With the election over, let's use real numbers when discussing energy.
Jim Barksdale, founding CEO of Netscape, preached "you can't manage what you don't measure." I agree. But in today's concerns about energy independence or security, numbers don't seem to matter. Examples abound from this election:
1) We're sending $700 billion abroad to buy imported oil. Fact: Our net cost of imported oil this year will be about $400 billion due to the midyear price spike.
2) We're dependent on the Middle East for our oil. Fact: We import oil from 60 countries; Canada and Mexico are our first and third largest suppliers. Persian Gulf suppliers provide less than 20 percent of imports; thus, we send about $5 billion a month to the gulf.
3) We import 70 percent of our oil. Fact: Our import percentage peaked in 2005 at 60.3 percent and now runs at 56.5 percent.
4) We have 3 percent of the world's oil reserves. Fact: There's no agreement on the size of global reserves with OPEC nations playing games to get more allocation; we continue to maintain up to a 10-year "backlog" of available oil.
5) Turn off your lights to save imported oil. Fact: Oil plays virtually no role in electricity production, which nationally comes from coal (50 percent), nuclear power (20 percent), natural gas (18 percent), and hydro (7 percent). Wind and solar currently contribute less than 2 percent.
One commercial used words like "government is doing nothing."
Government may not have acted on many issues, but energy is not one of them.
With recent federal mandates, oil imports are actually down 10 percent since 2005 from 12.5 million barrels per day (mbpd) to an estimated 11.3 mbpd this year. Ethanol replaced 0.6 mbpd (even at $65 a barrel, that saves $14 billion a year); U.S. oil production is up 0.4 mbpd since 2005 and conservation saved 0.3-0.5 mbpd.
More important, Congress finally escaped the clutches of Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., and allowed car and light truck fuel standards to dramatically increase after 15 years of stonewalling.
Oil serves two primary purposes in our society — 70 percent for transportation and 25 percent in manufactured products. We'll use internal combustion engines for many more decades, but increasing efficiency and using biofuels and electricity will decrease oil needs.
In manufacturing, where 300,000 commercial products from plastics to tires, to road surfaces on down to lipstick and other lubricants use oil, bio-based products hold promise.
So, bioproducts and plentiful electricity hold the key to "oil" security. We're doing well in biofuels, but we need to stick to it and keep the biofuels mandates of the 2007 mandate. Our universities and entrepreneurs are making great strides in converting biomaterials to the needs of both transportation and manufacturing.
The electricity picture is less clear. Here, in California, we may be proud of the low per capita use of electricity, but details suggest that our "progress" is due to driving electricity dependent manufacturing and the jobs that go along out of the state and even out of the country.
Electricity is essential to drive our economy; to ultimately help power our cars, trucks and, perhaps, trains; to meet our water needs through desalination. The numbers aren't encouraging. I'm as committed to renewables as anyone, but base load power that generates 24/7 is needed for industry and many residential needs. Turning nuclear and other clean base load alternatives on again makes economic as well as environmental sense.
In three years, we've reduced our demand for imported oil by 10 percent — a $40 billion a year savings. Biofuels and base load electricity will continue that progress. Let's cut out the misinformation, inform the public of the real numbers and achieve genuine energy leadership.
Manitoba Hydro Allegations Investigation reveals RCMP and OPP probes into 1960s abuses in northern Manitoba, affecting Fox Lake Cree Nation, citing racism, discrimination, sexual assault, and oversight by the IIU and Clean Environment Commission.
Key Points
A coordinated probe into historic abuses tied to Manitoba Hydro projects, led by OPP and IIU after RCMP referral.
✅ OPP to investigate historical cases involving Hydro staff and contractors.
✅ IIU to examine any allegations implicating Manitoba RCMP officers.
✅ Findings follow CEC report on racism and abuse near Fox Lake.
Manitoba RCMP have called in outside investigators to probe alleged assaults linked to hydro projects in the province’s north during the 1960s.
RCMP say any historical criminal investigations involving Manitoba Hydro employees or contractors will be handled by the Ontario Provincial Police.
The Independent Investigation Unit of Manitoba, the province’s police watchdog, will investigate any allegations involving RCMP officers.
A report released last month by an arm’s-length review agency outlined racism, discrimination and sexual abuse at the Crown-owned utility’s work sites dating back decades, while projects like Site C COVID-19 updates provide contemporary examples of reporting.
Much of the development at that time was centered around the community of Gillam and the nearby Fox Lake Cree Nation.
The report said the presence of a largely male construction workforce led to the sexual abuse of Indigenous women, some of whom said their complaints were ignored by the RCMP, and in a different context, Hydro One worker injury highlights safety risks in the sector.
Premier Brian Pallister says his government is taking the right approach to addressing alleged sexual assaults and racism by Manitoba Hydro workers against members of a remote northern First Nation, while pandemic cost-cutting at Manitoba Hydro has shaped recent operations.
Pallister made his first public comments about the allegations after a private meeting with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau on Tuesday evening, as COVID-19 reshaped Saskatchewan and other Prairie priorities were in focus.
The allegations, made by members of Fox Lake Cree Nation, were revealed in a report produced by the Clean Environment Commission. The report was released by the provincial government in August, although it was completed in May.
Allegations against Manitoba Hydro workers: What you need to know
"My reaction would be that's deplorable behaviour, and I have to admit, my puzzlement is why this wasn't investigated sooner or didn't come to light sooner," Pallister said, adding that he believes his government has taken the right approach by referring the information to the RCMP.
Some members of Fox Lake Cree Nation say the government didn't give them any advance notice of the release of the report, so the community was traumatized when it hit the news.
Pallister said his government didn't want to delay the release of the report.
'Pure trauma': Fox Lake members stricken after hasty release of troubling report
"I think the right thing to do is release the report. A lot of this information was in the public domain over the last number of weeks and months anyway. It wasn't the case of it being new in that respect," he said.
However, he accepted criticism of the timeline of the report's release.
"I would rather accept those criticisms, than accept the argument that we were in any way covering up information that is important to be released," he said.
Fox Lake Chief Walter Spence has said he expects Pallister to visit the community.
The premier said Tuesday he was not sure of the effectiveness of such a trip.
"I think most of the communities would prefer that there be electricity jobs for young Canadians created in their communities, that there be better water, many other tangible things rather than symbolism," he said.
"That's what I'm hearing and I've been in dozens of First Nations communities in the last two years."
Nova Scotia Power smart meter billing raises concerns amid estimated billing, catch-up bills, and COVID-19 meter reading delays, after seniors report doubled electricity usage and higher utility charges despite consistent consumption and on-time payments.
Key Points
Smart meter billing uses digital reads, limits estimates, and may trigger catch-up charges after reading suspensions.
✅ COVID-19 reading pause led to estimated bills and later catch-ups
✅ Smart meters reduce reliance on estimated billing errors
✅ Customers can seek payment plans and bill reviews
A Nova Scotia senior says she couldn't believe her eyes when she opened her most recent power bill.
Gloria Chu was billed $666 -- more than double what she normally pays, and similar spikes such as rising electricity bills in Calgary have drawn attention.
As someone who always pays her bi-monthly Nova Scotia Power bill in full and on time, Chu couldn't believe it.
According to her bill, her electricity usage almost tripled during the month of May, compared to last year, and is even more than it was last winter, and with some utilities exploring seasonal power rates customers may see confusing swings.
She insists she and her husband aren't doing anything differently -- but one thing has changed.
"I have had a problem since they put the smart meter in," said Chu, who lives in Upper Gulf Shore, N.S.
Chu got a big bill right after the meter was installed in January, too. That one was more than $530.
She paid it, but couldn't understand why it was so high.
As for this bill, she says she just can't afford it, especially amid a recently approved 14% rate hike in Nova Scotia.
"That's all of my CPP," Chu said. "Actually, it's more than my CPP."
Chu says a neighbor up the road who also has a smart meter had her bill double, too. In nearby Pugwash, she says some residents have seen an increase of about $20-$30.
Nova Scotia Power had put a pause on installing smart meters because of the COVID-19 pandemic, but it has resumed as of June 1, with the goal of upgrading 500,000 meters by 2021, even as in other provinces customers have faced fees for refusing smart meters during similar rollouts.
In this case, the utility says it's not the meter that's the problem, and notes that in New Brunswick some old meters gave away free electricity even as the pandemic forced Nova Scotia Power to suspend meter readings for two months.
"As a result, every one of our customers in Nova Scotia received an estimated bill," said Jennifer parker, Nova Scotia Power's director of customer care.
The utility estimated Chu's bill at $182 -- less than she normally pays -- so her latest bill is considered a catch-up bill after meter readings resumed last month.
Parker admits how estimates are calculated isn't perfect.
"There would be a lot of customers who probably had a more accurate bill because of the way that we estimate, and that's actually one of things that smart meters will get rid of, is that we won't need to do estimated billing," Parker said.
Chu isn't quite convinced.
"It is pretty smart for the power company, but it's not smart for us," she said with a laugh.
Nova Scotia Power has put a hold on her bill and says it will work with Chu on an affordable solution, though the province cannot order the utility to lower rates which limits what can be offered.
She just hopes to never see a big bill like this again, while elsewhere in Newfoundland and Labrador a lump-sum electricity credit is being provided to help customers.
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.
Ontario Electricity Policy debates rates, subsidies, renewables, nuclear baseload, and Quebec hydro imports, highlighting grid transmission limits, community consultation, conservation, and the province's energy mix after cancelled wind projects and rising costs to taxpayers.
Key Points
Ontario Electricity Policy guides rates, generation, grid planning, subsidies and imports for reliable, low-cost power.
✅ Focuses on rates, subsidies, and consumer affordability
✅ Balances nuclear baseload, renewables, and Quebec hydro imports
✅ Emphasizes grid transmission, consultation, and conservation
When Kathleen Wynne’s Liberals went down to defeat at the hands of Doug Ford and the Progressive Conservatives, Ontario electricity had a lot to do with it. That was in 2018. Now, two years later, Ford’s government has electricity issues of its own, including a new stance on wind power that continues to draw scrutiny.
Electricity is politically fraught in Ontario. It’s among the most expensive in Canada. And it has been mismanaged at least as far back as nuclear energy cost overruns starting in the 1980s.
From the start Wynne’s government was tainted by the gas plant scandal of her predecessor Dalton McGuinty and then she created her own with the botched roll-out of her green energy plan. And that helped Ford get elected promising to lower electricity prices. But, rates haven’t gone down under Ford while the cost to the government coffers for subsidizing them have soared - now costing $5.6 billion a year.
Meanwhile, Ford’s government has spent at least $230 million to tear up green energy contracts signed by the former Liberal government, including two wind-farm projects that were already mid-construction.
Lessons learned? In the final part of a three-part series, the six candidates vying to become the next leader of the Ontario Liberals discuss the province's electricity system, including the lessons learned from the prior Liberal government's botched attempts to fix it that led to widespread local opposition to a string of wind power projects, and whether they'd agree to import more hydroelectricity from Quebec.
“We had the right idea but didn’t stick the landing,” said Steven Del Duca, a member of the former Wynne government who lost his Vaughan-area seat in 2018, referring to its green-energy plan. “We need to make sure that we work more collaboratively with local communities to gain the buy-in needed to be successful in this regard.”
“Consultation and listening is key,” agreed Mitzie Hunter, who was education minister under Kathleen Wynne and in 2018 retained her seat in the legislature representing Scarborough-Guildwood. “We must seek input from community members about investments locally,” she said. “Inviting experts in to advise on major policy is also important to make evidence-based decisions."
Michael Coteau, MPP for Don Valley East and the third leadership candidate who was a member of the former government, called for “a new relationship of respect and collaboration with municipalities.”
He said there is an “important balance to be achieved between pursuing province wide objectives for green-energy initiatives and recognizing and reflecting unique local conditions and circumstances.”
Kate Graham, who has worked in municipal public service and has not held a provincial public office, said that experts and local communities are best placed to shape decisions in the sector.
In the final part of a three-part series, Ontario's Liberal leadership contenders discuss electricity, lessons learned from the bungled rollout of previous Liberal green policy, and whether to lean more on Quebec's hydroelectricity. “What's gotten Ontario in trouble in the past is when Queen's Park politicians are the ones micromanaging the electricity file,” she said.
“Community consultation is vitally important to the long-term success of infrastructure projects,” said Alvin Tedjo, a former policy adviser to Liberal ministers Brad Duguid and Glen Murray.
“Community voices must be heard and listened to when large-scale energy programs are going to be implemented,” agreed Brenda Hollingsworth, a personal injury lawyer making her first foray into politics.
Of the six candidates, only Coteau went beyond reflection to suggest a path forward, saying he would review the distribution of responsibilities between the province and municipalities, with the aim of empowering cities and towns.
Turn back to Quebec? Ford’s government has also turned away from a deal signed in 2016 to import hydroelectricity from Quebec.
Graham and Hunter both said they would consider increasing such imports. Hunter noted that the deal, which would displace domestic natural gas production, will lower the cost of electricity paid by Ontario ratepayers by a net total of $38 million from 2017 to 2023, according to the province’s fiscal watchdog.
“I am open to working with our neighbouring province,” Hunter said. “This is especially important as we seek to bring electricity to remote northern, on-reserve Indigenous communities.”
Tedjo said he has no issues with importing clean energy as long as it’s at a fair price.
Hollingsworth and Coteau both said they would withhold judgment until they could see the province’s capacity status in 2022.
“In evaluating the case for increasing importation of water power from Quebec, we must realistically assess the limitations of the existing transmission system and the cost and time required to scale up transmission infrastructure, among other factors,” Coteau said.
Del Duca also took a wait-and-see approach. “This will depend on our energy needs and energy mix,” he said. “I want to see our energy needs go down; we need more efficiency and better conservation to make that happen.”
What's the right energy mix? Nuclear energy currently accounts for about a third of Ontario’s energy-producing capacity, even as Canada explores zero-emissions electricity by 2035 pathways. But it actually supplies about 60 percent of Ontario’s electricity. That is because nuclear reactors are always on, producing so-called baseload power.
Hydroelectricity provides another 25 percent of supply, while oil and natural gas contribute 6 per cent and wind adds 7 percent. Both solar and biofuels account for less than one percent of Ontario’s energy supply. However, a much larger amount of solar is not counted in this tally, as it is used at or near the sites where it is generated, and never enters the transmission system.
Asked for their views on how large a role various sources of power should play in Ontario’s electricity mix in the future, the candidates largely backed the idea of renewable energy, but offered little specifics.
Graham repeated her statement that experts and communities should drive that conversation. Tedjo said all non-polluting technologies should play a role in Ontario’s energy mix, as provinces like Alberta demonstrate parallel growth in green energy and fossil fuels. Coteau said we need a mix of renewable-energy sources, without offering specifics.
“We also need to pursue carbon capture and sequestration, working in particular with our farming communities,” he added.
2019 Global CO2 Emissions stayed flat, IEA reports, as renewable energy growth, wind and solar deployment, nuclear output, and coal-to-gas switching in advanced economies offset increases elsewhere, supporting climate goals and clean energy transitions.
Key Points
33 gigatonnes, unchanged YoY, as advanced economies cut power emissions via renewables, gas, and nuclear.
✅ IEA reports emissions flat at 33 Gt despite 2.9% GDP growth
✅ Advanced economies cut power-sector CO2 via wind, solar, gas
✅ Nuclear restarts and mild weather aided reductions
Despite widespread expectations of another increase, global energy-related CO2 emissions stopped growing in 2019, according to International Energy Agency (IEA) data released today. After two years of growth, global emissions were unchanged at 33 gigatonnes in 2019, a notable marker in the global energy transition narrative even as the world economy expanded by 2.9%.
This was primarily due to declining emissions from electricity generation in advanced economies, thanks to the expanding role of renewable sources (mainly wind and solar across many markets), fuel switching from coal to natural gas, and higher nuclear power generation, the Paris-based organisation says in the report.
"We now need to work hard to make sure that 2019 is remembered as a definitive peak in global emissions, not just another pause in growth," said Fatih Birol, the IEA's executive director. "We have the energy technologies to do this, and we have to make use of them all."
Higher nuclear power generation in advanced economies, particularly in Japan and South Korea, avoided over 50 Mt of CO2 emissions. Other factors included milder weather in several countries, and slower economic growth in some emerging markets. In China, emissions rose but were tempered by slower economic growth and higher output from low-carbon sources of electricity. Renewables continued to expand in China, and 2019 was also the first full year of operation for seven large-scale nuclear reactors in the country.
A significant decrease in emissions in advanced economies in 2019 offset continued growth elsewhere. The USA recorded the largest emissions decline on a country basis, with a fall of 140 million tonnes, or 2.9%. US emissions are now down by almost 1 gigatonne from their peak in 2000. Emissions in the European Union fell by 160 million tonnes, or 5%, in 2019 driven by reductions in the power sector as electricity producers move away from coal in the generation mix. Japan’s emissions fell by 45 million tonnes, or around 4%, the fastest pace of decline since 2009, as output from recently restarted nuclear reactors increased.
Emissions in the rest of the world grew by close to 400 million tonnes in 2019, with almost 80% of the increase coming from countries in Asia where coal-fired power generation continued to rise, and in Australia emissions rose 2% due to electricity and transport. Coal-fired power generation in advanced economies declined by nearly 15%, reflecting a sharp fall in coal-fired electricity across multiple markets, as a result of growth in renewables, coal-to-gas switching, a rise in nuclear power and weaker electricity demand.
The IEA will publish a World Energy Outlook Special Report in June that will map out how to cut global energy-related carbon emissions by one-third by 2030 and put the world on track for longer-term climate goals, a pathway that, in Canada, will require more electricity to hit net-zero. It will also hold an IEA Clean Energy Transitions Summit in Paris on 9 July, bringing together key government ministers, CEOs, investors and other major stakeholders.
Birol will discuss the results published today tomorrow at an IEA Speaker Series event at its headquarters with energy and climate ministers from Poland, which hosted COP24 in Katowice; Spain, which hosted COP25 in Madrid; and the UK, which will host COP26 in Glasgow this year, as greenhouse gas concentrations continue to break records worldwide.
New England Grid Reform Initiative aligns governors with ISO New England to reshape market design, boost grid reliability, accelerate renewable energy and offshore wind, explore carbon pricing and forward clean energy markets, and bolster accountability.
Key Points
Five states aim to reform ISO New England markets, prioritize renewables and reliability, and test carbon pricing.
✅ Governors seek market design aligned with clean energy mandates
✅ ISO-NE accountability and stakeholder engagement prioritized
✅ Explore carbon pricing and forward clean energy market options
Weeks after initiating a broad overhaul of utility regulation within its borders, Connecticut has recruited four New England states, as Maine debates a 145-mile transmission line project to rework the regional grid that is overseen by ISO New England, the independent system operator charged with ensuring a reliable supply of electricity from power plants.
In a written statement Thursday morning, Gov. Ned Lamont said the current structure “has actively hindered” states’ efforts to phase out polluting power plants in favor of renewable sources like wind turbines and solar panels, while increasing costs “to fix market design failures” in his words. Lamont’s energy policy chief Katie Dykes has emerged as a vocal critic of ISO New England’s structure and priorities, in her role as commissioner of the Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection.
“When Connecticut opted to deregulate our electricity market, we wanted the benefits of competition — to achieve lower-cost energy, compatible with meeting our clean-energy goals,” Dykes said in a telephone interview Thursday afternoon. “We have a partner [in] ISO New England, to manage this grid and design a market that is not thwarting our clean-energy goals, but achieving them; and not ignoring consumers’ concerns. ... That’s really what we are looking to do — reclaim the benefits of competition and regional cooperation.”
Lamont and his counterparts in Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Vermont and Maine plan to release a “vision document” in their words on Friday through the New England States Committee on Electricity, after New Hampshire rejected a Quebec-Massachusetts transmission proposal that sought to import Canadian hydropower.
The initial documents made no mention of New Hampshire, which likewise obtains electricity through the wholesale markets managed by ISO New England and has seen clashes over the Northern Pass hydropower project in recent years; and whose Seabrook Station is one two nuclear power plants in New England alongside Dominion Energy’s Millstone Power Station in Waterford. Gov. Chris Sununu’s office did not respond immediately to a query on why New Hampshire is not participating.
Connecticut and the four other states outlined a few broad goals that they will hone over the coming months. Those include creating a better market structure and planning process supporting the conversion to renewables; improving grid reliability, with measures such as an emergency fuel stock program considered; and increasing the accountability of ISO New England to the states and by extension their ratepayer households and businesses.
ISO New England spokesperson Matt Kakley indicated the Holyoke, Mass.-based nonprofit will “engage with the states and our stakeholders” on the governors’ proposal, in an email response to a query. He did not elaborate on any immediate opportunities or challenges inherent in the governors’ proposal.
“Maintaining reliable, competitively-priced electricity through the clean energy transition will require broad collaboration,” Kakley stated. “The common vision of the New England governors will play an important role in the discussions currently underway on the future of the grid.”
Renewable revolution ISO New England launched operations in 1999, running auctions through which power plant operators bid to supply electricity, including against long-term projections for future needs that can only be met through the construction or installation of new generation capacity.
ISO New England falls under the jurisdiction of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission rather than the states whose electricity supplies it is tasked with ensuring. That has led to pointed criticism from Dykes and Connecticut legislators that ISO New England is out of touch with the state’s push to switch to renewable sources of electricity.
Entering October, ISO New England published an updated outlook that revealed 60 percent of proposed power generators in the region’s future “queue” are wind farms, primarily offshore installations like the proposed Park City Wind project of Avangrid and Revolution Wind from Eversource. But Dykes recently criticized as unnecessary an NTE Energy plant approved already by ISO New England for eastern Connecticut, which will be fueled by natural gas if all other regulatory approvals are granted.
The six New England states participate in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative that caps carbon emissions by individual power plants, while allowing them to purchase unused allowances from each other with that revenue funneled to the states to support renewable energy and conservation programs. FERC is now considering the concept of carbon pricing, which would levy a tax on power plants based on their emissions, and it also faces pressure to act on aggregated DERs from lawmakers.
ISO New England is investigating the concepts of net carbon pricing and a “forward clean energy market” that would borrow elements of the existing forward capacity market, but designed to meet individual state objectives for the percentage of renewable power they want generated while ensuring adequate electricity is in place when weather does not cooperate.
The Connecticut Public Utilities Regulatory Authority is collecting on its own initiative industry input on modernization proposals, as New York regulators open a formal review of retail energy markets for comparison, that would add up to hundreds of millions of dollars, including utility-scale batteries to store power generated by offshore wind farms and solar arrays; and “smart” meters in homes and businesses to help electricity customers better manage their power use.
The New England Power Pool serves as a central forum for plant operators, commercial users and others like the Connecticut Office of Consumer Counsel, amid Massachusetts solar demand charge debates that affect distributed generation policy, with NEPOOL’s chair stating Thursday morning the group was still reviewing the governors’ announcement.
“NEPOOL has been engaged this year in meetings ... exploring the transition to a future grid in New England and potential pathways forward to support that transition,” stated Nancy Chafetz, chair of NEPOOL, in an email.
Connecticut’s issues with ISO New England boiled over this summer on the heels of a power-purchase agreement between Millstone owner Dominion and transmission grid operators Eversource and United Illuminating, which contributed to a sharp increase in customer bills.
A few weeks ago, Lamont signed into law a “Take Back the Grid” act that allows the Connecticut Public Utilities Regulatory Authority to factor in Eversource’s and Avangrid subsidiary United Illuminating’s past performance in maintaining electric reliability, in addition to any future needs for revenue based on needed upgrades. The law included an element for Connecticut to initiate a study of ISO New England’s role.
Eversource and Avangrid have voiced support for the switch to “performance-based” regulation in Connecticut. Eversource spokesperson Mitch Gross on Thursday cited the company’s view that any changes to the operation of New England’s wholesale power markets should occur within the existing ISO New England structure.
“We also recommend any examination of potential alternatives includes a thorough evaluation that ensures unfair costs would not be imposed on customers,” Gross stated in an email.
In a statement forwarded by Avangrid spokesperson Ed Crowder, the United Illuminating parent indicated it intends to have “a voice in this process” with the goal of continued grid reliability amid increased adoption of clean energy sources.
