These are the energy types available to heat potable water.

1. Electricity
2. Natural Gas
3. Propane Gas (LPG)
4. Oil
5. Wood/Pellets
6. Solar Thermal

• Electricity is derived from the grid, on-site generators or from photovoltaics PV solar panels, or from wind power.
• Natural gas is not widely available in rural areas, which is the primary market area for propane.
• Oil is primarily available in the Northeast, but there are pockets in the Northwest and Midwest.
• Cord wood is more prevalent in rural areas, but wood pellets are increasingly common in suburban communities.
• Solar Thermal (hot water panels) is available anywhere, but only practical as a sole heating source in southernmost regions. In regions with less “solar fraction” – the time the sun typically can be relied upon to radiate the panels – solar can be relied upon between 40% and 80% of the time, otherwise, electric back-up is required.

Equipment types are listed as tank-type and “tank-less” and are outlined as follows.

1. Direct-fired tanks
2. Indirect-fired tanks
3. Direct-fired tank-less
4. Indirect-fired tank-less

Direct-fired tanks include:

• Natural gas
• Propane gas
• Oil
• Electric
• Heat pump
• Geothermal (with “desuperheater”)

Indirect-fired tanks include:

• Heating system water flow through a coil in the potable water tank

Direct-fired tank-less heaters include:

• Natural Gas-fired
• Propane Gas-fired
• Electric

Indirect-fired tank-less heaters include:

• Potable water flow through a coil submerged in heating water

To put this altogether so you can decide which option is best for you, you must consider the following.

1. Hot water capacity (gallons/minute) required
2. Fuel options and costs
3. Safety and code compliance
4. Space heating type
5. Site conditions and requirements
6. Efficiency ratings
7. Installation costs
8. Service costs
9. Whole-life costs
10. Replacement costs

So, let’s put all this information together so you can effectively decide what the best domestic hot water heating option is for you.

If you do not heat your building with forced hot water, then indirect-fired water heaters and tank-less coil water heaters are not an option for you. Otherwise, your space heating system boiler can be used to heat hot water through a tank-less coil (American boiler brands only) or an indirect-fired water heater. It’s simple: boiler water is circulated through a coil in an indirect tank, or potable water flows (when the hot tap is open) through the tank-less coil, which is submerged in boiler water. Boilers are heated by electric, gas, oil and wood.

Regardless of how you heat your building, you can use electric, gas, oil and solar thermal to the heat potable water in a tank. All of these energy sources, except solar, directly heat the potable water in the tank, while solar heats water in the panels and then sends it through a coil which heats up potable water that surrounds the coil in a storage tank an indirect means of heating. Electricity can power a heat pump water heater, or resistance heaters (like burner coils on an electric stove, but shaped differently), and can also power a geothermal heat pump which can specifically heat potable hot water or can utilize a “desuperheater” that scavenges the heat created by a geothermal heat pump compressor and sends it to an electric water heater, thereby minimizing the run time of the electric resistance heaters in the electric tank. PV solar panels generate electricity which is stored in a battery bank – the stored DC voltage electricity is inverted to AC voltage that can then be utilized to power a heat pump type water heater.

Finally, there are gas-fired and electric-fired tank-less (in the case of electric: “point-of-use”) water heaters. As the name implies, “tank-less” water heaters have no associated/integral tank, and, therefore, are compact and installable in many locations in a building. With gas-fired water heaters there is a primary concern: how to vent the flue gasses to the outdoors – this can make or break gas-fired tank-less heaters as an option.

Thus, you must decide first and foremost, how much hot water do you need, then how much does your budget allow for installation, operation, service and replacement, then what fuel/energy options are available to you.

This system is an indirect-fired life-time stainless steel tank fired by (2) 134,000 btu oil-fired boilers with an AFUE of 86%: “The Final Installation of the new systems in the basement” video. These boilers could also be fired by natural or propane gas utilizing a power gas burner.

Energy/fuel efficiency is not the only consideration, but suffice to say, tank-less coil, electric and propane (atmospheric/chimney-vented) tank-type water heaters are generally the least efficient. Of course, there are “high-efficiency” gas-fired tank-type water heaters.

The quickest recovery rate water heaters are indirect-fired and oil-fired water heaters, while heat pump water heaters are the slowest to recover and require electric back-up to begin to keep up with hot water demand, but sometimes can’t keep up.

There are too many variables to consider to tell you what type of potable hot water heating system to purchase – you must decide this yourself – but your best investment will be to thoroughly educate yourself before you decide what heater type is right for you and who you should hire to install it.

What would I install in my house? My approach is to Keep It Simple Stupid – the KISS principal. I prefer to do a job right, the first time and to install lifetime systems. For these reasons, I prefer cast iron Scotch Marine type boilers like Buderus and Triangle Tube lifetime stainless steel indirect-fired water heaters. These are forced hot water systems. The reason I choose FHW to heat potable water is because I can then heat my home with radiant floor heating – one of the largest fuel consumption pieces of the total energy/fuel pie in a building – which is the most efficient and comfortable way to heat a building. I also use my own circulator flanges, instruction holders, valve handles and accessory tees on all of my heating/hot water jobs.

For more information you can refer to the following outline – the basis for my presentation to the Residential Energy Performance Association (REPA) – and hyperlinks to greater information to assist you in your hot water decision-making.

REPA Training Seminar – Potable (“domestic”) Hot Water Heater Fundamentals for Auditors

Presenter – John Rocheleau

9:00 AM – May 8, 2012 – SPNHF

1. Introduction   9:05 AM – 9:10
2. Attendees’ Bio   9:10 – 9:30
3. Speaker’s Bio  9:30 – 9:45
   1. Protech HVAC, LLC – www.protechhvac.com
   2. The HVAC Guru, LLC – www.thehvacguru.com (same as above)
   3. Tradesmen Guru, LLC – www.tradesmenguru.com
   4. Guru Job Cost Pads – www.gurujobcostpads.com
   5. Types of Water Heaters  9:45 – 10:00
      1. Direct-Fired

i.    Natural Gas – Tank & Tank-less

1. 50-year old Copper Water Heater – Harry McCall Pics
2. (12 Years Old) 100-Gallon Glass-lined – Motel 6 Pic
3. Tank-less Water Heaters – Payback: 35-71 Years!
   1. http://www.greenbuildingadvisor.com/blogs/dept/musings/are-tankless-water-heaters-waste-money
   2. Long wait time for hot water

ii.    LPG – Tank & Tank-less

iii.    Oil – Tank Only

1. Atmospheric (Chimney) & Mechanically-vented
   1. Bock http://www.bockwaterheaters.com/products/products_oil_water_heaters.html
2. Non-Combustion Direct-Fired

i.    Electric “Resistive” Tank-Type & Point-of-Use http://www.boschsolar.com/

ii.    “Heat Pump” (really, it’s an air conditioner) – Air Source Hybrid

1. Varying Efficiency
   1. Temp/Size of Room
   2. Air Filter/Evap. Coil Cleanliness
   3. Refrigerant Charge
   4. Cools the Room
      1. Floors above will be colder w/ no insulation
      2. Noise – 60+ decibels (like a room air conditioner)
      3. Slow Recovery Rate – slower than electric water heaters
      4. Bigger Tanks are More Efficient http://www.greenbuildingadvisor.com/blogs/dept/musings/heat-pump-water-heaters-come-age
      5. G.E. “GeoSpring” Hybrid http://www.geappliances.com/products/water/water_heaters.htm

iii.    Heat Pump – “Geothermal” Water Source

1. De-Superheater/Electric W.H.
   1. Spring/Fall reliance on Electric W.H.
   2. Up to 5.0 COP
   3. 30% Installed Cost (residential) Tax Credit ‘til 2016
2. Indirect-Fired Appliances – Thermal Solar, Oil, Gas, Wood/Pellet

i.    Tank-in-a-Tank (Triangle Tube “Smart 80”) – BF Pics

ii.    Coil-in-a-Tank (Vaughan “Top Performer”) – KB Pics

iii.    Solar Thermal vs. Solar PV (w/ heat pump)

1. http://www.greenbuildingadvisor.com/blogs/dept/musings/solar-thermal-dead
2. Thermal Solar Fraction and Service Costs
   1. New Hampshire – 40% of need provided by solar
   2. Anti-freeze has high service costs
3. Tank-less Coil – HN Pic

i.    Boiler maintains 140-180 degrees 24/7/365

1. Direct-Fired Venting Types

i.    Gas: NFPA 54-3.3.6.11.1,2,3,4

1. Category I
2. Category II
3. Category III
4. Category IV

ii.    Oil:

1. Chimney Vent
2. Power Vent
3. Appliance Materials

i.    Stainless Steel

ii.    Copper

iii.    Cement/Stone-lined

1. http://www.vaughncorp.com/html/products.html

iv.    Glass-lined

1. Break– 10:00 – 10:10
   1. Codes – 10:10 – 10:30

i.    Expansion Tank

ii.    Tempering Valve, Vacuum Breaker & Relief Valve NFPA 54-10.28.4,.5

iii.    Watts Video:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5pVQryuKMj8

1. Assessing DHW Options for Auditor’s Client– 10:30 – 11:10
   1. Technical/Cost Considerations

i.    Hot water Capacity Required

ii.    Water Heater Sizing

1. A.O. Smith: http://www.hotwatersizing.com/
2. Bradford White: http://www.bradfordwhite.com/rightspec.asp

iii.    Fuel Options to Consider

1. What is available vs. what is practical/economical

iv.    Safety & Code Compliance

1. Venting – NFPA 54-12.1
2. Combustion Air – NFPA 54-9.3

v.    Heating System Type

1. FHW w/Indirect
2. FHW/Steam w/Tank-less Coil
3. Geothermal w/De-superheater & Electric W.H.

vi.    Site Requirements

1. Potable Water Condition
2. Chimney Size – NFPA 54-12.6.3

vii.    Efficiency Ratings

1. AFUE http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AFUE – btus heat output/btus fuel input
2. Fuel Efficiency/Combustion Efficiency http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_efficiency – How completely is the fuel burned/turned into heat
3. Thermal Efficiency http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_efficiency – what you get out = less than what you put in! (<100%)
4. COP http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coefficient_of_performance ex. Watts in/watts out (same units). If a heat pump delivers 3 units of heat for every unit of energy input – the COP is 3
5. SEER http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seasonal_energy_efficiency_ratio – Cooling Btus Output/Watt Hours Input averaged annually
6. EER http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_efficiency_ratioSame as SEER, but measured at a given operating point in time
   1. COP, EER, SEER Relationship http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_efficiency_ratio#Relationship_of_SEER_to_EER_and_COP
   2. HSPF “Heating Seasonal Performance Factor” – Specific to heat pumps http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HSPF – Btus of heat output (total for season)/(total) Watt hours of electricity used

viii.    Fuel Costs

1. EnergySavers.Gov Comparative Cost Considerations http://www.energysavers.gov/your_home/water_heating/index.cfm/mytopic=12780
2. DOE Fuel Cost Calculator – Excel Workbook

ix.    Installation Costs – SEJES “BF” Estimate – Not everyone knows how to properly calculate!

x.    Ongoing Service Costs – GJCPs – Not everyone knows how to properly calculate!

1. Direct-Fired
2. Annual – Oil Burners
3. Annual – Commercial Gas
4. Semi-Annual – Residential
5. Indirect-Fired
6. Coil – Clean outside
7. Anti-Freeze PH/Protection – Solar
8. Tank-less Coil – Acid Clean Inside
9. Heat Pump – Evaporator Cleaning/Filter Change

10. Water Conditions Affect All Water Heaters

11. KISS Principal – The more technologically complex; the more service costs can be expected.

1. Break   11:10 – 11:20
2. Whole-Life Costs to Consider   11:20 – 11:30

i.    “Other” Total Energy Values to Factor In

1. Mining Ore
2. Conversion to Useful Metal Ingot
3. Manufacturing Water Heater
4. Transportation to OEMs
5. Transportation to Reps
6. Transportation to Wholesalers/Retailers
7. Transportation (by installer) to End-User
8. Transportation to Service/Maintain
9. Transportation to Dispose of When Useful Life Expires

10. Do-it-Again w/ Short-lived Heaters

ii.    Replacement Frequency – Lifetime (Smart 80) vs. 5-15-Year High-Efficiency Heaters

iii.    Consider Replacement Costs and FV of $$$

1. PV of $$$ plus Interest
2. Which direction is inflation going in?

iv.    Origin of Manufacture

1. Third World ‘Slave’ Labor
2. Eliminating American Jobs
3. “Free-Trade” Concerning Environmental Degradation

10. The HVACR Installer’s Take on Your Recommendations   11:30 – 12:00

1. Is your advice to your client based on sound…

i.    Needs/Wants

ii.    System Practicality

Investment vs. Payback and Fuel Use

An engineer once told me that my (then) concept could not possibly extract 100% of the heat generated from combustion of any fuel. He was wrong, just as was Charles H. Duell – Commissioner, U.S. Patent Office, 1899, when he stated: “Everything that can be invented has been invented.”

No, there is no such thing as a perpetual motion machine, but there is such thing as a heating system apparatus that can transform any combustion process into a completely efficient one – I have it!

I am seeking an investor who wants to turn my invention into a world-wide marketable product. If you are such an individual/entity, then contact me anytime and lets start saving the planet together!

The questions you’ll want to ask yourself are, “what are the whole-life costs associated with every purchase I make, and how did my purchase simply relocate the point of ‘my’ fuel/energy consumption?” Those purchases include HVACR equipment and systems – a subject I know quite a bit about.

Consider claims that the natural gas industry is responsible for 18% of the methane that is released into the atmosphere, and that methane – 95% of the composition of Natural gas – is 72 times worse for the atmosphere than carbon dioxide. Here’s an article that offers information about the effect the natural gas industry has on the environment: http://www.americanenergycoalition.org/scienceandresearch.php.

There is a lot of information out there about what is, and isn’t, bad for the environment, but there is one solid truth – humans are not in charge of Mother Nature – she does what she wants. We’re just one colossal experiment-by-chance evolved onto the face of the earth. The truths are what they are. We are affecting our climate in very bad ways.

In my professional experience, a typical gas-fired cast aluminum boiler will only last 1/3 as long as a high-quality, oil-fired, cast iron boiler like a Buderus G215 – all things being equal, like proper design, installation and service. We are a throw-away society, and, therefore, have to keep replacing what we just bought not long ago. This is true with cell phones, computers and with boilers, furnaces, and air conditioning and refrigeration equipment.

If you have to buy 3 new gadgets instead of 1, think about the energy sources that go into the mining of the raw materials that will be used to create the basic building blocks of that gadget, say, a cast aluminum boiler. Then consider what energy sources are required to finish the production of that product, package it and deliver it to your door. Then triple the cost. Are you getting the best value for your money, and having a net positive on the environment?

The whole-life costs for every product are greater than what is depicted in your electric, gas or fuel oil bill, or even at the gas pump. Somewhere there are invoices for every transaction that involved energy costs to bring desired products to you from the origin of the product’s every ingredient (too bad we couldn’t get a copy of them when we purchase any product) – these are the total energy costs to bring a product to the point of consumption.

As daunting a challenge as it is, I think whole-life costs can be assessed for most products, you just have to use a little logic to figure them out, which is pretty easy for locally-produced products; not so much for foreign-made. (More on this subject in a future post.)

Personally, I would burn the most appropriate fuel for my region in the most efficient, and highest-quality equipment and heating system I could find. Such a system would be radiant floor with a Buderus G215 boiler with a power gas, or oil burner; Tekmar temperature modulation control; a Triangle Tube indirect-fired water heater; Grundfos Alpha circulators and relays and Apollo valves. I would use copper distribution piping, as much as possible, and, of course, I would install my own designated valve handles, circulator flanges, accessory tees, instruction holders and plaques. These are all ‘lifetime’ products – they are manufactured once, installed once, are transported once, and tend to last decades, like one upon a time when you didn’t have to pay for a warranty.

If you convert to natural gas, then be prepared for the gas utility to completely remove all of your oil equipment so you can’t economically convert back to oil. You might realize, over time, that instead of your total heating costs being reduced, they actually went up. I see this dilemma through my contracting business on a regular basis and cringe when an Energy Auditor, seeing it as a carbon footprint reduction panacea, recommends some of this newfangled technology. My advice is to think again. Talk about violating the KISS principal – that’s precisely what this new equipment does, and it costs much more to own in the long run!

Sure, you may spend less on gas than oil, but expect to pay more for gas equipment and service costs. I recently made $800 in repairs to a 4-year old cast aluminum boiler – which is not good and says something about the packaged design – the boiler and trim. Today, manufacturers often by the cheapest “trim” components available – items like dielectric unions, pressure gauges and ball valves, which leak and cause damage to other components in the system. Meanwhile, the building owner thinks everything will be in great repair for a long time to come. Cheap components + time installed = huge service/electricity/fuel bills, in a whole-life sense. What does it matter where along the distribution chain fossil fuels are burned to produce the energy necessary to move the development of that product that much further along, toward the consumer? Fossil fuels are often more efficiently burned through small burners, like in residential applications. High-efficiency is a relative term in the business of producing electricity, or gasoline, or diesel fuel, or plastic wrapping, or rubber tires, or any other petroleum-based product. Why not just buy an HVACR system once and watch it last for 30-50 years (with proper maintenance)? The energy necessary to bring a service technician and replacement parts to repair your short-lived boiler could be what tips the energy consumption scale toward your consumption having a negative impact on the planet instead of a positive one. Still, almost no building owner considers this fact, because there is no easy way to calculate the total energy used in a scenario like this.

The costs associated with maintaining high-efficiency gas-fired equipment – so manufacturers’ warranties don’t become void – are far greater than with oil equipment. There is a very long list of requirements that are specific to gas combustion technology of late, that are very often overlooked. PH of the system water is an example, and if not routinely maintained for a 6.5 – 7.0 on an alkaline/acid PH scale, the water in the system can corrode your system into dysfunctional bits. Sorry, no warranty.

Add to that the noxious chemicals that are required to flush an aluminum boiler, flushed…right into septic and sewerage systems, or in your driveway, or back yard, by careless technicians. But in their defense, there is no good way to dispose of these chemicals that is readily available to service companies.

Straight cast aluminum boilers (those without copper tube heat exchangers) often wear through just by the circulation of heating system water through them – I’ve seen this happen with a 3-year old boiler! Here is a good design high-efficiency boiler with copper waterways that eliminates water flow wear and tear: Triangle Tube Solo.

There is no substitute for high-quality, energy-efficient, oil-fired heating systems like I previously described, if you want longevity, reasonable fuel costs and the lowest service costs. These are some of the realities that you should consider before choosing any product, but especially fuel/energy consuming products, like HVACR systems. For now, you will need to do your best possible research into whole-life costs, then decide what the smaller carbon footprint might look like at the end of the useful life of the products you choose. During your investigation you will hear a lot of half-truths that simply don’t add up, so beware!

Parts I & II – 1997-1999

By John Rocheleau

Inventing is a precarious process, to say the least, but it can also be an educational experience of a lifetime. For me, the invention development process began with a problem and the thought that its solution lay with one tool design. I had had no previous experience with inventing and was blind to the realities of the journey that awaited me. Thirty-five tool, flange, and valve designs later, I had learned about casting processes, machining, heat treating, plating, and the ritual intricacies of the legal realm – more than I ever thought I wanted to know. Thirty designs failed to gain acceptance. Five succeeded.

I had been in the heating trade for 17 years, the last 10 as a less-than-satisfied contractor. I often installed hot water circulator flanges, but this extremely simple flange design was ridiculously difficult to install (the picture on the front page exemplifies a heating system that utilizes many of these flanges). One day while installing a multi-zone system that required 20 of these troublesome flanges, a novel idea sprang into my head, uncoiling no doubt from the considerable tension I was under. I recalled a recent experience watching another contractor install a flange. He inserted two screwdrivers through as many bolt holes in the flange, and, positioning the handle end of a hammer between them, rotated them clockwise. Lacking the leverage that it required for him to tighten the flange, the force he exerted caused his hand to slip and be sliced open by an adjacent electrical enclosure. We were both used to this sort of environment and its hazards, but it was the memory of his method, and his blood, that stuck in my mind. While attempting to assemble the 20 flanges to copper adapters with a pipe wrench and adjustable wrench—the traditional method—it occurred to me how easily a simple tool could be fashioned that would incorporate elements similar to his screwdriver and hammer method. Only my design would prove to be safer, more effective, and more efficient.

The next morning I looked in the yellow pages for a patent lawyer. We scheduled a consultation at which time I disclosed my idea. He suggested I seek the assistance of a pattern maker to begin the process of making a sand casting prototype. “What’s a pattern-maker?” I asked. The lawyer explained, and I remembered that my musician friend, David, whom I hadn’t seen in 10 years, was a pattern maker. Luckily, I was able to track him down.

I called David and his first words to me were, “I’m amazed you’re calling me. Just ten minutes ago I thought of you for no obvious reason.” How mysterious, but I believed it was a good omen. Soon we met and explored a couple of design options. With surprising efficiency he scratched out drawings almost as fast as I conveyed my ideas to him. In only a week, I had a finished bronze prototype for just $75. Because we were friends David was willing to accommodate my request for a rushed prototype even though he was in the midst of designing all of the door handles (250) for Bill Gates’ new house.

To make certain that I was the first to invent this new device, I paid for a prior art search of previously issued patents. The United States Patent and Trademark Office has issued over 6 million patents, so focusing the search on a category of low-tech hand tools relevant to mine seemed formidable. Luckily the search produced no similar designs, so I applied for a utility patent and the trademark, “Flange-Tite”.

Installing flanges epitomized my frustration with the trade, in general, in a way that challenged me to make a change. I needed a change, as I feared I might soon lose the ability to get out of the rut I was in, and like most naive inventors, I dreamed that riches were inevitable from my invention. I began to contemplate that inventing might be my new calling, so I justified spending an ever-increasing amount of time on the tool project and less and less on the heating business.

Excitedly, I began generating the interest of others in the trade. I soon learned that many tradesmen shared my view of the need to make flange installations easier. Some had created makeshift tools, but none were like mine. Most of the opinions of those who saw the invention were encouraging, but some were not. In retrospect, I seemed to give more weight to the positive comments and too quickly dismissed the negative ones. “How could they possibly know more about this than I?” I thought whenever I encountered a nay-sayer. As time went by I would eventually come to realize how important others’ opinions were in the development process, and the need to heed all opinions is essential.

The reaction to the innovative tool design by the president of a local supply house was very encouraging; he liked it enough to offer free booth space at tradeshows. I thought if the head of a major wholesaler approved of this design then it had to be a winner, and I took tremendous risk investing more money than I had by running up credit cards. I rationalized funding the first production run with borrowed money: It takes money to make money, I thought. And I would have enough product to fill all the orders I would receive at the tradeshows. As it turned out I didn’t sell a single tool set (3 integral components) at the first showing, but sold seven at the second one. The kit wasn’t getting the consistent reception I had hoped it would, and I needed to know why. I prepared a questionnaire to determine what customers thought of the product, and other aspects relating to their role in the trade. To justify their participation, I offered a free T-shirt in exchange for a completed questionnaire. The information I received was insightful and ample enough to bolster my creativity. In short, the tool kit needed reworking. A few weeks later, and with David’s help, the first versa-turn® ratchet system prototypes were created. I was pleased with the expediency with which this new design had come together. It was a real boon to the project that David and I worked so well together. It would come to pass that prototypes were always designed and built very quickly and efficiently.

Caught up in the velocity of the moment, I risked the last of the money available to me on another production run. Like a gambler, I justified my compulsion with the affirmation that, surely, the payoff would come soon. But I was developing a high quality product that I was certain would be irresistible. There seemed to be no time for heating contracting—it became a distraction— so I gave up the business, officially. Nothing in heating had challenged me like this new endeavor, therefore I was committed to staying the course with inventing, I willingly admit, in an unbridled fashion.

I garnered the interest of a Manufacturers’ Representatives (Rep) agency that specialized in the sales of tools and was given table space on the upcoming regional tradeshow circuit. I became so focused on demonstrating the tools, show after show, that I failed to see the Rep’s reaction to the lackluster sales. I concentrated more on suggestions for improvements, and I assumed we both knew it would take time before the product caught on. However, because of continued dismal showings I lost my first Rep and gained a bruised ego.

I remember being scared that I was out of money and had no heating work. Ironically, the mother of my college physics professor called me to service the heating system in a house she was trying to sell. Naturally, I took the work. Having completed the service call, conversation turned to the goings-on in our lives. She asked what I had been up to, and not wanting to forgo an opportunity to show her my inventions, I said, “I’ll show you!” I demonstrated the tools I had in my truck, and she accused me of being “a genius!” Her enthusiasm resonated through her words. She asked me when I was going public, and I told her “I was going private.” “How much do you need?” she asked. I said I would get back to her if she were really interested. She was. A few days later I called and told her I needed $15,000. “Alright”, she said. “Come over, I’ll have the check ready for you.”

As excited as a miner who discovers a new vein of gold, I anxiously made the trip across town to cash in on my find. But when I saw the amount of the check, $25,000, I thought she had made an error. “You’ll need more than fifteen”, she said. “I know how these things are; they always cost more than you’d expect.” There’s a name for people like Mary—Angel Investor. I could hardly believe my good fortune. In retrospect, it’s a good thing (for me) that we didn’t know how much money we would come to spend. Had we known, surely she never would have written that first check, and my inventing days would have ended then.

Mary’s great, great, great grandfather had started the Wiss Shears Company in 1842, which stayed in the family until 1988. Jacob Wiss, a Swiss watchmaker by trade, started making shears with a German Shepherd. Yes, a dog. As the dog walked along in a treadmill, like you’ve seen in hamster cages only much larger, a connecting drive belt turned a polishing stone. Jacob used this method for a year, then doubled production in his 2^nd year by adding a second dog. Perhaps he dangled a steak in front of the dogs as an incentive – probably not. My newly formed business reminded Mary of her ancestor’s early beginnings; she saw potential in my creations and thought I would ultimately succeed. For her, funding my project was a fitting tribute to Jacob.

I considered my luck. I had found an Angel without even looking. It seemed to make sense that this inventing business was my calling. Everything just fell into place at the crucial moments.

With my recent cash infusion I was able to integrate suggestions for new designs. I made radical changes to the tools and developed several for new applications. Going off on a tangent is so typical of inventors, a pattern I was unaware of then. I suppose I used the shotgun approach to inventing hoping to “hit” something.

I scurried from design table to Rep agency and tradeshows. Only now I had a set of “universal” ratchet wrenches and attachments. A pattern maker, Andrew J. Cutney, helped design these unique tools. I also began to establish important contacts with some wealthy and influential players in the industry who offered their opinions and support. Some talked of investing money, mostly through innuendo, but at the last minute reneged. Maybe they knew something I didn’t. They all seemed to think I was doing the right thing for the trade, so I continued to work diligently to come up with what seemed like saleable products. Many were profound and useful. A litany of people made money from them—pattern makers, machinists, foundries, heat-treating companies…a list of 42 different individuals and businesses. The list wouldn’t be complete, though, without including the lawyers.

By now I had two intellectual property lawyers and had gone through a number of business lawyers before finding one that showed a little mercy while tallying his billable hours. I had spent the equivalent of a year’s salary paying all their fees. Everyone was making money except my investor and me. I tried to be positive about it – at least I was getting the hang of product development, and surely something would come of it.

Interestingly enough, I knew little about the resources available to inventors. I did contact the Inventors Assistance Program at Franklin Pierce Law Center (the top intellectual property school in the country) but my phone calls were never returned. It’s an ironic coincidence that I lived only four blocks from the Law Center, the monthly meeting place of New Hampshire Inventors Association, and 3 blocks from the Academy of Applied Science. I was oblivious to their presence and that they were so close by. The Academy’s mission is to create a greater awareness for ‘invention, innovation and science’ and its founder, Dr. Robert Rines, also the cofounder of the Law Center, is married to the publisher of Inventor’s Digest magazine, a publication I had never seen. In a sense, I was inventing my invention development process as I went along. I assumed that I had to learn this business on my own, not knowing there was help out there.

The fact that I wasn’t aware of the local groups comes as no surprise to me now. Independent inventor organizations rarely advertise as a means of creating awareness for their existence—they’re simply under-funded, as I’ve come to learn. I did create a website, hoping the internet would facilitate sales of the tools, but never considered to search for inventor organizations that could offer help with the development process, online. Since then I’ve learned that the internet is a great source of information for inventors, and a basic search of the web can produce invaluable information that will make an inventors development process much easier. It makes for sad commentary that independent inventors are more likely to be exposed to advertising by scam companies than by legitimate organizations. Shady “invention marketing firms” are defrauding independent inventors to the sum of over a hundred million dollars a year, preying on their naivety and emotions, thus contributing to the 98 percentile that fail to achieve significant success. Government agencies such as the Small Business Administration, and the Small Business Development Centers, lack funding enough to deal with starry-eyed inventors. Given the available public and private resources, inventing is, basically, a series of lessons that each inventor must discover then master on his/her own.

My inventing may have been on-the-job-training for me, but having a lot of the right contacts helped me churn out new prototypes rather quickly—one took only a day from first thought to machined casting. Actually, the inventing part was the easiest, and the most fun. I suppose my investor began to look at it differently, though. She was beginning to wonder when the inventory would be sold and the cash would flow in our direction.

Just when our sales situation seemed insurmountable we were given cause for renewed hope when the tools appealed to a Rep with a major presence in the industry. They bought 110 Flange-Tite^®, FT II flange tools. Securing representation in the largest territory in the country, the Northeast, was a milestone for us. It seemed as though our investment would begin to pay off after all – too bad that belief was short lived. A few months after the initial sale to the Rep I got a call from them saying it would take more time to create the demand for our tools than they were willing to invest – end of story.

I began to see the light regarding distribution. A product may be a good one in many respects but if it fails to answer the questions surrounding the four “Ps” of marketing (product, price, place and promotion) it won’t attain a profitable position in the marketplace. The “P” we were not yet in control of was price. First, our tools were too costly to produce, and distribution costs also had to be factored in making the retail price greater than the end-user was willing to pay. Also, Reps don’t want products that take a lot of effort to establish a profitable market share, especially if sales are expected to peak only briefly, then drop off sharply and remain low—my tools fell into this category, unbeknownst to me. My inventions were too task specific and cheaper alternatives were readily available. Reps do want commodities that sell easily and have ongoing sales potential—products that “sell themselves.” They sell tools only if there is an established demand for them, as with pipe wrenches and cutters. Even then, the profit margins on tools of that nature are slim.

I was now faced with the choice to do the sales work myself or give up. So I tried a grassroots approach. I literally knocked on the doors of contractors with a salesman from the local supply house. I sold every tool the supply house had purchased from me in this way, but at a reduced price so they wouldn’t have the burdensome task of selling them and I wouldn’t have to return them to inventory. I also attempted to sell tools at supply house “counter-day” promotions, often to many of my competitors in the trade – talk about barriers to entry. These sales methods are designed to contribute, in part, to two more “Ps,” promotion and place, but alone do not guarantee success for the product.

So I gave up on the drudgery of going door-to-door and months later teamed up with Rep number three with an all new ratcheting flange driver. Primarily a manufacturer, this firm was new at promoting others’ products, they liked mine but they took a cautious approach toward investing their limited time on them. So I did all of the necessary work at the next tradeshows with them until they, too, decided the tools didn’t fit their niche. Really, the tools just weren’t selling well. As it turned out this would be my last opportunity for representation. Had I come all this way, learning so much, just to fail drastically? I had spent well over $100,000, but lack of funding wasn’t my problem. What, then, had gone wrong? I had become a very good coordinator of people who had the skills to create what I thought I needed to succeed. I had so many ideas that I just couldn’t believe none of them would end up in the marketplace. But I wasn’t finished; I had a lot more to learn.

Part II

The thought entered my mind that perhaps price, place, and promotion weren’t the only lessons to master. But I did redesign the product, too, in search of the right equation. Still, all of my attempts had failed. I had been blinded by my own dogged perseverance, causing me to fail the most crucial lesson of all. But what could that lesson be? I strained to find the answer, but it seemed time had run out. Then it was confirmed: offers for additional financial backing from my investor, representation, and free trade shows ceased, and with them my excitement and enthusiasm. I’d all but given up and others already had. What consumed me these days was how to explain to my friends, family and readers of my resume that I had lost six figures developing “pie-in-the-sky” inventions. I became seriously discouraged and as stressed as I’d ever been. I got in the habit of bringing a bath towel to bed with me so when I awoke during most nights, drenched in a cold sweat, I would have something to dry off with. Those around me sensed disaster and distanced themselves from me. Early into the invention project I ended a long-term relationship with my girlfriend who cringed at the amount of money I was spending and constantly reminded me of it. I couldn’t tolerate her incessantly nagging me. She really thought I wasn’t in my right mind. Even my friends lost patience with the never-ending saga. This inventing business was exacting a heavy toll, and I couldn’t decide which was worse, flange installing or my invention project—“the disease or the cure.”

Haunted by the memory of all the rejections during the last year and a half, I strained to find meaning at the last tradeshow as I demonstrated the last flange tool design. I was asked the same question for the nth time by the nth tradesman—“why do they make the flanges like that?” We agreed that the flange design was questionable, but I sensed that he didn’t think my tool concepts were the solution to the problem. Then I had a flash of insight, more importantly, a renewed perspective. My attention centered on the initial design options David and I had discussed at our first meeting. One design was of a flange with a hexagonal-shaped tightening surface. This was the turning point where I realized that I had veered down the wrong path by developing the flange tool of the same shape. A new flange design would offer the Reps and wholesalers a new utility that I was sure they could sell, as it would solve the installation problem for the tradesmen, and allow them to pass on the cost to their customer. My hope was rejuvenated.

I envisioned becoming successful with the first new circulator flange in as many as fifty years. Only now a shadow loomed over it, threatening it in its infancy. My investor surprised me by saying “No more, John!” She had often exclaimed, “Your inventions are all tinker toys!” To her I had also become the boy who cried wolf. I felt this time was different, just as in the tale of the boy and the wolf. Truthfully, I think she knew it, too. She was just being firm in her opposition to spend more money, merely out of principle.

Mary had considered using her 100-acre farm as collateral against a loan to my business early on. She had been ready to bet the farm—literally—but now was far from that liberal way of thinking. I felt hopeless, knowing she had already spent the money from the sale of her house where I had made the original service call roughly a year earlier. She had stayed with me for a year and 30 failed designs, I couldn’t expect anything more. I could have begged her, but I had never asked her for money – she had just always known when to contribute in this way. And what if this idea failed too? Mary was 78 then, and her best friend since college had nicknamed her “CW”, short for Crazy Woman, many years earlier. Exactly why I’m not certain, but it seems she took a risk in the past, and lost, with some sort of refrigeration business, and I didn’t want to give her friend more fodder. Nevertheless, I persisted in explaining the significance of this latest discovery to her from as many angles as seemed relevant. I realized the simplest solutions often are the best ones. And I had to convince her that this flange was my best one. Thankfully, I found several people in the industry to corroborate my belief that I really had invented a “winner” this time around. It was then that I knew I was right. Finally, she believed the flange was a good idea and invested even more money.

I met with David once again and revisited the sketch of the tool/flange that we had made years earlier. We modified the design to include an octagon shaped nut that could be easily gripped by an ordinary wrench. The only significant difference between the flange tool and the new flange was that the tool had a hexagonal nut. It was so simple, like a Post It Note. The prior art suggested that nobody had done this with a circulator flange before, so I applied for as many design and utility patents as my lawyer and I could think of. At that time I conjured up nearly 70 ideas for a range of flange designs.

I completed development on four of the designs in a month. It took just a few phone calls, and in an instant I was back on track. Once again the president of the local supply house offered his advice: ‘Call the executive vice president of marketing at a Rep firm, Emerson-Swan, Inc., in Massachusetts and ask him what he thinks about the flange.’ This firm represented a Rhode Island company, Taco, Inc., a manufacturer of “hydronic” components including circulators and flanges. Taco was the market leader in the region and their products enjoyed high brand loyalty. What I soon learned would delight and amaze me.

I called the VP, and we met two days later in the waiting room of a Mercedes dealership while his car was being serviced. He seemed very impressed with the flanges I showed him, though I had the feeling there was something he wasn’t telling me—he seemed too interested. These were such simple low-tech sand castings. I sort of accepted his energy, rationalizing that it was typical to see a person’s enthusiasm when they saw my inventions for the first time. But I decided to do a little digging and I am glad I did. I learned that Taco was losing money on their flanges, and were factoring that loss into the sell-price of their circulators. The negative contribution to profit stemmed from increased competition, resulting in the loss of 30% of their market share for flanges. This explained the VP’s immediate enthusiasm for a new flange design.

A week had passed, and he stayed true to his word that he would arrange a meeting with Taco. I met with Taco’s VP of marketing and a handful of managers at their plant. As expected, their interest level was high, and negotiations began. I was now in for an education in the art of negotiating. The pursuit of success had created immense strife in my personal life, but the pursuit of “a deal” dwarfed my earlier trials.

Negotiations weren’t going the way I had naively hoped, so I decided to shop the flange around, realizing that if Taco was interested in the flanges then their competitors might be, too. They were. I discovered that they all had problems with their flanges. This seemed incredulous. It wasn’t long before I was on a plane to California to meet with executives from the largest pump manufacturer in the world, Grundfos—all expenses paid. But Taco sold the greatest number of this style of threaded circulator flange in the world, over a million a year. Knowing this helped me determine the total market size, and I seriously considered supplying the market with flanges, myself. I made contacts with an array of other manufacturers, Reps and potential investors. I lined up production agreements in case negotiations with the two primary companies fell through. Nonetheless, I pursued them vigorously.

The last thing Taco needed was yet another company competing against them. Therefore, they had the most to lose without my design, and the most to gain with it. They were aware that if they could regain their lost market share with a patent pending flange, a “better mousetrap”, then a deal with me made a lot of sense. The fact that they produced so many flanges ensured the possibility of significant royalties for my investor and me, and I was determined to pay her back. So six months later I signed a license agreement with Taco on two flange designs, but not before asking for help one last time from the supply house president, this time with negotiations; I needed a mediator. Taco and I had reached an impasse in negotiations, but once the president agreed to mediate it took just 3 weeks to settle the deal, and the first check, $35,000, was signed to my company.

Since closing the deal, Taco has replaced their old standard with my designs. The “freedom Flanges,” as they’ve named them, are on the market, and the positive response has been nothing short of a consensus. It appears that a new standard has been created. The most often asked question was ‘why didn’t they do “this” years ago?’ I wish I could collect royalties on my answer to that question. Whenever I hear that question I am reminded of an inspirational statement on a poster in my insurance agent’s office: “What we can easily see is only a small percentage of what is possible. Imagination is having the vision to see what is just below the surface; to picture that which is essential, but invisible to the eye.” This flange solution was a glaring example of a concept so simple that no one before me considered looking for it. The torturous route that I had taken may have been less grueling and more direct if I had given equal attention to the flange option right from the beginning. Hindsight is so clear. Is it not?

Eight months following completion of the first deal, Taco and I signed a second agreement on three valve inventions. Recently we began discussions on my latest invention ideas.

Seeking to create tools based on a flange design reminds me of the 3M Company’s search for a new adhesive. When their engineer pasted a sticky substance on squares of paper, to keep his place in his church hymnal, he had created what would become the Post-It Note; as simple an idea as my flange. Another notable inventor, Norm Larson, created 39 chemical formulas to inhibit rust before his 40th proved successful: “Water displacement, 40th attempt” in other words, WD-40®. I became successful with my 30th attempt, though no comparison can be made to the 100 million dollar a year success that WD-40® has become. It seems solutions to certain problems are often discovered before they are recognized as solutions, and it can require carrying an idea through a process of elimination before the successful discovery is made. My plan wasn’t to start a one-product company—one-product companies are rarely successful. Although, failing with the tools and succeeding with the flange made it apparent that the simplest designs can often be the most successful. Moreover, I knew little about the market for flanges in the beginning of my journey and didn’t think I could compete with Taco’s established North American distribution, even with a new flange design. Thankfully, I had come full circle with my journey and was a lot wiser for having taken the trip. With attainment of inventing wisdom my hair has begun to gray, but I no longer need that bath towel.

The invention development process doesn’t have to be as difficult as it was for me. I should have done a lot more market research before spending so much money on patent applications, costly patterns and prototypes, production runs, and, generally, spinning my wheels on whimsical ideas. In a perfect world a $10,000 market analysis in the beginning may have helped me choose the path of profit much sooner. I would have discovered there was far greater market potential for flanges than for flange tools. I estimate I might have saved $145,000 if I had bypassed the tool approach and gone directly with the flanges and valves, my last five inventions.

Looking back at my experiences from my present perspective as president emeritus (2000) of New Hampshire Inventors Association, I’ve concluded that many other inventors are going through the same kind of educational process; I see mostly failure and small successes, as most inventors will have to learn by doing and aren’t prepared for what it takes to succeed. Inventors need to have an awareness of the invention development process and its pitfalls. Also, they will need to possess passion and determination and, more importantly, a marketable idea. Moreover, I know the following declaration by Thomas Edison echoes in the minds of other inventors, as it does in mine: “Had I known in advance what I was in for I would not have started!” But I did start, and I finished successfully. I pushed forth with drive and creativity I didn’t know I was capable of and beat the odds. 98% of inventors fail, many of them making the same predictable mistakes that I made.

It should be noted that my invention “boot camp,” and my ultimate success, would not have been possible without the ongoing faith of my investor. In exchange for her risk-taking Mary will receive a ten percent return on her total investment, plus 40% of royalties from the second license agreement. Most inventors run out of money before they succeed; I would have too if not for Mary. She was not only my Angel, but my savior during my darkest hours of seemingly imminent failure. I’m very thankful that she will be repaid.

An intangible benefit to me is that I’ve learned more about my capabilities and limitations through this process than through any other personal challenge. In overcoming this challenge I have found the new career path I hoped to discover. I am presently in school completing a degree in business that I started in the 80s and will continue on in engineering—I’m reinvesting my royalties. Ironically, and with any luck, I’ve invented products for the trade that I may never need to return to and use in the hands-on trade.

Part III

My book will be released in 2012 and there will be a link on this site to purchase this non-fiction writing by a tradesman who claws his way up from oil burner technician to a true innovator in an industry of copy cats, thieves, colluders and exporters of American jobs to China and other Third World countries.

The distribution of products for the plumbing and HVACR trade has traditionally followed a predetermined path: A manufacturer makes, or has made, its product, then sells or consigns it to a Manufacturer’s Representatives company; the “Rep” then sells or consigns the product to Wholesalers; the Wholesalers then sell the product to Tradesmen; finally, the Tradesman sells the product to building-owners who “consume” the product all at once, or through many years of use.

In example: Taco, Inc. has their “Freedom Flanges” – cast iron and bronze sweat circulator flanges and brass “isolation flanges” (my inventions) manufactured by another company and/or foundry, machine shop, plating company, “Teflon” producer and others, then “adds value” by painting, etc. themselves – they now have a finished product ready for packaging and shipping. This product is typically purchased by their Representatives across their market areas – Reps, such as Emerson-Swan have a number of individual Reps, or salesmen who canvass their assigned territory, calling on Purchasing Agents at Wholesaler Companies like F.W. Webb. The Wholesaler will then sell the product they purchase from Emerson-Swan to Tradesmen through “Counter Day” demonstrations, training seminars, inside sales and outside sales. The Wholesaler will also display products on counter mats and wall-hung banners featuring products like Webstone Valves and Taco circulators – sometimes combined  in a joint advertising/promotion. Tradesmen see the advertised products and/or is approached by the Rep and/or Wholesaler salesman with a special offer to purchase the new/existing product. If the Tradesman is convinced to buy the product he typically decides to purchase it based on his knowledge of the product and of competing products relative to his/his customers’ needs. Then the Tradesmen sells the product to his customers.

The traditional supply chain really only works for established manufacturers. The supply chain is a very loyal and political environment, making it nearly impossible for a small, non-established company to enter the market, even if the new market-player offers better products than those they endeavor to compete against. Nobody in the supply chain wants to see a new product, unless there is financial benefit to all of the players in the distribution stream. Otherwise, the existing players will either cannibalize their own products, or will have to expend enormous sales & marketing energy defending their market share.

Taco licensed my inventions from me to compete with the increasing market share gained by AmKor (Worcester, MA), who captured nearly a 1/3 of the circulator flange market in the Northeast. With my better “mousetraps” – flanges and valves, Taco was able to re-capture most of its lost market share.

The major problem with an exclusive members only market, and the traditional distribution channels, is products often need to be designed and made extremely cheaply, principally in China, if they are going to be marked up by all of the many participants in the distribution chain, and still be affordable in the judgement of Tradesmen. This is why there are so many low-quality products on the market in the HVACR and Plumbing Industry. If all Pluming and HVACR products were made in the USA, in a high-quality fashion, and were distributed through the existing channels, then the mark-ups along the way would, ultimately, render the product non-competitive, price-wise…that is, as long as China devalues its currency, pollutes its environment (and everyone else’s in the world), pays its workers starvation wages and abuses them through extreme labor conditions.

Stay tuned for more on this innovative and exciting opportunity for Plumbing and HVACR Tradesmen. In the meantime, contact us if you are interested in getting on-board with this ground-breaking opportunity.

“Time and Materials” and “Flat Rate” pricing are no longer the only options for tradesmen!

In this article (http://www.thehvacguru.com/flat-rate-hvac-plumbing-companies/) I  talk about an Excel Workbook that I created to accurately estimate jobs and call Sales Engineer Job Estimating System (SEJES). Yes, SEJES is a system that can help tradesmen more accurately account for job costs and become more profitable, and I’ve given away hundreds of copies of this system to tradesmen. (If you are a tradesman and want a copy, then register on this site as a new user and I will send it to you, for free.)

In this article (http://www.thehvacguru.com/flat-rate/) I complain about Flat Rate and (more subtly) Time & Materials.

When I immerse myself in a problem I usually come up with solutions – I’ve done this my entire life and have changed aspects of the industry with my designs as a result. This time I’ve taken lessons from my SEJES system and applied it to the service sector of the trades and have come up with what just may be the next biggest thing in the building trades.

But you are going to have to stay tuned for the solution. Expected release date is February 2012. You’re not going to want to miss this new product!

The posts and pages on this site are written entirely by me, John Rocheleau. What qualifies me to write factually about the HVAC industry? For starters, I began my varied career in the trade in 1980, working for a company called Tenney Fuels, in Concord, NH. I entered the trade when the winds of change began to shift.

Tenney Fuels was founded by the Macurda family in the 1940s and changed hands when it was sold to A.R. Wright Co, in 1982 – this was when I 1st noticed the leading edge of the new paradigm in business, when fuel companies were concentrating to become “petroleum marketers”. I was just 20 years old then, not very business-wise and had a lot to learn.

Long gone are the days of the business-with-a-handshake mentality. Companies have steadily become bigger and customers became account numbers, not so much human beings. While there still exist family-owned fuel businesses, many things have changed throughout the HVAC and Refrigeration trade.

I regularly see that yet another company is selling service contracts/preventative maintenance agreements – contracts that ensure the servicing company squeezes the maximum profit out of their customer. Some companies make 50% or more of their revenue from service contracts. More products are made cheaply and of poor quality in China, designed to fail and prop up the consumerism model. The days of furnaces lasting a hundred years or more have passed and “state-of-the-art” boilers only last 10 years. American boilers are often designed to burn the maximum amount of fuel. Manufacturers feign alliance and allegiance to tradesmen, but their intent is all about maximizing sales and profits.

Yes, there are new technologies that are more energy efficient, electricity and fuel-wise. Yes, there are fewer pollutants coming out of the smoke pipes of boilers and furnaces, and less harmful refrigerants being released into the atmosphere. But there are also twice as many people in the world than there was in 1980, so there are far more pollutants entering the environment than there were in earlier times, and the new equipment’s cradle-to-grave costs have actually increased, therefore, requiring an overall greater amount of fuel and energy to be consumed, and greater service and installation costs for HVACR equipment owners.

One of the most alarming things that I have seen in 32 years in the trade is that the average age of tradesmen is rapidly increasing. When I attend trade events, I am usually among the lower end of the age spectrum. It’s simple: virtually no young people are entering the trades, nor would I recommend that they do, as the building construction trades more often than not do not pay enough to tradesmen that will ever allow them the opportunity to even own their own home. Plus, kids today are more distracted by social media and the latest hand-held electronic device. This video pretty much sums up what kids today are exposed to: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dGCJ46vyR9o

Among the most successful companies in HVACR and plumbing are companies that charge “flat-rate” for their services, often earning an equivalent rate of between $125 and $400 per hour. Why? Because most tradesmen do not have a college degree and many have not even completed high school or received a GED. This means that they are typically blinded to the realities of accounting for all their costs-of-doing-business, never mind being profitable at a level that will afford them the good life. Flat Rate is easy and “dumbs down” tradesmen and consumers alike. Just open up the Flat Rate book and pick the price for the repair being provided, plus, these companies with these systems take credit cards – the old American way, just charge it!

Today, if you are a high-quality contractor, doing awesome work for your customers, then you are an outlier who is destined for financial failure. There are as few customers seeking high-quality work as there are tradesmen who offer it, because quality costs more up-front (but less in the long run) and American consumers more than average seek immediate gratification…and low bids. This sounds contradictory, but it’s true – building-owners are more interested in what their landscaping and kitchen counter tops look like than they are about the most important mechanical systems in their building. Consumers of HVACR products and services typically are searching for the lowest bid; not the highest, and along with low prices come…well, “you get what you pay for!” Meanwhile, their ‘affordable’ systems are excessively polluting the environment and costing them a fortune in electricity and fuel consumption, year after expensive year, never mind the increased service costs – for the entire life of their systems.

My approach to the trade is straightforward: change it!

I have over a hundred innovative designs of devices for HVAC and the building trades, in general. I conduct seminars that help tradesmen to think about the damage they are doing to the trades, by not being smart about how they price their jobs, or account for their costs. 10% of tradesmen know how to use a computer on some level. Most tradesmen are extremely overworked, struggling to make a decent living the old fashioned way, hard work. Therefore, most tradesmen don’t even have the time for personal development. These guys simply do not have the time to get educated so they can be more productive and more profitable. Most independent tradesmen do not have health insurance, a retirement plan, paid vacations and holidays, a personal vehicle, a house of their own, tuition for their children, a business plan and a clue how to turn this around. It’s no wonder young people aren’t attracted to the trades! What they’ve seen from their tradesman father (few women ever enter the trades) is very distressing, indeed.

This site, and me as its sole contributing writer, is dedicated to changing the status quo of the construction trades. Without change, the trades will become void of talent and newcomers, and then the consumer will surely pay the price for anything associated with building construction. As tradesmen die off prices will skyrocket…in the next 2 decades. It’s basic supply and demand – as the supply dwindles, the price will rise, all the while, demand is steadily increasing. And there are still tradesmen who charge a paltry $50/hour.

If I had good news about the trade, I would speak about it, but there is not much to tell. Manufacturers, their Reps and wholesalers are making all the money, at the expense of the ignorance of consumers and tradesmen alike. Meanwhile, China is reaping the reward, as are Thailand, Vietnam, India, South Korea and the rest of the Third World that are now making the products that used to be made here in the USA. You can thank Wal-Mart and The Home Depot, GATT, NAFTA and self-serving politicians. The “Global Marketplace” has been extremely destructive to the building trades, as more and more materials and supplies are being made in sub-quality fashion, by human beings that are being exploited in the new economic slavery, and in a way that usurps the profit opportunities once afforded to tradesmen. These days, manufacturers are busy convincing tradesmen that products like PEX and press-type copper pipe and fittings systems “save valuable time”, and tradesmen believe this is good for them. Tradesmen make their money primarily from selling their labor – take that away from them and there’s little to be made on the mark-up of materials alone.  Tradesmen and building owners are not even aware of what is steadily eroding the good that once was in the construction trades and those in the distribution channels are taking our ignorance all the way to the bank!

The only good in the trade is that which I create myself, despite the sad reality that innumerable American companies have stolen my inventions and have shipped them overseas to be made as nothing more than ballast that should be thrown overboard from the ship that hauls them to our shores. I do not buy these sub-quality products, even though I invented the overall designs, with the intent of improving the trade. I set out to help the trade and these thieves I speak of are hell-bent on destroying it, with the help of our legal system that encourages their extremely destructive and exploitative behavior.

Yes, I am an optimist, though you may think otherwise from this article. I get up everyday and work hard, building the best HVACR systems that I can possibly build with the budgets my customers set for me. I re-invent my earlier inventions so I can strive for a secondary income, because there is no way to make enough money as an HVAC contractor with one assistant. It costs me over $1000/month for insurance for one person that can’t go out on his own to do a fraction of what I have learned in 32 years. There is no incentive to working in the HVACR trade with the goal of developing a larger ethical and quality-producing company, and there is not enough stock to pick up-and-comers from – they do not exist. Trade schools graduate a handful of HVAC newbies each year and nobody seems to be doing anything about it…except for me, because I am an optimist, though a realist.

Realism will change the world, not doing-what-we’ve-always-done mentality. “If you do what you always did, you’ll get what you always got” is the mantra that drives me in a forward direction, constantly re-inventing products and myself and my approach to business and the trade. I’m a problem-solver and an innovative and creative one at that. To me, no problem is too big to tackle. I am an optimist, otherwise, I would not accept that there are problems and, therefore, opportunity to create profitable solutions, for me, my customers and tradesmen.

Thanks for reading through to this article’s end, something many people won’t have the time or interest in doing. I have written 48,000 words or more on this blog, then there are all of the pages too. Some of my writing is well-thought-out and other posts may be construed as frustrated diatribes. I’m just bold and not afraid to challenge the established order with my voice. Once upon a time countless voices were never heard, but with the help of the Internet, anyone who chooses to use their voice can do so with a blog and a website. I’d love for you to use your voice and post a comment.

I encourage all perspectives on this blog, just contribute to “The HVAC Guru” – the collection of HVAC stories on the Internet that are real and for the benefit of all who seek to learn from them. Maybe, with your help, we can help solve the problems in the trade that we all face. Tradesmen, building-owners, manufacturers…you are all welcome here at the “Inside HVACR” Blog!

John Rocheleau

Here’s the old system:

[Show as slideshow]

I know the old Sunbeam and ducts look like they are, well, old. But I assure you, this system was a solid as it was the day it was installed in the late 1800s. A little duct cleaning and some paint and this could have looked new again, and worked like a charm.

Here’s the new system:

[Show as slideshow]

While I think the Thermo-Pride furnace that I installed is the best oil-fired furnace on the market today, the same can’t be said for the new duct and fittings, which repeatedly broke during installation. That’s right, the new duct and fittings were such poor quality I was embarrassed to install them. Were they made in China? I don’t know because there was no name on the product, only a bar code. Not only that, when I returned the unused and broken elbows to the supply house (Air Purchases, Inc – API – Manchester, NH) I was met with the worst customer service I’ve ever experienced in the trade. After having an account with this company since 1988, I closed it when I got no better treatment from the owner of the company when I complained about the awful treatment the day (6 months later) he called me.

But this post is not about one company, nor one product. No, this post is about what is happening in the HVACR industry as a whole. Since I started in the trade (1980) there has been a major paradigm shift with manufacturing of HVACR equipment and materials. This shift can be analogized by the old Sunbeam furnace/soldered tin ducts, that lasted well over a hundred years, with that of new equipment and materials that are made to fail so “the consumer” will have to buy more products – that also don’t last – and the vicious cycle perpetuates.

This new era of excessive consumerism is designed to do one thing: make a few people very rich, at the expense of the often very ignorant consumer and/or tradesman.

I know what some of you are saying, “but that’s what keeps the economy going!” Yes, following WWII our leaders, both government and corporate, decided that continuance of the white hot economy that the war created was something that needed to be continued, so consumerism was created to do just that. My friends, consumerism has taken an ugly turn for the worse.

It’s not bad enough that we are destroying our natural world through excessive human population, therefore, consumption, but now manufacturers are going to Third World countries with the absolute worst environmental and human rights records for cheap (often poisonous) products that don’t last, at the expense of American manufacturing workers, tradesmen and consumers.

Here is a short list of the worst products on the market for HVACR.

1. Imported Valves and Fittings
2. Imported Grilles, Registers and Diffusers
3. Imported Sheet Metal – Pipe & Fittings
4. Imported “High-Efficient” Cast Aluminum and Stainless Steel Boilers and Furnaces
5. Imported Electronic Controls
6. PEX Tubing
7. Press-Type Copper Fittings and Valves
8. Pre-made Copper and Steel Manifolds
9. Anything that is advertised as “Save Time and Money”
10. Many More Than Time Permits Mentioning

Here’s a product that oughta turn heads, like the day it did when it exploded and almost took off a worker’s head, in Exeter, NH. This valve is made in China and is akin to the majority of valves on the market and bought and installed continually by tradesmen who think they are either getting, or giving a deal, presumably, to their customers. This valve is a private label for the largest supply house chain in the Northeast, F.W. Webb, a company that seems more interested in how many skew numbers move through the cash register each business day, than the quality of the products they supply to tradesmen to install, and the proof of this is the low quality private label products they sell under the names PVF Limited and Pure Pro:

[Show as slideshow]

With each passing year I see more cheap Third World products on the shelves of supply  house like Webb and API. It doesn’t matter that I complain that their fittings are high in lead or Zinc, or they fail almost immediately at times. Nope, my complaints and concerns fall on deaf ears, as the boys at the top of these companies are well aware of what I call the Wal-Mart Syndrome – a race-to-the-bottom-of-price. But it’s not the lowest price these financial wizards are so concerned with; it’s obviously profits,no matter the quality. This is the common business MO throughout our suffering capitalist system. As a tradesman of 30-plus years, the thing that distresses me the most is the crap wholesalers peddle to me with few, if any, alternatives. How am I to produce great work with crappy products? (I invent and develop my own products, actually. And they’re all made in America by hard-working, quality-minded craftsmen.)

These guys all know that everybody expects a deal. What they don’t know –  and how would they, they’re not craftsman – is that low price does not necessarily equal value. Low price, in my book, means somebody (or the environment) is paying a hefty price.

So who’s getting the s**t end of the stick?

When tradesmen buy the cheapest parts they can find they are ripping off the consumer or themselves. How? When tradesmen buy a part and mark up the sale of the part to his customer, this is expected and without a mark-up, no business will stay in business for long. This is ordinarily honest business exchange of goods and services – all costs should be considered for mark-up.

Say a tradesman buys a part for $100 and multiplies it by 2 and sells the part for $200. Now what if he gets “a deal” on a cheap import and pays $50 for it. He can either sell it for the same $200 price as the quality made part (gouging the customer), or he can apply the same multiplier (2) and sell it for $100 (he takes profit opportunity from himself – he only made $50). Who got the worst deal with the sale of the cheap Chinese part in this example, the tradesman or the end-user? The tradesman lost out on a much greater mark-up, for a quality part, which keeps him in the game, and his customer was sold a crappy part that won’t last and he’ll soon be in the market again for the same part. Both lose equally, in a strict economic sense.

Then who makes out in this cheap-imports ponzi scheme? The supplier, because his margins are far greater on cheap imports than on high quality, and relatively expensive, domestically made products. This is what The Home Depot, Wal-Mart, Lowes and all the other so-called big box stores have figured out. They also know that the best place to get cheap products is in the developing Third World, as no smart American manufacturer can possibly compete with workers who earn $15 a month and live in thatched roof huts, or chicken coop style low class worker dormitories. High quality parts don’t move as well when a cheap alternative is on the shelf next to it.

Another way tradesmen shoot themselves in the foot is with products that are purported to “save them installation time”.  Take PEX tubing for example: installation of PEX is usually very quick, quicker than copper piping, but the cost is often virtually the same, even more money per foot. But the time to install it is much less. The key word is “less”. Less time means less money the tradesman makes. Afterall, aren’t we in the business of selling our labor, too?

So when tradesmen give up the time it takes to pipe a system in copper by using products such as PEX tubing, pre-made copper or steel manifolds, press-type copper systems, etc., so they can “save time”, they are giving away their profit-making opportunity to the manufacturer of the so-called time-saving products. Meanwhile, they are still selling the job to the customer for about the same amount of money, given PEX and related fittings are generally more expensive than copper. Throw in the cheap valves and other fittings with stickers on them that say Thailand, or Malaysia, or China, and what tradesmen are doing is installing a system that not only looks like crap, is devoid of true craftsmanship and won’t last very long. They are giving their customer low value. But manufacturers love them for it!

The other big scam on the buying public and tradesmen is high-efficiency boilers, furnaces and water heaters. In the next post I will reveal why this is the greatest scam ever pulled on building owners by the industry, and why they are not actually reducing anyone’s carbon footprint like they are purported to do. What’s worse, from a tradesman’s perspective is the messenger is often the one who is shot, for an offense he didn’t commit.

Stay tuned.

Since the paradigm shift called the Internet, I spend a lot of time enumerating the ways of promoting my HVACR business – those that work and those on their way out. Once upon an easier time, all you really had to do was buy yellow page advertising and sales seemed to just happen. Today, that advertising method may not even pay for itself. Whether one tweets their way to sales, broadcasts it across their vehicles, or is a Flat Rate-type company with a full-page yellow page ad, one must accurately define what he/she/the HVAC company really has to offer, and who those are that are most likely to end up on your list of best customers.

I’m reminded of the incessant chatter that I keep hearing about if you’re not on board with social media marketing then you’re business will go the way of the dinosaur. And I keep answering back, “don’t you first need to teach one (the majority of HVACR guys) to type?” I can’t see being very productive at establishing fruitful business relationships on social media without the ability to type cohesive messages to prospects. Plus, I can assure the social media advocates that most HVACR tradesmen/business owners are busy out doing what they do to make a living. HVACR. Who’s got time to invest in a Facebook account and being Internet socially active, in a business sense?

More important than the need to type, is the need for HVACR contractors to target the right kind of customer for his/her business, myself included. My business model is very different than that of a typical Flat Rate business owner’s model. I want to go out and design/build custom, one-of-a-kind systems, and closely analyze defective systems and create reports for plaintiffs and lawyers in civil legal matters. Lots of Flat Rate companies will take any customer with an HVAC problem and a credit card. Then there are the in-betweens.

I just came off a project that took 7 months for me to design, build and complete the final punch list. The total cost was about $170,000 (the job costing hasn’t yet been finalized), and I made a reasonable profit for a great opportunity to build a set of signature HVAC systems. And, my customer will say that he got exceptional value for his money (testimonial coming soon).

But how did I find the opportunity to create cutting edge systems for an exceptional customer only a few miles from my headquarters, and a summer spent on the seaside making good money? It wasn’t on Linkedin. I met this customer at my local breakfast haunt, at the counter, 2 seats away. He had a baseball cap on with a local building contractor’s name embroidered on the side. I asked if he was an employee or a customer. He was a former customer, as I was a former sub for the same company. In an ironic coincidence, the project manager at the company had recommended me to this man when they were working on his house 2 years earlier, but I didn’t realize this then.

I told him I built HVAC systems to the tune of several hundred thousand dollars for the construction company and he fired back, “I have an HVAC project that I need to have done. Are you interested in giving me a bid?” Immediately, I envisioned the colossal waste of my time if my bid was not accepted. As anyone in the business of HVACR contracting knows, there is a lot of preparation that goes into preparing bids, in the hope of actually getting the project. Instead of giving him a direct answer, I had to figure this guy out. I asked him where he lived, and when he told me his address, I became more interested. He then went on to say that he had gotten one bid for systems installations costing $58,000, and another with a price tag of $129,000. “What do I do with that?” he said, frustrated.

I agreed to “take a look at his project” – remodel of a 1900s New England seaside colonial. When I got there I was a bit underwhelmed, until I walked through the front door. What I couldn’t see from the outside front, was obviously impressive once inside – a huge modern addition on the back. The house was 6,000 square feet and had nearly 200 windows. The thought of collecting all of the requisite information for a heat gain/heat loss report was daunting. Plus, the addition on this house was not an easy box to draw on a scratch pad, on site. The thought of doing all the necessary leg work to put together a professional estimate and proposal, then not getting the work seemed even more daunting. This is what happened to the 2 prior bidders. My hesitation was obvious.

“So, are you going to give me a bid?”, he asked again. “Sure.” I said, with a caveat. “Ill give you a bid, but it’s going to cost you $3,600.” “What?” he countered. “I’m going to give you the work. I can tell you know what you are doing!”

While I was flattered, I knew that I don’t necessarily want every job that comes my way. I want profitable outcomes from dealing with honest people that I like, and when I can design and build a system that becomes a literal work of art, from the best components available, including my own product designs/inventions. I told him I didn’t want every job and cited my refusal of a $50,000 job in recent weeks. He agreed to pay my design fee. I guaranteed system designs, bills-of-materials and labor, as well as the opportunity to shop the designs out for apples-to-apples bids, and that if he hired me to create the systems I would give him his money back from the final payment.

I was hired to produce technologically advanced and efficient systems and that’s what I did. Now I have a great portfolio project to use to advance my own cause. I’ll tell you this, 7 months on a project with one assistant, working for a hassle-free customer who is willing to pay me my price (he never even got another bid), sure made me more aware of what I need to focus my sales efforts on. Of course, not every project is this luxurious. These kinds of jobs are the exception, not the rule.

However, my next projects will involve work in several historic mansions, including The Fells, in Sunapee, NH. I think about the work that comes my way, and of how the accounts I’ve lost over the years are so not my type anyway. If I was a sales engineer, as in past positions, for another company I would be expected to keep all customers, regardless of how terrible they are to work for. I pretty much pick and choose the type of customers that I want to keep – the kind who want uncompromising quality, don’t think they are the only ones who deserve to make reasonable money, and who are reasonable people, in general. I especially seek out interesting projects, because that’s what motivates me to go to work in HVACR. I paid my dues as a service technician and installer for other companies, for years. I can now do what I want.

With that said, I know what I want, and I know where to get it. I also know what my best customer wants and I know I can give it to that customer type, consistently, every time. So tell me, how hard can it really be to be an effective salesman? It wouldn’t matter if I worked for someone else, as long as I knew what I was selling would bring me fulfillment and a decent paycheck, I could still be an effective salesman.

The dilemma is not what advertising medium produces the greatest sales results, but is what we are selling had better be something we’re not only talented, skilled and experienced in, but is personally and professionally satisfying. That includes targeting the right kind of customer, who may not be the next viewer of a YouTube video I may have posted, but someone from a favorite corner breakfast restaurant.

“HVAC SOS” is a forum where building-owners can get free answers and advice from professional technicians, installers, consultants and engineers.

While there are many HVAC answer sites on the Web, this site and the HVAC SOS forum is absolutely free to building-owners to post questions, comments and concerns and receive free professional advice and answers to whatever your problem(s) may be.

You read that correctly: Free HVACR answers on the HVAC SOS forum!

1st, you must register as a user on this site.