Green Giants – Episode 86

Wes Ashworth (03:51)

Yeah, absolutely. I think having that firsthand perspective of like growing up in a community like that, understanding the importance of the people, the community, how closely everything’s tied, the dependence on usually one or two businesses or industries that are in that town as well too, I think obviously shows up in how you think about long-term stability today. And so we’ll get more into that.

So you then trained in aerospace engineering. You know, one of the most structured and tightly regulated fields there is. What specifically made you realize maybe that path wasn’t where you wanted to spend your career and what sort of shaped your path forward?

Tristan Walker (04:24)

Yeah, it’s an interesting one, you know, growing up in northern BC, there’s a joke sometimes that there’s no rules north of Terrace. And so, rigidity and structure and that kind of stuff and regulation, obviously is very important, but it’s not something that was very tangible to me growing up. And so getting into the aerospace industry was more based on just the general interest of flying things in space and helicopters and all that kind of stuff, super cool.

As I advanced through the degree, there was a lot of really interesting stuff we got to do. We got to design planes and do orbital mechanics and that kind of thing. But as I kind of learned more about what the job market was, I had a challenge internally of trying to figure out how I could align what kind of makes my clock tick with what the opportunities are within that industry. And I think, just the way my brain works, it’s not always linear thinking. You know, professional engineer.

So, I want to clarify that I do follow regulations, and I make sure that that’s all very important. But when it’s prescribed so heavily, I think that is a challenge for myself and I want to say the people in the aerospace industry are some of the smartest people in the world. It’s incredible what they’re able to do and accomplish. Looking at the plane when you walk in, understanding all the design that goes into that is pretty impressive. And I think ultimately for me, the regulations in that industry, as well as how capital intensive it is to participate, throws a wrench in any kind of entrepreneurial opportunities.

And as you can see, there’s, in space, we have NASA, we have SpaceX, we have Rocket Lab, and that’s kind of it, right? In aircraft manufacturing, you have Airbus, you have Boeing, you know, De Havilland has a little bit of stuff, but these are all huge corporations, government backed. So for someone like me, who’s kind of looking to get into the entrepreneurial areas, it didn’t offer as much opportunity as potentially some other industries.

Wes Ashworth (06:10)

Makes a ton of sense. And you see that a lot. You know, I think people sort of figure out how they’re hardwired. So good on recognizing that early and pivoting and obviously using that skill and a lot of what you bring from that that’s incredibly valuable.

So, I do want to get to this, and maybe this is a great segue from aerospace engineering to before Massif Energy you launched a clothing company, probably pretty far from aerospace engineering, but just directly funded that company, directly funded community scale renewable projects. I love this concept and idea. I guess what did that experience teach you that no formal education maybe ever could?

Tristan Walker (06:42)

Yeah, it’s a good question. I think fundamentally, profit isn’t a bad thing was one of the things I learned. And that was because a lot of the momentum that I had managed to build was around friends and family and that kind of thing. And so when I started the company, I didn’t really want to take a profit on any of the stuff that I was selling. I just wanted to put it all back into projects, put it all back into growth ultimately not to take advantage of the people that were buying.

But as I ran the company, the realization was kind of like profit isn’t taking advantage of them. It’s making sure that the business is sustainable so it can keep running and keep accomplishing the goals. And that was a conversation I had with a couple people that we’re trying to sell as quite affordable and that sort of thing. And they made the comments like, hey, you should be upping your prices so that you can actually do more and accomplish more and I like what you’re doing here. Make sure that it stays sustainable.

On top of that, you know, there’s a whole bunch of things about running a business. I’m sure you’re familiar. You know, you get to be the bookkeeper, you get to be the designer, the creative director, you’re also running the procurements and all that kind of thing. So, it’s just layers on layers of things. And then at the root of it all, I think it really taught me that availability matters.

And this is something that I try and do continuously in our business. You can set yourself apart by being the person who answers quickly and who answers first and not letting people hang on a question or hang on something for quite a long time. And so that’s kind of one of the mantras I’ve tried to live by is really making sure that other people’s time is valued and that I’m quick and not always decisive but at least acknowledging that the communication is there.

Wes Ashworth (08:20)

Certainly, great experience. You wear all the hats, you know, from IT to counselor to anything and everything that possibly needs to be done, certainly teaches you a lot. After your master’s, too, you chose to work inside municipal government. So again, you’re very well rounded. But what was important to you at that stage and what were your takeaways from that experience?

Tristan Walker (08:40)

I think you can shape this as me choosing to work in municipal government or me being fresh out of school and taking any job that I can find, right? I think I really aligned with that position.

I feel that when you’re in a small community, the job that you do and the things that you accomplish have a direct impact on the people that are living in that community. And oftentimes, that’s just because of the nature of lack of capacity in some of these organizations, where if you’re in a large organization, you’re kind of more buried under the cogs and the wheel, you could say.

While the work that you’re doing is important and impactful, it kind of has four levels that it needs to go through before it gets integrated. Whereas in a small community, it’s kind of this is on you, this is your responsibility, it either flies or it doesn’t because of that. So, I think fundamentally, that’s what I aligned with.

Wes Ashworth (09:31)

Yeah, absolutely. And kind of bringing us to current day. So, take me back to early days of Massif Energy, even maybe before that. So, what was the problem that you were trying to solve? How did that all come to be? And what was the origin of the company?

Tristan Walker (09:46)

The origin of Massif, I want to say, is based on the understanding of a lot of things that I heard while working in Pincher Creek. I got to connect with the community quite a bit through open houses and discussions and then just making friends and being part of social groups in the community as well. And as you know, Pincher Creek, they claimed to be the birthplace of wind in Canada and all that sort of thing, so they have quite a history with the renewable energy industry.

And there were just certain topics that kept coming up where people were not always pumped on the wind energy and they didn’t understand the benefits that they were getting because of having those wind projects close to them and they didn’t really relate to the projects. And so my thinking was, hey, how can we do development differently, so that people are continuously proud of these projects?

And I want to say continuously because I think based on what I heard, at least Pincher Creek was very proud of being the birthplace of the wind industry for quite a while. And, yeah, in development, I think that there’s a way that you can, you can create long-term pride as well.

Wes Ashworth (10:50)

I think that realization of going through that, some people don’t do anything about it. But you actually taking that and it’s that seed that eventually really became Massif and taking that and actually doing something about it, which is incredible. And I think that insight naturally leads into maybe a little bit tougher conversation about where the renewable industry has gone wrong and we’ll keep this really positive. But I think some good things we can learn and perspective that we can gain from this.

You often contrast that top-down development with bottom-up development. From a community’s perspective, what does the traditional playbook actually feel like? And maybe just give us a bit more context to that sort of top-down development and bottom-up development as well.

Tristan Walker (11:28)

I guess from the community’s perspective, a lot of the time what we see, and this is something that I saw as not being involved as like a landowner that is being engaged to have a turbine on their land, but somebody that’s kind of part of the general community. A lot of the time, the first thing you hear about a project is when it’s fully designed, it’s got its location figured out, everything is in place and they’re going for their permits. And it’s like, this is the go no go for that project and the community really doesn’t have a say in anything. It’s more of just a hey, this is what’s happening. If you don’t like it, sorry.

And so that’s kind of what we see from top down oftentimes. And of course there’s nuance to that as well. Some developers will come in and do very early engagement while others will come in later in the game. But yeah, at the end of the day, I think the community almost always feels left out and taken by surprise.

Wes Ashworth (12:19)

Yeah, absolutely. And I think framing that way makes it easier to understand where resistance is kind of, you know, feels a little baked in from the start. And it’s not necessarily that people wake up ready to resist these things. But it’s just maybe how we frame it and how we bring them in early. I think these are great lessons that we can learn. With that, too, I think another perspective on that is renewable projects are capital intensive. They’re often owned by distant investors or pension funds. And I think that can also sort of aid in some of the difficulty.

How does that ownership structure shape public perception on the ground? And what could we do better or what could we do to help that?

Tristan Walker (12:51)

Yeah, so I mean, like you said, these projects require a massive amount of capital. So, it’s not like your local startup can go really build a wind project or a big solar farm. That’s just out of the question. But I think in saying that because they are so capital intensive, the community doesn’t really feel a relation to the companies that do build them, right? It’s your large pension funds. It’s your overseas investment vessels that are coming in and kind of saying this. So the community A, has no idea who you are, there’s no relationship there. And B, that the community understands that, you know, the money that this is making is being funneled back out of the to whoever put the investment in.

And, you know, obviously, that’s not necessarily a bad, but when we go circle back to the impacts and the importance of having economic drivers in these rural communities. If that’s not being provided, it makes it really challenging for the community members to kind of align behind it and say this is something we want to support. When we talk about the high cap ex, and we can talk about financial engineering ad nauseam, but basically, with a project like this, because your cap ex is so high, you want drive your operational costs as low as you can, which means that over the course of the project life, so the 30 years the system has been built, going to try and reduce those costs as much as you can, which means as few jobs as you can, as few contracts as you can.

And again, cost optimization, we want to keep energy prices low, but at the end of the day, that’s going to impact the community. If there’s less jobs, they’re not going to see that benefit. And so I think, there might be a balance that needs to be struck on some of these projects between keeping that energy costs low or maybe increasing the energy costs by a percent or two. When we’re talking seven cents to 7.07 cents a kilowatt hour to create some more jobs or to work with the community to identify what sort of benefits they’d like to see.

Really listening to the community and understanding how they want to be benefited rather than just getting that 12% IRR return on your investment and making your investors happy.

Wes Ashworth (15:03)

Yeah, absolutely. And I think there’s been more, you know, I’ve certainly heard more of a focus on that in the past years and in terms of just community first and getting into the community early and having them be a part of it. I think that’s obviously a key success driver. Say that person’s listening. They’re a foreign investor or an investor that’s not directly tied to that community. What are some things you would encourage them to do or to think about differently?

Tristan Walker (15:27)

Something that I think about a lot when we’re working with communities, and I think fundamentally is to go in and have conversations and let them know what your intentions are. You say, hey, we want to do this and then just listen. A lot of the time this can be at the council level or at the administration level or even just in general community open houses. Ask pointed questions.

What matters to you? What are your goals in this community? What do you want to see? When we talk about locations, it’s like where are sensitive locations in your region? And all of these things can kind of help guide the developer in their decisions. Because most of the time, and like I’ve done development work as well, you’re looking at a map and you’re saying, here’s good resource, here’s a transmission line, here is low environmental risk, this is where we’ll build our project.

And you’re just doing a lot of that from your desktop. So, if you can get in and have a conversation with the community and let them kind of guide that a little bit more, I think that would change perception of the project as you continue it.

Wes Ashworth (16:27)

Absolutely. It’s always interesting how simple, you know, it’s complicated, but it’s simple, you know, a lot of ways of just coming in early, obviously communicating, asking those questions, insightful questions, and then really listening. You know, it’s not rocket science. It’s simple. These are fundamental things of how to be successful and do things the right way. I love those. I love those concepts.

To kind of look at oil and gas a little bit. I think, again, these are some things that we can look at and learn. And I think it’s a great perspective. So, you know, oil and gas still commands a lot of loyalty in places like Alberta, who’s, you know, it’s sort of the Texas of the north. I hope nobody’s insulted by hearing that. But similar kind of like concept in terms of that connection to oil and gas. What did that industry get right when you think about culturally and those sorts of things that renewables maybe didn’t replicate quite as well early on or maybe just what they did well and what we can learn from?

Tristan Walker (17:17)

Yeah, I want to preface this by saying that they might not have gotten it right. They might have kind of just slipped and fell into the situation where they ended up having a positive impact. And exactly, you know, we’ll call it a positive impact at the end of the day. I think it’s not oil and gas only, right?

This is the same thing in a lot of industry dependent regions. We can see BC in the forestry industry, for example. But yeah, like in oil and gas, there’s a lot of bad impacts there. People are still unhappy about thinking about the water issues in Dawson Creek, the impact of pipelines through BC, abandoned wells in Alberta. But at the end of the day, the oil and gas industry offers the people that live in the areas where the development is happening an opportunity to make their buck.

If you want to get involved and start a business, you can buy a vac truck. You can go out and you can be a contractor for these places. You can get a job making quite a bit of money and sustain your family by working on these projects. And I think that’s kind of the differentiation we see in the oil and gas industry versus the renewable industry where, A, the job opportunities are less, right? Your operational jobs, you have a couple techs on quite a big facility. And then B, on the contracting side, there’s just less that’s needed. And so less opportunity for the local entrepreneurs to really get out there and achieve value.

And so I think at a baseline level, the difference that we see with oil and gas is that people say, yes, it’s bad, but at least I’ve been able to feed my family for the last 40 years and my grandpa was able to leave a property for us because we worked and built something with that industry whereas renewable energy, it’s kind of like, I know two or three people in town that work there, I see them. But other than that, there’s not really any relation to why that is a good investment.

Wes Ashworth (19:03)

It’s a good perspective and I think important to understand and to note. What’s the lesson to be learned from that? Or what are some things that thinking about the renewable industry, us moving forward, takeaways or things that we could do differently, like with that in mind or having that understanding?

Tristan Walker (19:19)

Man, hard-hitting question. I think one of the takeaways that you can have from that is that even though there’s huge benefits, right, your energy bills stay lower, your tax bill stays lower because it’s providing a huge amount of tax to the municipalities, the everyday person, somebody who just lives in a community does not see the connection between that wind project and a lower tax bill when it comes tax time. That is quite a few hoops that you have to jump through mentally to see the benefit.

Same with your electricity bill, right? You see your electricity bill, that’s a cost. You got upset about your cost. There’s no note on it that says, oh because you have wind turbines in Alberta that this was 12% cheaper this month. And so, I think the renewable energy industry as a whole needs to figure out how they can create that tangible connection for people so that they can feel like there’s value and there’s benefit from these projects. And I have some ideas about how to do that but definitely would be open to anyone that thinks that they might have the solution.

Wes Ashworth (20:19)

I think it’s good perspective. I think connecting the tangible benefits, really where it affects you, your livelihood, your pocketbook, whether that’s, short term, long term, both communicating in that way versus just focusing on green messages, which we’ve talked about. I think the industry is doing a much better job now at telling the story that’s not just all, you know, green, everything, green, everything, but really talking about the financial benefits and economic benefits and, local benefits, those sorts of things as well too.

I think putting in that perspective, you know, that’s, as you said, sort of the oil and gas for whatever it is, I can put food on the table and provide for my family. You know, that matters to me. And so, communicating in those sorts of practical, kitchen table topics that’s really important and really powerful. And I think we’re starting to do a much better job at that. Thinking about some of these projects. These are 30-to-50-year assets. What does that say about the industry that communities are one, often engaged late in the process, but else should we be thinking about when we’re thinking about the longevity of 30-to-50-year assets?

Tristan Walker (21:17)

Like you said, communities are engaged late. And I believe that goes back to just the structure of how these projects are built, right? They’re decisions that are made in the corporate boardroom because there’s a huge amount of capital that needs to be expended. You need to get your ROI on it. That’s a decision that’s made looking at balance sheets and profit and loss statements. That’s not the decision that’s made because you’re going out into the field and living in these communities. And so, I think that might be one of the reasons why communities are engaged later.

The other portion of it is just, you know, at the end of the day, a private company is going to do what it’s regulated to do. And in a lot of jurisdictions, there’s no regulations in place. This is changing so that there are becoming regulations in place. But historically, communities have not really needed to be a fundamental player in the development process. And so, if you’re looking at a project budget and it’s going to cost X amount of dollars to go engage with the community early and have these discussions, and you don’t have to do that to get the project built, you’re going to cut that cost, right?

And there’s some developers that will go the extra mile and have a little bit more of that long-term vision of, if we can create a positive impact, then we’ll get to rebuild this project in 30 years, 50 years. But a lot of the time, by the time the project is done at its end of life, the people who built the project and made those decisions are happily retired and living the high life. And so, it doesn’t really matter to them.

I don’t want to preach regulation because I think that’s an open door to escalating costs as well. And so, there’s got to be some trade off there, but maybe it’s a situation where the regulation says there’s ways to fast track or reduce costs in other areas if you get the community support and engagement.

Wes Ashworth (22:58)

Yeah, and I guess what’s important is understanding even if there was no regulation and it wasn’t required, my mind goes to, well, why? Why would a developer want to? Or what benefit would there be to do it anyways and to get involved early? And maybe I think that’s what we’re getting to, the heart of that. And I know you have worked with, you know, exceptional developers who maybe get that and understand the value of that in the long term and why they should do that regardless. You’ve worked with ones that aren’t that as well, too. Sort of the opposite side of that, kind of like, hey, we’re you know, we don’t need to get involved in the community, so we’re not getting involved.

 And, you know, we’ll just push it through. And obviously we don’t want to duplicate a lot of that if we can help it. Talk to us about that, what separates those two in real world execution and why should a developer, even if regulation is not there still get involved in that community early and do these things the right way?

Tristan Walker (23:47)

I think at the end of the day, it goes back to that listening, the good developers that we worked with are willing to come to the table early. They have the conversations, they provide the information, they say, hey, this is why we’re making our decisions, what do you think? The community has an opportunity to say, hey, we don’t like that decision because of X, we would prefer this. And the developer says, sure, okay, we can meet in the middle here.

The more challenging developers that we’ve worked with kind of say, hey, this is our project plan and you can come to the AUC and fight us there, the Alberta Utilities Commission, or you can go to a regulatory body and fight us, but we’re gonna move this forward and there’s nothing much you can do about it. And we’re definitely seeing a shift in that, like over the past couple of years, the developers are becoming much more conscious about the impact that they can have.

I think at the end of the day, the benefit of having those early conversations is more than just the internal company, right? It’s an industry-wide benefit. And so sometimes it’s hard for an individual company to say, yes, we’re gonna take this extra step so all the other developers can benefit.

Which is where, you know, things like industry associations come in and say, “Hey, we should set some standards and say, if you want to develop in this area, this is kind of the SOP for how to do it.” Because if we can create positive momentum and tangible benefits, and an industry that communities can get behind that makes development easier, not this year, but in five years and in 10 years and in 20 years, communities are going to be asking for these projects.

Wes Ashworth (25:17)

Yeah, let’s look at the positive side of this, right? So every let’s say every developer, every investor subscribes to this and goes, you know, all right, I understand the importance and value of getting in early, communicating, asking questions, getting buy-in from the community, being close to the community, not just forcing it on them or saying, “Hey, tough the way you feel, go take it up with somebody else, not my problem.” But let’s see, the opposite of that, everybody’s bought in.

What does that look like? What is the long-term impact for the industry as a whole for the benefit of these developers long-term? You started to mention that, but if we get it right, consistently, more often. What does that look like?

Tristan Walker (25:53)

I think on the development side of things, it’s increased speed to installation, which when you’re dealing with huge amounts of capital dollars is always a good thing. It’s less risk in the early development. So, you’re going to get communities that are more in favor, regions that are more in favor of these projects and are going to do some of that early development work for you so that you can come in and you can spend the dollars that you need to. But, you know, ultimately have it de-risked when you’re talking about some of these investments.

Utility returns are quite stable. So, there’s not always a huge margin for error. And so, from a developer’s perspective, you’re trying to reduce that risk as much as possible. In a perfect world, you’re going to get communities that are saying, hey, we want a project of X size in this location discussed with the landowners, everything’s good. And because they live there, they’ve already got most of that data. And then the developer comes in and says, okay, we’ll have it built in two and a half years because, long lead times for all the big equipment, but, you know, increasing that speed to market as well as de-risking the initial capital.

Wes Ashworth (26:58)

Yeah, clear benefits obviously there. And I think it’s, I’ve said this a lot, I’ve never regretted doing the right thing the right way, you know, and having people in mind. And sometimes there’s a short term pain to that, but it’s always long term beneficial, you know, and building that trust, as you said, of expediting timelines and reducing resistance and all those sort of things that helps long term and I think as we think about, you know, sustainable industry that’s still growing, still scaling, those are the things that we need to focus on and think about.

Let’s talk a little bit about what doing this differently actually looks like. So, I think we’ve kind of painted out some of the problems, some of the concepts of doing things differently. So, when you say community first development, I think some people do say, hey, we get in early, we communicate. But for you, what concretely changes in the first six months of a project? Like what does that really look like in practice?

Tristan Walker (27:48)

Yeah, it starts at the very beginning of the project. Like we had talked about, you can come in and you can have a fully baked idea and say, this is the project that we’re gonna build, or you can come in over the first six months and say, “You have a really good wind resource in your area and some transmission lines. We’d like to build a wind project. This is what it could mean. This is what we need to do to get there. Any flags? Anything negative that you wanna see? What are your goals? What would you like to see if this does get built?”

You know, some communities have issues with housing, or some communities have issues needing a new rec center or wanting to upscale their communities. They want scholarship dollars or maybe they just want cheaper energy locally. And so having those conversations early and really letting the community make some decisions on their own and help to shape the project, I think is one of the biggest changes that could happen in the early stages.

Wes Ashworth (28:39)

Yeah, I love that. I think that that early shift I think seems to cascade through everything else that follows after that as well, too. So, what are some other things when you approach a municipality or indigenous community, what are some of the other sort of first questions you ask before any megawatts are discussed? You mentioned a few there, but are there any others that come to mind in terms of those early conversations?

Tristan Walker (28:58)

Yeah, I think every community is different and sometimes that’s the challenge is figuring out how to relate and how to identify what matters to them. We’ve certainly, Massif, it’s been a learning curve. We’ve had some engagements that have gone really poorly and we’ve kind of put our foot in our mouth and, you know, willingly acknowledged that we screwed up and that’s a lesson learned to take to the next one.

And then there’s some that have gone super well and organizations or groups have said, you know what? Yeah, let’s do this. And I think at the early stages, really it just ends up being honest with them saying, hey, this is why we’re reaching out to you. Whether that is, you know, we’ve seen that you have a good resource in your area or we have a personal connection. We heard you’re interested in renewable energy. We offer these opportunities to work together. What matters to you? What do you want to do? What size are you looking for? Are you worried about certain environmental issues or certain social issues?

And yeah, really getting back to that first touch point of understanding where their community is coming from because like I said, every community is different and they’re going to have a different answer.

Wes Ashworth (30:08)

Yeah, no doubt. And I think those questions really signal respect, you know, and having those conversations early. You really go beyond that in your approach and just really helping bring communities in to influence siting, technology choice, benefits, really bringing them into the whole equation. Talk to me a bit about that and then like, how does that reshape the final project?

Tristan Walker (30:30)

Yeah, so on the final project, what we found sometimes is that there’s not always a ton of differences between what we would’ve designed initially and what ends up being designed. But what we kind of hear is that the community is happy to be part of the decision making, right? They get to take ownership of that project design because they were part of the deciding factor. And sometimes the case ends up being where you put a design decision in front of them, you say, hey, these are your options. And they say, do what’s best. We trust you, right? And you’re like, well, you I was hoping you would make this decision because there’s all these factors that are involved.

And they say, you know what, these are the factors that matter to us. You make that decision. so, oftentimes, like I said, it ends up being very similar to the original design. But the difference is that the community got to make the decision rather than being told what it is.

Wes Ashworth (31:24)

Yeah. And I think like we know this, right? Like we know that this is true and how we lead our organizations. It’s kind of similar. It’s like, yeah, you can make all these decisions from the top and never bring your people in and never discuss it with them and never get their opinion and it might not be received really well, but just even bring to the conversation early, getting their thoughts, ideas, you know, push back those sort of things as well. Then they’re part of it. You know, they’re part of the decision-making process. Ultimately, you’ve got to make the call, but oftentimes, as you said, the trust has been built.

There’s that true sort of working together and collaborating, and then they trust the outcome and probably makes it easier in the long term anyways. We’ve talked about length a little bit here too, but just to fully cover it. So, for those developers that maybe worry that deeper engagement, because you’re adding steps, you’re adding conversations, you’re adding levels of engagement. If they’re worrying about, man, this is going to slow the project down, and you’ve said in some cases it’s going to speed it up, Tell me about that. What does your experience actually show?

Tristan Walker (32:18)

Yeah, for me, it comes down to risk management. You know, if you can certainly move a project through very quickly and everything goes according to plan, it has a great timeline. But by doing it a little bit differently and starting early and getting that engagement in place, you’re kind of wearing your seatbelt, right? You’re saying in the case that something does go wrong, we have the protection and the background and trust in place to be able to navigate that.

There’s another saying here for us, slow is smooth, smooth is fast. And so sometimes taking that extra little bit of time to make sure the process is smooth can in the long run increase the speed and in the development scenario also increase the likelihood of getting a project built, which ultimately is where you get your money back, right? You don’t get a return until the wind turbine starts spinning or the sun starts shining on the solar panel. So, all those costs up front are risky.

Wes Ashworth (33:19)

Absolutely, I love that. Another saying as well too, it’s like some of the quickest way to speed up is to slow down. It sounds counterintuitive, but it’s true. So real life example, so have you seen a moment where that approach, community involvement, early and bringing them in, turned opposition into genuine pride and help things to be smoother as you just shared there?

Tristan Walker (33:40)

Yeah, I’m not sure if there’s a scenario where I’ve seen a complete opposition turned into pride. I think a lot of the time what we see is kind at the beginning there’s no thoughts about the project, essentially. And then as the project advances, you either get opposition or you get pride, depending on how it’s developed. And so, I think if you’ve reached a point where you’ve gotten opposition, you might be already too far gone.

And I, again, I don’t want to say that that’s a fact, but in terms of real world examples, I can give some with regards to the BC Hydro Call for Power that closed last year, I guess, two years ago at this point, but they just had a naming change for one of the projects and an Indigenous community got to choose the name and kind of really take ownership of the project. And they did an announcement at the First Nations Energy Summit in BC and it was quite powerful because the leaders of the community got to share their story and how they were involved in the project. And you could see that they were proud that they got to be a part of it and that it now held a name that mattered to them.

So yeah, that would be one of the most impactful that I’ve seen recently. And then another one, I think that was pretty cool is the town of Raymond in Alberta is now net zero for their municipal facilities because of the solar that they’ve installed. And so, you talk to people in the Raymond administration and they’re all pretty pumped about that. It’s something that they can say, yeah, we’re different. We did it a different way and have now ended up with a net even energy bill for our facilities. So yeah, those would be the examples that I’ve seen recently.

Wes Ashworth (35:19)

Yeah, good examples. And obviously, you know, helps really paint the picture. Community trust. We’ve talked about that. That’s one side of the equation. The system itself is also changing fast and Columbia is uniquely positioned with hydro acting like massive storage. Why does that change the renewable equation so dramatically?

Tristan Walker (35:37)

Hydro is one of the very fortunate assets that BC has. In Alberta, they’re heavily reliant on natural gas and used to be coal for their base load. Saskatchewan’s the same way. But essentially what hydro lets us do is save water, well sorry storage hydro, right? Run-of-river hydro, you got to generate when it’s going, there’s no way to store the water. But with an intermittent resource like wind and solar, you can turn the taps on or off depending on when the wind is blowing and the sun is shining.

So if you have a massive resource of hydro that’s sitting there waiting, what you can do is you can add wind and solar resources and every electron that’s generated, it doesn’t matter when it happens, is basically just an electron that doesn’t need to be generated by hydro, meaning that you can save a molecule of water behind the dam. And so over time, when you’re generating using these intermittent resources, which are cheaper than hydro, you’re going to drop that average cost and then you’re going to still have the reliability because you’re saving all that water for when it does get super cold. If the wind and the sun aren’t available, then you do still have that backstop there that’s not costing you extra because we already have it as a legacy resource.

Wes Ashworth (36:50)

And I think as we’re shifting to intermittent renewables paired with storage are really reshaping reliability and just the way we think about it altogether. But where do you think people maybe still misunderstand how the grid actually works?

Tristan Walker (37:04)

Complexity is king or queen, right? The grid system, and I have so much respect for the grid operators, like what they’re trying to manage, what they’ve tried to manage historically and now the way it is, is crazy. Historically it used to be kind of, you’d have these large generation assets, you’d push electricity into the grid and then the users would have it. And, you know, you need more electricity, you just turn the fuel up or open the gates a little more for hydro.

And I think what’s misunderstood now is how many different components can be adjusted and shifted throughout the electricity system to optimize it. With the wind and solar, it’s no longer about just adding more fuel. It’s about, okay how do we save that fuel and optimize for when the wind and solar is running? Knowing that we have smart systems in our homes and businesses and industries now that can adjust based on time of day and where you are, we’re seeing things like EV charging programs that are coming in that are creating these ghost spikes in the middle of the night because everyone’s deciding to charge their EV on a schedule. So, then all the EV chargers are pumping out at midnight, and the grid operator is going, oh no, now I’ve got to find all this energy at 12 a.m. where historically there’s been no demand.

And so that’s kind of a negative side of things, but on the positive side of things, if you can manage that EV charging, if you can manage when you’re using batteries and this kind of thing at very decentralized locations, you can create systems that are going to be cheaper on a per energy unit basis. So, the whole internet of things and kind of the complexity that that brings is very exciting and something I think that the energy sector is going to take advantage of in a big way.

Wes Ashworth (38:44)

Absolutely. Complexity, I think is the right word there. It is changing and evolving very quickly too and definitely important to kind of just stay in tune with what all is happening there. But yeah, probably something that’s somewhat misunderstood, you know, across the board as well too and just how quickly that’s coming up. Part of that too, so industrial expansion is really driving load growth far from cities.

So, we’re seeing a lot of these evolutions and changes happening with the way we use energy and where it’s getting distributed and times of day as you said as well too with all these different things. So how should planners just rethink transmission and generation to meet that demand?

Tristan Walker (39:17)

Yeah, I’ve got a couple ideas. I mean, I don’t want to make it seem like I know grid planning and I should be the one leading that exercise. Again, grid planners are some of the most impressive people in the industry. But one of the cool things, the opportunities that you see is that decentralized energy. If there’s going to be load, maybe plan on adding generation around that load.

We’re seeing in the North Coast of BC, there’s a whole ton of mining activity that’s coming online. The LNG facility that just got built, more LNG planned up in the area. And in order to meet that, they’re having to build a second or double the transmission line from Prince George to Terrace, right? So instead of one 500 kV line, it’s two. And the interesting thing there is that there’s so little generation in the Northwest.

And so, from a grid planning perspective, it could be something where instead of, or maybe in addition to building that transmission line, you’re starting to focus more on building generation assets up in that area as well. But again, the planners know a lot more about this than I do, and there’s obviously reasons to what they’re doing, but my answer would just be always circling back to taking advantage of the complexity and really leaning into what the new cool technology opportunities are.

Wes Ashworth (40:35)

Yeah, good perspective. I know you’re not the expert planner, but again, I think having those different perspectives, different lenses from different parts of the equation as well, too, I think it’s important. I think it’s important to understand that and learn from it all.

As we get closer to closing, I just want to step back a little bit, look at bigger picture and I asked this question a little bit earlier, but I want to revisit it and just if there’s anything else to add here. So if renewable energy succeeded, building this great emotional connection, this tie that people really bought in, bought in from the beginning and early on in these communities, what would feel different? What would be different in these communities or what would feel different in these communities?

Tristan Walker (41:10)

Yeah, I like your point about kind of the dinner table talk. And I think the way I thought about it was, you know, the coffee shop chatter. You walk into the local coffee shops, and you’re kind of hearing the benefits or, you know, people being excited about the renewable project that’s in town.

You know, the pride in somebody going to school on a scholarship that is funded by the local project, the community center having a logo on it that is the local developer or sponsored by the project name. At the end of the day, I think it is about creating that momentum and that positive thinking around these projects and so, the feeling that I would like to see when I go into those communities is that people are aligning with the project and really understanding the tangible benefit or I guess feeling a tangible benefit that they’re being impacted.

Wes Ashworth (42:04)

Yeah, I love that. It’s a great vision. I think you hit it spot on. I’m just really understanding from like, how does this benefit me and how does this affect me and my community and why is it a good thing and why should I be proud about it. You know, and ultimately, we’re doing a lot right if that’s the case. And I think again, more of that is happening. So, a lot to be hopeful and positive for.

For those listening, kind of as we wrap up a couple questions here. So whether founders, developers, investors or just connected to the industry. What’s a single mindset shift they should make if they want to see this succeed long term? I’m confident it will obviously, but building projects that last and just if we’re doing things the right way, what’s a mindset shift that should happen?

Tristan Walker (42:47)

My suggestion there would be just to try to walk a mile in the community’s shoes, right. A lot of the time, I’m assuming a lot of the listeners here are from large, in cities and not from the rural areas. If you are, know, that’s fantastic as well, but I think trying to have an understanding of what the impact of these projects are going to be seeing how you would like to be compensated or how you would benefit or what your connection to that project is gonna be if you’re gonna be living beside it for the next 20 to 30 years.

Wes Ashworth (43:22)

Yeah, I love it. Walk a mile in their shoes. Great insight there. And I think that mindset shift could be the most important takeaway of this entire conversation. Just thinking about it that way. It’s simple, but those simple things really are oftentimes the most impactful, right? Doing those things and doing them consistently. So, final question. Anything we left out, either final parting words of wisdom, things you didn’t get to share, things you want to leave the audience with?

Tristan Walker (43:45)

I think for me at the end of the day, what I’d like to establish is, I’ve worked in this industry for almost a decade at this point. I’ve had a lot of great conversations. Every time I have a conversation, I get something different out of it. I’ve failed a lot. I’ve made a lot of mistakes. I’m still making mistakes and will continue to not be perfect. And I think their recognition of, this is the latest round of the ideas that are in my head and how I think that we can adjust, but to continue iterating and embrace that complexity and just try and understand the way that people are thinking when these projects are brought to the forefront.

So yeah, really appreciate the opportunity to chat about this and it’s something I’m very passionate about. So anyone, please feel free to reach out and have a conversation. Yeah, it’s only my perspective and for what it’s worth, everyone’s got their own.

Wes Ashworth (44:38)

It’s a great perspective, great words to just end on and think about as well too. But Tristan, thank you for bringing both clarity and empathy to a conversation the industry desperately needs.

To our listeners out there, I always, always thank you for spending time with us today. If you found this episode valuable, please subscribe, leave a rating, share it with someone building the future of energy. And with that, we’ll see you next time.