The Environmental Protection Agency moved to more tightly control air pollution from large power plants, factories and oil refineries, a step to limit emissions widely blamed for global warming.
The EPA said it is completing a rule requiring large polluters to reduce the amounts of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases that they release into the air. Those emissions can boost many allergens and worsen smog, which can trigger asthma attacks and other respiratory ailments.
The rule would require companies to install better technology and improve energy efficiency whenever they build, or significantly modify, a plant.
EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson said the rule applies only to large polluters such as power plants, refineries and cement production facilities that collectively are responsible for 70 percent of greenhouse gas emissions from stationary sources in the United States.
Jackson said the rule sets commonsense standards that will clean the air and protect public health, while avoiding burdensome regulations that could harm farms and small and medium-sized businesses.
"There is no denying our responsibility to protect the planet for our children and grandchildren," she said in a statement. "It's long past time we unleashed our American ingenuity and started building the efficient, prosperous clean energy economy of the future."
The EPA announcement comes a day after an energy and climate bill was introduced in the Senate that seeks to accomplish many of the same goals. But EPA spokesman Brendan Gilfillan denied any connection, saying "rules are ready when they are ready."
The pollution rule will take effect in January, when industrial facilities that already obtain Clean Air Act permits for other pollutants will be required to obtain permits for greenhouse gases, if they increase those emissions by at least 75,000 tons per year.
Starting in July 2011, the rule would apply to any existing plant that emits at least 75,000 tons of greenhouse gases a year, or any new plant that emits 100,000 tons per year.
Emissions of 75,000 tons of carbon dioxide are equivalent to the annual emissions from 13,000 passenger vehicles, or the electricity use of about 8,200 homes per year, the EPA said.
The rule comes as Sens. John Kerry, D-Mass., and Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., made public a long-delayed bill aimed at curtailing greenhouse gas emissions. The bill would set a first-ever price on carbon dioxide emissions produced by coal-fired power plants and other large polluters.
The legislation aims to cut emissions of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping greenhouse gases by 17 percent by 2020 and by more than 80 percent by 2050. Both targets are measured against 2005 levels and are the same as those set by a House bill approved last year.
The Obama administration has long said it would prefer that Congress pass a bill to cut greenhouse gas emissions but has used the threat of EPA regulation to push lawmakers in states heavily dependent on fossil fuels to support the climate bill.
Many large utilities and other energy companies have said they want Congress to act, believing they would be in a better bargaining position with Congress than in regulations issued by the EPA.
Even so, the energy bill faces a steep hill in the Senate. No Republican has signed on as a co-sponsor. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., who had been working with Kerry and Lieberman, withdrew his support last week, saying it is impossible to pass the legislation in the current political climate.
The rule substantially raises the threshold amount of pollution required before greenhouse gas permits are needed. A proposal announced last September would have required permits for facilities that emit 25,000 tons per year.
Gina McCarthy, an assistant EPA administrator, said the change was made in response to complaints that the earlier proposal would have affected many small and medium-sized businesses, and even large apartment buildings. Such limits "clearly were not appropriate," she said.
SaskPower-Flying Dust flare gas power deal advances a 20 MW, 20-year Power Purchase Agreement, enabling grid supply from FNPA-backed generation, supporting renewable strategy, lower carbon footprint targets, and First Nation economic development in Saskatchewan.
Key Points
A 20 MW, 20-year PPA converting flare gas to grid power, with SaskPower buying from Flying Dust First Nation via FNPA.
✅ 20 MW of flare gas generation linked to Saskatchewan's grid
✅ 20-year term; about $300M total value to SaskPower
✅ FNPA-backed project; PPA targeted in 6-12 months
An agreement signed between SaskPower, which reported $205M income in 2019-20, and Flying Dust First Nation is an important step toward a plan that could see the utility buy $300 million worth of electricity from Flying Dust First Nation, according to Flying Dust's chief.
"There's still a lot of groundwork that needs to be done before we get building but you know we're a lot closer today with this signing," Jeremy Norman told reporters Friday.
Norman's community was assisted by the First Nations Power Authority (FNPA), a non-profit that helps First Nations get into the power sector, with examples like the James Bay project showing what Indigenous ownership can achieve.
The agreement signed Friday says SaskPower will explore the possibility of buying 20 megawatts of flare gas power from FNPA, which it will look to Flying Dust to produce.
#google#
20-year plan
The proposed deal would span 20 years and cost SaskPower around $300 million over those years, as the utility also explores geothermal power to meet 2030 targets.
The exact price would be determined once a price per metawatt is brought forward.
"We won't be able to do this ourselves," Norman said.
Flare gas power generation works by converting flares from the oil and gas sector into electricity. Under this plan, SaskPower would take the electricity provided by Flying Dust and plug it into the provincial power grid, complementing a recent move to buy more power from Manitoba Hydro to support system reliability.
"This is a great opportunity as we advance our renewable strategy, including progress on doubling renewables by 2030, and try to achieve a lower carbon footprint by 2030 and beyond," Marsh said.
Ombudsman report details dispute between senior with breathing disorder, SaskPower
Norman said the business deal presents an opportunity to raise money to reinvest into the First Nation for things like more youth programming.
For the next steps, both parties will need to sign a power purchase agreement that spells out the exact prices for the power generation.
Marsh expects to do so in the next six to 12 months, with development of the required infrastructure to take place after that.
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.
India Solar Slowdown and Coal Surge highlights policy uncertainty, grid stability concerns, financing gaps, and land acquisition issues affecting renewable energy, emissions targets, energy security, storage deployment, and tendering delays across the solar value chain.
Key Points
Analysis of slowed solar growth and rising coal in India, examining policy, grid, finance, and emissions tradeoffs.
✅ Policy uncertainty and tender delays stall solar pipelines
✅ Grid bottlenecks, storage gaps, and curtailment risks persist
✅ Financing strains and DISCOM payment delays dampen investment
India, a global leader in renewable energy adoption where renewables surpassed coal in capacity recently, faces a pivotal moment as the growth of solar power output decelerates while coal generation sees an unexpected surge. This article examines the factors contributing to this shift, its implications for India's energy transition, and the challenges and opportunities it presents.
India's Renewable Energy Ambitions
India has set ambitious targets to expand its renewable energy capacity, including a goal to achieve 175 gigawatts (GW) of renewable energy by 2022, with a significant portion from solar power. Solar energy has been a focal point of India's renewable energy strategy, as documented in on-grid solar development studies, driven by falling costs, technological advancements, and environmental imperatives to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Factors Contributing to Slowdown in Solar Power Growth
Despite initial momentum, India's solar power growth has encountered several challenges that have contributed to a slowdown. These include policy uncertainties, regulatory hurdles, land acquisition issues, and financial constraints affecting project development and implementation, even as China's solar PV growth surged in recent years. Delays in tendering processes, grid connectivity issues, and payment delays from utilities have also hindered the expansion of solar capacity.
Surge in Coal Generation
Concurrently, India has witnessed an unexpected increase in coal generation in recent years. Coal continues to dominate India's energy mix, accounting for a significant portion of electricity generation due to its reliability, affordability, and existing infrastructure, even as wind and solar surpassed coal in the U.S. in recent periods. The surge in coal generation reflects the challenges in scaling up renewable energy quickly enough to meet growing energy demand and address grid stability concerns.
Implications for India's Energy Transition
The slowdown in solar power growth and the rise in coal generation pose significant implications for India's energy transition and climate goals. While renewable energy remains central to India's long-term energy strategy, and as global renewables top 30% of electricity generation worldwide, the persistence of coal-fired power plants complicates efforts to reduce carbon emissions and mitigate climate change impacts. Balancing economic development, energy security, and environmental sustainability remains a complex challenge for policymakers.
Challenges and Opportunities
Addressing the challenges facing India's solar sector requires concerted efforts to streamline regulatory processes, improve grid infrastructure, and enhance financial mechanisms to attract investment. Encouraging greater private sector participation, promoting technology innovation, and expanding renewable energy storage capacity are essential to overcoming barriers and accelerating solar power deployment, as wind and solar have doubled their global share in recent years, demonstrating the pace possible.
Policy and Regulatory Framework
India's government plays a crucial role in fostering a conducive policy and regulatory framework to support renewable energy growth and phase out coal dependence, particularly as renewable power is set to shatter records worldwide. This includes implementing renewable energy targets, providing incentives for solar and other clean energy technologies, and addressing systemic barriers that hinder renewable energy adoption.
Path Forward
To accelerate India's energy transition and achieve its renewable energy targets, stakeholders must prioritize integrated energy planning, grid modernization, and sustainable development practices. Investing in renewable energy infrastructure, promoting energy efficiency measures, and fostering international collaboration on technology transfer and capacity building are key to unlocking India's renewable energy potential.
Conclusion
India stands at a crossroads in its energy transition journey, balancing the need to expand renewable energy capacity while managing the challenges associated with coal dependence. By addressing regulatory barriers, enhancing grid reliability, and promoting sustainable energy practices, India can navigate towards a more diversified and resilient energy future. Embracing innovation, strengthening policy frameworks, and fostering public-private partnerships will be essential in realizing India's vision of a cleaner, more sustainable energy landscape for generations to come.
Canada Electricity Shortage threatens renewable energy transition as EV adoption and building decarbonization surge; Hydro-Quebec exports, wind power expansion, demand response, and smart grid resilience shape investment and capacity planning.
Key Points
A looming supply gap in central and eastern provinces driven by EVs, heating decarbonization, exports, and limited new hydro.
✅ Hydro-Quebec capacity pressured by exports and new loads
✅ Wind power prioritized; new mega-dams deemed unworkable
✅ Smart meters boost flexibility but raise cyber risk
Quebec and other provinces in central and eastern Canada are heading toward a significant shortage of electricity to respond to the various needs of a transition to renewable energy, and Ontario's energy storage push underscores how supply is tightening across the region.
This is according to Polytechnique Montréal’s Institut de l’énergie Trottier, which published a report titled A Strategic Perspective on Electricity in Central and Eastern Canada last week.
The white paper says that at the current rate, most provinces will be incapable of meeting the electricity needs created by the increase in the number of electric vehicles, including the federal 2035 EV sales mandate that will amplify demand, and the decarbonization of building heating by 2030. “The situation worsens if we consider carbon neutrality objectives of the federal government and some provinces for 2050,” the institute says.
The researchers called on public utilities to immediately review their investment plans for the coming years in light of examples such as B.C.'s power supply challenges that accompany rapid green ambitions.
In a news conference Wednesday, Premier François Legault said the province could indeed be short on electricity as debates over Quebec's EV push continue. “We’re open to exploiting green hydrogen, if the price is good and also based on the electrical capacity we have. Because currently, we predict that in the coming years we’re going to lack electricity, so we must be prudent.”
Quebec is in a better position than other provinces because it is the largest hydroelectricity producer in the country. But that energy source also attracts new clients that have contributed to increased demand over the coming years, including data centres, cryptocurrency miners and greenhouses.
Report co-author Normand Mousseau said that while Hydro-Québec largely has the capacity to meet demand from electric vehicles, even amid EV shortages and wait times for buyers, heating and manufacturers, export contracts to the United States “risk reducing its leeway.”
Hydro-Québec will therefore have to find new sources of electricity, and Mousseau said the answer isn’t new dams.
“The reservoirs give an immense flexibility to the network, but we don’t have the capacity today to flood territories like we have done in the past,” said Mousseau, the institute’s scientific director. “From an environmental viewpoint and a social accessibility one, it’s unworkable.”
The solution would be more wind turbines, he said, adding construction could happen at “very competitive rates” and if there’s a surplus, “we can sell it without issue because other provinces are in an even worse situation than ours,” a reality echoed by eco groups in Northern Ontario sustainability discussions focused on the grid’s future.
The researchers propose solutions based on six themes: regulations, pricing, demand management, data, support for implementation and resilience.
In the resilience category, the report notes that innovative technology like smart meters makes the network more flexible, with pilots such as EV-to-grid integration in Nova Scotia illustrating emerging options, but also increases the risk of cyberattacks. The more extreme weather caused by climate change also increases the risks of damage to infrastructure while at the same time increasing demand.
German Energy Price Brakes harness price signals in a market-based policy, cutting gas consumption, preserving industrial output, and supporting CO2 reduction, showcasing Germany's resilience and adaptation while protecting households and businesses across Europe.
Key Points
Fixed-amount subsidies preserving price signals to curb gas use, shield consumers, and sustain industrial output.
✅ Maintains incentives via market-based price signals
✅ Cuts gas consumption without distorting EU markets
✅ Protects households and industry while curbing CO2
German industry and society are once again proving much more resilient and adaptable than certain people feared. Horror scenarios of a dangerous energy rationing or a massive slump in our economy have often been bandied about. But we are nowhere near that. With a challenging year just behind us, this is good news — not only for Germany, but also for Europe, where France-Germany energy cooperation has strengthened solidarity.
Companies and households reacted swiftly to the sharp increases in energy prices, in line with momentum in the global energy transition seen across markets. They installed more efficient heating or production facilities, switched to alternatives and imported intermediate products. The results are encouraging: German households and businesses have reduced gas consumption significantly, despite recent cold weather. From the start of the war in Ukraine to mid-December industrial gas consumption in Germany was (temperature-adjusted) around 20 per cent lower than the average level for the preceding three years. Even if some firms have cut back production, especially in energy-intensive sectors, industrial output as a whole has only fallen by about 1 per cent since the start of 2022. Added to this, in a survey released by the Ifo institute in November, over a third of German companies saw the potential to reduce gas consumption further without endangering output.
Instead of imposing excessive laws and regulations, we have relied on price signals and the prudence of market participants to create the right incentives and reduce gas consumption, as falling costs like record-low solar power prices continue to reinforce those signals across sectors.
We will follow this approach in coming months, when energy savings will remain important, even as the EU electricity outlook anticipates sharply higher demand by 2050. Our latest relief measures will not distort price signals. To this end, the Bundestag approved gas and electricity price brakes in its final session in 2022. They are designed to function without any intervention in markets or prices. This system will pay out a fixed amount relative to previous years’ consumption and the current difference to a reference price — regardless of current consumption.
Energy price brakes are the main component of Germany’s “protective shield”, which makes up to €200bn available for measures in 2022 to 2024. Seen in relation to the German economy’s size, its past heavy reliance on Russian energy imports and the fact that the measures will expire in 2024, these are balanced and expedient mechanisms. In contrast to instruments used in other countries, our new arrangements will not affect the price formation process driven by supply and demand, or on incentives to save gas. Companies and households will continue to save the full market price when they reduce consumption by a unit of gas or electricity. In this way, the price brakes also avoid the creation of additional demand for gas at the expense of consumers in other European countries, even as Europe’s Big Oil turning electric signals broader structural shifts in energy markets. No one need fear that competition will be distorted or that gas will be bought up. Indeed, a recent IMF working paper on cushioning the impact of high energy prices on households explicitly praises the German energy price brakes.
Current developments confirm the effectiveness of a market-based approach — and show that we should also rely on price signals when it comes to reducing CO₂ emissions, as suggested by IEA CO2 trends in recent years. Last year, households and companies had only a few weeks to adapt, yet we have already seen a strong response. The effect of CO₂ prices can be even stronger, as adaptation is possible over a much longer time and they additionally affect expectations and long-term decisions. Regulatory interventions and subsidy schemes, even if well targeted, cannot compete with market co-ordination and incentives that support individual decision-making and promote innovation.
Europe and Germany can weather this crisis without a collapse in industrial production. We also have an opportunity to deal efficiently with the move to climate neutrality, aligned with Germany’s hydrogen strategy for imported low-carbon fuels. In both cases, we should have confidence in price signals as well as in the power of people and business to innovate and adapt.
Bitcoin energy consumption is driven by mining electricity demand, with TWh-scale power use, carbon footprint concerns, and Cambridge estimates. Rising prices incentivize more hardware; efficiency gains and renewables adoption shape sustainability outcomes.
Key Points
Bitcoin energy consumption is mining's electricity use, driven by price, device efficiency, and energy mix.
✅ Cambridge tool estimates ~121 TWh annual usage
✅ Rising BTC price incentivizes more mining hardware
✅ Efficiency, renewables, and costs shape footprint
"Mining" for the cryptocurrency is power-hungry, with power curtailments reported during heat waves, involving heavy computer calculations to verify transactions.
Cambridge researchers say it consumes around 121.36 terawatt-hours (TWh) a year - and is unlikely to fall unless the value of the currency slumps, even as Americans use less electricity overall.
Critics say electric-car firm Tesla's decision to invest heavily in Bitcoin undermines its environmental image.
The currency's value hit a record $48,000 (£34,820) this week. following Tesla's announcement that it had bought about $1.5bn bitcoin and planned to accept it as payment in future.
But the rising price offers even more incentive to Bitcoin miners to run more and more machines.
And as the price increases, so does the energy consumption, according to Michel Rauchs, researcher at The Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance, who co-created the online tool that generates these estimates.
“It is really by design that Bitcoin consumes that much electricity,” Mr Rauchs told BBC’s Tech Tent podcast. “This is not something that will change in the future unless the Bitcoin price is going to significantly go down."
The online tool has ranked Bitcoin’s electricity consumption above Argentina (121 TWh), the Netherlands (108.8 TWh) and the United Arab Emirates (113.20 TWh) - and it is gradually creeping up on Norway (122.20 TWh).
The energy it uses could power all kettles used in the UK, where low-carbon generation stalled in 2019, for 27 years, it said.
However, it also suggests the amount of electricity consumed every year by always-on but inactive home devices in the US alone could power the entire Bitcoin network for a year, and in Canada, B.C. power imports have helped meet demand.
Mining Bitcoin In order to "mine" Bitcoin, computers - often specialised ones - are connected to the cryptocurrency network.
They have the job of verifying transactions made by people who send or receive Bitcoin.
This process involves solving puzzles, which, while not integral to verifying movements of the currency, provide a hurdle to ensure no-one fraudulently edits the global record of all transactions.
As a reward, miners occasionally receive small amounts of Bitcoin in what is often likened to a lottery.
To increase profits, people often connect large numbers of miners to the network - even entire warehouses full of them, as seen with a Medicine Hat bitcoin operation backed by an electricity deal.
That uses lots of electricity because the computers are more or less constantly working to complete the puzzles, prompting some utilities to consider pauses on new crypto loads in certain regions.
The University of Cambridge tool models the economic lifetime of the world's Bitcoin miners and assumes that all the Bitcoin mining machines worldwide are working with various efficiencies.
Using an average electricity price per kilowatt hour ($0.05) and the energy demands of the Bitcoin network, it is then possible to estimate how much electricity is being consumed at any one time, though in places like China's power sector data can be opaque.
