The stormy economy this winter cut industrial power usage in the Tennessee Valley by nearly 21 percent, biting a chunk out of earnings for the Tennessee Valley Authority.
But the recession has a silver lining for the TVA. The federal utility is paying only about half as much for fuel oil, natural gas and purchased electricity as it did a year ago.
But the decline still hurts.
“This is the biggest cutback in consumption I’ve seen in 30 years,” said John Van Mol, executive director of the Tennessee Valley Industrial Committee, which represents 34 of TVA’s biggest industrial customers. “Chemical, steel and aluminum production is way down across the valley, and it’s a very grim situation for many energy-intensive industries.”
In Chattanooga, EPB President Harold DePriest said industrial power usage is down this year by the biggest amount since 1980.
“We’re hoping that Volkswagen and its suppliers will help boost industrial power sales next year, but right now it’s as bad as anything I’ve seen in a long, long time,” he said.
Alcoa idled all of its aluminum smelters in East Tennessee and Abitibi Bowater, a major paper manufacturer, shut down two paper machines last December before filing for bankruptcy.
Similar cutbacks among Georgia manufacturers cut industrial power sales by the Southern Co. another 16.9 percent in the first quarter after declines last fall.
Natural gas and fuel oil prices doubled from 2006 to 2008 and forced three rate increases by TVA last year that hurt many industrial power users, utility officials report.
But after a record run-up in fuel prices in the past two years, the cost of fuel oil is down 52 percent, natural gas prices are down 47 percent and purchased power is off up to 41 percent in fiscal 2009 compared with a year ago, according to a new TVA financial report.
The slowing economy has reduced demand and the price of such fuels, TVA spokesman Gil Francis said.
Recent rains also should help replenish TVAÂ’s reservoirs that supply the utilityÂ’s cheapest power from its hydroelectric dams.
Such declines helped TVA reduce its electricity rates in both January and April. TVA will announce its next quarterly fuel cost adjustment soon.
But along with the fuel savings, TVA also is facing some daunting cost pressures.
TVAÂ’s dependence upon coal is proving to be more expensive even during the economic downturn. Coal prices were up in the first quarter of 2009 by 15 percent over a year ago. As TVAÂ’s long-term coal contracts expire, the utility is having to replace the older, cheaper contracts with todayÂ’s higher-priced coal, Mr. Francis said.
“Coal prices have come down this year but not as quickly as other fuels like natural gas,” he said.
TVA generates more than 60 percent of its power from its coal-fired power plants.
The December 22 spill at a coal ash pond at the Kingston Fossil Plant in Kingston, Tenn., also is projected to cost TVA up to $975 million to clean up. Local lawsuits could push up that price tag higher.
Stricter environmental rules for air emissions from TVA coal plants — including a $1.7 billion order from a federal judge in North Carolina last year to clean up four TVA coal plants — also will push up TVA’s generation costs.
At the same time, TVA has lost more than $2 billion in its pension investments.
All of those expenses could result in another base rate increase in TVA power rates by this fall, officials said.
“Our customers are benefiting from lower fuel and purchased power costs, which resulted in reductions in our fuel cost adjustment in January and April of this year,” TVA Chief Financial Officer Kim Greene said. “But the decrease in power sales, continuing expenses to clean up the Kingston ash spill, and the impact of the market decline on our pension and other investments are among the factors that make this a challenging year financially.”
Bay of Fundy Tidal Energy advances as Nova Scotia permits Jupiter Hydro to test floating barge platforms with helical turbines in Minas Passage, supporting renewable power, grid-ready pilots, and green jobs in rural communities.
Key Points
A Nova Scotia tidal energy project using helical turbines to generate clean power and create local jobs.
✅ Permits enable 1-2 MW prototypes near Minas Passage
✅ Floating barge platforms with patented helical turbines
✅ PPA at $0.50/kWh with Nova Scotia Power
An Alberta-based company has been granted permission to try to harness electricity from the powerful tides of the Bay of Fundy.
Nova Scotia has issued two renewable energy permits to Jupiter Hydro.
Backers have long touted the massive energy potential of Fundy's tides -- they are among the world's most powerful -- but large-scale commercial efforts to harness them have borne little fruit so far, even as a Scottish tidal project recently generated enough power to supply nearly 4,000 homes elsewhere.
The Jupiter application says it will use three "floating barge type platforms" carrying its patented technology. The company says it uses helical turbines mounted as if they were outboard motors.
"Having another company test their technology in the Bay of Fundy shows that this early-stage industry continues to grow and create green jobs in our rural communities," Energy and Mines Minister Derek Mombourquette said in a statement.
The first permit allows the company to test a one-megawatt prototype that is not connected to the electricity grid.
The second -- a five-year permit for up to two megawatts -- is renewable if the company meets performance standards, environmental requirements and community engagement conditions.
Mombourquette also authorized a power purchase agreement that allows the company to sell the electricity it generates to the Nova Scotia grid through Nova Scotia Power for 50 cents per kilowatt hour.
On its web site, Jupiter says it believes its approach "will prove to be the most cost effective marine energy conversion technology in the world," even as other regional utilities consider initiatives like NB Power's Belledune concept for turning seawater into electricity.
The one megawatt unit would have screws which are about 5.5 metres in diameter.
The project is required to obtain all other necessary approvals, permits and authorizations.
It will be located near the Fundy Ocean Research Center for Energy in the Minas Passage and will use existing electricity grid connections.
A study commissioned by the Offshore Energy Research Association of Nova Scotia says by 2040, the tidal energy industry could contribute up to $1.7 billion to Nova Scotia's gross domestic product and create up to 22,000 full-time jobs, a transition that some argue should be planned by an independent body to ensure reliability.
Last month, Nova Scotia Power said it now generates 30 per cent of its power from renewables, as the province moves to increase wind and solar projects after abandoning the Atlantic Loop.
The utility says 18 per cent came from wind turbines, nine per cent from hydroelectric and tidal turbines and three per cent by burning biomass across its fleet.
However, over half of the province's electrical generation still comes from the burning of coal or petroleum coke, even as environmental advocates push to reduce biomass use in the mix. Another 13 per cent come from burning natural gas and five per cent from imports.
✅ Gas-driven plants add efficient, flexible capacity and jobs
✅ Nuclear subsidies distort market signals and raise costs
For decades, the government regulation of Pennsylvania's electricity markets dictated all aspects of power generation resources in the state, thus restricting market-driven prices for consumers and hindering new power plant development and investment.
Deregulation has enabled competitive markets to drive energy prices downward, as recent grid auction payouts fell 64% indicate, which has transformed Pennsylvania from a higher-electricity-cost state to one with prices below the national average.
Recently, the economic advantage of abundant low-cost natural gas has spurred an influx of billions of dollars of private capital investment and thousands of jobs to construct environmentally responsible natural gas power generation facilities throughout the commonwealth — including our three power generation facilities in operation and one presently under construction.
Calpine is an independent power provider with a national portfolio of 80 highly efficient power plants in operation or under construction with an electric generating capacity of approximately 26,000 megawatts. Collectively, these resources can provide sufficient power for more than 30 million residential homes. We are not a regulated utility receiving a guaranteed rate of return on investment. Rather, Calpine competes to sell wholesale power into the electric markets, and the economics of supply and demand are fundamental to the success of our business.
Pennsylvania's deregulated electricity market is working. Consumers are benefiting from low-cost natural gas, as broader evidence shows competition benefits consumers and the environment across markets, and companies such as Calpine are investing billions of dollars and creating thousands of jobs to build advanced, energy efficient, environmentally responsible and flexible power generating facilities.
There are presently seven electric generating projects under construction in the commonwealth, representing about a $7 billion capital investment that will produce about 7,000 megawatts of efficient electrical power, with additional facilities being planned.
Looking back 20 years following the enactment of the Pennsylvania Electricity Generation Customer Choice and Competition Act, Pennsylvania's regulators and policymakers must conclude that the results of a free and fair market-driven structure have delivered indisputable benefits to the consumer, even amid potential winter rate spikes for residents, and the Pennsylvania economy.
While consumers are now reaping the benefits of open and competitive electricity markets, we see challenges on the horizon that could threaten the foundation of those markets. Due to pressure from nuclear power generators, state policymakers throughout the nation have been increasing efforts to impact the generation mix in their respective states by offering ratepayer funded subsidies to existing nuclear generation resources or by considering a market structure overhaul in New England.
Subsidizing one power generation type over others is having a significant, negative impact on wholesale electric markets, competitive retails markets and ultimately the cost the consumer will have to pay, and can exacerbate disruptions in coal and nuclear industries that strain the economy and risk brownouts.
In Pennsylvania, these subsidies would follow nearly $9 billion already paid by ratepayers to help the commonwealth's nuclear industry transition from regulated to competitive energy markets.
The deregulation of Pennsylvania's electricity markets in the late 1990s allowed the nuclear industry to receive billions of dollars from ratepayers to recover "stranded costs" related to investments in the commonwealth's nuclear plants. These costs were negotiated amounts based on settlements with Pennsylvania's Public Utility Commission to allow the nuclear industry to prepare and transition to competitive electricity markets.
Enough is enough. Regulatory or governmental interference in well functioning markets does not lead to better outcomes. Pennsylvania's state Legislature should not pick winners and losers by enacting legislation that would create an uneven playing field that subsidizes nuclear generating resources in the commonwealth.
William Ferguson is regional vice president for Calpine Corp.
Alberta Power Grid Level 2 Alert signals AESO reserve power usage, load management, supply shortage from generator outages, low wind, and limited imports, urging peak demand conservation to avoid blackouts and preserve grid reliability.
Key Points
An AESO status where reserves power the grid and load management is used during supply constraints to prevent blackouts.
✅ Triggered by outages, low wind, and reduced import capacity
✅ Peak hours 4 to 7 pm saw conservation requests
✅ Several hundred MW margin from Level 3 load shedding
Alberta's energy grid ran on reserves Wednesday, after multiple factors led to a supply shortage, a scenario explored in U.S. grid COVID response discussions as operators plan for contingencies.
At 3:52 p.m. Wednesday, the Alberta Electric System Operator issued a Level 2 alert, meaning that reserves were being used to supply energy requirements and that load management procedures had been implemented, while operators elsewhere adopted Ontario power staffing lockdown measures during COVID-19 for continuity. The alert ended at 6:06 p.m.
"This is due to unplanned generator outages, low wind and a reduction of import capability," the agency said in a post to social media. "Supply is tight but still meeting demand."
AESO spokesperson Mike Deising said the intertie with Saskatchewan had tripped off, and an issue on the British Columbia side of the border, as seen during BC Hydro storm response events, meant the province couldn't import power.
"There are no blackouts … this just means we're using our reserve power, and that's a standard procedure we'll deploy," he said.
AESO had asked that people reduce their energy consumption between 4 and 7 p.m., similar to Cal ISO conservation calls during grid strain, which is typically when peak use occurs.
Deising said the system was several hundred MWs away from needing to move to an alert Level 3, with utilities such as FortisAlberta precautions in place to support continuity, which is when power is cut off to some customers in order to keep the system operating. Deising said Level 2 alerts are fairly rare and occur every few years. The last Level 3 alert was in 2013.
According to the supply and demand report on AESO's website, the load on the grid at 5 p.m. was 10,643 MW.
That's down significantly from last week, when a heat wave pushed demand to record highs on the grid, with loads in the 11,700 MW range, contrasting with Ontario demand drop during COVID when many stayed home.
A heat warning was issued Wednesday for Edmonton and surrounding areas shortly before 4 p.m., with temperatures above 29 C expected over the next three days, with many households seeing residential electricity use up during such periods.
US Utilities Shift From Coal as natural gas stays cheap, renewables like wind and solar scale, Clean Power Plan uncertainty lingers, and investors, state policies, and emissions targets drive generation choices and accelerate retirements.
Key Points
A long-term shift by utilities from coal to cheap natural gas, expanding renewables, and lower-emission generation.
✅ Cheap natural gas undercuts coal on price and flexibility.
✅ Renewables costs falling; wind and solar add competitive capacity.
✅ State policies and investors sustain emissions reductions.
When President Donald Trump signed an executive order last week to sweep away Obama-era climate change regulations, he said it would end America's "war on coal", usher in a new era of energy production and put miners back to work.
But the biggest consumers of U.S. coal - power generating companies - remain unconvinced about efforts to replace Obama's power plant overhaul with a lighter-touch approach.
Reuters surveyed 32 utilities with operations in the 26 states that sued former President Barack Obama's administration to block its Clean Power Plan, the main target of Trump's executive order. The bulk of them have no plans to alter their multi-billion dollar, years-long shift away from coal, suggesting demand for the fuel will keep falling despite Trump's efforts.
The utilities gave many reasons, mainly economic: Natural gas - coal’s top competitor - is cheap and abundant; solar and wind power costs are falling; state environmental laws remain in place; and Trump's regulatory rollback may not survive legal challenges, as rushed pricing changes draw warnings from energy groups.
Meanwhile, big investors aligned with the global push to fight climate change – such as the Norwegian Sovereign Wealth Fund – have been pressuring U.S. utilities in which they own stakes to cut coal use.
"I’m not going to build new coal plants in today’s environment," said Ben Fowke, CEO of Xcel Energy, which operates in eight states and uses coal for about 36 percent of its electricity production. "And if I’m not going to build new ones, eventually there won’t be any."
Of the 32 utilities contacted by Reuters, 20 said Trump's order would have no impact on their investment plans; five said they were reviewing the implications of the order; six gave no response. Just one said it would prolong the life of some of its older coal-fired power units.
North Dakota's Basin Electric Power Cooperative was the sole utility to identify an immediate positive impact of Trump's order on the outlook for coal.
"We're in the situation where the executive order takes a lot of pressure off the decisions we had to make in the near term, such as whether to retrofit and retire older coal plants," said Dale Niezwaag, a spokesman for Basin Electric. "But Trump can be a one-termer, so the reprieve out there is short."
Trump's executive order triggered a review aimed at killing the Clean Power Plan and paving the way for the EPA's Affordable Clean Energy rule to replace it, though litigation is ongoing. The Obama-era law would have required states, by 2030, to collectively cut carbon emissions from existing power plants by 30 percent from 2005 levels. It was designed as a primary strategy in U.S. efforts to fight global climate change.
The U.S. coal industry, without increases in domestic demand, would need to rely on export markets for growth. Shipments of U.S. metallurgical coal, used in the production of steel, have recently shown up in China following a two-year hiatus - in part to offset banned shipments from North Korea and temporary delays from cyclone-hit Australian producers.
RETIRING AND RETROFITTING
Coal had been the primary fuel source for U.S. power plants for the last century, but its use has fallen more than a third since 2008 after advancements in drilling technology unlocked new reserves of natural gas.
Hundreds of aging coal-fired power plants have been retired or retrofitted. Huge coal mining companies like Peabody Energy Corp and Arch Coal fell into bankruptcy, and production last year hit its lowest point since 1978.
The slide appears likely to continue: U.S. power companies now expect to retire or convert more than 8,000 megawatts of coal-fired plants in 2017 after shutting almost 13,000 MW last year, according to U.S. Energy Information Administration and Thomson Reuters data.
Luke Popovich, a spokesman for the National Mining Association, acknowledged Trump's efforts would not return the coal industry to its "glory days," but offered some hope.
"There may not be immediate plans for utilities to bring on more coal, but the future is always uncertain in this market," he said.
Many of the companies in the Reuters survey said they had been focused on reducing carbon emissions for a decade or more while tracking 2017 utility trends that reinforce long-term planning, and were hesitant to change direction based on shifting political winds in Washington D.C.
"Utility planning typically takes place over much longer periods than presidential terms of office," Berkshire Hathaway Inc-owned Pacificorp spokesman Tom Gauntt said.
Several utilities also cited falling costs for wind and solar power, which are now often as cheap as coal or natural gas, thanks in part to government subsidies for renewable energy and recent FERC decisions affecting the grid.
In the meantime, activist investors have increased pressure on U.S. utilities to shun coal.
In the last year, Norway's sovereign wealth fund, the world's largest, has excluded more than a dozen U.S. power companies - including Xcel, American Electric Power Co Inc and NRG Energy Inc - from its investments because of their reliance on coal-fired power.
Another eight companies, including Southern Co and NorthWestern Corp, are "under observation" by the fund.
Wyoming-based coal miner Cloud Peak Energy said it doesn't blame utilities for being lukewarm to Trump's order.
"For eight years, if you were a utility running coal, you got the hell kicked out of you," said Richard Reavey, a spokesman for the company. "Are you going to turn around tomorrow and say, 'Let's buy lots of coal plants'? Pretty unlikely."
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 Lithium Brine can power EV batteries via direct lithium extraction, leveraging oilfield infrastructure and critical minerals policy to build a low-carbon supply chain with clean energy, lower emissions, and domestic manufacturing advantages.
Key Points
Alberta lithium brine is subsurface saline water rich in lithium, extracted via DLE to supply EV batteries.
✅ Uses direct lithium extraction from oilfield brines
✅ Leverages Alberta infrastructure and skilled workforce
✅ Supports EV battery supply chain with lower emissions
After a most difficult several months, Canadians are cautiously emerging from their COVID-19 isolation and confronting a struggling economy.
There’s a growing consensus that we need to build back better from COVID-19, and to position for the U.S. auto sector’s pivot to electric vehicles as supply chains evolve. Instead of shoring up the old economy as we did following the 2008 financial crisis, we need to make strategic investments today that will prepare Canada for tomorrow’s economy.
Tomorrow’s energy system will look very different from today’s — and that tomorrow is coming quickly. The assets of today’s energy economy can help build and launch the new industries required for a low-carbon future. And few opportunities are more intriguing than the growing lithium market.
The world needs lithium – and Alberta has plenty
It’s estimated that three billion tonnes of metals will be required to generate clean energy by 2050. One of those key metals – lithium, a light, highly conductive metal – is critical to the construction of battery electric vehicles (BEV). As global automobile manufacturers design hundreds of new BEVs, demand for lithium is expected to triple in the next five years alone, a trend sharpened by pandemic-related supply risks for automakers.
Most lithium today originates from either hard rock or salt flats in Australia and South America. Alberta’s oil fields hold abundant deposits of lithium in subsurface brine, but so far it’s been overlooked as industrial waste. With new processing technologies and growing concerns about the security of global supplies, this is set to change. In January, Canada and the U.S. finalized a Joint Action Plan on Critical Minerals to ensure supply security for critical minerals such as lithium and to promote supply chains closer to home, aligning with U.S. efforts to secure EV metals among allies worldwide.
This presents a major opportunity for Canada and Alberta. Lithium brine will be produced much like the oil that came before it. This lithium originates from many of the same reservoirs responsible for driving both Alberta’s economy and the broader transportation fuel sector for decades. The province now has extensive geological data and abundant infrastructure, including roads, power lines, rail and well sites. Most importantly, Alberta has a highly trained workforce. With very little retooling, the province could deliver significant volumes of newly strategic lithium.
Specialized technologies known as direct lithium extraction, or DLE, are being developed to unlock lithium-brine resources like those in Canada. In Alberta, E3 Metals* has formed a development partnership with U.S. lithium heavyweight Livent Corporation to advance and pilot its DLE technology. Prairie Lithium and LiEP Energy formed a joint venture to pilot lithium extraction in Saskatchewan. And Vancouver’s Standard Lithium is already piloting its own DLE process in southern Arkansas, where the geology is very similar to Alberta and Saskatchewan.
Heavy on quality, light on emissions
All lithium produced today has a carbon footprint, most of which can be tied back to energy-intensive processing. The purity of lithium is essential to battery safety and performance, but this comes at a cost when lithium is mined with trucks and shovels and then refined in coal-heavy China.
As automakers look to source more sustainable raw materials, battery recycling will complement responsible extraction, and Alberta’s experience with green technologies such as renewable electricity and carbon capture and storage can make it one of the world’s largest suppliers of zero-carbon lithium.
Beyond raw materials
The rewards would be considerable. E3 Metals’ Alberta project alone could generate annual revenues of US$1.8 billion by 2030, based on projected production and price forecasts. This would create thousands of direct jobs, as initiatives like a lithium-battery workforce initiative expand training, and many more indirectly.
To truly grow this industry, however, Canada needs to move beyond its comfort zone. Rather than produce lithium as yet another raw-commodity export, Canadians should be manufacturing end products, such as batteries, for the electrified economy, with recent EV assembly deals underscoring Canada’s momentum. With nickel and cobalt refining, graphite resources and abundant petrochemical infrastructure already in place, Canada must aim for a larger piece of the supply chain.
By 2030, the global battery market is expected to be worth $116 billion annually. The timing is right to invest in a strategic commodity and grow our manufacturing sector. This is why the Alberta-based Energy Futures Lab has called lithium one of the ‘Five big ideas for Alberta’s economic recovery.’ The assets of today’s energy economy can be used to help build and launch new resource industries like lithium, required for the low-carbon energy system of the future.
Industry needs support
To do this, however, governments will have to step up the way they did a generation ago. In 1975, the Alberta government kick-started oil-sands development by funding the Alberta Oil Sands Technology and Research Authority. AOSTRA developed a technology called SAGD (steam-assisted gravity drainage) that now accounts for 80% of Alberta’s in situ oil-sands production.
Canada’s lithium industry needs similar support. Despite the compelling long-term economics of lithium, some industry investors need help to balance the risks of pioneering such a new industry in Canada. The U.S. government has recognized a similar need, with the Department of Energy’s recent US$30 million earmarked for innovation in critical minerals processing and the California Energy Commission’s recent grants of US$7.8 million for geothermal-related lithium extraction.
To accelerate lithium development in Canada, this kind of leadership is needed. Government-assisted financing could help early-stage lithium-extraction technologies kick-start a whole new industry.
Aspiring lithium producers are also looking for government’s help to repurpose inactive oil and gas wells. The federal government has earmarked $1 billion for cleaning up inactive Alberta oil wells. Allocating a small percentage of that total for repurposing wells could help transform environmental liabilities into valuable clean-energy assets.
The North American lithium-battery supply chain will soon be looking for local sources of supply, and there is room for Canada-U.S. collaboration as companies turn to electric cars, strengthening regional resilience.
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.
