Energy Efficient Scotland: Improving energy efficiency in owner occupied homes

In general I agree, as long as it is recognised that some old buildings particularly in rural areas may need to have some leeway. Overall I suspect this is a small percentage of the current housing stock

In general yes, but there needs to be a recognition that this may not be possible ( or at least economically practicable) in all houses. eg those with stone built walls and lathe and plaster lining

The fabric first approach is sound

This is very complex and I don't fully understand it, but the last paragraph of Annexe A
would seem to be the best approach
'where a property does not meet the EPC band C standard by the installation of any measures to improve EER, there may be potential to introduce a requirement that the EIR is not made worse following the installation of those measures'

There should be the ambition to reduce the carbon footprint of households further in the future

Not sure - it depends what advice and financial help is available to householders and whether the infrastucture is in place e.g if the 5 households on our electricity line all opted for some form of electric heating SPEN would need to put in more capacity, possibly 3 phase. Who would pay for it?
We have been told in the past when just one house (ours) looked at ground source that we would need more capacity and we would have to pay for the installation (>£7000)

The new standards should be introduced geographically. The introduction of broadband has shown that it is clearly easier to upgrade some places than others. If the point of sale is the trigger some houses which could be easily upgraded may not be done for years where others that are more difficult may be impossible to sell because the infrastructure is not available.
Also if the matter is approached geographically rather than at the whim of individual householders there is room to consider an overall approach, such as district heating schemes or upgrading electric connections. The present system where it is up to a single householder to negotiate with SPEN is inefficient and they treat everyone independently and charge accordingly.

I don't think it will be possible to sell houses without the standard in place as solicitors will warn against it. If it is passed to the buyer they will expect a large discount. Some houses will be unsaleable and likely to be bought by speculators at low cost who may do nothing with them for years (like shops in town centres)
If a house is very unlikely to meet the standard perhaps it is better to consider demolition and rebuilding

It is more cost effective to put in insulation etc whilst a property is being renovated

It should be inspected by a qualified person independent of the builders/renovators

If it was made a statutory duty of Local Government there would need to be enough funding to make sure enough properly qualified and competent officers were employed.
In the past, our experience of building control officers enforcing necessary measures has been very poor.

An independent energy surveyor system might be better.
Whoever it is they should visit during construction and not just after it is completed

First there should be some arbitration body to oversee difficult cases where either the building has particular problems (e.g Listed) or the owner has insufficient resources or capacity
Then fines - related to the property's carbon footprint but careful consideration should be given to circumstances.
If a person genuinely could not afford to upgrade their property perhaps they should be given a government loan which would be repaid at an affordable rate or else a charge could be put on the property as a percentage of its value, and this percentage repaid whenever the property is sold

If the improvements are actually feasible (no matter if they are actually cost effective) and
if the owner of the property is deemed to be able to afford them, they could be given annual recurring fines proportional to the excess carbon which they produce. The cost of a unit could be increased annually.

I feel the people most likely to try and avoid their responsibility, probably also most likely to deny man made climate change probably will not mind about the fines.
They should be fined through the courts so their names appear in the public domain

Elderly people in old properties
People with low incomes
People in fuel poverty

Either the local council but better a separate body similar to SEPA

Cost effectiveness should include benefit to society and reduction in carbon emissions.
It should be done as a whole building project rather than as each measure is put in place

In rural areas, capacity and quality of connection to mains electricity may mean that the cost of implementing air or ground source heating becomes prohibitive.

Planning permissions??

Neighbours in a shared property?

But it depends on the building

Nationally

I think the occupancy based assessment is very important. Some people would use a lot more energy living in our house than we do, but it would be very costly. Generally we have cut down on using our central heating but heat individual rooms as necessary with electric fan heaters in the small rooms and wood burning in the large rooms and always use shutters and curtains at night. We expect to wear layers of warm clothes in winter Future occupants who might expect to walk around in tee shirts would not be comfortable here and to raise the energy efficiency standard sufficient for such behaviour would be prohibitively expensive

Zero carbon should take precedence over strict regulatory compliance

All necessary training should be put in place. If they are self employed and have to pay for qualifications they should be able to pay them back over time (like student loans)

They should be separate from any construction company and should be monitored, perhaps licensed? Their work should be subject to unannounced spot checks

Our experience of getting installers i.e plumbers, builders, joiners to do any job in this area is not good. They all have more jobs than than they can cope with and long waiting lists and tend to concentrate on big projects. We have lived here a long time and know that their standards are very high, if a job looks as if it will be in the least bit difficult or complicated they do not even give a quote. I suspect if they look at something and think it is not technically feasible they will just say they won't do it. Then we have to wonder if we trust the ones who say it can be done?

If I can get a qualified installer who has come with good recommendations I would say they should determine feasibility

They are all important (see above)

If work is undertaken and checked it should be guaranteed and certificated so that future sales of the property should not be compromised. Perhaps the installer should also be insured? (like an architect or for dry rot treatment)

Yes.