California allows electric school buses only from 2035

Canada Electricity Decarbonization Costs indicate challenging greenhouse gas reductions across a fragmented grid, with wind, solar, nuclear, and natural gas tradeoffs, significant GDP impacts, and Net Zero targets constrained by intermittency and limited interties.

Key Points

Costs to cut power CO2 via wind, solar, gas, and nuclear, considering grid limits, intermittency, and GDP impacts.

✅ Alberta model: eliminate coal; add wind, solar, gas; 26-40% CO2 cuts

✅ Nuclear option enables >75% cuts at higher but feasible system costs

✅ National costs 1-2% GDP; reserves, transmission, land, and waste not included

Along with many western developed countries, Canada has pledged to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 40–45 percent by 2030 from 2005 emissions levels, and to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050.

This is a huge challenge that, when considered on a global scale, will do little to stop climate change because emissions by developing countries are rising faster than emissions are being reduced in developed countries. Even so, the potential for achieving emissions reduction targets is extremely challenging as there are questions as to how and whether targets can be met and at what cost. Because electricity can be produced from any source of energy, including wind, solar, geothermal, tidal, and any combustible material, climate change policies have focused especially on nations’ electricity grids, and in Canada cleaning up electricity is viewed as critical to meeting climate pledges.

Canada’s electricity grid consists of ten separate provincial grids that are weakly connected by transmission interties to adjacent grids and, in some cases, to electricity systems in the United States. At times, these interties are helpful in addressing small imbalances between electricity supply and demand so as to prevent brownouts or even blackouts, and are a source of export revenue for provinces that have abundant hydroelectricity, such as British Columbia, Manitoba, and Quebec.

Due to generally low intertie capacities between provinces, electricity trade is generally a very small proportion of total generation, though electricity has been a national climate success in recent years. Essentially, provincial grids are stand alone, generating electricity to meet domestic demand (known as load) from the lowest cost local resources.

Because climate change policies have focused on electricity (viz., wind and solar energy, electric vehicles), and Canada will need more electricity to hit net-zero according to the IEA, this study employs information from the Alberta electricity system to provide an estimate of the possible costs of reducing national CO2 emissions related to power generation. The Alberta system serves as an excellent case study for examining the potential for eliminating fossil-fuel generation because of its large coal fleet, favourable solar irradiance, exceptional wind regimes, and potential for utilizing BC’s reservoirs for storage.

Using a model of the Alberta electricity system, we find that it is infeasible to rely solely on renewable sources of energy for 100 percent of power generation—the costs are prohibitive. Under perfect conditions, however, CO2 emissions from the Alberta grid can be reduced by 26 to 40 percent by eliminating coal and replacing it with renewable energy such as wind and solar, and gas, but by more than 75 percent if nuclear power is permitted. The associated costs are estimated to be some $1.4 billion per year to reduce emissions by at most 40 percent, or $1.9 billion annually to reduce emissions by 75 percent or more using nuclear power (an option not considered feasible at this time).

Based on cost estimates from Alberta, and Ontario’s experience with subsidies to renewable energy, and warnings that the switch from fossil fuels to electricity could cost about $1.4 trillion, the costs of relying on changes to electricity generation (essentially eliminating coal and replacing it with renewable energy sources and gas) to reduce national CO2 emissions by about 7.4 percent range from some $16.8 to $33.7 billion annually. This constitutes some 1–2 percent of Canada’s GDP.

The national estimates provided here are conservative, however. They are based on removing coal-fired power from power grids throughout Canada. We could not account for scenarios where the scale of intermittency turned out worse than indicated in our dataset—available wind and solar energy might be lower than indicated by the available data. To take this into account, a reserve market is required, but the costs of operating such a capacity market were not included in the estimates provided in this study. Also ignored are the costs associated with the value of land in other alternative uses, the need for added transmission lines, environmental and human health costs, and the life-cycle costs of using intermittent renewable sources of energy, including costs related to the disposal of hazardous wastes from solar panels and wind turbines.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Climate Change News

US electric vehicle momentum is slowing as tax credits expire, tariffs increase costs, and interest rates rise, while Europe and China accelerate EV adoption through stronger incentives, enhanced charging infrastructure, and growth in battery manufacturing.

Why has US Electric Vehicle Momentum Slowed as Globe Surges?

US electric vehicle momentum has slowed due to expiring subsidies, rising costs, and global competition from faster-moving markets.

✅ End of federal tax credits weakened buyer demand

✅ Tariffs and high interest rates raised EV prices

✅ Europe and China expanded incentives and infrastructure

You could be forgiven for thinking that electric cars might finally be gaining momentum in the United States. Last year, battery-powered vehicle sales topped 1.2 million—more than five times the number sold just four years earlier, amid an early-2024 EV surge in deliveries. Hybrid sales tripled over the same period, and in August, battery cars accounted for 10 percent of all new vehicle sales, a record high according to S&P Global Mobility.

Major automakers, including General Motors, Ford, and Tesla, reported record electric-vehicle deliveries this quarter, a rare bright spot in an industry still contending with high interest rates, inflation, and tariffs, and a sign the age of electric cars is arriving.

Yet analysts warn the apparent boom may be short-lived, noting a market share dip in early 2024 that could foreshadow slower growth. Much of the recent surge was driven by buyers rushing to take advantage of a federal subsidy worth up to $7,500 per vehicle—a credit that expired at the end of September. Without it, automakers expect demand to dip sharply.

"It's going to be a vibrant industry, but it's going to be smaller, way smaller than we thought," Ford CEO Jim Farley said Tuesday. General Motors’ CFO Paul Jacobson echoed that concern: "I expect that EV demand is going to drop off pretty precipitously," he told a conference last month.

Even with those gains, the US—still the world’s second-largest car market—remains a laggard compared with global peers, where global EV adoption has accelerated rapidly. Electric and hybrid vehicles accounted for nearly 30 percent of new sales in the UK last year and approximately one in five across Europe. In China, electric models accounted for almost half of all car sales in 2023 and are expected to become the majority this year, according to the International Energy Agency.

Analysts say policy differences largely explain the gap. Other regions have offered stronger incentives, stricter emissions rules, and more aggressive trade-in programs. President Joe Biden tried to close the gap, tightening emissions standards, offering loans for EV investments, and spending billions on charging networks while expanding the $7,500 credit. His goal was to have half of all US vehicle sales be electric by 2030.

Supporters argue that such measures are crucial to keeping American carmakers competitive with Chinese and European manufacturers. But former President Donald Trump, who recently dismissed climate change as a "con job," has vowed to roll back many of those initiatives, echoing arguments that the EV revolution is overstated by proponents. "We're saying ... you're not going to be forced to make all of those cars," Trump said this summer, while signing a bill to strike down California’s plan to phase out gasoline-only car sales by 2035. "You can make them, but it'll be by the market, judged by the market."

Although EVs have become cheaper, they still cost more than comparable gasoline models, and sales remain behind gas cars in most segments. The average US electric car sold for approximately $57,000 in August, which is roughly 16 percent higher than the overall average, according to Kelley Blue Book.

Chinese EV giants such as BYD have been blocked from the US market by tariffs supported by both Biden and Trump, further limiting price competition. Automakers now face the twin challenges of rising tariffs and disappearing subsidies.

"It would have been difficult enough if all you had to deal with were new tariffs, but with new tariffs and the incentive going away, there are two impacts," said Stephanie Brinley of S&P Global Mobility.

Researchers warn that the policy shift could further reduce EV investment. "It's a big hit to the EV industry—there's no tiptoeing around it," said Katherine Yusko of the American Security Project. "The subsidies were initially a way to level the playing field, and now that they're gone, the US has a lot of ground to make up."

Still, Brinley urged caution before declaring the race lost, even as some argue EVs have hit an inflection point in adoption. "Is [electric] really the right thing?" she asked. "Saying that we're behind assumes that this is the only and best solution, and I think it's a little early to say that."

Related Articles

• USA Electricity News

Harbour Air Electric Aircraft Project advances zero-emission aviation with CleanBC Go Electric ARC funding, converting seaplanes to battery-electric power, cutting emissions, enabling commercial passenger service, and creating skilled clean-tech jobs through R&D and electrification.

Key Points

Harbour Air's project electrifies seaplanes with CleanBC ARC support to enable zero-emission flights and cut emissions.

✅ $1.6M CleanBC ARC funds seaplane electrification retrofit

✅ Target: passenger-ready, zero-emission commercial service

✅ Creates 21 full-time clean-tech jobs in British Columbia

B.C.’s Harbour Air Seaplanes is building on its work in clean technology to decarbonize aviation, part of an aviation revolution underway, and create new jobs with support from the CleanBC Go Electric Advanced Research and Commercialization (ARC) program.

”Harbour Air is decarbonizing aviation and elevating the company to new altitudes as a clean-technology leader in B.C.'s transportation sector,” said Bruce Ralston, Minister of Energy, Mines and Low Carbon Innovation. “With support from our CleanBC Go Electric ARC program, Harbour Air's project not only supports our emission-reduction goals, but also creates good-paying clean-tech jobs, exemplifying the opportunities in the low-carbon economy.”

Harbour Air is receiving almost $1.6 million from the CleanBC Go Electric ARC program for its aircraft electrification project. The funding supports Harbour Air’s conversion of an existing aircraft to be fully electric-powered and builds on its successful December 2019 flight of the world’s first all-electric commercial aircraft, and subsequent first point-to-point electric flight milestones.

That flight marked the start of the third era in aviation: the electric age. Harbour Air is working on a new design of the electric motor installation and battery systems to gain efficiencies that will allow carrying commercial passengers, as it eyes first electric passenger flights in 2023. Approximately 21 full-time jobs will be created and sustained by the project.

“CleanBC is helping accelerate world-leading clean technology and innovation at Harbour Air that supports good jobs for people in our communities,” said George Heyman, Minister of Environment and Climate Change Strategy. “Once proven, the technology supports a switch from fossil fuels to advanced electric technology, and will provide a clean transportation option, such as electric ferries, that reduces pollution and shows the way forward for others in the sector.”

Harbour Air is a leader in clean-technology adoption. The company has also purchased a fully electric, zero-emission passenger shuttle bus to pick up and drop off passengers between Harbour Air’s downtown Vancouver and Richmond locations, and the Vancouver International Airport, where new EV chargers support travellers.

“It is great to see the Province stepping up to support innovation,” said Greg McDougall, Harbour Air CEO and ePlane test pilot. “This type of funding confirms the importance of encouraging companies in all sectors to focus on what they can be doing to look at more sustainable practices. We will use these resources to continue to develop and lead the transportation industry around the world in all-electric aviation.”

In total, $8.18 million is being distributed to 18 projects from the second round of CleanBC Go Electric ARC program funding. Recipients include Damon Motors and IRDI System, both based on the Lower Mainland. The 15 other successful projects will be announced this year.

The CleanBC Go Electric ARC program supports the electric vehicle (EV) sector in B.C., which leads the country in going electric, by providing reliable and targeted support for research and development, commercialization and demonstration of B.C.-based EV technologies, services and products.

“This project is a great example of the type of leading-edge innovation and tech advancements happening in our province,” said Brenda Bailey, Parliamentary Secretary for Technology and Innovation. “By further supporting the development of the first all-electric commercial aircraft, we are solidifying our position as world leaders in innovation and using technology to change what is possible.”

The CleanBC Roadmap to 2030 is B.C.’s plan to expand and accelerate climate action, including a major hydrogen project, building on the province’s natural advantages – abundant, clean electricity, high-value natural resources and a highly skilled workforce. It sets a path for increased collaboration to build a British Columbia that works for everyone.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

Ukraine Wind Energy Resilience shields the grid with wind power along the Black Sea, dispersing turbines to withstand missile attacks, accelerate clean energy transition, aid EU integration, and strengthen energy security and rapid recovery.

Key Points

A strategy in Ukraine using wind farms to harden the grid, ensure clean power, and speed recovery from missile strikes.

✅ Distributed turbines reduce single-point-of-failure risk

✅ Faster repair of substations and lines than power plants

✅ Supports EU-aligned clean energy and grid security goals

The giants catch the wind with their huge arms, helping to keep the lights on in Ukraine — newly built windmills, on plains along the Black Sea.

In 15 months of war, Russia has launched countless missiles and exploding drones at power plants, hydroelectric dams and substations, trying to black out as much of Ukraine as it can, as often as it can, even amid talk of limiting attacks on energy sites that has surfaced, in its campaign to pound the country into submission.

The new Tyligulska wind farm stands only a few dozen miles from Russian artillery, but Ukrainians say it has a crucial advantage over most of the country’s grid, helping stabilize the system even as electricity exports have occasionally resumed under fire.

A single, well-placed missile can damage a power plant severely enough to take it out of action, but Ukrainian officials say that doing the same to a set of windmills — each one tens of meters apart from any other — would require dozens of missiles. A wind farm can be temporarily disabled by striking a transformer substation or transmission lines, but these are much easier to repair than power plants.

“It is our response to Russians,” said Maksym Timchenko, CEO of DTEK Group, the company that built the turbines in the southern Mykolaiv region — the first phase of what is planned as Eastern Europe’s largest wind farm. “It is the most profitable and, as we know now, most secure form of energy.”

Ukraine has had laws in place since 2014 to promote a transition to renewable energy, both to lower dependence on Russian energy imports, with periods when electricity exports resumed to neighbors, and because it was profitable. But that transition still has a long way to go, and the war makes its prospects, like everything else about Ukraine’s future, murky.

In 2020, 12% of Ukraine’s electricity came from renewable sources — barely half the percentage for the European Union. Plans for the Tyligulska project call for 85 turbines producing up to 500 megawatts of electricity. That’s enough for 500,000 apartments — an impressive output for a wind farm, but less than 1% of the country’s prewar generating capacity.

After the Kremlin began its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the need for new power sources became acute, prompting deliveries such as a mobile gas turbine power plant to bolster capacity. Russia has bombarded Ukraine’s power plants and cut off delivery of the natural gas that fueled some of them.

Russian occupation forces have seized a large part of the country’s power supply, and Russia has built power lines to reactivate the Zaporizhzhia plant in occupied territory, ensuring that its output does not reach territory still held by Ukraine. They hold the single largest generator, the 5,700-megawatt Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant, which has been damaged repeatedly in fighting and has stopped transmitting energy to the grid, with UN inspectors warning of mines at the site during recent visits. They also control 90% of Ukraine’s renewable energy plants, which are concentrated in the southeast.

The postwar recovery plans Ukraine has presented to supporters including the European Union, which it hopes to join, feature a major new commitment to clean energy, even as a controversial proposal on Ukraine’s nuclear plants continues to stir debate.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Power Generation News

USPS Electric Mail Trucks promise zero-emission delivery, lower lifecycle and maintenance costs, and cleaner air. Congressional funding in Build Back Better would modernize the EV fleet and expand charging infrastructure, improving public health nationwide.

Key Points

USPS Electric Mail Trucks are zero-emission delivery vehicles that cut costs, reduce pollution, and improve health.

✅ Lower lifetime fuel and maintenance costs vs gas trucks

✅ Cuts greenhouse gas and NOx emissions in communities

✅ Expands charging infrastructure via federal investments

The U.S. Postal Service faces serious challenges, with billions of dollars in annual losses and total mail volume continuing to decline. Meanwhile, Congress is constantly hamstringing the agency.

But now lawmakers have an opportunity to invest in the Postal Service in a way that would pay dividends for years to come: By electrifying the postal fleet.

Tucked inside the massive social spending and climate package lumbering through the Senate is money for new, cleaner postal delivery trucks. There’s a lot to like about electric postal trucks. They’d significantly improve Americans’ health while also slowing climate change. And it just makes sense for taxpayers over the long term; the Postal Service’s private sector competitors have already made similar investments, as EV adoption reaches an EV inflection point in the market. As Democrats weigh potential areas to cut in President Joe Biden’s Build Back Better plan, this is one provision that should escape the knife.

To call the U.S. Postal Service’s current vehicles “clunkers” would be an understatement. These often decades-old trucks are famous for having no airbags, no air conditioning and a nasty habit of catching fire. So the Postal Service’s recent decision to buy 165,000 replacement trucks is basically a no-brainer. But the main question is whether they will run on electricity or gasoline.

Electric vehicles are newer to the market and still carry a higher sticker price, as seen with electric bus adoption in many cities. But that higher price buys concrete benefits, like lower lifetime fuel and maintenance costs and huge reductions in pollution. Government demand for electric trucks will also push private markets to create better, cheaper vehicles, directly benefiting consumers. So while buying electric postal trucks may be somewhat more costly at first, over the long term, failing to do so could be far costlier.

At some level, this is a straightforward business decision that the Postal Service’s competitors have already made. For instance, Amazon has already deployed some of the 100,000 electric vans it recently ordered, and FedEx has promised a fully electric ground fleet by 2040, while nonprofit investment in electric trucks is accelerating electrification at major ports. In a couple of decades, the Postal Service could be the only carrier still driving dirty gas guzzlers, buying expensive fuel and paying the higher maintenance costs that combustion engines routinely require. Consumers could flock to greener competitors.

Beyond these business advantages, zero-emission vehicles carry other big benefits for the public. The Postal Service recently calculated some of these benefits by estimating the climate harms that going all-electric would avoid, benefits that persist even where electricity generation still includes fossil-generated electricity in nearby grids. Its findings were telling: A fully electric fleet would prevent millions or tens of millions of dollars’ worth of climate-change-related harms to property and human health each year of the trucks’ lifetimes (and this is probably a considerable underestimate). The world leaders that recently gathered at the global climate summit in Glasgow encouraged exactly this type of transition toward low-carbon technologies.

A cleaner postal fleet would benefit Americans in many other important ways. In addition to warming the planet, tailpipe pollutants can have dire health consequences for the people who breathe in the fumes. Mail trucks traverse virtually every neighborhood in the country and often must idle in residential areas, so we all benefit when they stop emitting. And these localized harms are not distributed equally. Some parts of the country — too often, low-income communities of color — already have poor air quality. Removing pollution from dirty mail trucks will especially help these overburdened and underserved populations.

The government’s purchasing power also routinely inspires companies to devise better and cheaper ways to do business. Investments in aerospace technologies, for instance, have spilled over into consumer innovations, giving us GPS technologies and faster, more fuel-efficient passenger jets. Bulk demand for cleaner trucks could inspire similar innovations as companies clamor for government contracts, meaning we all could get cheaper and better green products like car batteries, and the American EV boom could further accelerate those gains.

Additionally, because postal trucks are virtually everywhere in the country, if they go electric, that would mean more charging stations and grid updates everywhere too, and better utility planning for truck fleets to ensure reliable service. Suddenly, that long road trip that discourages many would-be electric car buyers may be simpler, which could boost electric vehicle adoption.

White House climate adviser Gina McCarthy talks with EVgo CEO Cathy Zoi before the start of an event near an EVgo electric car charging station.
ENERGY

The case for electrifying the postal fleet is strong from both a business and a social standpoint. Indeed, even Postmaster General Louis DeJoy, who was appointed during the Trump administration, supports it. But getting there is not so simple. Most private businesses could just borrow the money they need for this investment and pay it back with the long-term savings they would enjoy. But not the Postal Service. Thanks to its byzantine funding structure, it cannot afford electric trucks’ upfront costs unless Congress either provides the money or lets it borrow more. This is the primary reason it has not committed to making more than 10 percent of its fleet electric.

And that returns us to the Build Back Better legislation. The version passed by the House sets aside $7 billion to help the Postal Service buy electric mail trucks — enough to electrify the vast majority of its fleet by the end of the decade.

Biden has made expanding the use of electric vehicles a top priority, setting an ambitious goal of 100 percent zero-emission federal vehicle acquisitions by 2035, and new EPA emission limits aim to accelerate EV adoption. But Sen. Joe Manchin has expressed resistance to some of the climate-related subsidies in the legislation and is also eager to keep costs down. This provision, however, is worthy of the West Virginia Democrat’s support.

Most Americans would see — and benefit from — these trucks on a daily basis. And for an operation that got its start under Benjamin Franklin, it’s a crucial way to keep the Postal Service relevant.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

The Netherlands grid crisis exposes how rapid renewable energy growth is straining transmission capacity. Solar, wind, and electric vehicle demand are overloading networks, forcing officials to urge reduced peak-time power use and accelerate national grid modernization plans.

Main Points

The Netherlands grid crisis refers to national electricity congestion caused by surging renewable energy generation and rising consumer demand.

✅ Grid congestion from rapid solar and wind expansion

✅ Strained transmission and distribution capacity

✅ National investment in smart grid upgrades

The Dutch government is urging households to reduce electricity consumption between 16:00 and 21:00 — a signal that the country’s once-stable power grid is under serious stress. The call comes amid an accelerating shift to wind and solar power that is overwhelming transmission infrastructure and creating “grid congestion” across regions, as seen in Nordic grid constraints this year.

In a government television campaign, a narrator warns: “When everyone uses electricity at the same time, our power grid can become overloaded. That could lead to failures — so please try to use less electricity between 4 pm and 9 pm.” The plea reflects a system where supply occasionally outpaces the grid’s ability to distribute it, with some regions abroad issuing summer blackout warnings already.

According to Dutch energy firm Eneco’s CEO, Kys-Jan Lamo, the root of the problem lies in the mismatch between modern renewable generation and a grid built for centralized fossil fuel plants. He notes that 70% of Eneco’s output already comes from solar and wind, and this “grid congestion is like traffic on the power lines.” Lamo explains:

“The grid congestion is caused by too much demand in some areas of the network, or by too much supply being pushed into the grid beyond what the network can carry.”

He adds that many of the transmission lines in residential areas are narrow — a legacy of when fewer and larger power plants fed electricity through major feeder lines, underscoring grid vulnerabilities seen elsewhere today. Under the new model, renewable generation occurs everywhere: “This means that electricity is now fed into the grid even in peripheral areas with relatively fine lines — and those lines cannot always cope.”

Experts warn that resolving these issues will demand years of planning and immense investment in smarter grid infrastructure over the coming years. Damien Ernst, an electrical engineering professor at Liège University and respected voice on European grids, states that the Netherlands is experiencing a “grid crisis” brought on by “insufficient investment in distribution and transmission networks.” He emphasizes that the speed of renewable deployment has outpaced the grid’s capacity to absorb it.

Eneco operates a “virtual power plant” control system — described by Lamo as “the brain we run” — that dynamically balances supply and demand. During periods of oversupply, the system can curtail wind turbines or shut down solar panels. Conversely, during peak demand, the system can throttle back electricity provision to participating customers in exchange for lower tariffs. However, these techniques only mitigate strain — they cannot replace the need for physical upgrades or bolster resilience to extreme weather outages alone.

The bottleneck has begun limiting new connections: “Consumers often want to install heat pumps or charge electric vehicles, but they increasingly find it difficult to get the necessary network capacity,” Lamo warns. Businesses too are struggling. “Companies often want to expand operations, but cannot get additional capacity from grid operators. Even new housing developments are affected, since there’s insufficient infrastructure to connect whole communities.”

Currently, thousands of businesses are queuing for network access. TenneT, the national grid operator, estimates that 8,000 firms await initial connection approval, and another 12,000 seek to increase their capacity allocations. Stakeholders warn that unresolved congestion risks choking economic growth.

According to Kys-Jan Lamo: “Looking back, almost all of this could have been prevented.” He acknowledges that post-2015 climate commitments placed heavy emphasis on adding generation and on grid modernization costs more broadly, but “we somewhat underestimated the impact on grid capacity.”

In response, the government has introduced a national “Grid Congestion Action Plan,” aiming to accelerate approvals for infrastructure expansions and to refine regulations to promote smarter grid use. At the same time, feed-in incentives for solar power are being scaled back in some regions, and certain areas may even impose charges to integrate new solar systems into the grid.

The scale of what’s needed is vast. TenneT has proposed adding roughly 100,000 km of new power lines by 2050 and investing in doubling or tripling existing capacity in many areas. However, permit processes can take eight years before construction begins, and many projects require an additional two years to complete. As Lamo points out, “the pace of energy transition far exceeds the grid’s existing capacity — and every new connection request simply extends waiting lists.”

Unless grid expansion keeps up, and as climate pressures intensify, the very clean energy future the Netherlands is striving for may remain constrained by the physics of distribution.

Related Articles

• Electricity Forum World News