Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Geothermal Pilots Design And Backup topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Delegate Laura Charkudian urges careful design of Maryland geothermal pilots and opposes in-home resistance backup
Summary
During a Public Service Commission hearing on the WARMTH Act pilots, Delegate Laura Charkudian said pilot costs are high but reducible with better design, recommended backup heating be sited at pump houses rather than inside homes, and urged workforce training, community benefit agreements and rigorous data collection.
Delegate Laura Charkudian told the Public Service Commission on the record that Maryland’s network geothermal pilots hold “so much potential” but that current cost estimates are ‘‘a little bit higher’’ than they should be for a pilot and must be driven down through design, outside review and use of tax credits.
"I think it's totally inappropriate to have backup resistance heat on these systems," Charkudian said, arguing such in-home resistance backup defeats the grid benefits the projects seek to deliver. Instead she suggested any necessary redundancy be located at the pump house, which she said would be less costly and easier to remove if it proves unnecessary.
Charkudian said federal tax credits and other outside funding make the pilots more feasible and urged the commission to require incremental design steps — for example approving reimbursement to reach 30% or 60% design and then asking outside experts (she referenced HEAT) to review those designs before further approvals. "Let's bring these costs down, let's work on... ask them to take the next step to get to 30% design with an understanding that they're going to be reimbursed for the cost to get to the 30% design," she said.
She also highlighted operational benefits that network geothermal can deliver beyond simple fuel switching, including demand-response potential from preheating and precooling loops and the possibility of capturing waste heat from facilities such as ice rinks or data centers for local heating. On workforce, Charkudian urged that utilities and contractors plan for maintenance training and certifications and incorporate community benefit agreements with prevailing wage and apprenticeship requirements.
Commissioners followed Charkudian with detailed technical questions about segregating the cost of backup systems to allow apples-to-apples comparisons, whether backup on pump houses could better isolate costs, and how air-source heat-pump appliances (stoves, water heaters) would change building panel upgrade needs. Charkudian repeatedly recommended more granular design and reporting: run comparative analyses to show the impacts of air-source versus ground-source approaches, require utilities to model scenarios, and insist on strong community engagement.
The delegate also urged utilities to begin MIHA (low‑income multifamily) energy-efficiency processes now for buildings under consideration, saying those upgrades deliver benefits to residents regardless of whether a pilot proceeds.
The hearing moved next to local and institutional testimony and a technical presentation from the Office of People's Counsel and PSC staff on budgets and cost controls. The commission closed the session after a staff discussion of reporting, staged approvals and regulatory options for managing budget risk.
