapid transition to low/no carbon alternatives. [1] Battery electric vehicles (EVs) and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) have become an increasing presence on our roads – one in ten new vehicles purchased in 2022 were EVs, with sales increasing by 40%. [2] This trend has been growing year on year, as more vehicles enter the market offering more choice and more competitive price points.

A big challenge, however, is how to ensure the UK has the necessary charging infrastructure to support the transition to electric vehicles. Range anxiety is a known concern among drivers. For a long time, worries about when and how to charge have prevented people from switching to EVs. One of the benefits of EVs over internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles is the relative ease with which they can be charged form home, if consumers can afford to, and have access to a home chargepoint. As sales of EVs have increased, sales and installations of home chargepoints have lagged behind, even though new smart functionalities have come to the market. Smart charging is a benefit as it enables consumers to manage how and when to home-charge their EV and to control charging remotely.

But to what extent are consumers aware of the value of smart chargepoints? And how clear are their different functions to consumers, given the number of chargepoints on the market? In 2022, we were asked to help the Government answer these questions. The DG Cities team undertook a national survey of EV consumers to find out more.

The first national survey of EV smart chargepoint attitudes and consumer behaviours

DG Cities was excited to be asked by the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy to explore this area in detail through a national survey of EV consumers, and to provide a useful baseline for new regulations designed to support improvements in the smart chargepoint market.

Working with BEIS, we delivered a literature review of recently published data and insights to develop a survey that captured views and behaviours. We partnered with YouGov to develop the national sample of EV and hybrid vehicle owners to distribute the survey among. We developed questions that investigated various aspects of vehicle charging – including preferences over location, charging time and chargepoint functions – and we asked respondents to share their views and interest in purchasing a smart chargepoint in the future.

Findings

Our survey was completed by over 1,002 electric vehicle and plug-in electric vehicle owners in March 2022. Some of the key findings were:

• Most battery EV owners have a dedicated chargepoint at home: Two-thirds (66%) of battery-electric car drivers have a dedicated chargepoint at home. However, the majority (66%) of respondents with battery-electric vans have a 3-pin cable as their main charger, which doesn’t allow charge scheduling.

• Smart functions are increasingly prevalent: The top three functions are charge scheduling (41%), connecting to the vehicles on-board computer (39%) and internet connectivity (36%). This indicates that many of the chargepoints EV drivers own have at least some degree of ‘smartness’.

• For those who schedule their smart charging, most have a positive experience: The majority agree that they can view their current charging schedule with ease (67%); change the charging schedule with ease (63%) and monitor the cost of their charging with ease (77%).

• Overriding schedules is common, which may have an impact on the grid at times of high load: The results show that a quarter (26%) of participants never override their charging schedule. However, over half override their schedule up to 50% of the time. A few respondents override every time they charge, suggesting that they may not have the scheduled charging set up to suit their needs.

• Workplace charging is still uncommon: A third (30%) of participants use workplace charging. Over 60% say that their workplace either does not have the facilities, that they do not go to a physical workplace or choose not to drive to work.

Growing smart charging in the future

Our work for BEIS highlights that there is growing interest amongst consumers of smart functionalities, particularly the ability to schedule charging. There are, however, some barriers that need to be overcome for consumers, particularly when it comes to the complexity of the products on offer, and standardisation of chargepoint technologies.

Data and insights of this type are important for industry and policymakers to understand progress towards net zero. DG Cities is excited to have partnered on this work, and we’re looking forward to seeing how industry, and adoption by consumers, evolves in the future.

To read the new research, click here. To find out more about our research into consumer behaviour when it comes to EVs and some of the projects we have been working on in this field, download our Electric Vehicles Community Insights Report, 2022.

[1] Department for Transport (2021) Decarbonising transport: a better, greener Britain.

[2] Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (2023) Annual vehicle sales figures.

Considering people, not just properties: when it comes to decarbonisation, what makes a home 'hard to treat'?

DG Cities and the Bartlett School of Architecture, UCL have teamed up on a government study to investigate hard to decarbonise housing. An estimated 10 million homes Britain are difficult to insulate or improve by conventional means. The project, commissioned by the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS), aims to identify these homes, define what makes a home ‘hard to treat’ or ‘hard to decarbonise’ (in the context of energy efficiency and low carbon heating), develop a practical framework to help inform policy and guidance to tackle challenging properties. Head of Research, Ed Houghton explains more…

Stretching targets but limited progress

The UK government is committed to achieving net zero carbon by 2050. To reach this target, significant sectors of the UK’s economy must undergo a considerable transformation. One major sector is the built environment. Data by the UK’s Climate Change Committee highlights that heat in buildings accounts for 468 MtCO2e or 37% of UK annual greenhouse gas emissions. If this is reduced it could deliver considerable progress towards the government’s net zero objectives. 

The challenge however isn’t a simple one – the complexity of the UK’s built environment, the diversity of housing stock and types, regional variation and history of many buildings means that ‘treatment’ for reducing emissions is not a quick fix. For the most difficult – termed “hard-to-treat” - the issues are complex, so it is important to be intentional and evidence-based in any approach to their improvement. 

What exactly is a ‘hard to treat’ or ‘hard to decarbonise’ home?

Definition matters, and this is part of the challenge we’re exploring in this work. A common industry definition describes hard-to-treat homes and properties as those which are difficult to make energy efficient through conventional improvements, such as cavity insulation, loft insulation or low-carbon heating solutions, like heat pumps. Very hard-to-treat are often rural, heritage, and off the gas grid. Estimates put the number of hard-to-treat homes in the UK at around 10 million.

But we’re also interested in understanding whether it is more useful to describe these homes as ‘hard to decarbonise’. Given targets are specifically focused on decarbonisation, academia and international policymakers are increasingly adopting this term. The terminology is broader, and reflects on the need to tackle these properties for the purposes of achieving legally binding targets. Others working in the space, perhaps focused on fuel poverty, may use a different phrase entirely, such as 'hard to heat'. Semantics, in this case, are important to consider: treatment doesn’t necessarily suggest long-term improvement, whereas approaches to decarbonisation are often sustainable and deliver impact over time.

Decarbonisation and fuel poverty

Tackling hard-to-treat homes will not only support progress towards the Government’s net-zero goals. There are also real economic, social and health benefits to improving the quality of the most difficult to improve housing stock – particularly given the ongoing cost-of-living crisis affecting people across the country. Many in hard-to-treat homes are struggling to make ends meet, with a much larger proportion than ever before entering fuel poverty.

For example, properties with uninsulated solid walls had the highest rate of fuel poverty (22.5% of households), compared to 8.0% of those with insulated solid walls.* A similar trend follows for households with uninsulated cavity walls compared to insulated cavity walls (15.0% vs 8.3%). Unsurprisingly older homes are more frequently hard-to-treat, and their residents are more likely to be in fuel poverty: 21.7% of households living in pre 1919 homes were in fuel poverty in 2020, compared to 10% of those built between 1965 and 1985; and less than 5% of those built after 2002. Therefore, tackling hard-to-treat homes, particularly among older and heritage properties, could also alleviate the issues presented by fuel poverty. 

Seeking best practice

The diversity of housing stock in the UK means there is no one-size fits all solution. This is why, through this work, we’re not only building a set of key terms and definitions that describe problems and solutions, we’re also constructing a practical framework to help decision-making in industry and across policy, with guidance for tackling challenging properties.

The efficacy of treatment approaches will of course differ considerably, by context, materials, housing archetype, resident behaviour. We know therefore that we must capture and shed a light on the effectiveness of holistic solutions, and provide depth and detail to support those exploring treatment options through the framework. We’re also keen to highlight what works, and draw on real-life examples from across industry to assess not only the challenges that hard-to-treat properties present, but the practical interventions that have been proven to work. 

Over the coming weeks and months, DG Cities and UCL Bartlett School of Architecture are undertaking research to better define and map ways forward for hard-to-treat homes. We’ll be speaking to leaders across the housing and energy industries, academia and third sector to collect insights and build case studies. We want to draw out examples from across Great Britain – and are keen to chat to as many organisations and individuals as possible about the challenge, and opportunity, we all face in improving the quality of our homes.

To find out more, and to take part, visit: https://www.dgcities.com/hard-to-treat-homes

---

Data: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/annual-fuel-poverty-statistics-report-2022