Ottawa to release promised EV sales regulations


ev charging

NFPA 70e Training

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

  • Live Online
  • 6 hours Instructor-led
  • Group Training Available
Regular Price:
$199
Coupon Price:
$149
Reserve Your Seat Today

Canada ZEV Availability Standard sets EV sales targets and zero-emission mandates, using compliance credits, early credits, and charging infrastructure investments under CEPA to accelerate affordable ZEV supply and meet 2035 net-zero goals.

 

Key Points

A federal ZEV policy setting 2026-2035 sales targets, using tradable credits and infrastructure incentives under CEPA.

✅ Applies to automakers; compliance via tradable ZEV credits under CEPA.

✅ Targets: 20% by 2026, 60% by 2030, 100% by 2035.

✅ Early credits up to 10% for 2026; charging investments earn credits.

 

Canadian Automobile manufacturers are on the brink of significant changes as Ottawa prepares to introduce its long-awaited electric vehicle regulations. A reliable source within the government says final regulations are aimed at ensuring that all new passenger vehicles sold in Canada by 2035 are zero-emission vehicles, a goal some critics question through analyses of the 2035 EV mandate in Canada.

These regulations, known as the Electric Vehicle Availability Standard, are designed to encourage automakers to produce more affordable zero-emission vehicles to meet the increasing demand. One of the key concerns for Canada is the potential dominance of zero-emission vehicle supply by other countries, particularly the United States, where several states have already implemented sales targets for such vehicles, and new EPA emission limits are expected to boost EV sales nationwide as well.

It's important to note that these regulations will apply primarily to automakers, rather than dealerships. Under this legislation, manufacturers will be required to accumulate sufficient credits to demonstrate their compliance with the established targets.

Automakers will be able to earn credits based on their sales of low- and no-emissions vehicles. The number of credits earned will depend on how close these vehicles come to meeting a zero-emissions standard. Additionally, manufacturers could earn early credits, amounting to a maximum of 10 percent of their total compliance requirements for 2026, by introducing more electric vehicles to the market ahead of schedule, even amid recent EV shortages and wait times reported across Canada.

Automakers can also increase their credit balance by contributing to the development of electric vehicle charging infrastructure, recognizing that fossil fuels still powered part of Canada's grid in 2019 and that charging availability remains a key enabler. In cases where companies exceed or fall short of their compliance targets, they will have the option to buy or sell credits to other manufacturers or use previously accumulated credits.

Further details regarding these regulations, which will be enacted under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, are set to be unveiled soon and will intersect with provincial approaches such as Quebec's, where experts have questioned the push for EV dominance as policies evolve.

These regulations will become effective starting with the model year 2026, and sales targets will progressively rise each year until 2035. The federal government's ambitious EV goals are to have 20 percent of all vehicles sold in Canada be zero-emission vehicles by 2026, with that figure increasing to 60 percent by 2030 and reaching 100 percent by 2035.

According to a government analysis conducted in 2022, the anticipated total cost to consumers for zero-emission vehicles and chargers over 25 years is estimated at $24.5 billion, though cost remains a primary barrier for many Canadians considering an EV. However, it is projected that Canadians will save approximately $33.9 billion in net energy costs over the same period. Please note that these estimates are part of a draft and may be subject to change upon the government's release of its final analysis.

In terms of environmental impact, these regulations are expected to prevent the release of an estimated 430 million tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions, according to regulatory analysis. Environmental Defence, a Canadian environmental think-tank, has estimated that the policy would also result in a substantial reduction in gasoline consumption, equivalent to filling approximately 73,000 Olympic-sized swimming pools with gasoline.

Nate Wallace, the program manager for clean transportation at Environmental Defence, emphasized the significance of these regulations, stating, "2035 really needs to be the last year that we are selling gasoline cars in Canada brand new if we're going to have any chance of actually, by 2050, reaching net-zero carbon emissions."

 

Related News

Related News

Biden's Climate Bet Rests on Enacting a Clean Electricity Standard

Clean Electricity Standard drives Biden's infrastructure, grid decarbonization, and utility mandates, leveraging EPA regulation, renewables, nuclear, and carbon capture via reconciliation to reach 80% clean power by 2030 amid partisan Congress.

 

Key Points

A federal mandate to reach 80% clean U.S. power by 2030 using incentives and EPA rules to speed grid decarbonization.

✅ Targets 80% clean electricity by 2030 via Congress or reconciliation

✅ Mix of renewables, nuclear, gas with carbon capture allowed

✅ Backup levers: EPA rules, incentives, utility planning shifts

 

The true measure of President Biden’s climate ambition may be the clean electricity standard he tucked into his massive $2.2 trillion infrastructure spending plan.

Its goal is striking: 80% clean power in the United States by 2030.

The details, however, are vague. And so is Biden’s plan B if it fails—an uncertainty that’s worrisome to both activists and academics. The lack of a clear backup plan underscores the importance of passing a clean electricity standard, they say.

If the clean electricity standard doesn’t survive Congress, it will put pressure on the need to drive climate policy through targeted spending, said John Larsen, a power system analyst with the Rhodium Group, an economic consulting firm.

“I don’t think the game is lost at all if a clean electricity standard doesn’t get through in this round,” Larsen said. “But there’s a difference between not passing a clean electricity standard and passing the right spending package.”

In his few months in office, Biden has outlined plans to bring the United States back into the international Paris climate accord, pause oil and gas leasing on public lands, boost the electric vehicle market, and target clean energy investments in vulnerable communities, including plans to revitalize coal communities across the country, most affected by climate change.

But those are largely executive orders and spending proposals—even as early assessments show mixed results from climate law—and unlikely to last beyond his administration if the next president favors fossil fuel usage over climate policy. The clean electricity standard, which would decarbonize 80% of the electrical grid by 2030, is different.

It transforms Biden’s climate vision from a goal into a mandate. Passing it through Congress makes it that much harder for a future administration to undo. If Biden is in office for two terms, the United States would see a rate of decarbonization unparalleled in its history that would set a new bar for most of the world’s biggest economies.

But for now, the clean electricity standard faces an uncertain path through Congress and steep odds to getting enacted. That means there’s a good chance the administration will need a plan B, observers said.

Exactly what kind of climate spending can pass Congress is the very question the White House and congressional Democrats will be working on in the next few months, including upgrades to an aging power grid that affect renewables and EVs, as the infrastructure bill proceeds through Congress.

Negotiations are fraught already. Congress is almost evenly split between a party that wants to curtail the use of fossil fuels and another that wants to grow them, and even high energy prices have not necessarily triggered a green transition in the marketplace.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said last week that “100% of my focus is on stopping this new administration.” He made similar comments at the start of the Obama administration and blocked climate policy from getting through Congress. He also said last week that no Republican senators would vote for Biden’s infrastructure spending plan.

A clean electricity standard has been referred to as the “backbone” of Biden’s climate policy—a way to ensure his policies to decarbonize the economy outlast a future president who would seek to roll back his climate work. Advocates say hitting that benchmark is an essential milestone in getting to a carbon-free grid by 2035. Much of President Obama’s climate policy, crafted largely through regulations and executive orders, proved vulnerable to President Trump’s rollbacks.

Biden appears to have learned from those lessons and wants to chart a new course to mitigate the worst effects of climate change. He’s using his majority in the House and Senate to lock in whatever he can before the 2022 midterms, when Democrats are expected to lose the House.

To pass a clean electricity standard, virtually every Democrat must be on board, and even then, the only chance of success is to pass a bill through the budget reconciliation process that can carry a clean electricity standard. Some Senate Democrats have recently hinted that they were willing to split the bill into pieces to get it through, while others are concerned that although this approach might win some GOP support on traditional infrastructure such as roads and bridges, it would isolate the climate provisions that make up more than half of the bill.

The most durable scenario for rapid electricity-sector decarbonization is to lock in a bipartisan clean electricity standard into legislation with 60 votes in the Senate, said Mike O’Boyle, the director of electricity policy for Energy Innovation. Because that’s highly unlikely—if not impossible—there are other paths that could get the United States to the 80% goal within the next decade.

“The next best approach is to either, or in combination, pursue EPA regulation of power plant pollution from existing and new power plants as well as to take a reconciliation-based approach to a clean electricity standard where you’re basically spending federal dollars to provide incentives to drive clean electricity deployment as opposed to a mandate per se,” he said.

Either way, O’Boyle said the introduction of the clean electricity standard sets a new bar for the federal government that likely would drive industry response even if it doesn’t get enacted. He compared it to the Clean Power Plan, Obama’s initiative to limit power plant emissions. Even though the plan never came to fruition, because of a Clean Power Plan rollback, it left a legacy that continues years later and wasn’t negated by a president who prioritized fossil fuels over the climate, he said.

“It never got enacted, but it still created a titanic shift in the way utilities plan their systems and proactively reposition themselves for future carbon regulation of their electricity systems,” O’Boyle said. “I think any action by the Biden administration or by Congress through reconciliation would have a similar catalytic function over the next couple years.”

Some don’t think a clean electricity standard has a doomed future. Right now, its provisions are vague. But they can be filled in in a way that doesn’t alienate Republicans or states more hesitant toward climate policy, said Sally Benson, an engineering professor at Stanford University and an expert on low-carbon energy systems. The United States is overdue for a federal mandate that lasts through multiple administrations. The only way to ensure that happens is to get Republican support.

She said that might be possible by making the clean electricity standard more flexible. Mandate the goals, she said, not how states get there. Going 100% renewable is not going to sell in some states or with some lawmakers, she added. For some regions, flexibility will mean keeping nuclear plants open. For others, it would mean using natural gas with carbon capture, Benson said.

While it might not meet the standards some progressives seek to end all fossil fuel usage, it would have a better chance of getting enacted and remaining in place through multiple presidents, she said. In fact, a clean electricity standard would provide a chance for carbon capture, which has been at the center of Republican climate policy proposals. Benson said carbon capture is not economical now, but the mandate of a standard could encourage investments that would drive the sector forward more rapidly.

“If it’s a plan that people see as shutting the door to nuclear or to natural gas plus carbon capture, I think we will face a lot of pushback,” she said. “Make it an inclusive plan with a specific goal of getting to zero emissions and there’s not one way to do it, meaning all renewables—I think that’s the thing that could garner a lot of industrial support to make progress.”

In addition to industry, Biden’s proposed clean electricity standard would drive states to do more, said Larsen of the Rhodium Group. Several states already have their own version of a clean energy standard and have driven much of the national progress on carbon emissions reduction in the last four years, he said. Biden has set a new benchmark that some states, including those with some of the biggest economies in the United States, would now likely exceed, he said.

“It is rare for the federal government to get out in front of leading states in clean energy policy,” he said. “This is not usually how climate policy diffusion works from the state level to the federal level; usually it’s states go ahead and the federal government adopts something that’s less ambitious.”

 

Related News

View more

Ukraine's Green Fightback: Rising from the Ashes with Renewable Energy

Ukraine Green Fightback advances renewable energy, energy independence, and EU integration, rebuilding war-damaged grids with solar, wind, and storage, exporting power to Europe, and scaling community microgrids for resilient, low-carbon recovery and REPowerEU alignment.

 

Key Points

Ukraine Green Fightback shifts to renewables and resilient grids, aiming 50% clean power by 2035 despite wartime damage.

✅ 50% renewable electricity target by 2035, up from 15% in 2021

✅ Community solar and microgrids secure hospitals and schools

✅ Wind and solar rebuild capacity; surplus exports to EU grids

 

Two years after severing ties with Russia's power grid, Ukraine stands defiant, rebuilding its energy infrastructure with a resolute focus on renewables. Amidst the ongoing war's devastation, a remarkable green fightback is taking shape, driven by a vision of a self-sufficient, climate-conscious future.

Energy Independence, Forged in Conflict:

Ukraine's decision to unplug from Russia's grid in 2022 was both a strategic move and a forced necessity, aligning with a wider pushback from Russian oil and gas across the continent. While it solidified energy independence aspirations, the full-scale invasion pushed the country into "island mode," highlighting vulnerabilities of centralized infrastructure.

Today, Ukraine remains deeply intertwined with Europe, inching towards EU accession and receiving global support, as Europe's green surge in clean energy gathers pace. This aligns perfectly with the country's commitment to environmental responsibility, further bolstered by the EU's own "REPowerEU" plan to ditch fossil fuels.

Rebuilding with Renewables:

The war's impact on energy infrastructure has been significant, with nearly half damaged or destroyed. Large-scale renewables have borne the brunt, with 30% of solar and 90% of wind farms facing disruption.

Yet, the spirit of resilience prevails. Surplus electricity generated by solar plants is exported to Poland, showcasing the potential of renewable sources and mirroring Germany's solar power boost across the region. Ambitious projects are underway, like the Tyligulska wind farm, Ukraine's first built in a conflict zone, already supplying clean energy to thousands.

The government's vision is bold: 50% renewable energy share by 2035, a significant leap from 2021's 15%, and informed by the fact that over 30% of global electricity already comes from renewables. This ambition is echoed by civil society groups who urge even higher targets, with calls for 100% renewable energy worldwide continuing to grow.

Community-Driven Green Initiatives:

Beyond large-scale projects, community-driven efforts are flourishing. Villages like Horenka and Irpin, scarred by the war, are rebuilding hospitals and schools with solar panels, ensuring energy security and educational continuity.

These "bright examples," as Svitlana Romanko, founder of Razom We Stand, calls them, pave the way for a broader green wave. Research suggests replacing all coal plants with renewables would cost a manageable $17 billion, paving the way for a future free from dependence on fossil fuels, with calls for a fossil fuel lockdown gaining traction.

Environmental Cost of War:

The war's ecological footprint is immense, with damages exceeding €56.7 billion. The Ministry of Environmental Protection and Natural Resources is meticulously documenting this damage, not just for accountability but for post-war restoration.

Their efforts extend beyond documentation. Ukraine's "EcoZagroza" app allows citizens to report environmental damage and monitor pollution levels, fostering a collaborative approach to environmental protection.

Striving for a Greener Future:

President Zelenskyy's peace plan highlights ecocide prevention and environmental restoration. The ministry itself is undergoing a digitalization push, tackling corruption and implementing EU-aligned reforms.

While the European Commission's recent progress report acknowledges Ukraine's strides, set against a Europe where renewable power has surpassed fossil fuels for the first time, the "crazy rhythm" of change, as Ecoaction's Anna Ackermann describes it, reflects the urgency of the situation. Finding the right balance between war efforts and green initiatives remains a crucial challenge.

Conclusion:

Ukraine's green fightback is a testament to its unwavering spirit. Amidst the darkness of war, hope shines through in the form of renewable energy projects and community-driven initiatives. By embracing a green future, Ukraine not only rebuilds but sets an example for the world, demonstrating that even in the face of adversity, sustainability can prevail.

 

Related News

View more

Will the next wave of Ontario's electric vehicles run on clean power?

Ontario EV Clean Electricity Plan aligns EV adoption with clean power, natural gas phaseout, and grid decarbonization, cutting greenhouse gas emissions. Parties propose net-zero by 2030 as IESO warns rising gas use undermines climate gains.

 

Key Points

A plan to link EV growth to a cleaner grid by phasing out gas, boosting renewables, and targeting net-zero power.

✅ Parties back EVs; most pledge gas phaseout by 2030

✅ IESO projects quadrupled grid emissions under more gas

✅ Clean power needed to maximize EV climate benefits

 

Ontario’s political leaders are unanimously promoting electric vehicles (EVs) in their election platforms, even as Ontario's EV charging network remains only partially complete by a recent deadline. But if the electricity that powers those vehicles continues to come from burning fossil fuels, the province won’t reap the full environmental benefit of EVs, the Ontario Clean Air Alliance says.

“If we’re going to get the maximum benefit of electric vehicles, we’ve got to have a clean electricity supply,” said Jack Gibbons, chair of the alliance.

The environmental advocacy group surveyed the province’s Progressive Conservative, Liberal, NDP and Green parties about where they stand on generating electricity from natural gas, a fossil fuel. Only three committed to phasing out Ontario’s gas plants, a step seen as essential for supporting Canada's EV goals over time.

The NDP promised an electricity grid with net-zero emissions by 2030, while federal targets like the 2035 EV sales mandate shape transport electrification as well. The Liberals pledged to bring electricity emissions "as close to zero as possible by 2030.” The Green Party plans to make Ontario’s electricity “emission-free as quickly as possible,” aiming for a gas phaseout by 2030. The Progressive Conservatives did not answer the survey and did not respond to requests for comment from Canada’s National Observer.

Affordability and reliability were the top concerns for all three parties that responded, including the cost of expanding EV charging stations across the province.

Ontario used to get 25 per cent of its electricity from coal-fired power plants, even as 2019 fossil-fuel electricity share remained significant nationwide. However, in 1997, Gibbons formed the alliance to campaign against coal, and the province’s last coal-fired plant closed in 2014, leaving Ontario with one of North America’s cleanest electricity systems. At the time, Gibbons said, transitioning to gas-fired electricity made sense.

Now, Doug Ford’s Progressive Conservatives plan to double-down on gas-fired electricity generation to meet future demand, despite a looming energy storage supply crunch that is reshaping planning. As a result, planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions from electricity generation will more than quadruple by 2030, according to Ontario’s Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO).

If that happens, Ontario will lose 30 per cent of the progress it made by phasing out coal.

“If you have an increasing percentage of your electricity generated with fossil fuels, that undermines the activities of a variety of sectors in the society,” said Peter Tabuns, NDP candidate for Toronto-Danforth and former NDP energy and climate critic. “Ford's position of not committing to greening the system undermines the goals.”

In 2020, the alliance spearheaded a campaign calling on the Ford government to phase out the province’s gas plants. Thirty-two municipalities supported the campaign, and in Northern Ontario, Sudbury eco groups say sustainability is key to the grid's future. Many cities have said they will not be able to meet their own goals to fight climate change unless Ontario stops using fossil fuels for electricity.

 

Related News

View more

Canada unveils plan for regulating offshore wind

Canada Offshore Wind Amendments streamline offshore energy regulators in Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador, enabling green hydrogen, submerged land licences, regional assessments, MPAs standards, while raising fisheries compensation, navigation, and Indigenous consultation considerations.

 

Key Points

Reforms assign offshore wind to joint regulators, enable seabed licensing, and address fisheries and Indigenous issues.

✅ Assigns wind oversight to Canada-NS and Canada-NL offshore regulators

✅ Introduces single submerged land licence and regional assessments

✅ Addresses fisheries, navigation, MPAs, and Indigenous consultation

 

Canada's offshore accords with Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador are being updated to promote development of offshore wind farms, but it's not clear yet whether any compensation will be paid to fishermen displaced by wind farms.

Amendments introduced Tuesday in Ottawa by the federal government assign regulatory authority for wind power to jointly managed offshore boards — now renamed the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Energy Regulator and Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Energy Regulator.

Previously the boards regulated only offshore oil and gas projects.

The industry association promoting offshore wind development, Marine Renewables Canada, called the changes a crucial step.

"The tabling of the accord act amendments marks the beginning of, really, a new industry, one that can play a significant role in our clean energy future," said  Lisen Bassett, a spokesperson for Marine Renewables Canada. 

Nova Scotia's lone member of the federal cabinet, Immigration Minister Sean Fraser, also talked up prospects at a news conference in Ottawa.


'We have lots of water'

"The potential that we have, particularly when it comes to offshore wind and hydrogen is extraordinary," said Fraser.

"There are real projects, like Vineyard Wind, with real investors talking about real jobs."

Sharing the stage with assembled Liberal MPs from Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador was Nova Scotia Environment Minister Tim Halman, representing a Progressive Conservative government in Halifax.

"If you've ever visited us or Newfoundland, you know we have lots of water, you know we have lots of wind, and we're gearing up to take advantage of those natural resources in a clean, sustainable way. We're paving the way for projects such as offshore wind, tidal energy in Nova Scotia, and green hydrogen production," said Halman.

Before a call for bids is issued, authorities will identify areas suitable for development, conservation or fishing.

The legislation does not outline compensation to fishermen excluded from offshore areas because of wind farm approvals.


Regional assessments

Federal officials said potential conflicts can be addressed in regional assessments underway in both provinces.

Minister of Natural Resources of Canada Jonathan Wilkinson said fisheries and navigation issues will have to be dealt with.

"Those are things that will have to be addressed in the context of each potential project. But the idea is obviously to ensure that those impacts are not significant," Wilkinson said.

Speaking after the event, Christine Bonnell-Eisnor, chair of what is still called the Canada Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board, said what compensation — if any — will be paid to fishermen has yet to be determined.

"It is a question that we're asking as well. Governments are setting the policy and what terms and conditions would be associated with a sea bed licence. That is a question governments are working on and what compensation would look like for fishers."

Scott Tessier, who chairs  the Newfoundland Board, added "the experience has been the same next door in Nova Scotia, the petroleum sector and the fishing sector have an excellent history of cooperation and communication and I don't expect it look any different for offshore renewable energy projects."


Nova Scotia in a hurry to get going

The legislation says the offshore regulator would promote compensation schemes developed by industry and fishing groups linked to fishing gear.

Nova Scotia is in a hurry to get going.

The Houston government has set a target of issuing five gigawatts of licences for offshore wind by 2030, with leasing starting in 2025, reflecting momentum in the U.S. offshore wind market as well. It is intended largely for green hydrogen production. That's almost twice the province's peak electricity demand in winter, which is 2.2 gigawatts.

The amendments will streamline seabed approvals by creating a single "submerged land" licence, echoing B.C.'s streamlined process for clean energy projects, instead of the exploration, significant discovery and production licences used for petroleum development.

Federal and provincial ministers will issue calls for bids and approve licences, akin to BOEM lease requests seen in the U.S. market.

The amendments will ensure Marine Protected Area's  (MPAs) standards apply in all offshore areas governed by the regulations.


Marine protected areas

Wilkinson suggested, but declined, three times to explicitly state that offshore wind farms would be excluded from within Marine Protected Areas.

After this story was initially published on Tuesday, Natural Resources Canada sent CBC a statement indicating offshore wind farms may be permitted inside MPAs.

Spokesperson Barre Campbell noted that all MPAs established in Canada after April 25, 2019, will be subject to the Department of Fisheries and Oceans new standards that prohibit key industrial activities, including oil and gas exploration, development and production.

"Offshore renewable energy activities and infrastructure are not key industrial activities," Campbell said in a statement.

"Other activities may be prohibited, however, if they are not consistent with the conservation objectives that are established by the relevant department that has or that will establish a marine protected area."


Federal impact assessment process

The new federal impact assessment process will apply in offshore energy development, and recent legal rulings such as the Cornwall wind farm decision highlight how courts can influence project timelines.

For petroleum projects, future significant discovery licences will be limited to 25 years replacing the current indefinite term.

Existing significant discovery licences have been an ongoing exception and are not subject to the 25-year limit. Both offshore energy regulators will be given the authority to fulfil the Crown's duty to consult with Indigenous peoples

 

Related News

View more

Wind power is Competitive on Reliability and Resilience Says AWEA CEO

Wind farm reliability services now compete in wholesale markets, as FERC and NERC endorse market-based solutions that reward performance, bolster grid resilience, and compensate ancillary services like frequency regulation, voltage support, and spinning reserve.

 

Key Points

Grid support from wind plants, including frequency, voltage, ramping, and inertial response via advanced controls.

✅ Enabled by advanced controls and inverter-based technology

✅ Compete in market-based mechanisms for ancillary services

✅ Support frequency, voltage, reserves; enhance grid resilience

 

 

American Wind Energy Association CEO Tom Kiernan has explained to a congressional testimony that wind farms can now compete, as renewables approach market majority, to provide essential electric reliability services. 

Mr Kiernan appeared before the US Congress House Energy and Commerce Committee where he said that, thanks to technological advances, wind farms are now competitive with other energy technologies with regard to reliability and resiliency. He added that grid reliability and resilience are goals that everyone can support and that efforts underway at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and by market operators are rightly focused on market-based solutions to better compensate generators for providing those essential services.

AWEA strongly agreed with other witnesses on the panel who endorsed market-based solutions in their submitted testimony, including the American Petroleum Institute, Solar Energy Industries Association, Energy Storage Association, Natural Resources Defence Council, National Hydropower Association, and others. However, AWEA is concerned that the Department of Energy’s recent proposal to provide payments to specific resources based on arbitrary requirements is anti-competitive, and threatens to undermine electricity markets that are bolstering reliability and saving consumers billions of dollars per year.

“We support the objective of maintaining a reliable and resilient grid which is best achieved through free and open markets, with a focus on needed reliability services – not sources – and a programme to promote transmission infrastructure.”

Kiernan outlined several major policy recommendations in his testimony, including reliance on competitive markets that reward performance to ensure affordable and reliable electricity, a focus on reliability needs rather than generation sources and the promotion of transmission infrastructure investment to improve resilience and allow consumers greater access to all low-cost forms of energy.

The CEO of the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) has recently testified that the state of reliability in North America remains strong and the trend line shows continuing improvement year over year. Technological advances and innovation by over 100,000 US wind workers enable wind farms today to provide the grid reliability services traditionally provided by conventional power plants. NERC’s CEO emphasised in its testimony at last month’s hearing that “variable resources significantly diversify the generation portfolio and can contribute to reliability and resilience in important ways.”

 

Related News

View more

AZ goes EV: Rate of electric car ownership relatively high in Arizona

Arizona Electric Vehicle Ownership is surging, led by EV adoption, charging stations growth, state incentives, and local manufacturers; yet rural infrastructure gaps and limited fast-charging plugs remain key barriers to convenient, statewide electrification.

 

Key Points

Arizona Electric Vehicle Ownership shows rising EV adoption and incentives, but rural fast-charging access still lags.

✅ 28,770 EVs registered; sixth per 1,000 residents statewide

✅ 385 fast chargers; 1,448 Level 2 plugs; many not 24/7

✅ Incentives: lower registration, HOV access, utility rebates

 

For a mostly red state, Arizona has a lot of blue-state company when it comes to states ranked by electric vehicle ownership, according to recent government data.

Arizona had 28,770 registered electric vehicles as of June, according to the U.S. Department of Energy's Alternative Fuels Data Center, the seventh-highest number among states. When ownership is measured per 1,000 residents, Arizona inches up a notch to sixth place, with just over four electric vehicles per 1,000 people.

That rate put Arizona just behind Oregon and Colorado and just ahead of Nevada and Vermont. California was in the lead by far, with California's EV and charging lead reflected in 425,300 registered electric vehicles, or one for every 10.7 residents.

Arizona EV enthusiasts welcomed the ranking, which they said they have seen reflected in steady increases in group membership, but said the state can do better, even amid soaring U.S. EV sales this year.

"Arizona is growing by leaps and bounds in major areas, but still struggling out there in the hinterlands," said Jerry Asher, vice president of the Tucson Electric Vehicle Association.

He and others said the biggest challenge in Arizona, as in much of the country, is the lack of readily available charging stations for electric vehicles.

Currently, there are 385 public fast-charging plugs and 1,448 non-fast-charging plugs in the state, where charging networks compete to expand access, said Diane Brown, executive director with the Arizona Public Interest Research Group Education Fund. And many of those "are not available 24 hours a day, often making EV charging less convenient to the public," she said.

And in order for the state to hit 10% EV ownership by 2030, one scenario outlined by Arizona PIRG, the number of charging stations would need to grow significantly.

"According to the Arizona PIRG Education Fund, to support a future in which 10% of Arizona's vehicles are EVs – a conservative target for 2030 – Arizona will need more than 1,098 fast-charging plugs and 14,888 Level 2 plugs," Brown said.

This will require local, state and federal policies, as EVs challenge state power grids, to make "EV charging accessible, affordable, and easy," she said.

But advocates said there are several things working in their favor, even as an EV boom tests charging capacity across the country today. Jim Stack, president of the Phoenix Electric Auto Association, said many of the current plug-ins charging stations are at stores and libraries, places "where you would stop anyway."

"We have a good charging infrastructure and it keeps getting better," Stack said.

One way Asher said Arizona could be more EV-friendly would be to add charging stations at hotels, RV parks and shopping centers. In Tucson, he said, the Culinary Dropout and Jersey Mike's restaurants have already begun offering free electric vehicle charging to customers, Asher said.

While they push for more charging infrastructure, advocates said improving technology and lower vehicle expenses are on their side, as post-2021 electricity trends reshape costs, helping to sway more Arizonans to purchase an electric vehicle in recent years.

"The batteries are getting better and lower in cost as well as longer-lasting," Stack said. He said an EV uses about 50 cents of electricity to cover the same number of miles a gas-burning car gets from a gallon of gas – currently selling for $3.12 a gallon in Arizona, according to AAA.

In addition, the state is offering incentives to electric vehicle buyers.

"In AZ we get reduced registration on electric vehicles," Stack said. "It's about $15 a year compared to $300-700 a year for gas and diesel cars."

Electric vehicle owners also "get 24/7 access to HOV lanes, even with one person," he said. And utilities like Tucson Electric Power offer rebates and incentives for home charging stations, according to a report by the National Conference of State Legislatures, and neighboring New Mexico's EV benefits underscore potential economic gains for the region.

Stack also noted that Arizona is now home to three eclectic vehicle manufacturers: Lucid, which makes cars in Casa Grande, Nikola, which makes trucks in Phoenix and Coolidge, and Electra Meccanica, which plans to build the three-wheeled SOLO commuter in Mesa.

"We get clear skies. No oil changes, no muffler work, no transmission, faster acceleration. No smog or smog tests," Stack said. "It's priceless."

 

Related News

View more

Sign Up for Electricity Forum’s Newsletter

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

Electricity Today T&D Magazine Subscribe for FREE

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

Download the 2025 Electrical Training Catalog

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

  • Interactive
  • Flexible
  • CEU-cerified