Jeff Veltri gives new meaning to the phrase "Break a leg!"
A compressor mechanic in the late 1980s, Veltri, in his mid-20s at the time, was helping a friend cut down a tree when the ladder he was on lost balance. Instinctively, he threw the chainsaw he was holding in the air and decided to jump off, landing on his right leg and breaking it in four places.
"It turned out the best thing that ever happened to me, besides meeting my wife," he half-jokes, rolling up his pant leg to reveal a long surgical scar.
If the leg break hadn't happened, Veltri, who was on crutches for three months, would have never gone back to high school to finish grade 13 math and physics. Without grade 13, he wouldn't have been accepted into the mechanical engineering program at Ryerson University. And without the Ryerson engineering degree, he wouldn't have become an inventor with five patents to his name.
But it was in 2008 that the self-professed garage tinkerer heard his true calling, after learning that Ontario was planning to introduce time-of-use electricity rates. What if, he asked himself, a homeowner could have an economical way to store electricity when it's least expensive and then use it as needed?
He investigated a number of technologies. Batteries? Nope - too costly, and they don't last long enough. Ultracapacitors? Nope - also too costly, and too quick to discharge. What got Veltri inspired, however, was the idea of building a better flywheel system.
The concept of flywheels is simple: An electric motor is used to spin a rotor, which is typically a heavy cylindrical mass made out of a high-strength material, such as carbon composite or steel.
The cylinder can be made to spin faster than 10,000 revolutions per minute, usually in a vacuum housing, and this gives it tremendous momentum. This momentum, or kinetic energy, amounts to storage of the electricity that got the mass spinning in the first place.
When you want to convert that kinetic energy back into electricity the flywheel drives the motor, making it function instead as a power-producing generator.
"How long it spins in standby mode depends on the amount of friction in the system," explains Veltri. The more sustained the spin the more energy that can be stored over a given period of time. "So the name of the game is to reduce friction as much as possible."
To reduce flywheel friction, many developers levitate the rotor on electromagnetic bearings. The problem is that some external power is required to keep those bearings magnetized. So while this approach reduces friction dramatically, the need for small amounts of electricity creates a "parasitic loss" that still limits how long the system can store the energy.
Indeed, that's why most flywheel systems today are used for temporary backup power or to manage short-term instabilities in the grid. That's because if they keep the flywheel in standby storage mode for too long — anywhere from tens of minutes to a few hours — all of the energy will drain out.
Veltri came up with a better, lower-cost design based instead on permanent magnets that require no electricity, meaning zero parasitic losses. He also figured out a way to integrate the various component of his system, including his magnets, to keep friction levels extremely low.
He claims, for example, that his flywheel system will be capable of holding 95 per cent of its charge for eight hours or longer. The end result would be a system that offers twice the power at half the cost of systems from its closest competitor, Beacon Power of Massachusetts.
A breakthrough in energy storage? Could be, but first Veltri has to back up his remarkable claims through commercial demonstration. That's what he plans to do.
His first prototype worked well but was small, only storing enough electricity to power three light bulbs for an hour. In spring 2009 Veltri received $300,000 through the Ontario Power Authority's technology development fund to build a one kilowatt-hour prototype. A third prototype that's 20 times larger is near complete.
No longer does Veltri have his sights set on a home energy system. It's simply not economical on such a small scale. The plan now is to build modules, each 50 kilowatt-hours in size, which can be used individually or grouped together as part of a large utility-scale system.
These modules would measure a metre in diameter and nearly two metres high. They would be capable of performing short but also longer-term storage functions, such as storing wind energy at night so it can be dispatched during the day.
"It doesn't seem like rocket science, but there is a lot of engineering work that goes into configuring how this all goes together," says Cam Carver, a local entrepreneur who in fall 2009 joined up with Veltri to co-found Burlington-based Temporal Power, where he serves as chief executive.
For example, the permanent magnets must suspend thousands of pounds of spinning steel with incredible accuracy, meaning the magnets must be fabricated and positioned with extreme precision. The final product, however, is expected to be incredibly low maintenance compared to battery alternatives.
"It has no aversion to temperature and no toxic components, and the way we're designing them they'll only need maintenance once every 10 years," says Carver, adding that it will be a made-in-Ontario technology. "It's amazing how many machine shops there are within five kilometres of us that can make parts for this."
Hydro One will likely be the first to test the system as part of a demonstration project that recently received funding from Sustainable Development Technology Canada. Temporal plans to deploy 10 of its flywheels on Hydro One's distribution network, where they will help smooth out power production from wind turbines in the area.
Another demonstration is also in the works.
I ask Veltri how a guy tinkering away in his garage could possibly do what dozens of deep-pocketed companies haven't.
"People ask me that all the time," he replies. "I honestly can't tell you why. I've personally reviewed 120 patents on flywheels and nobody has done what we're doing. Maybe it's because I bring a new perspective. I don't have blinders on.
"If an engineer were to look at this design, I'm sure he'd say, 'Duh, why didn't I think of that?' Fortunately, nobody did."
Medicine Hat Bitcoin Mining Facility drives massive electricity demand and energy use, leveraging natural gas and nearby wind power; Hut 8 touts economic growth, while critics cite carbon emissions, renewables integration, and climate impact.
Key Points
A Hut 8 project in Alberta that mines bitcoin at scale, consuming up to 60 MW and impacting energy and emissions.
✅ Consumes more than 60 MW, rivaling citywide electricity use
✅ Sited by natural gas plant; wind turbines nearby
✅ Economic gains vs. carbon emissions and climate risks
On the day of the grand opening of the largest bitcoin mining project in the country, the weather was partly cloudy and 15 C. On a Friday afternoon like this one, the new facility uses as much electricity as all of Medicine Hat, Alta., a city of more than 60,000 people and home to several large industrial plants.
The vast amount of electricity needed for bitcoin mining is why the city of Medicine Hat has championed the economic benefits of the project, while environmentalists say they are wary of the significant energy use.
Toronto-based Hut 8 has spent more than $100 million to develop the 4½-hectare site on the northern edge of the city. It has 56 shipping containers, each filled with 180 computer servers that digitally mine for bitcoin around the clock.
The company said it has already mined more than 3,300 bitcoins in Alberta, including at its much smaller site in Drumheller. On average, the Medicine Hat facility mines about 20 bitcoins per day. The value of bitcoin can fluctuate daily, but has sold recently for around $9,000.
The bitcoin mining facility is located right beside the city of Medicine Hat's new natural gas-fired power plant and four wind turbines are a short distance away. The bitcoin plant can consume more than 60 megawatts of power, more than 10 times more electricity used by any other facility in the city, according to the mayor.
That's why, in the event of a summer heat wave, the city has provisions in place to pull the plug on the electricity it provides to Hut 8, mirroring utility pauses on crypto loads seen elsewhere, so there won't be any blackouts for residents, according to the mayor.
Still, some say the bitcoin mining industry wastes far too much energy
"It's a huge magnitude when you talk about the carbon emissions," said Saeed Kaddoura, an analyst with the Pembina Institute, an environmental think-tank. "Moving forward, there needs to be some consideration on what the environmental impact of this is."
Medicine Hat owns its own natural gas and electricity generation and distribution businesses. The city leases the land to Hut 8 and the facility employs 40 full-time workers. Add up the economic benefits and the city of Medicine Hat will receive a significant financial boost from the new project, says Ted Clugston, the city's mayor.
Financial details of the city's deal with Hut 8 are not disclosed.
For more than a century, the city has attracted business by offering low-cost energy, and the mayor said this project is no different.
"They could have gone anywhere in the world and they chose Medicine Hat," said Clugston. "[Hut 8] is not here for renewable energy because it is not reliable. They need gas-fired generation and we have it in spades."
Environmental groups are concerned by the sheer amount of energy consumed by bitcoin mining, with some utilities warning they can't serve new energy-intensive customers right now, especially in places like Medicine Hat where most of the electricity is produced by fossil fuels.
The bitcoin system is designed, so only a limited number of the cryptocurrency can be mined everyday. Over time, as more miners compete for a decreasing number of available bitcoins, facilities will have to use more electricity compared to the amount of the cryptocurrency they collect.
"The way the bitcoin algorithm works is that it's designed to waste as much electricity as possible. And the more popular bitcoin becomes, the more electricity it wastes," said Keith Stewart, a spokesperson for Greenpeace.
Stewart questions whether natural gas should be used to produce a digital product.
"If you live in Alberta, you want to have heat and light, those types of things. I don't think bitcoin is a necessity of life for anyone," he said.
The CEO of Hut 8 completely disagrees, arguing the cryptocurrency is essential.
"Bitcoin was created during the financial crisis. It has really served a purpose in terms of providing the opportunity for people who don't necessarily trust their government or their central banks," said Andrew Kiguel.
Boeing 787 More-Electric Architecture replaces pneumatics with bleedless pressurization, VFSG starter-generators, electric brakes, and heated wing anti-ice, leveraging APU, RAT, batteries, and airport ground power for efficient, redundant electrical power distribution.
Key Points
An integrated, bleedless electrical system powering start, pressurization, brakes, and anti-ice via VFSGs, APU and RAT.
✅ VFSGs start engines, then generate 235Vac variable-frequency power
✅ Bleedless pressurization, electric anti-ice improve fuel efficiency
✅ Electric brakes cut hydraulic weight and simplify maintenance
The 787 Dreamliner is different to most commercial aircraft flying the skies today. On the surface it may seem pretty similar to the likes of the 777 and A350, but get under the skin and it’s a whole different aircraft.
When Boeing designed the 787, in order to make it as fuel efficient as possible, it had to completely shake up the way some of the normal aircraft systems operated. Traditionally, systems such as the pressurization, engine start and wing anti-ice were powered by pneumatics. The wheel brakes were powered by the hydraulics. These essential systems required a lot of physical architecture and with that comes weight and maintenance. This got engineers thinking.
What if the brakes didn’t need the hydraulics? What if the engines could be started without the pneumatic system? What if the pressurisation system didn’t need bleed air from the engines? Imagine if all these systems could be powered electrically… so that’s what they did.
Power sources
The 787 uses a lot of electricity. Therefore, to keep up with the demand, it has a number of sources of power, much as grid operators track supply on the GB energy dashboard to balance loads. Depending on whether the aircraft is on the ground with its engines off or in the air with both engines running, different combinations of the power sources are used.
Engine starter/generators
The main source of power comes from four 235Vac variable frequency engine starter/generators (VFSGs). There are two of these in each engine. These function as electrically powered starter motors for the engine start, and once the engine is running, then act as engine driven generators.
The generators in the left engine are designated as L1 and L2, the two in the right engine are R1 and R2. They are connected to their respective engine gearbox to generate electrical power directly proportional to the engine speed. With the engines running, the generators provide electrical power to all the aircraft systems.
APU starter/generators
In the tail of most commercial aircraft sits a small engine, the Auxiliary Power Unit (APU). While this does not provide any power for aircraft propulsion, it does provide electrics for when the engines are not running.
The APU of the 787 has the same generators as each of the engines — two 235Vac VFSGs, designated L and R. They act as starter motors to get the APU going and once running, then act as generators. The power generated is once again directly proportional to the APU speed.
The APU not only provides power to the aircraft on the ground when the engines are switched off, but it can also provide power in flight should there be a problem with one of the engine generators.
Battery power
The aircraft has one main battery and one APU battery. The latter is quite basic, providing power to start the APU and for some of the external aircraft lighting.
The main battery is there to power the aircraft up when everything has been switched off and also in cases of extreme electrical failure in flight, and in the grid context, alternatives such as gravity power storage are being explored for long-duration resilience. It provides power to start the APU, acts as a back-up for the brakes and also feeds the captain’s flight instruments until the Ram Air Turbine deploys.
Ram air turbine (RAT) generator
When you need this, you’re really not having a great day. The RAT is a small propeller which automatically drops out of the underside of the aircraft in the event of a double engine failure (or when all three hydraulics system pressures are low). It can also be deployed manually by pressing a switch in the flight deck.
Once deployed into the airflow, the RAT spins up and turns the RAT generator. This provides enough electrical power to operate the captain’s flight instruments and other essentials items for communication, navigation and flight controls.
External power
Using the APU on the ground for electrics is fine, but they do tend to be quite noisy. Not great for airports wishing to keep their noise footprint down. To enable aircraft to be powered without the APU, most big airports will have a ground power system drawing from national grids, including output from facilities such as Barakah Unit 1 as part of the mix. Large cables from the airport power supply connect 115Vac to the aircraft and allow pilots to shut down the APU. This not only keeps the noise down but also saves on the fuel which the APU would use.
The 787 has three external power inputs — two at the front and one at the rear. The forward system is used to power systems required for ground operations such as lighting, cargo door operation and some cabin systems. If only one forward power source is connected, only very limited functions will be available.
The aft external power is only used when the ground power is required for engine start.
Circuit breakers
Most flight decks you visit will have the back wall covered in circuit breakers — CBs. If there is a problem with a system, the circuit breaker may “pop” to preserve the aircraft electrical system. If a particular system is not working, part of the engineers procedure may require them to pull and “collar” a CB — placing a small ring around the CB to stop it from being pushed back in. However, on the 787 there are no physical circuit breakers. You’ve guessed it, they’re electric.
Within the Multi Function Display screen is the Circuit Breaker Indication and Control (CBIC). From here, engineers and pilots are able to access all the “CBs” which would normally be on the back wall of the flight deck. If an operational procedure requires it, engineers are able to electrically pull and collar a CB giving the same result as a conventional CB.
Not only does this mean that the there are no physical CBs which may need replacing, it also creates space behind the flight deck which can be utilised for the galley area and cabin.
A normal flight
While it’s useful to have all these systems, they are never all used at the same time, and, as the power sector’s COVID-19 mitigation strategies showed, resilience planning matters across operations. Depending on the stage of the flight, different power sources will be used, sometimes in conjunction with others, to supply the required power.
On the ground
When we arrive at the aircraft, more often than not the aircraft is plugged into the external power with the APU off. Electricity is the blood of the 787 and it doesn’t like to be without a good supply constantly pumping through its system, and, as seen in NYC electric rhythms during COVID-19, demand patterns can shift quickly. Ground staff will connect two forward external power sources, as this enables us to operate the maximum number of systems as we prepare the aircraft for departure.
Whilst connected to the external source, there is not enough power to run the air conditioning system. As a result, whilst the APU is off, air conditioning is provided by Preconditioned Air (PCA) units on the ground. These connect to the aircraft by a pipe and pump cool air into the cabin to keep the temperature at a comfortable level.
APU start
As we near departure time, we need to start making some changes to the configuration of the electrical system. Before we can push back , the external power needs to be disconnected — the airports don’t take too kindly to us taking their cables with us — and since that supply ultimately comes from the grid, projects like the Bruce Power upgrade increase available capacity during peaks, but we need to generate our own power before we start the engines so to do this, we use the APU.
The APU, like any engine, takes a little time to start up, around 90 seconds or so. If you remember from before, the external power only supplies 115Vac whereas the two VFSGs in the APU each provide 235Vac. As a result, as soon as the APU is running, it automatically takes over the running of the electrical systems. The ground staff are then clear to disconnect the ground power.
If you read my article on how the 787 is pressurised, you’ll know that it’s powered by the electrical system. As soon as the APU is supplying the electricity, there is enough power to run the aircraft air conditioning. The PCA can then be removed.
Engine start
Once all doors and hatches are closed, external cables and pipes have been removed and the APU is running, we’re ready to push back from the gate and start our engines. Both engines are normally started at the same time, unless the outside air temperature is below 5°C.
On other aircraft types, the engines require high pressure air from the APU to turn the starter in the engine. This requires a lot of power from the APU and is also quite noisy. On the 787, the engine start is entirely electrical.
Power is drawn from the APU and feeds the VFSGs in the engines. If you remember from earlier, these fist act as starter motors. The starter motor starts the turn the turbines in the middle of the engine. These in turn start to turn the forward stages of the engine. Once there is enough airflow through the engine, and the fuel is igniting, there is enough energy to continue running itself.
After start
Once the engine is running, the VFSGs stop acting as starter motors and revert to acting as generators. As these generators are the preferred power source, they automatically take over the running of the electrical systems from the APU, which can then be switched off. The aircraft is now in the desired configuration for flight, with the 4 VFSGs in both engines providing all the power the aircraft needs.
As the aircraft moves away towards the runway, another electrically powered system is used — the brakes. On other aircraft types, the brakes are powered by the hydraulics system. This requires extra pipe work and the associated weight that goes with that. Hydraulically powered brake units can also be time consuming to replace.
By having electric brakes, the 787 is able to reduce the weight of the hydraulics system and it also makes it easier to change brake units. “Plug in and play” brakes are far quicker to change, keeping maintenance costs down and reducing flight delays.
In-flight
Another system which is powered electrically on the 787 is the anti-ice system. As aircraft fly though clouds in cold temperatures, ice can build up along the leading edge of the wing. As this reduces the efficiency of the the wing, we need to get rid of this.
Other aircraft types use hot air from the engines to melt it. On the 787, we have electrically powered pads along the leading edge which heat up to melt the ice.
Not only does this keep more power in the engines, but it also reduces the drag created as the hot air leaves the structure of the wing. A double win for fuel savings.
Once on the ground at the destination, it’s time to start thinking about the electrical configuration again. As we make our way to the gate, we start the APU in preparation for the engine shut down. However, because the engine generators have a high priority than the APU generators, the APU does not automatically take over. Instead, an indication on the EICAS shows APU RUNNING, to inform us that the APU is ready to take the electrical load.
Shutdown
With the park brake set, it’s time to shut the engines down. A final check that the APU is indeed running is made before moving the engine control switches to shut off. Plunging the cabin into darkness isn’t a smooth move. As the engines are shut down, the APU automatically takes over the power supply for the aircraft. Once the ground staff have connected the external power, we then have the option to also shut down the APU.
However, before doing this, we consider the cabin environment. If there is no PCA available and it’s hot outside, without the APU the cabin temperature will rise pretty quickly. In situations like this we’ll wait until all the passengers are off the aircraft until we shut down the APU.
Once on external power, the full flight cycle is complete. The aircraft can now be cleaned and catered, ready for the next crew to take over.
Bottom line
Electricity is a fundamental part of operating the 787. Even when there are no passengers on board, some power is required to keep the systems running, ready for the arrival of the next crew. As we prepare the aircraft for departure and start the engines, various methods of powering the aircraft are used.
The aircraft has six electrical generators, of which only four are used in normal flights. Should one fail, there are back-ups available. Should these back-ups fail, there are back-ups for the back-ups in the form of the battery. Should this back-up fail, there is yet another layer of contingency in the form of the RAT. A highly unlikely event.
The 787 was built around improving efficiency and lowering carbon emissions whilst ensuring unrivalled levels safety, and, in the wider energy landscape, perspectives like nuclear beyond electricity highlight complementary paths to decarbonization — a mission it’s able to achieve on hundreds of flights every single day.
Alberta Electricity Market Reform reshapes policy under the UCP, weighing a capacity market versus energy-only design, AESO reliability rules, renewables targets, coal phase-out, carbon pricing, consumer rates, and investment certainty before AUC decisions.
Key Points
Alberta Electricity Market Reform is the UCP plan to reassess capacity vs energy-only, renewables, and carbon pricing.
✅ Reviews capacity market timeline and AESO procurement
✅ Alters subsidies for renewables; slows wind and solar growth
✅ Adjusts industrial carbon levy; audits Balancing Pool losses
Hearings kicked off this week into the future of the province’s electricity market design, amid an electricity market reshuffle pledged by the province, but a high-stakes decision about the industry’s fate — affecting billions of dollars in investment and consumer costs — won’t be made inside the meeting room of the Alberta Utilities Commission.
Instead, it will take place in the office of Jason Kenney, as the incoming premier prepares to pivot away from the seismic reforms to Alberta’s electricity sector introduced by the Notley government.
The United Conservative Party has promised to adopt market-based policies, reflecting changes to how Alberta produces and pays for power, that will reset how the sector operates, from its approach to renewable energy and carbon pricing to re-evaluating the planned transition to an electricity “capacity market.”
“Every ball in electricity is up in the air right now,” Vittoria Bellissimo, of the Industrial Power Consumers Association of Alberta, said Tuesday during a break in the commission hearings.
Industry players are uncertain how quickly the UCP will change direction on power policies, but there’s little doubt Kenney’s government will take a strikingly different approach to the sector that keeps the lights on in Alberta.
“There’s some things they are going to change that are going to impact the electricity industry significantly,” said Duane Reid-Carlson, chief executive of consultancy EDC Associates.
“But I don’t think it’s going to be upheaval. I think the new government will proceed with caution because electricity is the foundation of our economy.”
Alberta’s electricity market has been turned on its head in recent years due to the recession, power prices dropping to near two-decade lows and several transformative policies initiated by the NDP.
The Notley government’s climate plan included an accelerated phase-out of all coal-fired generation and set targets for more renewable energy.
The most significant, but least-understood, move has been the planned shift to an electricity capacity market in 2021.
Under the strategy, generators will no longer solely be paid for the power produced and sold into the market; they will also receive payments for having electricity capacity available to the grid on demand.
The change was recommended by the Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO) as a way to reduce price volatility and provide more reliability than the current energy-only market, which some argue needs more competition to deliver better outcomes.
The independent system operator and industry officials have spent more than two years planning the transition since the switch was announced in late 2016. Proposed rules for the new system, outlining market changes, are now being discussed at the Alberta Utilities Commission hearings.
However, there is no ironclad guarantee the system remake will go ahead following the UCP’s election victory last week — amid calls to scrap the overhaul from a Calgary retailer — it plans to study the issue further — while other substantive electricity changes are already in store.
The UCP has promised to end “costly subsidies” to renewable energy developments and abandon the NDP’s pledge to have such energy sources make up 30 per cent of all power generation by 2030.
It will remove the planned phase-out of coal-fired electricity generation, although federal regulations for a 2030 prohibition remain in place.
It will also ask the auditor general to conduct a special audit of the massive losses sustained by the province’s Balancing Pool due to power purchase arrangements being handed back to the agency three years ago.
While Kenney has pledged to cancel the provincewide carbon tax, a levy on large industrial greenhouse gas emitters (such has power plants) will still be charged, although at a reduced rate of $20 a tonne.
The biggest unknown remains the power market’s structure, which underpins how the entire system operates.
The UCP has promised to consult on the shift to the capacity market and report back to Albertans within 90 days.
The complex issue may sound like an eye-glazer, but it will have a profound effect on industry investment, as well as how much consumers pay on their monthly electricity bills.
A number of industry players worry the capacity market will lead AESO to procure more power than is necessary, foisting unnecessary costs onto all Albertans.
“I still have concerns for what the impact on consumers is going to be,” said energy market consultant Sheldon Fulton. “I’d love to see the capacity market go away.”
An analysis by EDC Associates found the transition to a capacity market will procure additional electricity before it’s needed, requiring consumers to pay up to 40 per cent more — an extra $1.4 billion — for power in 2021-22 than under the existing market structure.
“I don’t think there’s any prejudged outcome,” said Blake Shaffer, former head trader at TransAlta Corp. and a fellow-in-residence at the C.D. Howe Institute.
“But it really matters about getting this right.”
Evan Bahry, executive director of the Independent Power Producers Society of Alberta, said the fact the UCP’s review was confined to just 90 days is helpful, as it avoids throwing the entire industry into a prolonged period of uncertainty.
As for the greening of Alberta’s power grid, amid growing attention to clean grids and storage, the demise of the NDP’s Renewable Electricity Program will likely slow down the rapid pace of wind and solar development. But it’s unlikely to stop the growth trend as costs continue to fall for such developments.
“Renewables over the last number of years have evolved to the point that they make sense on a subsidy-free basis,” said Dan Balaban, CEO of Greengate Power Corp., which has developed 480 MW of wind power in Alberta and Ontario.
BC Fossil Fuel Phase-Out outlines a just transition to a green economy, meeting climate targets by mid-century through carbon budgets, ending subsidies for fracking, capping production, and investing in renewable energy, remediation, and resilient infrastructure.
Key Points
A strategic plan to wind down oil and gas, end subsidies, and achieve climate targets with a just transition in BC.
✅ End new leases, phase out subsidies, cap fossil production
✅ Carbon budgets and timelines to meet mid-century climate targets
✅ Just transition: income supports, retraining, site remediation jobs
Politicians in British Columbia aren't focused enough on phasing out fossil fuel industries, a new report says.
The report, authored by the left-leaning Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, says the province must move away from fossil fuel industries by mid-century in order to meet its climate targets, with B.C. projected to fall short of 2050 targets according to recent analysis, but adds that the B.C. government is ill prepared to transition to a green economy.
"We are totally moving in the wrong direction," said economist Marc Lee, one of the authors of the report, on The Early Edition Wednesday.
He said most of the emphasis of B.C. government policy has been on slowing reductions in emissions from transportation or emissions from buildings, even though Canada will need more electricity to hit net-zero according to the IEA, while still subsidizing fossil fuel extraction, such as fracking projects, that Lee said should be phased out.
"What we are putting on the table is politically unthinkable right now," said Lee, adding that last month's provincial budget called for a 26 per cent increased gas production over the next three years, even though electrified LNG facilities could boost demand for clean power.
B.C.'s $830M in fossil fuel subsidies undermines efforts to fight climate crisis, report says He said B.C. needs to start thinking instead about how its going to wind down its dependence on fossil fuel industries.
'Greener' job transition needed The report said the provincial government's continued interest in expanding production and exporting fossil fuels, even as Canada's race to net-zero intensifies across the energy sector, suggests little political will to think about a plan to move away from them.
It suggests the threat of major job losses in those industries is contributing to the political inaction, but cited several examples of ways governments can help move workers into greener jobs, as many fossil-fuel workers are ready to support the transition according to recent commentary.
Lee said early retirement provisions or income replacement for transitioning workers are options to consider.
"We actually have seen a lot of real-world policy around transition starting to happen, including in Alberta, which brought in a whole transition package for coal workers producing coal for electricity generation, and regional cooperation like bridging the electricity gap between Alberta and B.C. could further support reliability," Lee said.
Give cities the power to move more quickly on the environment, say Metro Van politicians Make it easier for small businesses to go green, B.C. Chamber of Commerce urges government Lee also said well-paying jobs could be created by, for example, remediating old coal mines and gas wells and building green infrastructure and renewable electricity projects in affected areas.
The report also calls for a moratorium on new fossil fuel leases and ending fossil fuel subsidies, as well as creating carbon budgets and fossil fuel production limits.
"Change is coming," said Lee. "We need to get out ahead of it."
Northern Ireland No-Deal Power Contingency outlines Whitehall plans to deploy thousands of generators on barges in the Irish Sea, safeguard the electricity market, and avert blackouts if Brexit disrupts imports from the Republic of Ireland.
Key Points
A UK Whitehall plan to prevent NI blackouts by deploying generators and protecting cross-border electricity flows.
✅ Barges in Irish Sea to host temporary power generators
✅ Mitigates loss of EU market access in a no-deal Brexit
✅ Ensures NI supply if Republic cuts electricity exports
Such a scenario could see thousands of electricity generators being requisitioned at short notice and positioned on barges in the Irish Sea, even as Great Britain's generation mix shapes wider supply dynamics, to help keep the region going, a Whitehall document quoted by the Financial Times states.
An emergency operation could see equipment being brought back from places like Afghanistan, where the UK still has a military presence, the newspaper said.
The extreme situation could arise because Northern Ireland shares a single energy market with the Irish Republic, where Irish grid price spikes have heightened concern about stability.
The region relies on energy imports from the Republic because it does not have enough generating capacity itself, and the UK is aiming to negotiate a deal to allow that single electricity market on the island of Ireland to continue post-EU withdrawal, while virtual power plant proposals for UK homes are explored to avoid outages, the FT stated.
However, if no Brexit deal is agreed Whitehall fears suppliers in the Irish Republic could cut off power because the UK would no longer be part of the European electricity market, and a recent short supply warning from National Grid underscores the risk.
In a bid to prevent blackouts in Northern Ireland in a worse case situation the Government would need to put thousands of generators into place, even as an emergency energy plan has reportedly not gone ahead nationwide, according to the report.
And officials fear they may need to commandeer some generators from the military in such a scenario, the FT reports.
An official was quoted by the newspaper as saying the preparations were “gob-smacking”.
Alberta Coal Phase-Out signals a clean energy transition, replacing coal with natural gas and renewables, cutting greenhouse gas emissions, leveraging a carbon levy, and supporting workers in Alberta's evolving electricity market.
Key Points
Alberta Coal Phase-Out moves power from coal to lower-emission natural gas and renewables to reduce grid emissions.
✅ Shift to natural gas and renewables lowers emissions
✅ Carbon levy and incentives accelerated clean power build-out
The closure of the Genesee Generating Station on September 30, 2023, marked a significant milestone in Alberta's energy history, as the province moved to retire coal power by 2023 ahead of its 2030 provincial deadline. The Genesee, located near Calgary, was the province's last remaining coal-fired power plant. Its closure represents the culmination of a multi-year effort to transition Alberta's electricity sector away from coal and towards cleaner sources of energy.
For decades, coal was the backbone of Alberta's electricity grid. Coal-fired plants were reliable and relatively inexpensive to operate. However, coal also has a significant environmental impact. The burning of coal releases greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide, a major contributor to climate change. Coal plants also produce air pollutants such as sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide, which can cause respiratory problems and acid rain, and in some regions electricity is projected to get dirtier as gas use expands.
In recognition of these environmental concerns, the Alberta government began to develop plans to phase out coal-fired power generation in the early 2000s. The government implemented a number of policies to encourage the shift from coal to cleaner energy such as natural gas and renewable energy. These policies included providing financial incentives for the construction of new natural gas plants and renewable energy facilities, as well as imposing a carbon levy on coal-fired generation.
The phase-out of coal was also driven by economic factors. The cost of natural gas has declined significantly in recent years, making it a more competitive fuel source for electricity generation as producers switch to gas under evolving market conditions. Additionally, the Alberta government faced increasing pressure from the federal government to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
The transition away from coal has not been without its challenges. Coal mining and coal-fired power generation have long been important parts of Alberta's economy. The closure of coal plants has resulted in job losses in the affected communities. The government has implemented programs to help workers transition to new jobs in the clean energy sector.
Despite these challenges, the closure of the Genesee Generating Station is a positive development for Alberta's environment and climate. Coal-fired power generation is one of the largest sources of greenhouse gas emissions in Alberta, and recent wind generation outpacing coal underscores the sector's transformation. The closure of the Genesee is expected to result in a significant reduction in emissions, helping Alberta to meet its climate change targets.
The transition away from coal also presents opportunities for Alberta. The province has vast natural gas resources, which can be used to generate electricity with lower emissions than coal. Alberta is also well-positioned to develop renewable energy sources, such as wind power and solar power. These renewable energy sources can help to further reduce emissions and create new jobs in the clean energy sector.
The closure of the Genesee Generating Station is a significant milestone in Alberta's energy history. It represents the end of an era for coal-fired power generation in the province, a shift mirrored by the UK's last coal station going offline earlier this year. However, it also marks the beginning of a new era for Alberta's energy sector. By transitioning to cleaner sources of energy, Alberta can reduce its environmental impact and create a more sustainable energy future.
Whether you would prefer Live Online or In-Person
instruction, our electrical training courses can be
tailored to meet your company's specific requirements
and delivered to your employees in one location or at
various locations.
