THE Warm Homes Plan has been announced with £15 billion pledged over five years – but experts have warned that “for individual families the savings will be negligible”.
The Government has launched its £15 billion Warm Homes Plan that it says will help millions of families benefit from solar panels, batteries, heat pumps and insulation that can cut energy bills.
The plan will triple the number of homes with solar panels on their rooftops by 2030 with zero interest loans and new rules that mean every new home will come with solar panels by default.
A £7,500 universal grant for heat pumps will be offered – but there will be no ban on gas boilers.
The Government is also cutting £150 of costs off energy bills for all families this April.
Luke Loveridge, Founder and CEO at Bristol-based Propflo, said the investment is positive news.
He added: “This plan is welcome news to give some certainty to an industry gearing up to deliver these upgrades. 1.9 million households have solar out of a potential 18 million, so we’ve got a long way to go.
“It is interesting they have included heat batteries and air-to-air heat pumps which will be more attractive to some homes. It is clear they are looking to support landlords to invest in their properties and with new Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards on the horizon, this is a timely reminder of the Government’s focus on the private rented sector.”
Welcome news
Scott Gallacher, Director at Leicester-based Rowley Turton, said the benefits of solar may not be felt by homeowners.
He continued: “It’s a good idea in principle, but the devil is in the detail. Solar typically delivers around a 5% return, and if households must still repay the full cost over 20 years – even at zero interest – the cashflow benefit for many working families may be negligible.
“In reality, those without spare capital risk swapping one bill for another, while better-off households gain the most. Social housing is different, as tenants aren’t borrowing, but clarity is needed on who ultimately pays – because interest-free doesn’t mean cost-free.”
Michelle Lawson, Director at Fareham-based Lawson Financial, said there are more important matters to be working on.
She added: “The Green gravy train continues. When the costs to install far outweigh the savings it is pointless. Good news though on the retention of gas boilers, though is it another mini U-turn?
“Any new builds can easily comply as can some refurbs. Retrofitting in a lot of existing stock can be counterproductive, exceeding the grant costs and incur other works. If the economy is in the state it’s in, I would be parking this and concentrating on the real things that matter.”
The Green gravy train continues
Colette Mason, Author & AI Consultant at London-based Clever Clogs AI, said energy demand from AI data centres is driving the move to ease grid “stress”.
She continued: “For individual families the savings may be negligible, but at scale they ease grid stress when it matters most. This is about buying time for the energy system, not householders paying lower bills. Building new power infrastructure takes decades. Demand from AI data centres is rising now and will continue as rollout advances.
“Cutting peak demand through homes is faster and cheaper than endlessly subsidising energy bills and the project management headaches of multiple power station builds. The real cost would be delaying and paying twice. As AI data centres soak up eyewatering amounts of electricity, household self-generation reduces competition for a finite grid.
“Rooftop solar and heat pumps deliver small gains quickly, long before new power stations come online. Speed can matter more than perfection. Excluding renters creates a gap that is a risk, not just a fairness issue. This helps owners while still leaving a large share of demand unmet.”
Sticking a cheap plaster on a haemorrhaging wound
Rohit Parmar-Mistry, Founder at Burton-on-Trent-based Pattrn Data, claimed the £150 cut isn’t as positive as it seems.
He added: “Let’s call this what it is: the £150 bill cut isn’t ‘help’ for families; it is a direct wealth transfer from the taxpayer to private energy shareholders. It’s sticking a cheap plaster on a haemorrhaging wound. While investing £15bn in solar and heat pumps is technically the right direction, we are ignoring the structural rot in the system.
“Why are we using public money to subsidise infrastructure that will ultimately prop up a privatised market? Essential services, energy, water, rail, should be public goods, not vehicles for wealth extraction. If we really want to lower costs for British businesses and families, we need to stop treating energy like a casino chip and start treating it like national infrastructure.
“Until we nationalise the supply, these grants are just expensive window dressing on a broken, predatory model that privatises profit and socialises cost.”
