Solar and wind power curtailments are rising in California

France EV Bonus Eligibility Rules prioritize lifecycle carbon footprint, manufacturing emissions, battery sourcing, and transport impacts, reshaping electric car incentives and excluding many China-made EVs while aiming for WTO-compliant, low-emission industrial policy.

Key Points

France's EV bonus rules score lifecycle emissions to favor low-carbon models and limit incentives for China-made EVs.

✅ Scores energy, assembly, transport, and battery criteria

✅ Likely excludes China-made EVs with coal-heavy production

✅ Aims to align incentives with WTO-compliant climate goals

France has published new eligibility rules for electric car incentives to exclude EVs made in China, even though carmakers in Europe do not have more affordable rival models on the French market.

WHY IS FRANCE REVISING ITS EV BONUS ELIGIBILITY RULES?
The French government currently offers buyers a cash incentive of between 5,000 and 7,000 euros in cash for eligible models to get more electric cars on the road, at a total cost of 1 billion euros ($1.07 billion) per year.

However, in the absence of cheap European-made EVs, a third of all incentives are going to consumers buying EVs made in China, a French finance ministry source said. The trend has helped spur a Chinese EV push into Europe and a growing competitive gap with domestic producers.

The scheme will be revamped from Dec. 15 to take into account the carbon emitted in a model's manufacturing process.

President Emmanuel Macron and government ministers have made little secret that they want to make sure French state cash is not benefiting Chinese carmakers.

WHAT DO THE NEW RULES DO?
Under the new rules, car models will be scored against government-set thresholds for the amount of energy used to make their materials, in their assembly and transport to market, as well as what type of battery the vehicle has.

Because Chinese industry generally relies heavily on coal-generated electricity, the criteria are likely to put the bonus out of Chinese carmakers' reach.

The government, which is to publish in December the names of models meeting the new standards, says that the criteria are compliant with WTO rules because exemptions are allowed for health and environmental reasons, and similar Canada EV sales regulations are advancing as well.

WILL IT DO ANYTHING?
With Chinese cars estimated to cost 20% less than European-made competitors, the bonus could make a difference for vehicles with a price tag of less than 25,000 euros, amid an accelerating global transition to EVs that is reshaping price expectations.

But French car buyers will have to wait because Stellantis' (STLAM.MI) Slovakia-made e-C3 city car and Renault's (RENA.PA) France-made R5 are not due to hit the market until 2024.

Nonetheless, many EVs made in China will remain competitive even without the cash incentive, reflecting projections that within a decade many drivers could be in EVs.

With a starting price of 30,000 euros, SAIC group's (600104.SS) MG4 will be less expensive than Renault's equivalent Megane compact car, which starts at 38,000 euros - or 33,000 euros with a 5,000-euro incentive.

Since its 46,000-euro starting price is just below the 47,000-euro price threshold for the bonus, Tesla's (TSLA.O) Y model - one of the best selling electric vehicles in France - could in theory also be impacted by the new rules for vehicles made in China.

S&P Global Mobility analyst Lorraine Morard said that even if most Chinese cars are ineligible for the bonus they would probably get 7-8% of France's electric car market next year, even as the EU's EV share continues to rise, instead of 10% otherwise.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

Canada 2035 Zero-Emission Vehicle Mandate sets EV sales targets, raising concerns over affordability, battery materials like lithium and copper, charging infrastructure, grid capacity, renewable energy mix, and policy impacts across provinces.

Key Points

Mandate makes all new light-duty vehicles zero-emission by 2035, affecting costs, charging, and electric grid planning.

✅ 100% ZEV sales target for cars, SUVs, light trucks by 2035

✅ Cost pressures from lithium, copper, nickel; EVs remain pricey

✅ Grid, charging build-out needed; impacts vary by provincial mix

Whether or not you want one, can afford one or think they will do essentially nothing to stop global warming, electric vehicles are coming to Canada en masse. This week, the Canadian government set 2035 as the “mandatory target” for the sale of zero-emission SUVs and light-duty trucks as part of ambitious EV goals announced by Ottawa.

That means the sale of gasoline and diesel cars has to stop by then. Transport Minister Omar Alghabra called the target “a must.” The previous target was 2040.

It is a highly aspirational plan that verges on the delusional according to skeptics of an EV revolution who argue its scale is overstated, even if it earns Canada – a perennial laggard on the emission-reduction front – a few points at climate conferences. Herewith, a few reasons why the plan may be unworkable, unfair or less green than advertised.

Liberals say by 2035 all new cars, light-duty trucks sold in Canada will be electric, as Ottawa develops EV sales regulations to implement the mandate.

Parkland to roll out electric-vehicle charging network in B.C. and Alberta

Sticker shock: There is a reason why EVs remain niche products in almost every market in the world (the notable exception is in wealthy Norway): They are bloody expensive and often in short supply in many markets. Unless EV prices drop dramatically in the next decade, Ottawa’s announcement will price the poor out of the car market. Transportation costs are a big issue with the unrich. The 2018 gilets jaunes mass protests in France were triggered by rising fuel costs.

While some EVs are getting cheaper, even the least expensive ones are about double the price of a comparable product with an internal combustion engine. Most EVs are luxury items. The market leader in Canada and the United States is Tesla. In Canada the cheapest Tesla, the Model 3 (“standard range plus” version), costs $49,000 before adding options and subtracting any government purchase incentives. A high-end Model S can set you back $170,000.

To be sure, prices will come down as production volumes increase. But the price decline might be slow for the simple reason that the cost of all the materials needed to make an EV – copper, cobalt, lithium, nickel among them – is climbing sharply and may keep climbing as production increases, straining supply lines.

Lithium prices have doubled since November. Copper has almost doubled in the past year. An EV contains five times more copper than a regular car. Glencore, one of the biggest mining companies, estimated that copper production needs to increase by a million tonnes a year until 2050 to meet the rising demand for EVs and wind turbines, a daunting task given the dearth of new mining projects.

Will EVs be as cheap as gas cars in a decade or so? Impossible to say, but given the recent price trends for raw materials, probably not.

Not so green: There is no such thing as a zero-emission vehicle, even if that’s the label used by governments to describe battery-powered cars. So think twice if you are buying an EV purely to paint yourself green, as research finds they are not a silver bullet for climate change.

In regions in Canada and elsewhere in the world that produce a lot of electricity from fossil-fuel plants, driving an EV merely shifts the output of greenhouse gases and pollutants from the vehicle itself to the generating plant (according to recent estimates, about 18% of Canada’s electricity comes from coal, natural gas and oil; in the United States, 60 per cent).

An EV might make sense in Quebec, where almost all the electricity comes from renewable sources and policymakers push EV dominance across the market. An EV makes little sense in Saskatchewan, where only 17 per cent comes from renewables – the rest from fossil fuels. In Alberta, only 8 per cent comes from renewables.

The EV supply chain is also energy-intensive. And speaking of the environment, recycling or disposing of millions of toxic car batteries is bound to be a grubby process.

Where’s the juice?: Since the roofs of most homes in Canada and other parts of the world are not covered in solar panels, plugging in an EV to recharge the battery means plugging into the electrical grid. What if millions of cars get plugged in at once on a hot day, when everyone is running air conditioners?

The next few decades could emerge as an epic energy battle between power-hungry air conditioners, whose demand is rising as summer temperatures rise, and EVs. The strain of millions of AC units running at once in the summer of 2020 during California’s run of record-high temperatures pushed the state into rolling blackouts. A few days ago, Alberta’s electricity system operator asked Albertans not to plug in their EVs because air conditioner use was straining the electricity supply.

According to the MIT Technology Review, rising incomes, populations and temperatures will triple the number of air conditioners used worldwide, to six billion, by mid-century. How will any warm country have enough power to recharge EVs and run air conditioners at the same time? The Canadian government didn’t say in its news release on the 2035 EV mandate. Will it fund the construction of new fleets of power stations?

The wrong government policy: The government’s announcement made it clear that widespread EV use – more cars – is central to its climate policy. Why not fewer cars and more public transportation? Cities don’t need more cars, no matter the propulsion system. They need electrified buses, subways and trains powered by renewable energy. But the idea of making cities more livable while reducing emissions is apparently an alien concept to this government.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

U.S. Renewable Energy Record 28% signals a cleaner power grid as wind, solar, and hydroelectric output soar; EIA data shows cost-competitive clean energy reshaping the electricity mix and reducing carbon emissions across regions.

Key Points

EIA-reported April share of electricity from wind, solar, and hydro, reflecting cost-driven growth in U.S. clean power.

✅ Wind, solar additions dominated recent U.S. capacity buildouts

✅ Lower levelized costs make renewables most competitive

✅ Seasonal factors and outages lowered fossil and nuclear output

The amount of electricity generated by renewable resources hit a record 28% in April, a breakthrough number that shows how important renewable energy has become in U.S. energy markets as it surpassed coal in 2022 overall.

"It's a 'Wow' moment," said Peter Kelly-Detwiler, an energy analyst and author of "The Energy Switch," a recent book about the transition to a carbon-free energy economy.

The percentage of U.S. electricity produced by renewable energy from wind, solar and hydroelectric dams has been steadily rising, from 8.6% in April 2001 to this April's 28%. Those numbers were released this week by the U.S. Energy Information Administration, which tracks energy data for the nation.

What explains the surge?
There are several reasons. At the top is that wind and solar installations dominated U.S. energy buildouts.

"Basically, the only things we've added to the grid in the past decade are wind, solar and natural gas," said Harrison Fell, an economist and engineer at Columbia University, where he co-leads the Power Sector and Renewables Research Initiative.

That's happening for two reasons. The first is cost. Renewables are simply the most economically competitive power currently available, Kelly-Detwiler said.

In 2021, the cost of producing a megawatt-hour of electricity from a new wind turbine was $26 to $50. The same amount of electricity from the cheapest type of natural gas plant ranged from $45 to $74, according to Lazard, a financial advisory firm that publishes annual estimates of the cost of producing electricity. 

Federal and state mandates and incentives to increase the amount of clean energy used also help, Fell said, as renewables reached 25.5% of U.S. electricity recently. 

"When you do the math on what's the most profitable thing to add, it's often going to be wind and solar at this stage," he said.

Was weather a factor?
Yes. April tends to be a particularly windy month, and this spring was windier than most, Fell said.

There's also less power coming into the grid from fossil fuels and nuclear in the spring. That's because electricity demand is generally lower because of the mild weather and fossil fuel and nuclear power plants use the time for maintenance and refueling, which reduces their production, he said.

Another surprise was that in April, wind and solar power together produced more electricity than nuclear plants nationwide. 

Historically, nuclear power plants, which are carbon-neutral, have reliably produced about 20% of America's electricity. In April that number dropped to 18% while wind and solar combined stood at 19.6%.

The nuclear decrease is partly a result of the shutdown of two plants in the past year, Indian Point in New York state and Palisades in Michigan, as well as scheduled closures for maintenance.

Will the trend continue?
When all U.S. carbon-neutral energy sources are added together – nuclear, wind, hydroelectric and solar – almost 46% of U.S. electricity in April came from sources that don't contribute greenhouse gases to the environment, federal data shows.  

"It's a milestone," Kelly-Detwiler said. "But in a few years, we'll look back and say, 'This was a nice steppingstone to the next 'Wow!' moment."

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News

Canada Distributed Energy faces disruption as solar, smart grids, microgrids, and storage scale utility-scale renewables, challenging centralized utilities and accelerating decarbonization, grid modernization, and distributed generation across provinces like Alberta.

Key Points

Canada Distributed Energy shifts from centralized grids to local solar, wind, and storage for reliable low-carbon power.

✅ Morgan Solar and Enbridge launch Alberta Solar One, 13.7 MW.

✅ Optical films boost panel efficiency, lowering cost per watt.

✅ Strong utilities slow adoption of microgrids and smart grids.

By Nick Waddell

Disruption is coming to electricity generation but Canada has become a laggard when it comes to not just adoption of alternative energy sources but in moving to a more distributed model of electricity generation. That’s according to Mike Andrade, CEO of Morgan Solar, whose new solar project in conjunction with Enbridge has just come online in Alberta, a province known as a powerhouse for both green and fossil energy in Canada.

“There’s a lot of inertia to Canada’s electrical system and I don’t think that bodes well,” said Andrade, who spoke on BNN Bloomberg on Thursday. 

“Canada is one of the poorest places for uptake of solar, as NEB data on solar demand indicates,” Andrade said, “I believe a lot of it has to do with the fact that we have strong provincial utilities that have their mandates and their chosen technologies.”

Alberta Solar One, a 13.7 MW power facility near Lethbridge, Alberta, had its unveiling this week amid red-hot solar growth in Alberta that shows no sign of slowing. It’s a 36,500-panel farm constructed by Enbridge in a quick six-month turnaround as part of the power company’s pledge to become a carbon-free generator by 2050. Along with solar, Enbridge has made big investments in offshore and onshore wind farms in the United States, while also producing so-called green hydrogen at an Ontario plant.

Private company Morgan Solar considers the Alberta Solar One project as the first utility-scale validation of its technology, which uses optical films to redirect light onto photovoltaic cells to further power production. 

“We use an advanced modelling system and a variety of tools to design very simple optical systems that can be easily inserted into a panel,” Andrade said. “They cost less and bring down the cost per watt. It captures light that would otherwise miss the cells and so you get more power per cell area than any other commercial technology at this point.”

Like renewables in general, solar energy has been thrust into the spotlight as governments worldwide aim to make good on their climate change and emissions pledges, with analyses showing zero-emissions electricity by 2035 is possible in Canada, and convert power generation from fossil fuels to alternative sources. 

The market has paid attention, too, driving up values on renewable energy stocks across the board, including solar stocks, as provinces like Alberta explore selling renewable energy into broader markets. Last year, the Invesco Solar ETF, which tracks the MAC Global Solar Energy Index, soared 234 per cent, while Canadian companies with solar assets like Algonquin Power and Northland Power have been winners over the past few years.

Canadian cleantech companies involved in the solar power sector have also fared well, with names like UGE International (UGE International Stock Quote, Chart, News, Analyst. Financials TSXV:UGE), Aurora Solar and 5N Plus (5N Plus Stock Quote, Chart, News, Analysts, Financials TSX:VNP) having attracted investor attention of late.

Currently, part of the push in alternative energy involves the move from centralized to a more distributed picture of power generation, where solar panels, wind turbines and small modular nuclear reactors can operate close to or within sources of consumption like cities.

But Andrade says Canada has a lot of catching up to do on that front, especially as its current system seems devoted to maintaining the precedence of large, centralized power production — along with the utility companies that generate it.

“Canada is going to be left with this big, old fashioned hub and spoke model, and that’s increasingly going to be out-competed by a distributed grid, call them smart grids or micro grids,” Andrade said.

“That’s the future that solar is going to drive along with storage, and I personally don’t think Canada is prepared for it, not because we can’t do it but because regulatory and incumbency is holding us back from doing that,” he said.

“We pay our utilities, saying, ‘You invest capital and we’ll give you a fixed return on capital.’ Well, guess what? You’re going to get large, centralized capital projects which are going to get big central generation hub and spoke distribution,” Andrade said.

Ahead of the Canadian federal government’s tabling next week of its first budget in two years, many in the energy sector will be taking notes on the Liberal government’s investments in the so-called green recovery after the economic downturn, with renewable energy proponents hoping for further support, noting Alberta’s renewable energy surge could power thousands of jobs, to shift Canada’s resource sector away from fossil fuels.

By comparison, President Biden in the US recently unveiled his $2-billion infrastructure plan which put precedence on greening the country’s power grid, encouraging the adoption of electric vehicles and supporting renewable resource development, and Canadian studies suggest 2035 zero-emission power is practical and profitable as well across the national grid. 

On disruption in power generation, Andrade said there are parallels to be drawn from information technology, which has historically made a point of discarded outdated models along the way.

“I was at IBM, and they had the mainframe business and that got blown up. I also worked with Nortel and Celestica and they got blown up —and it wasn’t due to having better central hub and spoke systems. They got beat up by this distributed system,” Andrade said. 

“The same thing is going to happen here and the disruption is coming in electricity generation as well,” he said.

About The Author - Nick Waddell

Cantech Letter founder and editor Nick Waddell has lived in five Canadian provinces and is proud of his country's often overlooked contributions to the world of science and technology. Waddell takes a regular shift on the Canadian media circuit, making appearances on CTV, CBC and BNN, and contributing to publications such as Canadian Business and Business Insider.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News

First Glasgow Electric Buses will transform the Caledonia depot with 160 charging points, zero-emission operations, grid upgrades, and rapid charging, supported by Transport Scotland funding and Alexander Dennis manufacturing for cleaner urban routes by 2023.

Key Points

Electric single-deckers at Caledonia depot with 160 chargers and upgrades, delivering zero-emission service by 2023

✅ 160 charging points; 4-hour rapid recharge capability

✅ Grid upgrades to power a fleet equal to a 10,000-person town

✅ Supported by Transport Scotland; built by Alexander Dennis

First Bus will install 160 charging points and replace half its fleet with electric buses at its Caledonia depot in Glasgow.

The programme is expected to be completed in 2023, similar to Metro Vancouver's battery-electric rollout milestones, with the first 22 buses arriving by autumn.

Charging the full fleet will use the same electricity as it takes to power a town of 10,000 people.

The scale of the project means changes are needed to the power grid, a challenge highlighted in global e-bus adoption analysis, to accommodate the extra demand.

First Glasgow managing director Andrew Jarvis told BBC Scotland: "We've got to play our part in society in changing how we all live and work. A big part of that is emissions from vehicles.

"Transport is stubbornly high in terms of emissions and bus companies need to play their part, and are playing their part, in that zero emission journey."

First Bus currently operates 337 buses out of its largest depot with another four sites across Glasgow.

The new buses will be built by Alexander Dennis at its manufacturing sites in Falkirk and Scarborough.

The transition requires a £35.6m investment by First with electric buses costing almost double the £225,000 bill for a single decker running on diesel.

But the company says maintenance and running costs, as seen in St. Albert's electric fleet results, are then much lower.

The buses can run on urban routes for 16 hours, similar to Edmonton's first e-bus performance, and be rapidly recharged in just four hours.

This is a big investment which the company wouldn't be able to achieve on its own.

Government grants only cover 75% of the difference between the price of a diesel and an electric bus, similar to support for B.C. electric school buses programmes, so it's still a good bit more expensive for them.

But they know they have to do it as a social responsibility, and large-scale initiatives like US school bus conversions show the direction of travel, and because the requirements for using Low Emissions Zones are likely to become stricter.

The SNP manifesto committed to electrifying half of Scotland's 4,000 or so buses within two years.

Some are questioning whether that's even achievable in the timescale, though TTC's large e-bus fleet offers lessons, given the electricity grid changes that would be necessary for charging.

But it's a commitment that environmental groups will certainly hold them to.

Transport Scotland is providing £28.1m of funding to First Bus as part of the Scottish government's commitment to electrify half of Scotland's buses in the first two years of the parliamentary term.

Net Zero Secretary Michael Matheson said: "It's absolute critical that we decarbonise our transport system and what we have set out are very ambitious plans of how we go about doing that.

"We've set out a target to make sure that we decarbonise as many of the bus fleets across Scotland as possible, at least half of it over the course of the next couple of years, and we'll set out our plans later on this year of how we'll drive that forward."

Transport is the single biggest source of greenhouse gas emissions in Scotland which are responsible for accelerating climate change.

In 2018 the sector was responsible for 31% of the country's net emissions.

Electric bus
First Glasgow has been trialling two electric buses since January 2020.

Driver Sally Smillie said they had gone down well with passengers because they were much quieter than diesel buses.

She added: "In the beginning it was strange for them not hearing them coming but they adapt very easily and they check now.

"It's a lot more comfortable. You're not feeling a gear change and the braking's smoother. I think they're great buses to drive."

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

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