Preston Pierott’s Post

A technology that is becoming increasingly important in heating, cooling and energy recycling strategies, its been a professional privilege to be involved in this for the last year. A comprehensive first principles revision which will be of interest to engineers involved in ground source schemes at any level. 

Ground source heat pumps should be the de facto choice for renewable heating, with so many advantages and scaling opportunities over air-source. Especially in Scotland. Great to see this guidance being updated by one the UKs top engineers #gshp #fabricfirst ofcourse!

Measured savings are a great way to see how improving the comfort of a home also saves energy and money. Win-Win-Win.

#ElectricTrucks #EVMyths #CleanFreightCoalition #CFC #DaimlerTruckNorthAmerica #BostonConsultingGroup "Last week, the Clean Freight Coalition (CFC), a group that includes truck dealers, freight carriers, and others in the U.S. trucking industry, dropped an attention-grabbing report suggesting that $1 trillion of investment in charging infrastructure would be needed to electrify 100% of the nation’s truck fleet. But as I’ll explain here, serious shortcomings in the analysis led to this inflated estimate, and it’s likely too high by an order of magnitude. For a quick gut check, let’s look to an industry leader, Daimler Truck North America, which has provided the only complete analysis of commercial truck infrastructure investment that will be needed in the United States. This work is in the company’s public comments on the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s Phase 3 greenhouse gas emission standards proposal, and Daimler estimated an upper-bound cost for charging infrastructure of $66 billion to support 1.425 million electric trucks by 2032. The equivalent infrastructure cost per truck works out to $46,316. Meanwhile, the CFC report put the cost per truck at a level three times higher. What explains the large difference? We identify some critical deficiencies in the CFC study. The CFC analysis imagines that all infrastructure is deployed everywhere, all at once; it assumes no change in costs over time; and it assumes twice the charging capacity needed for certain electric truck loads. In the world imagined by the CFC analysis, businesses do not plan, innovate, form partnerships, compete on cost, learn from experience, or grow profitable through effective charger utilization and economies of scale. This is not a realistic representation of how the energy transition will unfold and it produces unrealistic cost estimates. Daimler, which knows a thing or two about running a profitable business, took a different approach. Its analysis used historical data from the company’s own projects to derive behind-the-meter infrastructure costs per kilowatt of installed power. The analysis also used a study from Boston Consulting Group for estimates of both optimized and worst-case front-of-the-meter utility grid capacity upgrades. Daimler assumed these costs fall over time as the industry learns how to connect to the grid more efficiently. ..."

This is blog post 1 of 3 from about the upcoming NERC threshold changes. Kellie Macpherson provides excellent insights into what to expect. Contact me or check in with Radian Generation on LinkedIn to learn more (and read the next two blog posts!) about these changes.

I have always tried to be a positive HVAC industry advocate and over the years have had a history of working in collaboration with industry, utility and government. However, i have been biting my lip for some time and feel a neeed to speak up about the NRCan Greener Homes Grant program ending early and the impact it has had on the industry. I will start by saying that it is important to say that our HVAC industry appreciates this government stimulus that has driven additional activity to our sector. However the feds need to learn how to forecast and budget. The GHG program that started in 2021 was anticipated to go until 2027 but instead has ‘burned through’ its funding in just three years. Some people have tried to spin this as being a positive result and reflection of its own success and unforeseen popularity. In business this would be seen as a failure in execution and detrimental to the many that are impacted by this. Industry insiders have said from day one that these grants were too generous and should have been half of what they were. By doing so, this would have meant the consumer incentives could have lasted twice as long and gone twice as far in the number of homes that would have switched to heat pumps. Perhaps not as quickly but the lower incentives would have spread the number of installs out and have avoided the feeding frenzy which only resulted in a short lived spike by the industry’s greed to ‘cash in’ on this windfall. These ups and downs cause frustration and skepticism with consumers and wreak havoc on the supply chain that the government relies on to provide the special grant eligible equipment required for these incentives. In fact, many manufacturers pushed their A2L refrigerant transition product development and testing aside, just to provide products that met these grants. Many of these equipment makers are now questioning why they bothered doing this given the program lasted three years less than promised. We can likely expect to see many manufacturers NOT prioritize ‘Canadian only’ standards in the future because of this. Then there is the impact and turmoil on the energy advisor network that works hard to provide the needed energy audits which or key in supporting the program. These businesses now go from ‘can’t keep up’ to ‘find a new job’ unless something happens quickly. A higher degree of collaboration and common sense could have seen this program achieve the feds goal of running until 2027, converted more homes, and avoided the results that the program has ended up delivering. No, I am not trying to bite off the hand that feeds me but only hope that ‘GHG program V2’ will learn from the shortcomings of V1.

More data points on how PJM is reactive rather than proactive. In this case, the issue is transmission planning. If PJM doesn't account for statutory state policy in its base case, is the transmission it plans likely to cost-effectively meet needs across the footprint in the future? Seems unlikely... https://lnkd.in/ejW4mzhe

While there's a debate over what's right or wrong with renewable capacity, the ISO-NE has made it crystal clear that virtually all new generation capacity will not be fossil fueled. And in my opinion at least is investigating an intelligent course correction on how it will value that capacity in the future...basing it on real market supply/demand vs. forecasted.

Discover how Lions Court is driving into the future with EV charging facilities 🚗 Dive into the full case study to see how RMG London Limited and Future Fuel worked together to Future Proof this site. #SustainableCities #EVCharging https://lnkd.in/eG2D4W6X