Watts to ADD

Guusje Huybregts: Welcome to a new episode of What’s to ADD. In the previous episode, we discussed the practical aspects of the GAS solution at UH. In this episode, we will discuss why this may or may not offer a broader solution. For whom could this be a solution, and for whom would it not? Yes.

Dirk-Jan Houben: I don’t think so for most people, and that has to do with the fact that we have that large gas connection because there used to be a large empty lot in the center of the VVD. They needed that large gas connection to ensure that the sprinkler system wouldn’t freeze in the winter. And that’s why we have it now. I suspect that if this is now applied on a larger scale, it will be seen in the same way as those small-consumption connections. They will say this is a trick, we don’t want this, we’re stopping it. So I do think it works for people who already have a gas connection. Perhaps a group of smart developers will use it in the short term, but I suspect that after that, it will simply be stopped. Also because we may not want to import more and more gas now that we have shut down Groningen. It’s not getting any cheaper.

G: And what kind of projects does this suit? Is it right or wrong?

DJ: So I think projects that have that gas connection. I think the location also plays a role because it is. It’s not a cheap solution. If you’re in an area with lower rents, then you won’t recoup your investment this way. And then I just think it’s not financially relevant to look at it that way. And then it’s just not a solution for you.

G: Could we go into a little more detail about the technical limitations of this solution?

DJ: Yes, I think that’s not too bad. So if you don’t take the gas input into account. The technology behind it is fairly scalable. So that’s not too bad. I think you could get quite far with that. But there are certain issues involved. Whether that’s what we want in the long term.

G: And in terms of legal limits.

DJ: Not at this moment either. But there too, of course, treaties have been signed stating that we want to use less fossil fuels and reduce CO2 emissions. We don’t have the latter, but there is a correlation with fossil fuel consumption. So I suspect that, even though the legislation is not yet in place, if we want to honor our past commitments, restrictions will be introduced in the long term.

G: So this solution will not become the norm. Do you really think this will be banned?

DJ: I don’t think it will be banned, simply because we Yes, they are already happy that there is now a solution, even if it’s not ideal. And they would like another ideal solution, but we’re just not there yet. So no ban. I do think there will come a point where we can solve it in a different way. Where they say, okay, let’s stop this. But then it will always be about new cases, not existing ones.

G: Do you think that the problem of network congestion will soon become a competitive advantage?

DJ: No, I’m really convinced of that. We solved it by simply not solving our competitor. You have nothing to offer, but I also think that the way we have solved our congestion problem is that for companies whose work depends on electricity from technology, they simply cannot afford a blackout, and that congestion is becoming more and more severe. So the chance of blackouts is going to increase. And here we can now simply guarantee that you will not have a blackout.

G: What can others learn from our journey?

DJ: Um, no. Basically, I hope it’s a solution for some people. If we can oversize, maybe even for more than some people. But I think the most important thing is to look at your project creatively. What do you have and what do you have left? Play around with that and bring in professionals to solve that part for you.

G: What is needed to apply this more broadly?

DJ: Um, much more expertise, technological development, and yes, I hope so. That we will eventually solve this in a different way than what we are doing now.

G: Do you really think it will come to the point where projects simply cannot go ahead anymore?

DJ: Yes, actually. You can see it happening when a company is put on a waiting list that will be filled in 2037. Then you can safely assume that it will no longer go ahead, because there is such a long development period in between. It will be resolved in another way, or the company will simply withdraw. But what’s even worse is that you now see that some areas, including housing projects, can no longer be built. But that just means that your prioritization is no longer in order. And I expected that to happen, that it wouldn’t take five years before we got there.

G: And how is the government dealing with this?

DJ: Yes, without wanting to get political, you can see that regional authorities are very concerned about this. We can also see the problems coming and are not sitting idly by, but are looking for a solution. And the national government. Yes, that was mentioned there too. Something to attach quality to. We have too many new cabinets too quickly, which means that long-term solutions are being postponed. And this is one of them. It’s too lax and too slow, and I also have the impression that because it doesn’t affect the majority of our population and you just have electricity at home. Most employers simply have the electricity they need, so they don’t come into contact with it. So the urgency is simply not clear enough. That will probably continue until it really starts to affect homes, and then we will all have a much bigger problem. And I suspect that will be the point at which action will finally be taken.

G: Yes, so we can conclude that our GAS solution cannot serve as a broader alternative or offer a solution for everyone. No, unfortunately that is correct. Well, in the next episode, we will discuss whether congestion will ever disappear. Yes.

DJ: Interesting.