More about the unsuitable formula for a building heating installation… Dimitar Todorov to FACTI

Recently, after the decision of the Supreme Administrative Court to repeal the formula for calculating energy from a building installation, the media has increasingly asked how subscribers' bills will be calculated. This question raises curiosity on the one hand, and dissatisfaction on the other hand with the fact that many subscribers have been harmed so far, and may be harmed in the future. After we told you how and why we go from “consumers“ to “clients“ of Toplofikatsiya, we continue on the topic with more details about the formula for calculating the energy released by the building installation. Energy expert Dimitar Todorov spoke to FACTI.

– Mr. Todorov, let us explain in this conversation what the formula for calculating the energy released by the building installation is...
– The formula for calculating the energy released by the building installation was written in item 6.1.1. of the methodology for share allocation to the regulation on heat supply No. 16-334/06.04.2007. The Supreme Administrative Court canceled this formula and later the Ministry of Energy presented a new regulation named E-RD-04-1/12.03.2020. The methodology to it again contained the same formula, but with minor cosmetic changes. The coefficient 0.15 was replaced with the Greek letter β, and under the formula in the text it was written that β = 0.15. Laughter in the hall.

– In other words, a correction in the style of “to pass the number“ before the methodology, so that people can pay again...
– Exactly. A complete mockery of the court and the population of the country. In short, the same formula remains, which after five years was again canceled by both our and the European court.

– And now a new formula is about to be created, in the hope that it will be accurate?
– Everyone knows that when the building installation is working, the pipes are warm and emit heat into the home. This heat must be paid for. So says the European Court. No one can buy a watermelon from the store without the rind, right? It will be paid, okay! But the question is how to make this fair and correspond to actual consumption.

Here is an explanation: Upon analysis, it can be seen that the numerator of the formula is Qim, which is the total installed capacity of the heating units under design conditions. This capacity can vary widely, while the other multipliers in the formula hardly change. When many radiators are closed or removed, as is observed in many condominiums, Qim decreases sharply and since it is in the numerator, the energy released by the building installation should also decrease sharply. Yes, but no, as the late journalist Petko Bocharov used to say. It is entirely possible, and this still exists now, for the power of the heating units to decrease, but the power of the building installation to remain the same as designed. Then the percentage of the energy of the building installation relative to the total energy for heating becomes very large. This is exactly what all district heating customers complain about. This can be shown with a simple example.

Let's look at a riser from the first to the eighth floor:
-- If only one radiator on the first floor is working, and on the rest up to the eighth, all the radiator valves are closed, the coolant will not pass through the pipes from the second to the eighth floor and they will be cold, i.e. energy from the building installation is not released. However, everyone pays because the capacities of their radiators are included in the formula for the building installation and the energy is distributed proportionally to the volume of everyone's apartment. No one asks anyone whether they have used the radiators or not. Thus, subscribers without radiators pay part of the bill for the building installation, without having used it at all.
-- If only one radiator on the eighth floor is working, and all the other radiators on the lower floors have closed valves, the coolant will pass through the pipes from the first to the eighth floor, i.e. everyone will receive energy from the building installation, even though they do not want it and the first to the seventh floor are not heated. The bill is again paid by everyone. It is important to note that the increased bills for the building installation reduce the energy for heating with radiators, and therefore the energy value of the units from the distributors. Therefore, those using radiators pay lower heating bills.

– And what actually comes out...
– Many subscribers, due to false bills and high prices, have given up using radiators – finding alternative sources of heating. This is the reason why entire sections of the installation do not work. The trouble comes from the fact that the capacities of the heating units are strongly influenced by the subjective factor. It is up to the person how many and which heating units to leave working and which ones to remove from the heating installation altogether. It is up to the person to which division to turn the thermostat valve or to turn it off completely. It is up to the person when he will go on vacation or go to the hospital and turn off all the heating in his home. With these uncontrollable and unpredictable manipulations, the capacities of the heating units change uncontrollably and unpredictably, which also changes the heat transfer from the pipes of the vertical building installation. All these dependencies make the physical formula invalid and the court correctly overturned it. No matter how you look at it, the calculation of the energy from the building installation is not correct. The formula used for these calculations does not exist in the scientific literature. It is invented and, except in our regulation, you will not find it in the scientific literature, nor in a scientific monograph or abstract journal.

– Because...
– It cannot exist, because there cannot be a mathematical formula that is influenced by feelings, mental state, desires and intentions of a person.

– Now they are thinking of removing the formula and introducing a percentage. Explain...
– Now the desire of the specialists from the Ministry of Energy to remove the formula and introduce a percentage from 10 to 30 in its place, as in Art. 112c, para. 2 of the amendment to the Energy and Energy Efficiency Act (SG, issue 108/2000), does not meet with support from anyone. The percentage should have been chosen by the general meeting of the condominium. It is clear to any sane person that the condominium will never be able to choose a certain percentage for the building installation. Subscribers who use radiators will want a larger percentage for the building installation in order to pay less for heating, and those who have removed their radiators will want a smaller percentage because they do not pay for heating from radiators. The text in the regulation on the selection of a percentage by the general meeting of the condominium will relieve the Ministry of Energy of any responsibility and condemn subscribers to internecine wars.

– And what are we waiting for now. Is there a way out?
– We will see what will be decided, but… I want to draw attention to something else. Recently, in an interview, energy expert Ivan Hinovski was asked: “What are we going to do with the formula for the building installation, canceled by the court, and with the bills for heating and hot water?“. He said without shame that the formula was very accurate and said a bunch of untrue and offensive things about the statements of the Ombudsman of the Republic of Bulgaria Velislava Delcheva. You see, she said that the bills for the building installation were very high as a percentage of the total heating energy, that she was causing confusion among subscribers and that he would demand her resignation. He said that she did not understand at all how energy is calculated, emphasizing that Toplofikatsiya does not charge subscribers more money than what the heat meter in the subscriber station shows. In this regard, he is right – indeed, Toplofikatsiya charges condominium owners money according to the price of energy and the readings of the heat meter in the subscriber station, which is a commercial device. I emphasize – from the condominium.

In fact, it is he who does not understand or deliberately conceals that the bills of the subscribers inside – in the condominium – are incorrect and many subscribers are harmed at the expense of others. The formula can be relatively accurate, but only if all the heating works with the design capacities of the heating units.

Since this condition is not met, the formula is extremely inaccurate. This is what was concealed. The Ombudsman should have requested the right of reply or sued him for insult or damage to the prestige of the institution. The same thesis was developed by Kremen Georgiev, chairman of the Association of District Heating Companies. He stated that the formula for the building installation was very good, but not transparent enough. This shows that he also does not understand where the real reason for the inaccurate, opaque and incomprehensible bills is.

– You say several times that the formula is useless. But what is the solution?
– No matter how hard the specialists from the Ministry of Energy try, they will still come up with the same unsuitable formula. But since the court has banned its use, they will most likely turn to § 69, para. 15 of the 2000 law, which we have already talked about. This paragraph contains something very important - share distribution is introduced only in condominiums in which the users of radiators are more than 90%. With such a majority of radiators included, the building installation can work as designed, and the calculations using the formula can give acceptable results. But since this phenomenon - users being more than 90% - has not been observed for a long time, share distribution will have to be eliminated, and with it the formula and the companies for share distribution. The final conclusion is that whatever formula is invented, it will essentially be the same as the previous one, but even more incomprehensible to district heating subscribers, and no one will be satisfied. Not even those who created it.