California Takes the Lead in Electric Vehicle and Charging Station Adoption

USDA Rural Clean Energy Programs drive climate-smart infrastructure, energy efficiency, and smart grid upgrades, delivering REAP grants, renewable power, and cost savings that boost rural development, create jobs, and modernize electric systems nationwide.

Key Points

USDA programs funding renewable upgrades, efficiency projects, and grid resilience to cut costs and spur rural growth.

✅ REAP grants fund renewable and efficiency upgrades

✅ Smart grid loans strengthen rural electric resilience

✅ Projects cut energy costs and support good-paying jobs

When rural communities lean into clean energy, the path to economic prosperity is clear. Cleaner power options like solar and electric guided by decarbonization goals provide new market opportunities for producers and small businesses. They reduce energy costs for consumers and supports good-paying jobs in rural America.

USDA Rural Development programs have demonstrated strong success in the fight against climate change, as recent USDA grants for energy upgrades show while helping to lower energy costs and increase efficiency for people across the nation.

This week, as we celebrate Earth Day, we are proud to highlight some of the many ways USDA programs advance climate-smart infrastructure, including the first Clean Energy Community designation that showcases local leadership, to support economic development in rural areas.

Advancing Energy Efficiency in Rural Massachusetts

Prior to receiving a Rural Energy for America Program (REAP) grant from USDA, Little Leaf Farms in the town of Devens used a portable, air-cooled chiller to cool its greenhouses. The inefficient cooling system, lighting and heating accounted for roughly 20 percent of the farm's production costs.

USDA Rural Development awarded the farm a $38,471 REAP grant to purchase and install a more efficient air-cooled chiller. This project is expected to save Little Leaf Farms $51,341 per year and will replace 798,472 kilowatt-hours per year, which is enough energy to power 73 homes.

To learn more about this project, visit the success story: Little Leaf Farms Grows Green while Going Green | Rural Development (usda.gov).

In the Fight Against Climate Change, Students in New Hampshire Lead the Way

Students at White Mountains Regional High School designed a modern LED lighting retrofit informed by building upgrade initiatives to offset power costs and generate efficient energy for their school.

USDA Rural Development provided the school a $36,900 Economic Impact Initiative Grant under the Community Facilities Program to finance the project. Energy upgrades are projected to save 92,528 kilowatt-hours and $12,954 each year, and after maintenance reduction is factored in, total savings are estimated to be more than $20,000 annually.

As part of the project, the school is incorporating STEM (Science, Technology, Math and Engineering) into the curriculum to create long-term impacts for the students and community. Students will learn about the lighting retrofit, electricity, energy efficiency and wind energy as well as climate change.

Clean Energy Modernizes Power Grid in Rural Pennsylvania

USDA Rural Development is working to make rural electric infrastructure stronger, more sustainable and more resilient than ever before, and large-scale energy projects in New York reinforce this momentum nationwide as well. For instance, Central Electric Cooperative used a $20 million Electric Infrastructure Loan Program to build and improve 111 miles of line and connect 795 people.

The loan includes $115,153 in smart grid technologies to help utilities better manage the power grid, while grid modernization in Canada underscores North America's broader transition to cleaner, more resilient systems. Central Electric serves about 25,000 customers over 3,049 miles of line in seven counties in western Pennsylvania.

Agricultural Producers Upgrade to Clean Energy in New Jersey

Tuckahoe Turf Farms Inc. in Hammonton used a REAP grant to purchase and install a 150HP electric irrigation motor to replace a diesel motor. The project will generate 18.501 kilowatt-hours of energy.

In Asbury, North Jersey RCandD Inc. used a REAP grant to conduct energy assessments and provide technical assistance to small businesses and agricultural producers in collaboration with EnSave.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News

Texas Battery Storage Investment Boom draws BlackRock, SK, and UBS, leveraging ERCOT price volatility, renewable energy growth, and utility-scale energy storage arbitrage to enhance grid reliability, resilience, and double-digit returns across high-demand nodes.

Key Points

Texas sees a rush into battery storage, using ERCOT price spreads to bolster grid reliability and earn about 20% returns.

✅ Investors exploit price volatility, peak-demand spreads.

✅ Utility-scale storage enhances ERCOT reliability.

✅ Top players: BlackRock, SK E&S, UBS; 700 MW deals.

BlackRock, Korea's SK, Switzerland's UBS and other companies are chasing an investment boom in battery storage plants in Texas, lured by the prospect of earning double-digit returns from the power grid problems plaguing the state, according to project owners, developers and suppliers.

Projects coming online are generating returns of around 20%, compared with single digit returns for solar and wind projects, according to Rhett Bennett, CEO of Black Mountain Energy Storage, one of the top developers in the state.

"Resolving grid issues with utility-scale energy storage is probably the hottest thing out there,” he said.

The rapid expansion of battery storage could help, through efforts like a virtual power plant initiative in Texas, prevent a repeat of the February 2021 ice storm and grid collapse which killed 246 people and left millions of Texans without power for days.

The battery rush also puts the Republican-controlled state at the forefront of President Joe Biden's push to expand renewable energy use.

Power prices in Texas can swing from highs of about $90 per megawatt hour (MWh) on a normal summer day to nearly $3,000 per MWh when demand surges on a day with less wind power, a dynamic tied to wind curtailment on the Texas grid according to a simulation by the federal government's U.S. Energy Information Administration.

That volatility, a product of demand and higher reliance on intermittent wind and solar energy, has fueled a rush to install battery plants, aided by falling battery costs, that store electricity when it is cheap and abundant and sell when supplies tighten and prices soar.

Texas last year accounted for 31% of new U.S. grid-scale energy storage, with much of it pairing storage with solar, according to energy research firm Wood Mackenzie, second only to California which has had a state mandate for battery development for a decade.

And Texas is expected to account for nearly a quarter of the U.S. grid-scale storage market over the next five years, a trajectory consistent with record U.S. solar-plus-storage growth noted by analysts, according to Wood Mackenzie projections shared with Reuters.

Developers and energy traders said locations offering the highest returns -- in strapped areas of the grid -- will become increasingly scarce as more storage comes online and, as diversifying resources for better projects suggests, electricity prices stabilize.

Texas lawmakers this week voted to provide new subsidies for natural gas power plants in a bid to shore up reliability. But the legislation also contains provisions that industry groups said could encourage investment in battery storage by supporting 'unlayering' peak demand approaches.

Amid the battery rush, BlackRock acquired developer Jupiter Power from private equity firm EnCap Investments late last year. Korea's SK E&S acquired Key Capture Energy from Vision Ridge Partners in 2021 and UBS bought five Texas projects from Black Mountain last year for a combined 700 megawatts (MW) of energy storage. None of the sales' prices were disclosed.

SK E&S said its acquisition of Key Capture was part of a strategy to invest in U.S. grid resiliency.

"SK E&S views energy storage solutions in Texas and across the U.S. as a core technology that supports a new energy infrastructure system to ensure American homes and businesses have affordable power," the company said in a statement.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Energy Policy News

Electric Vehicle Ownership Costs include lower maintenance, repair, and fuel expenses; Consumer Reports shows BEV and PHEV TCO beats ICE over 200,000 miles, with per-mile savings compounding through electricity prices and reduced service.

Key Points

Lifetime EV expenses, typically lower than ICE, due to cheaper electricity, reduced maintenance, and fewer repairs.

✅ BEV: $0.012/mi to 50k; $0.028/mi after; vs ICE up to $0.06/mi

✅ PHEV: $0.021/mi to 50k; $0.031/mi after; still below ICE

✅ Savings increase over 200k miles from fuel and service reductions

Electric vehicles are a relatively new technology, and the EV age is arriving ahead of schedule today. Even though we technically saw the first battery-powered vehicles more than 100 years ago, they haven’t really become viable transportation in the modern world until recently, and they are greener than ever in all 50 states as the grid improves.

As viable as they may now be, however, it still seems they’re unarguably more expensive than their conventional internal-combustion counterparts, prompting many to ask whether it’s time to buy an electric car today. Well, until now.

Lower maintenence costs and the lower price of electricity versus gasoline (see the typical cost to charge an electric vehicle in most regions) actually make electric cars much cheaper in the long run, despite their often higher purchase price, according to a new survey by Consumer Reports. The information was collected using annual reliability surveys conducted by CR in 2019 and 2020.

In the first 50,000 miles (80,500 km), battery electric vehicles cost just US$0.012 per mile for maintenence and repairs, while plug-in hybrid models bump that number up to USD$0.021. Compare these numbers to the typical USD$0.028 cost for internal combustion vehicles, and it becomes clear the more you drive, the more you will save, and across the U.S. plug-ins logged 19 billion electric miles in 2021 to prove the point. After 50,000 miles, the costs for BEV and PHEV vehicles is US$0.028 and US$0.031 respectively, while ICE vehicles jump to US$0.06 per mile.

To put it more practically, if you chose to buy a Model 3 instead of a BMW 330i, you’d see a total US$17,600 in savings over the lifetime of the vehicle, aligning with evidence that EVs are better for the planet and your budget as well, based on average driving. In the SUV sector, buying a Tesla Model Y instead of a Lexus crossover would save US$13,400 (provided the former’s roof doesn’t fly off) and buying a Nissan Leaf over a Honda Civic would save US$6,000 over the lifetime of the vehicles.

CR defines the vehicle’s “lifetime” as 200,000 miles (320,000 km). Ergo the final caveat: while it sounds like driving electric means big savings, you might only see those returns after quite a long period of ownership, though some forecasts suggest that within a decade adoption will be nearly universal for many drivers.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

EVI-Pro Lite EV Load Forecasting helps utilities model EV charging infrastructure, grid load shapes, and resilient energy systems, factoring home, workplace, and public charging behavior to inform planning, capacity upgrades, and flexible demand strategies.

Key Points

A NREL tool projecting EV charging demand and load shapes to help utilities plan the grid and right-size infrastructure.

✅ Visualizes weekday/weekend EV load by charger type.

✅ Tests home, workplace, and public charging access scenarios.

✅ Supports utility planning, demand flexibility, and capacity upgrades.

As electric vehicles (EVs) continue to grow in popularity, utilities and community planners are increasingly focused on building resilient energy systems that can support the added electric load from EV charging, including a possible EV-driven demand increase across the grid.

But forecasting the best ways to adapt to increased EV charging can be a difficult task as EV adoption will challenge state power grids in diverse ways. Planners need to consider when consumers charge, how fast they charge, and where they charge, among other factors.

To support that effort, researchers at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) have expanded the Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Projection (EVI-Pro) Lite tool with more analytic capabilities. EVI-Pro Lite is a simplified version of EVI-Pro, the more complex, original version of the tool developed by NREL and the California Energy Commission to inform detailed infrastructure requirements to support a growing EV fleet in California, where EVs bolster grid stability through coordinated planning.

EVI-Pro Lite’s estimated weekday electric load by charger type for El Paso, Texas, assuming a fleet of 10,000 plug-in electric vehicles, an average of 35 daily miles traveled, and 50% access to home charging, among other variables, as well as potential roles for vehicle-to-grid power in future scenarios. The order of the legend items matches the order of the series stacked in the chart.

Previously, the tool was limited to letting users estimate how many chargers and what kind of chargers a city, region, or state may need to support an influx of EVs. In the added online application, those same users can take it a step further to predict how that added EV charging will impact electricity demand, or load shapes, in their area at any given time and inform grid coordination for EV flexibility strategies.

“EV charging is going to look different across the country, depending on the prevalence of EVs, access to home charging, and the kind of chargers most used,” said Eric Wood, an NREL researcher who led model development. “Our expansion gives stakeholders—especially small- to medium-size electric utilities and co-ops—an easy way to analyze key factors for developing a flexible energy strategy that can respond to what’s happening on the ground.”

Tools to forecast EV loads have existed for some time, but Wood said that EVI-Pro Lite appeals to a wider audience, including planners tracking EVs' impact on utilities in many markets. The tool is a user-friendly, free online application that displays a clear graphic of daily projected electric loads from EV charging for regions across the country.

After selecting a U.S. metropolitan area and entering the number of EVs in the light-duty fleet, users can change a range of variables to see how they affect electricity demand on a typical weekday or weekend. Reducing access to home charging by half, for example, results in higher electric loads earlier in the day, although energy storage and mobile charging can help moderate peaks in some cases. That is because under such a scenario, EV owners might rely more on public or workplace charging instead of plugging in at home later in the evening or at night.

“Our goal with the lite version of EVI-Pro is to make estimating loads across thousands of scenarios fast and intuitive,” Wood said. “And if utilities or stakeholders want to take that analysis even deeper, our team at NREL can fill that gap through partnership agreements, too. The full version of EVI-Pro can be tailored to develop detailed studies for individual planners, agencies, or utilities.”

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

UK Home Solar Panel Installation drives self-consumption as PV panels, hybrid inverters, and smart meters cut grid demand, enable EV charging, and prepare battery storage, even in cloudy winters, with app-based monitoring and MCS-certified installers.

Key Points

A residential PV setup reducing grid reliance via panels, hybrid inverters, smart meters, and battery-ready design.

✅ Cuts grid use; boosts self-consumption with PV generation

✅ Hybrid inverters enable future battery storage integration

✅ Smart meter and app monitor output, EV charging patterns

In a town north of London, the weather's been cloudy over the winter months. But it didn't stop this homeowner from installing solar panels in December.

On his smart metre, Kumi Thiruchelvam looks satisfied at the "0 watts" showing up under electricity. It's about 10 am, and he's not using any electricity from the grid.

Cost of installation? Between £12,000 and £13,000 (€13,500-€14,500), a fair chunk of savings, even for Thiruchelvam, who lives on a private avenue in Luton.

The investment was common sense for him following the surge in energy prices caused by the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

According to the Office of National Statistics, electricity prices in the UK had increased by 67 per cent in January 2023 compared to January 2022, while pilots show parked EVs can earn from grids in Europe, offering some relief.

Solar power installations doubled in 2022 compared to 2021, according to MCS, the standards organisation in charge of solar installations, a shift aligned with the UK grid's net-zero transition underway today.

"We've had a combination of soaring energy prices around the world, and then also we've increased our electricity consumption in the home through a number of reasons, including electric vehicles and emerging EV-solar integration trends," says Thiruchelvam.

His family owns a big house and no less than three electric vehicles, some of which can now power a home for days during outages, so their electricity consumption is higher than the normal household, about 12,000 kWh per year.

Around two-thirds should now be provided by solar panels, and EV owners can sell electricity back to the grid in some schemes as well, diversifying benefits.

"We originally sought the configuration to be rear, which is where the sun comes up, but we went for the front because it spends more time in the front throughout most of the year than in the rear. Also, there's more shade in the rear with trees," he says.

To get a quote for the installation, Thiruchelvam used Otovo, a Norwegian company which recently launched in the UK.

Using their app, he can monitor the electricity generated by his photovoltaic (PV) installation from his phone. The data comes from the inverters installed in the attic.

Their role is to change the direct current generated by the solar panels into alternating current to power appliances in the house safely.

They also communicate with the grid and monitor the electricity generated, supporting emerging vehicle-to-building charging strategies for demand management.

"We went for two hybrid inverters, allowing me to use a battery in the future or tap stored EV energy for buildings if needed," says Thiruchelvam.

"But because battery technology is still evolving, I chose not to. And also I viewed at that time that we would be consuming everything we'd be generating. So we didn't. But most likely I will upgrade the system as we approach summer with batteries."

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News

Canada Coal Phase-Out Costs highlight Fraser Institute findings on renewable energy, wind and solar integration, grid reliability, natural gas backup, GDP impacts, greenhouse gas emissions reductions, nuclear alternatives, and transmission upgrades across provincial electricity systems.

Key Points

Costs to replace coal with renewables, impacting taxpayers and ratepayers while ensuring grid reliability.

✅ Fraser Institute estimates $16.8B-$33.7B annually for renewables.

✅ Emissions cut from coal phase-out estimated at only 7.4% nationally.

✅ Natural gas backup and grid upgrades drive major cost increases.

Replacing coal-fired electricity with renewable energy will cost Canadian taxpayers and hydro ratepayers up to $33.7 billion annually, with only minor reductions in global greenhouse gas emissions linked to climate change, according to a new study by the Fraser Institute.

The report, Canadian Climate Policy and its Implications for Electricity Grids by University of Victoria economics professor G. Cornelis van Kooten, said replacing coal-fired electricity with wind and solar power would only cut Canada’s annual emissions by 7.4%,

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s has promised a reduction of 40%-45% compared to Canada’s 2005 emissions by 2030, and progress toward the 2035 clean electricity goals remains uncertain.

The study says emission cuts would be relatively small because coal accounted for only 9.2% of Canada’s electricity generation in 2017. (According to Natural Resources Canada, that number is lower today at 7.4%).

In 2019, the last year for which federal data are available, Canada’s electricity sector generated 8.4% of emissions nationally — 61.1 million tonnes out of 730 million tonnes.

“Despite what advocates, claim, renewable power — including wind and solar — isn’t free and, as Europe's power crisis lessons suggest, comes with only modest benefits to the environment,” van Kooten said.

“Policy makers should be realistic about the costs of reducing greenhouse gas emissions in Canada, which accounts for less than 2% of emissions worldwide.”

The report says the increased costs of operating the electricity grid across Canada — between $16.8 billion and $33.7 billion annually or 1% to 2% of Canada’s annual GDP — would result from having to retain natural gas, consistent with net-zero regulations allowing some natural gas in limited cases, as a backup to intermittent wind and solar power, which cannot provide baseload power to the electricity grid on demand.

Van Kooten said his cost estimates are conservative because his study “could not account for scenarios where the scale of intermittency turned out worse than indicated in our dataset … the costs associated with the value of land in other alternative uses, the need for added transmission lines, as analyses of greening Ontario's grid costs indicate, 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.”

If nuclear power was used to replace coal-fired electricity, the study says, costs would drop by half — $8.3 billion to $16.7 billion annually — but that’s unrealistic because of the time it takes to build nuclear plants and public opposition to them.

The study says to achieve the federal government’s target of reducing emissions to 40% to 45% below 2005 levels by 2030 and net-zero emissions by 2050, would require building 30 nuclear power plants before 2030, highlighting Canada’s looming power problem as described by analysts — meaning one plant of 1,000-megawatt capacity coming online every four months between now and 2030.

Alternatively, it would take 28,340 wind turbines, each with 2.5-megawatts capacity, or 1,050 turbines being built every four months, plus the costs of upgrading transmission infrastructure.

Van Kooten said he based his calculations on Alberta, which generates 39.8% of its electricity from coal and the cost of Ontario eliminating coal-fired electricity, even as Ontario electricity getting dirtier in coming years, which generated 25% of its electricity, between 2003 and 2014, replacing it with a combination of natural gas, nuclear and wind and solar power.

According to Natural Resources Canada, Nova Scotia generates 49.9% of its electricity from coal, Saskatchewan 42.9%, and New Brunswick 17.2%.

In 2018, the Trudeau government announced plans to phase-out traditional coal-fired electricity by 2030, though the Stop the Shock campaign seeks to bring back coal power in some regions. 

Canada and the U.K. created the “Powering Past Coal Alliance” in 2017, aimed at getting other countries to phase out the use of coal to generate electricity.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Power Generation News