If a small device that can be attached to a mobile phone is made accessible to the public, then each household will have to capability to do this assessment themselves. However, cost is not negligible—the ones we looked at cost around 500 USD per device (in Türkiye) at the time of writing. Although these mobile phone attachments are certainly cheaper than conventional specialist equipment, they are still not within reach for many people. Moreover, even if some can afford it, it is not a smart investment decision since they will only need to use it once or twice. The price tag cannot easily be justified. A potential solution to this problem is to establish a loan scheme in which people can be given a device for a short period of time to do their own heat audits. Not only would that give them agency and enough of an incentive to improve energy efficiency in their homes, but it would also mean that there is no permanent reliance on a central body (e.g., a municipality or an energy company) to carry out audits on behalf of every household.

We think such an approach would be a good opportunity to carry out a few mini experiments in which we can explore at least some of these questions:

1. How will participants respond when they are presented with evidence collected through thermal imaging? Will this kind of self-initiated information gathering exercise be more effective than any other awareness raising method in which people are passive recipients of information?
2. Will there be any differences between people’s reactions to findings based on their socio-economic background?
3. Are there any commonalities between flats/houses when it comes to heat loss?
4. How would a loan scheme work? Who needs to be responsible for the distribution and recollection of the devices? The municipality or some other actor? Who will maintain them? How long should they be loaned for?
5. Following audits, how do we expect households to respond to any negative findings? Will they take immediate action to address identified heat losses through retrofitting or repair, or will they be put off by the prospect of potential disruption during such works or simply unaffordability?
6. Will certain repair and/or retrofitting work be more popular than others? For instance, will people opt for cheaper, easier interventions rather than costly but longer-term, more effective solutions?
7. Where in the country should we test this approach first? If successful, how can we then scale it?
8. Can we find local manufacturers to keep the costs down? If not, how can we convince local tech companies to develop the technology and start producing it? The latter option would have additional benefits since it promotes technology development in the country.
9. What types of data (other than self-reported) can we collect to assess the value of this intervention? What kind of a software do we need to gather meaningful data?

In the fight for saving the planet and keeping energy costs down especially for lower income households ahead of a tough winter, we ought to find answers to the above questions sooner rather than later. We will shortly begin a new experiment in partnership with the Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources and other relevant stakeholders.

If you are a tech company and have a product that we can test as part of this experiment, please do get in touch with me Gokce Tuna (Head of Exploration, Accelerator Lab) at gokce.tuna@undp.org and I will get back to you as soon as possible.