See an Example Assessment

1. Executive Summary

This report gives the PCC a single decision document covering the condition of the building, its energy costs and carbon footprint, the practical opportunities to cut waste, and a costed, sequenced route toward net zero. It draws on a visual survey, a review of utility billing, and an early carbon baseline.

The central finding is that St. Jude-in-the-Fens has several low-cost control and fabric opportunities that should be resolved before any major heating replacement is committed to. Correcting these first will reduce the building's true heat demand, which in turn allows any future heating investment to be sized correctly rather than around today's inflated losses.

Priorities at a glance

• Priority 1 — Establish an accurate energy baseline and stop avoidable expenditure.
• Priority 2 — Reduce heat demand through draught-proofing and better controls.
• Priority 3 — Replace inefficient lighting and improve zoning.
• Priority 4 — Use the resulting evidence to build a fundable heating and decarbonisation project.

Executive Dashboard

Key risks if no action is taken

• The PCC continues paying for heat that occupants do not experience as useful comfort.
• A major heating replacement is designed around the current, unnecessarily high heat load.
• Grant applications lack the baseline evidence needed to demonstrate need and impact.
• Billing and tax anomalies remain unchallenged.
• The parish misses the opportunity to build a coherent route to its wider net-zero objectives.

2. Church Profile

3. Energy Consumption

No verified Parish Energy Footprint Tool (EFT) history currently exists for the site, which is itself a priority gap. The figures below are the illustrative baseline used for this sample report and should be reconciled against the most recent 12–24 months of meter reads and invoices.

Priority 1: establish a verified EFT baseline because every cost, saving and grant-readiness figure depends on it.

4. Energy Cost Analysis

4.1 Current Cost Picture

4.2 Billing and VAT Review

The sample case assumes the parish has been charged VAT at 20% despite potentially qualifying for a reduced or zero-rated treatment on eligible energy use.

4.3 Immediate Billing Actions

• Obtain the latest 12 months of bills.
• Identify electricity and gas meter numbers.
• Confirm annual consumption in kWh.
• Ask the supplier to review tax treatment.
• Retain written evidence of any correction or credit.
• Compare corrected positions with church-sector procurement routes.

5. Building and Heating Assessment

Photo references correspond to the full 50-photograph survey set, available via the digital project folder.

6. Lighting

6.1 Lighting Survey

6.2 Hall Lighting — Consumption and Savings Model

Existing connected load: 18 × 2 × 58W = 2.088 kW.

Estimated annual operation: 15 hours/week × 52 = 780 hours.

Estimated annual consumption: 2.088 kW × 780 hrs = ~1,629 kWh/year.

Proposed LED load: 18 × 40W = 720W (0.72 kW).

Annual consumption after retrofit: 0.72 kW × 780 hrs = ~562 kWh/year.

Potential energy saving: ~1,067 kWh/year.

Estimated financial saving: at an approximate electricity price of £0.28/kWh, the hall lighting upgrade alone delivers an estimated saving of ~£300 per year.

6.3 Payback and Costs

• Commercial-grade LED battens: £20–£45 per fitting (total materials £400–£800).
• Electrician labour: roughly half a day (4 hours), estimated £200–£350.
• Full financial payback: roughly 2–4 years.

7. Fabric / Heat Loss Observations

This report recommends a fabric-first, controls-first sequence: seal obvious leakage, improve controllability, reduce unnecessary heating hours, and only then reassess actual heat demand before specifying a replacement heat source.

8. Controls and Operating Practices

Heating control is currently poor and largely manual, and this is treated as a high-priority item because it is one of the cheapest levers available to the PCC — most of the actions below carry no capital cost.

9. Renewable Energy Opportunities

Renewable and low-carbon heat options should only be specified once Sections 5–8 have reduced the building's real heat demand — sizing a system against today's uncontrolled losses risks an oversized and poorly performing installation.

• Air source heat pump (ASHP) — full or hybrid replacement of the gas boiler; performs best once fabric and controls have reduced peak heat demand.
• Targeted local heating — electric or infrared, e.g. under-pew; a lower-capital pilot suited to intermittently occupied nave space.
• Solar PV — on hall or south-facing roof, subject to structural, heritage and shading assessment.
• Battery storage — worth reassessing only once PV and/or an electrified heating system are in place.

These options are not costed in detail in this sample report; a technical feasibility assessment is a prerequisite before any renewable technology is specified.

10. Recommended Actions

11. Prioritised Action Plan

12. Indicative Costs and Savings

12.1 The £20,000 Intervention Model

This is a hypothetical example of the improvements a major grant-assisted programme of works would provide:

12.2 Illustrative Savings by Measure

13. Net Zero Roadmap

Year 1 — Stabilisation and Quick Wins

• Q1: Collect 12–24 months of bills; correct tariff/tax issue; complete missing EFT records; register Eco Church engagement.
• Q1–Q2: Heating schedule and controls reset.
• Q2: LED specification and quotations.
• Q2–Q3: Submit Quick Wins / equivalent application.
• Q3–Q4: Implement first funded measures.
• Q4: Review annual energy use (Year-1 performance report).

Year 2 — Fabric Enhancement and Digitisation

• Survey windows and doors; obtain specialist secondary-glazing / draught-proofing proposals.
• Discuss proposed works with DAC / relevant heritage advisers.
• Use Year-1 data to reassess actual heat demand.
• Launch match-funding / community campaign where suitable.
• Compare monthly consumption with the Year-1 baseline via a performance dashboard.

Year 3 — Decarbonisation and Heating Transformation

Only after the first two years should the parish make the major heating decision. Options include targeted electric/infrared systems, heat-pump solutions, hybrid arrangements, or other technologies appropriate to the building, grid capacity, occupancy and heritage constraints.

Governance, DAC & Faculty Compliance Gateway

14. Grant and Funding Opportunities

Quick Wins / fabric grants: smaller first-stage measures supported by bills, photographs, quotes and a tightly scoped project.

Digital match funding: community/donor contribution supported by a clear project narrative and target, with campaign materials prepared.

Decarbonising Churches funding: larger strategic interventions requiring a technical case, baseline, governance and costs, alongside a credible investment case.

Diocesan / local support: match funding or advice coordinated with PCC approval and project budget.

15. Conclusion

St. Jude-in-the-Fens does not yet need a large, high-risk capital decision. It needs, first, an accurate baseline; second, a disciplined pass through low- and no-cost control and fabric measures; and third, the evidence base that a low-cost pass will generate to make a well-sized, well-funded heating decision in Year 3.

Followed in sequence, this roadmap gives the PCC a realistic, minuteable path: eliminate billing and control waste at no cost, fund the lighting and fabric work from Quick Wins and match funding, and arrive at the Year 3 heating decision with a verified, reduced heat demand and a funding case strong enough to support a Decarbonising Churches application.

Appendix A — 50-Photo Index Matrix Summary