A study conducted by the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry and the Credit Rating Information Services of India Limited, indicates that India's power requirement will increase dramatically, with an additional need of 161 gigawatts (GW) according to the Eleventh Five-Year Plan (2007-12) and the Twelfth Five-Year Plan (2012-17).
The report, covering the country's power capacity and requirements, manpower needs, power deficit and economic impact, was presented at the recently held India Electricity 2008 in New Delhi.
Data from July 2008 by the Ministry of Power show that India's total installed capacity for power generation is 145.58 GW. India's government has allocated $95 billion to meet the increased demand and to achieve the new power generation targets.
The study gave credit to the Electricity Act of 2003 for transforming the country's power sector. With the implementation of the act, many private players have shown interest in investing in the sector. Private-sector investments could prove to be a boon for meeting increasing power generation requirements.
The report dissuaded the Indian government from relying completely on conventional fuel sources like coal and emphasized the need to extend focus to alternate energy sources like gas and hydropower. A holistic approach toward effective coal mining in India was also recommended.
Though a lot of political, media and public attention in India has been focused on the Section 123 Agreement on nuclear deals, the study did not delve much on nuclear power, which could revolutionize the power sector in the country. It also noted that power distribution was not given its due importance and has recommended that the government renew focus in this area.
The report validated the proposed government investment of $66 billion in this area during the Eleventh Five-Year Plan and also expressed hopes that the Accelerated Power Development and Reform Program that was restructured to provide distribution to the National Thermal Power Corporation will usher in positive results. Power will be distributed to towns and cities in India with a population of more 30,000 with the aid of the latest IT-enabled applications to minimize distribution losses.
The study also highlights the stark realities of India's power industry — target slippages and power deficit. While there have been ambitious plans to increase generation capacity during the Eleventh and Twelfth Five-Year Plans, the target slippage in the Tenth Five-Year Plan (2002-07) alone has been around 40 GW.
The report identified the inadequate policy and regulatory framework as one of the primary causes. On a more positive note, the study recognized the implementation of the Electricity Act 2003 and its regulations as being instrumental in overcoming these slippages.
The infrastructure advisory study recommends that the Indian government takes immediate and concrete steps to reduce the gaps in the power deficit. A prolonged power deficit would lead to severe economic slowdown and hold long-term repercussions for the Indian economy, the study states. The current electricity demand deficit of 12%-13% and shortage of 6%-8% could be a huge deterrent to India's economic growth and ambitions of being a superpower.
With the Ministry of Power announcing the "Mission 2012: Power for All" plan and the ongoing rural electrification scheme in India, meeting the electricity demands has become not just an economic necessity but has a social facet, as well. To bring about this transformation, it is not just the generation, transmission and distribution channels that need to be revitalized but also the other supporting entities like resources, manpower and technology.
The study states that to make India self-sufficient in the power sector, the industry would require an additional 2 million people in skilled labor during the Eleventh and Twelfth Five-Year Plans. It also emphasized the need to develop more industrial training institutes to provide training in areas of power generation and management and also impart specific IT training.
The study is bullish on private sector investments in India's power industry. With huge investments required for immediate turnaround, private investments — both domestic and international — will play a very significant role. India is poised for huge economic growth and the power industry can most definitely accelerate this development.
Japan Electricity Crunch exposes vulnerabilities in a liberalised power market as LNG shortages, JEPX price spikes, snow-hit solar, and weak hedging strain energy security and retail providers amid cold snap demand and limited reserve capacity.
Key Points
A winter demand shock and LNG shortfalls sent JEPX to records, exposing gaps in hedging, data, and energy security.
✅ JEPX wholesale prices spiked to an all-time high
✅ LNG inventories and procurement proved insufficient
✅ Snow disabled solar; new entrants lacked hedging
Japan's worst electricity crunch since the aftermath of the Fukushima crisis has exposed vulnerabilities in the country's recently liberalised power market, although some of the problems appear self-inflicted.
Power prices in Japan hit record highs last month, mirroring UK peak power prices during tight conditions, as a cold snap across northeast Asia prompted a scramble for supplies of liquefied natural gas (LNG), a major fuel for the country's power plants. Power companies urged customers to ration electricity to prevent blackouts, although no outages occurred.
The crisis highlighted how many providers were unprepared for such high demand. Experts say LNG stocks were not topped up ahead of winter and snow disabled solar power farms, while China's power woes strained solar supply chains.
The hundreds of small power companies that sprang up after the market was opened in 2016 have struggled the most, saying the government does not disclose the market data they need to operate. The companies do not have their own generators, instead buying electricity on the wholesale market.
Prices on the Japan Electric Power Exchange (JEPX) hit a record high of 251 yen ($2.39) per kilowatt hour in January, equating to $2,390 per megawatt hour of electricity, above record European price surges seen recently and the highest on record anywhere in the world. One megawatt hour is roughly what an average home in the U.S. would consume over 35 days.
But the vast majority of the new, smaller companies are locked into low, fixed rates they set to lure customers from bigger players, crushing them financially during a price spike like the one in January.
More than 50 small power providers wrote on Jan. 18 to Japan's industry minister, Hiroshi Kajiyama, who oversees the power sector, asking for more accessible data on supply and demand, reserve capacity and fuel inventories.
"By organising and disclosing this information, retail electricity providers will be able to bid at more appropriate prices," said the companies, led by Looop Co.
They also called on Kajiyama to require transmission and distribution companies to pass on some of the unexpected profits from price spikes to smaller operators.
The industry ministry said it had started releasing more timely market data, and is reviewing the cause of the crunch and considering changes, echoing calls by Fatih Birol to keep electricity options open amid uncertainty.
Japan reworked its power markets after the Fukushima nuclear disaster in 2011, liberalizing the sector in 2016 while pushing for more renewables.
But Japan is still heavily reliant on LNG and coal, and only four of 33 nuclear reactors are operating. The power crisis has led to growing calls to restart more reactors.
Kazuno Power, a small retail provider controlled by a municipality of the same name in northern Japan, where abundant renewable energy is locally produced, buys electricity from hydropower stations and JEPX.
During the crunch, the company had to pay nearly 10 times the usual price, Kazuno Power president Takao Takeda said in an interview. Like most other new providers, it could not pass on the costs, lost money, and folded. The local utility has taken over its customers.
"There is a contradiction in the current system," Takeda said. "We are encouraged to locally produce power for local consumption as well as use more renewable energy, but prices for these power supplies are linked to wholesale prices, which depend on the overall power supply."
The big utilities, which receive most of their LNG on long-term contracts, blamed the power shortfall on a tight spot market and glitches at generation units.
"We were not able to buy as much supply as we wanted from the spot market because of higher demand from South Korea and China, where power cuts have tightened supply," Kazuhiro Ikebe, the head of the country's electricity federation, said recently.
Ikebe is also president of Kyushu Electric Power, which supplies the southern island of Kyushu.
Utilities took extreme measures - from burning polluting fuel oil in coal plants to scavenging the dregs from empty LNG tankers - to keep the grid from breaking down.
"There is too much dependence on JEPX for procurement," said Bob Takai, the local head of European Energy Exchange, where electricity pricing reforms are being discussed, and which started offering Japan power futures last year. He added that new entrants were not hedging against sharp price moves.
Three people, who requested anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter, were more blunt. One called the utilities arrogant in assuming they could find LNG cargoes in a pinch. Prices were already rising as China snapped up supplies, the sources noted.
"You had volatility caused by people saying 'Oh, well, demand is going to be weak because of coronavirus impacts' and then saying 'we can rely more on solar than in the past,' but solar got snowed out," said a senior executive from one generator. "We have a problem of who is charge of energy security in Japan."
Inventories of LNG, generally about two weeks worth of supplies, were also not topped up enough to prepare for winter, a market analyst said.
The fallout from the crunch has become more apparent in recent days, with new power companies like Rakuten Inc suspending new sales and Tokyo Gas, along with traditional electricity utilities, issuing profit downgrades or withdrawing their forecasts.
Although prices have fallen sharply as temperatures warmed up slightly and more generation units have come back online, the power generator executive said, "we are not out of the woods yet."
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.
NDC Renewable Energy Ambition drives COP25 calls to align with the Paris Agreement, as IRENA urges 2030 targets toward 7.7 TW, accelerating decarbonization, energy transition, socio-economic benefits, and scalable renewables in Nationally Determined Contributions.
Key Points
Raised 2030 renewable targets in NDCs to meet Paris goals, reaching 7.7 TW efficiently and speeding decarbonization.
✅ Double current NDC renewables to align with 7.7 TW by 2030
✅ Cost effective pathway with jobs, growth, welfare gains
✅ Accelerates decarbonization and energy access per UN goals
We need an oracle to get us out of this debacle. The UN climate group has met for the 25th time. Will anything ever change?
Countries are being urged to significantly raise renewable energy ambition and adopt targets to transform the global energy system in the next round of Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), according to a new IRENA report by the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) that will be released at the UN Climate Change Conference (COP25) in Madrid.
The report will show that renewable energy ambition within NDCs would have to more than double by 2030 to put the world in line with the Paris Agreement goals, cost-effectively reaching 7.7 terawatts (TW) of globally installed capacity by then. Today’s renewable energy pledges under the NDCs are falling short of this, targeting only 3.2 TW, even as over 30% of global electricity is already generated from renewables.
The reportNDCs in 2020: Advancing Renewables in the Power Sector and Beyondwill be released at IRENA’s official side event on enhancing NDCs and raising ambition on 11 December 2019.It will state that with over 2.3 TW installed renewable capacity today, following a record year for renewables in 2016, almost half of the additional renewable energy capacity foreseen by current NDCs has already been installed.
The analysis will also highlight that delivering on increased renewable energy ambition can be achieved in a cost-effective way and with considerable socio-economic benefits across the world.
“Increasing renewable energy targets is absolutely necessary,” said IRENA’s Director-General Francesco La Camera. “Much more is possible. There is a decisive opportunity for policy makers to step up climate action, including a fossil fuel lockdown, by raising ambition on renewables, which are the only immediate solution to meet rising energy demand whilst decarbonizing the economy and building resilience.
“IRENA’s analysis shows that a pathway to a decarbonised economy is technologically possible and socially and economically beneficial,” continued Mr. La Camera.
“Renewables are good for growth, good for job creation and deliver significant welfare benefits. With renewables, we can also expand energy access and help eradicate energy poverty by ensuring clean, affordable and sustainable electricity for all in line with the UN Sustainable Development Agenda 2030.
IRENA will promote knowledge exchange, strengthen partnerships and work with all stakeholders to catalyse action on the ground. We are engaging with countries and regions worldwide, from Ireland's green electricity push to other markets, to facilitate renewable energy projects and raise their ambitions”.
NDCs must become a driving force for an accelerated global energy transformation toward 100% renewable energy globally. The current pledges reflect neither the past decade’s rapid growth nor the ongoing market trends for renewables. Through a higher renewable energy ambition, NDCs could serve to advance multiple climate and development objectives.
Electric Vehicle Adoption Barriers include range anxiety, charging infrastructure, and cost parity; consumer demand, tax credits, lithium-ion batteries, and performance benefits are accelerating EV uptake, pushing SUVs and self-driving tech toward mainstream mobility.
Key Points
They are the key hurdles to mainstream EV uptake: range anxiety, sparse charging networks, and high upfront costs.
✅ Range targets of 300+ miles reduce anxiety and match ICE convenience
✅ Expanded home, work, and public charging speeds adoption
✅ Falling battery costs and incentives drive price parity
The automotive industry is hurtling toward a future that will change transportation the same way electricity changed how we light the world. Electric and self-driving vehicles will alter the automotive landscape forever — it's only a question of how soon, and whether the age of electric cars arrives ahead of schedule.
Like any revolution, this one will be created by market demand. Beyond the environmental benefit, electric vehicle owners enjoy the performance, quiet operation, robust acceleration, style and interior space. And EV owners like not having to buy gasoline. We believe the majority of these customers will stay loyal to electric cars, and U.S. EV sales are soaring into 2024 as this loyalty grows.
But what about non-EV owners? Will they want to buy electric, and is it time to buy an electric car for them yet? About 25 years ago, when we first considered getting into the electric vehicle business with a small car that had about 70 miles of range, the answer was no. But today, the results are far more encouraging.
We recently held consumer clinics in Los Angeles and Chicago and presented people with six SUV choices: three gasoline and three electric. When we asked for their first choice to purchase, 40% of the Chicago respondents chose an electric SUV, and 45% in LA did the same. This is despite a several thousand-dollar premium on the price of the electric models, and despite that EV sales still lag gas cars nationally today, consumer interest was strong (but also before crucial government tax credits that we believe will continue to drive people toward electric vehicles and help fuel market demand).
They had concerns, to be sure. Most people said they want vehicles that can match gasoline-powered vehicles in range, ease of ownership and cost. The sooner we can break down these three critical barriers, the sooner electric cars will become mainstream.
Range Range is the single biggest barrier to EV acceptance. Just as demand for gas mileage doesn't go down when there are more gas stations, demand for better range won't ease even as charging infrastructure improves. People will still want to drive as long as possible between charges.
Most consumers surveyed during our clinics said they want at least 300 miles of range. And if you look at the market today, which is driven by early adapters, electric cars have hit an inflection point in demand, and the numbers bear that out. The vast majority of electric vehicles sold — almost 90% — are six models with the highest range of 238 miles or more — three Tesla models, the Chevrolet Bolt EV, the Hyundai Kona and the Kia Niro, according to IHS Markit data.
Lithium-ion batteries, which power virtually all electric cars on the road today, are rapidly improving, increasing range with each generation. At GM, we recently announced that our 2020 Chevrolet Bolt EV will have a range of 259 miles, a 21-mile improvement over the previous model. Range will continue to improve across the industry, and range anxiety will dissipate.
Charging infrastructure Our research also shows that, among those who have considered buying an electric vehicle, but haven't, the lack of charging stations is the number one reason why.
For EVs to gain widespread acceptance, manufacturers, charging companies, industry groups and governments at all levels must work together to make public charging available in as many locations as possible. For example, we are seeing increased partnership activity between manufacturers and charging station companies, as well as construction companies that build large infrastructure projects, as the American EV boom approaches, with the goal of adding thousands of additional public charging stations in the United States.
Private charging stations are just as important. Nearly 80% of electric vehicle owners charge their vehicles at home, and almost 15% at work, with the rest at public stations, our research shows. Therefore, continuing to make charging easy and seamless is vital. To that end, more partnerships with companies that will install the chargers in consumers' homes conveniently and affordably will be a boon for both buyers and sellers.
Cost Another benefit to EV ownership is a lower cost of operation. Most EV owners report that their average cost of operation is about one-third of what a gasoline-powered car owner pays. But the purchase price is typically significantly higher, and that's where we should see change as each generation of battery technology improves efficiency and reduces cost.
Looking forward, we think electric vehicle propulsion systems will achieve cost parity with internal combustion engines within a decade or sooner, and will only get better after that, driving sticker prices down and widening the appeal to the average consumer. That will be driven by a number of factors, including improvements with each generation of batteries and vehicles, as well as expected increased regulatory costs on gasoline and diesel engines.
Removing these barriers will lead to what I consider the ultimate key to widespread EV adoption — the emergence of the EV as a consumer's primary vehicle — not a single-purpose or secondary vehicle. That will happen when we as an industry are able to offer the utility, cost parity and convenience of today's internal combustion-based cars and trucks.
To get the electric vehicle to first-string status, manufacturers simply must make it as good or better than the cars, trucks and crossovers most people are used to driving today. And we must deliver on our promise of making affordable, appealing EVs in the widest range of sizes and body styles possible. When we do that, electric vehicle adoption and acceptance will be widespread, and it can happen sooner than most people think.
Mark Reuss is president of GM. The opinions expressed in this commentary are his own.
Developing Countries Clean Energy investment fell as renewable energy financing slowed in China; solar and wind growth lagged while coal power hit new highs, raising emissions risks for emerging markets and complicating climate change goals.
Key Points
Renewables investment and power trends in emerging nations: solar, wind, coal shifts, and steps toward decarbonization.
✅ Investment fell to $133b; China dropped to $86b
✅ Coal power rose to 6,900 TWh; 47% generation share
✅ New coal builds declined to 39 GW, decade low
New clean energy investment slid by more than a fifth in developing countries last year due to a slowdown in China, while the amount of coal-fired power generation jumped to a new high, reflecting global power demand trends, a recent annual survey showed.
Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF) surveyed 104 emerging markets and found that developing nations were moving towards cleaner, low-emissions sources in many regions, but not fast enough to limit carbon dioxide emissions or the effects of climate change.
New investment in wind, solar and other clean energy projects dropped to $133 billion last year from $169 billion a year earlier, mainly due to a slump in Chinese investment, even as electricity investment globally surpasses oil and gas for the first time, the research showed.
China’s clean energy investment fell to $86 billion from $122 billion a year earlier, with dynamics in China's electricity sector also in focus. Investment by India and Brazil also declined, mainly due to lower costs for solar and wind.
However, the volume of coal-fired power generation produced and consumed in developing countries increased to a new high of 6,900 terrawatt hours (TWh) last year, even as renewables are poised to eclipse coal globally, from 6,400 TWh in 2017.
The increase of 500 TWh is equivalent to the power consumed in the U.S. state of Texas in one year, underscoring how surging electricity demand is putting power systems under strain. Coal accounted for 47% of all power generation across the 104 countries.
“The transition from coal toward cleaner sources in developing nations is underway,” said Ethan Zindler, head of Americas at BNEF. “But like trying to turn a massive oil tanker, it takes time.”
Despite the spike in coal-fired generation, the amount of new coal capacity which was added to the grid in developing countries declined, with Europe's renewables crowding out gas offering a contrasting pathway. New construction of coal plants fell to its lowest level in a decade last year of 39 gigawatts (GW).
The report comes a week ahead of United Nations climate talks in Madrid, Spain, where more than 190 countries will flesh out the details of an accord to limit global warming.
EU Electricity Market Reform CFDs seek stable prices via contracts for difference, balancing renewables and nuclear, shielding consumers, and boosting competitiveness as France and Germany clash over scope, grid expansion, and hydrogen production.
Key Points
EU framework using contracts for difference to stabilize power prices, support renewables and nuclear, and protect users.
✅ Guarantees strike prices for new low-carbon generation
✅ Balances consumer protection with industrial competitiveness
Despite record temperatures this October, Europe is slowly shifting towards winter - its second since the Ukraine war started and prompted Russia to cut gas supplies to the continent amid an energy crisis that has reshaped policy.
After prices surged last winter, when gas and electricity bills “nearly doubled in all EU capitals”, the EU decided to take emergency measures to limit prices.
In March, the European Commission proposed a reform to revamp the electricity market “to boost renewables, better protect consumers and enhance industrial competitiveness”.
However, France and Germany are struggling to find a compromise as rolling back prices is tougher than it appears and the clock is ticking as European energy ministers prepare to meet on 17 October in Luxembourg.
The controversy around CFDs At the heart of the issue are contracts for difference (CFDs).
By providing a guaranteed price for electricity, CFDs aim to support investment in renewable energy projects.
France - having 56 nuclear reactors - is lobbying for nuclear energy to be included in the CFDs, but this has caught the withering eye of Germany.
Berlin suspects Paris of wanting an exception that would give its industry a competitive advantage and plead that it should only apply to new investments.
France wants ‘to regain control of the price’ The disagreement is at the heart of the bilateral talks in Hamburg, which started on Monday, between the French and German governments.
French President Emmanuel Macron promised “to regain control of the price of electricity, at the French and European level” and outlined a new pricing scheme in a speech at the end of September.
As gas electricity is much more expensive than nuclear electricity, France might be tempted to switch to a national system rather than a European one after a deal with EDF on prices to be more competitive economically.
However, France is "confident" that it will reach an agreement with Germany on electricity market reforms, Macron said on Friday.
Siding with France are other pro-nuclear countries such as Hungary, the Czech Republic and Poland, while Germany can count on the support of Austria, Luxembourg, Belgium and Italy amid opposition from nine EU countries to treating market reforms as a price fix.
But even if a last-minute agreement is reached, the two countries’ struggles over energy are creeping into all current European negotiations on the subject.
Germany wants a massive extension of electricity grids on the continent so that it can import energy; France is banking on energy sovereignty and national production.
France wants to be able to use nuclear energy to produce clean hydrogen, while Germany is reluctant, and so on.
