According to the JEP sub-heading: ‘The map shows which properties are missing out on heat retention through poor insulation.’ That is nonsense.
The thermal image can only illustrate the amount of heat being radiated by objects. It cannot differentiate between a warm, but well-insulated house and an unheated house, with or without insulation.
Islanders can certainly not reliably ‘check online to see how green their homes are’. No wonder the energy efficiency programme manager stated: ‘We are seeing it more as a talking point rather than as a precise scientific tool.’
What a convenient excuse, which sounds very like an admission that it is a con. It is a very expensive talking point.
Your reporter noted a Longueville estate of identical new homes showing different rates of heat loss. La Providence in St Peter’s Valley is the same.
This is not the indication of poor insulation that we are supposed to believe. It merely means that some people are heating their homes more than others, thus more heat is escaping from the warmer homes through their identical insulation.
Laughably, on a farm I know, a cold, unheated lean-to shed with one side completely open to the weather is designated as having ‘substantial heat loss’.
How much has this cost us so far? I urge the minister to cut our losses and scrap the map, and not to waste yet more money on ‘more work to address some surprising anomalies.’