Beyond the Layout
Beyond the Layout is a long-form solar industry podcast focused on honest, technical conversations with the people building the energy transition, and without the marketing filter. Follow the show for future episodes, and share it with someone shaping the future of solar.
Beyond the Layout
#4 Meteonorm & Energy System Economics | Jan Remund
Use Left/Right to seek, Home/End to jump to start or end. Hold shift to jump forward or backward.
Jan Remund — the mind behind Meteonorm — walks through how solar modeling actually came to be, and why a lot of it was built out of necessity, not precision.
As solar gets cheaper, the problem shifts. It’s no longer about generating energy, it’s about making the system work. We get into why oversizing and curtailment can actually make more sense, and how grid and storage costs are now driving decisions.
You start to realize the hard part isn’t the solar anymore.
Have a question or perspective? Send it to the Beyond the Layout team.
•••
Beyond the Layout is a long-form solar industry podcast focused on honest, technical conversations with the people building the energy transition.
Follow the show for future episodes and share with someone shaping the future of solar.
Jan’s Road Into Climatology
SPEAKER_00Today I'm joined by Jan Raymond. He is the mastermind behind Media Norm in that data set, as well as a great partner in this firm power, the new firm power papers that have been coming out over the past 10 years. Thanks for joining me today, Jan.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, many thanks, Roker, for the invitation.
SPEAKER_00My pleasure. What really got you interested in climatology, in understanding the weather? Where did that interest?
SPEAKER_02It was during high school. I was interested in the measurements. And then mainly I also did read a book about climate change. So in the beginning of the 80s, the first public book about the threat was there. And so I got into it and then I started to study climatology.
SPEAKER_00So you went to school to study climatology. And back then that was before computers, right? So you're doing all those notes and everything by hand.
SPEAKER_02No, not really. This was the starting point already at high school. We had some PCs. So the PC personal computer was made by IEBM in 1981. So we didn't do that much by hand. Of course, there was not like today computers everywhere, but we had them. So it was in between and in the starting point of the personal computers. And the big computers, anyway, they exist quite a while ago.
SPEAKER_00Great. And so when you went to college to study that, right? When you were going through that, what really sparked like can you give me the story between college and then going and starting MINU norm, the first versions of it?
SPEAKER_02So I studied between 1988 and 93 in at ETH Zurich, climatology, geography. And then at the end, I had to decide if I make a PhD or going to company to work. And then totally by chance, I saw this job which was offered by a MeteoTest where I still work here. And they wanted to make a new version of Meteorm software. And this was really also topics which was covered in the study: solar climatology, so mathematical generation, stochastic generation of time series. And this was really uh a huge that I could find a job based on the knowledge, but I I found it and it was really a 100% fit.
SPEAKER_00So it was a blessing chance to get into that fit. What when you originally came on, were you doing at that company to revab Meteo tests?
SPEAKER_02Yeah, the so the Meteor Norm it existed as a book in 1985, and the Swiss Federal Office of Energy was making this book, and part of the guise of Meteor Test, the company have been working on it. And then in the beginning of the 90s, the Swiss Federal Office of Energy wanted to make a software out of it. And so there was a call, and but they didn't have any any person to work on it, so they hired me for that. And it was really a decision, also
From MeteorNorm Book To Software
SPEAKER_02I saw already in the beginning of the 90s that solar energy is really one of the points which has a huge potential, and one of the solutions to fight climate change. So that was also a major point, uh, which I decided then to go to this company and make this.
SPEAKER_00That's amazing. And so you saw the need, and then there's almost two lucky burns where you had that job at the company, and also the Swiss group was trying to bring this into the digital age.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, that was really really inside. This happened, but it happened like this, yes.
SPEAKER_00That's amazing. And so when you tasked with bringing that hard paper book into digital format, what were there any moments where you had inspiration on going too stochastic from the mathematical model behind it? Where did you get that and draw that innovations from? Really curious.
SPEAKER_02At this time, the typical meteorological years they already existed. There has been some kind of guidebook to make them in Europe, in the states. But the problem was they were always based on measurements on stations, meteorological stations. And the issue is that in Switzerland it's about 60% of the surface is mountains. And if you have this kind of mountain stations, they are very much affected by the high horizon, by the topography. And so you can use it for this spot, like in you can use it, that's okay. But if you go to a neighboring valley to whatever, it doesn't make sense. So you have at the wrong uh time where the sun shines. This type of TMY couldn't be used for Switzerland. So I had the invention was then okay, let's go to the monthly average. This can be interpolated and somehow corrected for the high horizon. And then if you have this monthly values, I have been looking at methods, and yes, there have been those stochastics models which have been published some years before. And so I just I didn't invent those stochastic models, but I just invented somehow the chain of algorithms which did go from monthly climatologies to the data.
SPEAKER_00And then Matt and Mention, when you were doing that, was there a lot of trial and error of different models, or was it pretty straightforward to go, okay, I'm going to use this smart off chain from computer science and then bring that into this methodology? Pretty straightforward, or were there aha moments in there that you remember?
SPEAKER_02So on a high level, it was quite clear to use them. There have been two, three other options, but not that many. And it was quite clear that this Markov chain model from the model, which is an auto-regressive model for the data by the same team fits very well. It was more in the details where it showed that we had to make uh a lot of twists and fine-tuning it looked good. But main chain of it was quite 30 years ago. I don't remember every little step anymore, but it was not too much of work to decide these models, yes.
SPEAKER_00Well, for you, it's not too much of work. Probably someone else, right? I think it's really interesting to see how, at least now in 2026, we have a lot of solar resource providers that are satellite-based, right? But when you were doing this, there really wasn't much satellite coverage throughout the world, and you're relying primarily on the local weather stations, right? The ground weather stations. Is that correct? Can you tell me more about yeah, that's correct.
SPEAKER_02Yes, in the 80s, end of nine beginning of the 90s, the satellite models just came out. So the first publication was mid of the 80s, and also the satellites were good enough to, but in the beginning it was poorly station-based. And it took about 10 to 15 years that the global coverage by the satellites was done, and that's why at the moment we include this also. But if in the beginning 1993 the satellite data would be available like they are today, it's probably that we didn't choose that way to generate the data. Got it. Because the interpolation is much easier. Of course, the alpine problem with the local topography still exists to some extent, but not that much. So, of course, it's also the stochastic way, has also the advantage that you don't need that much of data, it is hugely compressed. Get a climatology for the whole world, you can there are some megabytes, some some gigabytes, but not that much of data. And like this, you can distribute it easily also to offline software, which is not the case with satellite data, which is much easier to use with an API which is available today, but it wasn't in the 90s.
SPEAKER_00Got it, got it. That makes that makes a lot of sense with the satellite data versus the on the ground measurements, right? I'm really curious. You got medium norm to be in pv sis, right? Immediately. How did that happen, right? So you made the model and you kept iterating, making it better now to the point where now it even encompassed encompasses satellite data in certain degrees, but it's the bedrock of any PV Syst generation. So, how did you work directly with PV Sys? Did they just adopt that? How did that come to be?
SPEAKER_02There was uh quite a small scene of people within Switzerland in the beginning 1993-1995, and uh Pierre Inaisen and PV Syst, which is a spin-off of the University of Geneva, they already were in the group uh which defy defined Meteorm. They I don't remember if they have been also sponsored by or supported by the Swiss Federal Office of Energy. Maybe they did have some money, so they were they put us all together, and so it was a close exchange already when we made Meteor Norm. Of course, the first version was only
Stochastic Weather Files For Mountains
SPEAKER_02Switzerland, and it took years to make it a European and then a worldwide database, but like this already in 1995 we had close connections to, and that's why it didn't take a long time. We started to put in the data there.
SPEAKER_00That's amazing. And so now I'm curious as it stands now with Meteor Norm versus the solar satellite providers, right? Which one? How do you think the pros and cons work? I'm also really curious because Medianorm is stochastic. Which one is handling the changes in weather and projecting the future better as well? I'm very curious. Your thoughts on both of those topics.
SPEAKER_02So actually, we are using satellite data as well a lot, mainly in the new version nine, where we call it AMY, so actual. Depends a little bit on the size of a plant and the investment costs. If it's a mid-sized plant or a small one, TMY is good. If you go to a bigger one that uh takes in more uh extremes, it takes more variation because TMY is always compressed. If it's a stochastic one or a normal TMY, you put 10 years into one. But for a standard modeling of a not very big plant, it's okay. So it's mainly I would say satellite Ada gives a better picture if you really need it. But for plants which are not that big, uh, not the utility scale, it doesn't matter uh that much.
SPEAKER_00And especially plants closer to those local weather stations that for me enormous coming from. Exactly, yes.
SPEAKER_02And one big advantage is also for our future climates, so we can just use the anomalies of them. So this is the difference between the futures climate. We and then we have a new future climate, and with our stochastic generation, we can easily make the TMY for 2060. That's great. Which is much more complicated if you go having satellite data and then try to project gritty data to the future, which is uh not easy. You can use climate models for for sure, but climate models normally have uh quite a huge um bias. So, also with our methods, as we only use the difference between future and today's climate of the models, the bias is already corrected like this.
SPEAKER_00So there's a it sounds like there's a distinct advantage, the difference in methodology between the deterministic satellite models, where very good and accurate for right now than for projecting into the future versus the stochastic model, which may not be as perfectly accurate right now at the present, but may predict the future better because of the nature of the model. Is that yes?
SPEAKER_02If you wanna have in 25 years, can give a good uh approximation using it with the future uh with different scenarios of the climate change. But that's a really a pro, I would say, yes.
SPEAKER_00And then with that, with the different scenarios, are you using probabilistic metric for P10, P90 scenarios? Is that how you're doing that, or are you fundamentally changing a different we are changing the climate model data of the AR6 from IPCC?
SPEAKER_02The P10, P90, we uh have included this as well, but based on the last 20 years. Got it. So you can have it uh today's climate p10 p90, but for the future, there is three scenarios we have uh lower, middle, high scenario, uh, which is the average of about 10 to 20 different climate models for each of them. But for those who don't give us bread, we just give one one um possible scenario.
SPEAKER_00So you're trying to reduce the uncertainty by by aggregating all the different climate models and then not having like there's that's probably a very large uh band of precision, right? It might be accurate, but it may not be very precise because of the uncertainty of projecting into the future.
SPEAKER_02Exactly. As Daryl, you could have 100 models, and so let's make it easy to give at least uh three different ranges for future projections. Additionally, it has to be said that uh the temperature, let's say also humidity, rain, precipitation is quite accurate or uh regarding the outlook, but regarding um climate change of soil resources, it's quite uncertain. We did look at this also in our task 16. So it's uh mainly a question of how much uh uh the aerosol, so uh and it's depending on SSP so socioeconomic pathways, passes. And uh those were defined about 15 years ago, and they include a lot of fossil fuels, which produce a lot of aerosols, and um like this, the the outcome uh is not that accurate, I would say, regarding uh it's underestimating solar resources in the future.
SPEAKER_00Oh, interesting. So more aerosols, less solar resource, but we reduce the aerosols.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, but historically in the last 50 years, there was just uh before diming, the radiation did go up uh by quite a big amount. Not that much in the United States, North America, but mainly in Europe and but also in China, you did see it now with uh cleaner air, you get also some positive trends there. And this will go on into the future, yes. And it's heavily dependent on the clean air policies of the different countries.
SPEAKER_00And you're actually, from my research, part of the government of your country, right? And so you're actually helping to shape those policies. Is that do I understand that properly?
SPEAKER_02Or um, yeah, I'm I'm on the cantonal level. Bern, that's the the state which where the um uh capital is also located. I'm doing there mainly climate policy as well. Yes, I can't shape the national policy, of course, but uh the the Swiss policy is very, very federal, like perhaps also in the states, and like this the the policies how the the buildings need to be retrofitted is made by the cantons, and they would try to make strong regulations that they don't uh use any fossil fuels anymore, for example.
SPEAKER_00And that is really inspiring, or at least correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems that like that also inspires that task 16 where you're collaborating with Richard Prez and and basically scientists throughout the country to see how we can actually transition from fossil fuel-based electricity generation to fully renewable-based electricity generation. And so, in that you're being published, you uh published for specifically the Swiss, and then then the TAS 16, and then now the new Task 16 that was released uh, I think a month ago. Yeah. So can you tell me a little bit about that? That seems to be the newer area of research with these virtual renewable energy resources and then oversizing them and curtailing them accordingly.
SPEAKER_02Yes, that's very interesting. I'm I'm collaborating at the moment. Solar resources can't be better quite good at the moment. And uh put more and more PV, that's easy, but it's complicated at the moment is how to integrate it into
Satellites Arrive And PVsyst Adoption
SPEAKER_02the system. And in the beginning it was only one, two, three, four, five percent. That's nothing each of the system, and nobody cares. Uh, but now in many countries and regions, the end wind is bigger than the load itself, and so we uh also wind and solar to care about what's the effect, and finally it needs to fit the load. Of course, the load can be shifted as well, that's an important part. The the initial work was done by Richie Perez from the State University of New York, as you mentioned it, from the IEA 20 years, and then we made the studies in Switzerland, and it's very simply an optimization between storage and curtailment. And that's production of PV and wind is cheaper than the storage. It doesn't make sense to store everything, but it's cheaper to build a little bit, curtail it. And uh in history, curtailment is a bad thing, and still today, many policy, but no, it's uh without curtailment, it would be much too expensive. And it's much more a question how much optimal, and that's what we try to find. And it depends heavily on the load, on the differences between summer and winter resources. It depends also if you have a lot of hydropower or not, but generally 10 to 20 percent is generally the best. Gives you uh very low price or cost of PB and the whole system, LCOE-based, is very low with such systems, states in the United States, Nova Scotia, which is quite uh cloudy, uh windy spot for North America. We calculated it in Switzerland, and it's everywhere more or less the same. Build it but and you get a stable, uh good system, and uh could tell to throw away cheap. That's a bit contraintuitive, but it's like that, yes. And even we saw if you add some five percent gas-fired power plants, then it's the the cheapest way methods to produce electricity in the future.
SPEAKER_00And then with that, I was reading your papers that were in this was I'm really curious. Do you the damage to support the ability to hold all hydro from the summer that you'd ordinarily be using and to be able to dispatch that in the winter? Is that was that a consideration, or I'm really curious how you squared that circle?
SPEAKER_02Um this exists already uh in Switzerland. Uh about uh so the electricity consumption is about 60 terawatt hours, and the storage potential is about 10 terawatt hours of those dams. They uh stored uh uh because built about at 2000 meters above sea level, and in Switzerland that means there is a snow region, uh, even with today's climate, so there is no inflow more or less from November till March because it's snow. And so they build the dams to to uh to have some hydro power all over the winter, and then it fills again, it is empty in March, April, and then it fills again. Um, and like this, we have this, but it's and even we try to uh enhance this by two terawatt hours. So seasonal storage is really the critical thing in Switzerland, uh, because with batteries you can't do that, and we have December and January climate which is quite cloudy and it's 47-48 degrees north, so it's quite uh low radiation. In most states in the US, it's it's much sunnier in the in the winter time, and so it's really the two months which has to be fixed, and they it could be fixed with hydropower, these dams. But of course, it would be good to add some, let's say, some kind of uh let's say perhaps only 100-200 hours. Uh, this uh um um gas-fried power stations could help to fill in some holes. Of course, uh we try to add also uh more wind. Uh, wind energy would produce most of the energy also in winter time. Uh, but the amount and the potential is quite high, but the density of population in Switzerland is very high. So uh there will be always some people around the wind plants, and that's quite high uh difficult to build them.
SPEAKER_00So uh Yeah, I saw when you revised the paper to include wind, you also included scenarios where you're either long like making nuclear longer or building new nuclear plants, right? And so yeah, when you say five percent gas, my initial thought, at least in the first year, was like, well, why aren't you just keeping the nuclear that you have online? And then I realized that Swiss has you have a law prohibiting new nuclear construction. So could you take us through why that law was passed in in your country as well as like for the paper that you the 2023 paper that includes nuclear? Is that a greater consideration instead of doing gas? Or what are your thoughts on that?
SPEAKER_02So uh nuclear was prohibited after Fukushima uh in in 2012, still uh 2015. Uh the lawmakers were making this law, and in 2016 there was a public vow about it, so it's it's forbidden since 10 years. Uh actually, in those months, now the government wants to make it uh possible again. Um the study showed we had only at the moment we have let's say more or less three uh bigger p uh nuclear plants, and our model included one uh one new, one old. Um, and the results they really didn't differ. That much from other opt options. The LCOE was about more the same. You could have one or not. In Switzerland, it um will be very difficult to make money with nuclear because, in uh let's say in the months from May till October or from April till October, there will be that much of solar uh that the price will be way low at the spot market. So you would need to shut down it. But the problem with nuclear is then you can't shut down it for months because otherwise the price is even higher. And in Europe there have only uh no three nuclear plants they are building to have been built in Flamovville in uh in Finland and one in uh Hinklepoint in the United States, uh United Kingdom. And um they needed 20 years to build them, and the price they exploded, so uh it's it's extremely expensive. Um, but it could be an option there, um at least from the calculations. But the pro-nuclear side is say, okay, it's much cheaper, much stabler, but it isn't the case. That's also uh one of the results of our um our study.
SPEAKER_00Well, the big part is the cheaper is definitely in question. I know in the States we just commissioned our newest nuclear plant. Took the cost overruns were, I think, 4x, what they initially estimated, and it took an extra 10 years, and and it's really sad to see how long it takes to build that and to dispatch it. A question for you is is would you rather have nuclear or the gas plants to add that five or slightly more percent? I I'm really curious where you like is the 5% there to be dispatchable so that you can turn it on and turn it off, or is it really there for the winter months where you need more energy because solar isn't producing as much?
SPEAKER_02No, it would be dispatchable, and that's really the pro of of this flexible uh um gas-fired plants. And we calculated the uh uh expensive option with renewable uh hydrogen. So we it was about 20 cents per calodowse, this electricity. Uh and even with this expensive add-on, it makes the whole system cheaper. Um I would go for that. So uh, and you don't need that much of energy. Um and as I said, most of the year it is not used. So uh nuclear gives energy all the year round, but half of the year we it's it's just a surplus, nobody needs it. Additionally, this uh superpower uh uh
TMY Choices For Real Projects
SPEAKER_02nuclear power uh without zero risk and with uh with no nuclear waste, this doesn't exist, perhaps in some dreams or some uh plans, but it doesn't exist. So uh and it would take uh so much time uh which would be uh um not much use between till 2050 at least in Switzerland. So I would go for for this renewable plan as we have it now uh and go on with that, and it works. There are a lot of studies also from EGH which show we can build a system based on renewables in Switzerland without any any problem, and like basically I would go for that.
SPEAKER_00Yeah, and I and reading the papers, what struck me was I I'm really curious. So if we did right the gas the hydrogen peaker plans for the dispatchable, right? Well, in the 2023 paper says the range is between seven and eight and a half cents per kilowatt hour, right? For the cost energy. And we compare that to today's, or at least the pre-Ukraine war price per kilowatt hour of four to six cents, it still seems slightly higher than what the current cost to generate electricity is for the renewable grid. Could you speak to that? Am I misunderstanding the paper, or is that the case?
SPEAKER_02No, it's a bit higher than it was before Ukraine, but since then uh the level uh didn't go down. Now it's it's gone up because of the new oil crisis, um, because of the new war in Iran. Um and that this low level of energy was only possible because we had uh a system which was built on plants which are very old, and uh and uh so the amortization was done, and but of course they needed to have some updates anyway. And also nuclear have been old, they have been built in the 70s and the 80s. Um, and if you want to build them new, it it will get more expensive anyway. And uh this it's not that uh cost-sensitive in Switzerland, uh electricity consumption, uh, and we have quite so the production cost is only one-third of the costs for the final consumption. Uh uh additionally comes to grid, which is quite expensive in Switzerland, it's about 10 cents per kilowatt hours, and then it comes additionally also the taxes, which is between five to ten cents. So uh uh, if the final price would go up to by some percentages, this would be uh not a big problem. Additionally, we don't have a lot of heavy industries anymore in Switzerland. There are a few of them, perhaps for those could be an issue, but for most of the industry or anyway, it's Switzerland is a service-based uh country, the economy. Let's say chemistry, banks, and and um like this, it doesn't matter that much.
SPEAKER_00Got it. And so what what would you say the costs now are with having to like let's say we didn't go to this perfect renewable scenario, right? And we have the uncertainty of prices for the gas plants that are currently online, the refurbishment or replacement of those nuclear projects, like what would be the prices to do the alternative scenario? So we you've accurately were diligently projected the prices between seven and eight and a half cents per kilowatt hour to fully convert to renewables, right? What would be the cost per kilowatt hour to stay the course right now as these these gas prices increase as we need to refurbish these plants? Uh like I'm just really curious what that would look like.
SPEAKER_02So the refurbishment we calculated to some extent, so it would be uh three running nuclear plants, it would be built one new one, um, which would be about uh 10 uh billion US dollars for a one gigawatt plant. Something like this was the calculation, a little bit cheaper perhaps. As I said, the price level will be more or less the same on average. Um at the moment, Switzerland has only very limited gas-fired power plants, uh a very few percentage. And the price level is not defined by them in Switzerland. Uh but as Switzerland is very much uh interact uh linked to the German market, it's it's of course also linked to the German spot market price, which is in inflected by the gas price. So there is some an indirect way, and uh we calculate anyway with quite expensive hydrogen, which is double the price than uh MSN today, uh so it wouldn't matter anyway, also looking at the today's uh variations. And we hope that uh renewable uh gas would be more expensive, but it could be made more stable in the price because it can be made in uh lot of different uh locations, not just in some small uh critical regions like the Middle East.
SPEAKER_00So is part of switching to renewables to be able to give each nation the ability to really control its power generation and divorce the power generation from social, like the geopolitical pressures that are currently being faced, like being imposed on the electricity and then power markets.
SPEAKER_02Yes, I would say this is also a big advantage, which is seen also now. Uh so uh Europe is still heavily uh depending uh on on this um fossil fuels from uh first it was from Russia, this has stopped to a great extent, then it is based also on on the US, but also still heavily on on uh on Saudi Arabia and uh Qatar based for the for gas, the natural gas. And going away from this would help a lot uh Europe to be more sustainable uh and more uh not too much depending. Of course, the it's not like in the 70s when when this would happen as it is in Las Vies in the 70s, it was a catastrophic nowadays. Uh oil and gas is used, and it of course it matters, but it's not that big a uh an issue anymore. Everybody can buy uh an electric car today, nobody needs to to drive uh a diesel car. So I um as an example, also uh eating is much more, it's 50% less of the people are eating with oil and and gas today, as in the 70s. So uh like this this uh effect also on the on the industry is much less than it was before, but we can reduce it much more if you really go to this uh to this real path, yes. And also
Future Climate Scenarios And Aerosols
SPEAKER_02nuclear uh uh so uh uranium is not bound in Europe, but there have been some sources in in uh eastern Germany, but uh we are depending heavily on on Russia, uh uh especially in Switzerland. It's it's uh from Rosatom uh some of the nuclear uh fuels which are used in the power plants. And um like this, also uh we are depending then on on other continents which are uh critical to some extent, yes.
SPEAKER_00Got it. That makes sense. I I have two questions and I kind of want to go back a second. So it sounded like you solved the media norm problem, right? Giving really good resource data to allow solar to proliferate, right? Anybody who's using PV Sys by default uses media norm or then a satellite provider. And then from your like, can you give me an insight into how you thought of this work? Were you immediately, yes, this is the next step? Let's go to firm power generation. How did you go from weather files, right, to working with the firm power generation and tackling this different problem? Was it like can you give me some insight with that?
SPEAKER_02Yeah, it is uh um so it's really uh as I said in the beginning, uh it was good to harvest every kilowatt hours of of solar, and we needed to know what is the potential, what is the resources, what is the spatial temporal correlation of this uh of this source. Um, but finally now it's really uh we know that you can harvest it, it's cheap, but the grid integration and uh and uh fit below is really the big question. And still it perhaps looks as it's a totally different field of work, but it isn't to some extent. Uh the core of this four-program work is still uh the uh the natural resources. When does the sun shine? In which place? Where is it windy, where is it rainy? Is it uh a lot of difference between summer and winter? So it's still uh heavily uh it's one of the most important data is still the the weather data, and that's why it's uh still closely linked to this. Um and that makes also different other uh groups are working in the same field, but our uh approach is still heavily based on what is given by the physics of the earth, what's the what are the resources and how to harvest them and store them optimally to to uh to to um fit the load and uh the the people's need.
SPEAKER_00Got it. And so for you it was just a natural progression between doing the weather resource, right? And then going and say, well, I've solved that problem. The solar community, the world has this as a good data set to then go and proliferate. Now we have a new problem, which is what happens when we have how do we actually get the entire grid to change to this? Is that a question? Was it a was there any luck or chance involved kind of like going the media test?
SPEAKER_02No, not that much. Um of course it was also by chance, as uh in the beginning when I started uh through this uh framework of this uh uh International Energy Agency work. I didn't know uh Richard Paris and uh we talked about this. Perhaps the first time I heard about this was about 15 years ago, 10 years ago, and then I said, okay, let's let's do it for Switzerland. It would be good to have a European study or a German study, it wasn't made yet. And uh one uh quite important step was also into to include uh the cost of the grid, because the grid is the big issue. Everybody says, okay, because the grid is so slow to be extended and it's so costly, this slows down energy transition. But we also show that this is not fully uh true to some extent, yes, but uh with this oversizing and curtain, you can save a lot of cost for the grid.
SPEAKER_00Could you go more into that for people listening? When we say oversizing curtail, we we literally mean build so much solar that we're going to have to throw some of the electrons away and not save them in batteries and just set the limit of the system so that the grid doesn't like it doesn't have enough demand for it. But then in the fall, in the spring, in non in cloudy conditions, you have more solar in those situations to support the grid.
SPEAKER_02Yeah. So we we we uh make the system fit for spring and autumn, let's say, like this, or in some years even for winter
Firm Power Through Oversizing
SPEAKER_02time. Um and in summer you will have on a Sunday afternoon where there's not a lot of load, um, and and it couldn't can be sunny, then you have to not to stop to work, but to to to to make it uh produce a little bit less. Um and because the peak power it can be very high in solar based on the physics, but the energy value of those peaks is not that high. So you can uh let's say uh have a whole sizing factor of two uh from the modules to what you see uh going to the grid, but you only lose perhaps 10 or 15 percent of the energy. So um, and but you can have a grid which is half the the capacity as as before with this with this containment. And like this, it makes a lot of difference also for the for the grid.
SPEAKER_00And with that, right? So you're overproducing that capacity, that also should insulate against degradation in the future, right, of the PV, as well as with that overproduction, you're generating you're pumping the hydro back, you're doing energy storage, and potentially doing the green hydrogen, right, in those times of peak production. Would that be what you're doing?
SPEAKER_02Yeah, partly it's just thrown away, not used, but in other times it it will be important to, of course, uh battery storage is a no-brainer. Um, it has to be done a lot, um, and uh it's on a good good way at the moment, I would say it's getting cheaper or so, but it wouldn't make sense to to to store every calorie hours, as I said. Uh hydrogen would also be good. There is a bit uh and also self-consumption. If you have the PB on the roof, use it as much in the house at every moment. But perhaps the your car is full and is uh the afternoon and and everything is done and the houses cool down to 15 degrees. So um there is also some limit, of course. But uh if you need but perhaps you need 30-40 percent of the energy made by solar, and then we'll have so huge overcapacities it does doesn't make sense to to save all of it. But let's say behind the meter, you do everything what you want with it. Um but it wouldn't make sense to because the storage would be so expensive and also the grid would be too too expensive uh to use really every every single kilowatt hours.
SPEAKER_00Well, but part of that is it's cheaper to build excess solar and throw it away when you don't need it, that is, to build the battery storage or the storage capacity to save the excess to use it in the week, month ahead of time when you need it.
SPEAKER_02Is that exactly, or also to make uh the power line so big and heavy that you can transport it all around? It's also the question who will need it and use it in summer times in July at noon, it will be simply too much, and nobody will need it and use it. So it transport doesn't make sense then, also. Um, and of course, hydrogen it would be good, but the the electrolyzers need to have some kind of throughload hours, and they need to have some kind of size, and then you have hydrogen, and then you should have some size also for the storage. Not useful to do it in every single house or every plant, so to you need to have some grid and you need to have to some uh concentration, and like this, also uh there will be some limits to to to save every calor house in hydrogen. Anyway, I think hydrogen is an important thing, but I rather think acid uh of a kind of a champagne of the uh of the energy transition, it's not for everyday use and not uh not not drinking it like water. Um but so um it will be not as cheap as uh as natural gas as it today that can be a problem in some effects, but I I don't think it will be uh feasible because uh hydrogen is very uh difficult to transport um and to store, it's um only half of the density of the energy if we're meshane. So there are some disadvantages for that.
SPEAKER_00Got it, got it. And then is there uh are you coupling or trying to couple this with any actual say, like right now, at least in my state where I live, we for residents have net metered, right? So it doesn't matter when we charge our power or or consume our power or when my solar gives it back to the grid, the grid actual prices don't care about that, right? But for something like where you have solar and this fully renewable grid, is have you been looking at ways to incentivize people to charge when the solar is producing so that it is somehow less cost work, right? I I think of it from a market perspective. So if you make the cost less during those times and make the cost more during other times, then they're gonna be more incentivized to charge their car during the summer when the sun is shining than at night when the sun isn't shining. Is that also part of your calculations of that load shifting or and how to incentivize that load shifting? Have you given that any thought?
SPEAKER_02Yeah, that's a very important part now. So uh with the conclusion of the firm power work, we saw um the market, the subvention, the support schemas are not going in the right direction. Um, anyway, on the spot market, we see there will be no big money to be made with wind and soil. There will be cannibalization. It it's quite a it needs to be like this. Um and so uh we we made some papers lately which will be published this year, uh, where we try now to make some suggestions to to change the market and the supporting schema. So we still think the the general core sport it will work as it is. It's sometimes very difficult to change that and make sense for the dispatch, but earning money for the renewables will be mostly impossible. So uh we need to have some add-ons, could be some capacity payments in Switzerland. This exists already for the small TV plants on the rooftops. You get 10 to 20 percent of the uh um initial costs uh by the state to uh and and like this it worked quite well. Uh but also we made suggestions um and yes, that uh spot market price reflection of where uh should be shown to the end client. So uh also for the PV production, because if the PV has no load at noon at in summertime, it doesn't make sense to give the people a lot of money for that. But the problem is then that they don't get enough money and the investment will not be done. So the big question is and the big problem which has to be solved is to to give some um um updated um market schema, but to keep the investments uh uh safe. So they uh this is really uh and we don't know the final solution for that, and it will be different solutions for different countries and state of the PV integration. Um I do think there will be a lot of change needed in the next years uh to get to that point. Yes. Uh CFTEs could be an option for that. Um in Germany and Switzerland they change the laws now that uh also the for the injection of the PB. Electricity also for small clients, you will be you get the money off the spot market, but there will be some indirect ways to correct this that the investment levels should be kept at the same level as today.
SPEAKER_00So how what are your as you said, it will change in the future, but as a legislator who's probably trying to influence us as a scientist, what is the best and someone who published these papers, what are the best shots on target that we have right now in terms of how to allow this to actually work in a way that doesn't bankrupt the companies building the solar and the wind?
SPEAKER_02So a retroactive measure should be not be done anyway. So that there should be the plants which are there should have the same structures more or less. Otherwise, they will go bankrupt. Yes, that will be very bad. Um, so there should be so that the main investments and plants should be safe to some extent. Um, but for the future, we already see that um there could be auctions. So let's say Switzerland wants two gigawatt of PB, they make an auction. Uh, how much uh people are uh uh need for this, and and then uh they get the money, and uh from the spot markets there will be not a lot of um of uh of of money to be made from it, but spot markets will decide, make the dispatch more or less when which plant will run. Of course, the small and mid-scale PV will also be uh controllable from the distribution system operators or from aggregators. This will be another uh item which should be important with much more smart grid. So the the small PV and mid-side PV should be also be controllable from uh from uh from a bigger uh um uh viewpoints. So as I said, the distribution system operators could be the persons to to regulate them or also some microgates.
SPEAKER_00So, really the solution right now, as I hear it is government-funded like renewables to a degree to make sure that that comes online, as well as a centrally planned grid that has access to all the resources of the grid to be able to curtail it, dispatch it, charge, discharge as it's a will. Is that yeah?
SPEAKER_02I would say yes. And in the beginning it was the the government paid the kilowatt hours because it was important to get the kilowatt hours, but now the the government wants the the calow watts, they they need the capacity they they need uh for 30 gigawatt of TV in Switzerland, but um they don't want every calowatt hour of it, they want just the capacity, the potential to, and it need they need to pay for it, of course.
SPEAKER_00Uh that things are we we have similar things in the states with capacity markets, right? So we'll have our spot, but then we also have the capacity market, and so I'll have to get somebody else on to speak more to that since I'm not an expert in that. But it seems like there are already levers in
Hydro Storage Wind Limits Nuclear Debate
SPEAKER_00place with grids that do pay a premium for that capacity, and that's something that we leverage in this situation.
SPEAKER_02So it exists already, it would be not a totally new way to do that. Capacity markets was more for kind of uh securement that there are enough of capacity, let's say, from peak gas power plants are available because the energy-only market, the spot market didn't work very well in many regions, and the capacity market was built additionally to get enough uh capacity to to have also a good liquid uh spot market.
SPEAKER_00Yeah, this is uh it reminds me of Texas, where we had a big freeze a couple of years ago, and it was completely spot market price. So residents had their price for the electricity just to eat the home and survive, shoot through the roof for those months, and now they've since instituted partly a capacity market as well to allow that buffer for those extreme events.
SPEAKER_02Yeah. And there will be some kind of new capacity uh market for wind and solar only, let's say, or uh not for the traditional fossil fuel-based, but uh it could be very similar to that, yes. And also in Europe, many countries do know such kind of capacity markets nowadays. Understood.
SPEAKER_00Understood. So then with this, you just published this paper, or Joy published the paper a month ago. How has the reception been? What have you learned from that experience? And then where are you looking to go next with that?
SPEAKER_02Uh there was no big uh reaction up to now, uh, only now a bubble of our collaboration work. Uh um perhaps it wasn't published uh shown at the conference yet. Um I have also uh didn't have close contact with Richard Paris lately in the last few weeks. Um but we show uh we will uh in the pipeline there are some more papers out now. Uh mainly also uh there are other uh global simulations of future uh energy uh systems. Um one of the most uh famous ones is from the uh Finnish university, LUT, and Christian Breyer is the guy behind this, the professor. And they show quite different results regarding curtailment, they only include 3% of curtailment or 5%. And now we're trying to find the differences why this is in those papers. Um, why though is their app optimum at a totally different point as ours? And there are some uh good ways to explain the differences nowadays. So um they work more or less with our ideal system, very rare you have the storage, you have the grid, you have everything, but you say it needs a lot of activation costs to get to this ideal system. So we will be always in a non-ideal world where the grid is not good, their high hydrogen storage is not available, um, and like this, there will be more curtailment. So that's why uh one of the uh simple uh answers. I guess in the IEEE conference, PVSC, uh there will be some presentation about that this summer.
SPEAKER_00That makes as someone who is traditionally trained as an engineer, we always do calculations in ideal flow in ideal circumstances, and then once you get to the real world, it's like nothing is ideal, nothing is out there by seconds, right? And so I I see why they're they're focusing on that. But what are you are you starting the next like what's next on the docket for you specifically? Are you working and collaborating with them? Are you publishing like a revamp of the 20? Like, are you going more towards this, or do you consider this a now political problem and are you pivoting your thoughts more toward trying to get this policy enacted in your home country?
SPEAKER_02It's more about uh the policy enactment also, yes. Um we try to to support also policy making or NGOs regarding this. That's one part. Uh, we are publishing uh um a paper about how different uh countries are are trying to to change the markets to fulfill these firm power needs. Um I think uh it will be uh in this kind of um market market analysis where we try to work on uh there is another task in IAPVPS, it's task 19, which is one of the activities which I'm also uh collaborating with. But uh firm power update. Um I don't think there is in the next few months or or the next year there's one foreseen, but uh as I said, we I my wish was would be to um combine it also with some calculations of the grid costs, which would go down with this firm power approach as well. And there is some uh model out uh open data model uh PIPSA which could do that, and um some groups started to work with that also in the framework of the IAPPS task 16, and there I'm looking forward to to uh to evolve this, yes.
SPEAKER_00That's great. And what have you done in terms of your like your civil service? What have you passed to try to further this in your country? In your, as you said, it's a like part, like in the states, we have states and we've got counties and we have the federal government. So, like it sounds like you're uh from a United States perspective at the state level, right? How what have you done in that regard uh for the past since you've been in office for that?
SPEAKER_02Um so the the main regulations about uh the so the grid code remuneration modes there are done on the on the fail levels, and there I'm talking with the Swiss Solarist Federation or the lobby group. I try to put as much of PV as possible. Um I'm in contact with them on the canton level. Uh it's a bit more difficult regarding. But for example, uh one week ago I had a motion which was uh uh uh asking for more support for PV, especially when it delivers electricity during the winter time, uh, and to to lower also the regulations so it makes it easy to build such plants on the facades or also on workful install uh um installations, and this goes through, uh so everybody was uh okay with that, even uh the most conservative people in the parliament, it's still quite some stamp pro PV uh in the canton of Bern. So there are small parts which you can add on the national regulations, but in Switzerland, uh it's the building which are uh regulated by the cantons, but from the electricity, it's it's uh not that much you can do.
SPEAKER_00So with with that, I researched it. Is it current is my research correct in saying that you also made it easier to build heat pumps locally in Kanton?
SPEAKER_02Yeah, that's that's too many.
SPEAKER_00How how did you do that? Because in the States, right? I live in a county. And in order to do anything, we have it seems like so many regulations to try to build, even in the United States, where I think it's we're less regulated than most other nations, right? How are you able to build that to be able to deregulate building? Because I think that's a huge, as you talked about for solar, being able to deregulate putting solar in different places on on rooftops, as well as being able to build these heat pumps, being able to put in this next generation equipment. How do how did you do that?
SPEAKER_02Like uh it's on the one side, it's uh uh let's see everybody in the in the parliament is is is happy if it's easier for other people. Uh it's easier also because uh the new heat pumps are not uh quite silent. They used to be quite loud, uh loud uh 10 years ago. Uh and like this, uh, there was some kind of uh also Kran of Born was not the first one to do that in Switzerland, and heat bumps are quite common in Switzerland. It's it's not like in Germany, it's not so broadly used as in Sweden and in Norway, but in Switzerland it's quite common. So uh it's uh it's the normal heating system for new buildings in in Switzerland, and so there was a quite easy step to do that. Actually, we did it uh two years ago. There was uh 100% of the parliament was for that. So we only would have to tell the government of the city that that you will build that, and there is no formal way anymore. Uh but uh the government on the other hand shows how complicated and long how long it takes. Uh this official uh guideline is not out at the moment. They need uh some more months, they always say it will come in a few months, but it's not out yet. So the people actually they still need it and they complain. Sometimes I get emails from my people and in my uh voting district. They say, Okay, uh, why do I still need this uh this uh application? Because the government is not uh fast enough.
SPEAKER_00But so you go on two months two years ago, it was unanimously passed. Yeah, and despite all that, you still the the government bureaucracy is very slow to change and change up the now you've been voting on the deregulation of solar on the rooftops, right? And I assume it'll be another couple of years before the government slowly.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, they always say, but usually I say they it will come in two or three months, somewhere. Um so uh we uh they want to say okay, everything's done, we can forget this motion because we'll do it. But the parliament even said no, no, we wait for this no new regulation to be out, uh then we can uh uh finish uh this motion, but it's still uh um okay. It's not uh I don't know the name in English, it's a little bit uh special wording in in the policy making, but they are uh really keen that it's now done, yes. And um, but it's very difficult that we can make this motions, but it's very hard to uh make the government work working faster. Uh that's uh then you would need to give more um more money for more people to be uh uh employed by the government. And normally this is uh very hard task and also in Switzerland.
SPEAKER_00Is that similar where if if my research, and please tell me if I'm incorrect with this, but in 2022 you passed a resolution that were going to like escalate the issue of solar and storage and this renewable energy uh overhaul and next generation to the federal government. Is that correct as I understand it, or am I a little off basis there?
SPEAKER_02I'm not sure. Um in 2022,
Markets Capacity Payments And Smart Control
SPEAKER_02my my uh biggest success was uh to make uh Green New Deal uh motion.
SPEAKER_00Uh that's what I was talking about. Yeah.
SPEAKER_02Um and also here uh it was meant to really uh for the government for the people for the also for the as um chance for the companies to make money with it, really in a positive way. That's why so it was not uh animals, it was about a two-thirds of the of the parliament saying yes. But here the I was disappointed also by the government that it took so long, so it will be this summer when they publish the way they want to make it. Um they took it took four years for that, it's unbelievable. But um and they missed also some kind of windows of opportunity in the first where there was a a lot of pro movement for climate, uh climate change. Now it's a bit harder. Perhaps it gets better a bit with because of the Iran war, because everybody sees okay, it's not a really good way, good way to use fossil fuels, but anyway, it's um but push the government is almost impossible, yes, for the parliament side.
SPEAKER_00Well, it seems like there's something that is universal, right? It's death and taxes and also slow governments, right?
SPEAKER_02Yeah, they they want don't want to make errors, they want there are probably they're not doing wrong things, but they're already hesitating in in moves for small, fast movements. Uh perhaps I don't know the the ministry was blocked by others, could be. I don't know. This we don't know uh because perhaps they tried it another way, easier way. But there are other cantons like the canton of Grison where uh where uh St. Moritz is or uh Davos. They made it a lot faster. They put it within two years, they have uh the finance fixed, they have uh whoa, they could copy it from this canton, um, but they didn't somehow.
SPEAKER_00And so you've been hard at work, not only just for private industry, not only for science, but then also for your local government, all towards the same direction of creating a renewable energy future for your country and then for the world. Is that kind of like Yeah, that's the overall picture, yes, to fight climate change, more or less, yes. And I like how what is it like living in all domains of life going towards one unique goal? It seems like a lot, at least in the States and for a lot of people that I meet, there are a lot of conflicting things. Like you'll do one thing here in your personal life, one thing there in your social life, one thing there for your corporate life, right? But it seems for you uniquely you have all of your life is wrapped up around this one mission, this one unifying mission. What is that like? Can you speak to that? Even in my research, it I read that you often bike to work, you've helped pass bike, like deregulating the ability to bike more, right? And also you do correct me if I pronounce this wrong, ski to run, so like ski mountaineering, which I think is pretty awesome. And so I'd love for you to speak more on that as well.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, also so I'm really a happy, uh lucky guy that I can um uh do this uh for fighting climate change in my uh company in Indy, uh but also as a politician. Um it's also only possible because uh the work in this parliament is not a full-time job as it is in Germany, for example. Uh it's a part-time job, it's about a 30% job, and uh of 75% I'm working in the company. Um, in private, of course, I I run a PV uh um uh on my roof since 20 years with my neighborhoods. I have some uh I do it also in private, uh, but of course I have also a lot of different uh hobbies uh like ski touring, yes, that's that's skiing, and but you walk up the mountains by yourself, you put skins uh below the skis. Um there uh we have some kind of uh small uh ski touring club together with my friends. We uh and then we go let's say five, six times with the bigger groups and the same number of times with the smaller groups, and but also with my children. But I have all the um I like to go to movies and I read a lot of books. So it's not just about uh not just about climate change my whole life.
SPEAKER_00Well, the reason that I got into this industry as well is because I'm an avid hunter outdoors, but I like the backpack, and so I don't do ski touring because we don't have mountains in in Philadelphia that got super snow covered. But as someone who loves outdoors, I see why or at least the parallels there, right? Okay. I'm sure do you have any really interesting stories from ski touring?
SPEAKER_02I'm doing it uh quite a long time, uh 35 years. Special stories. Um in Switzerland very lucky that the distances to the Alps is quite close, so it's one hour and one or two hours by car, and even we have uh really good um public transport. You can go ski touring by public transport. Uh perhaps not in spring where you need to go up six o'clock in the morning or so or even earlier. Um for me, it's really a great sport. It's uh I'm not making uh rushing up. Some people are doing it like in the Olympics, uh like crazy, going fast up. For me, it's more being with friends and uh being outdoors, yes. I I uh used also to do some uh quite some climbing and mountaineering before. Now doing some climbing. I like to also to camp out. Um I did it also to some extent in the States, in the in the national parks. And uh so I've been in in Denver and Colorado at the National River Engine Lab uh C four times, and this uh used the opportunity to also to travel around uh the national parks in the surrounding, which is is great because it's uh the the density of population is totally different in the states, and uh you feel more in their real nature than you it is in in Switzerland, where you always see some huts or mountains or or people around.
SPEAKER_00So you always see people in Switzerland, whereas in the States you could go and get lost in the yeah, in Switzerland, not always, but uh most of the time, yes.
SPEAKER_02Even to some yeah, it's you see you see people, yeah.
SPEAKER_00Yeah, just my my wife and I we love the backpack, and so we've done Glacier National Park in the States. If you ever come back to the States, I'd highly recommend going to Glacier National Park because we love again not seeing anybody, and if you do see somebody, it's it's more uncommon. And I understand that desire of feeling very by yourself in nature, it's something very special.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, Glacier I haven't visited before. I've been uh to to uh the Rocky Mountains National Park, but also uh last year, uh two years ago, I was in uh Yellowstone and in the um uh Teton Grand Cheton National Park, so uh and also the Grand Canyon and Bryce Canyon in this region. I've been yeah.
SPEAKER_00Yeah, those are all beautiful places. Thank God for uh the national parks of America, you know. That's something that I'm happy that we're we still have, you know.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, that's quite unique. Yeah, I know it's it's not the same as it was before, and it's much more expensive now, especially for foreigners, but um, it's still alive there, yeah.
SPEAKER_00Yes, and so So as we kind of wrap this up, what like where do you think the science is going? What are you, if you're going to speak to somebody that is just starting out in the industry that is trying to do the same goals like you did when you were starting out a media test, what would you be saying to them? Where's the next like you just solved one problem, you're trying to solve this next problem? What's the future problem that comes with this problem or the once this one is solved? I'm curious from your view.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, it's still a lot to do. We did uh quite a huge but the installations are quite on a on a good level, but it has to go on for the next 20 years. So it's uh and if you multiply the last few years the growth of PV by 20, it gets to real big numbers. So it has to be really perhaps a little bit more dull job than it was 20 years before because uh it was new, but now it has to be duplicated, replicated, uh to a huge account in China and the United States, everywhere. So uh just just add on. Uh of course the planning needs to be changed. It's as I said, it's not to get the last kilod
Policy Work Personal Life And Advice
SPEAKER_02hours out of your plant. Um it's just to make it stable, to make it easy, uh, to make it cheap. Uh that's also a part to make it uh controllable. Uh by the bigger plants, it was anyway the case, but uh for smaller and and um and or even rooftop uh it isn't the case, so you have there has to be some planning. Um the guidance for the clients is perhaps also more complicated in the future because it's not just uh build and forget, um, produce and forget. Um the sources they change, of course, as well. It will be uh perhaps on the planning procedures, they will change perhaps also with with AI. I don't know too much. Um it's quite it will help you to make this, but uh you will still be needed, I would say. Um and the connection with the clients is in a way very important.
SPEAKER_00So we need everything. We need engineers, we need people to construct it, we need people to operate and maintain it. Yeah, we need people hopefully in the government speeding through this this change so that we can get it out even sooner.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, exactly. Yes.
SPEAKER_00Do you have any any insight from somebody who's as we said really lived a life that's in accordance with a unifying principle, right? How do you have any advice for young people who are starting out to try to do a life like that as well?
SPEAKER_02Yeah, I said I was a lucky guy. Um course. Um I was at the right time at the right place, but you can still do that. In uh I would say, uh, of course, you don't need to I also with policy it was more by chance that I got to know the people and then I slowly go uh connect to that. Uh I didn't uh it was some kind of my my my friends were active. Um but you still can uh I would say the policy part is uh very important nowadays that you are active, especially also in the United States. So democracy lives on the interaction of everybody, it's it's uh it's not a natural system, yeah, everybody's needed, and that not the natural state of the uh of the organization. Um and uh you can do policies not just being loud and and uh being uh the best uh and uh like it is done by the some top politicians in the country, you can do also on a lower level uh and starting. When I started, I was really a bad uh speaker. I I but I learned it how to do that, and uh um it's more about um having right connections to other people and other parties in Switzerland that makes it successful my way to do policy and um not being uh proud about and and talk aloud about it. Um and yes, of course, nobody is holy, you know. Uh everybody makes makes errors, so uh um so uh um and and in the field of solar energy, I was really happy. I think you're doing uh important and uh job, and there will be a lot of jobs out if you get to the target numbers we need to repeat. So uh um they will be uh and it when I uh also the people living uh working here at Metros, they are all happy because um they know they're doing a good job and not perhaps they wouldn't earn more money if they would go to the Swiss banks, but that's not the the way they want to live.
SPEAKER_00And uh well, it's good. So follow what calls you, and hopefully you're lucky and you get your you have some intervention to help to help get to that that spot. Well, thank you, Jan, for the time today. I really, really appreciate it, and I really appreciate your insights and and your contributions to this this industry, both from Metorm, but also for the new papers and that that you've been publishing. So thank you so much.