Toronto Hydro Corporation announced that it has closed the sale of the shares of its wholly-owned subsidiary, Toronto Hydro Telecom Inc., to Cogeco Cable Canada Inc. for $200 million in cash, subject to certain post-closing adjustments.
The Corporation is a holding company which through its wholly-owned subsidiaries:
- Toronto Hydro-Electric System Limited ("LDC") - distributes electricity and engages in Conservation and Demand Management activities; and
- Toronto Hydro Energy Services Inc. - provides street lighting and expressway lighting services, and energy efficiency products and services.
The principal business of the Corporation and its subsidiaries is the distribution of electricity by LDC. LDC owns and operates an electricity distribution system that delivers electricity to approximately 683,000 customers located in the City of Toronto.
China 2060 Carbon-Neutral Energy Transition projects tripled electricity, rapid electrification, wind and solar dominance, scalable hydrogen, CCUS, and higher carbon pricing to meet net-zero goals while decarbonizing heavy industry and transport.
Key Points
Shell's outlook for China to reach net zero by 2060 via electrification, renewables, hydrogen, CCUS, and carbon pricing.
✅ Power supply to 60% of energy; generation triples by 2060.
✅ Wind and solar reach 80% of electricity; coal declines sharply.
✅ Hydrogen scales to 17 EJ; CCUS and carbon pricing expand.
China may triple electricity generation to supply 60 percent of the country's total energy under Beijing's carbon-neutral goal by 2060, up from the current 23 per cent, according to Royal Dutch Shell.
Shell is one of the largest global investors in China's energy sector, with business covering gas production, petrochemicals and a retail fuel network. A leading supplier of liquefied natural gas, it has recently expanded into low-carbon business such as hydrogen power and electric vehicle charging.
In a rare assessment of the country's energy sector by an international oil major, Shell said China needed to take quick action this decade to stay on track to reach the carbon-neutrality goal.
China has mapped out plans to reach peak emissions by 2030, and aims to reduce coal power production over the coming years, but has not yet revealed any detailed carbon roadmap for 2060.
This includes investing in a reliable and renewable power system, including compressed air generation, and demonstrating technologies that transform heavy industry using hydrogen, biofuel and carbon capture and utilization.
"With early and systematic action, China can deliver better environmental and social outcomes for its citizens while being a force for good in the global fight against climate change," Mallika Ishwaran, chief economist of Shell International, told a webinar hosted by the company's China business.
Shell expects China's electricity generation to rise three-fold to more than 60 exajoules (EJ) in 2060 from 20 EJ in 2020, even amid power supply challenges reported recently.
Solar and wind power are expected to surpass coal as the largest sources of electricity by 2034 in China, reflecting projections that renewables will eclipse coal globally by mid-decade, versus the current 10 percent, rising to 80 percent by 2060, Shell said.
Hydrogen is expected to scale up to 17 EJ, or equivalent to 580 million tonnes of coal by 2060, up from almost negligible currently, adding over 85 percent of the hydrogen will be produced through electrolysis, supported by PEM hydrogen R&D across the sector, powered by renewable and nuclear electricity, Shell said.
Hydrogen will meet 16 percent of total energy use in 2060 with heavy industry and long-distance transport as top hydrogen users, the firm added.
The firm also expects China's carbon price to rise to 1,300 yuan (CDN$256.36) per tonne in 2060 from 300 yuan in 2030.
Nuclear, on a steady development track, and biomass will have niche but important roles for power generation in the years to come, Shell said.
Electricity generated from biomass, combined with carbon, capture, utilization and storage (CCUS), provide a source of negative emissions for the rest of the energy system from 2053, it added.
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.
Power Grid Attacks surge across substations and transmission lines, straining critical infrastructure as DHS and FBI cite vandalism, domestic extremists, and cybersecurity risks impacting resilience, outages, and grid reliability nationwide.
Key Points
Power Grid Attacks are deliberate strikes on substations and lines to disrupt power and weaken grid reliability.
✅ Physical attacks rose across multiple states and utilities.
✅ DHS and FBI warn of threats to critical infrastructure.
✅ Substation security and grid resilience upgrades urged.
Even before Christmas Day attacks on power substations in five states in the Pacific Northwest and Southeast, similar incidents of attacks, vandalism and suspicious activity were on the rise.
Federal energy reports through August – the most recent available – show an increase in physical attacks at electrical facilities across the nation this year, continuing a trend seen since 2017.
At least 108 human-related events were reported during the first eight months of 2022, compared with 99 in all of 2021 and 97 in 2020. More than a dozen cases of vandalism have been reported since September.
The attacks have prompted a flurry of calls to better protect the nation's power grid, with a renewed focus on protecting the U.S. power grid across sectors, but experts have warned for more than three decades that stepped-up protection was needed.
Attacks on power stations on the rise Twice this year, the Department of Homeland Security warned "a heightened threat environment" remains for the nation, including its critical infrastructure amid reports of suspected Russian breaches of power plant systems.
At least 20 actual physical attacks were reported, compared with six in all of 2021. Suspicious-activity reports jumped three years ago, nearly doubling in 2020 to 32 events. In the first eight months of this year, 34 suspicious incidents were reported. Total human-related incidents – including vandalism, suspicious activity and cyber events such as Russian hackers and U.S. utilities in recent years – are on track to be the highest since the reports started showing such activity in 2011.
Attacks reported in at least 5 states Since September, attacks or potential attacks have been reported on at least 18 additional substations and one power plant in Florida, Oregon, Washington and the Carolinas. Several involved firearms.
In Florida: Six "intrusion events" occurred at Duke Energy substations in September, resulting in at least one brief power outage, according to the News Nation television network, which cited a report the utility sent to the Energy Department. Duke Energy spokesperson Ana Gibbs confirmed a related arrest, but the company declined to comment further.
In Oregon and Washington state: Substations were attacked at least six times in November and December, with firearms used in some cases, local news outlets reported. On Christmas Day, four additional substations were vandalized in Washington State, cutting power to more than 14,000 customers.
In North Carolina: A substation in Maysville was vandalized on Nov. 11. On Dec. 3, shootings that authorities called a "targeted attack" damaged two power substations in Moore County, leaving tens of thousands without power amid freezing temperatures.
In South Carolina: Days later, gunfire was reported near a hydropower plant, but police said the shooting was a "random act."
It's not yet clear whether any of the attacks were coordinated. After the North Carolina attacks, a coordinating council between the electric power industry and the federal government ordered a security evaluation.
FBI mum on its investigations The FBI is looking into some of the attacks, including cyber intrusions where hackers accessed control rooms in past cases, but it hasn't said how many it's investigating or where.
Shelley Lynch, a spokesperson for the FBI's Charlotte field office, confirmed the bureau was investigating the North Carolina attack. The Kershaw County Sheriff's Office reported the FBI was looking into the South Carolina incident.
Utilities in Oregon and Washington told news outlets they were cooperating with the FBI, but spokespeople for the agency's Seattle and Portland field offices said they couldn't confirm or deny an investigation.
Could domestic extremists be involved? In January, the Department of Homeland Security said domestic extremists had been developing "credible, specific plans" since at least 2020, including a Neo-Nazi plot against power stations detailed in a federal complaint, and would continue to "encourage physical attacks against electrical infrastructure."
In February, three men who ascribed to white supremacy and Neo-Nazism pleaded guilty to federal crimes related to a scheme to attack the grid with rifles.
In a news release, Timothy Langan, assistant director of the FBI’s Counterterrorism Division, said the defendants "wanted to attack regional power substations and expected the damage would lead to economic distress and civil unrest."
Why is the power grid so hard to protect? Industry experts, federal officials and others have warned in one report after another since at least 1990 that the power grid was at risk, and a recent grid vulnerability report card highlights dangerous weak points, said Granger Morgan, an engineering professor at Carnegie Mellon University who chaired three National Academies of Sciences reports.
The reports urged state and federal agencies to collaborate to make the system more resilient to attacks and natural disasters such as hurricanes and storms.
"The system is inherently vulnerable, with the U.S. grid experiencing more blackouts than other developed nations in one study. It's spread all across the countryside," which makes the lines and substations easy targets, Morgan said. The grid includes more than 7,300 power plants, 160,000 miles of high-voltage power lines and 55,000 transmission substations.
One challenge is that there's no single entity whose responsibilities span the entire system, Morgan said. And the risks are only increasing as the grid expands to include renewable energy sources such as solar and wind, he said.
Ontario Clean Energy Adjustment lowers hydro bills by shifting global adjustment costs, cutting time-of-use rates, and using OPG debt financing; ratepayers get inflation-capped increases for four years, then repay costs over 20 years.
Key Points
A 20-year line item repaying debt used to lower rates for 10 years by shifting global adjustment costs off hydro bills.
✅ 17% average bill cut takes effect after royal assent
✅ OPG-managed entity assumes debt for 10 years
✅ 20-year surcharge repays up to $28B plus interest
Ontarians will see lowered hydro bills for the next 10 years, but will then pay higher costs for the following 20 years, under new legislation tabled Thursday.
Ten weeks after announcing its plan to lower hydro bills, the Liberal government introduced legislation to lower time-of-use rates, take the cost of low-income and rural support programs off bills, and introduce new social programs.
It will lower time-of-use rates by removing from bills a portion of the global adjustment, a charge consumers pay for above-market rates to power producers. For the next 10 years, a new entity overseen by Ontario Power Generation will take on debt to pay that difference.
Then, the cost of paying back that debt with interest -- which the government says will be up to $28 billion -- will go back onto ratepayers' bills for the next 20 years as a "Clean Energy Adjustment."
An average 17-per-cent cut to bills will take effect 15 days after the hydro legislation receives royal assent, even as a Nov. 1 rate increase was set by the Ontario Energy Board, but there are just eight sitting days left before the Ontario legislature breaks for the summer. Energy Minister Glenn Thibeault insisted that leaves the opposition "plenty" of time for review and debate.
Premier Kathleen Wynne promised to cut hydro bills and later defended a 25% rate cut after widespread anger over rising costs helped send her approval ratings to record lows.
Electricity bills in the province have roughly doubled in the last decade, due in part to green energy initiatives, and Thibeault said the goal of this plan is to better spread out those costs.
"Like the mortgage on your house, this regime will cost more as we refinance over a longer period of time, but this is a more equitable and fair approach when we consider the lifespan of the clean energy investments, and generating stations across our province," he said.
NDP critic Peter Tabuns called it a "get-through-the-election" next June plan.
"We're going to take on a huge debt so Kathleen Wynne can look good on the hustings in the next few months and for decades we're going to pay for it," he said.
The legislation also holds rate increases to inflation for the next four years. After that, they'll rise more quickly, as illustrated by a leaked cabinet document the Progressive Conservatives unveiled Thursday.
The Liberals dismissed the document as containing outdated projections, but confirmed that it went before cabinet at some point before the government decided to go ahead with the hydro plan.
From about 2027 onward -- when consumers would start paying off the debt associated with the hydro plan -- Ontario electricity consumers will be paying about 12 per cent more than they would without the Liberal government's plan to cut costs in the short term, even though a deal with Quebec was not expected to reduce hydro bills, the government document projected.
But that was just one of many projections, said Energy Minister Glenn Thibeault.
"We have been working on this plan for months, and as we worked on it the documents and calculations evolved," he said.
The government's long-term energy plan is set to be updated this spring, and Thibeault said it will provide a more accurate look at how the hydro plan will reduce rates, even as a recovery rate could lead to higher hydro bills in certain circumstances.
Progressive Conservative critic Todd Smith said the "Clean Energy Adjustment" is nothing more than a revamped debt retirement charge, which was on bills from 2002 to 2016 to pay down debt left over from the old Ontario Hydro, the province's giant electrical utility that was split into multiple agencies in 1999 under the previous Conservative government.
"The minister can call it whatever he wants but it's right there in the graph, that there is going to be a new charge on the line," Smith said. "It's the debt retirement charge on steroids."
USAID GE Mobile Power Plant Ukraine supplies 28MW of emergency power and distributed generation to bolster energy security, grid resilience, and critical infrastructure reliability across cities and regions amid ongoing attacks.
Key Points
A 28MW GE gas turbine from USAID providing mobile, distributed power to strengthen Ukraine's grid resilience.
✅ 28MW GE gas turbine; power for 100,000 homes
✅ Mobile deployment to cities and regions as needed
✅ Supports hospitals, schools, and critical infrastructure
Deputy U.S. Administrator Isobel Coleman announced during her visit to Kyiv that the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) has provided the Government of Ukraine with a mobile gas turbine power plant purchased from General Electric (GE), as discussions of a possible agreement on power plant attacks continue among stakeholders.
The mobile power plant was manufactured in the United States by GE’s Gas Power business and has a total output capacity of approximately 28MW, which is enough to provide the equivalent electricity to at least 100,000 homes. This will help Ukraine increase the supply of electricity to homes, hospitals, schools, critical infrastructure providers, and other institutions, as the country has even resumed electricity exports in recent months. The mobile power plant can be operated in different cities or regions depending on need, strengthening Ukraine’s energy security amid the Russian Federation’s continuing strikes against critical infrastructure.
Since the February 2022 full-scale invasion of Ukraine, and particularly since October 2022, the Russian Federation has deliberately targeted critical civilian heating, power, and gas infrastructure in an effort to weaponize the winter, raising nuclear risks to grid stability noted by international monitors. Ukraine has demonstrated tremendous resilience in the wake of these attacks, with utility workers routinely risking their lives to repair the damage, often within hours of air strikes, even as Russia builds power lines to reactivate the Zaporizhzhia plant to influence the energy situation.
The collaboration between USAID and GE reflects the U.S. government’s emphasis on engaging American private sector expertise and procuring proven and reliable equipment to meet Ukraine’s needs. Since the start of Putin’s full-scale war against Ukraine, USAID has both directly procured equipment for Ukraine from American companies and engaged the private sector in partnerships to meet Ukraine’s urgent wartime needs, with U.S. policy debates such as a proposal on Ukraine’s nuclear plants drawing scrutiny.
This mobile power plant is the latest example of USAID assistance to Ukraine’s energy sector since the start of the Russian Federation’s full-scale invasion, during which Ukraine has resumed electricity exports as conditions improved. USAID has already delivered more than 1,700 generators to 22 oblasts across Ukraine, with many more on the way. These generators ensure electricity and heating for schools, hospitals, accommodation centers for internally-displaced persons, district heating companies, and water systems if and when power is knocked out by the Russian Federation’s relentless, systematic and cruel attacks against critical civil infrastructure. USAID has invested $55 million in Ukraine’s heating infrastructure to help the Ukrainian people get through winter. This support will benefit up to seven million Ukrainians by supporting repairs and maintenance of pipes and other equipment necessary to deliver heating to homes, hospitals, schools, and businesses across Ukraine. USAID’s assistance builds on over two decades of support to Ukraine to strengthen the country’s energy security, complementing growth in wind power that is harder to destroy.
✅ States, market operators push investment certainty and storage
The United Nation’s climate body, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, on Monday said radical emissions reduction across the world’s economies, including a phase-out of coal by 2050, was required to avoid the most devastating climate change impacts.
The Morrison government dismissed the findings. Treasurer Josh Frydenberg insisted this week that “coal is an important part of the energy mix”.
“If we were to take coal out of the system the lights would go out on the east coast of Australia overnight. It provides more than 60 per cent of our power," he said.
Ms Zibelman, whose organisation operates the nation’s largest gas and electricity markets, said if Australia was to make an orderly transition to low-emissions electricity generation, aligning with the sustainable electric planet vision, “then certainly we would keep the lights on”.
Ms Zibelman said coal assets should be maintained “as long as they are economically viable and we should have a plan to replace them with resources that are lowest cost”.
Those options comprised gas, renewables, pumped hydro and other energy storage, she told ABC radio, as New Zealand weighs electrification to replace fossil fuels.
Under the Paris treaty the government has pledged to lower emissions by 26 per cent by 2030, based on 2005 levels, even as national emissions rose 2% recently according to industry reports.
Labor would increase the goal to a 45 per cent cut - a policy Prime Minister Scott Morrison said last month would " shut down every coal-fired power station in the country and ... increase people’s power bill by about $1,400 on average for every single household”.
The federal government has scrapped its proposed National Energy Guarantee, which would have cut emissions in the electricity sector, but the reliability component of the plan may continue in some form.
The policy was being developed by the Energy Security Board. The group’s chairwoman Kerry Schott has expressed anger at its demise but on Thursday revealed the board was still working on the policy because “nobody told us to stop”.
Speaking at the Melbourne Institute's Outlook conference, she urged the government to revive the emissions reduction component of the plan to provide investment certainty, noting the IEA net-zero report on Canada shows electricity demand rises in decarbonisation.
Energy Minister Angus Taylor, an energy consultant before entering Parliament, on Thursday said the electricity sector would reduce emissions in line with the Paris deal without a mandated target.
Mr Taylor said only a “very brave state” would not support the policy’s reliability obligation.
The federal government has called a COAG energy council meeting for October 26 in Sydney to discuss electricity reliability.
It is understood Mr Taylor has not contacted Victoria, Queensland or the ACT since taking the portfolio, despite needing unanimous support from the states to progress the issue.
The Victorian government goes into caretaker mode on October 30 ahead of that state's election.
Victorian Energy Minister Lily D’Ambrosio said the federal government was “a rabble when it comes to energy policy, and we won’t be signing anything until after the election".
Speaking at the Melbourne Institute conference, prominent business leaders on Thursday bemoaned a lack of political leadership on energy policy and climate change, saying the only way forward appeared to be for companies to take action themselves, with some pointing to Canada's race to net-zero as a case study in the role of renewables.
Jayne Hrdlicka, chief executive of ASX-listed dairy and infant-formula company a2 Milk, said "we all have an obligation to do the very best job we can in managing our carbon footprint".
"We just need to get on doing what we can .. and then hope that policy will catch up. But we can’t wait," she said.
Ms Hrdlicka said the recent federal political turmoil had been frustrating "because if you invest in building relationships as most of us do in Canberra and then overnight they are all changed, you’re starting from scratch".
