Editorial policy

NetZeroNow aims to publish accurate, practical, and clearly written guidance for UK households. This page explains how we choose topics, review content, disclose assumptions, and keep editorial work separate from revenue.

Our editorial standards

  • Accuracy before speed.
  • Clarity before jargon.
  • Practical usefulness before hype.
  • Independence from advertisers, sponsors, and paid placements.
  • Transparency about assumptions, examples, and limitations.

How topics are chosen

We prioritise topics that help readers answer practical questions such as:

  • what to do first in a home upgrade journey
  • whether a technology fits a given property type
  • what a grant or scheme actually covers
  • how to compare costs, savings, and carbon outcomes
  • how to troubleshoot common problems after installation

Source hierarchy

When possible, we build pages from primary or authoritative sources such as:

  • GOV.UK departments and official public services
  • Ofgem and other regulators
  • Planning Portal and standards bodies such as MCS
  • Energy Saving Trust and other established UK guidance organisations
  • manufacturer technical documentation for product-specific points

We avoid presenting speculation or sales copy as settled fact.

How we handle numbers and estimates

Many retrofit decisions involve uncertainty. Energy use, weather, user behaviour, tariff choice, system design, and property condition all affect the final outcome. For that reason:

  • calculators on NetZeroNow are estimates, not guarantees
  • key assumptions should be visible on the page or explained in our methodology
  • worked examples are labelled as representative scenarios when they are not reader-submitted case studies
  • we try to show ranges, trade-offs, or limitations instead of implying false precision

Review process

Before a page is published or materially updated, we aim to check:

  • whether the page solves a real reader problem
  • whether headings and copy are complete and not just placeholders
  • whether links and calls to action take readers somewhere useful
  • whether calculator descriptions match the actual behaviour of the tool
  • whether the page makes clear when expert or regulated advice is still required

Commercial independence

Advertising and monetisation do not decide our conclusions, rankings, or coverage. We do not accept payment for favourable reviews or for inclusion in “best” lists. Revenue policy is explained on our how we make money page.

Corrections policy

We take correction requests seriously. If a reader reports a factual error, broken link, or misleading statement, we review it and update the page when needed.

We aim to:

  • acknowledge substantive correction requests within 2 working days where possible
  • fix clear factual errors as quickly as practical
  • make sure the page reflects the current position when a policy or assumption changes materially

AI use

We may use AI tools to support drafting, outlining, gap-spotting, or readability checks. We do not publish unreviewed AI output as final editorial content. Human review remains responsible for the published result.

Advertising and affiliate disclosures

If a page contains advertising, it should still stand on its own as useful editorial content. We do not build pages whose only purpose is to host ads. If affiliate links are introduced in future, they will be disclosed clearly.

Reader submissions and examples

We welcome reader feedback, error reports, and homeowner stories. If we publish an illustrative example rather than a named submission, we say so. We do not present invented examples as verified testimonials.

Contact

Questions about our editorial standards or a specific page can be sent via contact us or our feedback page.

Written by NetZeroNow Editorial Team | Last updated on 2026-03-30