Electricity News in December 2020
World Bank helps developing countries wind spurt
World Bank Offshore Wind Investment drives renewables and clean energy in developing countries, funding floating turbines and shallow-water foundations to replace fossil fuels, expand grids, and scale climate finance across Latin America, Africa, and Asia.
Key Points
A World Bank program funding offshore wind to speed clean power, cut fossil fuels, and expand grids in emerging markets.
✅ US$80bn to 565 onshore wind projects since 1995
✅ Pilot funds offshore wind in Asia, Africa, Latin America
✅ Floating turbines and shallow-water foundations enable deep resources
Europe and the United States now accept onshore wind power as the cheapest way to generate electricity, and U.S. lessons from the U.K. are informing policy discussions. But this novel technology still needs subsidising before some developing countries will embrace it. Enter the World Bank.
A total of US$80 billion in subsidies from the Bank has gone over 25 years to 565 developing world onshore wind projects, to persuade governments to invest in renewables rather than rely on fossil fuels.
Central and Latin American countries have received the lions share of this investment, but the Asia Pacific region and Eastern Europe have also seen dozens of Bank-funded developments. Now the fastest-growing market is in Africa and the Middle East, where West African hydropower support can complement variable wind resources.
But while continuing to campaign for more onshore wind farms, the World Bank in 2019 started encouraging target countries to embrace offshore wind as well. This uses two approaches: turbines in shallow water, which are fixed to the seabed, and also a newer technology, involving floating turbines anchored by cables at greater depth.
The extraordinary potential for offshore wind, which is being commercially developed very fast in Europe, including the UK's offshore expansion, China and the U.S. offshore wind sector today as well, is now seen by the Bank as important for countries like Vietnam which could harness enough offshore wind power to provide all its electricity needs.
Other countries it has identified with enormous potential for offshore wind include Brazil, Indonesia, India, the Philippines, South Africa and Sri Lanka, all of them countries that need to keep building more power stations to connect every citizen to the national grid.
The Bank began investing in wind power in 1995, with its spending reaching billions of dollars annually in 2011. The biggest single recipient has been Brazil, receiving US$24.2 bn up to the end of 2018, 30 per cent of the total the Bank has invested worldwide.
Many private companies have partnered with the Bank to build the wind farms. The biggest single beneficiary is Enel, the Italian energy giant, which has received US$6.1 bn to complete projects in Brazil, Mexico, South Africa, Romania, Morocco, Bulgaria, Peru, and Russia.
Among the countries now benefitting from the Banks continuing onshore wind programme are Egypt, Morocco, Senegal, Jordan, Vietnam, Thailand, Indonesia and the Philippines.
Offshore wind now costs less than nuclear power, and global costs have fallen enough to compete in most countries with fossil fuels. Currently the fastest-growing industry in the world, it continued to grow despite Covid-19 across most markets.
Persistent coal demand
Particularly in Asia, some countries are continuing to burn large quantities of coal and are considering investing in yet more fossil fuel generation unless they can be persuaded that renewables are a better option, with an offshore wind $1 trillion outlook underscoring the scale.
Last year the World Bank began a pilot scheme to explore funding investment in offshore wind in these countries. Launching the scheme Riccardo Puliti, a senior director at the Bank, said: Offshore wind is a clean, reliable and secure source of energy with massive potential to transform the energy mix in countries that have great wind resources.
We have seen it work in Europe we can now make use of global experience to scale up offshore wind projects in emerging markets.
Using data from the Global Wind Atlas, the Bank calculated that developing countries with shallow waters like India, Turkey and Sri Lanka had huge potential with fixed turbines, while others the Philippines and South Africa, for example would need floating foundations to reach greater depths, up to 1,000 metres.
For countries like Vietnam, with a mix of shallow and deep water, wind power could solve their entire electricity needs. In theory offshore wind power could produce ten times the amount of electricity that the country currently gets from all its current power stations, the Bank says.
Related News
BWE - Wind power potential even higher than expected
German Wind Power 2030 Outlook highlights onshore and offshore growth, repowering, higher full-load hours, and efficiency gains. Deutsche WindGuard, BWE, and LEE NRW project 200+ TWh, potentially 500 TWh, covering rising electricity demand.
Key Points
Forecast: efficiency and full-load gains could double onshore wind to 200+ TWh; added land could lift output to 500 TWh.
✅ Modern turbines and repowering boost full-load hours and yields
✅ Onshore generation could hit 200+ TWh on existing areas by 2030
✅ Expanding land to 2% may enable 500 TWh; offshore adds more
Wind turbines have become more and more efficient over the past two decades, a trend reflected in Denmark's new green record for wind-powered generation.
A new study by Deutsche WindGuard calculates the effect on the actual generation volumes for the first time, underscoring Germany's energy transition balancing act as targets scale. Conclusion of the analysis: The technical progress enables a doubling of the wind power generation by 2030.
Progressive technological developments make wind turbines more powerful and also enable more and more full-load hours, with wind leading the power mix in many markets today. This means that more electricity can be generated continuously than previously assumed. This is shown by a new study by Deutsche WindGuard, which was commissioned by the Federal Wind Energy Association (BWE) and the State Association of Renewable Energies NRW (LEE NRW).
The study 'Full load hours of wind turbines on land - development, influences, effects' describes in detail for the first time the effects of advances in wind energy technology on the actual generation volumes. It can thus serve as the basis for further calculations and potential assessments, reflecting milestones like UK wind surpassing coal in 2016 in broader analyses.
The results of the investigation show that the use of modern wind turbines with higher full load hours alone on the previously designated areas could double wind power generation to over 200 terawatt hours (TWh) by 2030. With an additional area designation, generation could even be increased to 500 TWh. If the electricity from offshore wind energy is added, the entire German electricity consumption from wind energy could theoretically be covered, and renewables recently outdelivered coal and nuclear in Germany as a sign of momentum: The current electricity consumption in Germany is currently a good 530 TWh, but will increase in the future.
Christian Mildenberger, Managing Director of LEE NRW: 'Wind can do much more: In the past 20 years, technology has made great leaps and bounds. Modern wind turbines produce around ten times as much electricity today as those built at the turn of the millennium. This must also be better reflected in potential studies by the federal and state governments. '
Wolfram Axthelm, BWE Managing Director: 'We need a new look at the existing areas and the repowering. Today in Germany not even one percent of the area is designated for wind energy inland. But even with this we could cover almost 40 percent of the electricity demand by 2030. If this area share were increased to only 2 percent of the federal area, it would be almost 100 percent of the electricity demand! Wind energy is indispensable for a CO2-neutral future. This requires a clever provision of space in all federal states. '
Dr. Dennis Kruse, Managing Director of Deutsche WindGuard: 'It turns out that the potential of onshore wind energy in Germany is still significantly underestimated. Modern wind turbines achieve a significantly higher number of full load hours than previously assumed. That means: The wind can be used more and more efficiently and deliver more income. '
On the areas already designated today, numerous older systems will be replaced by modern ones by 2030 (repowering). However, many old systems will still be in operation. According to Windguard's calculations, the remaining existing systems, together with around 12,500 new, modern wind systems, could generate 212 TWh in 2030. If the area backdrop were expanded from 0.9 percent today to 2 percent of the land area, around 500 TWh would be generated by inland wind, despite grid expansion challenges in Europe that shape deployment.
The ongoing technological development must also be taken into account. The manufacturers of wind turbines are currently working on a new class of turbines with an output of over seven megawatts that will be available in three to five years. According to calculations by the LEE NRW, by 2040 the same number of wind turbines as today could produce over 700 TWh of electricity inland. The electricity demand, which will increase in the future due to electromobility, heat pumps and the production of green hydrogen, can thus be completely covered by a combination of onshore wind, offshore wind, solar power, bioenergy, hydropower and geothermal energy, and a net-zero roadmap for Germany points to significant cost reductions.
Related News
Global: Nuclear power: what the ‘green industrial revolution’ means for the next three waves of reactors
UK Nuclear Energy Ten Point Plan outlines support for large reactors, SMRs, and AMRs, funding Sizewell C, hydrogen production, and industrial heat to reach net zero, decarbonize transport and heating, and expand clean electricity capacity.
Key Points
A UK plan backing large, small, and advanced reactors to drive net zero via clean power, hydrogen, and industrial heat.
✅ Funds large plants (e.g., Sizewell C) under value-for-money models
✅ Invests in SMRs for factory-built, modular, lower-cost deployment
✅ Backs AMRs for high-temperature heat, hydrogen, and industry
The UK government has just announced its “Ten Point Plan for a Green Industrial Revolution”, in which it lays out a vision for the future of energy, transport and nature in the UK. As researchers into nuclear energy, my colleagues and I were pleased to see the plan is rather favourable to new nuclear power.
It follows the advice from the UK’s Nuclear Innovation and Research Advisory Board, pledging to pursue large power plants based on current technology, and following that up with financial support for two further waves of reactor technology (“small” and “advanced” modular reactors).
This support is an important part of the plan to reach net-zero emissions by 2050, as in the years to come nuclear power will be crucial to decarbonising not just the electricity supply but the whole of society.
This chart helps illustrate the extent of the challenge faced:
Electricity generation is only responsible for a small percentage of UK emissions. William Bodel. Data: UK Climate Change Committee
Efforts to reduce emissions have so far only partially decarbonised the electricity generation sector. Reaching net zero will require immense effort to also decarbonise heating, transport, as well as shipping and aviation. The plan proposes investment in hydrogen production and electric vehicles to address these three areas – which will require, as advocates of nuclear beyond electricity argue, a lot more energy generation.
Nuclear is well-placed to provide a proportion of this energy. Reaching net zero will be a huge challenge, and industry leaders warn it may be unachievable without nuclear energy. So here’s what the announcement means for the three “waves” of nuclear power.
Who will pay for it?
But first a word on financing. To understand the strategy, it is important to realise that the reason there has been so little new activity in the UK’s nuclear sector since the 1990s is due to difficulty in financing. Nuclear plants are cheap to fuel and operate and last for a long time. In theory, this offsets the enormous upfront capital cost, and results in competitively priced electricity overall.
But ever since the electricity sector was privatised, governments have been averse to spending public money on power plants. This, combined with resulting higher borrowing costs and cheaper alternatives (gas power), has meant that in practice nuclear has been sidelined for two decades. While climate change offers an opportunity for a revival, these financial concerns remain.
Large nuclear
Hinkley Point C is a large nuclear station currently under construction in Somerset, England. The project is well-advanced, with its first reactor installed and due to come online in the middle of this decade. While the plant will provide around 7% of current UK electricity demand, its agreed electricity price is relatively expensive.
Under construction: Hinkley Point C. Ben Birchall/PA
The government’s new plan states: “We are pursuing large-scale new nuclear projects, subject to value-for-money.” This is likely a reference to the proposed Sizewell C in Suffolk, on which a final decision is expected soon. Sizewell C would be a copy of the Hinkley plant – building follow-up identical reactors achieves capital cost reductions, and setbacks at Hinkley Point C have sharpened delivery focus as an alternative funding model will likely be implemented to reduce financing costs.
Other potential nuclear sites such as Wylfa and Moorside (shelved in 2018 and 2019 respectively for financial reasons) are also not mentioned, their futures presumably also covered by the “subject to value-for-money” clause.
Small nuclear
The next generation of nuclear technology, with various designs under development worldwide are smaller, cheaper, safer Small Modular Reactors (SMRs), such as the Rolls Royce “UK SMR”.
Reactors small enough to be manufactured in factories and delivered as modules can be assembled on site in much shorter times than larger designs, which in contrast are constructed mostly on site. In so doing, the capital costs per unit (and therefore borrowing costs) could be significantly lower than current new-builds.
The plan states “up to £215 million” will be made available for SMRs, Phase 2 of which will begin next year, with anticipated delivery of units around a decade from now.
Advanced nuclear
The third proposed wave of nuclear will be the Advanced Modular Reactors (AMRs). These are truly innovative technologies, with a wide range of benefits over present designs and, like the small reactors, they are modular to keep prices down.
Crucially, advanced reactors operate at much higher temperatures – some promise in excess of 750°C compared to around 300°C in current reactors. This is important as that heat can be used in industrial processes which require high temperatures, such as ceramics, which they currently get through electrical heating or by directly burning fossil fuels. If those ceramics factories could instead use heat from AMRs placed nearby, it would reduce CO₂ emissions from industry (see chart above).
High temperatures can also be used to generate hydrogen, which the government’s plan recognises has the potential to replace natural gas in heating and eventually also in pioneering zero-emission vehicles, ships and aircraft. Most hydrogen is produced from natural gas, with the downside of generating CO₂ in the process. A carbon-free alternative involves splitting water using electricity (electrolysis), though this is rather inefficient. More efficient methods which require high temperatures are yet to achieve commercialisation, however if realised, this would make high temperature nuclear particularly useful.
The government is committing “up to £170 million” for AMR research, and specifies a target for a demonstrator plant by the early 2030s. The most promising candidate is likely a High Temperature Gas-cooled Reactor which is possible, if ambitious, over this timescale. The Chinese currently lead the way with this technology, and their version of this reactor concept is expected soon.
In summary, the plan is welcome news for the nuclear sector, even as Europe loses nuclear capacity across the continent. While it lacks some specifics, these may be detailed in the government’s upcoming Energy White Paper. The advice to government has been acknowledged, and the sums of money mentioned throughout are significant enough to really get started on the necessary research and development.
Achieving net zero is a vast undertaking, and recognising that nuclear can make a substantial contribution if properly supported is an important step towards hitting that target.
Related News
The UK’s energy plan is all very well but it ignores the forecast rise in global sea-levels
UK Marine Energy and Climate Resilience can counter sea level rise and storm surge with tidal power, subsea turbines, heat pumps, and flood barriers, delivering renewable electricity, stability, and coastal protection for the United Kingdom.
Key Points
Integrated use of tidal power, barriers, and heat pumps to curb sea level rise, manage storms, and green the UK grid.
✅ Tidal bridges and subsea turbines enhance baseload renewables
✅ Integrated barriers cut storm surge and river flood risk
✅ Heat pumps and marine heat networks decarbonize coastal cities
IN concentrating on electrically driven cars, the UK’s new ten-point energy plans, and recent UK net zero policies, ignores the elephant in the room.
It fails to address the forecast six-metre sea level rise from global warming rapidly melting the Greenland ice sheet.
Rising sea levels and storm surge, combined with increasingly heavy rainfall swelling our rivers, threaten not only hundreds of coastal communities but also much unprotected strategic infrastructure, including electricity systems that need greater resilience.
New nuclear power stations proposed in this United Kingdom plan would produce radioactive waste requiring thousands of years to safely decay.
This is hardly the solution for the Green Energy future, or the broader global energy transition, that our overlooked marine energy resource could provide.
Sea defences and barrier design, built and integrated with subsea turbines and heat pumps, can deliver marine-driven heat and power to offset the costs, not only of new Thames Barriers, but also future Severn, Forth and other barrages, while reducing reliance on high-GWP gases such as SF6 in switchgear across the grid.
At the Pentland Firth, existing marine turbine power could be enhanced by turbines deployed from new tidal bridges to provide much of UK’s electricity needs, as nations chart an electricity future that replaces fossil fuels, from its estimated 60 gigawatt capability.
Energy from Bluemull Sound could likewise be harvested and exported or used to enhance development around UK’s new space station at Unst.
The 2021 Climate Change Summit gives Glasgow the platform to secure Scotland’s place in a true green, marine energy future and help build an electric planet for the long term.
We must not waste this opportunity.
THERE is no vaccine for climate change.
It is, of course, wonderful news that such progress is being made in the development of Covid-19 vaccines but there is a risk that, no matter how serious the Covid crisis is, it is distracting attention, political will and resources from the climate crisis, a much longer term and more devastating catastrophe.
They are intertwined. As climate and ecological systems change, vectors and pathogens migrate and disease spreads.
What lessons can be learned from one to apply to the other?
Prevention is better than cure. We need to urgently address the climate crisis, charting a path to net zero electricity by the middle of the century, to help prevent future pandemics.
We are only as safe as the most vulnerable. Covid immunisation will protect the most vulnerable; to protect against the effects of climate change we need to look far more deeply. Global challenges require systemic change.
Neither Covid or climate change respect national borders and, for both, we need to value and trust science and the scientific experts and separate them from political posturing.
Related News
Announces Completion of $16 Million Project to Install Smart Energy-Saving Streetlights in Syracuse
Smart Street Lighting NY delivers Syracuse-wide LED retrofits with smart controls, Wi-Fi, and sensors, saving $3.3 million annually and cutting nearly 8,500 tons of greenhouse gases, improving energy efficiency, safety, and maintenance.
Key Points
A NYPA-backed program replacing streetlights with LED and controls to cut costs and emissions across New York by 2025.
✅ Syracuse replaced 17,500 fixtures with LED and smart controls.
✅ Saves $3.3M yearly; cuts 8,500 tons CO2e; improves safety.
✅ NYPA financing and maintenance support enable Smart City sensors.
Governor Andrew M. Cuomo today announced the completed installation of energy-efficient LED streetlights throughout the City of Syracuse as part of the Governor's Smart Street Lighting NY program. Syracuse, through a partnership with the New York Power Authority, replaced all of its streetlights with the most comprehensive set of innovative Smart City technologies in the state, saving the city $3.3 million annually and reducing greenhouse gas emissions by nearly 8,500 tons a year--the equivalent of taking more than 1,660 cars off the road. New York has now replaced more than 100,000 of its streetlights with LED fixtures, reflecting broader state renewable ambitions across the country, a significant milestone in the Governor's goal to replace at least 500,000 streetlights with LED technology by 2025 under Smart Street Lighting NY.
Today's announcement directly supports the goals of the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act, the most aggressive climate change law in the nation, through the increased use of energy efficiency, exemplified by Seattle City Light's program that helps customers reduce bills, to annually reduce electricity demand by three percent--equivalent to 1.8 million New York households--by 2025.
"As we move further into the 21st century, it's critical we make the investments necessary for building smarter, more sustainable communities and that's exactly what we are doing in Syracuse," Governor Cuomo said. "Not only is the Smart Street Lighting NY program reducing the city's carbon footprint, but millions of taxpayer dollars will be saved thanks to a reduction in utility costs. Climate change is not going away and it is these types of smart, forward-thinking programs which will help communities build towards the future."
The more than $16 million cutting-edge initiative, implemented by NYPA, includes the replacement of approximately 17,500 streetlights throughout the city with SMART, LED fixtures, improving lighting quality and neighborhood safety while saving energy and maintenance costs. The city's streetlights are now outfitted with SMART controls that provide programmed dimming ability, energy metering, fault monitoring, and additional tools for emergency services through on-demand lighting levels.
"The completion of the replacement of LED streetlights in Syracuse is part of our overall efforts to upgrade more than 100,000 streetlights across the state," Lieutenant Governor Kathy Hochul said. "The new lights will save the city $3.3 million annually, helping to reduce cost for energy and maintenance and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. These new light fixtures will also help to improve safety and provide additional tools for emergency services. The conversion of streetlights statewide to high-tech LED fixtures will help local governments and taxpayers save money, while increasing efficiency and safety as we work to build back better and stronger for the future."
NYPA provided Syracuse with a $500,000 Smart Cities grant for the project. The city utilized the additional funding to support special features on the streetlights that demonstrate the latest in Smart City technologies, focused on digital connectivity, environmental monitoring and public safety. These features are expected to be fully implemented in early 2021.
Connectivity: The city is planning to deploy exterior Wi-Fi at community centers and public spaces, including in neighborhoods in need of expanded digital network services.
Environmental Monitoring: Ice and snow detection systems that assist city officials in pinpointing streets covered in ice or snow and require attention to prevent accidents and improve safety. The sensors provide data that can tell the city where salt trucks and plows are most needed instead of directing trucks to drive pre-determined routes. Flood reporting and monitoring systems will also be installed.
Public Safety and Property Protection: Illegal dumping and vandalism detection sensors will be installed at strategic locations to help mitigate these disturbances. Vacant house monitoring will also be deployed by the city. The system can monitor for potential fires, detect motion and provide temperature and humidity readings of vacant homes. Trash bin sensors will be installed at various locations throughout the city that will detect when a trash bin is full and alert local officials for pick-up.
NYPA President and CEO Gil C. Quiniones said, "Syracuse is truly a pioneer in its exploration of using SMART technologies to improve public services and the Power Authority was thrilled to partner with the city on this innovative initiative. Helping our customers bring their streetlights into the future further advances NYPA's reputation as a first-mover in the energy-sector."
New York State Public Service Commission Chair John B. Rhodes said, "Governor Cuomo signed legislation making it easier for municipalities to purchase and upgrade their street lighting systems. With smart projects like these, cities such as Syracuse can install state-of-the-art, energy efficient lights and take control over their energy use, lower costs to taxpayers and protect the environment."
Mayor Ben Walsh said, "Governor Cuomo and the New York Power Authority have helped power Syracuse to the front of the pack of cities in the U.S., leveraging SMART LED lighting to save money and make life better for our residents. Because of our progress, even in the midst of a global pandemic, the Syracuse Surge, our strategy for inclusive growth in the New Economy, continues to move forward. Syracuse and all of New York State are well positioned to lead the nation and the world because of NYPA's support and the Governor's leadership."
To date, NYPA has installed more than 50,000 LED streetlights statewide, with more than 115,000 lighting replacements currently implemented. Some of the cities and towns that have already converted to LED lights, in collaboration with NYPA, include Albany, Rochester, and White Plains. In addition, the Public Service Commission, whose ongoing retail energy markets review informs consumer protections, in conjunction with investor-owned utilities around the state, has facilitated the installation of more than 50,000 additional LED lights.
The NYPA Board of Trustees, in support of the Smart Street Lighting NY program, authorized at its September meeting the expenditure of $150 million over the next five years to secure the services of Candela Systems in Hawthorne, D&M Contracting in Elmsford and E-J Electric T&D in Wallingford, Connecticut, while in other regions, city officials take a clean energy message to Georgia Power and the PSC to spur utility action. All three firms will work on behalf of NYPA to continue to implement LED lighting replacements throughout New York State to meet the Governor's goal of 500,000 LED streetlights installed by 2025.
Smart Street Lighting NY: Energy Efficient and Economically Advantageous
NYPA is working with cities, towns, villages and counties throughout New York to fully manage and implement a customer's transition to LED streetlight technology. NYPA provides upfront financing for the project, and during emergencies, New York's utility disconnection moratorium helps protect customers while payments to NYPA are made in the years following from the cost-savings created by the reduced energy use of the LED streetlights, which are 50 to 65 percent more efficient than alternative street lighting options.
Through this statewide street lighting program, NYPA's government customers are provided a wide-array of lighting options to help meet their individual needs, including specifications on the lights to incorporate SMART technology, which can be used for dozens of other functions, such as cameras and other safety features, weather sensors, Wi-Fi and energy meters.
To further advance the Governor's effort to replace existing New York street lighting, in 2019, NYPA launched a new maintenance service to provide routine and on-call maintenance services for LED street lighting fixtures installed by NYPA throughout the state, and during the COVID-19 response, New York and New Jersey suspended utility shut-offs to protect customers and maintain essential services. The new service is available to municipalities that have engaged NYPA to implement a LED street lighting conversion and have elected to install an asset management controls system on their street lighting system, reducing the number of failures and repairs needed after installation is complete.
To learn more about the Smart Street Lighting NY program, visit the program webpage on NYPA's website.
New York State's Nation-Leading Climate Plan
Governor Cuomo's nation-leading climate plan is the most aggressive climate and clean energy initiative in the nation, calling for an orderly and just transition to clean energy that creates jobs and continues fostering a green economy as New York State builds back better as it recovers from the COVID-19 pandemic. Enshrined into law through the CLCPA, New York is on a path to reach its mandated goals of economy wide carbon neutrality and achieving a zero-carbon emissions electricity sector by 2040, similar to Ontario's clean electricity regulations that advance decarbonization, faster than any other state. It builds on New York's unprecedented ramp-up of clean energy including a $3.9 billion investment in 67 large-scale renewable projects across the state, the creation of more than 150,000 jobs in New York's clean energy sector, a commitment to develop over 9,000 megawatts of offshore wind by 2035, and 1,800 percent growth in the distributed solar sector since 2011. New York's Climate Action Council is working on a scoping plan to build on this progress and reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 85 percent from 1990 levels by 2050, while ensuring that at least 40 percent of the benefits of clean energy investments benefit disadvantaged communities, and advancing progress towards the state's 2025 energy efficiency target of reducing on-site energy consumption by 185 TBtus.
Related News
California, Oregon will take over dams controlled by Warren Buffett -- and tear them down
Klamath River Dam Removal Agreement advances a $450 million plan by California and Oregon, with PacifiCorp and FERC oversight, to demolish four aging hydropower dams, restore salmon runs, and support Yurok and Karuk tribal communities.
Key Points
A bi-state plan to remove four Klamath River dams, restore salmon runs, and honor tribal rights.
✅ $450M budget with shared contingency for overruns
✅ Co-licensees: California, Oregon, KRRC; PacifiCorp limited
✅ Goal: remove 4 dams by 2023 to boost salmon and tribes
Gov. Gavin Newsom and his Oregon counterpart signed a landmark deal Tuesday to take control of four aging dams targeted for removal on the Lower Klamath River, an agreement designed to push the controversial $450 million plan over the finish line.
Newsom and Oregon Gov. Kate Brown committed their states to replacing PacifiCorp -- a utility company controlled by financier Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway conglomerate -- as co-licensees of the dams, which have been blamed for ruining salmon runs considered vital by California Indian tribes.
The agreement "ensures that we have sufficient backing" to get the four dams demolished, said Chuck Bonham, director of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife.
"We're finally one step closer," Newsom said on a Zoom conference call. Removing the dams lets California "right some wrongs, address some of our historic mistakes."
It will cost money if the dams really are to come down by 2023, as planned.
The project is expected to cost $450 million, including $250 million already pledged by California and $200 million contributed by PacifiCorp ratepayers on both sides of the border through surcharges that can prompt customer backlash in similar utility cases. With the deal signed Tuesday, California, Oregon and PacifiCorp will contribute $15 million apiece to a contingency fund to cover unforeseen costs, and agreed to share equally in any additional cost overruns.
Three of the dams are in Siskiyou County, the other is in southern Oregon.
The agreement represents a breakthrough for a project pursued for years by Indian tribes and environmental groups -- but fiercely opposed by Siskiyou County residents, along with congressional Republicans. Bonham said the dams' removal will lead to the "biggest salmon restoration ever."
"It's a new day and new era for California tribes," said Yurok Tribe Chairman Joseph James. "Our way of life will thrive with these dams being (taken) out."
'The river is sick, and the Klamath Basin tribes are suffering'
The Yurok and other tribes, including the Karuk and the Hoopa Valley, have been complaining about the dams for decades, saying the facilities have hurt their livelihoods and culture by disrupting salmon runs, an issue tied to regional salmon and electricity talks as well.
In 2016, former President Barack Obama's administration brokered a deal under which PacifiCorp would turn the dams over to the nonprofit Klamath River Renewal Corp., which would oversee the dams' removal.
But in July the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, or FERC, blocked the transfer of the dams' licenses unless PacifiCorp remained a co-licensee. FERC said the nonprofit wasn't capable of handling the dam removal by itself.
That decision threatened to derail the carefully-negotiated agreement. Buffett's company didn't want to be stuck with potential cost overruns. Two weeks later Newsom wrote to Buffett and two of his executives, pleading with them to keep the project on track.
"The river is sick, and the Klamath Basin tribes are suffering," Newsom wrote. "The Klamath River dam removal project is a shining example of what we can accomplish when we act according to our values."
Tuesday's agreement makes California and Oregon the co-licensees, along with the nonprofit, and takes PacifiCorp's name off the license, as Oregon's delegation advances a wildfire-resilient grid bill to harden infrastructure. Buffett's company remains on the hook for a share of the overruns, the participation of the two states makes it less likely the costs will be onerous.
"Working together from this historic moment, we can complete the project and remove these dams," Buffett said in a statement released by Newsom's office.
FERC still needs to approve the new arrangement. "We have more work to do," Brown said.
Northern Californians oppose dam removal
The dams provide no irrigation water and little flood control to the region, and contribute little electricity at a time when regulators weigh more power plants for reliability. Nonetheless, local residents and property owners have protested against the dam removal project for years. They say the demolition process would harm the river, and would wreck the values of properties that sit on the reservoirs formed by the dams.
In 2010, voters in Siskiyou County voted by a 79-21 margin against the demolition in a non-binding vote, echoing resistance to a 145-mile transmission line in Maine that spurred debate.
Rep. Doug LaMalfa, R-Richvale, who represents the Klamath area, blasted Tuesday's agreement, citing California grid reliability pressures.
"California's quest to remove these perfectly good dams continues. Now the taxpayers of California and Oregon will be on the hook due to this agreement to pick up a multi-billion dollar expense for the cost and liability of the inevitable environmental damage this project will cause. Removing these dams will do nothing to help fish but will destroy water storage needed for firefighting and will bankrupt Siskiyou County," LaMalfa said in a prepared statement. "The dams themselves are a benefit to our overloaded power grid and the local area economy."
The dams are upriver from where farmers and federal officials clashed nearly two decades ago over water deliveries. Farmers who take water from the Klamath miles above the dams, launched huge protests after officials in 2001 shut off irrigation water from a collection of federally-owned canals to prop up coho salmon populations, with one group of activists attempting to destroy a canal gate with a saw and a blowtorch.
The following year, Vice President Dick Cheney personally ordered officials to deliver water to the farmers, resulting in a huge fish kill. The four PacifiCorp dams weren't involved in that incident. But the ensuing litigation resulted in the agreement calling for the removal of the four dams.
At the same time, construction has begun on a disputed $1 billion electricity corridor in Maine, underscoring regional tensions over large energy projects.
Related News
Failed PG&E power line blamed for Drum fire off Hwy 246 last June
PG&E Drum Fire Cause identified as a power line failure in Santa Barbara County, with arcing electricity igniting vegetation near Buellton on Drum Canyon Road; 696 acres burned as investigators and CPUC review PG&E safety.
Key Points
A failed PG&E power line sparked the 696-acre Drum Fire near Buellton; the utility is conducting its own probe.
✅ Power line failed between poles, arcing ignited vegetation.
✅ 696 acres burned; no structures damaged or injuries.
✅ PG&E filed CPUC incident report; ongoing investigation.
A downed Pacific Gas and Electric Co. power line was the cause of the Drum fire that broke out June 14 on Drum Canyon Road northwest of Buellton, a reminder that a transformer explosion can also spark multiple fires, the Santa Barbara County Fire Department announced Thursday.
The fire broke out about 12:50 p.m. north of Highway 246 and burned about 696 acres of wildland before firefighters brought it under control, although no structures were damaged or mass outages like the Los Angeles power outage occurred, according to an incident summary.
A team of investigators pinpointed the official cause as a power line that failed between two utility poles and fell to the ground, and as downed line safety tips emphasize, arcing electricity ignited the surrounding vegetation, said County Fire Department spokesman Capt. Daniel Bertucelli.
In response, a PG&E spokesman said the utility is conducting its own investigation and does not have access to whatever data investigators used, and, as the ATCO regulatory penalty illustrates, such matters can draw significant oversight, but he noted the company filed an electric incident report on the wire with the California Public Utilities Commission on June 14.
"We are grateful to the first responders who fought the 2020 Drum fire in Santa Barbara County and helped make sure that there were no injuries or fatalities, outcomes not always seen in copper theft incidents, and no reports of structures damaged or burned," PG&E spokesman Mark Mesesan said.
"While we are continuing to conduct our own investigation into the events that led to the Drum fire, and as the Site C watchdog inquiry shows, oversight bodies can seek more transparency, PG&E does not have access to the Santa Barbara County Fire Department's report."
He said PG&E remains focused on reducing wildfire risk across its service area while limiting the scope and duration of public safety power shutoffs, including strategies like line-burying decisions adopted by other utilities, and that the safety of customers and communities it serves are its most important responsibility.
Related News
NREL’s Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Projection Tool Helps Utilities, Agencies, and Researchers Predict Hour-by-Hour Impact of Charging on the Grid
EVI-Pro Lite EV Load Forecasting helps utilities model EV charging infrastructure, grid load shapes, and resilient energy systems, factoring home, workplace, and public charging behavior to inform planning, capacity upgrades, and flexible demand strategies.
Key Points
A NREL tool projecting EV charging demand and load shapes to help utilities plan the grid and right-size infrastructure.
✅ Visualizes weekday/weekend EV load by charger type.
✅ Tests home, workplace, and public charging access scenarios.
✅ Supports utility planning, demand flexibility, and capacity upgrades.
As electric vehicles (EVs) continue to grow in popularity, utilities and community planners are increasingly focused on building resilient energy systems that can support the added electric load from EV charging, including a possible EV-driven demand increase across the grid.
But forecasting the best ways to adapt to increased EV charging can be a difficult task as EV adoption will challenge state power grids in diverse ways. Planners need to consider when consumers charge, how fast they charge, and where they charge, among other factors.
To support that effort, researchers at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) have expanded the Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Projection (EVI-Pro) Lite tool with more analytic capabilities. EVI-Pro Lite is a simplified version of EVI-Pro, the more complex, original version of the tool developed by NREL and the California Energy Commission to inform detailed infrastructure requirements to support a growing EV fleet in California, where EVs bolster grid stability through coordinated planning.
EVI-Pro Lite’s estimated weekday electric load by charger type for El Paso, Texas, assuming a fleet of 10,000 plug-in electric vehicles, an average of 35 daily miles traveled, and 50% access to home charging, among other variables, as well as potential roles for vehicle-to-grid power in future scenarios. The order of the legend items matches the order of the series stacked in the chart.
Previously, the tool was limited to letting users estimate how many chargers and what kind of chargers a city, region, or state may need to support an influx of EVs. In the added online application, those same users can take it a step further to predict how that added EV charging will impact electricity demand, or load shapes, in their area at any given time and inform grid coordination for EV flexibility strategies.
“EV charging is going to look different across the country, depending on the prevalence of EVs, access to home charging, and the kind of chargers most used,” said Eric Wood, an NREL researcher who led model development. “Our expansion gives stakeholders—especially small- to medium-size electric utilities and co-ops—an easy way to analyze key factors for developing a flexible energy strategy that can respond to what’s happening on the ground.”
Tools to forecast EV loads have existed for some time, but Wood said that EVI-Pro Lite appeals to a wider audience, including planners tracking EVs' impact on utilities in many markets. The tool is a user-friendly, free online application that displays a clear graphic of daily projected electric loads from EV charging for regions across the country.
After selecting a U.S. metropolitan area and entering the number of EVs in the light-duty fleet, users can change a range of variables to see how they affect electricity demand on a typical weekday or weekend. Reducing access to home charging by half, for example, results in higher electric loads earlier in the day, although energy storage and mobile charging can help moderate peaks in some cases. That is because under such a scenario, EV owners might rely more on public or workplace charging instead of plugging in at home later in the evening or at night.
“Our goal with the lite version of EVI-Pro is to make estimating loads across thousands of scenarios fast and intuitive,” Wood said. “And if utilities or stakeholders want to take that analysis even deeper, our team at NREL can fill that gap through partnership agreements, too. The full version of EVI-Pro can be tailored to develop detailed studies for individual planners, agencies, or utilities.”
Related News
Sens. Wyden, Merkley Introduce Bill to Ensure More Wildfire Resilient Power Grid
Wildfire Resilient Power Grid Act proposes DOE grants for utility companies to fund wildfire mitigation, grid resilience upgrades, undergrounding power lines, fast-tripping protection, weather monitoring, and vegetation management, prioritizing rural electric cooperatives.
Key Points
A federal bill funding utility wildfire mitigation and grid hardening via DOE grants, prioritizing rural utilities.
✅ $1B DOE matching grants for grid upgrades and wildfire mitigation.
✅ Prioritizes rural utilities; supports undergrounding and hardening.
✅ Funds fast-tripping protection, weather stations, vegetation management.
U.S. Sens. Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley today introduced new legislation, amid transmission barriers that persist, to incentivize utility companies to do more to reduce wildfire risks as aging power infrastructure ignite wildfires in Oregon and across the West.
Wyden and Merkley's Wildfire Resilient Power Grid Act of 2020 would ensure power companies do their part to reduce the risk of wildfires through power system upgrades, even as California utility spending crackdown seeks accountability, such as the undergrounding of power lines, fire safety equipment installation and proper vegetation management.
"First and foremost, this is a public safety issue. Fire after fire ignited this summer because the aging power grid could not withstand a major windstorm during the season's hottest and driest days," Wyden said. "Many utility companies are already working to improve the resiliency of their power grid, but the sheer costs of these investments must not come at the expense of equitable regulation for rural utility customers. Congress must do all that it can to stop the catastrophic wildfires decimating the West, and that means improving rural infrastructure. By partnering with utilities around the country, we can increase wildfire mitigation efforts at a modest cost -- a fire prevention investment that will pay dividends by saving lives, homes and businesses."
"When this year's unprecedented wildfire event hit, I drove hundreds of miles across our state to see the damage firsthand and to hear directly from impacted communities, so that I could go back to D.C. and work for the solutions they need," said Merkley. "What I saw was apocalyptic--and we have to do everything we can to reduce the risk of this happening again. That means we have to work with our power companies to get critical upgrades and safety investments into place as quickly as possible."
The Wildfire Resilient Power Grid Act of 2020:
* Establishes a $1 billion-per-year matching grant program for power companies through the Department of Energy, even as ACORE opposed DOE subsidy proposals, to reduce the risk of power lines and grid infrastructure causing wildfires.
* Gives special priority to smaller, rural electric companies to ensure mitigation efforts are targeted to forested rural areas.
* Promotes proven methods for reducing wildfire risks, including undergrounding of lines, installing fast-tripping protection systems, and constructing weather monitoring stations to respond to electrical system fire risks.
* Provides for hardening of overhead power lines and installation of fault location equipment where undergrounding of power lines is not a favorable option.
* Ensures fuels management activities of power companies are carried out in accordance with Federal, State, and local laws and regulations.
* Requires power companies to have "skin in the game" by making the program a 1-to-1 matching grant, with an exception for smaller utilities where the matching requirement is one third of the grant.
* Delivers accountability on the part of utilities and the Department of Energy by generating a report every two years on efforts conducted under the grant program.
Portland General Electric President and CEO Maria Pope: "We appreciate Senator Wyden's and Senator Merkley's leadership in proposing legislation to provide federal funding that will help protect Oregon from devastating wildfires. When passed, this will help make Oregon's electric system safer, faster, without increasing customer prices. That is especially important given the economy and hotter, drier summers and longer wildfire seasons that Oregon will continue to face."
Lane County Commission Chair Heather Butch: " In a matter of hours, the entire Lane County community of Blue River was reduced to ashes by the Holiday Farm Fire. Since the moment I first toured that devastation I've been committed to building it back better. I applaud Senators Wyden and Merkley for drafting the Wildfire Resilient Power Grid Act, as it could well provide the path towards meeting this important goal. Moreover, the resultant programs will better protect rural communities from the increasing dangers of wildfires through a number of preventative measures that would otherwise be difficult to implement."
Linn County Commissioner Roger Nyquist: "This legislation is a smart strategic investment for the future safety of our residents as well as the economic vitality of our community."
Marion County Commissioner Kevin Cameron: "After experiencing a traumatic evacuation during the Beachie Creek and Lion's Head wild fires, I understand the need to strengthen the utility Infrastructure. The improvements resulting from Senator Wyden and Merkley's bill will reduce disasters in the future, but improve everyday reliability for our citizens who live, work and protect the environment in potential wildfire areas."
Edison Electric Institute President Tom Kuhn: "EEI thanks Senator Wyden and Senator Merkley for their leadership in introducing the Wildfire Resilient Power Grid Act. This bill will help support and accelerate projects already planned and underway to enhance energy grid resiliency and mitigate the risk of wildfire damage to power lines. Electric companies across the country are committed to working with our government partners and other stakeholders on preparation and mitigation efforts that combat the wildfire threat and on the rapid deployment of technology solutions, including aggregated DERs at FERC, that address wildfire risks, while still maintaining the safe, reliable, and affordable energy we all need."
Oregon Rural Electric Cooperative Association Executive Director Ted Case: "Oregon's electric cooperatives support the Wildfire Resilient Power Grid Act and appreciate Senator Wyden's and Senator Merkley's leadership and innovative approach to wildfire mitigation, particularly for small, rural utilities. This legislation includes targeted assistance that will help us to continue to provide affordable, reliable and safe electricity to over 500,000 Oregonians."
Sustainable Northwest Director of Government Affairs & Program Strategy Dylan Kruse: "In recent years, the West has seen too many wildfires originate due to poorly maintained or damaged electric utility transmission and distribution infrastructure. This legislation plays an important role to ensure that power lines do not contribute to wildfire starts, while providing safe and reliable power to communities during wildfire events. Utilities must, even as Wyoming clean energy bill proposals emerge, live up to their legal requirements to maintain their infrastructure, but this bill provides welcome resources to expedite and prioritize risk reduction, while preventing cost increases for ratepayers."
Oregon Wild Wilderness Program Manager Erik Fernandez: "2020 taught Oregon the lesson that California learned in the Paradise Fire, and SCE wildfire lawsuits that followed underscore the stakes. Addressing the risk of unnaturally caused powerline fires is an increasingly important critical task. I appreciate Senator Ron Wyden's efforts to protect our homes and communities from powerline fires."
Related News
Barakah Unit 1 reaches 100% power as it steps closer to commercial operations, due to begin early 2021
Barakah Unit 1 100 Percent Power signals the APR-1400 reactor delivering 1400MW of clean baseload electricity to the UAE grid, advancing decarbonisation, reliability, and Power Ascension Testing milestones ahead of commercial operations in early 2021.
Key Points
The milestone where Unit 1 reaches full 1400MW output to the UAE grid, providing clean, reliable baseload electricity.
✅ Delivers 1400MW from a single generator to the UAE grid
✅ Enables clean, reliable baseload power with zero operational emissions
✅ Completes key Power Ascension Testing before commercial operations
The Emirates Nuclear Energy Corporation, ENEC, has announced that its operating and maintenance subsidiary, Nawah Energy Company, Nawah, has successfully achieved 100% of the rated reactor power capacity for Unit 1 of the Barakah Nuclear Energy Plant. This major milestone, seen as a crucial step in Abu Dhabi towards completion, brings the Barakah plant one step closer to commencing commercial operations, scheduled in early 2021.
100% power means that Unit 1 is generating 1400MW of electricity from a single generator connected to the UAE grid for distribution. This milestone makes the Unit 1 generator the largest single source of electricity in the UAE.
The Barakah Nuclear Energy Plant is the largest source of clean baseload electricity in the country, capable of providing constant and reliable power in a sustainable manner around the clock. This significant achievement accelerates the decarbonisation of the UAE power sector, while also supporting the diversification of the Nation’s energy portfolio as it transitions to cleaner electricity sources, similar to the steady development in China of nuclear energy programs now underway.
The accomplishment follows shortly after the UAE’s celebration of its 49th National Day, providing a strong example of the country’s progress as it continues to advance towards a sustainable, clean, secure and prosperous future, having made the UAE the first Arab nation to open a nuclear plant as it charts this path. As the Nation looks towards the next 50 years of achievements, the Barakah plant will generate up to 25 percent of the country’s electricity, while also acting as a catalyst of the clean carbon future of the Nation.
Mohamed Ibrahim Al Hammadi, Chief Executive Officer of ENEC said: "We are proud to deliver on our commitment to power the growth of the UAE with safe, clean and abundant electricity. Unit 1 marks a new era for the power sector and the future of the clean carbon economy of the Nation, with the largest source of electricity now being generated without any emissions. I am proud of our talented UAE Nationals, working alongside international experts who are working to deliver this clean electricity to the Nation, in line with the highest standards of safety, security and quality." Nawah is responsible for operating Unit 1 and has been responsible for safely and steadily raising the power levels since it commenced the start-up process in July, and connection to the grid in August.
Achieving 100% power is one of the final steps of the Power Ascension Testing (PAT) phase of the start-up process for Unit 1. Nawah’s highly skilled and certified nuclear operators will carry out a series of tests before the reactor is safely shut down in preparation for the Check Outage. During this period, the Unit 1 systems will be carefully examined, and any planned or corrective maintenance will be performed to maintain its safety, reliability and efficiency prior to the commencement of commercial operations.
Ali Al Hammadi, Chief Executive Officer of Nawah, said: "This is a key achievement for the UAE, as we safely work through the start-up process for Unit 1 of the Barakah plant. Successfully reaching 100% of the rated power capacity in a safe and controlled manner, undertaken by our highly trained and certified nuclear operators, demonstrates our commitment to safe, secure and sustainable operations as we now advance towards our final maintenance activities and prepare for commercial operations in 2021." The Power Ascension Testing of Unit 1 is overseen by the independent national regulator – the Federal Authority for Nuclear Regulation (FANR), which has conducted 287 inspections since the start of Barakah’s development. These independent reviews have been conducted alongside more than 40 assessments and peer reviews by the International Atomic Energy Agency, IAEA, and World Association of Nuclear Operators, WANO, reflecting milestones at nuclear projects worldwide that benchmark safety and performance.
This is an important milestone for the commercial performance of the Barakah plant. Barakah One Company, ENEC’s subsidiary in charge of the financial and commercial activities of the Barakah project signed a Power Purchase Agreement, PPA, with the Emirates Water and Electricity Company, EWEC, in 2016 to purchase all of the electricity generated at the plant for the next 60 years. Electricity produced at Barakah feeds into the national grid in the same manner as other power plants, flowing to homes and business across the country.
This milestone has been safely achieved despite the challenges of COVID-19. Since the beginning of the global pandemic, ENEC, and subsidiaries Nawah and Barakah One Company, along with companies that form Team Korea, including Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power, with KHNP’s work in Bulgaria illustrating its global role, have worked closely together, in line with all national and local health authority guidelines, to ensure the highest standards for health and safety are maintained for those working on the project. ENEC and Nawah’s robust business continuity plans were activated, alongside comprehensive COVID-19 prevention and management measures, including access control, rigorous testing, and waste water sampling, to support health and wellbeing.
The Barakah Nuclear Energy Plant, located in the Al Dhafra region of the Emirate of Abu Dhabi, is one of the largest nuclear energy new build projects in the world, with four APR-1400 units. Construction of the plant began in 2012 and has progressed steadily ever since. Construction of Units 3 and 4 are in the final stages with 93 percent and 87 percent complete respectively, benefitting from the experience and lessons learned during the construction of Units 1 and 2, while the construction of the Barakah Plant as a whole is now more than 95 percent complete.
Once the four reactors are online, Barakah Plant will deliver clean, efficient and reliable electricity to the UAE grid for decades to come, providing around 25 percent of the country’s electricity and, as other nations like Bangladesh expand with IAEA assistance, reinforcing global decarbonisation efforts, preventing the release of up to 21 million tons of carbon emissions annually – the equivalent of removing 3.2 million cars off the roads each year.
Related News
Atlantic Canadians less charged up to buy electric vehicle than rest of Canada
Atlantic Canada EV adoption lags, a new poll finds, as fewer buyers consider electric vehicles amid limited charging infrastructure, lower provincial rebates, and affordability pressures in Nova Scotia and Newfoundland compared to B.C. and Quebec.
Key Points
Atlantic Canada EV adoption reflects demand, shaped by rebates, charging access, costs, and the regional energy mix.
✅ Poll shows lowest purchase intent in Atlantic Canada
✅ Lack of rebates and charging slows EV consideration
✅ Income and energy mix affect affordability and benefits
Atlantic Canadians are the least likely to buy a car, truck or SUV in the next year and the most skittish about going electric, according to a new poll.
Only 31 per cent of Nova Scotians are looking at buying a new or used vehicle before December 2021 rolls around. And just 13 per cent of Newfoundlanders who are planning to buy are considering an electric vehicle. Both those numbers are the lowest in the country. Still, 47 per cent of Nova Scotians considering buying in the next year are thinking about electric options, according to the numbers gathered online by Logit Group and analyzed by Halifax-based Narrative Research. That compares to 41 per cent of Canadians contemplating a vehicle purchase within the next year, with 54 per cent of them considering going electric.
“There’s still a high level of interest,” said Margaret Chapman, chief operating officer at Narrative Research.
“I think half of people who are thinking about buying a vehicle thinking about electric is pretty significant. But I think it’s a little lower in Atlantic Canada compared to other parts of the country probably because the infrastructure isn’t quite what it might be elsewhere. And I think also it’s the availability of vehicles as well. Maybe it just hasn’t quite caught on here to the extent that it might have in, say, Ontario or B.C., where the highest level of interest is.”
Provincial rebates
Provincial rebates also serve to create more interest, she said, citing New Brunswick's rebate program as an example in the region.
“There’s a $7,500 rebate on top of the $5,000 you get from the feds in B.C. But in Nova Scotia there’s no provincial rebate,” Chapman said. “So I think that kind of thing actually is significant in whether you’re interested in buying an electric vehicle or not.”
The survey was conducted online Nov. 11–13 with 1,231 Canadian adults.
Of the people across Canada who said they were not considering an electric vehicle purchase, 55 per cent said a provincial rebate would make them more likely to consider one, she said.
In Nova Scotia, that number drops to 43 per cent.
Nova Scotia families have the lowest median after-tax income in the country, according to numbers released earlier this year.
The national median in 2018 was $61,400, according to Statistics Canada. Nova Scotia was at the bottom of the pack with $52,200, up from $51,400 in 2017.
So big price tags on electric vehicles might put them out of reach for many Nova Scotians, and a recent cost-focused survey found similar concerns nationwide.
“I think it’s probably that combination of cost and infrastructure,” Chapman said.
“But you saw this week in the financial update from the federal government that they’re putting $150 million into new charging station, so were some of that cash to be spread in Atlantic Canada, I’m sure there would be an increase in interest … The more charging stations around you see, you think ‘Alright, it might not be so hard to ensure that I don’t run out of power for my car.’ All of that stuff I think will start to pick up. But right now it is a little bit lagging in Atlantic Canada, and in Labrador infrastructure still lags despite a government push in N.L. to expand EVs.”
'Simple dollars and cents'
The lack of a provincial government rebate here for electric vehicles definitely factors into the equation, said Sean O’Regan, president and chief executive officer of O'Regan's Automotive Group.
“Where you see the highest adoption are in the provinces where there are large government rebates,” he said. “It’s a simple dollars and cents (thing). In Quebec, when you combine the rebates it’s up to over $10,000, if not $12,000, towards the car. If you can get that kind of a rebate on a car, I don’t know that it would matter much what it was – it would help sell it.”
A lot of people who want to buy electric cars are trying to make a conscious decision about the environment, O’Regan said.
While Nova Scotia Power is moving towards renewable energy, he points out that much of our electricity still comes from burning coal and other fossil fuels, and N.L. lags in energy efficiency as the region works to improve.
“So the power that you get is not necessarily the cleanest of power,” O’Regan said. “The green advantage is not the same (in Nova Scotia as it is in provinces that produce a lot of hydro power).”
Compared to five years ago, the charging infrastructure here is a lot better, he said. But it doesn’t compare well to provinces including Quebec and B.C., though Newfoundland recently completed its first fast-charging network for electric car owners.
“Certainly (with) electric cars – we're selling more and more and more of them,” O'Regan said, noting the per centage would be in the single digits of his overall sales. “But you're starting from zero a few years ago.”
The highest number of people looking at buying electric cars was in B.C., with 57 per cent of those looking at buying a car saying they’d go electric, and even in southern Alberta interest is growing; like Bob Dylan in 1965 at the Newport Folk Festival.
“The trends move from west to east across Canada,” said Jeff Farwell, chief executive officer of the All EV Canada electric car store in Burnside.
“I would use the example of the craft beer market. It started in B.C. about 15 years before it finally went crazy in Nova Scotia. And if you look at Vancouver right now there’s (electric vehicles) everywhere.”
Expectations high
Farwell expects electric vehicle sales to take off faster in Atlantic Canada than the craft beer market. “A lot faster.”
His company also sells used electric vehicles in Prince Edward Island and is making moves to set up in Moncton, N.B.
He’s been talking to Nova Scotia’s Department of Energy and Mines about creating rebates here for new and used electric vehicles.
“I guess they’re interested, but nothing’s happened,” Farwell said.
Electric vehicles require “a bit of a lifestyle change,” he said.
“The misconception is it takes a lot longer to charge a vehicle if it’s electric and gas only takes me 10 minutes to fill up at the gas station,” Farwell said.
“The reality is when I go home at night, I plug my vehicle in,” he said. “I get up in the morning and I unplug it and I never have to think about it. It takes two seconds.”
Related News
Alberta set to retire coal power by 2023, ahead of 2030 provincial deadline
Alberta coal phaseout accelerates as utilities convert to natural gas, cutting emissions under TIER regulations and deploying hydrogen-ready, carbon capture capable plants, alongside new solar projects in a competitive, deregulated electricity market.
Key Points
A provincewide shift from coal to natural gas and renewables, cutting power emissions years ahead of the 2030 target.
✅ Capital Power, TransAlta converting coal units to gas
✅ TIER pricing drives efficiency, carbon capture readiness
✅ Hydrogen-ready turbines, solar projects boost renewables
Alberta is set to meet its goal to eliminate coal-fired electricity production years earlier than its 2030 target, amid a broader shift to cleaner energy in the province, thanks to recently announced utility conversion projects.
Capital Power Corp.’s plan to spend nearly $1 billion to switch two coal-fired power units west of Edmonton to natural gas, and stop using coal entirely by 2023, was welcomed by both the province and the Pembina Institute environmental think-tank.
In 2014, 55 per cent of Alberta’s electricity was produced from 18 coal-fired generators. The Alberta government announced in 2015 it would eliminate emissions from coal-fired electricity generation by 2030.
Dale Nally, associate minister of Natural Gas and Electricity, said Friday that decisions by Capital Power and other utilities to abandon coal will be good for the environment and demonstrates investor confidence in Alberta’s deregulated electricity market, where the power price cap has come under scrutiny.
He credited the government’s Technology Innovation and Emissions Reduction (TIER) regulations, which put a price on industrial greenhouse gas emissions, as a key factor in motivating the conversions.
“Capital Power’s transition to gas is a great example of how private industry is responding effectively to TIER, as it transitions these facilities to become carbon capture and hydrogen ready, which will drive future emissions reductions,” Nally said in an email.
Capital Power said direct carbon dioxide emissions at its Genesee power facility near Edmonton will be about 3.4 million tonnes per year lower than 2019 emission levels when the project is complete.
It says the natural gas combined cycle units it’s installing will be the most efficient in Canada, adding they will be capable of running on 30 per cent hydrogen initially, with the option to run on 95 per cent hydrogen in future with minor investments.
In November, Calgary-based TransAlta Corp. said it will end operations at its Highvale thermal coal mine west of Edmonton by the end of 2021 as it switches to natural gas at all of its operated coal-fired plants in Canada four years earlier than previously planned.
The Highvale surface coal mine is the largest in Canada, and has been in operation on the south shore of Wabamun Lake in Parkland County since 1970.
The moves by the two utilities and rival Atco Ltd., which announced three years ago it would convert to gas at all of its plants by this year, mean significant emissions reduction and better health for Albertans, said Binnu Jeyakumar, director of clean energy for Pembina.
“Alberta’s early coal phaseout is also a great lesson in good policy-making done in collaboration with industry and civil society,” she said.
“As we continue with this transformation of our electricity sector, it is paramount that efforts to support impacted workers and communities are undertaken.”
She added the growing cost-competitiveness of renewable energy, such as wind power, makes coal plant retirements possible, applauding Capital Power’s plans to increase its investments in solar power.
In Ontario, clean power policy remains a focus as the province evaluates its energy mix.
The company announced it would go ahead with its 75-megawatt Enchant Solar power project in southern Alberta, investing between $90 million and $100 million, and that it has signed a 25-year power purchase agreement with a Canadian company for its 40.5-MW Strathmore Solar project now under construction east of Calgary.
Related News
State-sponsored actors 'very likely' looking to attack electricity supply, says intelligence agency
Canada Critical Infrastructure Cyber Risks include state-sponsored actors probing the electricity grid and ICS/OT, ransomware on utilities, and espionage targeting smart cities, medical devices, and energy networks, pre-positioning for disruptive operations.
Key Points
Nation-state and criminal cyber risks to Canada's power, water, and OT/ICS, aiming to disrupt, steal data, or extort.
✅ State-sponsored probing of power grid and utilities
✅ OT/ICS exposure grows as systems connect to IT networks
✅ Ransomware, espionage, and pre-positioning for disruption
State-sponsored actors are "very likely" trying to shore up their cyber capabilities to attack Canada's critical infrastructure — such as the electricity supply, as underscored by the IEA net-zero electricity report indicating rising demand for clean power, to intimidate or to prepare for future online assaults, a new intelligence assessment warns.
"As physical infrastructure and processes continue to be connected to the internet, cyber threat activity has followed, leading to increasing risk to the functioning of machinery and the safety of Canadians," says a new national cyber threat assessment drafted by the Communications Security Establishment.
"We judge that state-sponsored actors are very likely attempting to develop the additional cyber capabilities required to disrupt the supply of electricity in Canada, even as cleaning up Canada's electricity remains critical for climate goals."
Today's report — the second from the agency's Canadian Centre for Cyber Security wing — looks at the major cyber threats to Canadians' physical safety and economic security.
The CSE does say in the report that while it's unlikely cyber threat actors would intentionally disrupt critical infrastructure — such as water and electricity supplies — to cause major damage or loss of life, they would target critical organizations "to collect information, pre-position for future activities, or as a form of intimidation."
The report said Russia-associated actors probed the networks of electricity utilities in the U.S. and Canada last year and Chinese state-sponsored cyber threat actors have targeted U.S. utility employees. Other countries have seen their industrial control systems targeted by Iranian hacking groups and North Korean malware was found in the IT networks of an Indian power plant, it said.
The threat grows as more critical infrastructure goes high-tech.
In the past, the operational technology (OT) used to control dams, boilers, electricity and pipeline operations has been largely immune to cyberattacks — but that's changing as manufacturers incorporate newer information technology in their systems and products and as the race to net-zero drives grid modernization, says the report.
That technology might make things easier and lower costs for utilities already facing debates over electricity prices in Alberta amid affordability concerns, but it comes with risks, said Scott Jones, the head of the cyber centre.
"So that means now it is a target, it is accessible and it's vulnerable. So what you could see is shutting off of transmission lines, you can see them opening circuit breakers, meaning electricity simply won't flow to our homes to our business," he told reporters Wednesday.
While the probability of such attacks remains low, Jones said the goal of Wednesday's briefing is to send out the early warnings.
"We're not trying to scare people. We're certainly not trying to scare people into going off grid by building a cabin in the woods. We're here to say, 'Let's tackle these now while they're still paper, while they're still a threat we're writing down.'"
Steve Waterhouse, a former cybersecurity officer for the Department of National Defence who now teaches at Université de Sherbrooke, said a saving grace for Canada could be the makeup of its electrical systems.
"Since in Canada, they're very centralized, it's easier to defend, and debates about bridging Alberta and B.C. electricity aim to strengthen resilience, while down in the States, they have multiple companies all around the place. So the weakest link is very hard to identify where it is, but the effect is a cascading effect across the country ... And it could impact Canada, just like we saw in the big Northeastern power outage, the blackout of 2003," he said.
"So that goes to say, we have to be prepared. And I believe most energy companies have been taking extra measures to protect and defend against these type of attacks, even as Canada points to nationwide climate success in electricity to meet emissions goals."
In the future, attacks targeting so-called smart cities and internet-connected devices, such as personal medical devices, could also put Canadians at risk, says the report.
Earlier this year, for example, Health Canada warned the public that medical devices containing a particular Bluetooth chip — including pacemakers, blood glucose monitors and insulin pumps — are vulnerable to cyber attacks that could crash them.
The foreign signals intelligence agency also says that while state-sponsored programs in China, Russia, Iran and North Korea "almost certainly" pose the greatest state-sponsored cyber threats to Canadian individuals and organizations, many other states are rapidly developing their own cyber programs.
Waterhouse said he was glad to see the government agency call out the countries by name, representing a shift in approach in recent years.
"To tackle on and be ready to face a cyber-attack, you have to know your enemy," he said.
"You have to know what's vulnerable inside of your organization. You have to know how ... vulnerable it is against the threats that are out there."
Commercial espionage continues
State-sponsored actors will also continue their commercial espionage campaigns against Canadian businesses, academia and governments — even as calls to make Canada a post-COVID manufacturing hub grow — to steal Canadian intellectual property and proprietary information, says the CSE.
"We assess that these threat actors will almost certainly continue attempting to steal intellectual property related to combating COVID-19 to support their own domestic public health responses or to profit from its illegal reproduction by their own firms," says the "key judgments" section of the report.
"The threat of cyber espionage is almost certainly higher for Canadian organizations that operate abroad or work directly with foreign state-owned enterprises."
The CSE says such commercial espionage is happening already across multiple fields, including aviation, technology and AI, energy and biopharmaceuticals.
While state-sponsored cyber activity tends to offer the most sophisticated threats, CSE said that cybercrime continues to be the threat most likely to directly affect Canadians and Canadian organizations, through vectors like online scams and malware.
"We judge that ransomware directed against Canada will almost certainly continue to target large enterprises and critical infrastructure providers. These entities cannot tolerate sustained disruptions and are willing to pay up to millions of dollars to quickly restore their operations," says the report.
Cybercrime becoming more sophisticated
According to the Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre, Canadians lost over $43 million to cybercrime last year. The CSE reported earlier this year that online thieves have been using the COVID-19 pandemic to trick Canadians into forking over their money — through scams like a phishing campaign that claimed to offer access to a Canada Emergency Response Benefit payment in exchange for the target's personal financial details.
Online foreign influence activities — a dominant theme in the CSE's last threat assessment briefing — continue and constitute "a new normal" in international affairs as adversaries seek to influence domestic and international political events, says the agency.
"We assess that, relative to some other countries, Canadians are lower-priority targets for online foreign influence activity," it said.
"However, Canada's media ecosystem is closely intertwined with that of the United States and other allies, which means that when their populations are targeted, Canadians become exposed to online influence as a type of collateral damage."
According to the agency's own definition, "almost certainly" means it is nearly 100 per cent certain in its analysis, while "very likely" means it is 80-90 per cent certain of its conclusions. The CSE says its analysis is based off of a mix of confidential and non-confidential intelligence and sources.
Related News
What cities can learn from the biggest battery-powered electric bus fleet in North America
Canadian Electric Bus Fleet leads North America as Toronto's TTC deploys 59 battery-electric, zero-emission buses, advancing public transit decarbonization with charging infrastructure, federal funding, lower maintenance, and lifecycle cost savings for a low-carbon urban future.
Key Points
Canada's leading battery-electric transit push, led by Toronto's TTC, scaling zero-emission buses and charging.
✅ Largest battery-electric bus fleet in North America
✅ TTC trials BYD, New Flyer, Proterra for range and reliability
✅ Charging infrastructure, funding, and specs drive 2040 zero-emissions
The largest battery-powered electric bus fleet in North America is Canadian. Toronto's transit system is now running 59 electric buses from three suppliers, and Edmonton's first electric bus is now on the road as well. And Canadian pioneers such as Toronto offer lessons for other transit systems aiming to transition to greener fleets for the low-carbon economy of the future.
Diesel buses are some of the noisier, more polluting vehicles on urban roads. Going electric could have big benefits, even though 18% of Canada's 2019 electricity from fossil fuels remains a factor.
Emissions reductions are the main reason the federal government aims to add 5,000 electric buses to Canada's transit and school fleets by the end of 2024. New funding announced this week as part of the government's fall fiscal update could also give programs to electrify transit systems a boost.
"You are seeing huge movement towards all-electric," said Bem Case, the Toronto Transit Commission's head of vehicle programs. "I think all of the transit agencies are starting to see what we're seeing ... the broader benefits."
While Vancouver has been running electric trolley buses (more than 200, in fact), many cities (including Vancouver) are now switching their diesel buses to battery-electric buses in Metro Vancouver that don't require overhead wires and can run on regular bus routes.
The TTC got approval from its board to buy its first 30 battery-electric buses in November 2017. Its plan is to have a zero-emissions fleet by 2040.
That's a crucial part of Toronto's plan to meet its 2050 greenhouse gas targets, which requires 100 per cent of vehicles to transition to low-carbon energy by then.
But Case said the transition can't happen overnight.
Finding the right bus
For one thing, just finding the right bus isn't easy.
"There's no bus, by any manufacturer, that's been in service for the entire life of a bus, which is 12 years," Case said.
"And so really, until then, we don't have enough experience, nor does anyone else in the industry, have enough experience to commit to an all-electric fleet immediately."
In fact, Case said, there are only three manufacturers that make suitable long-range buses — the kind needed in a city the size of Toronto.
Having never bought electric buses before, the city had no specifications for what it needed in an electric bus, so it decided to try all three suppliers: Winnipeg-based New Flyer; BYD, which is headquartered in Shenzhen, China, but built the TTC buses at its Newmarket, Ont. facility; and California-based Proterra.
They all had their strengths and weaknesses, based on their backgrounds as a traditional non-electric bus manufacturer, a battery maker and a vehicle technology and design startup, respectively.
"Each bus type has its own potential challenges." Case said all three manufacturers are working to resolve any adoption challenges as quickly as possible.
But the biggest challenge of all, Case said, is getting the infrastructure in place.
"There's no playbook, really, for implementing charging infrastructure," he said.
Each bus type needed their own chargers, in some cases using different types of current. Each type has been installed in a different garage in partnership with local utility Toronto Hydro.
Buying and installing them represented about $70 million, or about half the cost of acquiring Toronto's first 60 electric buses. The $140 million project was funded by the federal Public Transit Infrastructure Fund.
Case said it takes about three hours to charge a battery that has been fully depleted. To maximize use of the bus, it's typically put on a long route in the morning, covering 200 to 250 kilometres. Then it's partially charged and put on a shorter run in the late afternoon.
"That way we get as much mileage on the buses as we can."
Cost and reliability?
Besides the infrastructure cost of chargers, each electric bus can cost $200,000 to $500,000 more per bus than an average $750,000 diesel bus.
Case acknowledges that is "significantly" more expensive, but it is offset by fuel savings over time, as electricity costs are cheaper. Because the electric buses have fewer parts than diesel buses, maintenance costs are also about 25 per cent lower and the buses are expected to be more reliable.
As with many new technologies, the cost of electric buses is also falling over time.
Case expects they will eventually get to the point where the total life-cycle cost of an electric and a diesel bus are comparable, and the electric bus may even save money in the long run.
As of this fall, all but one of the 60 new electric buses have been put into service. The last one is expected to hit the road in early December.
Summer testing showed that air conditioning the buses reduced the battery capacity by about 15 per cent.
But the TTC needs to see how much of the battery capacity is consumed by heating in winter, at least when the temperature is above 5 C. Below that, a diesel-powered heater kicks in.
Once testing is complete, the TTC plans to develop specifications for its electric bus fleet and order 300 more in 2023, for delivery between 2023 and 2025.
Potential benefits
Even with some diesel heating, the TTC estimates electric buses reduce fuel usage by 70 to 80 per cent. If its whole fleet were switched to electric buses, it could save $50 million to $70 million in fuel a year and 150 tonnes of greenhouse gases per bus per year, or 340,000 tonnes for the entire fleet.
Other than greenhouse gases, electric buses also generate fewer emissions of other pollutants. They're also quieter, creating a more comfortable urban environment for pedestrians and cyclists.
But the benefits could potentially go far beyond the local city.
"If the public agencies start electrifying their fleet and their service is very demanding, I think they'll demonstrate to the broader transportation industry that it is possible," Case said.
"And that's where you'll get the real gains for the environment."
Alex Milovanoff, a postdoctoral researcher in the University of Toronto's department of civil engineering, did a U of T EV study that suggested electrified transit has a crucial role to play in the low-carbon economy of the future.
His calculations show that 90 per cent of U.S. passenger vehicles — 300 million — would need to be electric by 2050 to reach targets under the global Paris Agreement to fight climate change.
And that would put a huge strain on resources, including both the mining of metals, such as lithium and cobalt, that are used in electric vehicle batteries and the electrical grid itself.
A better solution, he showed, was combining the transition to electric vehicles with a reduction in the number of private vehicles, and higher usage of transit, cycling and walking.
"Then that becomes a feasible picture," he said.
What's needed to make the transition
But in order to make that happen, governments need to make investments and navigate the 2035 EV mandate debate on timelines, he added.
That includes subsidies for buying electric buses and building charging stations so transit agencies don't need to make fares too high. But it also includes more general improvements to the range and reliability of transit infrastructure.
"Electrifying the bus fleet is only efficient if we have a large public transit fleet and if we have many buses on the road and if people take them," Milovanoff said.
In its fall economic update on Monday, the federal government announced $150 million over three years to speed up the installation of zero-emission vehicle infrastructure.
Josipa Petrunic, CEO of the Canadian Urban Transit Research and Innovation Consortium, a non-profit organization focused on zero-carbon mobility and transportation, said that in the past, similar funding has paid for high-powered charging systems for transit systems in B.C. and Ontario. But that's only a small part of what's needed, she said.
"Infrastructure Canada needs to come to the table with the cash for the buses and the whole rest of the system."
She said funding is needed for:
Feasibility studies to figure out how many and what kinds of buses are needed for different routes in different transit systems.
Targets and incentives to motivate transit systems to make the switch.
Incentives to encourage Canadian procurement to build the industry in Canada.
Technology to collect and share data on the performance of electric vehicles so transit systems can make the best-possible decisions to meet the needs of their riders.
Petrunic said that a positive side-effect of electrifying transit systems is that the infrastructure can support, in addition to buses, electric trucks for moving freight.
"It's not a lot given that we have 15,000 buses out there in the transit fleet," she said.
"But we should be able to get a lot further ahead if we match the city commitments to zero emissions with federal and provincial funding for jobs creating zero-emissions technologies."
Related News
Questions abound about New Brunswick's embrace of small nuclear reactors
New Brunswick Small Modular Reactors promise clean energy, jobs, and economic growth, say NB Power, ARC Nuclear, and Moltex Energy; critics cite cost overruns, nuclear waste risks, market viability, and reliance on government funding.
Key Points
Compact reactors proposed in NB to deliver low-carbon power and jobs; critics warn of costs, waste, and market risks.
✅ Promised jobs, exports, and net-zero support via NB Power partnerships
✅ Critics cite cost overruns, nuclear waste, and weak market demand
✅ Government funding pivotal; ARC and Moltex advance licensing
When Mike Holland talks about small modular nuclear reactors, he sees dollar signs.
When the Green Party hears about them, they see danger signs.
The loquacious Progressive Conservative minister of energy development recently quoted NB Power's eye-popping estimates of the potential economic impact of the reactors: thousands of jobs and a $1 billion boost to the provincial economy.
"New Brunswick is positioned to not only participate in this opportunity, but to be a world leader in the SMR field," Holland said in the legislature last month.
'Huge risk' nuclear deal could let Ontario push N.B. aside, says consultant
'Many issues' with modular nuclear reactors says environmental lawyer
Green MLAs David Coon and Kevin Arseneau responded cheekily by ticking off the Financial and Consumer Services Commission's checklist on how to spot a scam.
Is the sales pitch from a credible source? Is the windfall being promised by a reputable institution? Is the risk reasonable?
For small nuclear reactors, they said, the answer to all those questions is no.
"The last thing we need to do is pour more public money down the nuclear-power drain," Coon said, reminding MLAs of the Point Lepreau refurbishment project that went $1 billion over budget.
The Greens aside, New Brunswick politicians have embraced small modular reactors as part of a broader premiers' nuclear initiative to develop SMR technology, which they say can both create jobs and help solve the climate crisis.
Smaller and cheaper, supporters say
They're "small" because, depending on the design, they would generate from three to 300 megawatts of electricity, less than, for example, Point Lepreau's 660 megawatts.
It's the modular design that is supposed to make them more affordable, as explained in next-gen nuclear guides, with components manufactured elsewhere, sometimes in existing factories, then shipped and assembled.
Under Brian Gallant, the Liberals handed $10 million to two Saint John companies working on SMRs, ARC Nuclear and Moltex Energy.
Greens point to previous fiascoes
The Greens and other opponents of nuclear power fear SMRS are the latest in a long line of silver-bullet fiascoes, from the $23 million spent on the Bricklin in 1975 to $63.4 million in loans and loan guarantees to the Atcon Group a decade ago.
"It seems that [ARC and Moltex] have been targeting New Brunswick for another big handout ... because it's going to take billions of dollars to build these things, if they ever get off the drawing board," said Susan O'Donnell, a University of New Brunswick researcher.
O'Donnell, who studies technology adoption in communities, is part of a small new group called the Coalition for Responsible Energy Development formed this year to oppose SMRs.
"What we really need here is a reasonable discussion about the pros and cons of it," she said.
Government touts economic spinoffs
According to the Higgs government's throne speech last month, if New Brunswick companies can secure just one per cent of the Canadian market for small reactors, the province would see $190 million in revenue.
The figures come from a study conducted for NB Power by University of Moncton economist Pierre-Marcel Desjardins.
But a four-page public summary does not include any sales projections and NB Power did not provide them to CBC News.
"What we didn't see was a market analysis," O'Donnell said. "How viable is the market? … They're all based on a hypothetical market that probably doesn't exist."
O'Donnell said her group asked for the full report but was told it's confidential because it contains sensitive commercial information.
Holland said he's confident there will be buyers.
"It won't be hard to find communities that will be looking for a cost effective, affordable, safe alternative to generate their electricity and do it in a way that emits zero emissions," he said.
SMRs come in different sizes and while some proponents talk about using "micro" reactors to provide electricity to remote northern First Nations communities, ARC and Moltex plan larger models to sell to power utilities looking to shift away from coal and gas.
"We have utilities and customers across Canada, where Ontario's first SMR groundbreaking has occurred already, across the United States, across Asia and Europe saying they desperately want a technology like this," said Moltex's Saint John-based CEO for North America Rory O'Sullivan.
"The market is screaming for this product," he said, adding "all of the utilities" in Canada are interested in Moltex's reactors
ARC's CEO Norm Sawyer is more specific, guessing 30 per cent of his SMR sales will be in Atlantic Canada, 30 per cent in Ontario, where Darlington SMR plans are advancing, and 40 per cent in Alberta and Saskatchewan — all provincial power grids.
O'Donnell said it's an important question because without a large number of guaranteed sales, the high cost of manufacturing SMRs would make the initiative a money-loser.
The cost of building the world's only functioning SMR, in Russia, was four times what was expected.
An Australian government agency said initial cost estimates for such major projects "are often initially too low" and can "overrun."
Up-front costs can be huge
University of British Columbia physicist M.V. Ramana, who has authored studies on the economics of nuclear power, said SMRs face the same financial reality as any large-scale manufacturing.
"You're going to spend a huge amount of money on the basic fixed costs" at the outset, he said, with costs per unit becoming more viable only after more units are built and sold.
He estimates a company would have to build and sell more than 700 SMRs to break even, and said there are not enough buyers for that to happen.
But Sawyer said those estimates don't take into account technological advances.
"A lot of what's being said ... is really based on old technology," he said, estimating ARC would be viable even if it sold an amount of reactors in the low double digits.
O'Sullivan agrees.
"In fact, just the first one alone looks like it will still be economical," he said. "In reality, you probably need a few … but you're talking about one or two, maximum three [to make a profit] because you don't need these big factories."
'Paper designs' prove nothing, says expert
Ramana doesn't buy it.
"These are all companies that have been started by somebody who's been in the nuclear industry for some years, has a bright idea, finds an angel investor who's given them a few million dollars," he said.
"They have a paper design, or a Power Point design. They have not built anything. They have not tested anything. To go from that point … to a design that can actually be constructed on the field is an enormous amount of work."
Both CEOs acknowledge the skepticism about SMRs.
'The market is screaming for this product,' said Moltex’s Saint John-based CEO for North America, Rory O’Sullivan. (Brian Chisholm, CBC)
"I understand New Brunswick has had its share of good investments and its share of what we consider questionable investments," said Sawyer, who grew up in Rexton.
But he said ARC's SMR is based on a long-proven technology and is far past the on-paper design stage "so you reduce the risk."
Moltex is now completing the first phase of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission's review of its design, a major hurdle. ARC completed that phase last year.
But, Ramana said there are problems with both designs. Moltex's molten salt model has had "huge technical challenges" elsewhere while ARC's sodium-cooled system has encountered "operational difficulties."
Ottawa says nuclear is needed for climate goals
The most compelling argument for looking at SMRs may be Ottawa's climate change goals, and international moves like the U.K.'s green industrial revolution plan point to broader momentum.
The national climate plan requires NB Power to phase out burning coal at its Belledune generating station by 2030. It's scrambling to find a replacement source of electricity.
The Trudeau government's throne speech in October promised to "support investments in renewable energy and next-generation clean energy and technology solutions."
And federal Natural Resources Minister Seamus O'Regan told CBC earlier this year that he's "very excited" about SMRs and has called nuclear key to climate goals in Canada as well.
"We have not seen a model where we can get to net-zero emissions by 2050 without nuclear," he said.
O'Donnell said while nuclear power doesn't emit greenhouse gases, it's hardly a clean technology because of the spent nuclear fuel waste.
Government support is key
She also wonders why, if SMRs make so much sense, ARC and Moltex are relying so much on government money rather than private capital.
Holland said "the vast majority" of funding for the two companies "has to come from private sector investments, who will be very careful to make sure they get a return on that investment."
Sawyer said ARC has three dollars for every dollar it has received from the province, and General Electric has a minority ownership stake in its U.S.-based parent company.
O'Sullivan said Moltex has attracted $5 million from a European engineering firm and $6 million from "the first-ever nuclear crowdfunding campaign."
But he said for new technologies, including nuclear power, "you need government to show policy support.
"Nuclear technology has always been developed by governments around the world. This is a very new change to have an industry come in and lead this, so private investors can't take the risk to do that on their own," he said.
So far, Ottawa hasn't put up any funding for ARC or Moltex. During the provincial election campaign, Higgs implied federal money was imminent, but there's been no announcement in the almost three months since then.
Last month the federal government announced $20 million for Terrestrial Energy, an Ontario company working on SMRs, alongside OPG's commitment to SMRs in the province, underscoring momentum.
"We know we have the best technology pitch," O'Sullivan said. "There's others that are slightly more advanced than us, but we have the best overall proposition and we think that's going to win out at the end of the day."
But O'Donnell said her group plans to continue asking questions about SMRs.
"I think what we really need is to have an honest conversation about what these are so that New Brunswickers can have all the facts on the table," she said.