Podcasts about EPC

executive director outreach guia epc michael davis

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 7, 2026 20:49

In this episode of In All Things, Michael Davis returns as a guest host and sits down with Gabriel de Guia, Executive Director of World Outreach. Michael and Gabriel discuss the exciting developments and strategic initiatives within the EPC's global outreach efforts, and explore recent achievements, upcoming events, and the importance of prayer and collaboration in advancing the gospel worldwide. To donate to the matching grant fund, click here. To learn more about how you can pray and get involved, click here.

Luis Javier Garcia de Rozas - Guascor Energy

The Industrial Talk Podcast with Scott MacKenzie

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 4, 2026 28:07 Transcription Available

Industrial Talk is onsite at PowerGen and talking to Luis J Garcia de Rozas, CEO of Guascor Energy about "Flexible, scalable generation solutions". Luis J. Garcia de Rozas, CEO of Guascor Energy, discussed the company's operations and market position. Guascor specializes in gas and diesel engines, capable of running on various fuels including natural gas, biogas, and synthetic gas. The company, with 210-220 employees, manufactures engines in Spain and provides after-sales services globally. Garcia highlighted the company's financial success, achieving an EBDA of 8 million in 2025, and its strategic focus on power generation, particularly for data centers. The company is adapting to meet the increasing demand for reliable power solutions, emphasizing flexibility and customization in their offerings. Barcelona Cybersecurity Congress Announcement Scott introduces the Barcelona Cybersecurity Congress, emphasizing its importance for cybersecurity professionals.The event is scheduled for November 3-5 in Barcelona, with networking opportunities and expert discussions.Scott mentions their own participation and broadcasting at the event.Contact information and details about the event are available on Industrial Talk. Introduction to Industrial Talk Podcast The podcast focuses on industry professionals and their contributions to various sectors.Scott reiterates the podcast's purpose of celebrating industry heroes and their innovations.The podcast is broadcasting live from PowerGen in San Antonio, Texas. Meeting Luis J. Garcia de Rozas Scott introduces Luis J. Garcia de Rozas, highlighting his role and background in the energy sector.Luis shares his recent arrival in Spain and his journey from Madrid to San Antonio.Scott expresses admiration for Spain and its people, mentioning a personal connection to the Basque region.Luis talks about the company's factory in the Basque region and its unique features. Luis's Background and Company Overview Luis provides a brief history of his career in the energy sector, mentioning his recent role as CEO.The company was previously part of the Siemens Group but was acquired by Mutales, a German private equity firm.The company achieved significant financial success in 2025, with an EBDA of 8 million and a closed debt.Luis discusses the current market demand for power generation solutions and the company's position to meet this demand. Company's Product Offerings and Market Position The company specializes in gas and diesel engines, capable of running on various gases including natural gas, biogas, and synthetic gas.They have three facilities in the Basque region: one for engine manufacturing, one for assembly, and one for R&D.The R&D center tests different gases to adapt engines to various fuel conditions.Luis shares insights on the challenges and solutions for using biogas and synthetic gas in engines. Challenges and Solutions in Biogas and Syngas Scott recalls past challenges with biogas and its impact on power generation assets.Luis explains the company's approach to using biogas and syngas, including adapting combustion systems.The company uses scrubbers and filters to clean gases and protect engines from harmful residues.Luis highlights the importance of maintaining the methane number in gases for efficient combustion. Company's Market Focus and Vertical Integration The company focuses on power generation, with a significant portion of its market being IPPs, EPC companies, and utility companies.They also serve niche markets for special gases like biogas and syngas.The company is vertically integrated, handling engineering, design, and product development in-house.They provide after-sales services, including parts and maintenance, through a network of partners and distributors. Impact of Data Centers on the Market Luis discusses the significant impact of data centers on the power generation market.Data centers are demanding large amounts of power and setting long-term contracts, changing the traditional customer base.The market is shifting from traditional IPPs to data center developers, creating new challenges and opportunities.The company is adapting to these changes by negotiating long-term production slots and modifying factory capabilities. Future Prospects and Contact Information Luis shares the company's plans to increase production capacity to meet growing demand.The company is focusing on delivering reliable and efficient solutions to meet the needs of data centers and other customers.Scott asks for Luis's contact information for listeners interested in connecting with the company.Luis provides his contact details and LinkedIn profile, encouraging listeners to reach out for further discussions. Closing Remarks and Call to Action Scott thanks Luis for the insightful conversation and highlights the importance of connecting with industry professionals.The podcast aims to help industry professionals succeed by sharing their stories and solutions.Scott encourages listeners to attend events like PowerGen and connect with experts like Luis.The podcast concludes with a call to action for listeners to reach out and tell their own stories. If interested in being on the Industrial Talk show, simply contact us and let's have a quick conversation. Finally, get your exclusive free access to the Industrial Academy and a series on “Why You Need To Podcast” for Greater Success in 2026. All links designed for keeping you current in this rapidly changing Industrial Market. Learn! Grow! Enjoy! LUIS JAVIER GARCIA de ROZAS' CONTACT INFORMATION: Personal LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/luis-javier-garc%C3%ADa-de-rozas-a83b9615/ Company LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/guascorenergy/ Company Website: https://guascor-energy.com/ PODCAST VIDEO: https://youtu.be/-FooIzaWQm8 THE STRATEGIC REASON "WHY YOU NEED TO PODCAST": OTHER GREAT INDUSTRIAL RESOURCES: NEOM: https://www.neom.com/en-us Hexagon: https://hexagon.com/ Arduino: https://www.arduino.cc/ Fictiv: https://www.fictiv.com/ Hitachi Vantara: https://www.hitachivantara.com/en-us/home.html Industrial Marketing Solutions: https://industrialtalk.com/industrial-marketing/ Industrial Academy: https://industrialtalk.com/industrial-academy/ Industrial Dojo: https://industrialtalk.com/industrial_dojo/ We the 15: https://www.wethe15.org/ YOUR INDUSTRIAL DIGITAL TOOLBOX: LifterLMS: Get One Month Free for $1 – https://lifterlms.com/ Active Campaign: Active Campaign Link Social Jukebox: https://www.socialjukebox.com/ Business Beatitude the Book Do you desire a more joy-filled, deeply-enduring sense of accomplishment and success? Live your business the way you want to live with the BUSINESS BEATITUDES...The Bridge connecting sacrifice to success. YOU NEED THE BUSINESS BEATITUDES! TAP INTO YOUR INDUSTRIAL SOUL, RESERVE YOUR COPY NOW! BE BOLD. BE BRAVE. DARE GREATLY AND CHANGE THE WORLD. GET THE BUSINESS BEATITUDES!

ceo live texas energy challenges data german spain impact barcelona bridge madrid san antonio garcia flexible data centers closing remarks basque be bold arduino be brave company website future prospects epc podcast video greater success biogas rozas ipps hitachi vantara javier garcia market focus industrial market powergen reserve your copy now

Proverbs Part 3: Scorched by sex appeal

proverbs sermon reformed epc sex appeal scorched

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 4, 2026 38:30

Proverbs Part 3: Scorched by sex appealProverbs 6:23-33Rev. Justin OlivettiMain idea: Stay sexually faithful in mind and body

Proverbs Part 4: Trustfall

proverbs sermon trust in god reformed epc

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 4, 2026 37:22

Proverbs Part 4: TrustfallProverbs 3:1-6Rev. Justin OlivettiMain idea: Trust in God to go full speed forward

Psalm 137

Valley Hope Church

Play Episode Listen Later Aug 2, 2026 27:26

Today we are pleased to be led by Rachel Pies in, our Psalms for the Summer series, Psalm 137. Rachel is a part of our community at Valley Hope and serves as the Dean of Spiritual Formation at Montreat College as well as being a teaching elder in the EPC.

psalm psalms spiritual formation psalm 137 epc montreat college

Episode 240: Gospel Priorities Update with Michael Davis

gospel priorities epc michael davis

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 31, 2026 10:09

In this episode of I All Things, Assistant Stated Clerk Michael Davis sits down and walks us through the recent initiatives of the EPC's gospel priorities, as well as upcoming events that aim to strengthen church leadership, health, and planting efforts across the denomination. To learn more about the EPC's gospel priorities and how you can get involved, visit www.epconnect.org

256: How the Ex-Unacademy COO built an edtech solving India's healthcare skills gap | Vivek Sinha

Matrix Moments by Matrix Partners India

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 30, 2026 38:55

How much money is enough to make starting up safe? Vivek Sinha thought he knew: ₹50 lakh in the bank. The day he hit it, he quit.Vivek is the founder of Emversity, which trains people for the jobs India actually has in healthcare, hospitality, EPC and manufacturing. Homeschooled till eight in a Bihar village surrounded by three rivers, he built Buildzar, lost ₹50 lakh, and spent nine years compounding skills at Mobikwik, OYO and Unacademy before starting again in a sector everyone had written off.In this episode, Avnish and Vivek take on, 1. Where did you get the confidence to do this?2. Why didn't it work? What did you think going in that didn't play out?3. Should I drop out and work full time on my startup?" 4. How do I find the right co-founder?5. How can we secure investment in a stigmatized sector despite proven traction?"6. What stays with you: build it for the right reasons Chapters 00:00 Introduction02:00 Flood village to NIT: growing up in Bihar06:00 First startup & why it failed: market timing11:00 MobiKwik: 0 to 20 lakh merchants in 6 months16:00 OYO & Unacademy: the lessons that compounded22:00 The 9-year gap: how he killed bad ideas early28:00 Should you drop out of college?34:00 How many co-founders — and going solo40:00 Building in a stigmatised, out-of-favour sector48:00 What Mversity does + closing advice

building healthcare built chapters flood edtech vivek nit sinha skills gap bihar epc homeschooled oyo

GE Vernova Q2 Wind Losses, Envision AI Turbine for Fortescue

The Uptime Wind Energy Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 28, 2026 27:55

GE Vernova posts a record quarter as gas and grid surge while wind orders drop 40%. Plus Envision grid-connects its first AI turbine for Fortescue. Visit https://woma2027.com/ to register speaking and sponsorship interest! Sign up now for Uptime Tech News, our weekly newsletter on all things wind technology. This episode is sponsored by Weather Guard Lightning Tech. Learn more about Weather Guard’s StrikeTape Wind Turbine LPS retrofit. Follow the show on YouTube, Linkedin and visit Weather Guard on the web. And subscribe to Rosemary’s “Engineering with Rosie” YouTube channel here. Have a question we can answer on the show? Email us! If you haven’t visited woma2027.com, you should do so right now because we are putting together all of the, uh, events at WOMA 2027, which is March 3rd through 5th in Melbourne at the Pullman, Matthew, Pullman East? Pullman East Melbourne. And it’s packed full. Our, in fact, actually, we have so many people applying to attend the event, we’re getting a little nervous on if the size of the venue is not large enough, and we, we have a lot of people already chime in wanting to be sponsors, which is great. But I wanna talk about what you will experience at WOMA. We’ve done it for two years now, and the feedback has been great. And Yolanda, you’ve been to the one just this past February, and participated in panels and saw some of the, uh, workshops and was involved in a lot of WOMA 2026. What are you expecting in 2027, and what did you think of 2026? Yolanda Padron: I thought [00:01:00] 2026 was great. I loved seeing everybody there. Uh, got to meet a lot of new people. It was, it was sweet. There was a lot of r- people returning from WOMA 2025, um, and a lot of new people that were told that that was the event to be at to learn about wind, which was really, really nice to hear. Uh, something that I loved, especially since we’ve been through quite a few conferences since then and before then, was just the fact that, like, you’re, you’re just talking about problems and just talking about solutions, and you’re talking about real stories, and it’s nothing that’s super, super public. You know, like, you, you can have real conversations with real people. I know during a panel I mentioned a, a solution to an issue that I had seen that was kind of niche, and then, uh, like three minutes later, like I had had some people come up to me and we all talked about the problem that we saw and then [00:02:00]talked about their problem, and it was really similar, and obviously in a totally different continent. And it was, it was good to, to be able to have those conversations that you usually wouldn’t have elsewhere, especially if everything’s just really, really public and just big and you’re having a lot of people sell at you, and it’s, it’s just something that we’ve really shied away from. What, what was your favorite part of it? Matthew Stead: I, I think, um, it was really the fact that it was a a technical, useful, helpful conference rather than having some rando talking about things that they’re told to talk to you about Allen Hall: It’s real answers from real problem solvers. And everybody’s gonna be in Melbourne on the 3rd through the 5th of March 2027. If you’re interested in attending, you need to go to woma2027.com. If you’re interested in sponsoring, it’s also woma2027.com. There’s limited [00:03:00]sponsorship left, so if you wanna do something, you better get in quick. And if you wanna attend the event, and I suggest that you do, that you visit woma2027.com and get registered today The Uptime Wind Energy podcast, brought to you by StrikeTape. Protecting thousands of wind turbines from lightning damage worldwide. Visit StrikeTape.com. And now, your hosts Welcome to the Uptime Wind Energy podcast. I’m your host, Allen Hall. I’m here with Rosemary Barnes, Matthew Stead, and Yolanda Padron. It’s been a busy day as we record because GE just announced its second quarter earnings and a bunch of things about the business. They had an investor call early, early, early on the East Coast, and even earlier for those on the West Coast of the US, and it was a very good quarter for GE, but a really lopsided one. Uh, GE Vernova reported second quarter orders of [00:04:00] $24.2 billion, up 88% with a backlog that has now climbed to $176 billion. Free cash came in at $5.1 billion. Man, $5.1 billion is a lot of cash, everybody, which is more than the company generated in all of last year. So they made more in one quarter in cash than made in all of last year, and management is raising its full year guidance, but the strength is coming from gas power and the electric grid, not from wind. The wind segment saw orders fall 40% and revenue slip 10%, and the company still expects wind to lose about $400 million this year. Although in the investor call, they did say that the forecast for wind in Q3 and maybe even Q4 was to be essentially break even on the EBITDA scale. So that’s a, a, a good number. It does seem like GE is being more [00:05:00] aggressive on pricing and selective on the projects they are choosing to participate with. Repowers was way down, if I remember correctly. Uh, they are not doing a lot of that at the moment. So there is a slowdown they’re seeing in wind, but they’re more than making up for it in gas turbines and electrification. Orders for gas turbines are out to ’30, ’31, and I think they’re gonna close out all of ’30, ’31, um, book orders for gas turbines here shortly. So if you want a gas turbine, Matthew, you’re gonna have to get in line because your GE has a long list of, of clients in front of them. What does this mean for wind? When I hear the discussion where GE is focused on gas and electrification because of the huge cash flow that comes in their door- Does that mean a good positive things for wind because they have the cash to kinda hang around wind? Or is it gonna be set aside for other [00:06:00] more profitable business segments? I Matthew Stead: mean, GE’s had a number of setbacks over the years. Um, you know, we know, we know all about them. We’ve been talking about them, you know, multiple times. But, you know, they’ve gotta just wait it out, don’t they? Um, you know, wind is not gonna go away, so they just need to wait it out, get their problems out of the way, get their cash flow in, build the order books again, just wait for things to improve. Um, I, I think one thing I just wanna pull out, the Sands Ear, i- isn’t that a massive achievement? Allen Hall: It is. It’s, it’s a colossal engineering achievement on its own. Forget about just delivering and manufacturing all those turbines and getting them installed. And that’s a pattern energy project, and Fairwind I think was involved with that in terms of project development, EPC items. It’s huge. It’s gigantic. But it may be the last one we see in the United States for a while. Matthew Stead: And but Vineyard, you know, they’ve gotta resolve that, don’t they? We’ve spoken about that before. Get that one out the way, clear out the decks and, yeah. That’ll come good. Allen Hall: Rosemary, of our former GE [00:07:00] employees, I guess we have two of them here. I’m one. Not of wind, but of another division. What’s your thoughts on GE Vernova at the minute? Rosemary Barnes: These days I see them through the O&M lens. That’s how I work with them, is when my clients need support for all their wind farms and It’s just, it’s just never enough. It’s not a GE-specific thing. Uh, you know, across Australia, anybody with a full service agreement does not… Uh, the, the company performing that agreement just gives the impression that they just do not have enough, um, uh, enough people. Y- you know? It’s just, just hands or maybe it’s budget. Uh, I guess it, it’s both at the same time. Yeah, I mean, I see some good things like their, the pace of new technologies has slowed and they’re consolidating, which was needed, but it’s just hard to imagine that it’s even gonna be enough considering how many fewer blade engineers that they’ve got now. Like, how are they, [00:08:00] how are they going to get the, you know, the issues with the platforms that they are, uh, pushing, how are they gonna get all that under control with so many fewer engineers? And will they ever be able to, you know, go back to innovating a- again when they’ve lost so much of their, you know, institutional knowledge? Allen Hall: Two things they did not mention during the phone call today or in any of the documents that I saw was TPI Composites and that EPC has acquired that and is now operating the factories, uh, making GE blades. And LM Wind Power was not discussed either, although LM Wind Power has been integrated into the overall financials of the company, so it’s not a standalone financial entity like it was last year. So you can’t really r- read the tea leaves of what’s happening at LM, but nobody talked about or even asked on the investor call what was happening on the wind side. They were very interested in gas turbines and what the order rate was going to be, and GE was concerned [00:09:00] on their side, saying that they’re trying to ramp up production to make more gas turbines, but there’s limitations to how much they can do. Rosemary Barnes: I guess that’s the s- the zeitgeist now, right? Or it’s the, I don’t know, like, it’s, it’s a sign of the times. Everyone’s obsessed with data centers, and for some reason, data centers are obsessed with gas turbines, um, even though, like, it’s not a fast solution to, uh, y- you know, to, to anything. So I don’t… You know, I’m not saying that building a, you know, a wind farm or solar farms, batteries, those are not without challenges. But I really don’t think that the, yeah, gas turbine challenge is so much easier than the, um, yeah, than the renewables challenges. It’s a bit weird to me how everyone has just kind of latched onto, “Oh, you need new power, then it needs to be gas.” It’s just a bit weird to me. Allen Hall: GE was predicting a peak of orders in gas turbines to happen sometime in 2026. They, they think that the demand curve is gonna trend downward because everybody is already in [00:10:00] line essentially, and it’s five years out, so not many other people are gonna join that line to make it seven, eight years out That also indicates that sort of the d- the demand for gas turbines may be waning a little bit, or there’s just a backlog, they just can’t produce more. Is that going to then maybe finally open up the best solar wind discussion for AI data centers? Rosemary Barnes: Yeah, I wonder if it’s partly because y- you know, in a lot of cases… So people wanna build data centers, and then those data centers need power. You can’t just plug into the grid in an easy, timely manner. So then now they’ve gotta BYO their own power, and in fact, in Australia they’ve just announced a, a policy where you will have to… You can bring your own power, and it will have to be renewable, actually, in Australia. So, um, at least that’s, at least that’s a win for, you know, generation source. Allen Hall: Yeah. The, the AI data center discussion and gas turbines in the United States has more recently been focused [00:11:00] on, on the AI data centers that use those gas turbines, and the number of gas turbines that they’re choosing, and that they’re choosing gas turbines that fall under some sort of EPA threshold on size. And what is happening, and which, uh, SpaceX has done and some others have done, is they go underneath that threshold on the size of the gas turbines, and then they, you know, and they daisy chain them together, right? So you, you… Instead of having one massive, I don’t know, two-megawatt generator of some sort, you have a bunch of 200 kilowatts, and you just stack them all together. And the concern is, is that are some of these data centers violating EPA, the… If not the actual rule or the intent of the rule in terms of emissions, and it’s causing a little bit of a stink. It’s, it’s raised enough of, uh, the noise floor about it that you’re, you’re hearing it on podcasts, you’re hearing people involved in AI data ce- [00:12:00] data centers push back on it saying, “It’s all legal. It’s all legal.” So it’s gonna come to a head pretty quickly in the United States. Rosemary Barnes: It was some real, like, real sketchy loophole finding, right? Like, I can’t remember the exact wording, but you’re not supposed to be able to just chuck in a diesel generator or a gas turbine in without any kind of planning, right? But they found a loophole where it’s like, okay, well, you know, it’s just like a truck except for that there’s no truck, and so it was called, like- off-road or non-road use or something. And it’s just, like, clearly not the, um, the meaning of the, of the law, right? The spirit of the law had, like, obviously been broken. In Australia we have a saying, the pub test. It doesn’t pass the pub test. Like, if you said that to someone in a pub, then they would be like, “What the hell is that? That is not right.” They have closed the loophole. However, I think that they also kind of quietly just allowed them to keep the ones that they had or had planned or something, so [00:13:00] it’s, like, overall by far not ideal. But I think that it’s just, like, you can, you can do that for a single site, but it’s obviously, like, the more that you do ridiculous stuff like that, that you lose the community ac- acceptance, which they barely had and definitely don’t really have anymore. Um, and secondly, yeah, like people, uh, people close the loophole and they respond. It’s, it’s much better, and we see it with wind as well. Like, yeah, you can do things technically by the law, but if you wanna have a, you know, sustainable, uh, industry through the years, through the decades, you actually have to kind of, you know, think, “What happens if I do y- push to the furthest extent of the law, um, to get away with whatever I can?” What’s gonna happen is regulation is gonna come down on you and you’ll lose the ability to kind of self-regulate. Allen Hall: We’re gonna take a quick break, but when we come back we’ll meet a wind turbine that runs on artificial intelligence, Rosie.[00:14:00] Delamination and bondline failures in blades are difficult problems to detect early. These hidden issues can cost you millions in repairs and lost energy production. CIC NDT are specialists to detect these critical flaws before they become expensive burdens. Their nondestructive test technology penetrates deep into blade materials to find voids and cracks traditional inspections completely miss. CIC NDT maps every critical defect, delivers actionable reports, and provides support to get your blades back in service. So visit cicndt.com because catching blade problems early will save you millions In the red dirt of Western Australia, a mining company and a Chinese turbine maker are trying something new. Envision Energy says it has grid connected its first [00:15:00] artificial intelligence wind turbine prototype for Fortescue’s Nullagine Wind Project in Pilbara. The full project will use 17 of Envision’s EN182 turbines, each rated for 7.8 megawatts and built to handle mining sites, desert heat, and tough grid rules. The turbines- The turbines pair a self-erecting tower from Nabler Wind with a hub standing an astonishing 188 meters tall. Behind it all sits Envision’s Energy Foundation Model software that company calls the world’s largest physical AI system. The goal is to swap diesel and gas for wind across the mine’s fleet and processing sites. So this is an effort by Fortescue to power mining operations with electricity. It’s a pretty ex- exciting [00:16:00] project if you’re watching. The Envision artificial intelligence piece is an aspect that I didn’t know much about, and I still am trying to gather more information on, because there’s not a ton of info about what AI means in terms of a physical system. And maybe Rosie, you know a little bit more, or Yolande, you can brief us on what this really is. Rosemary Barnes: We just need to start with a pronunciation lesson, Allen. Sorry. Matthew Stead: Not Pilbara, Pilbara. Pilbara. Rosemary Barnes: I, I don’t actually… I hadn’t heard that part about AI and that it doesn’t… I, I don’t know. It’s, it’s such a buzzword that it might not mean anything, you know. However, there’s so many cool aspects to that project that aren’t related to AI. Um, yeah, the tower height, the tower erection technology. I’m interested to hear that they have taken the heat of the environment into [00:17:00] consideration, ’cause that’s one of the, my obsessions actually, as long as I’ve been working on wind turbines, and ever since I found out how, you know, the materials qualification and certification process works, that it just doesn’t take into account the really high temperatures. That’s one of the projects that Padlo has going on at the moment, is, um, putting sensors on some turbines to, like, look into that more. Um, yeah, because we do see in Australia a lot of sites have, you know, even within a few years, they might have 20 years of operation left, but we already see a whole lot of cracks that look suspiciously like end of, end of life fatigue cracks on them. So yeah, we are looking into that more, and it’s very interesting to hear that Envision have taken the heat into consideration. I hope it includes the blade structure as well as just, you know, other turbine components, electronics, and that sort of thing. Allen Hall: It does sound like they’re pairing batteries or BESS with wind turbines, where the BESS is located at the base of the turbine. That would make sense in [00:18:00] Australia, particularly around where mines are, because it tends to be very remote, and storing electricity would make sense. The Discussions I’ve seen on YouTube deal with more on the energy trading side, that the wind turbine stores energy, of course, and it does it very efficiently into the best system, and then the AI system sits on top of that to help arbitrage the energy that’s stored in the battery to make more money. Not a bad way of doing it, but it does lead to a ton of questions about national security, the use of AI, the, uh, and how this is all going to integrate together from a asset manager side. Yolande, I know in the United States we have a lot of restrictions about the technology that is in wind turbines and the, and the firewalls that exist there, where you, you can’t even plug into a wind turbine without having a lot of approvals. Is AI coming in wind [00:19:00] turbines in the US and the rest of the world, or is this mostly a Western Australia event? Yolanda Padron: We talked a little bit about a trading company a couple episodes ago, right? And that was a… It sounded like it’s, it’s coming. Um, I, when I first read the article that we’re talking about for Fortescue, I thought this was more of, like, a SCADA self-learning AI type thing, where, like It, it kind of learns from the, from itself, and then maybe it, it tells you you’re more likely to be seeing some sort of blade issue that wasn’t shown before Rosemary Barnes: I heard, um, Andrew Forrest speak at a smart energy conference earlier this year, and he was talking about not for, um, not for wind, but for the solar and battery projects that they’ve already got there. He called it a self-healing grid, and AI was the technology that enabled that. And so he, [00:20:00] he was saying, and I can’t remember the, the details specifically either, but when there was a, a disturbance, something that would’ve caused the, you know, without the AI, um, you know, layer looking after everything, a fault that would’ve shut the whole site down was able to self, self-heal with no interruption to supply. Um, and that that was the kind of AI that, uh, they were talking about. I believe that the new wind farm addition to that is the same sort of thing, where they’re looking at, you know, a very complex system with… I mean, they don’t have energy prices to deal with, uh, in that case because it’s self-contained. They’re not conne- connected to any external grid. Um, but you know, they’ve got wind, they’ve got solar, they’ve got, uh, so obviously weather conditions related to those two going on. They’ve got batteries, they’ve got, you know, yeah, the, um, availability of every single different… of probably many [00:21:00] thousands of different components in that system that, um, y- you know, you need to make sure that if there’s a failure or when there’s a failure in any one or combination of those things, that you’re always going to be able to reroute around that and kind of heal itself. So it probably does include some of, of what you were saying, Yolanda, but I think when they say this is the biggest physical AI, like, I think that that might be a little bit of a meaningless term because y- you know, like, there’s AI… It, it could be like… I, I don’t know. It, like, what, what does that mean? Like, if you have AI that is, um, you know, playing some role in controlling America’s electricity grids, then that would be the biggest, the biggest one, even if it was, you know, like a tiny little, playing a tiny role. I, I, I don’t know what that specifically means and… Is it bad marketing ’cause it’s just confusing and makes you assume that it’s, um, just meaningless buzzword cool [00:22:00]sounding thing Allen Hall: It’s probably genius marketing because they attach AI to whatever the product is. So we have AI lightning diverters at Weather Guard. EOLOGIX-PING has AI CMS, and Partload has whatever Partload does, AI-Partload. So that’s the smart move, th- uh, because it does seem to raise the value Rosemary Barnes: But you know what? Partload is anti-AI because 90% of our work is you get, you know, drone inspections, and they use AI, and then it w- and it works really, w- it works really… I’d never wanna make it sound like it is bad technology because, you know, the status quo before we had drones with using AI was to just not inspect your blades. So, you know, like, we’re doing much better than that now. But everything that we do is where AI was not able to do it or AI did it wrong. So y- you know, um, like I- we use AI in that everything that comes into us is AI. Allen Hall: Well, if the same AI [00:23:00] technology that is reviewing blade images is being applied inside of a wind turbine, what do you see as a likely outcome there, Rosemary? Rosemary Barnes: Well, it’s not, I mean, it’s not the, it’s not the same. And like I said, uh, it’s very easy for me to be like, “Oh, AI, you know, makes all these mistakes,” but it, I only see the mistakes. I don’t see the 90%-plus of correctly categorized things. I don’t, they’re not relevant to me. Um- Uh, but I think for controlling a complex system, like it, it is… That, that’s a really great application. I mean, I think it’s like with any like super hyped up technology, it’s like really useful in a few things, and that’s what leads to the hype, and then people start to just wanna apply it everywhere. It becomes the, you know, like when the only tool you’ve got is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. Like, that’s where we’re at. Like AI is this, um, is this hammer that we’ve got, and everyone wants to solve every problem with it. And I do it myself, you know. Like I hate writing LinkedIn posts, and so I’ll work with, with Claude or, um, I [00:24:00] use NotebookLM as well to, you know, I draft my LinkedIn post. And you’re like, “Well, th- no, that sucks. Do this, do this, do this.” And then, you know, like half an hour later, you’re like, okay, I could very easily have written my own post in less time, and I could… I, I try again and again because I just, I, uh, you know, hate that kind of writing so much. But yeah, I think that like economy-wide, that’s the problem, that everyone is just trying to whack every problem with AI regardless of whether it’s the right one. Allen Hall: Okay, so there’s gonna be products that are gonna incorporate AI or have AI somewhere hyphenated in the name of the product. What products should not be using AI right now? Matthew Stead: Yeah, I think there’s… Uh, I wanna add to the… You know, go back a few steps. That calling this the largest, you know, physical AI device is complete rubbish really. That’s stupid, really. It’s like, like, like what you said, Rosie. It’s like putting an AI machine on a road, and then it becomes the world’s largest AI infrastructure. I mean, that was, that was pretty stupid, um, [00:25:00] really. And that, that’s just marketing. My, my view is if you can’t explain what it does, you shouldn’t be using the word AI So in marketing, you know, you can’t just say, “Oh, it’s AI ’cause I don’t understand what it does.” You should actually be able to explain, “This is what this product does, and this is why it does it, and we use AI to help make that occur in a smart way.” Rather than just being randomly talking about, um, AI solving all of these complex issues and not actually knowing how it’s done is rubbish. Rosemary Barnes: To answer your question, Allen, I think AI shouldn’t be used for most creative stuff. Like video, um, creation, everybody hates it, and companies keep on pushing it, and it sucks. And I think also it’s kind of… It, it makes people so angry, I think it’s gonna backfire if it hasn’t already for most, [00:26:00] most people that are using it. Um, yeah, so that would be one thing. And also, uh, you shouldn’t use too much AI for, like, I see it heaps on LinkedIn now, and it’s, it’s kind of… Like, at the first time you use AI, you’re like, “Whoa, th- this is pretty, pretty good. Like, this is something, you know, like I could… That’s very similar to the stuff that I, yeah, used to post on LinkedIn or the infographics that I used to make.” But the issue is that, like, it looks that way the first time, but then once you use it a bit and you can recognize that it’s AI, then you see it everywhere and it, it turns you, really turns you off whoever’s put it out there. And so, like, there’s so much on LinkedIn now where it’s, like, just AI-generated things. It’s… Even if, you know, like, if an expert has created it and edited it afterwards and made sure that the output is accurate, then I wouldn’t call it AI slop. But it is also, like, it’s always too [00:27:00] wordy. It’s, um, you know, it’s just like the style is just clearly e- the h- if the point is that you’re trying to express, “I’m an expert. These are my expert opinions. I know what I’m talking about,” AI is not doing that for you. Like, you write your post or create your graphic with AI, it’s just not doing that for you. So I think that that is another example of where people shouldn’t be using AI. Allen Hall: That wraps up another episode of the Uptime Wind Energy podcast. If today’s discussion sparked any questions or ideas, we’d love to hear from you. Reach out to us on LinkedIn. And if you found value in today’s conversation, please leave us a review. It really helps other wind energy professionals discover the show. And please, please, please don’t forget to subscribe so you never miss an episode. For Rosie, Yolande, and Matthew, I’m Allen Hall, and we’ll see you here next week on the Uptime Wind Energy [00:28:00] podcast.

Enerji Günlüğü 24 Temmuz 2026 Enerji Bülteni

Enerji Günlüğü Enerji Bülteni

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 24, 2026 5:11

Enerji Günlüğü Haber Bülteni:Türkiye'nin ve Dünyanın Enerji Gündemienerjigunlugu.net

tesla ges fas epc temmuz ecowas enerji rekor

Proverbs Part 2: Beware the ambush!

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 22, 2026 34:33

Proverbs Part 2: Beware the ambush!Proverbs 1:8-19Rev. Justin OlivettiMain idea: Guard against the world's ambush

proverbs sermon guard reformed ambush epc

The Grid Can't Keep Up. Can Linear Generators Solve the Power Crisis? #360

academy basement general assembly pca season wrap epc

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 21, 2026 32:15 Transcription Available

Power generation is changing fast. As utilities struggle with interconnection delays and growing electricity demand, businesses are looking for faster, more reliable ways to secure power.In this episode of Clean Power Hour, Tim Montague sits down with Walt Jordan, Chief Revenue Officer at dGEN Energy Partners, to explore one of the least talked-about emerging technologies in distributed energy: linear generators.Unlike traditional generators, linear generators have no crankshaft, no spark plugs, no engine oil, and very few moving parts. They are designed to operate continuously, and they run on multiple fuel sources, including natural gas, propane, hydrogen, ammonia, and biogas. Combined with solar, battery storage, and microgrids, they may offer commercial and industrial facilities a new path to reliable, behind-the-meter power that can lower their LCOE.The conversation also explores why dGEN Energy is combining roofing, solar, battery storage, and distributed generation into integrated energy solutions that help businesses reduce costs, improve resilience, and avoid lengthy utility interconnection delays.Whether you work in commercial solar, microgrids, energy storage, EPC development, or distributed energy resources, this episode offers valuable insights into important technology options.In this episode, you'll learn:• What a linear generator is and how it differs from diesel generators• Why dGEN Energy believes linear generators can complement solar and battery storage• How the technology operates without spark plugs, oil, or traditional engine components• The fuels linear generators can use, including hydrogen, propane, natural gas, ammonia, and biogas• How behind-the-meter generation is helping businesses overcome utility interconnection delays and rising energy costs• Why "speed to power" is becoming a competitive advantage• How commercial roofing and solar can be combined into a single engineered capital project• Where batteries, microgrids, and linear generators work together• The emissions profile and efficiency of modern linear generators• Real-world commercial and industrial applications for distributed generation• What EPCs, facility owners, and developers should know before adopting this technologyAs utilities struggle to keep pace with growing electricity demand and interconnection delays continue to slow new projects, businesses are being forced to rethink how they generate and manage power. This conversation with Walt Jordan explores why linear generators are emerging as a compelling option alongside solar, battery storage, and microgrids, especially for commercial and industrial facilities that cannot afford to wait years for grid upgrades.Whether linear generators become a mainstream technology or remain a specialized solution, the bigger story is clear. Speed to power, energy resilience, and flexible distributed generation are becoming just as important as the cost of electricity itself. Connect with Walt Jordan:Walt Jordan | LinkedIn Website: https://dGEN energy.com Support the showConnect with Tim Clean Power Hour Clean Power Hour on YouTubeTim on TwitterTim on LinkedIn Email tim@cleanpowerhour.com Review Clean Power Hour on Apple PodcastsThe Clean Power Hour is produced by the Clean Power Consulting Group and created by Tim Montague. Contact us by email: CleanPowerHour@gmail.comCorporate sponsors who share our mission to speed the energy transition are invited to check out https://www.cleanpowerhour.com/support/The Clean Power Hour is brought to you by CPS America, maker of North America's number one 3-phase string inverter, with over 6GW shipped in the US. With a focus on commercial and utility-scale solar and energy storage, the company partners with customers to provide unparalleled performance and service. The CPS America product lineup includes 3-phase string inverters from 25kW to 275kW, exceptional data communication and controls, and energy storage solutions designed for seamless integration with CPS America systems. Learn more at www.chintpowersystems.com

power real north america speed solve grid keep up chief revenue officer linear generators epc power crisis 6gw tim montague

General Assembly Season Wrap-up #2 - The Basement Academy - July 21, 2026

Greenwich

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 21, 2026 28:26

On SBC, PCA, and EPC assemblies

July 15 2026- Gilroy Talks Encampments & Drug Use Crackdown, Need For More Democratic City Hall

The Great Canadian Talk Show

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 16, 2026 65:56

She's been in the news more often in the last year than at any other time of her 12 year stint on Winnipeg city council, and in Episode 28 you'll hear directly from Councillor Cindy Gilroy about the key issues heading into her re-election campaign.In Part 1, Gilroy reviews initiatives undertaken to preserve infrastructure and restore parks and trees in her Daniel McIntyre ward. 11.00- Marty Gold compares her success in saving amenities for the West End with the destruction of Happyland Pool in the St. Boniface neighborhood. "You're raising a very big challenge that all inner-city wards have ... we don't really balance it out," saying she is "always terrified of what could happen to Sherbrook Pool."17.25 Part 2- Gilroy describes her fight to ensure Sherbrook Pool is properly staffed and that the area is made safer for users, including adding cameras and staff. She advocates hiring locals as they 'get' the community, and wants to help establish programming to train kids to become lifeguards.As to homelessness and addictions, "that is something that has impacted residents and businesses in my ward," and she explains why she supports a managed encampment that city leaders refused to consider. "I cannot understand the rationale for leaving things the way they are... You are correct marty, we would see a reduction in the (emergency) services required... I do think there is room for the province to be part of the discussion."If services were delivered there and "not in neighborhoods where it's affecting families (it would be) much safer than wehave it now." Gilroy also believes overdose deaths would be reduced. 25.30 - Gilroy is asked about the NDP provincial government refusing to provide space on provincial property for homeless women and addicts at risk of exploitation in encampments. She called for law enforcement to arrest the perps.“They need to be in jail. If you are exploiting somebody, if you're raping somebody, they're not in an encampment- I want them in jail, that's the reality… if you're doing something so blatantly violent towards other people, you need to be in jail and kept in jail.” 31.00- In regards to the recent police blitz on open drug use, which included her ward, Gilroy supported it, stating “I have seen very blatant” outdoor drug dealing, and “my business owners are threatening to shut their doors because they feel unsafe.” Importantly, she noted that “sometimes, it was because theywere arrested” that addicts sought treatment and recovered. While Mayor Gillingham directed citizens to complain tothe Police Board after police chief Gene Bowers bowed to the demands of social service agencies to back off the crackdown, “I don't feel as a councillor, I have a say… It's a frustrating system in terms of what I can and can not do as an elected official.”Gilroy explains how the NDP's “Your Way Home” strategyprevents the city from removing encampments and move people along, and a lack of coordination between departments.37.45 Part 3 - We went into overtime to get Cindy Gilroy's views on issues like - The Arlington Bridge controversy after former Councillor Terry Wachniak tried to blow the whistle on potential risks to the public purse -"he has concerns that are valid." - The new restrictions on valuable public input to council, including that "5 minutes is not enough" and being denied the chance to respond to dubious 'verbal reports' by the bureaucrats. - "Dealing with the 'Strong Mayor' model that is not equitable" is Gilroy's solution, as "people who are not on EPC do not have the access to information." - (At 50.40) on the city nearing its borrowing limit: "I 100% think it's dire and we need to prioritize looking at these big massive projects when there's no need"- The "unbearable" effects of the disastrous WinnipegTransit roll-out and routing buses onto narrow residential roads: "I've used the system, they aren't being whiners." ****To support our reporting- martygoldlive@gmail.com

democratic winnipeg west end crackdown city hall drug use ndp gilroy boniface epc strong mayor

Swift Solar's Plan to Close the 10x U.S. Solar Cell Gap

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 14, 2026 62:24 Transcription Available

What does it take to turn next-generation solar technology into a bankable commercial product?Swift Solar is closing the U.S. heterojunction and perovskite tandem solar cell gap. Dr. Gunter Erfurt, managing director at Swift Solar and former Meyer Burger CEO, joins Tim Montague and John Weaver to explain why U.S. module capacity sits near 50 gigawatts while domestic cell capacity trails at 5 gigawatts.Following Swift Solar's acquisition of Meyer Burger's technology, intellectual property, manufacturing equipment, and engineering team, Dr. Erfurt shares how the company plans to accelerate U.S. solar manufacturing while preparing for the future of perovskite tandem solar cells. John Weaver presses Erfurt throughout on tariffs and real project pricing, drawing on his own current commercial bid.The conversation explores why heterojunction (HJT) technology is the ideal foundation for perovskites, why bankability matters as much as efficiency, and how domestic solar manufacturing can strengthen energy security and supply chain resilience.Whether you're a solar developer, EPC, utility professional, investor, policymaker, or clean energy enthusiast, this episode offers valuable insights into where the solar industry is heading over the next decade.In this episode, you'll learn:Why Swift Solar acquired Meyer Burger's manufacturing assets and IPHow heterojunction technology supports the future of perovskite tandem solar cellsWhy Swift Solar plans to commercialize HJT modules before launching tandem productsThe importance of reliability, bankability, and long-term module performanceWhy glass-glass solar modules outperform traditional glass-backsheet designsHow domestic U.S. solar manufacturing is evolving, and why module capacity still outpaces cell capacity by a factor of tenThe challenges of scaling advanced solar cell manufacturingWhy the utility scale market is Swift Solar's primary focusHow electrification is expected to triple or quadruple global electricity demand, and why Tim and Dr. Erfurt believe solar, wind, and batteries scale faster than nuclear to meet itJohn Weaver's pushback on tariffs, grounded in real project pricing, and Dr. Erfurt's counter on how the IRA tax credit shaped domestic manufacturing growthWhat the next five years could look like for solar manufacturing and clean energyAs electrification accelerates and global electricity demand climbs toward a projected tripling or quadrupling in the coming decades, the solar industry faces real pressure to build technology that is efficient, reliable, and ready to scale. This conversation with Dr. Gunter Erfurt, joined by Tim Montague and John Weaver, offers a behind-the-scenes look at what it actually takes to move breakthrough innovations from the research lab into commercial production. From heterojunction technology and perovskite tandem cells to domestic manufacturing, bankability, and long-term reliability, this episode provides valuable insight into the engineering and business decisions that will shape the next generation of solar. Connect with Dr. Gunter Erfurt on LinkedIn.https://www.linkedin.com/in/gunter-erfurt-55103850?originalSubdomain=de Support the showConnect with Tim Clean Power Hour Clean Power Hour on YouTubeTim on TwitterTim on LinkedIn Email tim@cleanpowerhour.com Review Clean Power Hour on Apple PodcastsThe Clean Power Hour is produced by the Clean Power Consulting Group and created by Tim Montague. Contact us by email: CleanPowerHour@gmail.comCorporate sponsors who share our mission to speed the energy transition are invited to check out https://www.cleanpowerhour.com/support/The Clean Power Hour is brought to you by CPS America, maker of North America's number one 3-phase string inverter, with over 6GW shipped in the US. With a focus on commercial and utility-scale solar and energy storage, the company partners with customers to provide unparalleled performance and service. The CPS America product lineup includes 3-phase string inverters from 25kW to 275kW, exceptional data communication and controls, and energy storage solutions designed for seamless integration with CPS America systems. Learn more at www.chintpowersystems.com

north america swift originalsubdomain erfurt epc growthwhat solar cells productsthe john weaver meyer burger 6gw tim montague

Proverbs Part 1: The beginning of wisdom

god proverbs sermon reformed beginning of wisdom epc

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 13, 2026 34:09

Proverbs Part 1: The beginning of wisdomProverbs 1:1-7Rev. Justin OlivettiMain idea: You have to humble yourself to receive God's wisdom

God and David vs Satan and Goliath

The Podcasting Morning Chat

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 12, 2026 32:57

God and David vs Satan and Goliathfeat. Gaelen Negus

god satan sermon goliath reformed epc

549. Why Podcast Conferences Leave Podcasters Overwhelmed

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 9, 2026 61:15

Feeling overwhelmed by podcasting advice, creator conferences, and too many decisions? This conversation shows how Empowered Podcasting Conference 3 (EPC3) is being built to help podcasters overwhelmed by information overload find more simplicity, stronger connections, and a real sense of community.In this episode, I hand the conversation over to the Podcasting Morning Show team for a behind-the-scenes look at Empowered Podcasting Conference 3. Joining me are Jason Cercone, Rich Perry, Ralph Estep, and members of the podcasting community as we discuss the origins of EPC, the lessons learned from the first two conferences, the challenges of planning an intimate event, and why independent podcasters need spaces where they can feel supported, connected, and inspired instead of overwhelmed.Episode Highlights:[10:19] Why Creators Need EPC[16:20] The EPC Origin Story[18:44] Early Risks and First Wins[21:04] Lessons from the EPC2 Stress Test[26:53] Partners and Event Roles[31:37] The Virtual Tickets Debate[35:07] Building Year-Round Sponsorships[40:30] Community and Networking Matter Most[47:36] Intimacy vs. Conference Growth[50:53] How Speakers Are Selected[55:29] Volunteers Wanted!Links & Resources:Join us at Empowered Podcasting August 21-23:https://empoweredpodcasting.com (20% off with code: EPCMARC20)Connect with Jason Cercone:https://www.bombtrackmedia.com/Connect with Rich Perry:https://richperry.com/Feature Your Podcast on the Podcasting Morning Show:https://PodcastingMorningShow.com/spotlightThe Podcasting Morning Show:⁠⁠www.podcastingmorningshow.com⁠⁠Ways to Watch or Listen:⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.podcastingmorningshow.com/joinus/Meet the Cast and Crew:⁠⁠https://podcastingmorningshow.com/people⁠⁠Join The Empowered Podcasting Facebook Group:⁠⁠www.facebook.com/groups/empoweredpodcasting⁠⁠⁠Book A Free Call With Marc:https://calendly.com/ironickmedia/freestrategycallApplication To Submit Your Show For Evaluation:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://podcastingmorningshow.com/eval⁠⁠Powered by⁠⁠⁠ ⁠iRonickMedia.com⁠⁠⁠⁠ and⁠ ⁠ContentCreatorsAccountant.com⁠⁠Send in your mailbag questions:⁠⁠⁠⁠ https://www.podcastingmorningshow.com/contact/⁠⁠⁠⁠ or ⁠marc@ironickmedia.com⁠Want to be a guest on The Podcasting Morning Show? Send me a message on PodMatch, here:https://podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/1729879899384520035bad21b

community lessons podcasters partners intimacy overwhelmed powered conferences epc podmatch jason cercone rich perry

Why is it so hard to build big energy projects? The barriers that obstruct new infrastructure development, and how to get past them

The Energy Gang

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 7, 2026 66:17

Whoever you ask, you are likely find broad agreement that the world needs more energy infrastructure. Whether you are worried about ensuring secure supplies, powering new data centres, or cutting greenhouse gas emissions, the answer is most often going to be investing in new assets: power plants, transmission lines, factories, pipelines, ports… the list goes on. But all too often, getting big projects built is painfully slow, expensive and unpredictable. It is particularly difficult in high-income countries, and perhaps in the US most of all.For this episode, host Ed Crooks and regular guest Dr. Melissa Lott are joined by Craig Albert, the President and COO of Bechtel, one of the world's biggest engineering and construction companies. Together, they discuss the critical problems that get in the way of infrastructure projects, and what businesses and governments can do to get past them.First off, Craig acknowledges that the problems in the system all reflect good intentions. Communities, safety, the environment and local impacts all deserve scrutiny. The problem, especially in the US, is that the process used to take all those factors into account when approving large projects is slow, fragmented and uncertain. The result is that it pushes up costs, delays revenue, creates financing risk, and ultimately slows progress towards energy security and a lower-carbon energy system.The conversation digs into the role of trust and certainty in decision-making. Once a project has been assessed and approved, how do you stop it from being endlessly revisited? Craig argues that some aspects of the US system create particular difficulties. Other developed countries have shown that infrastructure projects can be brought in on time and on budget. Craig cites the Western Sydney International Airport project, which moved from site selection to full construction approval in just two and a half years. In the US, he says, the same process could easily take eight to ten.The discussion then turns to nuclear power, and the lessons from the two new AP1000 reactors built at the Vogtle plant in Georgia. Craig calls Southern Company and Georgia Power “national heroes” for taking on the first greenfield US nuclear project in decades, but he is candid about what went wrong. His biggest takeaway is the importance of deeply integrated EPC: engineering, procurement and construction working as one system from the start. He also stresses the need for earlier investment in workforce training, stronger supply-chain visibility and better sequencing to reduce costly reworks.From there, Ed and Melissa widen the lens to look at other energy sectors. Craig explains why the US LNG industry offers a more hopeful model of projects delivered without huge cost overruns and multi-year delays. In that industry the construction companies are building repeated, standardised projects, with integrated delivery, and a relentless focus on finding and fixing bottlenecks. Bechtel has delivered dozens of LNG trains, he says, all on schedule and within budget, while still improving speed from one project to the next. Similar lessons apply in solar, where scale, automation and better execution are helping push installation rates sharply higher.But policy and project design are only part of the story. Craig argues that workforce is the other great constraint. If every new power plant, grid upgrade, semiconductor fab and airport ultimately depends on skilled craft labour, then the US has to start treating those jobs with the respect they deserve. Restoring the status of skilled trades is not just a cultural issue. It is essential to the country's ability to build, Craig says. The closing message is both practical and cautionary: if the US wants more energy security, more electricity for AI and data centres, and faster progress on decarbonisation, it has to get much better at building. That means fixing permitting, reducing project uncertainty, investing earlier in supply chains, and treating skilled labour as a strategic asset, rather than an afterthought.This episode of Energy Gang is brought to you by ENGIE, the smarter energy supplier. ENGIE doesn't just provide the power to run your business — they supply the energy to move it forward, with reliable, flexible solutions built for what's next. Learn more at engieresources.com.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

How to Ethically Navigate and Benefit From The 5 Hidden Forces Crushing the UK Rental Market

The Progressive Property Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 7, 2026 14:46

Six people - as you listen to this podcast today in 2026 that is the exact number of desperate renters fighting over a single property the moment it hits a portal like Right Move, or Zoopla. Imagine standing in a freezing queue of strangers on a Tuesday afternoon outside a flat you haven't even seen inside yet, knowing that five of you will go home defeated tonight, but here's the truth that the mainstream media refuses to say out loud. It's about to get significantly harder for renters. Not because of one single catastrophic event. But because five separate economic fault lines are quietly closing in on the UK housing market, at the exact same time. Number five is a hidden regulatory change nobody is talking about. I reveal what each change is and why it is likely to make the UK´s housing market worse for investors as well as tenants. If you're serious about turning this broken market into your advantage, join my free online masterclass. I'll show you exactly how to understand the changes, find discounted deals, and build a resilient, ethical portfolio that actually works in 2026 and beyond. Join here: INSERT URL KEY TAKEAWAYS England completed about 119,000 homes in 2024–25, down from roughly 221,000 the year before and far below the 300,000-a-year target, so the supply gap is widening fast. Higher interest rates hitting as fixed interest deals expire are doubling many landlords' mortgage costs forcing many to sell up, while buyers are struggling to secure loans. As small “mom-and-pop” landlords exit institutional investors are rapidly taking a growing share of the rental stock, which will cause problems for renters. The 2030 EPC upgrade mandate (to band C) and steep fines will be the final straw for many independent landlords, shrinking rental supply further. With many casual landlords selling, competition is falling, and motivated sellers are more open to negotiation. Ethical, independent landlords who understand the changes, know how to stress test deals, and focus on real tenant comfort rather than just EPC box‑ticking can build portfolios that survive and actually benefit from this market squeeze. BEST MOMENTS “We aren't closing the gap. The gap is aggressively widening right in front of us.” “The UK housing supply tap isn't just turned down; it's completely clogged at every single joint.” “You quite literally cannot save your way to home ownership.” “The people who take time to understand the board right now are the exact ones who will look back in 2026 as the moment everything changed for them.” VALUABLE RESOURCES MSOPI – Multiple Streams of Income: https://www.progressiveproperty.co.uk https://kevinmcdonnell.co.uk ABOUT THE HOST Sean Fitzpatrick is a property investor, educator, and the Face of Progressive Property. With a 6-figure portfolio and expertise in creative strategies, finance, and off-market deals, Sean shares success stories from the Progressive Property community, expert insights, and real-world strategies to help investors succeed. Tune in for practical tips and no-nonsense advice to accelerate your property journey. ABOUT THE HOST Kevin McDonnell is a Speaker, Author, Mentor & Professional Property Investor. He is an expert when it comes to creative property investment strategies. His book No Money Down: Property Invest talks about how to control and cash flow other people's property to create financial freedom. CONTACT METHOD https://www.facebook.com/kevinMcDonnellProperty https://kevinmcdonnell.co.uk TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@progressiveproperty YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC0g1KuusONVStjY_XjdXy6g Twitter: https://twitter.com/progperty LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/progressiveproperty Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/progressiveproperty Facebook Community: https://www.facebook.com/groups/progressivepropertycommunity Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com/Progperty This Podcast has been brought to you by Disruptive Media. https://disruptivemedia.co.uk/

uk speaker mentor benefit income navigate ethical crushing best moments ethically rightmove rental market epc hidden forces zoopla progressive property professional property investor

TDI Podcast: Schiff's Debt Reckoning (#980)

The Disciplined Investor

Play Episode Listen Later Jul 5, 2026 59:43

Jobs report out a day early and a little soft. New revelation about data-center capacity smack tech shares. June ends on an upbeat note – July is very interesting so far. Our guest, Peter Schiff of Echelon Wealth Partners . NEW! DOWNLOAD THE AI GENERATED SHOW NOTES (Guest Segment) Peter Schiff began his investment career as a financial consultant with Shearson Lehman Brothers in 1987. A financial professional for over twenty years, he joined Euro Pacific Capital, Inc. (EPC) in 1996 and has served as its President since January 2000. Peter Schiff is a widely recognized economic and financial analyst and has appeared frequently on Fox News, Fox Business, CNBC, CNN, and other financial and political news outlets. Peter is a highly recommended broker by many leading financial newsletters and investment advisory services and achieved national notoriety in 2008 as being one of the few economists to have accurately forecast the financial crisis well in advance. Between 2004 and 2006 he had made numerous high-profile statements predicting the bursting of the real estate bubble, significant declines in national real estate prices, the collapse of the mortgage market and the banking sector, the bankruptcy and bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Peter has authored several best-selling books including Crash Proof, Crash Proof 2.0, How and Economy Grows and Why it Crashes, The Little Book of Bull Moves in Bear Markets, and The Real Crash. He also served as an economic advisor to the 2008 Ron Paul presidential campaign. Check Out EuroPacific Asset Management Follow @andrewhorowitz Check this out and find out more at: http://www.interactivebrokers.com/ Looking for style diversification? More information on the TDI Managed Growth Strategy – HERE Stocks mentioned in this episode: (GLD), (SLV), (BTCUSD), (GOOG), (MU), (INTC), (META), (ORCL)

president investing barack obama jobs cnn debt fox news bloomberg cnbc stocks mu reckoning ramsey crashes schiff fox business bear markets little book laporte cramer fannie mae ron paul freddie mac dvorak twit epc peter schiff goog tdi gld intc economy grows slv orcl crash proof euro pacific capital curzio btcusd

Creation Outside Genesis Part 9: Creation 2.0

jesus christ revelation rev hebrews sermon reformed epc genesis part

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 29, 2026 38:51

Creation Outside Genesis Part 9: Creation 2.0Romans 8:19-23 and Hebrews 1:10-12 and Revelation 21:1-5 Rev. Justin OlivettiMain idea: Jesus will continue to create forever

The Engineering Gap Costing Solar Companies A Fortune #356

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 23, 2026 44:47 Transcription Available

A single design error on a commercial solar project can cost $60,000 to $70,000 to fix. Scott Wyssling and Catherine Kelso of Wyssling Consulting explain what quality design actually looks like, why AI cannot replace a licensed engineer reviewing plans, and how battery integration really fits into commercial solar today.In this episode, Tim Montague sits down with Scott Wyssling, founder and principal at Wyssling Consulting, and Catherine Kelso, Director of Commercial Design and electrical engineer at the firm. Wyssling provides structural and electrical engineering and design for residential and commercial solar and storage projects across the United States. With 75 employees and an engineer-owned, engineer-led structure, the firm has built its reputation on quality control, fast turnaround, and a refusal to treat the PE seal as a formality.With the ITC safe harbor deadline pushing a construction boom through 2027, the pressure to move fast is real. Scott's point is direct: speed without engineering integrity creates liability that lands on the EPC and installer, not just the firm that signed the plans.What you'll learn in this conversation:Why a single design error on a commercial project can cost $60,000 to $70,000 to fix, and how $3,000 to $4,000 in better upfront engineering eliminates that risk entirely.How Wyssling's QAQC process actually works, including internal peer reviews and a 20% audit of already-delivered projects, and why that sets a different standard than automated or outsourced design.Why Catherine Kelso says battery integration is simpler than most EPCs expect, whether you're retrofitting storage onto an existing system or designing it in from day one, and what to watch for when choosing a manufacturer.Scott Wyssling's direct case against letting AI replace hands-on engineering review, and why a licensed PE needs eyes on the actual roof, the actual photos, and the actual electrical equipment.How 15 to 20 year old solar farms are creating a new engineering challenge as 600-volt inverters age out in a market now built around 1,000 and 1,500-volt equipment, and why this only grows from here.Quality control gets treated as optional right up until a six-figure correction lands on your desk. This episode gives you concrete criteria for telling a serious engineering partner from a shortcut operation before you sign anything.Connect with Guests Website: https://www.wysslingconsulting.com/Scott LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/scott-wyssling-5b2aa77/Catherine LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/catherine-kelso-pe-997b014a/ Support the showConnect with Tim Clean Power Hour Clean Power Hour on YouTubeTim on TwitterTim on LinkedIn Email tim@cleanpowerhour.com Review Clean Power Hour on Apple PodcastsThe Clean Power Hour is produced by the Clean Power Consulting Group and created by Tim Montague. Contact us by email: CleanPowerHour@gmail.comCorporate sponsors who share our mission to speed the energy transition are invited to check out https://www.cleanpowerhour.com/support/The Clean Power Hour is brought to you by CPS America, maker of North America's number one 3-phase string inverter, with over 6GW shipped in the US. With a focus on commercial and utility-scale solar and energy storage, the company partners with customers to provide unparalleled performance and service. The CPS America product lineup includes 3-phase string inverters from 25kW to 275kW, exceptional data communication and controls, and energy storage solutions designed for seamless integration with CPS America systems. Learn more at www.chintpowersystems.com

united states director ai north america fortune companies engineering pe solar costing itc epc epcs commercial design 6gw tim montague

Ep. 437 Michael Rhodes - The Gospel is Political (Just Not How You Think)

Shifting Culture

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 23, 2026 59:41 Transcription Available

In this episode, Michael Rhodes claims the gospel is inherently political, and "the Lord reigns" was never just a private comfort but a statement about who actually runs the world. We name the two instincts that keep so many of us stuck: retreating into a safe bubble or chasing the halls of power, and why a more holistic approach is necessary. And we get practical: city council meetings, speed bumps, a libertarian business owner whose whole politics quietly rearranged once he started hiring single moms. In a moment when faith and politics have collapsed into the culture war, this feels like a third way, or a faithful way - a politics you can practice this week, on your own street, as a small taste of the beauty of the Kingdom of God.Michael J. Rhodes (PhD, Trinity College / University of Aberdeen) is lecturer in Old Testament at Carey Baptist College in Aotearoa New Zealand. He is the author of several books, including Reimagining Biblical Politics, Just Discipleship, Formative Feasting,and Practicing the King's Economy (with Robby Holt and Brian Fikkert). Rhodes (an ordained EPC pastor) and his family currently live in South Auckland, where they are part of an intentional community engaged in Christian community development.Michael's Book:Reimagining Biblical PoliticsConnect with Joshua: jjohnson@shiftingculturepodcast.comGo to www.shiftingculturepodcast.com to interact and donate. Every donation helps to produce more podcasts for you to enjoy.Follow on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Threads, Bluesky or YouTubeSupport the podcast and the ministry that my wife and I do around the world. Just click on the support the show link below Support the show

lord gospel political economy kingdom of god old testament practicing threads blue sky rhodes aberdeen aotearoa new zealand epc faith and politics public theology south auckland brian fikkert michael rhodes

Creation Outside Genesis Part 8: Believing in Creation

god sermon believing reformed epc genesis part

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 23, 2026 34:25

Creation Outside Genesis Part 8: Believing in CreationHebrews 11:1-3Rev. Justin OlivettiMain idea: God gives us faith to believe that he created

186. N.Y. Tech Week Live Demo: Engineering the Future of Manufacturing with Roebling's Brentan Alexander

Grow Everything Biotech Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 18, 2026 39:31

Recorded live at New York Tech Week, Karl and Erum sit down with Brenton Alexander (CTO at Roebling) to unpack one of the biggest bottlenecks in scaling “biology as technology”: figuring out what it really takes to design and finance physical infrastructure. Brenton walks through how Roebling uses AI alongside deterministic engineering models (physics/thermodynamics) to accelerate early facility design, generate capex/opex estimates with uncertainty ranges (not false precision), and help teams run scenarios fast—so founders, investors, and operators can make better go/no-go decisions earlier, reduce wasteful iteration across siloed teams, and focus human expertise where it matters most.Grow Everything brings the bioeconomy to life. Hosts Karl Schmieder and Erum Azeez Khan share stories and interview the leaders and influencers changing the world by growing everything. Biology is the oldest technology. And it can be engineered. What are we growing?Learn more at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠www.messaginglab.com/groweverything⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Chapters:(00:00:00) Welcome to Grow Everything Live at NY Tech Week(00:02:10) The “infrastructure gap”: why feasibility work is slow and expensive(00:03:05) What Roebling does: accelerating the path from R&D to final investment decision(00:05:05) Live demo setup: building a yeast-based fermentation facility for a red bio-dye(00:07:15) What the platform decides (and why inputs matter): equipment, DSP, and cost drivers(00:10:00) “Why not just use Claude?” Deterministic models + AI tooling for defensible results(00:14:30) Handling uncertainty: ranges, distributions, and Monte Carlo-style scenario runs(00:18:40) What changes for engineers/consultants: shifting effort from manual work to judgment(00:23:10) Reading the outputs: capex/opex, IRR, and the “tornado chart” of uncertainty drivers(00:28:10) Audience Q&A: logistics/customer delivery, AI's impact on costs, review fatigue, and assumptions(00:29:30) Long-term direction: more fidelity, narrower bounds, EPC-ready handoff(00:30:05) Audience Q&A begins(00:30:30) Q1: logistics + customer delivery costs (not just “at the gate”)(00:32:55) Q2: how AI changes operating cost assumptions over time(00:34:15) Q3: review fatigue—how to structure checks and triage what matters(00:36:10) Q4: what did the model assume for “colorant”? (and why specificity matters)(00:38:15) Wrap-up + thank-yousLinks and Resources:RoeblingRoebling Early Access ProgramBrentan AlexandarEdward Shenderovich65. Scaling Cells, Dreaming Big: The Biomanufacturing Cloud with Synonym's Edward Shenderovich166. The Great Reformulation: Joshua Lachter Rethinks How We Make Everything at Scale172. Generating Needles in Haystacks: Elise de Reus Designs Proteins with CradleBioInnovations Events - For 25% off use code: Grow EverythingTopics Covered:Roebling, bioprocess modeling, techno-economic analysis, fermentation economics, food dyes, bio-based ingredients, process engineering, AI for biomanufacturing, scale-up planning, regulatory considerations, industrial engineering AI.Have a question or comment? Message us here:Text or Call (804) 505-5553⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ / ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ / ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠LinkedIn⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ / ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Youtube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ / ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Grow Everything⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Music by: Nihilore Production by: Amplafy Media

live ai reading wrap engineering chapters biology manufacturing monte carlo dsp synonyms brenton irr audience q epc techweek live demo week live deterministic erum roebling

Creation Outside Genesis Part 7: Works of delusion, works of power

god creator sermon delusion reformed epc genesis part

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 16, 2026 35:48

Creation Outside Genesis Part 7: Works of delusion, works of powerJeremiah 10:1-16Rev. Justin OlivettiMain idea: God is the only actual Creator

The EPC Motto & Mission

Ward Church with Dr. Scott McKee

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 14, 2026 30:35

On the eve of Ward Church's denomination's annual gathering, Rev. Sean Carroll reflects on the heart of the EPC motto—“In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; in all things, charity”—through Romans 14. He clarifies the difference between core gospel convictions and faithful disagreements, grounding the church in the authority of Scripture while calling believers to humility in areas where interpretations differ. This message invites us to hold firmly to the truths that define our faith—such as the person and work of Jesus—while extending grace and freedom to others in non-essential matters. With pastoral clarity, he reminds us that Christian maturity is not just about being right, but about reflecting Christ in how we relate to one another. As we live within the tension of conviction and compassion, the church becomes a witness to the gospel through its love. May we be a people who embody truth with tenderness, so that our unity and love point others to Jesus.

jesus christ mission romans scripture rev motto epc sean carroll

Episode 235:Prayer Service with Dave Strunk

lord drawing moderators better together general assembly prayer service epc strunk

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 12, 2026 31:16

What does it mean to be a people marked by prayer? In this episode of In All Things, Dave Strunk, outgoing Moderator of the 45th General Assembly and Thursday morning worship speaker, reflects on the theme of prayer through the story of Hezekiah and Isaiah. Drawing from scripture and his experience serving the EPC, Dave offers encouragement for leaders and churches to seek the Lord with humility, dependence, and trust. As we gather for General Assembly, this conversation reminds us that our strength as a church is found not in ourselves, but in the Lord, and that we are “Better Together” when we come to Him in prayer. To learn more about the 2026 General Assembly and to register, visit: epconnect.org/ga2026

Why the Global South should produce SAF, not just export feedstocks

Sustainability In The Air

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 11, 2026 44:15

In this episode, we speak with Elvis Ebikade, Director of Strategic Market Development at Bioleum Corporation, about why the Global South should be producing SAF rather than just exporting raw feedstocks, how renewable fuels are becoming an energy security play, the technical challenge of getting aromatics into SAF, and what actually separates a bankable SAF project from a good-looking spreadsheet.Ebikade discusses:The case for Africa and Southeast Asia as SAF producers, not just feedstock suppliersWhy exporting feedstocks and reimporting SAF adds a carbon intensity penalty that undermines the product's core valueFeedstock diversity in Africa: HEFA, alcohol-to-jet, woody biomass, and e-fuelsThe energy security reframe: why renewable fuels change who sits at the tableExport vs book-and-claim: why there's no single model for Global South SAFWhat Bioleum is building: lignin-to-aromatics, cellulosic ethanol, and the Hexas Biomass acquisitionWhy most SAF today still needs to be blended with fossil jet fuel before it can be used to power aircraftWhat makes a SAF project bankable: feedstock, offtake, EPC, and a credible path to cost parityThe gap between financial models and operational realityIf you LOVED this episode, you'll also love the conversation we had with Meg Gentle, Executive Director at HIF Global, about how synthetic fuels and waste-based pathways could reshape the economics of sustainable aviation fuel. Check it out here. Learn more about the innovators who are navigating the industry's challenges to make sustainable aviation a reality, in our new book ‘Sustainability in the Air: Volume 2'. Click here to learn more.Feel free to reach out via email to podcast@simpliflying.com. For more content on sustainable aviation, visit our website green.simpliflying.com and join the movement. It's about time.Links & More:Bioleum Corporation Why the Global South could produce aviation's cheapest sustainable fuels - SimpliFlyingThe six-times markup that convinced a Kenyan entrepreneur to make his own SAF - SimpliFlying Could Cameroon become Central Africa's SAF gateway? - SimpliFlying The country that banned petrol cars is now betting on SAF - SimpliFlyingHexas: A sustainable solution to the food vs. fuel debate - SimpliFlying

director africa executive director loved sustainability produce southeast asia kenyan export global south saf central africa epc feedstocks simpliflying

Creation Outside Genesis Part 6: The true Creator

god creator sermon reformed epc genesis part

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 9, 2026 31:29

Creation Outside Genesis Part 6: The true CreatorIsaiah 45:7-12Rev. Justin OlivettiMain idea: God is the only actual Creator

Psalm 63

Valley Hope Church

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 8, 2026 45:13

We are excited to welcome guest preacher Katie Piquette, as she continues our summer series with Psalm 63. Katie is a teaching elder in the EPC and a chaplain at the VA Hospital.

psalm psalm 63 epc va hospitals

Creation Outside Genesis Part 5: The good news of Creation

creator good news sermon reformed epc genesis part

Play Episode Listen Later Jun 2, 2026 36:41

Creation Outside Genesis Part 5: The good news of CreationIsaiah 40:9-31Rev. Justin OlivettiMain idea: The Creator is in your corner

Non-technical Features For Assessing Inventive Step – Alternatives to the Problem Solution Approach – Emotional Perception AI Limited Case of the UK Supreme Court – Abbout vs. Sinocare UPC Case – Interview with Bruce Dearling ̵

IP Fridays - your intellectual property podcast about trademarks, patents, designs and much more

Play Episode Listen Later May 29, 2026 50:04

[powerpresss] My co-host Ken Suzan and I are welcoming you to episode 175 of our podcast IP Fridays! Today's interview guest is Bruce Dearling, patent attorney and partner at Hepworth Browne in the UK, and we talk about how non-technical features must be considered when assessing inventive step of patents at least according to recent decisions of the UK supreme court and the Unified Patent Court. Profile of Bruce Dearling UK Supreme Court Emotional Perception AI Limited UPC Abbot vs Sinocare But before we jump into this interesting interview, I have news for you: On May 20, 2026, the Swiss Federal Council adopted the fully revised Patent Ordinance, which will enter into force on January 1, 2027, together with the revised Patent Act. In the future, the Swiss Federal Institute of Intellectual Property will prepare a mandatory search report for each application; applicants can choose between a partially examined version and a full examination that assesses novelty and inventive step. The full examination costs an additional 300 Swiss francs, and renewal fees will increase by a total of eight percent over the 20-year term. On May 19, 2026, Asus entered into a licensing agreement with the Wi-Fi multimode patent pool managed by Sisvel, thereby ending all ongoing infringement proceedings. Sisvel bundles standard-essential patents in the pool from, among others, Atlantia, ETRI, and Mitsubishi Electric. On May 18, 2026, the UPC Local Chamber in Düsseldorf rejected Align Technology's application for a preliminary injunction against its Chinese competitor Angelalign. Angelalign may continue to sell its clear aligners within the UPC jurisdiction. Our partners Dirk Schulz, Ulrich Storz, and Wanze Zhang, together with Arnold Ruess, successfully represented Angelalign. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) announced midweek that, since October of last year, it has invalidated or is seeking to invalidate approximately 10,500 trademark applications and registrations in eleven administrative orders. Reasons include forged attorney signatures and the fabrication of non-existent filing requirements. This stems from ongoing abuse of the U.S. trademark system, primarily by non-U.S. applicants, which can lead to conflicts with validly registered trademarks for legitimate businesses. On May 12, 2026, the British Court of Appeal overturned a lower court decision that would have required Nokia to grant interim licenses for video coding patents. The court found that Nokia's license offer to the Taiwanese manufacturers Acer and Asus had already been made on RAND terms. In May, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a brief in the ongoing Corteva v. Inari litigation, expressing antitrust concerns regarding certain patent practices in the field of plant breeding. This marks the first time the agency has actively intervened in a biopharmaceutical patent dispute with implications for seed innovations. Episode 175 of the IP Fridays podcast was a conversation I will not forget quickly. My guest Bruce Dearling, partner at Hepworth Brown in the UK and a patent attorney for 36 years, took a case through every level of the British court system up to the Supreme Court and, in doing so, fundamentally changed patent law for AI inventions in the UK. The case is called Emotional Perception, and its effects reach well beyond British borders. Below I summarize the key points from our conversation. The full episode is available at IP Fridays. A. What Is the Emotional Perception Case About? The underlying invention concerns artificial neural networks. Specifically, it relates to a method of closing what is called the semantic gap at the output of a neural network. That sounds abstract, but the idea is straightforward: a neural network always produces an output that does not fully correspond to what a human would actually expect or feel. Closing that gap brings the system closer to human perception and human expectations. Bruce Dearling drafted this application himself and filed it at the UK Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO). The Office rejected it as excluded subject matter, characterizing it as essentially a computer program as such. The legal basis for that rejection was the Aerotel decision from 2006. The case then went to the High Court, which found in favor of the applicant. The Court of Appeal reversed that decision. Then the UK Supreme Court stepped in and changed everything. B. The Aerotel Test and Its Flaws Since 2006, the Aerotel test had been the standard British method for assessing whether an invention falls within the excluded categories under patent law. It was a four-step approach: construe the claim, identify the actual contribution the invention makes to human knowledge, ask whether that contribution falls solely within excluded subject matter, and finally check whether the contribution is technical in nature. The problem Dearling described in our conversation is that Aerotel reverses the logical order of the analysis. You start with the contribution and only then ask about the exclusions under Article 52 EPC. The UK Supreme Court described Aerotel in its judgment as “unsound law” and overturned it. The EPO’s Technical Boards of Appeal had previously called Aerotel “disingenuous,” which at the time led to a public dispute between the British courts and the Boards. With the Emotional Perception ruling, that conflict has now been resolved in favor of harmonization with the EPO. C. What the UK Supreme Court Decided The Supreme Court made two central findings. First, the exclusion of computer programs “as such” is overcome as soon as a claim includes any piece of hardware. It does not matter whether that is a processor, a memory module, or any other component. The threshold is deliberately low. Dearling described this as the “any hardware” approach, which aligns fully with the EPO’s position following G1/19. Second, and in Dearling’s assessment the more important finding: when assessing inventive step, the invention must be considered as a whole. The Court introduced what it called an “intermediate step,” an analytical stage in which the interactions between all features of a claim are examined before the question of inventive step is addressed. Non-technical features cannot simply be struck out if they contribute to the overall technical effect of the invention. D. Inventive Step: The Intermediate Step This is the heart of the judgment. In EPO practice, Dearling said, it happens regularly that examiners strike through features they consider non-technical and thereby fail to assess the invention’s inventive step correctly. A recent Technical Board of Appeal decision, T 1249/22, already criticized this approach: a claim directed at a technical solution to a problem can be patentable even if the underlying problem is non-technical in nature. Dearling recalled a remark made by a Board of Appeal member at a hearing he attended years ago: “We understand that examining divisions can operate with a degree of mental laziness and that it’s too easy to throw too many things out of the basket when considering the issues of inventive step.” That quote stayed with him because it names a structural problem that the intermediate step now addresses directly. The British method for assessing inventive step is the Pozzoli test, which differs from the EPO’s problem-solution approach. The Supreme Court explicitly retained Pozzoli because the problem-solution approach, in its view, is structurally infected with hindsight reasoning: you already know the invention, you work backwards to formulate an objective technical problem, and then you ask whether it would have been obvious for the skilled person to arrive at precisely that solution. Dearling sees this as a source of unfairness toward genuine inventions. E. Alignment with the Unified Patent Court In April 2025, the Court of Appeal of the Unified Patent Court issued a decision in Abbott v. Sinocare (APP_000000901/2025, judgment of 17 April 2025). Dearling pointed out that this decision uses language and reasoning strikingly similar to the UK Supreme Court’s Emotional Perception ruling of February 2025. That is significant because the UPC is bound neither by UK courts nor by the EPO. The overlap suggests voluntary convergence. Dearling reported a conversation with a person close to the EPO, whom he did not name, who used the word “permissive” to describe the UK Supreme Court’s approach and indicated that the EPO might move toward it. Whether and how quickly that happens remains to be seen. What is clear is that the UPC, as the new European patent court, is setting its own standards, and the question of how to handle non-technical features in inventive step assessment is now being asked at multiple levels simultaneously. F. Implications for the EPO and Practice The EPO is not directly bound by the ruling. It is an administrative body, not a court. Dearling is nonetheless optimistic that change is coming. On one hand, external pressure is building: when the UK Supreme Court and the UPC articulate similar principles, convergence becomes hard to resist. On the other hand, Article 27.1 TRIPS requires all contracting states to make patents available in all fields of technology. Examiners routinely striking non-technical features from AI claims and rejecting them on that basis sits uncomfortably with that obligation. For the underlying application in the Emotional Perception case, the ruling has a pointed consequence. The Supreme Court did not grant the patent itself; it referred the matter back to the UKIPO for reconsideration under the intermediate step. The Office’s subsequent response was, in Dearling’s words, unconvincing. He suspects the Office is attempting to reintroduce the Aerotel test through the back door. As a last resort, he has not excluded a judicial review, a procedure that does not simply challenge the substantive decision but holds the Comptroller General of Patents to account for whether the Office is deliberately circumventing the Supreme Court’s direction on the intermediate step. That is, as Dearling put it, “a nuclear option,” but one he would not rule out if the evidence in the file already suggests the Office is in contempt of court. There is also an international dimension. Singapore’s Intellectual Property Office launched a public consultation shortly after the ruling, asking whether Singapore should adopt the Emotional Perception approach into national law. That is British soft power operating in real time within the Commonwealth. G. Three Takeaways for Patent Practitioners At the end of our conversation I asked Bruce Dearling to distill the most important practical points. His first takeaway: make sure the claim contains hardware. This applies not only to UK and European applications but is simply good drafting hygiene. Without hardware in the claim, the application remains exposed. The second takeaway concerns the description. Anyone filing an AI invention needs to explain clearly which function is achieved by which piece of hardware, circuit, or software. Not as boilerplate, but as a complete technical account that describes the real-world effects. Dearling’s experience is that practitioners who write the claim first and fill in the description afterward run into trouble. The third takeaway emerged from the conversation itself: how the EPO assesses inventive step for AI inventions is not a settled question. It is worth following the development of UPC case law and any shifts in EPO practice closely. Anyone advising on AI patent applications today needs to know these arguments. H. Conclusion The UK Supreme Court’s Emotional Perception ruling is not a British footnote. It has declared the Aerotel test dead, introduced the intermediate step that brings non-technical features back into the inventive step analysis, and set off a convergence movement that is already visible at the UPC and still pending at the EPO. For everyone working in AI patent practice, whether in prosecution, examination, or counseling, this ruling is required reading. Rolf Claessen: Our interview guest on IP Fridays podcast is Bruce Dearling. He has been in the IP field and a patent attorney for 36 years and is partner at Hepworth Brown in the UK. Thank you very much for being on the podcast. Bruce Dearling: My pleasure, Rolf. Thank you for inviting me. Rolf Claessen: All right. We just met at the INTA annual meeting in London. And you talked about the UK Supreme Court case where you were involved. And the core questions were whether non-technical features would be considered when assessing inventive step of patents. Can you briefly summarize this case? Bruce Dearling: It’s a bit more than that. It started — I actually wrote the case. And I prosecuted it through the patent office. The patent office rejected the case for being excluded subject matter. So pretty much the excluded subject matter provisions in the UK are nearly identical. They’re as near as practical to the language of the EPC, so those of the European Patent Office — Article 52.2. But again, they apply as such. The actual technology relates to artificial neural networks. And the invention related to a very clever way of what is termed closing the semantic gap at the output of the neural network. So that means that in a neural network, there is always a discrepancy between the output of the neural network in terms of what it’s telling you you should be thinking essentially, and what reality is. So if you can close the semantic gap, then you align the neural network or the artificial intelligence system to better reflect human knowledge or human reactions and human expectations. So that’s really what the invention is about. There’s no point in going into too much detail with it — that’s the way it is. It’s very clever. So the UKIPO rejected this because they said it was essentially a computer program excluded from patentability as such. And they used a decision which is called Aerotel, which has been around since 2006. And that decision has caused considerable consternation and tension between the EPO Technical Boards of Appeal and the UK courts. Aerotel was described as being essentially disingenuous by the EPO Technical Board of Appeal. And the UK courts pushed back and said, you don’t know what you’re talking about. So that’s where it fell apart. So that’s where they rejected it for essentially being a computer program as such, possibly with a bit of business methods thrown in as well. But let’s leave that for the time being. So the case then went to the High Court and at the High Court, we won. The judge said, actually, it’s not a computer program. Neural networks aren’t computers. They’re not programs themselves. There’s more to them than that. And the invention as claimed is not excluded from patentability as such. The UKIPO obviously weren’t very happy about that because they liked their Aerotel case and so they appealed it. And they appealed it on several grounds, including a new one, which was that it was a mathematical method. The Court of Appeal decided that the UKIPO was right and that we were wrong, so we lost the case. So we then went to the Supreme Court. Well, actually, they denied us an ability to go to the Supreme Court. The court said no appeal. We went — actually, no, I think there is a bigger issue here — because we realized, or I realized at that point, that the work that we were doing was much broader than this. It requires real consideration of what an invention is at a fundamental level. So not only exclusions, but how inventive step is applied. And these issues were built into the case from the very beginning. And they sort of — I wouldn’t say crept up on the court as we went through — but they became more and more prominent to the extent that ultimately, when we made an application to the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court went, yeah, we’ve got some issues here. We want to hear the full arguments on why this is not excluded from patentability, why Aerotel is potentially bad and how we more or less try to align ourselves with the European Patent Office. So that’s essentially what happened. And the Supreme Court hearing was last July. It took them the thick end of eight months to come out with a decision, which was issued in early February, at which point the entire legal landscape in the UK changed because they said we were right. The Patent Office doesn’t know what they’re talking about. Aerotel is bad. It’s unsound. That’s what they described it as — unsound law. It needs to be removed and we’re going to harmonize with the European Patent Office. So before I — I’m just going on a bit of a rant here, standing on my soapbox telling you what you already know. But the Aerotel test essentially was — it was a four-step test, past tense. So you firstly had to construe the claim. That’s pretty straightforward. Then you actually had to identify the actual contribution. This is what they said — identify the contribution. Really in this aspect, you’re asking what, as a matter of substance rather than form, the inventor has added to human knowledge. So that’s what they said the contribution was. And then they said, the next step in Aerotel was to ask, well, does that contribution fall solely within the excluded subject matter field or realm? And then they said, well, if you get through that question, then you check the actual contribution or the alleged contribution to see whether it’s technical in nature. So that’s the Aerotel test as it was. And what the Supreme Court in their unanimous final decision said was that Aerotel at best jumbles up the order. It reverses the logical order of the analysis by starting with the contributions and then addressing the Article 52 exclusions. And then finally it goes back to what the technical nature of the invention is about. So they really went, no, we don’t like any of this stuff. It’s bad, it’s stupid, it puts the cart before the horse. So, in the intervening period between finding the case and actually seeing it progress all the way to the Supreme Court, we obviously had the G1/19 decision from the EPO Enlarged Board. And they basically said that they are going to validate any hardware as the approach. And that’s essentially what the UK also went with. The UK Supreme Court said we’re going to say that the threshold of patentability — or the exclusion to patentability — is simply overcome by the inclusion in a claim of any piece of hardware, whether it’s a processor or a piece of memory or whatever. It doesn’t matter. Any hardware makes the invention a technical invention. So it’s a really low threshold to consider. And they then went, well, actually, if we now align and harmonize with the European Patent Office sensibly, then we need to look at how we assess inventive step, which is the other thing that we raised with the Supreme Court. In fact, we probably raised it at other times and in all the other instances as well, but it came to a head at the Supreme Court. So the Supreme Court then also went a bit further and said, well, actually, whilst we do like the global approach to assessing inventive step for all fields of technology — whether it’s chemistry or biotech or electronics or software or AI — we use a test called Pozzoli. So that isn’t problem-solution. We don’t like problem-solution. We think it’s not codified in the European Patent Office. It’s just a mechanism that the EPO has come up with to try to objectively assess inventive step. We don’t particularly think that’s appropriate. We like our approach called Pozzoli. That’s it. So we’re going to say with Pozzoli, however, in order to actually understand — particularly in the context of mixed inventions having technical and non-technical features — it’s necessary for the examiner to undertake the so-called intermediate step, where you have to look at the interactions between features within a claim. The invention is defined by the claim. That’s what the act says. That’s what everyone understands. It’s the invention defined by the claim. So you look at the claim features and then you have to understand the interactions that take place. And even if they are between technical and non-technical features, if they bring about an overall technical effect when you consider the invention as a whole, then your claim should be good and you can assess it for classical inventive step. So that’s really where we’re at. There’s a lot to unpack there already. It’s probably a podcast in its own right, but that’s the positive history of where we’re at. And I can keep going if you wish me to for a second and talk about why I think this is — we’ll just contrast it quickly with the problem-solution approach at the EPO and COMVIK. So for inventions in the computer-implemented field, they use COMVIK and the problem-solution approach. The Supreme Court said, as I said, they don’t like problem-solution. I think the problem-solution issue is that it is also inherently pre-baked with hindsight because you have to look at the invention and then step back and exclude those features which are common. And then you formulate a problem based on the function that the claim achieves. And then you’re asking whether or not it would be obvious for a skilled person to arrive at the claimed invention, having been given that hindsight-developed problem. So COMVIK is not great by any means. And we know from a practical perspective that examiners are only too willing to look at a claim and simply line through features which they believe are non-technical, whereas they don’t actually look at the interaction of those features in the context of the claim as a whole. There is also a decision — very recent one actually, about a year ago — T 1249/22, where the Technical Board of Appeal told the examiners and the examining division, you cannot do this. It’s okay to have a claim directed towards an invention in a non-technical field, as long as the invention is directed to a technical solution of that problem. I think it’s paragraphs 11 and 12 or 10 of that decision that are worth looking at. But they’re saying that in all fields of technology, it doesn’t matter as long as the technical solution is about technology — therefore, you should be able to obtain a patent as long as there is a realistic and appropriate technical effect. Be careful actually, Bruce — I don’t mean technical contribution, I mean technical effect. There’s a reason for that distinction. Rolf Claessen: The non-technical features are nevertheless used to assess inventive step in the UK now after this decision, right? Bruce Dearling: Yes, that is the intermediate step. The decision says you must look at the invention as a whole. It’s the important thing. There are a couple of issues that arise out of this. The first one is that you have to provide context for the invention. The Supreme Court never provided any specific guidance about how we deal with the intermediate step or what the exact test is, which is in some respects fine. It seems to be fairly clear that you just have to engage your gray matter — your neurons — to work out what is going on in the real world. And once you work out what’s going on in the real world, what the benefits are, then you look at whether or not the actual implementation of the invention fundamentally has a technical flavor to it, which is not just coding, not just simple coding, but it does something smarter. There’s a real technical impetus. There’s a technical effect. Now that actually brings me onto something I’ve postulated or said. I think the intermediate step will follow something like what I’ve termed the holistic character test, which essentially is: work out what’s going on in the real world. Then once you’ve worked out what’s actually being achieved, what the benefits are, what the invention’s concerned with, then you ask the question, how am I achieving it technically? And how is there a technical effect? How does the technical effect arise? That brings out a couple of issues. The first one is that it’s actually about the word “contribution” because it depends on how the word is used. So if you look at head note one in COMVIK, it uses the word “contribute” — how the non-technical feature contributes to the invention. So that’s an additive inclusive concept. The UK IPO historically, and arguably at the moment today whilst they’re trying to retrain their 400 examiners — which this has caused them to have to do — their idea of contribution is this backward-looking concept. So technical contribution and technical effect, I think — although we mix them up and interchange them — are distinct. Technical contribution: you’re looking backwards. Technical effect is what you look at when you look forward into what’s going on. So this is subtle — it’s really subtle, but it’s important. And once you realize that you are actually looking for the technical effects, then you’re on much safer ground. It’s much more objective in terms of the assessment. This might be somewhat contentious, because it’s the way I’m looking at this, but I’ve been working on this a long, long time and thinking about it for probably decades, worryingly so. So technical contribution and technical effects are probably not the same, where they are interchangeably used to mean the same thing within existing decisions. Rolf Claessen: And in the beginning you said, now that Aerotel is dead basically, it’s more harmonized with the EPO’s approach. But what I take from the discussion now is that maybe — especially in view of the problem-solution approach — it’s not fully harmonized with the EPO’s approach at the moment, right? Or did the UK Supreme Court get something wrong, or was that a desired outcome from your point of view that this is not so completely harmonized with the EPO? Bruce Dearling: Well, the EPO — the any-hardware solution is fully harmonized, no doubt. So it’s now a question of inventive step under Article 56 or Section 3 of the Act. The EPC nowhere mandates the use of problem-solution. And we know that there are many different ways of actually assessing inventive step, including the concrete elaboration test from last year and problem-of-invention approaches. So there are numerous ways of assessing inventive step. So the UK says, “Pozzoli — we like Pozzoli.” Interestingly, I had a discussion with someone I probably can’t mention. They’re saying that the UK approach may actually be more permissive now. It might even influence how the EPO operates. So they may move away from COMVIK towards more of a Pozzoli approach, which basically says this: You identify the notion of the skilled person — step one. You identify the common general knowledge of that skilled person — step one B. You identify the inventive concept of the claim in question, where you construe it if you can’t work out what it is. You then identify what the differences are. And then you ask the question, is it obvious to the skilled person, given knowledge of the common general knowledge? This is entirely not artificial because, as I said beforehand, when you look at problem-solution, you are formulating a problem by backtracking from what the claimed invention is to a situation where you say, well, these are the common features and I’m going to project a problem to try and solve. Now that is already tainted with hindsight reasoning. It’s not safe, it’s not thoroughly objective. There is an inherent problem with this which sees good inventions cast by the wayside. Although it’s a preferred mechanism, it’s not fully baked. There are situations where examiners are inherently lazy, or they just simply use something like the requirements specification argument, which is just factual. It just demonstrates that they can’t be bothered to actually argue it properly or think about what the invention is. Sorry to any examiners listening to this, but this is just my personal view, that sometimes there are problems. I’m reminded of a quote from an EPI hearing I was at a long time ago, where the Legal Board of Appeal member said: “We understand that examining divisions can operate with a degree of mental laziness and that it’s too easy to throw too many things out of the basket when considering the issues of inventive step.” Now that one has stayed with me because you think — did someone just say that? And the answer is yes, they did. But it just goes to show that there is some tension between the TBA and the examining divisions, and they don’t always get it right. Rolf Claessen: So there might be a small difference now between the UKIPO’s future approach of assessing inventive step and the EPO? Bruce Dearling: Yeah, it might do. But the other interesting thing here — and thank you for pointing this out, I hadn’t entirely caught up with it, I’ve been traveling beforehand and I missed some of the UPC case law. So the UPC case law — in, was it — yeah, we talked about that. Rolf Claessen: Yeah. There was a decision in April, Abbott versus Sinocare. Bruce Dearling: Yeah, 901 of 2025. So a Court of Appeal decision from the UPC. It was APP_000000901, I believe, 2025. Decision 17th of April, hearing 27th of March. The UPC is not bound by — it’s a court. The European Patent Office is not a court, it’s an agency that administers and looks after the administrative rule of law. So the fact that this decision came out from the UK Supreme Court in February, and you see almost identical language used in the UPC decision, suggests that there is some alignment here, or some convergence in thought. Now, whilst the UPC decision also references G1/19 and uses problem-solution, there is enough — you’ve got to bear in mind that high-level courts do look at each other’s decisions. And this is really a question of influence and the desire to converge. So the fact that they’ve done this at this time is quite interesting. Again, I can’t quote someone directly from the EPO, although I would love to. They were saying — at a very high level — and they used the words “converge UPC practice towards UK Supreme Court practice on interpretation of the law.” So this may actually be happening in real time. Again, it would be wrong to actually refer to anyone by name, but it’s an observation that when I looked at the case, I can see why this is going ahead. And I can see why the judiciaries — they want to maintain independent judicial controls. They won’t reference the UK Supreme Court decision, not least because we’re not in the UPC. But if you look at the arguments in sections 106 and 107 of the UK Supreme Court’s Emotional Perception decision and head note one, you go — wow, this is very close. Rolf Claessen: Very close and nearly identical wording. Yeah. And the UPC also now uses non-technical features for assessing inventive step. Is that a problem for the EPO that has historically been aggressive in throwing out non-technical features for inventive step analysis? Bruce Dearling: Well, I think they really need to get to the situation — I don’t know — this holistic character test that I’m sort of proposing, where you really have to think about what the invention is achieving, and then look at how it’s technically being achieved. And then if you look at that again in the context of that other decision I mentioned — T 1249/22 — it says something like, in the case of an invention that amounts to a technical implementation of a non-technical method, provided the non-technical method does not contribute to the technical character of the invention. The board validated the approach of identifying the non-technical method and then goes through and says it’s patentable. There are decisions like this which suggest that examining divisions have to give it a bit more thought, because the Technical Board will realize that to satisfy the WTO requirements — which pretty much everyone is bound by — Article 27.1 TRIPS, which requires that you protect all fields of technology. And that means whether it’s data processing or business methods, because business methods can be patentable so long as they are implemented on a technical basis. That essentially seems to be what T 1249/22 is saying, although it doesn’t explicitly say “allowing business methods.” The exclusion is only “as such.” So does this decision, in combination with the Supreme Court case and the movement of the UPC, say: well, actually, let’s look at this properly? It requires objective assessments, not just superficial “let’s strike through that feature because I don’t like it, it looks non-technical.” Rolf Claessen: So are you hopeful that the EPO is adjusting and will reshape their case law in view of the UPC decision and the UK Supreme Court decision? Bruce Dearling: It’s a bit unfortunate that the corresponding UK case at the EPO was dropped by the applicants, because it was heading towards an examination hearing at the examining division. It would have gone to the TBA, and I’m sure it would then have gone from the TBA to the Enlarged Board. I’m pretty sure that’s the case. There is another case from the same client which will probably argue the same thing because the specs are almost identical. It’s just lagged in time. So is it going to change? I hope so, because I think the EPO have got it wrong — more often than not in this field. Well, maybe not more often than not — they get it wrong more times than they should do. Would I like to see it changed? Yes, I would, because I want the examiners to actually think about the technology as opposed to just — oh, it’s not — I don’t want to engage the gray matter. That serves no one. That doesn’t serve technology. That doesn’t serve industry. These patent rights are there for a reason. They are property rights. I’m referring to the award of the 2025 Nobel Prize for Economics — they are a core driver for society’s development. So the 2025 Nobel Prize was for something called creative destruction — the replacement of old technology with new — and it’s based on the patent paradigm. So all this stuff is coming to a head now. It’s just a question of how quickly the EPO actually catch up, and maybe they have something to catch up on. It’s just understanding that the examiners have to start to think. As I said, we’ve got the issues at the UKIPO where they’re going to have to retrain 400 examiners. Rolf Claessen: Yeah, right. Bruce Dearling: The Emotional Perception case wasn’t granted by the Supreme Court. They referred it back to the patent office for consideration under the intermediate step. So the patent office produced a response that I would describe as — I’d say arguably — not well reasoned, which I’ve filed the response to, which basically says you don’t really know what you’re talking about. What really worries me a bit is that I think they’re trying to introduce the Aerotel case through the back door. It’s backsliding. It’s a mechanism for trying to apply it in a different way or a different context, which would be wrong. I think they believe that the applicant will appeal this if they get a bad decision — they will appeal it back to the courts again via the High Court, Court of Appeal, Supreme Court route. I say maybe not. I say maybe the client will file what they call a judicial review, which is a nuclear option. That’s when you actually hold the Comptroller General of Patents to account and get full discovery of whether or not there’s internal documentation showing that they are deliberately circumventing the direction of the Supreme Court on the intermediate step. This is basically holding them to account and saying: if you’re not applying the intermediate step appropriately, you are in contempt of the law. So judicial review is a really serious thing to do, but it’s certainly something I would not exclude from consideration. We’ll see what happens. It’s not saying we’re just going to go through the courts and make them decide on this. We’re going to say you’re wrong. And there’s already enough evidence in the files to suggest that they are probably in contempt of court and they’re not applying the intermediate step appropriately. They may not know any better at the moment — they need to be guided — but the consequences for them are potentially severe. Rolf Claessen: I have another question for you. You were the instructing attorney — do you think the decision was perfect? What argument that you made was the most underappreciated by the court? And where do you think the judgment got it wrong, or was it all perfect? Bruce Dearling: No, it got 90% or 95% correct. The intermediate step is right. That’s the most important thing in the decision — it’s the intermediate step. The any-hardware thing — that’s logical, that makes some sense — but if people say “if the any-hardware rule is the important bit,” no it isn’t. It’s the intermediate step. That’s the important thing. Where do they go wrong? I think they went wrong because — and you’ve got to bear in mind that unlike German courts, I’ve got to be careful about how I express this — generally, as I understand it, and correct me if I’m wrong, but the judiciary in Germany on patent cases are generally more technically able. They’re normally technically qualified. I look at the Supreme Court justices and the Court of Appeal justices — we had one who was a humanities undergrad, one was a chemist. Good luck with trying to argue complex artificial neural network technologies, which are difficult even for me to understand. And I’ve been working in the field. They’re hard to understand. They require real understanding, real appreciation. They could say, well, actually we don’t need to look at the technology — but frankly, if you’re looking at the statutes and exclusions to patentability and asking what a computer program is, then you need to understand what these technical terms really are. And if you can’t, then the judgment is potentially flawed. Their finding that the neural network is a computer program is, I think, technically obtuse. You know that the Singaporean government — the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore — released about six weeks ago a consultation note to the Singaporean profession and population, asking: is the Emotional Perception case right, and do we need to adopt it into Singaporean national law? So this is direct soft power from the UK Supreme Court changing Commonwealth legislation and statutes. We’ll see what happens. But from what I’ve seen of a draft response from the attorneys, they’re saying essentially: we agree any hardware is right, the intermediate step is right. The assessment of the neural network as a computer program is wrong, or it just doesn’t make any sense. And I’ve made the same comments before in SIPA, in the relevant round in March. There’s a disconnect. I mean, it’s like they equate a computer program with being able to be run on an analog computer. Now, an analog computer has no central processing unit. An analog computer just has resistors and transistors and capacitors. So if they’re saying that an analog computer can run a program — that’s essentially what they’re saying in part of the judgment. Where is the program in an analog computer? And if they’re saying it’s in the values of the resistors and the capacitors, then that has implications for any circuit we’ve got — it’s potentially a computer program — which is just madness, because it doesn’t sit well with the legislation and decisions we’ve looked at over the last 50 years. This is a real problem. It may be a storm in a teacup because you can overcome the objections by having any hardware, but it’s an argument they shouldn’t have been making. It seems to be abstract legal argumentation which has little credibility in my personal view, although it’s now law. It may be that someone can take that, have an argument with the Supreme Court, get them to fix this. The other thing is the EPO looks at a neural network as a mathematical method, and the UK now says it’s a computer program. Neither is right. The EPO is wrong as well. If you look at the actual decision which they regularly quote — the Vicom case — if you actually read the claim and look at the case, you see that it doesn’t make a huge amount of sense. A neural network has applied mathematics in it. It can be based on a computer program because it’s required to set up the learning objectives and the loss function. Mathematical processes — it tweaks the weighting factors of neurons over the course of the training epochs. But at the end of the day, if the function performed by the neural network is new and it’s directed towards a technical implementation which is technically relevant, then it shouldn’t fail for being a mathematical method. And I think the EPO guidelines actually say that. Even recommendations — the UK court said that a recommendation is not technical. Well, actually it is, because it’s data processing, and you’ve got to work out how does the data processing work to provide an improved recommendation? Again, it goes back to the T 1249/22 decision. There’s a whole raft of these things which are left not entirely resolved. There’s enough here to keep someone busy for a few more years. Rolf Claessen: Right. So I have a question for you now that we’ve talked about the decision of the UK Supreme Court and the UPC — the Unified Patent Court — with very, very similar wording. What do you say are the three most important takeaways for patent practitioners in the US, in Europe, in the UK, before the EPO? Are there any things that you really want patent practitioners to take away from our discussion here? Bruce Dearling: Yeah, okay. So first: make sure the claim has some structure in it. You need to have any hardware. That’s number one — in terms of claim drafting. In terms of the description, you really have to understand what the invention is about. And you’ve got to make sure that you explain what function is achieved by what piece of hardware, kit or software. And if you do that — don’t nickel-and-dime this by writing the claim first — I would suggest that you run into problems. You need to understand what the invention is about. And you need to make sure that the description is complete and full to describe the functionality and the effects that are achieved in the real world. And if you can do that, then you’re on a much sounder basis — much, much stronger. There’s a much stronger foundation for this. So that’s two things. Is there a third one? That’s me being a bit cheeky, but I suppose I know what’s going on. Rolf Claessen: Yeah, but maybe the third takeaway is that maybe the EPO will rethink the way — at least how AI inventions are assessed for inventive step. Bruce Dearling: Well, as I said to you before, it could be that that’s the case. I don’t want to repeat myself again. The word “permissive” was used in a conversation I had with respect to the UK Supreme Court approach. COMVIK fundamentally still breaks with me and has done for years, because the way it’s set up and the way it’s applied distorts fundamentally what the invention is about. And until such time as that distortion is removed, there is a problem of objectivity versus subjectivity. And I think that’s really what the EPO has to grapple with. It’s not an easy thing to deal with, but maybe there are things going on. Bruce Dearling: It’s not an easy thing to deal with. I don’t know who’s going to argue it. It would have been useful for me to still have the original case up and running at the EPO because these arguments would have been fleshed out. I’m pretty sure they would have been referred to the Enlarged Board. We would have got it resolved. So it’s whether or not I can now work this into the existing case to try and get the examining division to — well, they will refuse, I suspect. And then it’ll go to the TBA. And then the TBA will have to look at this, hopefully with the referrals to the Enlarged Board. And then that fixes the problem on a national and international basis. Rolf Claessen: Yeah. Let’s see. [Laughs] Bruce Dearling: No, we don’t know. I mean, you might have a different view. What do you think? Do you think COMVIK is fundamentally right or fundamentally wrong? Rolf Claessen: Well, I’m not so much into AI inventions. I’m a chemist and I usually deal with chemistry inventions. But from the discussion that we had, I think that the EPO might rethink their position. I don’t know. Let’s see. Let’s hope so. Bruce Dearling: Well, they liked it. They liked problem-solution. It’s been with us for 25 years. It suggests that it’s a compromise. It’s not mandated by the European Patent Convention — that’s the point. It’s something they think works. And these things only work until such time as someone comes along and says, actually, you’re wrong, and this is the reason. Rolf Claessen: Let’s see if they choose a different route at least for AI inventions. So Bruce, thank you very much for your insight and for talking about the case that you were involved in with the UK Supreme Court. Where could people reach you if they have more questions about this field — basically patents, AI protection in the UK and Europe — and if they want to ask you more questions about this case? Bruce Dearling: Sure. Through the Hepworth Brown website or my LinkedIn profile, I suppose. The Hepworth Brown website has an email link. I’m trying to post things on it as well to try and provide a bit more context. But if people have fundamental questions on this stuff, then I’m happy to try and answer them. I suppose that I can be considered to be quite knowledgeable in the area. Rolf Claessen: Right. Certainly more than I am. [Laughing] Bruce Dearling: So I was fortunate. As a consequence of the work I’m doing, I was appointed last year to the WIPO Standing Committee on Patents and Privacy. That was discussed for the issues of where WIPO goes and what the direction of the problems are that we have in high-tech areas. So there seems to be some degree of understanding that I might know what I’m talking about. I think I probably do. Rolf Claessen: Thank you, Bruce. Thank you very much for being on IP Fridays. Bruce Dearling: My pleasure. Thank you very much, Rolf.

Collapsing 30 Feet of Power Infrastructure Into Four with DG Matrix

My Climate Journey

Play Episode Listen Later May 27, 2026 50:19

Haroon Inam is Co-founder and CEO of DG Matrix, a company that makes the world's most compact Power Router, aggregating distributed energy for GenAI datacenters, microgrids, fleet electrification, and associated systems. As AI workloads drive unprecedented electricity demand and legacy grid infrastructure struggles to keep pace, DG Matrix has commercialized the world's first multi-port solid-state transformer to meet the energy needs. In this episode, Inam explains why transformer bottlenecks, distributed generation, and 800V DC architectures are reshaping the future of power delivery for AI infrastructure. He discusses DG Matrix's product strategy, manufacturing scale-up plans, and the role of software-defined power systems in next-generation data centers. Finally, Inam shares his take on the future of distributed microgrids and “cellular power” and how to scale power electronics manufacturing. DG Matrix recently closed a $60 million Series A led by Engine Ventures that MCJ is proud to have participated in. Episode recorded on May 13, 2026 (Published on May 26, 2026) In this episode, we cover: (00:00) Overview of DG Matrix (01:41) Introducing the Founders: Haroon Inam and Dr. Bhattacharya (05:25) How traditional grid architecture became constrained for AI workloads (09:57) Solid-state transformers (SST), multi-port systems and voltage classes (12:18) Why early SST efforts struggled economically (13:13) How DG Matrix's multi-port architecture works (16:48) Comparing DG Matrix hardware footprint to legacy power systems (20:08) Transformer shortages and data center infrastructure bottlenecks (24:27) DG Matrix's medium-voltage and low-voltage product strategies (27:55) Product rebranding and current commercial deployments (30:45) Partnerships with EPC firms, battery providers, and turbine manufacturers (34:27) Manufacturing scale-up plan and hyperscaling production (36:36) Supply chain strategy to avoid rare earth dependencies (38:16) Reliability engineering and software-defined power systems (43:47) DG Matrix's go-to-market and hybrid hardware/software business model (46:36) The vision for distributed “cellular power” (48:14) Utilities, microgrids, and the future of interconnected distributed infrastructure Enjoyed this episode? Please leave us a review! Share feedback or suggest future topics and guests at info@mcj.vc.Connect with MCJ:Cody Simms on LinkedInVisit mcj.vcSubscribe to the MCJ Newsletter*Editing and post-production work for this episode was provided by The Podcast Consultant

The 3,000-Year-Old Battery Replacing Industrial Gas | Cache Energy

Entrepreneurs for Impact

Play Episode Listen Later May 26, 2026 42:04

This limestone battery can achieve 100+ hour heat storage without lithium and zero standby losses.Industrial heat is a $1T+ problem, but most solutions ignore storage, especially those using ancient chemistry.Arpit Dwivedi is the founder and CEO of Cache Energy, building thermal storage systems for industrial decarbonization.Cache uses calcium oxide chemistry to store and release heat, targeting sub-1,000°F processes that represent ~75% of global industrial demand, with modular systems designed for rapid deployment and low cost.Here's what we discussed:Unit economics anchored in materials, not breakthroughs – Limestone feedstock at

ceo university energy minnesota single fortune ceos climate midwest roi industrial batteries replacing leasing 200m cache capped epc limestone 1t vc pe

Can Homeowners Finally Afford Whole Home Backup? #352

Play Episode Listen Later May 26, 2026 53:32 Transcription Available

Energy resilience for homeowners is the mission behind Energy Access Innovations, a multi-brand clean energy company building an end-to-end ecosystem for solar and battery storage. Nicole Tomasin, Chief Commercial Officer at EAI, joins Tim Montague to explain how the company serves the consumers the rest of the industry ignores, including DIYers and rural markets.Battery storage and solar access for homeowners is moving beyond coastal markets and high-income consumers. Energy Access Innovations has built a multi-brand portfolio covering distribution, DIY support, installation, and financing under one mission: making energy resilience affordable for every American. Nicole walks Tim through how the company's sister brands, including EG4, Signature Solar, Outback Power, Solar 76, Sun Atlas Power, and EA365, work together to serve customers that most distributors and installers turn away. The company's new XR60 battery, 60 kWh with a 16 kW inverter for under $20,000, and its EA365 prepaid lease, which returns a 30% rebate directly to homeowners, are proof that affordability and transparency are not competing goals. Here is what you will learn in this conversation about residential battery storage affordability and energy resilience:You will find out how the XR60 delivers 60 kWh of storage and a 16 kW inverter for under $20,000, why it ships as a single freestanding unit weighing 1,600 pounds, and when it arrives in market.Learn how the EA365 prepaid lease returns a 30% rebate directly to homeowners, making the residential ITC phase-out less damaging for consumers who no longer qualify for the tax credit.Understand why Energy Access Innovations built Sun Atlas Power, its own EPC company, to capture DIY customers who need installation help, and how it taps a network of 2,000 to 3,000 regional contractors already buying through Signature Solar.Find out why Tim pushed back on a California developer's claim that consumer-owned residential batteries are done, and what EAI's experience with DIY customers suggests about that prediction.You will hear why Texas surpassed California in storage deployment, how PJM grid services programs are generating returns that recover a battery investment in two to three years, and why Illinois is a priority market for EAI.The residential ITC phase-out is compressing margins across the solar industry and pushing more customers toward third-party ownership models. Illinois is incentivizing 1.8 gigawatts of distributed batteries through its clean energy incentive program, and Texas has already surpassed California in storage deployment. Contractors who are not yet offering storage are running out of time to get positioned.Connect with Nicole Tomasin, Energy Access Innovations Nicole Tomasi: https://www.linkedin.com/in/nicole-santos-tomasin/Sun Atlas Power: https://www.sunatlaspower.com/Episode 325, James Showalter: https://youtu.be/7CoJQ_lTLkU Support the showConnect with Tim Clean Power Hour Clean Power Hour on YouTubeTim on TwitterTim on LinkedIn Email tim@cleanpowerhour.com Review Clean Power Hour on Apple PodcastsThe Clean Power Hour is produced by the Clean Power Consulting Group and created by Tim Montague. Contact us by email: CleanPowerHour@gmail.comCorporate sponsors who share our mission to speed the energy transition are invited to check out https://www.cleanpowerhour.com/support/The Clean Power Hour is brought to you by CPS America, maker of North America's number one 3-phase string inverter, with over 6GW shipped in the US. With a focus on commercial and utility-scale solar and energy storage, the company partners with customers to provide unparalleled performance and service. The CPS America product lineup includes 3-phase string inverters from 25kW to 275kW, exceptional data communication and controls, and energy storage solutions designed for seamless integration with CPS America systems. Learn more at www.chintpowersystems.com

american california texas energy north america illinois diy solar backup batteries afford contractors homeowners chief commercial officer kw itc kwh epc diyers pjm eai 6gw tim montague

ASK525: Has the market just crashed? PLUS: Should I make these upgrades now or wait?

The Property Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later May 26, 2026 10:02

Is the 18-year property cycle about to trigger a crash? Plus, with EPC rules changing, should landlords be upgrading now or holding off? Your questions answered on this week's episode of Ask Rob & Rob. (00:45) Phil's wondering, could the conflict in Iran spark a property crash and prove the 18-year cycle right? Rob B explains why he's confident enough to go on record saying it won't happen this year. (06:08) Pete's properties are rated D and E. Should he start upgrading now to meet the 2030 EPC deadline? Rob D reveals why waiting for the new criteria could save you thousands and a lot of unnecessary hassle. Enjoy the show? Leave us a review on Apple Podcasts - it really helps others find us! Sign up for our free weekly newsletter, Property Pulse Got a question? Send it in here Find out more about Property Hub Invest

market iran upgrades robb crashed epc rob d

Creation Outside Genesis Part 4: Floored by awe

god sermon reformed epc genesis part floored

Play Episode Listen Later May 26, 2026 33:45

Creation Outside Genesis Part 4: Floored by awePsalm 33Rev. Justin OlivettiMain idea: The proper response to God's creative work is awe

Episode 232: Better Together with the Global Church with Ed McCallum

god jesus christ better together general assembly mccallum epc global church program development iten

Play Episode Listen Later May 22, 2026 33:53

What does it mean to be part of Christ's global church? In this episode of In All Things, Ed McCallum, ITEN's Associate for Site and Program Development and our Tuesday evening worship speaker at this year's General Assembly, reflects on Matthew 16 and the promise that Christ will build His church. With a focus on global mission and the upcoming World Outreach Commissioning service, Ed shares how the EPC participates in God's work around the world. This episode reminds us that the church is truly global and that we are “Better Together” as we join in God's mission across nations and cultures. To learn more about the 2026 General Assembly and to register, visit: epconnect.org/ga2026

Week in Review - EPC in Armenia, Russia, Parliamentary Election, Swiss Peace Initiative | Ep 545, May 10, 2026

Armenian News Network - Groong: Week In Review Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later May 14, 2026 49:44 Transcription Available

Week in Review - May 13, 2026In this Week in Review, we discuss the fallout from the EPC summit in Yerevan, Armenia's role as a platform for anti-Russian messaging, and Putin's warning about a possible “separation” if Armenia moves toward the EU. They examine the Armenia-EU declaration, focusing on TRIPP, Ukraine, hybrid threats, security cooperation, visa liberalization, and the Armenian Nuclear Power Plant. The episode then turns to Armenia's election campaign, Pashinyan's claim that Artsakh was “never ours,” Aliyev's parallel messaging from occupied Artsakh, pressure on opposition figures, the Swiss Peace Initiative, and sharp divergence between election polls.Topics:EPC fallout and Russia responseArmenia-EU declaration controversiesPashinyan's Artsakh campaign narrativeAliyev-Pashinyan tag-team messagingSwiss Peace InitiativePollsters diverge on election forecastsHosts:Hovik ManucharyanAsbed BedrossianEpisode 545 | Recorded: May 12, 2026SHOW NOTES: https://podcasts.groong.org/545VIDEO: https://youtu.be/pLYUk6q9Wx4#WeekInReview #Armenia #SwissPeaceInitiative #NagornoKarabakh #ArtsakhSubscribe and follow us everywhere you are: linktr.ee/groong

russia ukraine elections russian european union vladimir putin swiss armenia azerbaijan week in review parliamentary nagorno karabakh epc yerevan artsakh aliyev peace initiative european political community ilham aliyev pashinyan nikol pashinyan

Why Utility-Scale Solar Is Quietly Failing in 2026? #349

Armenian News Network - Groong: Week In Review Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later May 12, 2026 26:42 Transcription Available

American solar manufacturing is getting a reboot. Dean Solon, founder of Create Energy and formerly of Shoals Technologies, sold 1 GW of product in Q1 of this year alone. In this episode, he walks Tim Montague through his vertically integrated factory in Portland, Tennessee, and names exactly why utility-scale solar equipment is quietly failing at scale. American solar manufacturing has a reliability problem, and the utilities and independent power producers who own these fields for 30 to 50 years are the ones absorbing the cost. Dean Solon, founder of Create Energy and the man who built and took Shoals Technologies public on the NASDAQ in 2021, has spent three years building a vertically integrated solar manufacturing operation in Portland, Tennessee, to address this directly. Create sold 1 gigawatt of product in Q1 of this year, with Q2 expected to double that output. Host Tim Montague tours the Create Energy factory floor and draws out exactly what full-stack, American-made solar hardware looks like in practice. Here is what you will learn from this conversation:You'll hear Dean Solon explain why module warranties are misleading and why EPC economics push toward equipment designed to last only past the two-year mark, leaving utilities and IPPs exposed for the decades of ownership ahead.Find out how Create Energy's OnTrack system uses one common control board across trackers, E-boss units, weather stations, and inverters, giving asset owners a single view of every row in a solar field with no separate pony panel required.Learn why Create offers a 10-year bumper-to-bumper warranty on its full product stack, and what Solon means when he says he eliminated failure modes rather than reduced them.Understand how automated, electric vegetation control cuts solar O&M costs in half, and why long-term asset owners should treat this as a budget line item, not a feature.For any asset owner weighing supply chain decisions in 2025, this conversation is a direct look at what the American manufacturing alternative looks like on the ground. Connect with Dean Solon and Create LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/dean-solon-b8876649/Website: https://www.create.energy/ Support the showConnect with Tim Clean Power Hour Clean Power Hour on YouTubeTim on TwitterTim on LinkedIn Email tim@cleanpowerhour.com Review Clean Power Hour on Apple PodcastsThe Clean Power Hour is produced by the Clean Power Consulting Group and created by Tim Montague. Contact us by email: CleanPowerHour@gmail.comCorporate sponsors who share our mission to speed the energy transition are invited to check out https://www.cleanpowerhour.com/support/The Clean Power Hour is brought to you by CPS America, maker of North America's number one 3-phase string inverter, with over 6GW shipped in the US. With a focus on commercial and utility-scale solar and energy storage, the company partners with customers to provide unparalleled performance and service. The CPS America product lineup includes 3-phase string inverters from 25kW to 275kW, exceptional data communication and controls, and energy storage solutions designed for seamless integration with CPS America systems. Learn more at www.chintpowersystems.com

american north america tennessee portland scale failing solar nasdaq utility gw epc solon on track ipps 6gw tim montague

Anna Grigoryan - Armenia Alliance in the 2026 Armenian Parliamentary Election | Ep 544, May 11, 2026

Play Episode Listen Later May 12, 2026 61:02 Transcription Available

Conversations on Groong - May 11, 2026Anna Grigoryan of Hayastan Dashinq (Armenia Alliance) joins Groong to discuss Armenia's June 7 parliamentary election and the start of the official campaign. The conversation examines the EPC and Armenia-EU summits in Yerevan, EU political and financial support for Pashinyan, Aliyev's remote demarche, and opposition protests around Artsakh rights, Armenian prisoners, and democratic backsliding. The episode also covers opposition coalition math, Hayastan Dashinq's 8% bloc threshold, Strong Armenia's lead among opposition forces, possible post-election governing formulas, and the risks of a falsified vote. Grigoryan also discusses Armenia's foreign policy direction, the peace treaty with Azerbaijan, TRIPP and Syunik amid the Iran war, education as a national priority, and Hayastan Dashinq's core message to voters.Topics:Election campaign and opposition strategyEPC, EU-Armenia summit, and foreign influenceForeign policy, security, and regional risksDomestic priorities and election integrityGuest: Anna GrigoryanHosts:Hovik ManucharyanAsbed BedrossianEpisode 544 | Recorded: May 9, 2026SHOW NOTES: https://podcasts.groong.org/544VIDEO: https://youtu.be/SV2I8iBr9ss#AnnaGrigoryan #Armenia #ArmenianPolitics #ArmeniaElections #HayastanDashinq #EPCSummit #TRIPP #ArtsakhSubscribe and follow us everywhere you are: linktr.ee/groong

donald trump conversations elections european union iran alliance armenia azerbaijan armenian parliamentary nagorno karabakh epc yerevan artsakh aliyev european political community ilham aliyev grigoryan pashinyan syunik

SDE's Approach to Solar Racking: What DG Installers Need to Know #348