Could gas utilities transform into "thermal utilities"? Here's how networked heat pumps could give them a whole new business model instead of going extinct.
This interview was a bit frothy. I'd like to see some math--an interactive simulation model, actually--about geothermal load balancing and how that varies across climates and sub-surface geologies. I'd like to see math about unusual but inevitable extreme weather events. And, living on the West Coast next to a subduction zone, I worry about relying on any system of trenched pipes that will be chewed up by a major quake and VERY expensive and time-consuming to repair compared, say, to just reconnecting above-ground wires or a propane tank.
Yes, certainly we have water and sewer and gas pipes. But we don't expect to rely on them after a major earthquake. We store emergency water in our basements. Lots of water. Most people own a shovel to bury waste. And we install shake-triggered shut-off valves where gas lines enter our homes. No one expects to be able to use natural gas for many months after "the big one.". Some people have purchased generators, propane generators are best because the fuel does not have to be replaced every year. And there will not be much gasoline around after a big quake cuz, at least in Portland where I live, all the petroleum comes by pipe from Puget sound, and those pipes go under two major rivers that will turn to quicksand during a quake. Also, unfortunately, all the petroleum storage is built on one of the river
I'm not really sure Portland would be ideal for this system. You don't really get cold enough or hot enough. I suspect a cold climate air source heat pump would be the best option for your area.
District heating based on forest-health biomass (whose removal increases EV measured in Tonnes (Avoided) CO2) competes with this technology. Denser living competes well with the Spawn of Levittown.
All economics in these discussion *must* analyze in TAC terms. Messing around with Dollars, real or nominal, is just silly in the energy industries.
Two questions - doesn’t this only work if you also electrify the rest of the homes (water heat, stove, dryer), otherwise you still need to keep using the gas infrastructure?
Also, how does metering work? Is it possible to measure how much heat you are taking or inputting into the system?
I really like this idea but it's going to take a while to roll out. I would signup in a second if it was in my neighborhood.
In the meantime it would be better to incentivize people to switch to cold climate air source heat pumps with their natural gas or propane high efficiency furnace as backups if the climate zone their in gets really cold. The reason for this is that they don't strain the grid when it gets really cold and still reduce emissions by at least 60% or more.
I'm not a fan of switching to all electric systems with resistant backup where the area relies on natural gas or coal for their electricity. To produce heat from the electricity from a centralized fossil fuel generator is much less efficient and produces more emissions to create the same amount of heat as a high efficiency gas furnace with 95% efficiency.
So when you have a high efficiency boiler furnace what do you actually save? With this system you have two systems and boiler and furnace. You have the carbon footprint of manufacturing the heat pump, monitoring and running it all the electrical network that goes with it, the fact that most modern homes are overheating! They require specialist mechanical to have electrical operating window opening filters etc etc.. if you were thinking truly green you would look at solar blinds, shutters, lobbies, ceiling heights….. this carbon footprint is tiny in comparison.
Think of triple glazed windows over double glazed for example:- manufacturing more glass, more gaskets, more framing material, more weight, ( one man can’t pick a window up they need more men or machines), more trucks, Crains to lift them into place, reduce heat loss from homes already overheating ….. where is the sense. This is the same old same old kicking the tin can down the road so it’s someone’s else’s issue so on my side my math looks good.
It’s a balance that must consider all these factors. In most home with no pool this simply is more consumption. Our problem is consumption. A new car ever 2/3 years. Throw away society. That’s the real issue.
I'm not sure how they replace the boiler but if you have a furnace, this will be removed and replaced with a heat pump and air handler. Basically a two way air conditioner with fan. With this ground source heat pump the electrical demand is small. They're talking about a COP of 5. That means it would take 20% of the electricity needed to heat with baseboard heating.
Heat recovery from waste water is already being done as an adjunct to a district heating system in central Vancouver, B.C. and at multiple sites in Europe.
And along these lines how about an interview with Tom Rand of ArcTern Venture? Among many other things Arctern/Rand rebuilt a derelict hotel in Toronto and heat it with geothermal from pipes laid under the alley behind the hotel. Rand a few years ago wrote a book called The Case for Climate Capitalism - he's all about reining in climate change with capitalism as a means to that end. Arctern has a finger in many climate solutions.
You talked about energy efficiency of this system vs air source heat pumps. But you didn't talk about the elephant in the room, which is will it cost more to have a community that uses this system (and less electricity) or a community that uses air source heat pumps and has more generation capacity. The costs of ground source are simply staggering. I got a quote at 1/3 the cost of the assessed value of my house.
The main equation here is can you amortize the CapEx?
The other huge question is: there were a lot of comparisons to air source heat pumps. Were those EPA energy star air source heat pumps? Were they top of the line models? Were they average installed models?
The economy is from scale. Installing your own system is expensive because you're not sharing the drilled holes among other things.
The problem with cold climate air source heat pumps is the demand they put on the grid at the coldest temperatures but on the other hand they're much quicker to get installed in people's houses than this solution. Definitely for moderate climates the air source is the solution.
The best air source heat pumps have COP at about 3 above freezing but drop to 2 and lower when the temperatures gets really cold. This system would be consistently at 5.
Thanks for the reply. We agree that ground source cost less to operate (and that will continue to be the case). So that's why it's a question of CapEx and maintenance (broken ground loops will be expensive to repair relative to broken air source outside units) vs operating costs.
There's also a question of how good air source will get. You said the previous best of the line had a COP of 2 below 32. This one has a COP of 3.1 at 17F. As that number keeps rising (will it?), ground source makes less and less sense. https://ashp.neep.org/#!/product/126891/7/25000/95/7500/0///0
This is also literally the main concern the Eric Bosworth shared, that the CapEx is so huge. I'd say listen to him, he gets the business model.
Sorry I didn't mean below freezing I was thinking about below zero. It may not happen often depending on where you live but the grid will need to have the capacity for this situation. Not only do they loose COP they also have lower capacity the lower the temperatures. Look at the NEEP listing you posted.
With that said, I don't think we have time to roll this out quickly and I think the ccASHPs are the good interim. I also believe that high efficiency natural gas backup is a good solution for now. I know people who've installed these setups and hardly used the natural gas and I live in Ontario.
Regarding the CapEx it's speculation now. I would suspect the gas company guy would be angling to make this the best deal for the company. Once they get the hang of this it will be less to install these systems than gas systems but that's a guess.
No, it really was the freezing point of water that caused issues for a long time, you were right. That's why the initial heating specs were always at 40 F, that's where manufacturers wanted them to have big COP numbers.
To your larger point, the operating cost of ground source being lower was never in doubt. THE question, the one and only is: which system delivers the heat at the lowest social cost? And that's basically a net present value calculation.
Another excellent interview, thanks David. The questions that came to me all got asked and answered - so unusual when too much info on energy innovation is limited to press releases - and question asked that I didn't think of too. Thanks for providing the transcript too - I do like to read these things through.
I have a similar comment in what happens to our gas water heaters and stoves once we try to electrify everything? It is a high cost transition to change them out to the more efficient electric models.
In some states, there are already substantial rebates & tax breaks available to reduce the cost of these appliance transitions for existing property owners. You can find out what's available in your area by searching online or contacting your utility provider. Heat pump water heaters will reduce your utility bill & induction cooktops will improve your health.
I think the dream is that, for example, a gas stove would be replaced with an induction stove that has battery storage built in, so the new electric stove can use the same 120V outlet the gas stove did.
Right now the ones from Copper and Impulse Labs are pretty expensive, but the installation is as simple as if one were just buying a replacement gas stove. We just have to hope Wright's Law means the cost will come down dramatically.
Great to see folks hard at work on these sorts of innovations.
This did raise one question for me that I’ve had on my mind for a while. I’m in an apartment building with a standalone ground source heat pump system but it still uses gas for, I assume, heat augmentation and emergency backup. What’s the plan for mandated emergency backup power when buildings are disconnected from the gas grid? Can batteries stand in for this?
There's a rapidly deployable solution for this "problem" in many communities. Shade our vast acres of widely distributed & ridiculously under-utilized hot asphalt (sub)urban parking lots with solar canopies +stationary storage batteries +Vehicle-2-Grid chargers at large apartments & condos, neighborhood shopping centers, business parks, & various public facilities. No new utility transmission, site acquisition or other site improvement spending required, & no NIMBY opposition or lengthy permitting. Modular canopy structures will last for 75+ years with minimal maintenance & make robotic solar panel cleaning easy. This is how we make cheap reliable stored solar micro grid energy readily available to almost everyone, by using Inflation Reduction Act investment incentives. All of the new healthcare facilities in my county have solar canopies shading 80% of their parking
Can laying the thermal loop alongside sewer lines be enough to make use of the waste heat or are dedicated heat exchangers needed?
Re-reading, it sounds like just being in proximity will do just fine - win-win. Industrial waste heat may do better with heat exchangers
This interview was a bit frothy. I'd like to see some math--an interactive simulation model, actually--about geothermal load balancing and how that varies across climates and sub-surface geologies. I'd like to see math about unusual but inevitable extreme weather events. And, living on the West Coast next to a subduction zone, I worry about relying on any system of trenched pipes that will be chewed up by a major quake and VERY expensive and time-consuming to repair compared, say, to just reconnecting above-ground wires or a propane tank.
Do you have water and sewer pipes where you live?
Yes, certainly we have water and sewer and gas pipes. But we don't expect to rely on them after a major earthquake. We store emergency water in our basements. Lots of water. Most people own a shovel to bury waste. And we install shake-triggered shut-off valves where gas lines enter our homes. No one expects to be able to use natural gas for many months after "the big one.". Some people have purchased generators, propane generators are best because the fuel does not have to be replaced every year. And there will not be much gasoline around after a big quake cuz, at least in Portland where I live, all the petroleum comes by pipe from Puget sound, and those pipes go under two major rivers that will turn to quicksand during a quake. Also, unfortunately, all the petroleum storage is built on one of the river
I'm not really sure Portland would be ideal for this system. You don't really get cold enough or hot enough. I suspect a cold climate air source heat pump would be the best option for your area.
Thanks. I wondered about that. I have air source heat pumps now. Not sure what "cold climate" pumps are.
Basically the ccASHPs operate efficiently to a much lower temperature than standard ASHPs.
District heating based on forest-health biomass (whose removal increases EV measured in Tonnes (Avoided) CO2) competes with this technology. Denser living competes well with the Spawn of Levittown.
All economics in these discussion *must* analyze in TAC terms. Messing around with Dollars, real or nominal, is just silly in the energy industries.
Two questions - doesn’t this only work if you also electrify the rest of the homes (water heat, stove, dryer), otherwise you still need to keep using the gas infrastructure?
Also, how does metering work? Is it possible to measure how much heat you are taking or inputting into the system?
I really like this idea but it's going to take a while to roll out. I would signup in a second if it was in my neighborhood.
In the meantime it would be better to incentivize people to switch to cold climate air source heat pumps with their natural gas or propane high efficiency furnace as backups if the climate zone their in gets really cold. The reason for this is that they don't strain the grid when it gets really cold and still reduce emissions by at least 60% or more.
I'm not a fan of switching to all electric systems with resistant backup where the area relies on natural gas or coal for their electricity. To produce heat from the electricity from a centralized fossil fuel generator is much less efficient and produces more emissions to create the same amount of heat as a high efficiency gas furnace with 95% efficiency.
So when you have a high efficiency boiler furnace what do you actually save? With this system you have two systems and boiler and furnace. You have the carbon footprint of manufacturing the heat pump, monitoring and running it all the electrical network that goes with it, the fact that most modern homes are overheating! They require specialist mechanical to have electrical operating window opening filters etc etc.. if you were thinking truly green you would look at solar blinds, shutters, lobbies, ceiling heights….. this carbon footprint is tiny in comparison.
Think of triple glazed windows over double glazed for example:- manufacturing more glass, more gaskets, more framing material, more weight, ( one man can’t pick a window up they need more men or machines), more trucks, Crains to lift them into place, reduce heat loss from homes already overheating ….. where is the sense. This is the same old same old kicking the tin can down the road so it’s someone’s else’s issue so on my side my math looks good.
It’s a balance that must consider all these factors. In most home with no pool this simply is more consumption. Our problem is consumption. A new car ever 2/3 years. Throw away society. That’s the real issue.
I'm not sure how they replace the boiler but if you have a furnace, this will be removed and replaced with a heat pump and air handler. Basically a two way air conditioner with fan. With this ground source heat pump the electrical demand is small. They're talking about a COP of 5. That means it would take 20% of the electricity needed to heat with baseboard heating.
Good episode.
Tying in to the district heat theme there is a project for a campus district heat project with much of the heat coming from waste water:
https://kingcounty.gov/en/dept/dnrp/about-king-county/about-dnrp/newsroom/2023-news-releases/10-19-sewer-heat-recovery
https://www.sharcenergy.com/customers/alexandria-center-for-lifescience/
Heat recovery from waste water is already being done as an adjunct to a district heating system in central Vancouver, B.C. and at multiple sites in Europe.
And along these lines how about an interview with Tom Rand of ArcTern Venture? Among many other things Arctern/Rand rebuilt a derelict hotel in Toronto and heat it with geothermal from pipes laid under the alley behind the hotel. Rand a few years ago wrote a book called The Case for Climate Capitalism - he's all about reining in climate change with capitalism as a means to that end. Arctern has a finger in many climate solutions.
You talked about energy efficiency of this system vs air source heat pumps. But you didn't talk about the elephant in the room, which is will it cost more to have a community that uses this system (and less electricity) or a community that uses air source heat pumps and has more generation capacity. The costs of ground source are simply staggering. I got a quote at 1/3 the cost of the assessed value of my house.
The main equation here is can you amortize the CapEx?
The other huge question is: there were a lot of comparisons to air source heat pumps. Were those EPA energy star air source heat pumps? Were they top of the line models? Were they average installed models?
The economy is from scale. Installing your own system is expensive because you're not sharing the drilled holes among other things.
The problem with cold climate air source heat pumps is the demand they put on the grid at the coldest temperatures but on the other hand they're much quicker to get installed in people's houses than this solution. Definitely for moderate climates the air source is the solution.
The best air source heat pumps have COP at about 3 above freezing but drop to 2 and lower when the temperatures gets really cold. This system would be consistently at 5.
Thanks for the reply. We agree that ground source cost less to operate (and that will continue to be the case). So that's why it's a question of CapEx and maintenance (broken ground loops will be expensive to repair relative to broken air source outside units) vs operating costs.
There's also a question of how good air source will get. You said the previous best of the line had a COP of 2 below 32. This one has a COP of 3.1 at 17F. As that number keeps rising (will it?), ground source makes less and less sense. https://ashp.neep.org/#!/product/126891/7/25000/95/7500/0///0
This is also literally the main concern the Eric Bosworth shared, that the CapEx is so huge. I'd say listen to him, he gets the business model.
Sorry I didn't mean below freezing I was thinking about below zero. It may not happen often depending on where you live but the grid will need to have the capacity for this situation. Not only do they loose COP they also have lower capacity the lower the temperatures. Look at the NEEP listing you posted.
With that said, I don't think we have time to roll this out quickly and I think the ccASHPs are the good interim. I also believe that high efficiency natural gas backup is a good solution for now. I know people who've installed these setups and hardly used the natural gas and I live in Ontario.
Regarding the CapEx it's speculation now. I would suspect the gas company guy would be angling to make this the best deal for the company. Once they get the hang of this it will be less to install these systems than gas systems but that's a guess.
No, it really was the freezing point of water that caused issues for a long time, you were right. That's why the initial heating specs were always at 40 F, that's where manufacturers wanted them to have big COP numbers.
To your larger point, the operating cost of ground source being lower was never in doubt. THE question, the one and only is: which system delivers the heat at the lowest social cost? And that's basically a net present value calculation.
Another excellent interview, thanks David. The questions that came to me all got asked and answered - so unusual when too much info on energy innovation is limited to press releases - and question asked that I didn't think of too. Thanks for providing the transcript too - I do like to read these things through.
I have a similar comment in what happens to our gas water heaters and stoves once we try to electrify everything? It is a high cost transition to change them out to the more efficient electric models.
In some states, there are already substantial rebates & tax breaks available to reduce the cost of these appliance transitions for existing property owners. You can find out what's available in your area by searching online or contacting your utility provider. Heat pump water heaters will reduce your utility bill & induction cooktops will improve your health.
I think the dream is that, for example, a gas stove would be replaced with an induction stove that has battery storage built in, so the new electric stove can use the same 120V outlet the gas stove did.
Right now the ones from Copper and Impulse Labs are pretty expensive, but the installation is as simple as if one were just buying a replacement gas stove. We just have to hope Wright's Law means the cost will come down dramatically.
Great to see folks hard at work on these sorts of innovations.
This did raise one question for me that I’ve had on my mind for a while. I’m in an apartment building with a standalone ground source heat pump system but it still uses gas for, I assume, heat augmentation and emergency backup. What’s the plan for mandated emergency backup power when buildings are disconnected from the gas grid? Can batteries stand in for this?
There's a rapidly deployable solution for this "problem" in many communities. Shade our vast acres of widely distributed & ridiculously under-utilized hot asphalt (sub)urban parking lots with solar canopies +stationary storage batteries +Vehicle-2-Grid chargers at large apartments & condos, neighborhood shopping centers, business parks, & various public facilities. No new utility transmission, site acquisition or other site improvement spending required, & no NIMBY opposition or lengthy permitting. Modular canopy structures will last for 75+ years with minimal maintenance & make robotic solar panel cleaning easy. This is how we make cheap reliable stored solar micro grid energy readily available to almost everyone, by using Inflation Reduction Act investment incentives. All of the new healthcare facilities in my county have solar canopies shading 80% of their parking