Canada, Germany to work together on clean energy

IEA World Energy Outlook 2020 highlights solar power as the cheapest electricity, projects faster renewables growth, models net-zero pathways, assesses COVID-19 impacts, oil and gas demand, and policy scenarios including STEPS, SDS, and NZE2050.

Key Points

A flagship IEA report analyzing energy trends, COVID-19 impacts, renewables growth, and pathways to net-zero in 2050.

✅ Solar now the cheapest electricity in most major markets

✅ Scenarios: STEPS, SDS, NZE2050, plus delayed recovery case

✅ Oil and gas demand uncertain; CO2 peak needs stronger policy

The world’s best solar power schemes now offer the “cheapest…electricity in history” with the technology cheaper than coal and gas in most major countries.

That is according to the International Energy Agency’s World Energy Outlook 2020. The 464-page outlook, published today by the IEA, also outlines the “extraordinarily turbulent” impact of coronavirus and the “highly uncertain” future of global energy use and progress in the global energy transition over the next two decades.

Reflecting this uncertainty, this year’s version of the highly influential annual outlook offers four “pathways” to 2040, all of which see a major rise in renewables across markets. The IEA’s main scenario has 43% more solar output by 2040 than it expected in 2018, partly due to detailed new analysis showing that solar power is 20-50% cheaper than thought.

Despite a more rapid rise for renewables and a “structural” decline for coal, the IEA says it is too soon to declare a peak in global oil use, unless there is stronger climate action. Similarly, it says demand for gas could rise 30% by 2040, unless the policy response to global warming steps up.

This means that, while global CO2 emissions have effectively peaked flatlining in 2019 according to the IEA, they are “far from the immediate peak and decline” needed to stabilise the climate. The IEA says achieving net-zero emissions will require “unprecedented” efforts from every part of the global economy, not just the power sector.

For the first time, the IEA includes detailed modeling of a 1.5C pathway that reaches global net-zero CO2 emissions by 2050. It says individual behaviour change, such as working from home “three days a week”, would play an “essential” role in reaching this new “net-zero emissions by 2050 case” (NZE2050).

Future scenarios
The IEA’s annual World Energy Outlook (WEO) arrives every autumn and contains some of the most detailed and heavily scrutinised analysis of the global energy system. Over hundreds of densely packed pages, it draws on thousands of datapoints and the IEA’s World Energy Model.

The outlook includes several different scenarios, to reflect uncertainty over the many decisions that will affect the future path of the global economy, as well as the route taken out of the coronavirus crisis during the “critical” next decade. The WEO also aims to inform policymakers by showing how their plans would need to change if they want to shift onto a more sustainable path, including creating the right clean electricity investment incentives to accelerate progress.

This year it omits the “current policies scenario” (CPS), which usually “provides a baseline…by outlining a future in which no new policies are added to those already in place”. This is because “[i]t is difficult to imagine this ‘business as-usual’ approach prevailing in today’s circumstances”.

Those circumstances are the unprecedented fallout from the coronavirus pandemic, which remains highly uncertain as to its depth and duration. The crisis is expected to cause a dramatic decline in global energy demand in 2020, with oil demand also dropping sharply as fossil fuels took the biggest hit.

The main WEO pathway is again the “stated policies scenario” (STEPS, formerly NPS). This shows the impact of government pledges to go beyond the current policy baseline. Crucially, however, the IEA makes its own assessment of whether governments are credibly following through on their targets.

The report explains:

“The STEPS is designed to take a detailed and dispassionate look at the policies that are either in place or announced in different parts of the energy sector. It takes into account long-term energy and climate targets only to the extent that they are backed up by specific policies and measures. In doing so, it holds up a mirror to the plans of today’s policy makers and illustrates their consequences, without second-guessing how these plans might change in future.”

The outlook then shows how plans would need to change to plot a more sustainable path, highlighting efforts to replace fossil fuels with electricity in time to meet climate goals. It says its “sustainable development scenario” (SDS) is “fully aligned” with the Paris target of holding warming “well-below 2C…and pursuing efforts to limit [it] to 1.5C”. (This interpretation is disputed.)

The SDS sees CO2 emissions reach net-zero by 2070 and gives a 50% chance of holding warming to 1.65C, with the potential to stay below 1.5C if negative emissions are used at scale.

The IEA has not previously set out a detailed pathway to staying below 1.5C with 50% probability, with last year’s outlook only offering background analysis and some broad paragraphs of narrative.

For the first time this year, the WEO has “detailed modelling” of a “net-zero emissions by 2050 case” (NZE2050). This shows what would need to happen for CO2 emissions to fall to 45% below 2010 levels by 2030 on the way to net-zero by 2050, with a 50% chance of meeting the 1.5C limit, with countries such as Canada's net-zero electricity needs in focus to get there.

The final pathway in this year’s outlook is a “delayed recovery scenario” (DRS), which shows what might happen if the coronavirus pandemic lingers and the global economy takes longer to recover, with knock-on reductions in the growth of GDP and energy demand.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Climate Change News

Floating Solar at Fort Bragg delivers a 1 MW DoD-backed floatovoltaic array on Big Muddy Lake, boosting renewable energy, resilience, and efficiency via water cooling, with Duke Energy and Ameresco supporting backup power.

Key Points

A 1 MW floating PV array on Big Muddy Lake, built by the US Army to boost efficiency, resilience, and backup power.

✅ 1 MW array supplies backup power for training facilities.

✅ Water cooling improves panel efficiency and output.

✅ Partners: Duke Energy, Ameresco; DoD's first floating solar.

Floating solar had a moment in the spotlight over the weekend when the US Army unveiled a new solar plant sitting atop the Big Muddy Lake at Fort Bragg in North Carolina. It’s the first floating solar array deployed by the Department of Defense, and it’s part of a growing current of support in the US for “floatovoltaics” and other innovations like space-based solar research.

The army says its goal is to boost clean energy, support goals in the Biden solar plan for decarbonization, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and give the nearby training facility a source of backup energy during power outages. The panels will be able to generate about one megawatt of electricity, which can typically power about 190 homes, and, when paired with solar batteries, enhance resilience during extended outages.

The installation, the largest in the US Southeast, is a big win for floatovoltaics, and projects like South Korea’s planned floating plant show global momentum for the technology, which has yet to make a big splash in the US. They only make up 2 percent of solar installations annually in the country, according to Duke Energy, which collaborated with Fort Bragg and the renewable energy company Ameresco on the project, even as US solar and storage growth accelerates nationwide.

Upfront costs for floating solar have typically been slightly more expensive than for its land-based counterparts. The panels essentially sit on a sort of raft that’s tethered to the bottom of the body of water. But floatovoltaics come with unique benefits, complementing emerging ocean and river power approaches in water-based energy. Hotter temperatures make it harder for solar panels to produce as much power from the same amount of sunshine. Luckily, sitting atop water has a cooling effect, which allows the panels to generate more electricity than panels on land. That makes floating solar more efficient and makes up for higher installation costs over time.

And while solar in general has already become the cheapest electricity source globally, it’s pretty land-hungry, so complementary options like wave energy are drawing interest worldwide. A solar farm might take up 20 times more land than a fossil fuel power plant to produce a gigawatt of electricity. Solar projects in the US have already run into conflict with some farmers who want to use the same land, for example, and with some conservationists worried about the impact on desert ecosystems.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News

OEB Energy Storage Integration advances DERs and battery storage through CDM guidelines, streamlined connection requirements, IESO-aligned billing, grid modernization incentives, and the Innovation Sandbox, providing regulatory clarity and consumer value across Ontario's electricity system.

Key Points

A suite of OEB initiatives enabling storage and DERs via modern rules, cost recovery, billing reforms, and pilots.

✅ Updated CDM guidelines recognize storage at all grid levels.

✅ Standardized connection rules for DERs effective Oct 1, 2022.

✅ Innovation Sandbox supports pilots and temporary regulatory relief.

The energy sector is in the midst of a significant transition, where energy storage is creating new opportunities to provide more cost-effective, reliable electricity service. The OEB recognizes it has a leadership role to play in providing certainty to the sector while delivering public value, and a responsibility to ensure that the wider impacts of any changes to the regulatory framework, including grid rule changes, are well understood. 

Accordingly, the OEB has led a host of initiatives to better enable the integration of storage resources, such as battery storage, where they provide value for consumers.

Energy storage integration – our journey 
We have supported the integration of energy storage by:

Incorporating energy storage in Conservation and Demand Management (CDM) Guidelines for electricity distributors. In December 2021, the OEB released updated CDM guidelines that, among other things, recognize storage – either behind-the-meter, at the distribution level or the transmission level – as a means of addressing specific system needs. They also provide options for distributor cost recovery, aligning with broader industrial electricity pricing discussions, where distributor CDM activities also earn revenues from the markets administered by the Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO).
 
Modernizing, standardizing and streamlining connection requirements, as well as procedures for storage and other DERs, to help address Ontario's emerging supply crunch while improving project timelines. This was done through amendments to the Distribution System Code that take effect October 1, 2022, as part of our ongoing DER Connections Review.
 
Facilitating the adoption of Distributed Energy Resources (DERs), which includes storage, to enhance value for consumers by considering lessons from BESS in New York efforts. In March 2021, we launched the Framework for Energy Innovation consultation to achieve that goal. A working group is reviewing issues related to DER adoption and integration. It is expected to deliver a report to the OEB by June 2022 with recommendations on how electricity distributors can assess the benefits and costs of DERs compared to traditional wires and poles, as well as incentives for distributors to adopt third-party DER solutions to meet system needs.
 
Examining the billing of energy storage facilities. A Generic Hearing on Uniform Transmission Rates is underway. In future phases, this proceeding is expected to examine the basis for billing energy storage facilities and thresholds for gross-load billing. Gross-load billing demand includes not just a customer’s net load, but typically any customer load served by behind-the-meter embedded generation/storage facilities larger than one megawatt (or two megawatts if the energy source is renewable).
 
Enabling electricity distributors to use storage to meet system needs. Through a Bulletin issued in August 2020, we gave assurance that behind-the-meter storage assets may be considered a distribution activity if the main purpose is to remediate comparatively poor reliability of service.
 
Offering regulatory guidance in support of technology integration, including for storage, through our OEB Innovation Sandbox, as utilities see benefits across pilot deployments. Launched in 2019, the Innovation Sandbox can also provide temporary relief from a regulatory requirement to enable pilot projects to proceed. In January 2022, we unveiled Innovation Sandbox 2.0, which improves clarity and transparency while providing opportunities for additional dialogue. 
Addressing the barriers to storage is a collective effort and we extend our thanks to the sector organizations that have participated with us as we advanced these initiatives. In that regard, we provided an update to the IESO on these initiatives for a report it submitted to the Ministry of Energy, which is also exploring a hydrogen economy to support decarbonization.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

YVR EV Charging Infrastructure Funding backs new charging stations at Vancouver International Airport via ZEVIP and CleanBC Go Electric, supporting Net Zero 2030 with Level 2 and DC fast charging across Sea Island.

Key Points

A federal and provincial effort to expand EV charging at YVR, accelerating airport electrification toward Net Zero 2030.

✅ Up to 74 new EV charging outlets across Sea Island by 2025

✅ Funded through ZEVIP and CleanBC Go Electric programs

✅ Supports passengers, partners, and YVR fleet electrification

Vancouver International Airport (YVR) welcomes today’s announcement from the Government of Canada, which confirms new federal funding under Natural Resource Canada’s Zero Emission Vehicle Infrastructure Program (ZEVIP) and broader zero-emission vehicle incentives for essential infrastructure at the airport that will further enable YVR to achieve its climate targets.

This federal funding, combined with funding through the Government of British Columbia’s CleanBC Go Electric program, which includes EV charger rebates, will support the installation of up to 74 additional Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging outlets across Sea Island over the next three years. EV charging infrastructure is identified as a key priority in the airport’s Roadmap to Net Zero 2030. It is also an important part of its purpose in being a Gateway to the New Economy.

“We know that our passengers’ needs and expectations are changing as EV adaptation increases across our region and policies like the City’s EV-ready requirements take hold, we are always working hard to anticipate and exceed these expectations and provide world-class amenities at our airport,” said Tamara Vrooman, President & CEO, Vancouver Airport Authority.

This airport initiative is among 26 projects receiving $19 million under ZEVIP, which assists organizations as they adapt to the Government of Canada’s mandatory target for all new light-duty cars and passenger trucks to be zero-emission by 2035, and to provincial momentum such as B.C.'s EV charging expansion across the network.

“We are grateful to have found partners at all levels of government as we take bold action to become the world’s greenest airport. Not only will this critical funding support us as we work to the complete electrification of our airport operations, and as regional innovations like Harbour Air’s electric aircraft demonstrate what’s possible, but it will help us in our role supporting the mutual needs of our business partners related to climate action,” Vrooman continued.

These new EV Charging stations are planned to be installed by 2025, and will provide electricity to the YVR fleet, commercial and business partners’ vehicles, as well as passengers and the public, complementing BC Hydro’s expanding charging network in southern B.C. Currently, YVR provides 12 free electric vehicle charging stalls (Level Two) at its parking facilities, as well as one DC fast-charging stall.

This exciting announcement comes on the heels of the Province of BC’s Integrated Marketplace Initiative (IMI) pilot program in November 2022, a partnership between YVR and the Province of British Columbia to invest up to 11.5 million to develop made-in-BC clean-tech solutions for use at the airport, and related programs offering home and workplace charging rebates are accelerating adoption.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

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

• 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