And I’m not going to be critical of heat pumps in this blog, instead I am going to pay heed to the words of two of the technology’s most vocal cheerleaders, who work for the all-electrification lobby group, RAP. They recently authored, with others, a paper called “Total cost of ownership of heat pumps and policy choice: The case of Great Britain.”

It all sounds very grand, very academic – after all they boast the paper has been “peer-reviewed” and it is published in a scientific journal. So, what they say should carry some weight. (At this point, I will leave aside my concerns over the cherry-picked data they have used to draw what they believe are important conclusions around whether a heat pump is cheaper over its lifetime than a gas boiler).

They examine the impact of rebalancing levies and taxes, from electricity to gas or taxation; they apply a carbon tax to gas use; they use smart tariff pricing for heat pumps and use various trial data as their evidence base (and some less than academically rigorous observations).

Their big claim is that a heat pump, running at a SCOP of 3.3 costs the consumer less over a lifetime than a gas boiler. We could argue the toss about this but wait, they then go on to say:

“Although this is certainly achievable as data shows, this is not currently the situation for the majority of homes where heat pumps have been fitted.” Thud, as the torpedo hits the hull.

The paper then goes onto explore some sensitivities around policy areas, including the current subsidy scheme – the Boiler Upgrade Scheme with its £7500 incentive.

This is what they conclude:

“Importantly, if the BUS grant was removed, heat pumps could not achieve the same TCO (Total Cost of Ownership) as a gas boiler as a SCOP of more than 5 would be required under all scenarios.” Gush, as the water floods in.

Next week, I will revert to my words not those of others.