Canada and the United States will ensure there is co-ordination and no duplication in $7 billion worth of technology projects — $3.5 billion on each side of the border — aimed at reducing carbon emissions from coal-fired power plants and the Alberta oilsands, Environment Minister Jim Prentice said.
He made the comment during a news conference in Washington, where he announced Canada-U.S. government working groups will be established to follow up on the "clean-energy dialogue" agreed during President Barack Obama's recent meetings with Prime Minister Stephen Harper in Ottawa.
"Collectively, we are at the threshold of investing public dollars close to $7 billion," Prentice said. He cited $3.5 billion on the U.S. side, about $1 billion in the federal budget before Parliament, more than $2 billion from the Alberta government, and less than $1 billion from Saskatchewan. Although the written dialogue agreement only mentioned coal plants, Prentice said, "We are moving forward on both fronts."
"The focus of the clean-energy dialogue has been to ensure that we collaborate on those investments, that we have the best information available, that we don't duplicate investments and, frankly, that we make sure that the investments that are made are appropriate and advantageous for both carbon capture and storage in the context of the oilsands, as well as in thermal electricity," Prentice said.
"This is a technology that has common application. It's also technology that has been proceeding apace in the context of hydrocarbon industry in Western Canada, in particular, but it holds a promise for thermal coal application."
Chris Bordeau, an Alberta government environment spokesman, said a panel will choose three to five carbon-capture technology projects in June from among a short list of 20 submissions for coal and oilsands operations.
While some environmentalists say only 10 per cent of carbon can be captured from the oilsands, compared to almost all from coal plants, Bordeau said the Alberta government estimates 60 to 75 per cent of carbon could be captured from the oilsands.
An environmental group, ForestEthics, issued a statement blasting the oilsands as "the dirtiest oil on earth," and said Prentice was met by a group of "protesting polar bears" when he arrived at the White House to meet Energy Secretary Steven Chu and Lisa Jackson, head of the Environmental Protection Agency.
But Prentice told reporters he did not see any protesters during his two days in the capital, and the oilsands were mentioned only tangentially during his meetings with U.S. officials and legislators, who also included climate-change envoy Todd Stern, John Kerry, chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and Henry Waxman, chair of the House energy committee.
Asked if Canada was still worried about a proposed U.S. law last year that was interpreted as a possible ban on use of oilsands oil in U.S. public projects, Prentice said the matter was not raised by either side in any of his meetings.
He said proposals from both sides of the border for carbon cap-and-trade systems and industrial regulations were compared, but there were no discussions about dovetailing them. Prentice has said the two countries might have parallel cap-and-trade systems with a common carbon-trading market.
The carbon-capture technology is one of three elements of the clean-energy dialogue. The others are: expansion of clean-energy research in advanced biofuels; clean engines and energy efficiency; and modernization of the energy grid to reduce power blackouts and energy losses during transmission.
"We share the same economic space and environmental space, and we need to ensure that our policies are workable together," Prentice said "Certainly, they cannot be discordant."
BC Energy Debate: Nuclear Power and LNG divides British Columbia, as a new survey weighs zero-emission clean energy, hydroelectric capacity, the Site C dam, EV mandates, energy security, rising costs, and blackout risks.
Key Points
A BC-wide debate on power choices balancing nuclear, LNG, hydro, costs, climate goals, EVs, and grid reliability.
✅ Survey: 43% support nuclear, 40% oppose in BC
✅ 55% back LNG expansion, led by Southern BC
✅ Hydro at 90%; Site C adds 1,100 MW by 2025
There is a long-term need to produce more electricity to meet population and economic growth needs and, in particular, create new clean energy sources, with two new BC generating stations recently commissioned contributing to capacity.
Increasingly, in the worldwide discourse on climate change, nuclear power plants are being touted as a zero-emission clean energy source, with Ontario exploring large-scale nuclear to expand capacity, and a key solution towards meeting reduced emissions goals. New technological advancements could make nuclear power far safer than existing plant designs.
When queried on whether British Columbia should support nuclear power for electricity generation, respondents in a new province-wide survey by Research Co. were split, with 43% in favour and 40% against.
Levels of support reached 46% in Metro Vancouver, 41% in the Fraser Valley, 44% in Southern BC, 39% in Northern BC, and 36% on Vancouver Island.
The closest nuclear power plant to BC is the Columbia Generating Station, located in southern Washington State.
The safe use of nuclear power came to the forefront following the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster when the most powerful earthquake ever recorded in Japan triggered a large tsunami that damaged the plant’s emergency generators. Japan subsequently shut off many of its nuclear power plants and increased its reliance on fossil fuel imports, but in recent years there has been a policy reversal to restart shuttered nuclear plants to provide the nation with improved energy security.
Over the past decade, Germany has also been undergoing a transition away from nuclear power. But in an effort to replace Russian natural gas, Germany is now using more coal for power generation than ever before in decades, while Ontario’s electricity outlook suggests a shift to a dirtier mix, and it is looking to expand its use of liquefied natural gas (LNG).
Last summer, German chancellor Olaf Scholz told the CBC he wants Canada to increase its shipments of LNG gas to Europe. LNG, which is greener compared to coal and oil, is generally seen as a transitionary fuel source for parts of the world that currently depend on heavy polluting fuels for power generation.
When the Research Co. survey asked BC residents whether they support the further development of the province’s LNG industry, including LNG electricity demand that BC Hydro says justifies Site C, 55% of respondents were supportive, while 29% were opposed and 17% undecided.
Support for the expansion of the LNG is highest in Southern BC (67%), followed by the Fraser Valley (56%), Metro Vancouver (also 56%), Northern BC (55%), and Vancouver Island (41%).
A larger proportion of BC residents are against any idea of the provincial government moving to ban the use of natural gas for stoves and heating in new buildings, with 45% opposed and 39% in support.
Significant majorities of BC residents are concerned that energy costs could become too expensive, and a report on coal phase-outs underscores potential cost and effectiveness concerns, with 84% expressing concern for residents and 66% for businesses. As well, 70% are concerned that energy shortages could lead to measures such as rationing and rolling blackouts.
Currently, about 90% of BC’s electricity is produced by hydroelectric dams, but this fluctuates throughout the year — at times, BC imports coal- and gas-generated power from the United States when hydro output is low.
According to BC Hydro’s five-year electrification plan released in September 2021, it is estimated BC has a sufficient supply of clean electricity only by 2030, including the capacity of the Site C dam, which is slated to open in 2025. The $16 billion dam will have an output capacity of 1,100 megawatts or enough power for the equivalent of 450,000 homes.
The provincial government’s strategy for pushing vehicles towards becoming dependent on the electrical grid also necessitates a reliable supply of power, prompting BC Hydro’s first call for power in 15 years to prepare for electrification. Most BC residents support the provincial government’s requirement for all new car and passenger truck sales to be zero-emission by 2035, with 75% supporting the goal and 21% opposed.
Southeast Alaska Energy Projects advance hydroelectric, biomass, and heat pumps, displacing diesel via grants. Inside Passage Electric Cooperative and Alaska Energy Authority support Kake, Hoonah, Ketchikan with wood pellets, feasibility studies, and rate relief.
Key Points
Programs using hydro, biomass, and heat pumps to cut diesel use and lower electricity costs in Southeast Alaska.
✅ Hydroelectric at Gunnuk Creek to replace diesel in Kake
✅ Biomass and wood pellets displacing fuel oil in facilities
✅ Free feasibility studies; heat pumps where economical
New projects are under development throughout the region to help reduce energy costs for Southeast Alaska residents. A panel presented some of those during last week’s Southeast Conference annual fall meeting in Ketchikan.
Jodi Mitchell is with Inside Passage Electric Cooperative, which is working on the Gunnuk Creek hydroelectric project for Kake. IPEC is a non-profit, she said, with the goal of reducing electric rates for its members.
The Gunnuk Creek project will be built at an existing dam.
“The benefits for the project will be, of course, renewable energy for Kake. And we estimate it will save about 6.2 million gallons over its 50-year life,” she said. “Although, as you heard earlier, these hydro projects last forever.”
The gallons saved are of diesel fuel, which currently is used to power generators for electricity, though in places with limited options some have even turned to new coal plants to keep the lights on.
IPEC operates other hydro projects in Klukwan and Hoonah. Mitchell said they’re looking into future projects, one near Angoon and another that would add capacity to the existing Hoonah project, even as an independent power project in British Columbia is in limbo.
Mitchell said they fund much of their work through grants, which helps keep electric rates at a reasonable level.
Devany Plentovich with the Alaska Energy Authority talked about biomass projects in the state. She said the goal is to increase wood energy use in Alaska, even as some advocates call for a reduction in biomass electricity in other regions.
“We offer any community, any entity, a free feasibility study to see if they have a potential heating system in their community,” she said. “We do advocate for wood heating, but we are trying to get a community to pick the best heating technology for their situation, including options that use more electricity for heat when appropriate. So in a lot of situations, our consultants will give you the economics on a wood heating system but they’ll also recommend maybe you should look at heat pumps or look at waste energy.”
Plentovich said they recently did a study for Ketchikan’s Holy Name Church and School. The result was a recommendation for a heat pump rather than wood.
But, she said, wood energy is on the rise, and utilities elsewhere are increasing biomass for electricity as well. There are more than 50 systems in the state displacing more than 500,000 gallons of fuel oil annually. Those include systems on Prince of Wales Island and in Ketchikan.
Ketchikan recently experienced a supply issue, though. A local wood-pellet manufacturer closed, which is a problem for the airport and the public library, among other facilities that use biomass heaters.
Karen Petersen is the biomass outreach coordinator for Southeast Conference. She said this opens up a great opportunity for someone.
“Devany and I are working on trying to find a supplier who wants to go into the pellet business,” she said. “Probably importing initially, and then converting over to some form of manufacturing once the demand is stabilized.”
So, Petersen said, if anyone is interested in this entrepreneurial opportunity, contact her through Southeast Conference for more information.
Gaza Electricity Crisis drives severe power cuts in the Gaza Strip, as Hamas-PA tensions and Mahmoud Abbas's supply reductions under blockade spur fuel shortages, hospital strain, and soaring demand for batteries, LED lights, and generators.
Key Points
A prolonged Gaza power shortage from politics, blockade, and fuel cuts, disrupting daily life, hospitals, and water.
✅ Demand surges for batteries, LED lights, and generators
✅ PA cuts to Israel-supplied power deepen shortages
✅ Hospitals, water, and sanitation face critical strain
In Imad Shlayl’s electronics shop in Gaza City, the customers crowding his store are interested in only two products: LED lights and the batteries to power them.
In the already impoverished Gaza Strip, residents have learned to adapt to the fact that electricity is only available for between two and four hours a day.
But fresh anger was sparked when availability was cut further last month, at the request of the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, in an escalation of his conflict with Hamas, the Islamist group.
The shortages have defined how people live their lives, echoing Europe’s energy crisis in other regions: getting up in the middle of the night, if there is power, to run washing machines or turn on water pumps.
Only the wealthy few have frequent, long-lasting access to electricity, even as U.S. brownout risks highlight grid fragility, to power lights and fans and fridges, televisions and wifi routers, in Gaza’s stifling summer heat.
“We used to sell all sorts of things,” says Shlayl. “But it’s different these days. All we sell is batteries and chargers. Because the crisis is so deep we are selling 100 batteries a day when normally we would sell 20.”
Gaza requires 430 megawatts of power to meet daily demand, but receives only half that. Sixty megawatts are supplied by its solitary power station, now short on fuel, while the rest is provided through the Israel’s power sector and funded by Abbas’s West Bank-based Palestinian Authority (PA).
Abbas’s move to cut supplies to Gaza, which is already under a joint Israeli and Egyptian blockade – now in its 11th year – has quickly made him a hate figure among many Gazans, who question why he is punishing 2 million fellow Palestinians in what appears to be an attempt to force Hamas to relinquish control of the territory.
Though business is good for Shlayl, he is angry at the fresh shortages faced by Gazans which, as pandemic power shut-offs elsewhere have shown, affect all areas of life, from hospital emergency wards to clean water supplies.
“I’ve not done anything to be punished by anyone. It is the worst I can remember but we are expecting it to get worse and worse,” he said. “Not just electricity, but other things as well. We are in a very deep descent.”
As well as cutting electricity, the PA has cut salaries for its employees in Gaza by upwards of 30% , prompting thousands to protest on the streets of Gaza city.
Residents also blame Abbas for a backlog in processing the medical referral process for those needing to travel out of Gaza for treatment, although who is at fault in that issue is less clear cut.
The problems facing Gaza – where high levels of unemployment are endemic – is most obvious in the poorest areas.
In Gaza City’s al-Shati refugee camp, home to the head of Hamas’s political bureau, Ismail Haniyeh, whole housing blocks were dark, while in others only a handful of windows were weakly illuminated.
In the one-room kiosk selling pigeons and chickens that he manages, just off the camp’s main market, Ayman Nasser, 32, is sitting on the street with his friends in search of a sea breeze.
His face is illuminated by the light of his mobile phone. He has one battery-powered light burning in his shop.
“Part of the problem is that we don’t have any news. Who should we blame for this? Hamas, Israelis, Abbas?” he said.
A Palestinian girl reads by candle light due to power cut at the Jabalia Camp in Gaza City Facebook Twitter Pinterest A Palestinian girl reads by candlelight due to a power cut at the Jabalia camp in Gaza City. Photograph: Anadolu Agency/Getty Images His friend, Ashraf Kashqin, interrupts: “It is all connected to politics, but it is us who is getting played by the two sides.”
If there is a question that all the Palestinians in Gaza are asking, it is what the ageing and remote Abbas hopes to achieve, a dynamic also seen in Lebanon’s electricity disputes, not least whether he hopes the cuts will lead to an insurrection against Hamas following demonstrations linked to the power supply in January.
While a senior official in the Fatah-led government on the West Bank said last month that the aim behind the move by the PA – which has been paying $12m (£9m) a month for the electricity Israel supplies to Gaza – was to “dry up Hamas’s financial resources”, others are dubious about the timing, the motive and the real impact.
Among them are human rights groups, such as Amnesty International, who have warned it could turn Gaza’s long-running crisis into a major disaster already hitting hospitals and waste treatment plants.
“For 10 years the siege has unlawfully deprived Palestinians in Gaza of their most basic rights and necessities. Under the burden of the illegal blockade and three armed conflicts, the economy has sharply declined and humanitarian conditions have deteriorated severely. The latest power cuts risk turning an already dire situation into a full-blown humanitarian catastrophe,” said Magdalena Mughrabi, of the group.
Then there is the question of timing. “Abbas is probably the only one who knows why he is doing this to Gaza,” adds Mohameir Abu Sa’da, a political science professor at Al Azhar University and analyst.
“I honestly don’t buy what he has been saying for the last three months: that he will take exceptional measures against Hamas to put pressure on it to give up control of the Gaza Strip.
Australia Electricity Supply Shortfall highlights AEMO's warning of reduced reserves as coal retirements outpace capacity, risking load shedding. Calls for 1GW strategic reserves and investment in renewables, storage, and dispatchable power in Victoria.
Key Points
It is AEMO's forecast of reduced reserves, higher outage risk, and a need for 1GW strategic backup capacity.
✅ AEMO urges 1GW strategic reserves in Victoria and South Australia
✅ Investment needed: renewables, storage, grid and reliability services
Australia’s electricity operator has warned of threats to electricity supply including a shortfall in generation and reduced power reserves on the horizon.
The Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) has called for further investment in the country’s energy portfolio as retiring coal plants are replaced by intermittent renewables poised to eclipse coal, leaving the grid with less back-up capacity.
AEMO has said this increases the chances of supply interruption and load shedding.
It added the federal government should target 1GW of strategic reserves in the states most at risk – Victoria and South Australia, even as the Prime Minister has ruled out taxpayer-funded power plants in the current energy battle.
CEO of the Clean Energy Council, Kane Thornton, said the shortfall in generation, reflected in a short supply of electricity, was due a decade of indecisiveness and debate leading to a “policy vacuum”.
He added: “The AEMO report revealed that the new projects added to the system under the renewable energy target will help to improve reliability over the next few years.
“We need to accept that the energy system is in transition, with lessons from dispatchable power shortages in Europe, and long term policy is now essential to ensure private investment in the most efficient new energy technology and solutions.”
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.
Enel Green Power España Aragon wind farms advance Spain's renewable energy transition, with 90MW under construction in Teruel, Endesa investment of €88 million, 25-50MW turbines, and 2017 auction-backed capacity enhancing grid integration and clean power.
Key Points
They are three Teruel wind projects totaling 90MW, part of Endesa's 2017-awarded plan expanding Spain's clean energy.
✅ 90MW across Sierra Costera I, Allueva, and Sierra Pelarda
✅ €88m invested; 14+7+4 turbines; Endesa-led build in Teruel
✅ Part of 2017 tender: 540MW wind, 339MW solar, nationwide
Enel Green Power Espana, part of Enel's wind projects worldwide, has started constructing three wind farms in Aragon, north-east Spain, which are due online by the end of the year.
The projects, all situated in the Teruel province, are worth a total investment of €88 million.
The biggest of the facilities, Sierra Costera I, will have a 50MW and will feature 14 turbines.
The wind farm is spread across the municipalities of Mezquita de Jarque, Fuentes Calientes, Canada Vellida and Rillo.
The Allueva wind facility will feature seven turbines and will exceed 25MW.
Sierra Pelarda, in Fonfria, will have four turbines and a capacity of 15MW, as advances in offshore wind turbine technology continue to push scale elsewhere.
The projects bring the total number of wind farms that Enel Green Power Espana has started building in the Teruel province to six, equal to an overall capacity of 218MW.
Endesa chief executive Jose Bogas said: “These plants mark the acceleration on a new wave of growth in the renewable energy space that Endesa is committed to pursue in the next years, driving the energy transition in Spain.”
The six wind farms under construction in Teruel are part of the 540MW that Enel Green Power Espana was awarded in the Spanish government's renewable energy tender held in May 2017.
In Aragon, the company will invest around €434 million euros, reflecting broader European wind power investment trends in recent years, to build 13 wind farms with a total installed capacity of more than 380MW.
The remaining 160MW of wind capacity will be located in Andalusia, Castile-Leon, Castile La Mancha and Galicia, even as some Spanish turbine factories closed during pandemic restrictions.
Enel Green Power Espana was also awarded 339MW of solar capacity in the Spanish government's auction held in July 2017, while other Spanish developers advance CSP projects abroad in markets like Chile.
Once all wind and solar under the 2017 tender are complete they will boost the company’s capacity by around 52%.
