Coffee & Geography Season 6 Episode 15
If you are a UK citizen or resident, please take just 60 seconds to sign the government petition:
“Make solar-shading improvements a permitted development for homes and workplaces”
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/776625
A few doors down from me are houses that look very much like ours. They were built at roughly the same time, in the same style and with the same solid walls. Originally, they were all council houses. Some remain social housing while others, including ours, have moved into private ownership over the years.
A while ago, several of the privately owned homes had external wall insulation fitted. It is not the sort of difference you would necessarily notice unless you knew what to look for, but once you do, the line between the original wall and the extra insulation becomes visible. The houses look slightly thicker and their rendered finish is different.
Dr Claire Brown is a colleague of mine through the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, although Claire is based at the University of Manchester while I am at the University of East Anglia. Her research looks at heating and cooling demand in UK social housing and, in particular, how social homes may perform under the climate conditions expected later this century.
As we talked, those houses outside my window became part of the conversation. Two homes can begin with almost identical walls, windows, orientation and exposure, yet gradually acquire very different capacities to protect the people living inside them. One household may own the property and be able to apply for a grant, contribute some money, install insulation or arrange other improvements. In the social home next door, those decisions sit with the landlord and become entangled with funding schemes, eligibility criteria, housing portfolios, competing priorities and the practical challenge of improving thousands of properties rather than one.
The climate our homes were built for
Most British homes have been designed around the need to keep people warm. Cold homes still cause serious harm, and unaffordable heating forces far too many households into choices between comfort, food and other essentials. Insulating homes properly remains a vital part of reducing energy demand, lowering bills and improving health.
In our conversation we took care not to lose sight of that, because the need to prepare for hotter summers doesn’t make cold housing disappear, and both problems exist together.
The difficulty is that homes designed primarily to retain heat are being asked to perform in a climate different from the one their designers had in mind. A house completed today could still be occupied in 2050 and probably in 2080. The people living there will inherit choices made now about orientation, glazing, insulation, ventilation, window openings, shading and the materials used throughout the building.
Claire’s interest in this began while working in construction and sustainability. She would visit sites, look at buildings going up and find herself wondering how they would perform as the climate changed. Would they still be comfortable? Would residents be able to keep cool without using large amounts of energy? Had anyone considered how much sunlight would enter through the windows during a heatwave, or were the buildings being evaluated against past conditions?
Her route back into academic research grew from those practical questions. That background came through throughout our conversation because Claire was thinking about the gap between what research indicates and what can actually be delivered through planning, construction, housing management and regulation.
The phrase “future-proofing” gets used quite easily, but these buildings need to work for someone trying to sleep through several hot nights in a row, for an older person spending much of the day at home, for young children in an upstairs bedroom, or for somebody whose health or medication affects how effectively their body regulates temperature.
A change that looks moderate on a climate graph can become much more serious when experienced inside a bedroom that has absorbed sunlight all afternoon and cannot release the heat overnight.
Comfort is not evenly distributed
The more Claire and I talked about thermal comfort, the more I found myself questioning the word “comfort”. It can make the issue sound like personal preference, along the lines of one person opening a window while another reaches for a jumper.
There is certainly an individual dimension. People experience temperature differently, and the same indoor conditions may be tolerable for one resident but dangerous for another. Age, health, disability, medication, pregnancy and many other factors affect how someone responds to heat.
At the serious end, however, this is about whether people can remain healthy and safe in their homes.
My own body does not regulate heat particularly well because of medical issues, so I am acutely aware of what happens when temperatures move beyond what I can comfortably manage. High humidity makes it harder because sweating becomes less effective. During prolonged hot weather, I am thinking about how I can keep working, whether I can sleep and which part of the house is least uncomfortable. Looking ahead, I also have to consider what those same temperatures might mean when I am twenty or thirty years older.
I know that personal experience doesn’t make my situation the same as someone living in a badly overheating home without the resources or authority to alter it. Instead it helps me understand why a conversation about thermal modelling eventually becomes a conversation about power.
Who controls the building? Who can install an awning or shutter? Who can replace unsuitable windows? Who can afford to run a cooling system? Who has somewhere else to go during an extreme heat event? Who receives support, and who is expected to cope?
Claire spoke about housing as a safe sanctuary. Shelter is one of the most basic functions of a home, but a building that traps dangerous levels of heat can begin to amplify the conditions outside instead of protecting its occupants from them.
For people in social housing, the ability to respond may sit a few steps away from the household itself. A resident can report that the property is too hot, but the eventual response depends on the landlord recognising the issue, assessing it, finding an appropriate intervention, securing funding and working within planning and building regulations. It doesn’t necessarily mean a social landlord is indifferent, more likely that the arrangements through which adaptations happen are more complicated than telling somebody to buy a fan or open a window.
Retrofitting the homes we already have
I asked Claire whether attention should be directed towards existing homes or towards making sure new houses are designed properly. It is the sort of question that sounds as though there ought to be a an easy answer, but there really is no sensible choice between the two.
Most of the homes that people will occupy in 2050 already exist, so retrofit has to be a central part of climate adaptation. At the same time, continuing to build new homes that will require expensive alterations within a few decades would be a spectacular waste of money, material and opportunity.
Insulation remains part of that picture. It can reduce heat transfer through walls and roofs, improving winter warmth and slowing the movement of summer heat through the building fabric. Yet a well-insulated home can still overheat, especially where sunlight enters through large areas of glazing.
Once solar energy passes through a window and warms the internal surfaces of a room, the building may retain that heat extremely effectively. The features that reduce heat loss during winter can make it more difficult to release excess heat during summer.
This was where our conversation moved towards shading – stopping too much sunlight from entering in the first place.
External shutters, awnings, recessed windows, roof overhangs and brise soleil can intercept sunlight before it passes through the glass. Internal curtains and blinds still help, particularly where residents cannot alter the outside of the building, but they are dealing with energy that has already crossed the window.
Trees can provide shade while also supporting biodiversity, managing water and improving the surrounding environment. Ceiling fans can make occupants feel cooler using far less electricity than air conditioning. Claire had recently experienced their effectiveness during hot weather in France and wondered why they remain relatively uncommon in British homes.
None of these options will suit every property. A small flat has different constraints from a detached house. A home facing east and west experiences sunlight differently from one facing north and south. Ground-floor and upper-floor flats behave differently. Urban density, noise, air pollution and security can determine whether opening a window is practical. There is no single intervention that can be applied everywhere, which is exactly why the design and retrofit process needs to begin with the building, its location and the people who occupy it.
Why do shutters still seem foreign?
Our own house has larger windows facing east and west. The eastern end receives the morning sun, while the western side collects heat later in the day and into the evening. During hot weather, that pattern becomes quite noticeable.
I have considered external shutters or awnings, but the house sits within a conservation area. Something intended to prepare the home for hotter summers could therefore require planning permission because it would alter the external appearance of the building.
I understand why conservation areas exist. Built heritage and local character are important, and without planning controls we could lose places and features that communities value. Yet the climate in which those buildings stand is changing, and preserving their appearance can’t mean refusing to consider the conditions people experience inside them.
If you are a UK citizen or resident, please take just 60 seconds to sign the government petition:
“Make solar-shading improvements a permitted development for homes and workplaces”
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/776625
Shutters can appear foreign in Britain because they haven’t been a common part of our recent housing culture. In warmer European countries, they are an ordinary and practical response to strong sunlight. There is no physical reason they couldn’t become more familiar here, although that would require some movement in planning expectations, public taste, manufacturing and the way housing adaptation is discussed.
The appearance of British homes has actually never stayed the same anyway. Windows, doors, roofs, extensions, conservatories, satellite dishes, solar panels and parked cars have all altered the streetscape over time. Climate adaptation will change it again, by hook or crook. The question really is whether that change happens carefully and proactively, or only after more homes become intolerably hot.
Looking again at Goldsmith Street
During the conversation we looked at Goldsmith Street in Norwich, an award-winning social housing development built to Passivhaus standards. The development uses orientation, insulation, airtightness, window positioning and roof form to reduce energy demand while retaining the feeling of terraced streets.
Environmentally ambitious buildings are sometimes presented as objects that sit apart from ordinary life, visually announcing their cleverness. But Goldsmith Street looks like housing. It draws on a form that belongs in Norwich while changing how that form performs.
It is also socially rented housing, which challenges the assumption that excellent environmental design should first be available to people who can afford it privately. If anything, households with fewer financial resources have more to gain from homes with low energy demand and more to lose when buildings are expensive to heat or increasingly difficult to cool.
Of coruse, Passivhaus design is not a magic answer to every question Claire’s research raises. Individual residents will still experience thermal conditions differently, and any building can be affected by how it is occupied, maintained and adapted over time. Nevertheless, Goldsmith Street shows that social housing can be designed with care, architectural quality and long-term energy performance in mind. The frustration is knowing that we can do this while still approving homes that need to be retrofitted almost as soon as they are occupied.
Is the UK hot right now?
At one point I brought up the website Is the UK Hot Right Now?, which compares current temperatures with what is historically typical for a place and time of year.
I like the site because a temperature means very little without context. Twenty-five degrees Celsius may be unremarkable in one region or season and highly unusual in another. People, buildings, services and ecosystems are adapted to the climates they have historically experienced, so the difference from that ‘local norm’ is probably more important than the raw temperature.
This is also why I find the conversations about heat in Britain so frustrating. Somebody will remember a hot summer from childhood and use that memory to dismiss the wider trend. Another person will point out that hotter countries routinely experience higher temperatures. Neither of those actually tell us whether the frequency, duration and intensity of heat in a particular UK location are changing, or whether homes and communities are prepared for those changes.
During the episode, we looked at places experiencing temperatures substantially above their historical expectations. The map makes that visible immediately. Fundamentally, climate change doesn’t produce the same conditions everywhere.
A heat episode also doesn’t finish when the outdoor temperature begins to fall. Buildings can store heat, particularly after several hot days, and release it slowly overnight. Residents may therefore lose the chance to recover physically between days. The geography of heat carries on through walls, roofs, windows, street layouts, green space and the night-time urban environment.
Adaptation as a form of safeguarding
The conversation kept moving between housing research and my own work with schools.
Safeguarding is already understood as a responsibility rather than an optional environmental ambition. Schools and organisations are expected to anticipate risks, protect vulnerable people and act when conditions may cause harm. For me, it’s as clear as day that extreme heat belongs within that thinking.
A child unable to sleep because their bedroom remains dangerously warm may arrive at school tired and unwell. A disabled resident may be unable to move to a cooler part of the building. An older person may not recognise the early signs of heat illness. A tenant may avoid using an electric fan or cooling device because of the cost. These are issues of health, participation, learning and dignity, and not as detached environmental concerns as some might claim.
The same principle applies across schools, hospitals, care environments and homes. If future climate conditions can reasonably be anticipated, then preparing buildings and support systems for those conditions is part of the duty to protect people.
I don’t think responding to every heat risk with mechanical air conditioning is the answer. For me, without very careful thought, air conditioning is an example of climate maladaptation. Widespread air conditioning increases electricity demand, create affordability issues and, depending on the energy source and refrigerants used, risk contributing further to the problem. It means understanding the hierarchy of responses: reduce heat gain, provide shade, support safe ventilation, use lower-energy cooling where appropriate, improve the surrounding environment and provide targeted mechanical cooling where people genuinely need it.
A cake for somebody who might otherwise go without
The conversation eventually moved into the “Spilling the Beans” section, where Claire talked about baking for Free Cakes for Kids.
The organisation connects volunteer bakers with families who might otherwise struggle to provide a birthday cake for their child. Referrals can come through schools, refuges, social services and other organisations, and the baker is given information about the child’s interests and dietary requirements.
Claire spoke about making themed cakes, including a design with a small toy car that the child could keep afterwards. She also talked about learning to bake for different dietary needs, including vegan cakes.
It might appear separate from the earlier discussion about housing, although it did not feel separate while we talked. Much of our conversation had been about what happens when systems do or do not provide people with security, dignity and the feeling that their needs matter. Baking a birthday cake for a child does not solve poverty or housing inequality. It does give that child something made specifically for them, at a moment that should feel special.
There is care in that act, but there is also geography. Local networks, referrals, volunteers, ingredients, kitchens, family circumstances and the uneven distribution of the resources that make childhood milestones possible.
I told Claire about the vegan and gluten-free cake at our wedding. It had originally been intended as an alternative for guests with particular dietary requirements, only to become the cake everybody wanted once they had tasted it. This is the sort of diversion the podcast regularly wanders into, but it also made the point that adapting something for inclusion does not necessarily mean producing an inferior version for a small group by the side. Sometimes the more inclusive choice is simply the better one.
Looking back out of the window
After the recording, I found myself looking again at those houses on my street.
The visible difference in insulation does not tell me the whole story. I do not know the internal condition of every home, what work may have been done elsewhere, how the residents experience temperature, or what plans the landlord may have. I would be making assumptions if I treated the rendered walls as the whole picture. But they still provide food for thought.
Some households are able to act earlier to adapt to a changing climate because they have money, information, ownership and control. Others will have to wait for policies, grants, landlords and institutions to catch up. The people with the least control over their housing are likely to be those with the fewest options when it becomes unsafe.
Claire’s research sits within that gap between the homes we have, the climate approaching us and the decisions that could still reduce harm.
Links:
🔗 Claire Brown — Tyndall Centre profile (https://tyndall.ac.uk/people/claire-brown/)
🔗 Claire Brown — University of Manchester research profile (https://research.manchester.ac.uk/en/persons/claire.brown-3)
🔗 Tyndall Spotlight: Claire Brown (https://tyndall.ac.uk/news/8728/)
🔗 Futureproofing UK social housing (https://www.tyndall.manchester.ac.uk/about/news/headline-1051798-en.htm)
🔗 Goldsmith Street, Norwich — Passivhaus Trust (https://www.passivhaustrust.org.uk/projects/detail/?cId=101)
🔗 Goldsmith Street — Mikhail Riches (https://www.mikhailriches.com/project/goldsmith-street/)
🔗 Shade the UK (https://www.shadetheuk.com/)
🔗 Shading for Housing: Design Guide for a Changing Climate (https://kb.goodhomes.org.uk/guidance/shading-for-housing/)
🔗 Is the UK Hot Right Now? (https://istheukhotrightnow.com/)
🔗 National Emergency Briefing (https://www.nebriefing.org/expert-briefings)
🔗 Free Cakes for Kids UK (https://www.freecakesforkids.org.uk/)
If you are a UK citizen or resident, please take just 60 seconds to sign the government petition:
“Make solar-shading improvements a permitted development for homes and workplaces”
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/776625
