The starting point: heating is included in the monthly charge
In most housing associations the heating is baked into the monthly charge and split by share ratio, which in practice means by floor area. The model is simple and has a reasonable element to it: a larger apartment takes more energy to heat. But it misses the other half of what heat costs: how warm the household chooses to keep it.
Two apartments of the same size can differ by several degrees in indoor temperature. With a split by floor area they pay exactly the same. The household that holds 20 degrees and airs sparingly subsidises the neighbour who holds 23 and opens a window when it gets too warm. And because nobody sees their own heating cost, there is no reason for anyone to change.
Option one: individual heat metering
Individual metering and billing of heat means that the energy supplied to each apartment is measured, with heat meters or heat cost allocators on the radiators, and that the household is billed for its measured energy.
The principle sounds fair but has a known problem: the energy need depends on where in the building the apartment sits. A corner apartment with a lot of external wall, or the apartment at the top, needs considerably more energy to hold the same temperature than a sheltered apartment in the middle. With individual heat metering the exposed positions pay more for the same comfort, because of something they cannot influence. That is why the model is often criticised and sometimes supplemented with correction factors, which in turn become hard to explain and defend.
Option two: measure the comfort instead
The comfort model measures not the energy in the pipes but the result: the temperature each apartment actually holds, measured with a sensor in every room. Households that choose more heat pay a larger share of the building's heating cost, households that keep it cooler pay less, and the apartment's position in the building makes no difference, because it is the comfort that is priced, not the energy required to reach it.
The model is position-neutral and easy to explain at a general meeting: everyone pays for the heat they have chosen themselves. The metering needs to be complete, one sensor per room, to be hard to get around. It is the model Comfort heating is built on: the association sets the split model, the metering and the underlying figures are handled automatically, and the cost goes onto the ordinary monthly invoice.
What does the law require?
Less than many think. The requirement for individual heat metering applies only to a small part of the stock with the worst energy performance, and even there exemptions exist where the measure is not profitable or technically reasonable. For the great majority of associations the heating split is a free choice, which means the question can be decided on what is fair and what lowers the cost, not by a rulebook.
The split affects consumption
The underrated argument is that the model for splitting changes behaviour. When heating is included in the monthly charge, overheating is free for the household, and the building pays. When households see and pay for their own heat, a reason appears not to keep it warmer than they want: the average temperature falls, and studies of individual heat metering point to typically 5–10 percent lower heating cost for the building. Every degree of lower average temperature reduces the energy for heating by about five percent according to Energimyndigheten.
A fair split is also one of the cheapest energy measures an association can take. It does not require anyone to be cold, only that nobody is heating on the neighbour's behalf any longer.
How the association chooses
-
Map the situation. Measure the indoor temperature per apartment for a while. The differences between apartments, facade sides and floors show how large the unfairness and the overheating actually are.
-
Choose a model. By floor area if simplicity matters most, individual heat metering if you accept the position problem, comfort metering if the split is to be both individual and position-neutral.
-
Get backing at the general meeting. The fairness argument is easy to win when there is measured data showing the differences between apartments.
-
Put the billing on the invoice. The split should land automatically in the ordinary invoicing, with no manual work for the board or the property manager.
Frequently asked questions
Is it a legal requirement to meter heat per apartment?
Only for a small part of the stock with the worst energy performance, and even there exemptions exist. For most associations the split is a free choice.
Why not just individual heat metering, as with water?
Water is easy to meter fairly: a cubic metre is a cubic metre wherever in the building it is drawn. Heat is different, because the energy needed for the same indoor temperature depends on where the apartment sits. Measuring the comfort instead of the energy removes the position problem.
Does consumption really fall from a new way of splitting?
Yes, that is the pattern in studies of individual metering: when households see and pay for their own heat the average temperature falls, and the building's heating cost lands typically 5–10 percent lower.
Is it unfair to families with children or older people who want it warm?
They pay for the comfort they choose, just as with hot water or electricity. The difference from today is that nobody else pays for it, and whoever keeps it cooler gets a lower cost instead of subsidising the neighbour.
How is comfort metering introduced in practice?
Wireless sensors are fitted in every room, the platform works out each apartment's share of the heating cost across the season, and the amount goes onto the ordinary monthly invoice through the association's invoicing.