CplKlinger said:
There's still no building permit issued for the EcoDen build, but there's some equipment on-site now. I wonder if the city told them to expect a permit soon?
View attachment 677761
Click to expand...
This is where this one is going?
IMG_3450.jpeg
 
According to Taproot:
  • Administration plans to prepare amendments that will limit developers from opting out of connecting their homes to Blatchford’s district energy sharing system. Builders can currently choose not to connect to the city-owned system if they prove that the housing they are building is net zero. But the exemption process has generated operational and financial challenges for the utility, said a report that will be presented to council’s utility committee on Sept. 2. Administration will prepare an amendment that limits any further exemptions, and council will vote on the amendment in the fall.
In other words no more NetZero homes of any type for Blatchford. As I see it, all DEC homes will therefore experience utility costs “no more than the average for typical homes” on a rolling basis. Which makes the DEC homes more expensive to live in than comparable new homes elsewhere in the city.
 
kcantor said:
According to Taproot:
  • Administration plans to prepare amendments that will limit developers from opting out of connecting their homes to Blatchford’s district energy sharing system. Builders can currently choose not to connect to the city-owned system if they prove that the housing they are building is net zero. But the exemption process has generated operational and financial challenges for the utility, said a report that will be presented to council’s utility committee on Sept. 2. Administration will prepare an amendment that limits any further exemptions, and council will vote on the amendment in the fall.
In other words no more NetZero homes of any type for Blatchford. As I see it, all DEC homes will therefore experience utility costs “no more than the average for typical homes” on a rolling basis. Which makes the DEC homes more expensive to live in than comparable new homes elsewhere in the city.
Click to expand...
Why would this mean no more net zero homes? Wouldn’t a home connected to the district energy system with sufficient solar be pretty much net zero?
 
fjordgard said:
Why would this mean no more net zero homes? Wouldn’t a home connected to the district energy system with sufficient solar be pretty much net zero?
Click to expand...
The report going to Council says Blatchford planned to have 5% of the homes in Blatchford being net zero and that they would be exempt from having to connect to the DEC. That exemption will no longer be available as they’ve already apparently reached that limit with one of the current builders.

As I understand it there are two things happening here. A net zero home is one where it generates as much energy for the grid as it consumes from the grid. It both buys and sells that energy and actually has the potential to earn more money than it spends, not simply break even over the course of a year. The utility savings are sufficient to capitalize the additional capital costs.

Without the exemption, all homes will need to incur the additional capital costs of connecting to the DEC and meeting their standards for in-home mechanical connections and equipment. The mandate from DEC is two fold. Other than the initial capital investment, it will operate on a break even basis from the city’s perspective and costs to the homeowner will be less than the average annualized costs for homeowners elsewhere in the city. Again, as I understand it, that’s the actual cost, not the cost per unit. So even if consumption is considerably less than that of those typical homes elsewhere, Blatchford homeowners may not actually end up saving any money.

The DEC system they’re part of may be “net zero” in regard to its non-consumption off grid utilities but that won’t be the equivalent of living in a net zero home with net zero utility costs. They may well feel good about what they’re buying every month but they won’t be as well off financially as someone in a net zero home.

I’d be happy to be wrong but if I am, why would anyone choose to build or purchase a net zero home in Blatchford (because it’s economically advantageous compared to DEC?), why would the city have capped the number of them in Blatchford and why are they proceeding to enforce that number by eliminating the exemption?
 
kcantor said:
The report going to Council says Blatchford planned to have 5% of the homes in Blatchford being net zero and that they would be exempt from having to connect to the DEC. That exemption will no longer be available as they’ve already apparently reached that limit with one of the current builders.

As I understand it there are two things happening here. A net zero home is one where it generates as much energy for the grid as it consumes from the grid. It both buys and sells that energy and actually has the potential to earn more money than it spends, not simply break even over the course of a year. The utility savings are sufficient to capitalize the additional capital costs.

Without the exemption, all homes will need to incur the additional capital costs of connecting to the DEC and meeting their standards for in-home mechanical connections and equipment. The mandate from DEC is two fold. Other than the initial capital investment, it will operate on a break even basis from the city’s perspective and costs to the homeowner will be less than the average annualized costs for homeowners elsewhere in the city. Again, as I understand it, that’s the actual cost, not the cost per unit. So even if consumption is considerably less than that of those typical homes elsewhere, Blatchford homeowners may not actually end up saving any money.

The DEC system they’re part of may be “net zero” in regard to its non-consumption off grid utilities but that won’t be the equivalent of living in a net zero home with net zero utility costs. They may well feel good about what they’re buying every month but they won’t be as well off financially as someone in a net zero home.

I’d be happy to be wrong but if I am, why would anyone choose to build or purchase a net zero home in Blatchford (because it’s economically advantageous compared to DEC?), why would the city have capped the number of them in Blatchford and why are they proceeding to enforce that number by eliminating the exemption?
Click to expand...

Net Zero homes in Alberta cannot generate a surplus. Utilities regulations.

Also I thought the DEC was powered by renewables & alternative energy sources?
 
policyenthusiast said:
Net Zero homes in Alberta cannot generate a surplus. Utilities regulations.

Also I thought the DEC was powered by renewables & alternative energy sources?
Click to expand...
The DEC is currently powered by a geo-exchange field; 150 boreholes drilled 500m down under the storm pond. The future energy centres will either use geo-exchange, or sewer heat exchange. There's a backup natural gas system for peak summer/winter demand, but so far not has not been used.
 
^ ^^
My concern isn't how the DEC is powered, it's that it appears the homeowners in Blatchford are now effectively paying for it twice. They're paying for the capital costs in their purchase price and for its output regardless of whether they need that output or not.
 
policyenthusiast said:
Net Zero homes in Alberta cannot generate a surplus. Utilities regulations.

Also I thought the DEC was powered by renewables & alternative energy sources?
Click to expand...
That may be the case currently but I'm not sure as power generation for the grid becomes scarcer that it will stay the case. If anything, I would think we will get to the point where microgeneration will be encouraged, not discouraged.
 
kcantor said:
That may be the case currently but I'm not sure as power generation for the grid becomes scarcer that it will stay the case.
Click to expand...
One can hope. Solar providers have been asking for it for years, and the AUC barely understands their own policy/enforcement of the microgen regulation. Might be stagnant on policy amendments today because of the oil lobby.

I asked the GoA about it a while back, and the main concern was about the capacity constraints of transformers, and that maxing out the grid (lol) would disproportionately benefit some microgen homes while blocking other neighbors from installing solar/alternative energies. Nonsensical.
 
I'm no expert, but there's certainly a hole that they're expanding pretty quickly. There's at least three dump trucks going between this site and a spot near the aviation museum, where they dump the dirt. There's still no building permit listed for it online; is it safe to say at this point they'll get it? Or is there a risk the city will reject it and we'll be stuck with a pit?
20250904_075343.jpg
20250904_075337.jpg
20250904_075806.jpg
 
kcantor said:
^ ^^
My concern isn't how the DEC is powered, it's that it appears the homeowners in Blatchford are now effectively paying for it twice. They're paying for the capital costs in their purchase price and for its output regardless of whether they need that output or not.
Click to expand...
I get the concern, but it also seems reasonable to require homes in Blatchford to use the utility that was purpose-built for heating/cooling. If you could use any system at any time, you wouldn't be able to amortize the cost of the district geothermal utility over time.

The only difference I can see is that the natural gas system in the rest of the city has been built out to the point that it has become the default choice because it is easy, not because it is the best choice. Seems a little late for Blatchford to opt out of the infrastructure that's already built.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top