Is a solar trade war about to flare?

By Reuters


Protective Relay Training - Basic

Our customized live online or in‑person group training can be delivered to your staff at your location.

  • Live Online
  • 12 hours Instructor-led
  • Group Training Available
Regular Price:
$699
Coupon Price:
$599
Reserve Your Seat Today
Germany's fifth-biggest solar power park emerges as a smudge on the horizon long before you reach it on the outskirts of the small, sleepy village of Eberswalde, an hour's drive north of Berlin. "In the far distance, you can see it," Peter Kobbe says, pointing through heavy December snowfall as he steers his Citroen van along an icy road.

Kobbe, 64, works at Finow airport, where a local investment firm built the 58 million euro US $77 million solar park in 2009. Finow itself was built by the Nazis before World War Two and later became one of the Soviet Union's main Cold War hubs. Now the small aircraft that still use the airport share it with about 90,000 solar modules — which together generate enough to power 6,400 households a year.

"This is where they the Soviets used to store their nuclear weapons," says Kobbe, who runs a small museum documenting the airport's history, guiding his van over the snow-covered landing strip.

Now there's a different foreign presence in Finow. When the first solar modules arrived for installation they came not from a local manufacturer — German solar company Conergy runs a factory just 45 minutes away in Frankfurt an der Oder, for instance — but from China's Suntech Power Holdings, now the world's largest maker of photovoltaic PV solar modules. "We were quite surprised when the trucks brought Chinese modules, and not German ones," Kobbe says. "But they were probably cheaper." Solarhybrid, which spearheaded construction of the park, says reductions in Germany's renewable subsidies meant it had to use Suntech modules to stay competitive.

Germany has long been the global solar industry's engine. Europe's biggest economy consumed more than half the solar panels produced around the world in 2010. Solar accounts for just two percent of Germany's power production, but the country added a record 8,000 megawatts MW of solar modules last year — equal to the capacity of eight nuclear reactors — far outpacing Italy, Japan and the United States.

So why are China's solar companies benefiting at the expense of renewable energy manufacturers in Europe and the United States? Virtually non-existent a decade ago, Chinese solar companies now control two thirds of solar cell production in the $39 billion global PV market. Critics say this is mostly because the generous subsidies they receive at home give them an advantage over other countries' manufacturers and restrictions keep foreign companies from competing for China's domestic projects. European and U.S. subsidies are designed to boost solar usage no matter who builds the hardware. Chinese subsidies, western firms complain, help Chinese solar manufacturers alone.

Resentment in western capitals is building. Beijing is currently considering plans to spend up to $1.5 trillion over five years to back strategic industries, including alternative energy, a source with ties to the leadership and direct knowledge of the proposal told Reuters in December.

The Obama administration, prompted by a complaint by the United Steelworkers union in September, is now considering taking a case against China to the World Trade Organization WTO regarding Beijing's support of its solar companies. Last month, the U.S. government complained to the WTO that China illegally helped its wind power manufacturers. The issue of trade will be under discussion when Chinese President Hu Jintao visits Washington. Could a green trade war be brewing?

"I think we're always afraid of a trade war so we don't act. The Chinese are never afraid of a trade war so they do act. And that's why they're beating us in too many cases on clean energy and other industrial concerns," said U.S. Senator Sherrod Brown, a Democrat whose home state of Ohio is a hub of solar panel production for companies such as First Solar Inc, which still ranks as the world's top solar maker by market value and is one of the largest producers.

"For 10 years we've always stepped back because we're afraid, we don't want to upset anybody. Every other country practices trade according to its national interest. We practice trade according to an economic text book that is 10 years out of print."

So far, Berlin's response has been more restrained, relying on European Union discussions with China to overcome the trade disputes. But "if such talks remain unsuccessful, the launch of a WTO dispute settlement can be considered," Jochen Homann, deputy German Economy Minister, said in a statement to a member of the German parliament who then passed it on to Reuters.

Every solar company in the world relies on some form of subsidy to build or sell its products. That's because solar electricity is still about eight times more expensive than power generated by coal-fired plants. The global solar industry only really began to take off when, about a decade ago, governments introduced subsidies for clean energy systems in an effort to trim their carbon dioxide output and reduce dependence on fossil fuels.

Germany's supports are generous — an estimated 7.3 billion euros this year — and have been so successful that Berlin started reducing payments for new solar plants last year, bringing forward by more than a year a decrease it already planned. The support comes indirectly, through so-called feed-in tariffs. Berlin doesn't pay solar panel makers directly, but forces larger utilities to pay the generators of solar power, including homeowners, more for each watt that comes from the sun. In the end, the cost for solar power — currently about 28.74 euro cents per kilowatt hour KWh, which is down about 27 percent since the beginning of 2010 — is borne by all consumers. Because the subsidy goes to the person or company generating power, the issue of where the equipment is made is ignored.

The United States, too, subsidizes its solar industry. Last month Washington extended for a year a popular cash grant program that pays 30 percent of the development costs to build power plants that use solar modules. Crucially, that help is available to anyone building a solar power plant, irrespective of where the panels come from. U.S. companies also earn manufacturing tax credits for production facilities, and states and cities often waive taxes to lure manufacturers to set up operations.

The big difference with China, its solar critics say, is that Beijing helps only its own manufacturers — who then send their panels around the globe to reap additional subsidies in other countries. Western companies also complain that foreign solar firms are locked out of bidding for projects inside China.

"While foreign manufacturers find the German market open, the Chinese domestic market has so far been walled off. Therefore, we're watching the WTO initiatives in the U.S. very carefully," says Carsten Koernig, managing director of BSW, the German solar industry association.

The USW complaint blames China's aid to its solar industry for a creating a supply glut which drove down panel prices by 40 percent in 2009 and pushed U.S. competitors out of the market. China's solar shipments to Europe grew eightfold from 2006 to 2009, the USW complaint says, faster than the rise in overall European demand.

The USW also accuses Beijing of direct violations of China's agreement with the WTO. According to the steelworkers' complaint, Sinosure, China's official export credit insurance agency, provided $1.25 billion in insurance for photovoltaic exports from China, covering nearly half of all Chinese exports of the product. The USW claims Sinosure ran a cumulative loss of 1.4 billion yuan US $212 million between 2002 and 2008. Those losses, a USW lawyer claims, indicate the subsidy was a violation of trade rules. Chinese companies reject the idea they are helped more than their western rivals.

Western companies also argue that Beijing's subsidy regime discourages the use of solar panels in China. Unlike Germany, China refuses to introduce tariff incentives that would drive domestic demand for solar energy. Even with its dominant share of solar cell and panel production, and even as the country scrambles to generate more power, analysts estimate China installed less than 500 MW of solar power inside its own borders in 2010.

With no incentive to sell at home, it's no wonder that Chinese companies prefer to export their hardware. Some of China's leading exporters shunned a Chinese government tender for solar projects in the third quarter, saying they could not earn a profit.

"The Chinese government does not want to be purchasing or installing PV at the current prices. It wants to use the Western market to create volume to drive down the cost and, when the cost is lower, then China will start buying," says Michael Eckhart, president of the trade group American Council on Renewable Energy.

The result, western companies complain, is that they suffer while the Chinese prosper. Just up the road from Finow airport's solar park, Conergy, once Europe's largest solar player, was rescued from insolvency by hedge funds in late December, as it struggled to service a mounting debt pile. In the United States, many small solar companies have gone bust earlier this month, publicly listed Evergreen Solar Inc said it would shut its plant in Massachusetts and concentrate on manufacturing in Wuhan, China — where it is the minority partner in a factory sponsored by the provincial Hubei government.

China's Suntech, on the other hand, is booming. Founded in Wuxi in the southeast of Jiangsu province in 2001, Suntech is now the largest solar company by output in the world. After starting with just $6 million in state money in 2001 it now turns over $1.5 billion a year. In 2002 it produced 10 MW of solar panels. It expects to ship 2,200 MW this year.

It's had some help. Where Germany's Conergy struggled to get credit last year, Suntech signed an agreement with China Development Bank in April that gives it access to up to 50 billion yuan US $7.3 billion to help finance its expansion.

Beijing does not disclose the total amount it has put behind its solar sector, but Chinese solar executives say credit lines to domestic solar firms from state-owned China Development Bank alone totaled over $30 billion in 2010. Suntech and Jiangxi-based LDK Solar Co, which is five years old, have been the biggest beneficiaries, accounting for over half those credits, which run up to six years. The lines of credit are on top of cash grants, tax benefits and low-interest loans Beijing has put behind the industry — funds that backstop the young companies' balance sheets and are the envy of their Western competitors.

Suntech has also benefited from provincial government support. Like most companies building a business within China's specified high-tech zone, Suntech was exempt from the usual rate of 33 percent corporate tax for its first two profitable years, and subsequently paid 7.5 percent, rising to 15 percent in 2008. As it has grown, the company has also been given value added tax VAT rebates on goods sold overseas and exempted from paying VAT on the raw materials it imports. Renewable energy companies like Suntech can also secure loans at a discount of around 50 basis points on the headline rate, currently 5.81 percent.

All that support helped Suntech win the contract for the hardware installed at Finow, a fact that "is certainly pretty frustrating for German manufacturers," says Marc Lohoff, head of Asian business at Conergy.

China's solar manufacturers deny they have an edge over their foreign rivals, arguing that companies the world over receive help from national governments.

"The Chinese government really does not do much for solar energy not as much support like you see in Germany and the U.S.," LDK chairman and chief executive Peng Xiaofeng, one of the world's youngest billionaires, told Reuters in an interview. "Every country, every government subsidizes its solar sector. China is not alone in giving subsidies," agrees Terry Wang, chief financial officer of Jiangsu-based Trina Solar, China's third-largest solar module company.

Wang believes the WTO will reject any complaint about solar subsidies. "I don't believe a U.S. trade complaint before the WTO will have a solid case against Chinese module makers," he said.

On the charge that foreign solar manufacturers are shut out of China, Beijing can point to U.S. firm First Solar, which has won tentative approval to install its panels for a power-producing plant in China. First Solar produces thin-film solar panels at the lowest cost in the world. In 2009, it became the first — and so far only — foreign company to win a contract in China, signing a memorandum of understanding to develop the world's largest photovoltaic power plant, a 2,000 MW solar project in the city of Ordos, Inner Mongolia.

Earlier this month, First Solar sealed a partnership with China Guangdong Nuclear Solar Energy Development Co. that would see the Chinese company take a majority stake in the pilot project, though no start date for construction has been announced. Plans for a 30 MW pilot project at Ordos have been delayed. And First Solar's hopes of cracking the Chinese market pale in comparison to the advances its competitors are making on its home turf. In August, Suntech opened its first U.S. manufacturing plant in Goodyear, Arizona, just up the road from First Solar's headquarters in Tempe.

"First Solar is a leader in the industry. We want to make sure our first step in there is at a set of economics that make this project viable, and define viable economics in the future," says First Solar board member TK Kallenbach, who heads up the company's business development in China.

With costs for solar modules falling fast, some industry experts have speculated that China could simply drag out any WTO process until its companies are strong enough to stand on their own.

It's a risky game — for all concerned. If the United States lodges a complaint and proves that China wrongly boosted its companies, Washington could "retaliate to the extent of the damage that we allege they have caused," says Carla Hills, a former U.S. Trade Representative who battled with Japan, Brazil and India over trade and led negotiations that led to the NAFTA trade treaty. But a formal complaint could trigger a trade war that the Chinese government has said would hit an industry crucial to tackling climate change. "If the U.S. closes the door for trading with the rest of the world, including China, in renewable energy products, the U.S. may significantly delay the already long struggle for developing alternative energy sources, if not entirely destroy this opportunity for humankind," China said in a written response to the USW complaint.

That sort of rhetoric does not sit well in Finow, where German workers saw few benefits from the huge solar plant. "Economically, this plant had no impact on our region," one of the owners of Finow airport said on condition of anonymity, because of the sensitivity of the topic. "No jobs were created as the installation work was mainly done by eastern Europeans." The park is set for expansion this year. But, says Kobbe, "I doubt that they'll use German modules this time."

Related News

Idaho gets vast majority of electricity from renewables, almost half from hydropower

Idaho Renewable Energy 2018 saw over 80% in-state utility-scale power from hydropower, wind, solar, biomass, and geothermal, per EIA, with imports declining as Snake River Plain resources and Hells Canyon hydro lead.

 

Key Points

Idaho produced over 80% in-state power from renewables in 2018, led by hydropower, wind, solar, and biomass.

✅ Hydropower supplies about half of capacity; Hells Canyon leads.

✅ Wind provides nearly 20% of capacity along the Snake River Plain.

✅ Utility-scale solar surged since 2016; biomass and geothermal add output.

 

More than 80% of Idaho’s in-state utility-scale electricity generation came from renewable resources in 2018, behind only Vermont, according to recently released data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration’s Electric Power Monthly and broader trends showing that solar and wind reached about 10% of U.S. generation in the first half of 2018.

Idaho generated 17.4 million MWh of electricity in 2018, of which 14.2 million MWh came from renewable sources, while nationally January power generation jumped 9.3% year over year according to EIA. Idaho uses a variety of renewable resources to generate electricity:

Hydroelectricity. Idaho ranked seventh in the U.S. in electricity generation from hydropower in 2018. About half of Idaho’s electricity generating capacity is at hydroelectric power plants, and utility actions such as the Idaho Power settlement could influence future resource choices, and seven of the state’s 10 largest power plants (in terms of electricity generation) are hydroelectric facilities. The largest privately owned hydroelectric generating facility in the U.S. is a three-dam complex on the Snake River in Hells Canyon, the deepest river gorge in North America.

Wind. Nearly one-fifth of Idaho’s electricity generating capacity and one-sixth of its generation comes from wind turbines. Idaho has substantial wind energy potential, and nationally the EIA expects solar and wind to be larger sources this summer, although only a small percentage of the state's land area is well-suited for wind development. All of the state’s wind farms are located in the southern half of the state along the Snake River Plain.

Solar. Almost 5% of Idaho’s electricity generating capacity and 3% of its generation come from utility-scale solar facilities, and nationally over half of new capacity in 2023 will be solar according to projections. The state had no utility-scale solar generation as recently as 2015. Between 2016 and 2017, Idaho’s utility-scale capacity doubled and generation increased from 30,000 MWh to more than 450,000 MWh. Idaho’s small-scale solar capacity also doubled since 2017, generating 33,000 MWh in 2018.

Biomass. Biomass-fueled power plants account for about 2% of the state’s utility-scale electricity generating capacity and 3% of its generation, contributing to a broader U.S. shift where 40% of electricity came from non-fossil sources in 2021. Wood waste from the state’s forests is the primary fuel for these plants.

Geothermal. Idaho is one of seven states with utility-scale geothermal electricity generation. Idaho has one 18-MW geothermal facility, located near the state’s southern border with Utah.

EIA says Idaho requires significant electricity imports, totaling about one-third of demand, to meet its electricity needs. However, Idaho’s electricity imports have decreased over time, and Georgia's recent import levels illustrate how regional dynamics can vary. Almost all of these imports are from neighboring states, as electricity imports from Canada accounted for less than 0.1% of Idaho’s total electricity supply in 2017.

 

Related News

View more

Pacific Northwest's Renewable Energy Goals Hindered

Pacific Northwest Transmission Bottleneck slows clean energy progress as BPA's aging grid constrains renewable interconnections, delaying wind, solar, and data center growth; decarbonization targets depend on transmission upgrades, new substations, and policy reform.

 

Key Points

An interconnection and capacity shortfall on BPA's aging grid that delays renewables and impedes clean energy goals.

✅ BPA approvals lag: 1 of 469 projects since 2015.

✅ Yakama solar waits for substation upgrades until 2027.

✅ Data centers and decarbonization targets face grid constraints.

 

Oregon and Washington have set ambitious targets to decarbonize their power sectors, aiming for 100% clean electricity in the coming decades. However, a significant obstacle stands in the way: the region's aging and overburdened transmission grid, underscoring why 100% renewables remain elusive even as momentum builds.

The Grid Bottleneck

The BPA operates a transmission system that is nearly a century old in some areas, and its capacity has not expanded sufficiently to accommodate the influx of renewable energy projects, reflecting stalled grid spending in many parts of the U.S., according to recent analyses. Since 2015, 469 large renewable projects have applied to connect to the BPA's grid; however, only one has been approved—a stark contrast to other regions in the country. This bottleneck has left numerous wind and solar projects in limbo, unable to deliver power to the grid.

One notable example is the Yakama Nation's solar project. Despite receiving a $32 million federal grant under the bipartisan infrastructure law as part of a broader grid overhaul for renewables, the tribe faces significant delays. The BPA estimates that it will take until 2027 to complete the necessary upgrades to the transmission system, including a new substation, before the solar array can be connected. This timeline poses a risk of losing federal funding if the project isn't operational by 2031.

Economic and Environmental Implications

The slow pace of grid expansion has broader implications for the region's economy and environmental goals. Data centers and other energy-intensive industries are increasingly drawn to the Pacific Northwest due to its clean energy potential, while interregional projects like the Wyoming-to-California wind link illustrate how transmission access can unlock supply. However, without adequate infrastructure, these industries may seek alternatives elsewhere. Additionally, the inability to integrate renewable energy efficiently hampers efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and combat climate change.

Policy Challenges and Legislative Efforts

Efforts to address the grid limitations through state-level initiatives have faced challenges, even as a federal rule to boost transmission advances nationally. In 2025, both Oregon and Washington considered legislation to establish state bonding authorities aimed at financing transmission upgrades. However, these bills failed to pass, leaving the BPA as the primary entity responsible for grid expansion. The BPA's unique structure—operating as a self-funded federal agency without direct state oversight—has made it difficult for regional leaders to influence its decision-making processes.

Looking Ahead

The Pacific Northwest's renewable energy aspirations hinge on modernizing its transmission infrastructure, aligning with decarbonization strategies that emphasize grid buildout. While the BPA has proposed several projects to enhance grid capacity, the timeline for completion remains uncertain. Without significant investment and policy reforms, the region risks falling behind in the transition to a clean energy future. Stakeholders across Oregon and Washington must collaborate to advocate for necessary changes and ensure that the grid can support the growing demand for renewable energy.

The Pacific Northwest's commitment to clean energy is commendable, but achieving these goals requires overcoming substantial infrastructure challenges, and neighboring jurisdictions such as British Columbia have pursued B.C. regulatory streamlining to accelerate projects. Addressing the limitations of the BPA's transmission system is critical to unlocking the full potential of renewable energy in the region. Only through concerted efforts at the federal, state, and local levels can Oregon and Washington hope to realize their green energy ambitions.

 

Related News

View more

Changes Coming For Ontario Electricity Consumers

Ontario Electricity Billing Changes include OEB-backed shifts to time-of-use or tiered pricing, landlord blanket elections, LDC implementation guidance, a customer choice webpage with a bill calculator, and ENDM rate mitigation messaging.

 

Key Points

They are OEB measures enabling TOU-to-tiered switching, landlord elections, LDC guidance, and ENDM bill messages.

✅ Option to switch from TOU to tiered pricing

✅ Landlord blanket elections on tenant turnover

✅ ENDM-led bill info and rate mitigation messaging

 

By David Stevens, Aird & Berlis LLP

Electricity consumers in Ontario may see a couple of electricity rate changes in their bills in the coming months.

First, as we have already discussed, as of November 1, 2020, regulated price plan customers will have the option to switch to "tiered pricing" instead of time-of-use (TOU) pricing structures. Those who switch to "tiered pricing" will see changes in their electricity bills.

The Ontario Energy Board (OEB) has now issued final amendments to the Standard Supply Service Code to support the customer election process necessary to switch from TOU pricing to tiered pricing. The main change from what was already published in previous OEB notices is that landlords will be permitted to make a "blanket election" between TOU pricing and tiered pricing that will apply each time a tenant's account reverts back to the landlord on turnover of the rental unit. In its most recent notice, the OEB acknowledges that implementing the new customer billing option as of Nov. 1 (less than two months from now) will be challenging and directs Local Distribution Companies (LDCs) who cannot meet this date to be immediately in touch with the OEB. Finally, the OEB indicates that there will be a dedicated "customer choice webpage for consumers, including a bill calculator" in place by early October.

Second, as of January 1, 2021 low-volume consumers will see additional messaging on their bills to inform them of available rate mitigation programs.

A recent proposal posted on Ontario's Regulatory Registry indicates that the Ministry of Energy, Northern Development and Mines (ENDM) proposes that LDCs and Utility Sub-Meter Providers will be required to include a new on-bill message for low-volume consumers that "will direct customers to ENDM's new web page for further information about how the province provides financial support to electricity consumers." This new requirement is planned to be in place as of January 1, 2021. In conjunction with this requirement, the ENDM plans to launch a new web page that will provide "up-to-date information about electricity bills," including information about rate mitigation programs available to consumers. Parties are invited to submit comments on the ENDM proposal by October 5, 2020.

 

Related News

View more

How Energy Use Has Evolved Throughout U.S. History

U.S. Energy Transition traces the shift from coal and oil to natural gas, nuclear power, and renewables like wind and solar, driven by efficiency, grid modernization, climate goals, and economic innovation.

 

Key Points

The U.S. Energy Transition is the shift from fossil fuels to cleaner power, driven by tech, policy, and markets.

✅ Shift from coal and oil to gas, nuclear, wind, and solar

✅ Enabled by grid modernization, storage, and efficiency

✅ Aims to cut emissions while ensuring reliability and affordability

 

The evolution of energy use in the United States is a dynamic narrative that reflects technological advancements, economic shifts, environmental awareness, and societal changes over time. From the nation's early reliance on wood and coal to the modern era dominated by oil, natural gas, and renewable sources, the story of energy consumption in the U.S. is a testament to innovation and adaptation.

Early Energy Sources: Wood and Coal

In the early days of U.S. history, energy needs were primarily met through renewable resources such as wood for heating and cooking. As industrialization took hold in the 19th century, coal emerged as a dominant energy source, fueling steam engines and powering factories, railways, and urban growth. The widespread availability of coal spurred economic development and shaped the nation's infrastructure.

The Rise of Petroleum and Natural Gas

The discovery and commercialization of petroleum in the late 19th century transformed the energy landscape once again. Oil quickly became a cornerstone of the U.S. economy, powering transportation, industry, and residential heating, and informing debates about U.S. energy security in policy circles. Concurrently, natural gas emerged as a significant energy source, particularly for heating and electricity generation, as pipelines expanded across the country.

Electricity Revolution

The 20th century witnessed a revolution in electricity generation and consumption, and understanding where electricity comes from helps contextualize how systems evolved. The development of hydroelectric power, spurred by projects like the Hoover Dam and Tennessee Valley Authority, provided clean and renewable energy to millions of Americans. The widespread electrification of rural areas and the proliferation of appliances in homes and businesses transformed daily life and spurred economic growth.

Nuclear Power and Energy Diversification

In the mid-20th century, nuclear power emerged as a promising alternative to fossil fuels, promising abundant energy with minimal greenhouse gas emissions. Despite concerns about safety and waste disposal, nuclear power plants became a significant part of the U.S. energy mix, providing a stable base load of electricity, even as the aging U.S. power grid complicates integration of variable renewables.

Renewable Energy Revolution

In recent decades, the U.S. has seen a growing emphasis on renewable energy sources such as wind, solar, and geothermal power, yet market shocks and high fuel prices alone have not guaranteed a rapid green revolution, prompting broader policy and investment responses. Advances in technology, declining costs, and environmental concerns have driven investments in clean energy infrastructure and policies promoting renewable energy adoption. States like California and Texas lead the nation in wind and solar energy production, demonstrating the feasibility and benefits of transitioning to sustainable energy sources.

Energy Efficiency and Conservation

Alongside shifts in energy sources, improvements in energy efficiency and conservation have played a crucial role in reducing per capita energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions. Energy-efficient appliances, building codes, and transportation innovations have helped mitigate the environmental impact of energy use while reducing costs for consumers and businesses, and weather and economic factors also influence demand; for example, U.S. power demand fell in 2023 on milder weather, underscoring the interplay between efficiency and usage.

Challenges and Opportunities

Looking ahead, the U.S. faces both challenges and opportunities in its energy future, as recent energy crisis effects ripple across electricity, gas, and EVs alike. Addressing climate change requires further investments in renewable energy, grid modernization, and energy storage technologies. Balancing energy security, affordability, and environmental sustainability remains a complex task that requires collaboration between government, industry, and society.

Conclusion

The evolution of energy use throughout U.S. history reflects a continuous quest for innovation, economic growth, and environmental stewardship. From wood and coal to nuclear power and renewables, each era has brought new challenges and opportunities in meeting the nation's energy needs. As the U.S. transitions towards a cleaner and more sustainable energy future, leveraging technological advancements and embracing policy solutions, amid debates over U.S. energy dominance, will be essential in shaping the next chapter of America's energy story.

 

Related News

View more

Franklin Energy and Consumers Energy Support Small Businesses During COVID-19 with Virtual Energy Coaching

Consumers Energy Virtual Energy Coaching connects Michigan small businesses with remote efficiency experts to cut utility costs, optimize energy usage, and access rebates and incentives, delivering safe COVID-19-era support and long-term savings through tailored assessments.

 

Key Points

A remote coaching service helping small businesses improve energy efficiency, access rebates, and cut utility costs.

✅ Three-call virtual coaching with usage review and savings plan

✅ Connects to rebates, incentives, and financing options

✅ Eligibility: <=1,200,000 kWh, <=15,000 MCF annually

 

Franklin Energy, a leading provider in energy efficiency and grid optimization solutions, announced today that they will implement Consumers Energy's Small Business Virtual Energy Coaching Service in response to the COVID-19 pandemic and broader industry coordination with federal partners across the power sector.

This Michigan-wide offering to natural gas, electric and combination small business customers provides a complimentary virtual energy-coaching service to help small businesses find ways to reduce electricity bills and benefit from lower utility costs, both now during COVID-19 and into the future, informed by similar Ontario electricity bill support efforts in other regions. To be eligible for the program, small businesses must have electric usage at or below 1,200,000 kWh annually and gas usage at or below 15,000 MCF annually.

"By developing lasting customer relationships and delivering consistent solutions through conversation, the Energy Coaching Program offers the next level of support for small business customers," said Hollie Whitmire, Franklin Energy program manager. "Energy coaching is suitable for all small businesses, but it's ideal for businesses that are new to energy efficiency or for those that have had low engagement with energy efficiency offerings and emerging new utility rate designs in years past."

Through a series of three calls, eligible small businesses can speak with an energy coach to help them connect to the right program offering available through Consumers Energy's energy efficiency programs for businesses, including demand response models like the Ontario Peak Perks program that support load management. From answering questions to reviewing energy usage, conducting assessments, identifying savings opportunities, and more, the energy coach is available to help small businesses put money back into their pocket now, when it matters most.

"Consumers Energy is committed to helping Michigan's small business community prosper, now more than ever, with examples such as Entergy's COVID-19 relief fund underscoring industry support," said Lauren Youngdahl Snyder, Consumers Energy's vice president of customer experience. "We are excited to work with Franklin Energy to develop an innovative solution for our small business customers. The Virtual Energy Coaching Service lets us engage our customers in a safe and effective manner, as seen with utilities waiving fees in Texas during the crisis, and has the potential to last even past the COVID-19 pandemic."

 

Related News

View more

Vancouver's Reversal on Gas Appliances

Vancouver Natural Gas Ban Reversal spotlights energy policy, electrification tradeoffs, heat pumps, emissions, grid reliability, and affordability, reshaping building codes and decarbonization pathways while inviting stakeholders to weigh practical constraints and climate goals.

 

Key Points

Vancouver ending its ban on natural gas in new homes to balance climate goals with reliability, costs, and technology.

✅ Balances emissions goals with reliability and affordability

✅ Impacts builders, homeowners, and energy infrastructure

✅ Spurs debate on electrification, heat pumps, and grid capacity

 

In a significant policy shift, Vancouver has decided to lift its ban on natural gas appliances in new homes, a move that marks a pivotal moment in the city's energy policy and environmental strategy. This decision, announced recently and following the city's Clean Energy Champion recognition for Bloedel upgrades, has sparked a broader conversation about the future of energy systems and the balance between environmental goals and practical energy needs. Stewart Muir, CEO of Resource Works, argues that this reversal should catalyze a necessary dialogue on energy choices, highlighting both the benefits and challenges of such a policy change.

Vancouver's original ban on natural gas appliances was part of a broader initiative aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions and promoting sustainability, including progress toward phasing out fossil fuels where feasible over time. The city had adopted stringent regulations to encourage the use of electric heat pumps and other low-carbon technologies in new residential buildings. This move was aligned with Vancouver’s ambitious climate goals, which include achieving carbon neutrality by 2050 and significantly cutting down on fossil fuel use.

However, the recent decision to reverse the ban reflects a growing recognition of the complexities involved in transitioning to entirely new energy systems. The city's administration acknowledged that while electric alternatives offer environmental benefits, they also come with challenges that can affect homeowners, builders, and the broader energy infrastructure, including options for bridging the electricity gap with Alberta to enhance regional reliability.

Stewart Muir argues that Vancouver’s policy shift is not just about natural gas appliances but represents a larger conversation about energy system choices and their implications. He suggests that the reversal of the ban provides an opportunity to address key issues related to energy reliability, affordability, and the practicalities of integrating new technologies, including electrified LNG options for industry within the province into existing systems.

One of the primary reasons behind the reversal is the recognition of the practical limitations and costs associated with transitioning to electric-only systems. For many homeowners and builders, natural gas appliances have long been a reliable and cost-effective option. The initial ban on these appliances led to concerns about increased construction costs and potential disruptions for homeowners who were accustomed to natural gas heating and cooking.

In addition to cost considerations, there are concerns about the reliability and efficiency of electric alternatives. Natural gas has been praised for its stable energy supply and efficient performance, especially in colder climates where electric heating systems might struggle to maintain consistent temperatures or fully utilize Site C's electricity under peak demand. By reversing the ban, Vancouver acknowledges that a one-size-fits-all approach may not be suitable for every situation, particularly when considering diverse housing needs and energy demands.

Muir emphasizes that the reversal of the ban should prompt a broader discussion about how to balance environmental goals with practical energy needs. He argues that rather than enforcing a blanket ban on specific technologies, it is crucial to explore a range of solutions that can effectively address climate objectives while accommodating the diverse requirements of different communities and households.

The debate also touches on the role of technological innovation in achieving sustainability goals. As energy technologies continue to evolve, renewable electricity is coming on strong and new solutions and advancements could potentially offer more efficient and environmentally friendly alternatives. The conversation should include exploring these innovations and considering how they can be integrated into existing energy systems to support long-term sustainability.

Moreover, Muir advocates for a more inclusive approach to energy policy that involves engaging various stakeholders, including residents, businesses, and energy experts. A collaborative approach can help identify practical solutions that address both environmental concerns and the realities of everyday energy use.

In the broader context, Vancouver’s decision reflects a growing trend in cities and regions grappling with energy transitions. Many urban centers are evaluating their energy policies and considering adjustments based on new information and emerging technologies. The key is to find a balance that supports climate goals such as 2050 greenhouse gas targets while ensuring that energy systems remain reliable, affordable, and adaptable to changing needs.

As Vancouver moves forward with its revised policy, it will be important to monitor the outcomes and assess the impacts on both the environment and the community. The reversal of the natural gas ban could serve as a case study for other cities facing similar challenges and could provide valuable insights into how to navigate the complexities of energy transitions.

In conclusion, Vancouver’s decision to reverse its ban on natural gas appliances in new homes is a significant development that opens the door for a critical dialogue about energy system choices. Stewart Muir’s call for a broader conversation emphasizes the need to balance environmental ambitions with practical considerations, such as cost, reliability, and technological advancements. As cities continue to navigate their energy futures, finding a pragmatic and inclusive approach will be essential in achieving both sustainability and functionality in energy systems.

 

Related News

View more

Sign Up for Electricity Forum’s Newsletter

Stay informed with our FREE Newsletter — get the latest news, breakthrough technologies, and expert insights, delivered straight to your inbox.

Electricity Today T&D Magazine Subscribe for FREE

Stay informed with the latest T&D policies and technologies.
  • Timely insights from industry experts
  • Practical solutions T&D engineers
  • Free access to every issue

Download the 2025 Electrical Training Catalog

Explore 50+ live, expert-led electrical training courses –

  • Interactive
  • Flexible
  • CEU-cerified