Project Constraint Analysis

Context Matters On August 2nd, the Pembina Institute released a report titled “Creating (Un)certainty for Renewable Projects” to mark the one-year anniversary of the 7-month renewables moratorium in Alberta. On page 4, the report states that 33 renewable energy projects have been cancelled since the moratorium and that “The cancelled projects would have added enough capacity to produce 10,600 GWh of electricity per year." and "...that is equivalent to 98% of the average annual electricity consumption of all homes in the province..." The implication is that all of these projects would have gone to commercial operation and all of them would be able to provide energy without constraint.  Unfortunately, given the fact that many projects never go to completion due to economics and given the current and future transmission constraints on the Alberta power system, I think this is an overstatement and some physical context is necessary. We are currently seeing significant operational constraints on renewable energy due to insufficient transmission capacity in Alberta, which can be observed from the AESO’s publicly available real time data that shows constraints on sunny and windy days. In addition, the Alberta Market Surveillance Administrator (MSA) quarterly reports provide good documentation of persistent constraints, with 188 GWh of renewables constrained in Q4 2023 and 28 GWh constrained in Q1 2024. In addition, the AESO recently published its latest assessment of projects requesting access to the grid and the results indicate significant transmission constraints in southern Alberta, with between 1000 to 8000 GWh of renewable energy constrained annually depending on how many projects in the queue proceed. So, while many projects may have been cancelled as a result of the moratorium, the reality is that economics and physical constraints on Alberta’s grid will limit the pace of renewable energy development, not to mention the operational challenges created by increasing volumes of inverter-based energy that reduce system inertia and frequency response. I post this because I believe those of us who understand the power system have a duty to provide factual information to help non-experts understand the issues facing our grid to enable informed policy decisions. I urge the Pembina Institute to provide more balance and context in future reports as part of their stated approach to "drive change through evidence-based policy solutions." Data sources: Pembina Institute Report: https://lnkd.in/gGVrZWjT MSA Quarterly reports: https://lnkd.in/gHz3QQK6 AESO Cluster Assessment Results: https://lnkd.in/g6P_HEQ9 AESO Real Time Constraint Data: http://ets.aeso.ca/

❗𝟵𝟱% 𝗼𝗳 𝘄𝗶𝗻𝗱 𝗱𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗹𝗼𝗽𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀 𝗳𝗮𝗶𝗹* 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗜 𝗰𝗮𝗻 𝘁𝗲𝗹𝗹 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗶𝗻 𝗼𝗻𝗲 𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗱 𝘄𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘄𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝗰𝗮𝘂𝘀𝗲 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗻𝗲𝘅𝘁 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗷𝗲𝗰𝘁 𝘁𝗼 𝗳𝗮𝗶𝗹❗   "𝗨𝗻𝗸𝗻𝗼𝘄𝗻𝘀"   Overly simplistic? Perhaps. So let me double the complexity of my answer.   "𝗨𝗻𝗸𝗻𝗼𝘄𝗻 𝘂𝗻𝗸𝗻𝗼𝘄𝗻𝘀"   Unknown unknowns are things where we have neither knowledge of the occurrence, nor knowledge of the impact.   🦜Will a bird survey reveal a rare species of parakeet? If it does, what area will become unbuildable? 🧑🌾Will the farmer on the western boundary be supportive? If not, how much will it reduce the development envelope? 🍃Will atmospheric turbulence limit turbine choice? If it does, which classes will be unsuitable? 🪖Will the military restrict tip height? If it does, what will be the restriction? 🔋Will national energy policy shift? If it does, where will it shift to?   At Wind Pioneers we've worked on hundreds of potential sites across 50+ markets. Our clients are some of the best developers in the world and what we've learnt is that successful developers don't focus on known qualities of a site. 𝗦𝘂𝗰𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗳𝘂𝗹 𝗱𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗹𝗼𝗽𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝗳𝗼𝗰𝘂𝘀 𝗼𝗻 𝘄𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘄𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝗸𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗶𝗿 𝗱𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗹𝗼𝗽𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁.   Here are our top tips for dealing with Unknown Unknowns: 𝟭) 𝗠𝗮𝗸𝗲 𝗮 𝗹𝗶𝘀𝘁 𝗼𝗳 𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘆𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗺𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁 𝗸𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗷𝗲𝗰𝘁. Rank them by likelihood and severity. Be your site's own worst critic. 𝟮) Have a workflow that enables you to easily 𝗿𝘂𝗻 𝗱𝗼𝘇𝗲𝗻𝘀 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗱𝗼𝘇𝗲𝗻𝘀 𝗼𝗳 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗷𝗲𝗰𝘁 𝘀𝗰𝗲𝗻𝗮𝗿𝗶𝗼𝘀. 𝟯) 𝗥𝘂𝗻 𝗱𝗼𝘇𝗲𝗻𝘀 𝗼𝗳 𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗜𝗳 𝗦𝗰𝗲𝗻𝗮𝗿𝗶𝗼𝘀. For all severe or likely risks, perform a desktop what if scenario. Hunt for scenarios that make the project unviable, and then spend your time understanding and mitigating those risks. 𝟰) 𝗛𝗮𝘃𝗲 𝗕𝘂𝗳𝗳𝗲𝗿𝘀. Have 30-50% buffer on capacity at an early stage. If you want to build a 200MW project, have space for 300MW. When unknowns become known, they will eat away at your capacity. 𝟱) 𝗛𝗮𝘃𝗲 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗶𝗲𝘀. Allow 10-20% erosion in NetCF as unknowns become known and constrain the project. 6) 𝗕𝗲𝘄𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝗢𝗽𝘁𝗶𝗺𝗶𝘀𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻. "Optimisation" is an exercise in "optimism" until you have complete knowledge of all constraints on a site. Be pragmatic and realistic, not blindly optimistic. 𝟳) 𝗚𝗮𝗺𝗯𝗹𝗲 𝗥𝗲𝘀𝗽𝗼𝗻𝘀𝗶𝗯𝗹𝘆. Wind farm development is hard. Really hard. Understand that every site is a bet with long odds. Plan your portfolio to be hedged and spread your risks over multiple projects with diverse risk factors.   Come talk to us if you'd like a sympathetic ear to the challenges of wind farm development.   *95% is a guestimate that depends on definitions. The exact number is not important - what's important is that most sites will never become wind farms so we need to consider risks not just opportunities…

📌 Turnaround Planning: Root Cause Analysis of Delays in Oil & Gas Plant Shutdowns 🔹 Is your refinery or gas plant shutdown running behind schedule? 🔹 Facing cost overruns and extended downtime? ✅ The key to a successful turnaround lies in Root Cause Analysis (RCA) using Project Planning as a Benchmark. Below is a step-by-step approach to systematically identify, analyze, and mitigate delays in shutdowns and turnarounds. 📊 1️⃣ Establish the Baseline Shutdown Plan 🟢 A well-structured Primavera P6 schedule is essential for delay analysis. Key elements include: Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) 📑 (Scopes: mechanical, electrical, instrumentation, etc.) Critical Path Analysis (CPA) ⏳ (Shutdown, maintenance & startup sequencing) Resource Loading & Constraints 👷♂️ (Manpower, equipment, spare parts availability) Permit & Safety Clearances 🛑 (Isolation, depressurization & confined space permits) 🔍 2️⃣ Identify & Classify Delays 🔄 Compare actual shutdown progress vs. the baseline and categorize delays: Planned vs. Unplanned Delays ⚙ (Scope growth, unanticipated failures, material shortages) Excusable vs. Non-Excusable Delays ⏳ (Weather, contractor inefficiencies, logistics) Systemic vs. Random Delays 🔄 (Recurring bottlenecks vs. one-time disruptions) 🔄 3️⃣ Perform Root Cause Analysis (RCA) 💡 Use structured problem-solving techniques to trace delays to their source: 5 Whys Analysis ❓ (Identify underlying process inefficiencies) Fishbone Diagram (Ishikawa) 🎣 (Categorize issues: manpower, materials, method, equipment, environment) Variance Analysis & Historical Data Review 📈 (Compare trends from previous shutdowns) ⚙ 4️⃣ Implement Corrective Actions & Recovery Plans 🚀 Once the root causes are identified, deploy mitigation strategies: Schedule Acceleration Tactics ⏩ (Fast-tracking, extended shifts, parallel work execution) Supply Chain Optimization 🚛 (Pre-positioning of critical spares & materials) Contractor Performance Audits 📊 (Review & enforce SLA compliance) Risk Mitigation Plans ⚠ (Scenario planning & proactive contingency measures) 🚀 Why Root Cause Analysis is Critical in Turnarounds ✔ Reduces unplanned downtime & revenue losses ✔ Improves work execution efficiency ✔ Strengthens compliance with HSE & operational standards ✔ Optimizes resource allocation for future shutdowns 📌 How do you manage delays in plant shutdowns? Share your best practices in the comments. 🔎 #TurnaroundPlanning #ShutdownExecution #OilAndGas #PrimaveraP6 #ProjectControls #MaintenancePlanning #RootCauseAnalysis #RefineryShutdown #EngineeringJobs #PMO

Your schedule might be lying to you. Just because the resources fit on paper doesn’t mean they fit on-site. Let’s talk about how to avoid this common scheduling trap. How to Estimate Workfront Capacity (Eyeball + P6 Method): Workfront constraints are one of the most overlooked issues in project scheduling. Here’s how to avoid it. 1. Eyeball the Workfront Density Before Opening P6 Before touching Primavera, do a quick Workfront Density Check: ✅ Measure available workspace using drawings or site plans. ✅ Estimate the number of workers per square foot/meter based on industry benchmarks. ✅ Example: If 10m² per worker is needed and the workfront is 1,000m², then max capacity is 100 workers. ✅ Compare against scheduled resources—if more workers are planned than can fit, adjust durations or split shifts. Too many workers in too little space? Productivity us unrealistic. 2. Apply Workfront Constraints in P6 Once you have a rough estimate, integrate it into Primavera P6: 📌 Activity Codes or UDFs → Define work zones. 📌 Resource Limits → Cap crew size per area. 📌 Logic Links (FS/SS with lag) → Stagger work to prevent overcrowding. 📌 Resource Leveling → Balance labor across work zones. 📌 4D Scheduling & Field Feedback → Validate feasibility. Why This Works ✅ Prevents overcrowding and lost productivity. ✅ Improves schedule accuracy by incorporating real-world constraints. ✅ Reduces delays by aligning workforce with available workspace. ✅ Enhances coordination between trades. Final Thought Space is a hidden constraint in construction scheduling. If you don’t plan for it, you’ll feel it in lost time and efficiency. The best schedulers don’t just manage time—they manage space. Do you factor in work front capacity in your schedules? Drop your thoughts in the comments! 👇 --- Looking for more strategies and tactics in construction planning and scheduling? Join our community of thousands of subscribers today: https://lnkd.in/gPiR6pth

When will we stop spreading the myth that the Critical Path is the sequence of activities that defines the earliest possible project completion date? It’s simply not true. The actual earliest completion date is shaped by technological constraints, resource availability, and external factors and priorities. Moreover, Critical Path Method (CPM) schedules are based on expected activity durations, not the shortest possible ones. In theory, the critical path can be shortened by adding resources, increasing risk tolerance, extending work hours, adding shifts, changing technology, or reducing scope. In practice, however, real-world constraints, such as resource limitations, financial boundaries, organisational policies, cultural nuances, and contractual conditions create barriers that limit how fast a project can actually be delivered. There are often ways to accelerate the resource-critical path, but let’s be clear: it’s rarely free. The Critical Path is nothing more than a step in developing a feasible delivery model. It’s not the finish line but a starting point. Critical Path serves as a useful indicator of where to begin optimisation, but by itself, it doesn’t define the earliest possible project completion date.

Think your project has cost overruns or is late because your team is inefficient? It’s late because someone tried to stretch the triangle. One of my favorite concepts in B-school was this simple, but spot on rule, because it really distills projects down to their fundamentals. Every project (IT or otherwise) lives inside the 𝗧𝗿𝗶𝗽𝗹𝗲 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗶𝗻𝘁: 🔺 Time 🔺 Scope 🔺 Cost The rule? You can only control two. If you want more 𝗳𝗲𝗮𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲𝘀 (scope), you need more time or budget. If you want it 𝗳𝗮𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗿 (time), you either shrink scope or pay more. If you want it 𝗰𝗵𝗲𝗮𝗽𝗲𝗿 (cost), reduce that scope or tighten deadlines. Sounds obvious? Yes, until enhancement creep kicks in. A new dashboard. An extra report. Add more, change this, remove that.... Suddenly, your “on track” project is off the rails. I've used this model more than once to explain the tight guardrails we work with. Stakeholders or external voices always want to change the scope after the fact. So, I try to: 🛑 Freeze enhancements early. 🤝 Renegotiate the constraints transparently. 📊 Track your triangle in real-time. Managing the Triple Constraint isn’t just for project management, it's for any project that you'll undertake. Draw it out to get a reality check.

5 steps to finding the one problem that matters. Yes there is only ONE. Every system, your company included, has a process that is blocking progress. In Theory of Constraints (ToC) it's called… you guessed it… the constraint. Here's what you need to do to identify it: 1. Map out your company process visually. Blocks and arrows. Start at the highest level possible, the company level. From there you can drill down where the data takes you. 2. Quantify the input, output, and ratio of each block. If each block represents a process, then each block will have an input, an output, and a ratio. An easy example is the “sales” process. Input equals qualified leads. The output equals the number of closed sales. The ratio is the close rate. 3. Compare metrics to benchmarks (history, industry, or other). You need a benchmark to compare against. In some industries benchmarks will be harder to get than others. The internet is your friend. You should also have a wealth of historical data you can dive into. 4. Identify the poorest performing step (block) and quantify its impact. It will be clear where the problem is. If not, you might have picked the wrong system to work on. 5. Focus all available resources on fixing it. Don’t dilute. This is the time to focus. Sometimes it might even make sense to slow down the “machinery” until you address the problem. An example could be paying for traffic while your conversion rate is poor. Why waste the cash? 6. Once solved, do it all over again, your key constraint will have moved. Yep. By definition the key constraint will just move to another block in your system. Your job is to find it and go at it again. Hope this helps. If you haven't, I highly encourage you to read The Goal by Eli Goldratt. It's a treatise in the application of common sense to business.