As distributors increasingly rely on accurate, trusted data to plan deliveries, manage risk and reduce unnecessary cost, the focus is shifting from what telemetry can do to how it is designed to perform in the real world, over the long term.
In a sector where a missed delivery has substantial financial implications, the reliability of data matters as much as the fuel itself.
In this interview, Fuel Oil News speaks with Dr Michael Kolb, Chief Technology Officer at FoxInsights, to explore the thinking behind the company’s latest generation of tank monitoring devices.
From eliminating installation errors and extending service life, to re-examining the value of on-site visibility and future-proofing systems against emerging regulation, Kolb explains how engineering decisions made today can fundamentally change how telemetry supports distributors tomorrow.
Designing for the real world
FoxInsights’ starting point, Michael explains, was not features but failure – identifying where telemetry breaks down in real-world conditions and designing those weaknesses out.
“We refused to compromise on a fit-and-forget philosophy.”
What were the non-negotiables?
Reliability in the harshest environments was our absolute baseline. We refused to compromise on a fit-and-forget philosophy.
That meant achieving a battery life of up to 15 years and a housing that surpasses IP68 standards using automotive-grade materials.
Another non-negotiable was removing the black box nature of telemetry.
We insisted on the integrated E-Ink display so that anyone, from a driver to a homeowner, could trust the device without needing an app.
Telemetry devices often look simple, but where did the real complexity sit?
The real complexity is energy orchestration. Adding a high-contrast display and multi-standard connectivity while increasing battery life by 150% compared to previous generations required a ground-up redesign of our power management.
The FoxRadar’s radar technology was also refined to reduce the dead zone to just 7cm, while still ignoring internal obstructions such as cross-braces – a significant engineering achievement.
How much of the final design was driven by field feedback versus engineering ambition?
It was a symbiotic process. Field feedback told us that installation errors and blind deployments – where you don’t know if a device is working until you leave the site – were the biggest pain points.
Our ambition was to solve this not with more software, but with hardware. That’s why we integrated the tilt sensor and the display – not just to build a better sensor, but a better installation experience.
Why does visibility at the tank still matter?
If reliability is the foundation, visibility becomes the differentiator – particularly for those working on site.
Digital portals are great for planners, but they are invisible to the person standing at the tank.
By adding a world-first E-Ink display to a battery-powered device, we provide a reliable on-site reference.
An installer knows instantly if the device is level and connected. A driver can verify the volume before and after a fill. And a customer gets peace of mind at a glance.
It humanises the data.
What kinds of errors does on-site visibility eliminate that remote data alone can’t?
“It eliminates the “I think it’s working” factor.”
Without a display, an installer might leave a site thinking the device is active, only to discover later it never joined the network.
The display provides a live connection test and a battery health check on site.
It also prevents measuring the wrong tank in multi-tank setups, as the level is immediately visible.
Was there internal debate about whether adding a display was “over-engineering” – and what ultimately convinced you it was the right call?
There is always a debate when adding components that may impact cost or battery life. But, the cost of a single failed installation – requiring a return visit – far outweighs the cost of the display.
E-Ink technology, as used in e-readers, was the key. It only consumes power when the screen refreshes, allowing us to add operational value without compromising battery life.
Why is eliminating failure modes before they happen so important?
Installation, rather than hardware capability, has long been a weak point in telemetry accuracy.
It is arguably the biggest cause of bad data.
Even a small tilt can cause the signal to reflect off tank walls or internal structures rather than the fuel surface.
Historically, these errors were often only discovered weeks later when data failed to match the customer’s actual usage – eroding trust and triggering emergency deliveries.
What does the tilt sensor change in practice – in terms of avoided call-backs, trust in data, and total cost of ownership?
The tilt sensor acts as a digital spirit level.
“We are finally solving the “Garbage In, Garbage Out” problem at source.”
If installation falls outside correct tolerances, the display warns the installer immediately.
This right-first-time approach reduces call-backs, and for the distributor, it ensures high-fidelity data from day one – essential for true logistical automation.
Do you see this as shifting responsibility away from installers, or simply removing unnecessary risk from the system?
It’s about empowering the installer.
We’re not checking their work – we’re giving them certainty.
By removing the risk of human error in mounting, installers can work faster with greater confidence, reducing deployment costs for distributors.
Battery life. Maintenance. Lifetime cost
Eliminating failure isn’t just about installation – it’s about longevity.
Fifteen-year battery life is a bold claim. What engineering decisions made that possible – and with what trade-offs?
It’s the result of 150% more usable energy and extreme hardware efficiency.
We moved to a system architecture that remains in a deep sleep for 99.9% of its lifecycle.
The trade-off was a much longer, more expensive development phase to optimise every micro-amp of current – to us this was essential.
In 2026, no distributor wants to be planning a battery-replacement programme for 2030.
How should distributors adapt maintenance planning with devices designed to be “fit and forget” for a decade or more?
Distributors should shift from a maintenance mindset to a deployment mindset.
With a 10-to-15-year lifespan, the hardware becomes a long-term asset rather than a consumable – outlasting many of the tanks it is sitting on.
This fundamentally changes total cost of ownership and improves ROI through long-term amortisation.
Is long battery life about sustainability, cost, or operational resilience – or all three?
It’s the intersection of all sustainability, cost and resilience.
Fewer battery replacements mean less waste, lower labour costs, and fewer data gaps.
In the UK, where sites can be remote, operational resilience is often the most critical of the three.
Architecture. Security. Future regulation
Looking ahead, the focus shifts from device performance to system resilience.
You’ve designed the platform to comply with the upcoming EU Cyber Resilience Act. Why was it important to build for future regulation now, rather than retrofit later?
Retrofitting security into IoT hardware is nearly impossible and extremely costly.
By designing to meet upcoming regulatory standards now, we ensure that our partners aren’t left with non-compliant hardware in future.
It’s about protecting our customers’ long-term investments.
Do you think cybersecurity and data governance are still underestimated risks in the sector?
Absolutely.
“We treat fuel data with the same security mindset as financial data.”
As telemetry moves from a gadget to core infrastructure that triggers multi-thousand-pound fuel deliveries, the data becomes a target. If a hacker can spoof tank levels, they can disrupt supply chains.
How does futureproofing at the architecture level protect FoxInsights partners as expectations around data security evolve?
It provides regulatory peace of mind.
Partners can assure their customers, that their monitoring systems meets the highest security standards. The architecture also supports secure over-the-air updates, meaning devices can evolve without hardware replacement.
What this unlocks for distributors
With these engineering foundations in place, the practical implications for distributors become clear.
From a partner’s perspective, what does this new generation of devices enable that simply wasn’t practical before?
It unlocks difficult tanks.
With a 7cm dead zone and advanced obstacle recognition, the FoxRadar can now accurately monitor shallow tanks, IBCs, and complex industrial vessels that previously produced unreliable readings.
Additional interfaces also allow integration with wider industrial systems, expanding the distributor’s service offering beyond simply fuel.
How does white-labelling change the way distributors can position telemetry within their own customer relationships?
The large branding area on the device itself is about more than aesthetics – it’s about brand stickiness – the customer sees the distributor’s brand every time they check their tank.
Combined with a white-labelled app, this reinforces the distributor’s position as a high-tech energy partner and service provider, not just a commodity supplier.
Looking ahead, do you see telemetry becoming foundational to broader energy services – rather than a standalone optimisation tool?
“Telemetry is the eye of the energy transition.”
We already see it moving that way.
Whether for heating oil today or alternative fuels tomorrow, reliable data layer enables distributors to move toward Energy-as-a-Service models – managing customers’ entire energy needs automatically in response to real-time demand.
What this means in practice
- Fewer installation errors: Reduced call-backs and deployment cost
- Higher data accuracy: Improved delivery planning
- Longer device life: Better ROI and asset value
- On-site visibility: Increased trust and fewer disputes
- Future-ready systems: Reduced regulatory risk
Closing thoughts
What’s the most common misconception about telemetry that still frustrates you as an engineer?
The idea that it is just a sensor.
The real value is in the data reliability not the hardware cost.
A cheap sensor with poor accuracy or a short lifespan is ultimately more expensive than a premium one.
What problem in tank monitoring do you think the industry will look back on and wonder why it took so long to solve?
Installation failure.
We’ve spent years dealing with sensors that were installed upside down, at an angle, or in the wrong tank. With integrated display and tilt detection, we are finally solving this at source.
If you were designing FoxRadar again in five years’ time, what do you think would be radically different?
I believe we will see even more edge intelligence.
Devices won’t simply report levels; they will predict issues such as leaks or tank integrity failures.
And the hardware foundations for that future are already being built.
Image credit: FoxInsights GmbH
