Arvato commissions first solar power plant

Microgrid solar outage algorithms optimize renewable energy during blackouts using grid-forming inverters, islanding control, demand forecasting, and energy storage from batteries and EVs, improving reliability by up to 35% for resilient power sharing.

Key Points

Algorithms that island homes, forecast demand, and prioritize critical loads using storage and grid-forming inverters.

✅ Disconnects inverters to form resilient neighborhood microgrids

✅ Forecasts solar, wind, and demand; allocates energy fairly

✅ Uses EVs and batteries; boosts reliability by up to 35%

Some people who have solar panels on their roof are under the impression that they can use them to power their home in the case of an outage, but that simply is not the case. Homes do remain connected to the grid during outages, as U.S. power outage risks grow, but the devices tasked with managing solar panels are normally turned off due to safety concerns. This permanent grid connection essentially prevents homeowners from drawing on the power that their own renewable energy resources generate.

This could be about to change, however, thanks to the efforts of a team of University of California San Diego engineers who have come up with algorithms that would enable homes to share and use their power in outages by disconnecting solar inverters from the grid. Their algorithms work with the existing technology and would have the added benefit of boosting the system’s reliability by as much as 35 percent.

The genius of their work lies in the ability of the algorithm to prioritize the distribution of power from the renewable resources in outages. Their equation considers forecasts for wind and solar power generation to address clean energy intermittency challenges and the available energy storage, including batteries and electric vehicles. It combines this information with the projected energy usage of residents and the amount of energy the homes are able to produce. It can be programmed to prioritize in several different ways, the most vital of which is by favoring those who need power urgently, such as those using life support equipment. It could also prioritize those who are willing to pay extra or reward those who typically generate an energy surplus during normal operations.

Learning lessons from past outages

Lead author Abdulelah H. Habib said the engineers were inspired to find a way to use the renewable power in outages by the events of Hurricane Sandy. This storm affected more than eight million people on the nation’s East Coast, some of whom were left without power for as long as two weeks.

According to the researchers, most customers prefer sharing community-scale storage systems over having systems in each home because of the lower costs. One of the paper’s senior authors, Raymond de Callafon, said that homes that are connected together are not only more resilient in power outages but they also happen to be more resilient to price fluctuations.

Each home needs to be equipped with special circuit breakers that can be remotely controlled, while utilities would need to install some communications methods so the power systems within a particular residential cluster can communicate amongst themselves. They also need a “grid forming inverter” to help them connect to one another and manage excess solar on networks safely.

One stumbling block that will have to be overcome is the current regulations. Most states do not allow individual homeowners to sell power to other homeowners, so there would have to be some adjustments to make this a reality.

Solar power growing in popularity

Solar power’s popularity is currently on the rise, and reductions in cost as the technology improves are only expected to drive this growth even further. REC CEO Steve O’Neil told CNBC that the installation rates of solar double every two years, a trend that informs residential solar economics for homeowners even though just two percent of the planet’s electricity comes from converting sunlight to energy. This means there is plenty of room for expansion. The world’s current solar capacity is 305 gigawatts, compared to just 50 gigawatts in 2010.

In addition, he pointed out that the price of solar energy has dropped by 70 percent since the year 2010 and continues to fall; it costs around eight cents per kilowatt hour at the moment. Another factor that could boost adoption is storage improvements, driven by affordable solar batteries that expand capacity, which will allow solar energy to be used even on overcast days.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News

U.S. Renewable Energy Forecast 2024 will see wind and solar power surpass one-fourth of electricity generation, EIA projects, as coal declines, natural gas dips, and clean energy capacity, grid integration, and policy incentives expand.

Key Points

EIA outlook: renewables at 26% of U.S. power in 2024, led by wind and solar as coal declines and gas share dips.

✅ Wind and solar hit 18% combined, surpassing coal's 17%.

✅ Natural gas dips to 37% as demand rebounds modestly.

✅ Coal plant closures accelerate amid costs, emissions, and age.

Renewable energy is poised to reach a milestone, after a record 28% in April this year, as a new government report projects that wind, solar and other renewable sources will exceed one-fourth of the country’s electricity generation for the first time, in 2024.

This is one of the many takeaways from the federal government’s Short Term Energy Outlook, a monthly report whose new edition is the first to include a forecast for 2024. The report’s authors in the Energy Information Administration are expecting renewables to increase in market share, while natural gas and coal would both decrease.

From 2023 to 2024, renewables would rise from 24 percent to 26 percent of U.S. electricity generation; coal’s share would drop from 18 percent to 17 percent; gas would remain the leader but drop from 38 percent to 37 percent; and nuclear would be unchanged at 19 percent.

It was a big deal in 2020 when generation from renewables passed coal for the first time in 130 years over a full year. Coal made a comeback in 2021 and then retreated again in 2022 as renewables surpassed coal in generation. The ups and downs were largely the result of fluctuations in electricity demand during and then after the Covid-19 pandemic.

The new report indicates that coal doesn’t have another comeback in the works. This fuel, which was the country’s leading electricity source less than a decade ago, is declining as many coal-fired power plants are old and economically uncompetitive. Coal plants continue to close, and developers aren’t building new ones because of concerns about high costs and emissions, a trend underscored when renewables became the second-most prevalent source in 2020 across the U.S.

The growth in renewable energy is coming from wind and solar power, with wind responsible for about one-third of the growth and solar accounting for two-thirds, the report says, and combined output from wind and solar has already exceeded nuclear for the first time in the U.S. Other renewable sources, like hydropower and biomass, would be flat.

In fact, the growth of wind and solar is projected to be so swift that the combination of just those two sources would be 18 percent of the U.S. total by 2024, which would surpass coal’s 17 percent.

A key variable is overall electricity consumption. EIA is projecting that this will fall 1 percent in 2023 compared to 2022, due a mild summer. Then, consumption will increase 1 percent in 2024.

If demand was rising more, then natural gas power would likely gain market share because of gas power plants’ ability to vary their output as needed to respond to changes in demand.

I asked Eric Gimon, a senior fellow at the think tank Energy Innovation, what he thinks of these latest numbers.

He said wind and solar have gotten so big that it almost makes sense to track them as their own categories as opposed to lumping them into the larger category of renewables. He expects that the government will do this sometime soon.

Also, he thinks the projected increases for wind and solar, while substantial, are still smaller than those resources are likely to grow.

“My experience over the last 10 years is that the EIA tends to have flattish forecasts,” he said, meaning the federal office has underestimated the actual growth.

Some energy analysts have criticized EIA for being slow to recognize the growth of renewables. But much of the criticism is about the Annual Energy Outlook, which has numbers going out to mid-century, even as the U.S. is moving toward 30% from wind and solar by the end of the decade. The Short Term Energy Outlook, with numbers going one year into the future, has been more reliable.

Gimon said EIA is “kind of like your conservative uncle” in its forecasts, so it’s notable that the office expects to see a significant uptick in wind and solar.

Even so, he thinks the latest Short Term Energy Outlook should be read as the lower end of the range of potential increase for wind and solar.

For him to be right, the wind and solar industries will need to figure out solutions to the challenges they’ve been having in obtaining parts; they will need to make progress in dealing with local opposition to many projects and in having enough interstate power lines to deliver the electricity. And, new policies like the Inflation Reduction Act will need to have their desired effect of encouraging projects through the use of tax incentives.

It’s not much of a stretch to imagine that clean energy industries will make some progress on all of those fronts.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News

Electric Vehicle Price Parity 2027 signals cheaper EV manufacturing as battery costs plunge, widening model lineups, and tighter EU emissions rules; UBS and BloombergNEF foresee parity, with TCO advantages over ICE amid growing fast-charging networks.

Key Points

EV cost parity in 2027 when manufacturing undercuts ICE, led by cheaper batteries, wider lineups, and emissions policy.

✅ Battery costs drop 58% next decade, after 88% fall

✅ Manufacturing parity across segments from 2027

✅ TCO favors EVs; charging networks expand globally

A Bloomberg/NEF report commissioned by Transport & Environment forecasts 2027 as the year when electric vehicles will start to become cheaper to manufacture than their internal combustion equivalents across all segments, aligning with analyses that the EV age is arriving ahead of schedule for consumers and manufacturers alike, mainly due to a sharp drop in battery prices and the appearance of new models by more manufacturers.

Batteries, which have fallen in price by 88% over the past decade and are expected to plunge by a further 58% over the next 10 years, make up between one-quarter and two-fifths of the total price of a vehicle. The average pre-tax price of a mid-range electric vehicle is around €33,300, and higher upfront prices concern many UK buyers compared to €18,600 for its diesel or gasoline equivalent. In 2026, both are expected to cost around €19,000, while in 2030, the same electric car will cost €16,300 before tax, while its internal combustion equivalent will cost €19,900, and that’s without factoring in government incentives.

Other reports, such as a recent one by UBS, put the date of parity a few years earlier, by 2024, after which they say there will be little reason left to buy a non-electric vehicle, as the market has expanded from near zero to 2 million in just five years.

In Europe, carmakers will become a particular stakeholder in this transition due to heavy fines for exceeding emissions limits calculated on the basis of the total number of vehicles sold. Increasing the percentage of electric vehicles in the annual sales portfolio is seen by the industry as the only way to avoid these fines. In addition to brands such as Bentley or Jaguar Land Rover, which have announced the total abandonment of internal combustion engine technology by 2025, or Volvo, which has set 2030 as the target date, other companies such as Ford, which is postponing this date in its home market, also set 2030 for the European market, which clearly demonstrates the suitability of this type of policy.

Nevertheless internal combustion vehicles will continue to travel on the roads or will be resold in developing countries. In addition to the price factor, which is even more accentuated when estimates are carried out in terms of total cost of ownership calculations due to the lower cost of electric recharging versus fuel and lower maintenance requirements, other factors such as the availability of fast charging networks must be taken into account.

While price parity is approaching, it is worth thinking about the factors that are causing car sales, which are still behind gasoline models in share, to suffer: the chip crisis, which is strongly affecting the automotive industry and will most likely extend until 2022, is creating production problems and the elimination of numerous advanced electronic options in many models, which reduces the incentive to purchase a vehicle at the present time. These types of reasons could lead some consumers to postpone purchasing a vehicle precisely when we may be talking about the final years for internal combustion technology, which would increase the likelihood that, later on and as the price gap closes, they would opt for an electric vehicle.

Finally, in the United States, the ambitious infrastructure plan put in place by the Biden administration also promises to accelerate the transition to electric vehicles by addressing key barriers to mainstream adoption such as charging access, which in turn is fueling the interest of automotive companies to have more electric vehicles in their range. In Europe, meanwhile, more Chinese brands offering electric vehicles are beginning to enter the most advanced markets, such as Norway and the Netherlands, with plans to expand to the rest of the continent with very competitive offers in terms of price.

One way or another, the future of the automotive industry is electric, and the transition will take place during the remainder of this decade. You might want to think about it if you are weighing whether it’s time to buy an electric car this year.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

Pyroelectric Energy Harvesting captures low-grade heat via thin-film materials, converting temperature fluctuations into power for waste heat recovery in electronics, vehicles, and industrial machinery, offering a thermoelectric alternative for microelectronics and exascale systems.

Key Points

Thin-film pyroelectric harvesting turns temperature changes into electricity, enabling low-grade waste heat recovery.

✅ Converts low-grade heat fluctuations into usable power

✅ Thin-film design suits microelectronics and edge devices

✅ Alternative to thermoelectrics for waste heat recovery

The electronic device you are reading this on is currently producing a modest to significant amount of waste heat that emerging thermoelectric materials could help recover in principle. In fact, nearly 70% of the energy produced annually in the US is ultimately wasted as heat, much of it less than 100 degrees Celsius. The main culprits are computers and other electronic devices, vehicles, as well as industrial machinery. Heat waste is also a big problem for supercomputers, because as more circuitry is condensed into smaller and smaller areas, the hotter those microcircuits get.

It’s also been estimated that a single next-generation exascale supercomputer could feasibly use up to 10% of the energy output of just one coal-fired power station, and that nearly all of that energy would ultimately be wasted as heat.

What if it were possible to convert that heat energy into a useable energy source, and even to generate electricity at night from temperature differences as well?

#google#

It’s not a new idea, of course. In fact the possibility of thermoelectric energy generation, where thermal energy is turned into electricity was recognised as early as 1821, around the same time that Michael Faraday developed the electric motor.

Unfortunately, when the heat source is ‘low grade’, aka less than 100 degrees Celsius, a number of limitations arise, and related approaches for nighttime renewable generation face similar challenges as well. For it to work well, you need materials that have quite high electrical conductivity, but low thermal conductivity. It’s not an easy combination to come by.

Taking a different approach, researchers at the University of California, Berkeley, have developed thin-film that uses pyroelectric harvesting to capture heat-waste and convert heat to electricity in prototype demonstrations. The findings were published today in Nature Materials.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Power Generation News

EV charging anxiety reflects concerns beyond range anxiety, focusing on charging infrastructure, fast chargers, and network reliability during road trips, from Tesla Superchargers to Electrify America stations across highways in the United States.

Key Points

EV charging anxiety is worry about finding reliable fast chargers on public networks, not just limited range.

✅ Non-Tesla networks vary in uptime and plug-and-charge reliability.

✅ Charging deserts complicate route planning on long highway stretches.

✅ Sync stops: align rest breaks with fast chargers to save time.

With electric cars, people often talk about "range anxiety," and how cars with bigger batteries and longer driving ranges will alleviate that. I just drove an electric car from New York City to Atlanta, a distance of about 950 miles, and it taught me something important. The problem really isn't range anxiety. It's anxiety around finding a convenient and working chargers on America's still-challenged EV charging networks today.

Back in 2019, I drove a Tesla Model S Long Range from New York City to Atlanta. It was a mostly uneventful trip, thanks to Tesla's nicely organized and well maintained network of fast chargers that can fill the batteries with an 80% charge in a half hour or less. Since then, I've wanted to try that trip again with an electric car that wasn't a Tesla, one that wouldn't have Tesla's unified charging network to rely on.
I got my chance with a Mercedes-Benz EQS 450+, a car that is as close to a direct competitor to the Tesla Model S as any. And while I made it to Atlanta without major incident, I encountered glitchy chargers, called the charging network's customer service twice, and experienced some serious charging anxiety during a long stretch of the Carolinas.

Long range
The EPA estimated range for the Tesla I drove in 2019 was 370 miles, and Tesla's latest models can go even further.

The EQS 450+ is officially estimated to go 350 miles on a charge, but I beat that handily without even trying. When I got into the car, its internal displays showed a range estimate of 446 miles. On my trip, the car couldn't stretch its legs quite that far, because I was driving almost entirely on highways at fairly high speeds, but by my calculations, I could have gone between 370 and 390 miles on a charge.

I was going to drive over the George Washington Bridge then down through New Jersey, Delaware, Virginia then North Carolina and South Carolina. I figured three charging stops would be needed and, strictly speaking, that was correct. The driving route laid out by the car's navigation system included three charging stops, but the on-board computers tended push things to the limit. At each stop, the battery would be drained to a little over 10% or so. (I learned later this is a setting I could adjust to be more conservative if I'd wanted.)

But I've driven enough electric cars to have some concerns. I use public chargers fairly often, and I know they're imperfect, and we need to fix these problems to build confidence. Sometimes they aren't working as well as they should. Sometimes they're just plain broken. And even if the car's navigation system is telling you that a charger is "available," that can change at any moment. Someone else can pull into the charging spot just a few seconds before you get there.
I've learned to be flexible and not push things to the limit.

On the first day, when I planned to drive from New York to Richmond, Virginia, no charging stop was called for until Spotsylvania, Virginia, a distance of nearly 300 miles. By that point, I had 16% charge left in the car's batteries which, by the car's own calculation, would have taken me another 60 miles.

As I sat and worked inside the Spotsylvania Town Centre mall I realized I'd been dumb. I had already stopped twice, at rest stops in New Jersey and Delaware. The Delaware stop, at the Biden Welcome Center, had EV fast chargers, as the American EV boom accelerates nationwide. I could have used one even though the car's navigation didn't suggest it.

Stopping without charging was a lost opportunity and it cost me time. If I'm going to stop to recharge myself why not recharge the car, too?
But that's the thing, though. A car can be designed to go 350 miles or more before needing to park whereas human beings are not. Elementary school math will tell you that at highway speeds, that's nearly six hours of driving all at once. We need bathrooms, beverages, food, and to just get out and move around once in a while. Sure, it's physically possible to sit in a car for longer than that in one go, but most people in need of speed will take an airplane, and a driver of an EQS, with a starting price just north of $100,000, can almost certainly afford the ticket.

I stopped for a charge in Virginia but realized I could have stopped sooner. I encountered a lot of other electric cars on the trip, including this Hyundai Ioniq 5 charging next to the Mercedes.

I vowed not to make that strategic error again. I was going to take back control. On the second day, I decided, I would choose when I needed to stop, and would look for conveniently located fast chargers so both the EQS and I could get refreshed at once. The EQS's navigation screen pinpointed available charging locations and their maximum charging speeds, so, if I saw an available charger, I could poke on the icon with my finger and add it onto my route.

For my first stop after leaving Richmond, I pulled into a rest stop in Hillsborough, North Carolina. It was only about 160 miles south from my hotel and I still had half of a full charge.

I sipped coffee and answered some emails while I waited at a counter. I figured I would take as long as I wanted and leave when I was ready with whatever additional electricity the car had gained in that time. In all, I was there about 45 minutes, but at least 15 minutes of that was used trying to get the charger to work. One of the chargers was simply not working at all, and, at another one, a call to Electrify America customer service -- the EV charging company owned by Volkswagen that, by coincidence, operated all the chargers I used on the trip -- I got a successful charging session going at last. (It was unclear what the issue was.)

That was the last and only time I successfully matched my own need to stop with the car's. I left with my battery 91% charged and 358 miles of range showing on the display. I would only need to stop once more on way to Atlanta and not for a long time.

Charging deserts
Then I began to notice something. As I drove through North Carolina and then South Carolina, the little markers on the map screen indicating available chargers became fewer and fewer. During some fairly long stretches there were none showing at all, highlighting how better grid coordination could improve coverage.

It wasn't an immediate concern, though. The EQS's navigation wasn't calling for me to a charge up again until I'd nearly reached the Georgia border. By that point I would have about 11% of my battery charge remaining. But I was getting nervous. Given how far it was between chargers my whole plan of "recharging the car when I recharge myself" had already fallen apart, the much-touted electric-car revolution notwithstanding. I had to leave the highway once to find a gas station to use the restroom and buy an iced tea. A while later, I stopped for lunch, a big plate of "Lexington Style BBQ" with black eyed peas and collard greens in Lexington, North Carolina. None of that involved charging because there no chargers around.

Fortunately, a charger came into sight on my map while I still had 31% charge remaining. I decided I would protect myself by stopping early. After another call to Electrify America customer service, I was able to get a nice, high-powered charging session on the second charger I tried. After about an hour I was off again with a nearly full battery.

I drove the last 150 miles to Atlanta, crossing the state line through gorgeous wetlands and stopping at the Georgia Welcome Center, with hardly a thought about batteries or charging or range.

But I was driving $105,000 Mercedes. What if I'd been driving something that cost less and that, while still going farther than a human would want to drive at a stretch, wouldn't go far enough to make that trip as easily, a real concern for those deciding if it's time to buy an electric car today. Obviously, people do it. One thing that surprised me on this trip, compared to the one in 2019, was the variety of fully electric vehicles I saw driving the same highways. There were Chevrolet Bolts, Audi E-Trons, Porsche Taycans, Hyundai Ioniqs, Kia EV6s and at least one other Mercedes EQS.

Americans are taking their electric cars out onto the highways, as the age of electric cars gathers pace nationwide. But it's still not as easy as it ought to be.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

New Mexico Energy Transition Act advances renewable energy, battery storage, energy efficiency, and demand response to boost grid reliability during climate change-fueled heatwaves, reducing emissions while supporting solar and wind deployment.

Key Points

A state policy phasing out power emissions, scaling renewables and storage, bolstering grid reliability in extreme heat.

✅ Replaces coal generation with solar plus battery storage

✅ Enhances grid reliability during climate-driven heatwaves

✅ Promotes energy efficiency and demand response programs

While temperatures hit record highs across much of the West in recent weeks and California was forced to curb electricity service amid heat-driven grid strain that week, the power stayed on in New Mexico thanks to proactive energy efficiency and conservation measures.

Public Service Company of New Mexico on Aug. 19 did ask customers to cut back on power use during the peak demand time until 9 p.m., to offset energy supply issues due to the record-breaking heatwave that was one of the most severe to hit the West since 2006. But the Albuquerque Journal's Aug. 28 editorial, "PRC should see the light with record heat and blackouts," confuses the problem with the solution. Record temperatures fueled by climate change – not renewable energy – were to blame for the power challenges last month. And thanks to the Energy Transition Act, New Mexico is reducing climate change-causing pollution and better positioned to prevent the worst impacts of global warming.

During those August days, more than 80 million U.S. residents were under excessive heat warnings. As the Journal's editorial pointed out, California experienced blackouts on Aug. 14 and 15 as wildfires swept across the state and temperatures rose. In fact, a recent report by the University of Chicago's Climate Impact Lab found the world has experienced record heat this summer due to climate change, and heat-related deaths will continue to rise in the future.

As the recent California energy incidents show, climate change is a threat to a reliable electricity system and our health as soaring temperatures and heatwaves strain our grid, as seen in Texas grid challenges this year as well. Demand for electricity rises as people depend more on energy-intensive air conditioning. High temperatures also can decrease transmission line efficiency and cause power plant operators to scale back or even temporarily stop electricity generation.

Lobbyists for the fossil fuel industry may claim that the service interruptions and the conservation requests in New Mexico demonstrate the need for keeping fossil-fueled power generation for electricity reliability, echoing policy blame narratives in California that fault climate policies. But fossil fuel combustion still is subject to the factors that cause blackouts – while also driving climate change and making resulting heatwaves more common. After an investigation, California's own energy agencies found no substance to the claim that renewable energy use was a factor in the situation there, and it's not to blame in New Mexico, either.

New Mexico's Energy Transition Act is a bold, necessary step to limit the damage caused by climate change in the future. It creates a reasonable, cost-saving path to eliminating greenhouse gas emissions associated with generating electricity.

The New Mexico Public Regulation Commission properly applied this law when it recently voted unanimously to replace PNM's coal-fired generation at San Juan Generating Station with carbon-free solar energy and battery storage located in the Four Corners communities, a prudent step given California's looming electricity shortage warnings across the West. The development will create jobs and provide resources for the local school district and help ensure a stronger economy and a healthier future for the region.

As we expand solar and wind energy here in New Mexico, we can help ensure reliable electricity service by building out greater battery storage for renewable energy resources. Expanding regional energy markets that can dispatch the lowest-cost energy from across the region to places where it is needed most would make renewable energy more available and reduce costs, despite concerns over policy exports raised by some observers.

Energy efficiency and demand response are important when we are facing extraordinary conditions, and proven strategies to improve electricity reliability show how demand-side tools complement the grid, so it is unfortunate that the Albuquerque Journal made the unsubstantiated claim that a stray cloud will put out the lights. It was hot, supplies were tight on the electric grid, and in those moments, we should conserve. We should not use those moments to turn our back on progress.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Energy Policy News