The three layers of feasibility - technical, economic, and human - and how they impact our decision to implement renewable energy solutions.

In our experience, renewable energy solutions for space heating have three layers of feasibility.
The first is technical feasibility: does this energy solution adhere to the laws of science? Is it technically possible?
The second is economic feasibility: does this energy solution achieve our clients’ business aims? Are the OPEX, CAPEX, and levelized cost of energy acceptable to our clients? Is there sufficient ROI?
In theory, if the answer to these questions is “yes”, the project can move forward.
And yet, there is an industry joke: if you took all the renewable energy pre-feasibility studies over the past decade that never materialized despite being technically and economically feasible, you would have enough paper to fuel a biomass plant with them.
What does this mean?
It means that there are hundreds, if not thousands, of renewable energy projects that could have been approved - from an engineering and ROI perspective - that have not materialized. These potential district energy, geothermal, biomass, or sewer energy projects were technically sound, had positive ROI, achieved the aims of the project’s stakeholders, but were not approved anyway.
Why?
Us.
The human component.
Many (if not most) projects do not materialize at least in part due to the third layer of feasibility: human feasibility, or the inherent biases that exist in our decision-making process.
What are these biases?
Status Quo Bias: we are good at looking at the “new thing” with a critical eye - analyzing it, assessing it, critiquing it, dismissing it. We do not, however, analyze our business-as-usual option(s) - in this case, natural gas boilers - with the same critical eye. We do not put it under the same spotlight.
Optimism Bias: we may be thinking to ourselves “we don’t have to worry about this now”, “the government will intervene and make regulatory changes that force us to adapt”, or “a new solution that solves all our problems will come out next year”. By doing so, we punt the problem down the road, and continue to do what we’ve been doing, rather than choosing the renewable option.
Choice Overload Bias: there are professionals in the engineering, real estate, development, and/or built environment fields that have spent their entire careers without being asked “what should I put in this building, besides a gas boiler?” even once. This is because the gas boiler has been, for decades, the standard approach to space heating. However, this is changing, and now these same professionals are being told to find alternatives because soon gas boilers may no longer be an option. In this situation, there’s no easy fix. There is no technology that swaps perfectly to replace the gas boiler. Instead, there are many technologies, none of which operate in the exact same way, and none of which cost the same. So, in a situation like this, it’s easier to stick with the gas boiler while you can.
In short, change is difficult, especially without all the information.
That is why, at OVR-VU, our pre-feasibility studies include workshops, webinars, and self-serve educational content that extend organizational understanding and education, allowing all team members to understand their project’s energy-transition journey.
In particular, our Renewables 101 workshop is aimed at providing a preliminary working knowledge of the relevant renewable energy technologies that can be used to unlock technical and economic feasibility and optimize energy and business outcomes.
To learn more about Renewables 101 and/or book a workshop free of charge, feel free to schedule a demo here.
Комментарии