The POWER Podcast

What Does It Take to Develop Utility-Scale Solar Projects? Constructing a utility-scale solar project requires more than simply buying PV panels and mounting them in a field. It can take years to find the right location, conduct feasibility studies, obtain permits, and align the proverbial stars. A couple of experts, who have managed multiple projects through the process, were guests on The POWER Podcast. Carl Jackson and Charles Silio, two of the three partners who founded Glidepath Ventures, a company focused on solar project development in PJM and other fast-growing solar markets in North America, provided a high-level overview of the development process and explained what drew them to the PJM market. “There’s an old saying in solar that every project that actually gets built dies a thousand deaths, and that’s probably accurate,” Jackson said. “A lot of that has to do with all the things that you deal with at the beginning stages of development.” Jackson earned his stripes by leading project origination and business development for Cypress Creek Renewables, where he worked on solar energy projects in a variety of states. Some of that experience helped inform the partners’ decision to focus on the PJM market, and Pennsylvania in particular. “One of the reasons we picked Pennsylvania was it’s very close to a lot of load in the competitive PJM market. There are multiple opportunities for corporate or municipal offtake, and a lot of companies, municipalities, and universities—even within the state of Pennsylvania—that have sustainability goals, who are actively looking for renewable power. In addition, it being PJM, you can sell via contract for differences to corporates or other buyers anywhere within PJM. And failing that, if you really want to run a plant merchant, there’s a fairly liquid market for power and for other ancillary services and capacity,” Silio said. Most people probably don’t think of Pennsylvania as a solar power hotbed, but in some ways that works to Glidepath Ventures’ advantage. There is less competition from other developers, and land is reasonably priced. However, most landowners aren’t particularly well-versed in the benefits that solar power projects can offer. “You may get some inbound calls from a landowner because their neighbors or friends in that community have had success with a project, but a lot of the areas that we’re targeting, we’re one of the first phones calls that they’re receiving or the first phone call that they’re receiving,” Jackson said. “Most of the time, we’re proactively reaching out to landowners, educating them exactly on what solar is, what the actual economic impact could be for them, and then getting them onboard.” But there is a fair amount of work done behind the scenes before a landowner is contacted. “We canvas areas to make sure that we have what we anticipate as at least a reasonable opportunity from an electrical perspective to interconnect the type of projects that we actually want to interconnect there. Then, we reach out to landowners,” said Jackson. “We ultimately get a lease option or some sort of lease agreement with those landowners, and then begin the process of entering into PJM, getting an interconnection feasibility study completed, and then working our way through all the studies through PJM, as well as starting the process of getting the requisite entitlements needed to deliver that project.” Jackson said those steps can take anywhere from 18 to 24 months for projects connecting at 69 kV or higher. For projects connecting at the distribution level (less than 69 kV), the timeline for getting the interconnection agreement from the utility and PJM can be shortened to about 12 months or so. Then, it can take another six months to a year to satisfy all the state and local regulatory requirements before the project is ready to begin construction.

PLM, ERP, EAM, Digital Twin: What Do They All Mean? The power industry and technology worlds are filled with acronyms. It’s often hard to know what they all mean. Mark Reisig, director of Product Marketing at Aras, was a guest on The POWER Podcast. He explained how digital technology is being utilized to bring products to market and track assets throughout their lifecycle. The process often starts in a product lifecycle management (PLM) system. Reisig said when a product is created for the first time, things like the engineering bill of materials (BOM) and computer-aided design (CAD) drawings can be linked to the component in a PLM system. In all, he said there are about 20 key attributes documented in the system. They typically revolve around the form, fit, and function of the product, including its description, revision, unit of measure, part number, and more. The PLM information feeds into an enterprise resource planning (ERP) system. ERP is a transactional system. It coordinates how everything is put together. It tracks what is made and what is bought—including financial data—and allows the product to be manufactured and assembled. ERP systems often include 150 to 175 different attributes. When complete, the ERP provides an as-shipped BOM. At that point, an enterprise asset management (EAM) system becomes important. It is used to track and manage the physical asset through its lifecycle. This basically covers construction, commissioning, operations, and maintenance, all the way to decommissioning and replacement. As an enterprise tool, it goes beyond a single plant to include all the assets an owner manages. The idea is to track all the changes to all the physical assets, which is what Reisig called an “as-maintained” or “as-running” BOM. The EAM system also facilitates planning and execution of the work required to keep everything running. “The real value of the three systems that I just mentioned is that you can connect across them in a digital thread,” Reisig said. “The person looking into the enterprise asset management, when they click on a digital twin, if they want to go back and see what the actual requirement was, they can actually do so. So, the real value is when you can cut across all of these pillar systems—EAM, ERP, and PLM.” What is a digital twin? Reisig said most vendors position digital twins as models. The models are typically created during the engineering phase, which means they are a representation of what was designed. However, they don’t always reflect what was actually made during the manufacturing or construction process. “Right there, you’ve got a problem, and that’s because many things happen to products when they go through production,” Reisig said. “We believe the digital twin is first available after it’s been manufactured, and even after it’s shipped, during the as-built stage.” By creating the digital twin in the as-built phase, much more detailed and accurate information can be captured. In this way, physical part BOMs and related simulation data can be linked to the digital twin. Things like CAD drawings, service bulletins, work order history, electronics wiring schematics, and more, can be connected using a digital thread back to where that information is stored. “Our definition is: the digital twin is the individual configuration of that physical product or a system of assets, and that creates the context you need to create value across the lifecycle,” Reisig said.

Are Traditional Power Companies Being Disintermediated? How will the electric grid change as the world transitions to a power system with more renewable energy resources? Some experts foresee a shift from today’s grid-type architecture to a system of systems—from the current centralized design to a distributed energy scheme. While it’s hard to know exactly what the future holds, it’s commonly believed that change is inevitable. Shuli Goodman, executive director of LF Energy, was a recent guest on The POWER Podcast. LF Energy is an open-source initiative, overseen and hosted at The Linux Foundation. On the podcast, Goodman said power companies need to think of themselves more like network operators rather than as conventional utilities; otherwise, they may become irrelevant within 10 or 15 years. “I think that any utility on the planet—particularly playing at the distribution level or an investor-owned utility—if they are not thinking of themselves as a network operator, they’re going to be disintermediated. And in the U.S., I think they’re going to be disintermediated by the Google’s, Amazon’s, and Apple’s for sure, because those companies are going to own their customers,” she said. Goodman said two main factors are driving the change: decarbonization and electric mobility. “We have to get to 100% decarbonization in 20 years. But I think that we have to be able to show tremendous progress in 10 years,” Goodman said. “I think that the easier part of the equation is onboarding the generation assets at scale from a utility-scale perspective. I think the more complicated problems that we’re trying to solve for—and will need to solve for—are what happens behind the meter.” Goodman suggested consensus among European Commission members is helping Europe move quickly toward a clean energy future. In the U.S., however, she said the government is sending mixed signals. “Recently, [the Department of Energy] said that they were making a $64 million investment in coal,” said Goodman. “That kind of confusion in the marketplace from a signaling perspective is going to be extremely damaging to the economy of the United States. I have no doubt about it that we are going to suffer tremendously from that.” Goodman said the economics are clear. “Right now, renewable energy is on par with any other kind of traditional energy or it is now becoming cheaper,” she said. “What’s going to happen is a level of innovation that’s going to occur in Europe in which actually the cost of energy is going to get less, and less, and less, and less.” The reason that’s important is because energy equates to productivity or production. “There’s a very tight integration between economics or economies and energy,” Goodman said.

Why Do People Choose Careers in Engineering? Do you want to solve important problems, contribute to society, and help people? Well, then, you may want to become an engineer. At least that’s why some successful engineers have said they entered and persist in the occupation, according to a recent study published by DiscoverE, an engineering outreach organization based in Alexandria, Virginia. The research was conducted by DiscoverE in partnership with the Concord Evaluation Group. It specifically sought to answer the question: What are the common factors that motivate girls to pursue—and then persist—in engineering education and careers? Thea Sahr, director of Communications and Programs with DiscoverE, discussed some of the findings as a guest on The POWER Podcast. “We’re finding that the women who are staying in engineering have a really strong support network, whether that’s family or friends or they have role models, that network is super important,” said Sahr. “They can draw on past obstacles. They have the cultural and social capital to get through the tough times—that resiliency, that grit that we hear is so important for all of us—and a sense of belonging. The women who feel a sense of belonging, either in their university or at their place of employment, have a better chance of staying.” So, do men have other reasons for getting into the engineering field? Not really. Sahr said DiscoverE has done additional surveys asking people what attracted them to the profession, and across the board, women and men said solving critical problems was the main reason they liked engineering. But many kids don’t get the opportunity to really understand what an engineer does. That’s why DiscoverE’s work is so important. The group helps get the word out in schools and through other events throughout the year. In fact, DiscoverE is the backbone organization behind Engineers Week, which was established in 1951. The week begins this year on Feb. 16 with the theme “Engineers: Pioneers of Progress.” Learn more about it at DiscoverE.org. Sahr suggested the outreach is vital. She said DiscoverE has conducted surveys of 11- and 12-year-old kids, and it found that 92% of those surveyed were thinking about their future careers, even at that early age. “It’s not just when Grandma asks at Thanksgiving, they’re thinking about this pretty seriously,” Sahr said. Another DiscoverE-sponsored program begins on March 11 and runs on Wednesdays through April 8. Called “Global Marathon,” it will be a five-part series with stories from inspiring women in the engineering and technology fields. It’s a free web-based event designed to provide actionable career advice and connect women around the globe.

How Utilities Can Manage Supplier Risk. Power companies are turning to external suppliers and contractors now more than ever. Utilities are getting help with tasks ranging from the relatively simple, such as vegetation management and the handling of customer calls, to the complex, including turbine repair and large infrastructure projects. Although the benefits of utilizing contractors are often obvious, the dangers, which include cyber, reputational, financial, legal, and regulatory risks, may not be as easy to assess. Two Boston Consulting Group (BCG) experts, Mike Lewis and João Maciel, were recent guests on The POWER Podcast. Both men are managing directors and partners with BCG based in Houston, Texas. Lewis leads the firm’s Houston office, while Maciel specializes in green energy, energy efficiency, and the environment. The pair helped author a paper on supplier risk management best practices and shared some tips during an interview for the podcast. Maciel noted that outsourcing amplifies three main risks that utilities are typically already exposed to in their businesses. Those are operational risk, reputational risk, and cyber risk. For example, if a contractor fails to follow suitable health and safety practices, then a utility could be operationally affected by the consequences. Additionally, power companies may be held accountable by the community or media when a contractor makes a mistake, which places the utility’s reputation at risk. Lastly, even though a utility may have excellent internal protocols designed to protect digital plant systems, when suppliers are given access to perform work, the utility’s risk increases. Suppliers also bring new risk exposure, such as fourth-party risk, which arises when a supplier uses subcontractors. Another added risk is contractual risk, which may limit a utility’s ability to monitor a contractor’s work. Concentration risk is also a potential problem. If a utility becomes too dependent on a supplier, it could lose bargaining power and internal expertise, which could lead to the last risk Maciel discussed: financial risk. That threat can be realized when a supplier falls into financial distress. If a power company can’t quickly replace the supplier, the utility’s operations could be adversely affected, which could have financial implications. On the podcast, Maciel presents a method to manage the risks. “One of the principles of the approach is that the complexity and the hard work and the really detailed design happens in a center of excellence in the corporate center,” Lewis explained. “It is very tailored to the needs and very, very user-friendly for people at the front lines.” Lewis said a lot of the setup and screening is done as vendors go through the procurement and contracting process, well before a job is scheduled to take place. “When things are the most complex, when the timing is tight, when deadlines are short, when a lot of people are onsite, that’s when a lot of the potential incidents could happen,” Lewis said. That’s why it’s important for utilities to manage risks appropriately in advance.

Good Water Treatment Systems Need Both Equipment and Chemistry. Proper water treatment is vital to successful power plant operation. The water treatment system must be designed appropriately, implementing a suitable water chemistry program, and operated and monitored correctly. Having adequate training and utilizing the services of a knowledgeable partner can be invaluable. Three water industry experts from U.S. Water, a Kurita company, were recent guests on The POWER Podcast. Kevin Milici, vice president of Marketing and Technology; Nathan Bach, vice president of Engineering Services and Equipment, and Joe Tirreno, vice president of Strategic Corporate Accounts shared insight from their years of experience helping customers develop sound water treatment solutions. Bach noted that many older power plants are shifting from primary ion exchange, that is, cation-anion mixed beds, to membrane treatment systems for their demineralized water needs. Meanwhile, some that may have had older-generation membrane treatment systems, such as reverse osmosis (RO) and electrodeionization (EDI) systems, have been upgrading to include ultrafilters ahead of the RO to reduce fouling and extend membrane life or utilizing two-pass RO units to reduce the loading on EDIs. A lot of things must be studied when designing a water treatment system for a power plant. Bach said boiler operating pressure is one of the first considerations, but the raw water source is also very important. “A plant that operates on well water will have different challenges than one that operates on surface water or maybe even a plant that has multi-source—maybe they have a blend of surface and well water or multiple wells of different depths blending into a common feed point into the plant,” Bach said. “Knowing where the water comes from really helps us determine how we might need to treat it.” Tirreno said two of the most important items in a power plant are steam quality and condenser cleanliness. He noted that most plants spend significant amounts of money to monitor steam quality, but they don’t always do the same on the condenser side. He said monitoring equipment is available today that allows biofilm and corrosion to be more instantaneously scrutinized. “The steam side is important,” Tirreno said, “but don’t forget the condenser side as equally as important to ensuring efficiency of electricity generation.” “The takeaway is that we can’t just think of it in terms of chemistry or equipment, we have to think of the combination of those things,” Milici said. “Every situation can be unique. It’s a function of the customer’s assets, their design, the water qualities that they’re working with, the other challenges they might be confronted with, for example, water scarcity or the discharge of conventional phosphate-bearing treatments and having to minimize those and look for alternative chemistries. So, my takeaway would be that it’s not one or the other, it’s the ability to be able to look at both of those levers in looking at the total solution and put them together in the right proportions to deliver the best and most cost-effective result.”

Recruiting the New Power Workforce. It’s a time of great transition in the power industry. Not only are generation resources changing, but so are the work skills needed to operate and maintain those resources. Meanwhile, a large number of workers are reaching retirement age, leaving open positions that had long been filled by highly experienced staff. And the talent pool to fill those positions is not as large as many employers would like. Robin Schawe, vice president and global workforce solutions leader with Kelly Services, discussed some of the challenges as a guest on The POWER Podcast. She offered insight into some of the trends Kelly Services is seeing in the power industry. “Our research shows that up to 30% of the overall industry will be ready to retire within the next 10 years, with 10% being ready to retire now, 11% within the next one to five years, and 10% over the next six to 10 years,” she said. “While these retireants mount, the industry grows younger—22% of utility industry workers are below the age of 34. The concern becomes making sure there are no skills gaps, and we’re seeing a lot of effort in this space.” Schawe suggested transition planning and knowledge transfer is key. Still, filling technical positions can be particularly difficult. “The number of graduating engineers is on the decline and recruiting new workers with the right skillsets for those jobs is becoming more and more difficult each and every year,” Schawe said. However, leading companies are doing innovative things to attract the right people. “What we’re seeing is that power generation companies are starting to engage with those pools of talent very early in a new and exciting way,” she said. “One utility I know does outreach as early as middle school, educating children on what a utility does and the different types of careers available. I see high schools with some amazing apprenticeship programs. For example, my local high school has a four-year welding program. I also see a lot of power generation utility organizations making very strategic commitments and investments into hiring veterans. It’s an exceptional source of talent.”

Is Carbon Pricing the Key to a Clean Energy Future? The New York Independent System Operator (NYISO) has proposed incorporating the social cost of carbon into the wholesale price of electricity. According to an October-released study conducted by the consulting firm Analysis Group, “A carbon price in NYISO’s competitive wholesale power markets can help deliver New York’s clean-energy transition in faster, cheaper, more reliable, more efficient, and more creative ways.” NYISO President and CEO Rich Dewey was a guest on The POWER Podcast. He seemed to agree that carbon pricing is the best way for New York to achieve its clean energy goals. “We just thought that unleashing the power of competitive markets is really the most cost-effective and the most efficient way to do that,” Dewey said. “So, we designed a mechanism by which New York state as the policy-setter could establish a social cost of carbon. We could embed that cost right into the offers that the generators put in for producing power, and using the competitive forces, we could reward those sources of power that are zero or low-emitters and at the same time institute a payment, if you will, for the emitters of carbon dioxide to essentially pay for the pollution that they’re putting into the air. And we thought that by using the competitive market forces and the optimization engine that we have in place that we could more-efficiently and more-effectively achieve those carbon reduction goals from the electric sector.” NYISO is the first ISO/RTO in the U.S. to propose a market-based mechanism for pricing energy-based carbon emissions. It would incorporate a carbon price in the NYISO-administered wholesale energy markets, in dollars per ton of CO2 emissions resulting from power plant operations. The carbon price would be based on the social cost of carbon emissions, which is to be established by the state. Power plant operators would include their expected cost of carbon in their NYISO market offer prices, in dollars per unit of electricity sold. While suppliers of power with zero or low CO2 emissions would benefit from higher net revenues, fossil generators’ payments would reflect a deduction for the carbon charges related to their emissions. Retail electricity suppliers (known as “Load Serving Entities” in the NYISO market) would be charged the locational price for power they need for their consumers, with that price reflecting carbon-related costs. They would also receive a credit to substantially offset the impact of carbon pricing, because consumers would see a portion of the carbon charges collected from generators returned to them. The carbon charge would provide incentives to suppliers of power with low or no carbon emissions, including innovative low-carbon technologies that may not yet be developed or are unable to be commercial in wholesale markets that do not include carbon pricing. Imports of power into New York would include a carbon price to discourage leakage of CO2 emissions from neighboring regions. “We’re sensing that even some of the participants who were skeptical or opposed to it are now recognizing it is the most cost-effective way to achieve these goals,” Dewey said. The Analysis Group found that carbon pricing could save up to $850 million while achieving New York’s aggressive climate targets.

Experts Share Insight on the Industry at Recent Power Event. POWER was at the POWERGEN International exhibition and summit, which was held in New Orleans, Louisiana, Nov. 19–21, 2019. Among the experts we met with at the show were Paul Browning, CEO of Mitsubishi Hitachi Power Systems Americas (MHPSA); Chris Mieckowski, director of global solutions marketing and strategy with Siemens; Robert Yeager, president of Emerson’s Power and Water Solutions business; Britt Burt, vice president of power industry research at Industrial Info Resources (IIR); and Eduardo Almeida, director of innovation with Industrial Specialists By BrandSafway. Here snippets from the interviews on The POWER Podcast. Topics covered include the latest developments in gas turbine and digital technology, energy storage and wind power growth, and innovative power industry solutions.

Using Extreme Visibility to Protect Industrial Control Systems. What does it mean to have “extreme visibility” in an operational technology (OT) environment? According to Claroty, a New York-based company that offers cybersecurity products for industrial control systems, it’s having the ability to see all assets on a network, knowing what they are, and understanding what functions they perform. The company says the more organizations know about their OT network assets, the better equipped they will be to detect and investigate suspicious behavior. “In order to really understand how to protect these networks, you really have to have your finger on the pulse of the threat landscape,” Dave Weinstein, Chief Security Officer with Claroty, said as a guest on The POWER Podcast. “With respect to industrial control systems, nation-state actors continue to monopolize, if you will, the threat landscape. That is to say that the barriers to entry are sufficiently high enough at this point to prevent your average script kiddie or high school hacker from doing serious damage to, for example, the electrical grid,” Weinstein said. “But our observation is that those barriers to entry that I referred to are slowly but surely falling to the point where in the next couple of years we may start to see non-state actors penetrate this threat landscape, which of course is a troubling scenario because it’s much more difficult if not impossible to deter non-state actors.” Weinstein said one of the main factors contributing to increased cyber risk is that OT networks, which have historically been isolated from the internet, are increasingly connected by way of corporate IT networks. “Our assessment is that it’s only going to grow more connected with time, which compels organizations to think really proactively about how to deal with this phenomenon,” Weinstein said. “Quite frankly, the first step is gaining really deep visibility of the assets on the OT side of the house. What once was a trusted network can no longer be trusted,” he said. Most of the traffic on OT networks involves machine-to-machine communications. That can actually be beneficial when it comes to threat detection. “When you’re dealing with industrial control systems, they are communicating in highly predictable ways. It’s repeatable. There are lots of patterns. Deviations from those patterns are typically indicative of either a malicious threat or some sort of operational anomaly,” Weinstein said. “We perform something called deep-packet inspection on all the network’s communications. And by doing that, we’re able to—at a very granular level—understand the communications between all these devices and parse their protocols,” said Weinstein. The result is that end-users get the information needed to better understand security and operational events, so they can perform actions to mitigate risks.