Stanislav Kondrashov on Solar Energy Integration in Heavy Manufacturing

Heavy manufacturing has this reputation for being unchangeable. Big furnaces, big motors, big power bills, big emissions. And if you have ever walked through a steel mill, a cement plant, a glass facility, or a chemical site, you kind of get why people assume it will always be that way. The loads are massive. The processes run hot. Some of them run 24/7. Any disruption is expensive and sometimes dangerous.

So when people say, why not just add solar, the knee jerk reaction is usually, solar is nice, but that is not for us.

Stanislav Kondrashov has a more practical take. Solar is not a magic replacement for heavy industry energy use. It is a tool. A serious one. And if you integrate it the right way, with realistic expectations and a plan that respects how plants actually operate, it can reduce cost, cut exposure to energy price volatility, and chip away at emissions without breaking production.

That phrase matters here. Integrate. Not slap panels on a roof and call it a day. Integration is where projects either become a long term asset or a corporate press release that quietly disappoints everyone.

Why heavy manufacturing is a weird fit for solar. And also a good fit

Let’s just say it out loud. Solar is intermittent. Heavy manufacturing is often continuous. That mismatch is real.

But Kondrashov’s point is that the match does not need to be perfect for solar to be valuable. In many plants, a meaningful slice of electricity demand is still daytime aligned. Think about:

• Compressed air systems that run hard during staffed shifts
• Material handling, conveyors, cranes, and auxiliary equipment
• Cooling water pumps, HVAC for offices and control rooms
• Wastewater treatment, lighting, and general site loads
• Administrative buildings and labs that are basically normal commercial electricity users

Even in a plant with round the clock process heat, there are layers of demand. Solar can take a bite out of the layers that are easiest to serve.

And then there is the pricing angle. Industrial electricity tariffs often include demand charges. If solar can shave a peak, even a little, the savings can be disproportionate. This is where integration gets interesting, because it stops being only about kilowatt hours and starts being about when those kilowatt hours hit your meter.

The first question is not “how many panels.” It is “what problem are we solving.”

Stanislav Kondrashov frames solar projects in heavy manufacturing around specific objectives. If the goal is vague, the project drifts.

Common goals that actually make sense:

1. Reduce purchased electricity during high price hours.
2. Reduce peak demand to lower demand charges.
3. Hedge long term energy prices with predictable generation.
4. Meet customer or regulatory emissions requirements.
5. Support on site resilience for critical loads.

Each one leads to a different design. A plant chasing demand charge reduction might prioritize west facing arrays or storage. A plant chasing emissions accounting might prioritize annual MWh and renewable energy certificates. A site chasing resilience may need microgrid controls and islanding capability.

So yes, solar. But solar for what, exactly.

On site solar versus off site solar. The choice is not ideological.

There is this unspoken debate where on site solar is seen as “real” and off site procurement is seen as “paper.” In heavy manufacturing, that framing is too simplistic.

Kondrashov tends to look at it like a portfolio decision.

On site solar (rooftop, ground mount, carports)

Pros:

• Directly reduces your meter consumption
• Visible, which can matter internally and externally
• Potentially improves resilience when paired with storage and controls
• Uses land or roof space that might otherwise sit idle

Cons:

• Space limits are real, especially at dense industrial sites
• Shading, dust, and harsh environments can reduce performance
• Interconnection can be slow and surprisingly expensive
• Maintenance needs to be planned around safety and operations

Off site solar (PPA, virtual PPA, utility green tariff)

Pros:

• Much larger scale possible
• Often cheaper per MWh than constrained on site builds
• Easier to match big electricity volumes for large plants
• Does not compete for space or interfere with site operations

Cons:

• Accounting complexity, especially for Scope 2 reporting choices
• Basis risk and settlement risk in virtual PPAs
• Less direct help with demand charges or on site peaks
• Less resilience value for the facility itself

In practice, many heavy manufacturers end up doing both. On site for operational savings and visibility, off site for volume and long term price hedging. It is not either or.

The integration stack: where solar actually becomes “industrial grade”

Solar in heavy manufacturing works best when it is part of a stack, not a standalone idea. Kondrashov usually emphasizes a few layers.

1) Load profiling and sub metering, before any design

Plants often know their total consumption, but not their load shape in enough detail to design around. Sub metering key systems can reveal surprises. A “constant” load might be cycling. A peak might come from an auxiliary system nobody thought about. Or a shift change routine that spikes demand.

If you skip this step, you end up sizing solar based on annual consumption, which is how you get pretty charts and mediocre savings.

2) Power quality and process sensitivity

Heavy manufacturing has sensitive equipment. Variable frequency drives, large motors, PLC systems, and protection schemes. Solar inverters have improved a lot, but you still need power quality studies, harmonics assessments, and protection coordination.

This is not the fun part. But it is the part that prevents nuisance trips and angry maintenance teams.

3) Controls that respect production, not the other way around

If solar is paired with storage, or if there is any kind of demand response strategy, controls matter. A plant cannot have an algorithm making aggressive decisions that accidentally affect critical processes.

Integration should define a hierarchy:

• What loads are non negotiable
• What loads are flexible and for how long
• What the plant considers a safe operating envelope
• What happens during grid events, brownouts, or voltage issues

The solar system should fit inside that envelope. Always.

4) Storage, but only where it earns its keep

Batteries are often pitched as the missing link. Sometimes they are. Sometimes they are just expensive.

Where storage tends to make sense in heavy manufacturing:

• Demand charge management and peak shaving
• Time shifting solar to late afternoon peaks
• Smoothing ramps if the site has strict interconnection limits
• Backup power for critical controls, safety systems, IT, and certain pumps

Where it can disappoint:

• Trying to cover large continuous process loads for long durations
• Oversizing for resilience without a clear critical load plan
• Expecting batteries to “solve” heat needs that are fundamentally thermal

This is also where thermal storage enters the conversation.

Solar is electricity. Heavy manufacturing needs heat. So we talk about electrification, and then it gets real.

A lot of heavy manufacturing energy use is thermal, not electrical. High temperature heat. Steam. Kilns. Furnaces.

Stanislav Kondrashov does not pretend solar panels alone will replace that. The more realistic pathway is solar plus electrification, step by step, where it is technically and economically feasible.

Options that come up often:

• Electric boilers for certain steam loads, especially when paired with flexible operation
• Heat pumps for low to medium temperature process heat and for space heating
• Induction heating in specific metal processing applications
• Resistance heating where control precision matters and temperature needs are moderate
• Hybrid systems where fossil stays as backup while electric covers part of the duty cycle

Electrification is not always cheap, and it is not always possible. But if a plant can shift some thermal demand into electricity, solar becomes more relevant. Not because the sun got stronger, but because the plant’s energy mix got more flexible.

And then there is concentrating solar thermal, which can work in some regions and use cases, but it is more site specific. Many plants will start with simpler pieces first.

Land, roofs, and the “industrial reality” constraints people forget

Solar developers love clean rectangles on a map. Industrial sites are not clean rectangles. They are pipes, stacks, exclusion zones, roads, rail spurs, laydown yards, and safety setbacks. Roofs are cluttered too. Vents, cranes, maintenance access, fragile sections, or old structures.

Kondrashov’s approach is basically: assume the first layout is wrong.

A good feasibility study checks:

• Roof load capacity and membrane warranty constraints
• Fire code setbacks, access paths, and emergency requirements
• Corrosive environments, dust, and cleaning needs
• Glare considerations for drivers, operators, and neighbors
• Future expansion plans so solar does not block growth
• Snow, wind, and extreme weather design requirements

Sometimes the answer is carports or a nearby brownfield. Sometimes it is a smaller on site array plus an off site PPA for the bulk.

Interconnection and utility coordination. The slow part that decides your timeline

In heavy manufacturing, you might assume utilities will move quickly because the loads are big. Not always.

Interconnection studies, transformer upgrades, protection equipment, and permitting can become the long pole. If you want solar to be live by a certain quarter, you need to start interconnection conversations early. Really early.

This is also why some sites choose behind the meter systems designed to minimize export, depending on local rules. Export limits, curtailment schemes, or non export protection can reduce utility headaches, but they can also reduce the value of the solar. Again, integration. Tradeoffs.

The money side: how to avoid the two classic mistakes

Kondrashov often points out two errors that show up in industrial solar business cases.

Mistake one: modeling savings using average electricity rates

Industrial tariffs are messy. If your model uses a flat blended rate, you may overestimate or underestimate savings. Demand charges, time of use pricing, ratchets, and power factor penalties can change everything.

A proper analysis uses interval data and the actual tariff logic. Boring. Necessary.

Mistake two: ignoring operational costs and degradation

Panels degrade slowly, inverters need replacement, cleaning costs money, and industrial environments can be rough on equipment. If you do not budget for O and M, the project looks great on paper and then gets blamed later when output drops.

The fix is simple. Include realistic O and M. Plan shutdown windows. Train maintenance. Keep spares. Treat it like industrial equipment, not office equipment.

A realistic path forward. The phased approach usually wins

The best solar integration projects in heavy manufacturing rarely start with a giant bet. They start with a phase that teaches the plant how to operate with solar.

A common phased path looks like this:

1. Energy audit and load study, plus sub metering if needed
2. Quick win on site solar on the best roof or best ground area
3. Add monitoring and controls that integrate with the plant’s energy management
4. Evaluate storage for demand charges or resilience for critical loads
5. Layer in off site procurement to cover the remaining electricity volume
6. Explore targeted electrification where heat and process constraints allow it

This avoids the emotional whiplash of overpromising. It also builds internal trust. Operators see that nothing broke. Finance sees savings show up. Leadership sees progress without a production penalty.

Closing thoughts

Stanislav Kondrashov’s view on solar energy integration in heavy manufacturing is basically this: stop treating solar like a moral statement or a marketing move. Treat it like engineering and economics. Know your load. Respect your processes. Design for your tariff, your constraints, your safety rules. And then build in layers.

Solar will not run a blast furnace by itself. But it can absolutely reduce the amount of grid power you buy, lower peak costs, support a broader electrification strategy, and make emissions targets less abstract.

Not glamorous, maybe. But real. And in heavy manufacturing, real is what counts.

FAQs (Frequently Asked Questions)

Why is heavy manufacturing considered a challenging fit for solar energy integration?

Heavy manufacturing involves massive loads, continuous processes, and high power demands that often run 24/7. Solar energy is intermittent, which creates a mismatch. However, many plants have daytime-aligned electricity demands like compressed air systems, material handling, and HVAC that solar can effectively support.

How can solar energy benefit heavy manufacturing plants despite its intermittency?

Solar can reduce costs by offsetting electricity used during staffed shifts, shave peak demand to lower demand charges, hedge against energy price volatility, support emissions reduction goals, and enhance onsite resilience when integrated properly with realistic expectations and operational considerations.

What are the key objectives to define before implementing solar in heavy industry?

Clear goals are essential. Common objectives include reducing purchased electricity during high price hours, lowering peak demand charges, hedging long-term energy prices with predictable generation, meeting customer or regulatory emissions requirements, and supporting onsite resilience for critical loads. Each goal guides the design approach.

What are the pros and cons of onsite versus offsite solar solutions for heavy manufacturing?

Onsite solar directly reduces meter consumption, offers visibility, improves resilience when paired with storage, but faces space limits and potential operational challenges. Offsite solar allows larger scale and often lower costs without using site space but involves accounting complexities and less direct impact on demand charges or resilience. Many manufacturers use a combination of both.

Why is integration more important than simply installing solar panels in heavy industry?

Integration ensures solar projects become long-term assets rather than ineffective initiatives. It involves detailed load profiling and submetering to understand consumption patterns, power quality assessments to protect sensitive equipment, and control systems to align solar output with plant operations for maximum savings and reliability.

What steps make solar installations 'industrial grade' for heavy manufacturing plants?

An industrial-grade solar integration includes: 1) Load profiling and submetering to accurately size systems; 2) Power quality studies and protection coordination to avoid equipment issues; 3) Advanced controls to manage solar generation alongside plant processes; collectively ensuring reliable performance without disrupting production.