Canada's race to net-zero and the role of renewable energy

Northwest Territories EV Charging Corridor aims to link the Alberta boundary to Yellowknife with Level 3 fast chargers and Level 2 stations, boosting electric vehicle adoption in cold climates, cutting GHG emissions, supporting zero-emission targets.

Key Points

A planned corridor of Level 3 and Level 2 chargers linking Alberta and Yellowknife to boost EV uptake and cut GHGs.

✅ Level 3 fast charger funded for Behchoko by spring 2024.

✅ Up to 72 Level 2 chargers funded across N.W.T. communities.

✅ Supports Canada ZEV targets and reduces fuel use and CO2e.

Electric vehicles are a rare sight in Canada's North, with challenges such as frigid winter temperatures and limited infrastructure across remote regions.

The Northwest Territories is hoping to change that.

The territorial government plans to develop a vehicle-charging corridor between the Alberta boundary and Yellowknife to encourage more residents to buy electric vehicles to reduce their carbon footprint.

"There will soon be a time in which not having electric charging stations along the highway will be equivalent to not having gas stations," said Robert Sexton, director of energy with the territory’s Department of Infrastructure.

"Even though it does seem right now that there’s limited uptake of electric vehicles and some of the barriers seem sort of insurmountable, we have to plan to start doing this, because in five years' time, it’ll be too late."

The federal government has committed to a mandatory 100 per cent zero-emission vehicle sales target by 2035 for all new light-duty vehicles, though in Manitoba reaching EV targets is not smooth so progress may vary. It has set interim targets for at least 20 per cent of sales by 2026 and 60 per cent by 2030.

A study commissioned by the N.W.T. government forecasts electric vehicles could account for 2.9 to 11.3 per cent of all annual car and small truck sales in the territory in 2030.

The study estimates the planned charging corridor, alongside electric vehicle purchasing incentives, could reduce greenhouse gas emissions by between 260 and 1,016 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent in that year.

Sexton said it will likely take a few years before the charging corridor is complete. As a start, the territory recently awarded up to $480,000 to the Northwest Territories Power Corporation to install a Level 3 electric vehicle charger in Behchoko.

The N.W.T. government projects the charging station will reduce gasoline use by 61,000 litres and decrease carbon dioxide equivalent by up to 140 tonnes per year. It is scheduled to be complete by the spring of 2024.

The federal government earlier this month announced $414,000, along with $56,000 in territorial funding, to install up to 72 primarily Level 2 electric vehicle charges in public places, streets, multi-unit residential buildings, workplaces, and facilities with light-duty vehicle fleets in the N.W.T. by March 2024, while in New Brunswick new fast-charging stations are planned on the Trans-Canada.

In Yukon, the territory has pledged to develop electric vehicle infrastructure in all road-accessible communities by 2027. It has already installed 12 electric vehicle chargers with seven more planned, and in N.L. a fast-charging network signals early progress as well.

Just a few people in the N.W.T. currently own electric vehicles, and in Atlantic Canada EV adoption lags as well.

Patricia and Ken Wray in Hay River have owned a Tesla Model 3 for three years. Comparing added electricity costs with savings on gasoline, Patricia estimates they spend 60 per cent less to keep the Tesla running compared to a gas-powered vehicle.

“I don’t mind driving past the gas station,” she said.

Despite some initial hesitation about how the car would perform in the winter, Wray said she hasn’t had any issues with her Tesla when it’s -40 C, although it does take longer to charge. She added it “really hugs the road” in snowy and icy conditions.

“People in the North need to understand these cars are marvellous in the winter,” she said.

Wray said while she and her husband drive their Tesla regularly, it’s not feasible to drive long distances across the territory. As the number of electric vehicle charge stations increases across the N.W.T., however, that could change.

“I’m just very, very happy to hear that charging infrastructure is now starting to be put in place," she said.

Andrew Robinson with the YK Care Share Co-op is more skeptical about the potential success of a long-distance charging corridor. He said while government support for electric vehicles is positive, he believes there's a more immediate need to focus on uptake within N.W.T. communities. He pointed to local taxi services as an example.

"It’s a long stretch," he said of the drive from Alberta, where EVs are a hot topic, to Yellowknife. "It’s 17 hours of hardcore driving and when you throw in having to recharge, anything that makes that longer, people are not going to be really into that.”

The car sharing service, which has a 2016 Chevy Spark dubbed “Sparky,” states on its website that a Level 2 charger can usually recharge a vehicle within six to eight hours while a Level 3 charger takes approximately half an hour, as faster charging options roll out in B.C. and beyond.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

North Central Energy Facilities deliver 1,484 MW of renewable power in Oklahoma, uniting Invenergy, GE Renewable Energy, and AEP with the Traverse, Maverick, and Sundance wind farms, 531 turbines, grid-scale clean energy, and regional decarbonization.

Key Points

A 1,484 MW trio of Oklahoma wind farms by Invenergy with GE turbines, owned by AEP to supply regional customers.

✅ 1,484 MW capacity from 531 GE 2 MW platform turbines

✅ Largest single-phase wind farm: 998 MW Traverse

✅ Owned by AEP subsidiaries SWEPCO and PSO

Invenergy, the largest privately held global developer, owner and operator of sustainable energy solutions and GE Renewable Energy, today announced commercial operations for the 998-megawatt Traverse Wind Energy Center, the largest wind farm constructed in a single phase in North America, reflecting broader growth such as Enel's 450 MW project announced recently.

Located in north central Oklahoma, Traverse joins the operational 199-megawatt Sundance Wind Energy Center and the 287-megawatt Maverick Wind Energy Center, as the last of three projects developed by Invenergy for American Electric Power (AEP) to reach commercial operation, amid investor activity like WEC Energy's Illinois stake in wind assets this year. These projects make up the North Central Energy Facilities and have 531 GE turbines with a combined capacity of 1,484 megawatts, making them collectively among the largest wind energy facilities globally, even as new capacity comes online such as TransAlta's 119 MW addition in the US.

"This is a moment that Invenergy and our valued partners at AEP, GE Renewable Energy, and the gracious members of our home communities in Oklahoma have been looking forward to," said Jim Shield, Senior Executive Vice President and Development Business Leader at Invenergy, reflecting broader momentum as projects like Building Energy project begin operations nationwide. "With the completion of Traverse and with it the North Central Energy Facilities, we're proud to further our commitment to responsible, clean energy development and to advance our mission to build a sustainable world."

The North Central Energy Facilities represent a $2 billion capital investment in north central Oklahoma, mirroring Iowa wind investments that spur growth, directly investing in the local economy through new tax revenues and lease payments to participating landowners and will generate enough electricity to power 440,000 American homes.

"GE was honored to work with Invenergy on this milestone wind project, continuing our long-standing partnership," said Steve Swift, Global Commercial Leader for GE's Onshore Wind business, a view reinforced by projects like North Carolina's first wind farm coming online. "Wind power is a key element of driving decarbonization, and a dependable and affordable energy option here in the US and around the world. GE's 2 MW platform turbines are ideally suited to bring reliable and sustainable renewable energy to the region for many years to come."

AEP's subsidiaries Southwestern Electric Power Company (SWEPCO) and Public Service Company of Oklahoma (PSO) assumed ownership of the three wind farms upon start of commercial operations, alongside emerging interstate delivery efforts like Wyoming-to-California wind plans, to serve their customers in Arkansas, Louisiana and Oklahoma.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News

U.S. EV Sales Growth reflects rising consumer demand, expanding market share, new tax credits, and robust charging infrastructure, as automakers boost output and quarterly sales under the Inflation Reduction Act drive adoption across states.

Key Points

It is the rise in U.S. EV sales and market share, driven by incentives, charging growth, and automaker investment.

✅ Quarterly EV sales and share have risen since Q3 2021.

✅ Share topped 10% in Q3 2023, with states far above.

✅ IRA credits and chargers lower costs and boost adoption.

Contrary to any skepticism, the demand for electric vehicles (EVs) in the United States is not dwindling. Data from the Alliance for Automotive Innovation highlights a significant and ongoing increase in EV sales from 2021 through the third quarter of 2023. An upward trend in quarterly sales (depicted as bars on the left axis) and EV sales shares (illustrated by the red line on the right axis) is evident. Sales surged from about 125,000 in Q1 2021 to 185,000 in Q4 2021, and from around 300,000 in Q1 2023 to 375,000 by Q3 2023. Notably, by Q3 2023, annual U.S. EV sales exceeded 1 million for the first time, a milestone often cited as the tipping point for mass adoption in the U.S., marking a 58% increase over the same period in 2022.

EV sales have shown consistent quarterly growth since Q3 2021, and the proportion of EVs in total light-duty vehicle sales is also on the rise. EVs’ share of new sales increased from roughly 3% in Q1 2021 to about 7% in 2022, and further to over 10% in Q3 2023, though they are still behind gas cars in overall market share, for now. For context, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Automotive Trends Report, EVs have reached a 10% market share more quickly than conventional hybrids without a plug, which took about 25 years.

State-level data also indicates that several states exceed national averages in EV sales. California, for example, saw EVs comprising nearly 27% of sales through September 2023, even as a brief Q1 2024 market share dip has been noted nationally. Additionally, 12 states plus the District of Columbia had EV sales shares between 10% and 20% through Q3 2023.

EV sales data by automaker reveal that most companies sold more EVs in Q2 or Q3 2023 than in any previous quarter, mirroring global growth that went from zero to 2 million in five years. Except for Ford, each automaker sold more EVs in the first three quarters of 2023 than in all of 2022. EV sales in Q3 2023 notably increased compared to Q3 2022 for companies like BMW, Tesla, and Volkswagen.

Despite some production scalebacks by Ford and General Motors, these companies, along with others, remain dedicated to an electric future and expect to sell more EVs than ever. The growing consumer interest in EVs is also reflected in recent surveys by McKinsey, J.D. Power, and Consumer Reports, and echoed in Europe where the share of electric cars grew during lockdown months, showing an increasing intent to purchase EVs and a declining interest in gasoline vehicles.

Furthermore, the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 introduces new tax credits, potentially making EVs more affordable than gasoline counterparts. Investments in charging infrastructure are also expected to increase, especially as EV adoption could drive a 38% rise in U.S. electricity demand, with over $21 billion allocated to boost public chargers from around 160,000 in 2023 to nearly 1 million by 2030.

The shift to EVs is crucial for reducing climate pollution, enhancing public health, and generating economic benefits and jobs, and by 2021 plug-in vehicles had already traveled 19 billion miles on electricity, underscoring real-world progress toward these goals. The current data and trends indicate a robust and positive future for EVs in the U.S., reinforcing the need for strong standards to further encourage investment and consumer confidence in electric vehicles.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

Canada EV Manufacturing Strategy catalyzes electric vehicles growth via batteries, mining, and supply chain localization, with Unifor deals, Ford and FCA retooling, and government incentives safeguarding jobs and competitiveness across the auto industry.

Key Points

A coordinated plan to scale EV assembly, batteries, and mining supply chains in Canada via union deals and incentives.

✅ Government-backed Ford and FCA retooling for EV models.

✅ Battery cell, module, and pack production localizes value.

✅ Mining-to-mobility links metals to the EV supply chain.

As of a month ago Canada was just a speck on the global EV manufacturing map. We couldn’t honestly claim to be in the global race to electrify the automotive sector, even as EV shortages and wait times signalled surging demand.

An analysis published earlier this year by the International Council on Clean Transportation and Pembina Institute found that while Canada ranked 12th globally in vehicle production, EV production was a miniscule 0.4 per cent of that total and well off the average of 2.3 per cent amongst auto producing nations.

As the report’s co-author Ben Sharpe noted, “Canada is a huge auto producer. But nobody is really shining a light on the fact that if Canada’s doesn’t quickly ramp up its EV production, the steady decline we’ve seen in auto manufacturing over the past 20 years is going to accelerate.”

National strategy
While the report received relatively scant attention outside industry circles, its thesis was not lost on the leadership of Unifor, the union representing Canadian autoworkers.

In an August op-ed, Unifor national president Jerry Dias laid out the table stakes: “Global automakers are pouring hundreds of billions of dollars into electric vehicle investments, but no major programs are landing in Canada. Without a comprehensive national auto strategy, and active government engagement, the future is dim … securing our industry’s future requires a much bigger made-in-Canada style effort. An effort that government must lead.”

And then he got busy at the negotiating table.

The result? All of a sudden Canada is (or rather, will be) on the EV assembly map, just as the market hits an EV inflection point globally on adoption trends.

Late last month, contract negotiations between Unifor and Ford produced the Ford Oakville deal that will see $2 billion — including $590 million from the federal and Ontario governments ($295 million each) — invested towards production of five EV models in Oakville, Ont.

Three weeks later, Unifor reached a similar agreement with Fiat Chrysler Automobiles on a $1.5-billion investment, including retooling, to accommodate production of both a plug-in hybrid and battery electric vehicle (including at least one additional model). 

Workforce implications
The primary motivation for Unifor in pushing for EVs in contract negotiations is, at minimum, preserving jobs — if not creating them. Unifor estimates that retooling the Ford plant in Oakville will save 3,000 of the 3,400 jobs there, contributing to Ontario's EV jobs boom as the transition accelerates. However, as VW CEO Herbert Diess has noted, “The reality is that building an electric car involves some 30 per cent less effort than one powered by an internal combustion engine.”

So, when it comes to the relationship between jobs and EVs, at first glance it might not seem to be a great news story. What exactly are the workforce implications?

To answer this question, and aid automakers and their suppliers in navigating the transition to EV production, the Boston Consulting Group (BCG) has done a study on the evolution of labour requirements along the automotive value chain. And the results, it turns out, are both illuminating and encouraging — so long as you look across the full value chain.

Common wisdom “inaccurate”
The study provides an in-depth unpacking of the similarities and differences between manufacturing an internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicle versus a battery EV (BEV), and in doing so it arrives at a surprising conclusion: “The common wisdom that BEVs are less labor intensive in assembly stages than traditional vehicles is inaccurate.” 

BCG’s analysis modeled how many labour hours were required to build an ICE vehicle versus a BEV, including the distribution of labour value across the automotive value chain.

While ICE vehicles require more labour associated with components, engine, motor and transmission assembly and installation, BEVs require the addition of battery manufacturing (cell production and module and battery pack assembly) and an increase in assembly-related labour. Meanwhile, labour requirements for press, body and paint shops don’t differ at all. Put that all together and labour requirements for BEVs are comparable to those of ICE vehicles when viewed across the full value chain.

Value chain shifting to parts suppliers
However, as BCG notes, this similarity not only masks, but even magnifies, a significant change that was already underway in the distribution of labour value across the value chain — an accelerating shift to parts suppliers.

This trend is a key reason why the Canadian Automotive Parts Manufacturers’ Association launched Project Arrow earlier this year, and just unveiled the winner of the EV concept design that will ultimately become a full-build, 100 per cent Canadian-equipped zero-emission concept vehicle. The project is a showcase for Canadian automotive SMEs.

The bulk of the value shift is into battery cell manufacturing, which is dominated by Asian players. In light of this, both the EU and UK are working hard to devise strategies to secure battery cell manufacturing, including projects like a Niagara Region battery plant that signal momentum, and hence capture this value domestically. Canada must now do the same — and in the process, capitalize on the unique opportunity we have buried underground: the metals and minerals needed for batteries.

The federal government is well aware of this opportunity, which Minister of Industry, Science and Economic Development Navdeep Bains has coined “mines to mobility.” But we’re playing catch up, and the window to effectively position to capture this opportunity will close quickly.

Cooperation and coordination needed
As Unifor’s Dias noted in an interview with Electric Autonomy after the FCA deal, the scale of the opportunity extends beyond the assembly plants in Oakville and Windsor: “This is about putting workers back in our steel plants. This is about making batteries. This is about saying to aluminum workers in Quebec and B.C. … to lithium workers in Quebec … cobalt workers in Northern Ontario, you’re going to be a part of the solution…It is a transformative time. … We’re on the cusp of leading globally for where this incredible industry is going.”

With their role in securing Ford’s EV production commitment, the federal and Ontario governments made clear that they understand the potential that EVs offer Canada, including how to capitalize on the U.S. auto sector's pivot as supply chains evolve, and their role in capitalizing on this opportunity.

But to ultimately succeed will require more than an open chequebook, it will take a coordinated industrial strategy that spans the full automotive value chain and extends beyond it into batteries and even mining, alongside Canada-U.S. collaboration to align supply chains. This will require effective cooperation and coordination between governments and across several industrial sectors and their associations.

Together they are Team Canada’s pit crew in the global EV race. How we fare will depend on how efficiently and effectively that crew works together. 

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

Vineyard Wind I advances as BOEM issues a final environmental impact statement for the 800 MW offshore wind farm south of Martha's Vineyard, delivering clean energy, jobs, and carbon reductions to Massachusetts toward net-zero.

Key Points

An 800 MW offshore wind project near Martha's Vineyard supplying clean power to Massachusetts.

✅ 800 MW capacity; power for 400,000+ homes and businesses

✅ BOEM final EIS; record of decision pending within 30+ days

✅ 1.68M metric tons CO2 avoided annually; jobs and lower rates

Federal environmental officials have completed their review of the Vineyard Wind I offshore wind farm, moving the project that is expected to deliver clean renewable energy to Massachusetts by the end of 2023 closer to becoming a reality.

The U.S. Department of the Interior said Monday morning that its Bureau of Ocean Energy Management completed the analysis it resumed about a month ago, published the project's final environmental impact statement, and said it will officially publish notice of the impact statement in the Federal Register later this week.

"More than three years of federal review and public comment is nearing its conclusion and 2021 is poised to be a momentous year for our project and the broader offshore wind industry," Vineyard Wind CEO Lars Pedersen said. "Offshore wind is a historic opportunity to build a new industry that will lead to the creation of thousands of jobs, reduce electricity rates for consumers and contribute significantly to limiting the impacts of climate change. We look forward to reaching the final step in the federal permitting process and being able to launch an industry that has such tremendous potential for economic development in communities up and down the Eastern seaboard."

The 800-megawatt wind farm planned for 15 miles south of Martha's Vineyard was the first offshore wind project selected by Massachusetts utility companies with input from the Baker administration to fulfill part of a 2016 clean energy law. It is projected to generate cleaner electricity for more than 400,000 homes and businesses in Massachusetts, produce at least 3,600 jobs, reduce costs for Massachusetts ratepayers by an estimated $1.4 billion, and eliminate 1.68 million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions annually.

Offshore wind power, informed by the U.S. offshore wind outlook, is expected to become an increasingly significant part of Massachusetts' energy mix. The governor and Legislature agree on a goal of net-zero carbon emissions by 2050, but getting there is projected to require having about 25 gigawatts of offshore wind power. That means Massachusetts will need to hit a pace in the 2030s where it has about 1 GW of new offshore wind power on the grid coming online each year.

"I think that's why today's announcement is so historic, because it does represent that culmination of work to understand how to permit and build a cost-effective and environmentally-responsible wind farm that can deliver clean energy to Massachusetts ratepayers, but also just how to do this from start to finish," said Energy and Environmental Affairs Secretary Kathleen Theoharides. "As we move towards our goal of probably [25 GW] of offshore wind by 2050 to hit our net-zero target, this does give us confidence that we have a much clearer path in terms of permitting."

She added, "There's a huge pipeline, so getting this project out really should open the door to the many additional projects up and down the East Coast, such as Long Island proposals, that will come after it."

According to the American Wind Energy Association, there are expected to be 14 offshore projects totaling 9,112 MW of capacity in operation by 2026.

Susannah Hatch, the clean energy coalition director for the Environmental League of Massachusetts and a leader of the broad-based New England for Offshore Wind Regional group, called offshore wind farms like Vineyard Wind "the linchpin of our decarbonization efforts in New England." She said the Biden administration's quick action on Vineyard Wind is a positive sign for the burgeoning sector.

"Moving swiftly on responsibly developed offshore wind is critical to our efforts to mitigate climate change, and offshore wind also provides an enormous opportunity to grow the economy, create thousands of jobs, and drive equitable economic benefits through increased minority economic participation in New England," Hatch said.

With the final environmental impact statement published, Vineyard Wind still must secure a record of decision from BOEM, which processes wind lease requests, an air permit from the Environmental Protection Agency and sign-offs from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the National Marine Fisheries Service to officially clear the way for the project that is on track to be the nation's first utility-scale offshore wind farm. BOEM must wait at least 30 days from the publication of the final environmental impact statement to issue a record of decision.

Project officials have said they expect the final impact statement and then a record of decision "sometime in the first half of 2021." That would allow the project to hit its financial close milestone in the second half of this year, begin on-shore work quickly thereafter, start offshore construction in 2022, begin installing turbines in 2023 and begin exporting power to the grid, marking Vineyard Wind first power, by late 2023, Pedersen said in January.

"Offshore energy development provides an opportunity for us to work with Tribal nations, communities, and other ocean users to ensure all decisions are transparent and utilize the best available science," BOEM Director Amanda Lefton said.

The commercial fishing industry has been among the most vocal opponents of aspects of the Vineyard Wind project and the Responsible Offshore Development Alliance (RODA) has repeatedly urged the new administration to ensure the voices of the industry are heard throughout the licensing and permitting process.

In comments submitted earlier this month in response to a BOEM review of an offshore wind project that is expected to deliver power to New York, including the recent New York offshore wind approval, RODA said the present is "a time of significant confusion and change in the U.S. approach to offshore wind energy (OSW) planning" and detailed mitigation measures it wants to see incorporated into all projects.

"To be clear, none of these requests are new -- nor hardly radical. They have simply been ignored again, and again, and again in a political push/pull between multinational energy companies and the U.S. government, leaving world-famous seafood, and the communities founded around its harvest, off the table," the group said in a press release last week. Some of RODA's suggestions were analyzed as part of BOEM's Vineyard Wind review.

Vineyard Wind has certainly taken a circuitous path to get to this point. The timeline for the project was upended in August 2019 when the Trump administration decided to conduct a much broader assessment of potential offshore wind projects up and down the East Coast, which delayed the project by almost a year.

When the Trump administration delayed its action on a final environmental impact statement last year, Vineyard Wind on Dec. 1 announced that it was pulling its project out of the federal review pipeline in order to complete an internal study on whether the decision to use a certain type of turbine would warrant changes to construction and operations plan. The Trump administration declared the federal review of the project "terminated."

Within two weeks of President Joe Biden being inaugurated, Vineyard Wind said its review determined no changes were necessary and the company resubmitted its plans for review. BOEM agreed to pick up where the Trump administration had left off despite the agency previously declaring its review terminated.

"It would appear that fishing communities are the only ones screaming into a void while public resources are sold to the highest bidder, as BOEM has reversed its decision to terminate a project after receiving a single letter from Vineyard Wind," RODA said.

The final environmental impact statement that BOEM published Monday showed that the federal regulators believe the Vineyard Wind I development as proposed will have "moderate" impacts on commercial fisheries and for-hire recreational fishing outfits, and that the project combined with other factors not related to wind energy development will have "major" impacts on commercial and recreational fishing ventures.

Vineyard Wind pointed Monday to the fishery mitigation agreements it has entered into with Massachusetts and Rhode Island, a fishery science collaboration with the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth's School of Marine Science and Technology, and an agreement with leading environmental organizations around the protection of the endangered right whale.

Responding to concerns about safe navigation among RODA and others in the fishing sector, Vineyard Wind and the four other developers holding leases for offshore wind sites off New England agreed to orient their turbines in fixed east-to-west rows and north-to-south columns spaced one nautical mile apart. Last year, the U.S. Coast Guard concluded that the grid layout was the best way to maintain maritime safety and ease of navigation in the offshore wind development areas south of Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket.

Since a 2016 clean energy law kicked off the state's foray into the offshore wind world, Massachusetts utilities have contracted for a total of about 1,600 MW between two projects, Vineyard Wind I and Mayflower Wind.

A joint venture of Shell and Ocean Winds North America, Mayflower Wind was picked unanimously in 2019 by utility executives to build and operate a wind farm approximately 26 nautical miles south of Martha's Vineyard and 20 nautical miles south of Nantucket, with South Coast construction activity expected as the project progresses. The 804-megawatt project is expected to be operational by December 2025.

Massachusetts and its utilities are expected to go out to bid for up to another 1,600 MW of offshore wind generation capacity later this year using authorization granted by the Legislature in 2018.

The climate policy bill that Gov. Charlie Baker returned to the Legislature with amendments more than a month ago would require that the executive branch direct Massachusetts utilities to buy an additional 2,400 MW of offshore wind power.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News

California NEM-3 Tariff ushers a successor Net Energy Metering framework, revising export compensation, TOU rates, and non-bypassable charges to balance ratepayer impacts, rooftop solar growth, and energy storage adoption across diverse communities.

Key Points

The CPUC's successor NEM policy redefining export credits and rates to sustain customer-sited solar and storage.

✅ Sets export compensation methodology beyond NEM 2.0

✅ Aligns TOU rates and non-bypassable charges with costs

✅ Encourages solar-plus-storage adoption and equity access

The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) has officially commenced its “NEM-3” proceeding, which will establish the successor Net Energy Metering (NEM) tariff to the “NEM 2.0” program in California. This is a highly anticipated, high-stakes proceeding that will effectively modify the rules for the NEM tariff in California, amid ongoing electricity pricing changes that affect residential rooftop solar – arguably the single most important policy mechanism for customer-sited solar over the last decade.

The CPUC’s recent order instituting rule-making (OIR) filing stated that “the major focus of this proceeding will be on the development of a successor to existing NEM 2.0 tariffs. This successor will be a mechanism for providing customer-generators with credit or compensation for electricity generated by their renewable facilities that a) balances the costs and benefits of the renewable electrical generation facility and b) allows customer-sited renewable generation to grow sustainably among different types of customers and throughout California’s diverse communities.”

This successor tariff proceeding was initiated by Assembly Bill 327, which was signed into law in October of 2013. AB 327 is best known as the legislation that directed the CPUC to create the “NEM 2.0” successor tariff, which was adopted by the CPUC in January of 2016.

The original Net Energy Metering program in California (“NEM 1.0”) effectively enabled full-retail value net metering “allowing NEM customers to be compensated for the electricity generated by an eligible customer-sited renewable resource and fed back to the utility over an entire billing period.” Under the NEM 2.0 tariff, customers were required to pay charges that aligned them more closely with non-NEM customer costs than under the original structure. The main changes adopted when the NEM 2.0 was implemented were that NEM 2.0 customer-generators must: (i) pay a one-time interconnection fee; (ii) pay non-bypassable charges on each kilowatt-hour of electricity they consume from the grid; and (iii) customers were required to transfer to a time-of-use (TOU) rate, with potential changes to electric bills for many customers.

NEM 2.0

The commencement of the NEM-3 OIR was preceded by the publishing of a 318-page Net Energy Metering 2.0 Lookback Study, which was published by Itron, Verdant Associates, and Energy and Environmental Economics. The CPUC-commissioned study had been widely anticipated and was expected to act as the starting reference point for the successor tariff proceeding. Verdant also hosted a webinar, which summarized the study’s inputs, assumptions, draft findings and results.

The study utilized several different tests to study the impact of NEM 2.0. The cost effectiveness analysis tests, which estimate costs and benefits attributed to NEM 2.0 include: (i) total resource cost test, (ii) participant cost test, (iii) ratepayer impact measure test, and (iv) program administrator test. The evaluation also included a cost of service analysis, which estimates the marginal cost borne by the utility to serve a NEM 2.0 customer.

The opening paragraph of the report’s executive summary stated that “overall, we found that NEM 2.0 participants benefit from the structure, while ratepayers see increased rates.” In every test that the author’s conducted the results generally supported this conclusion for residential customers. There were some exceptions in their findings. For example, in the cost of service analysis the report stated that “residential customers that install customer-sited renewable resources on average pay lower bills than the utility’s cost to serve them. On the other hand, nonresidential customers pay bills that are slightly higher than their cost of service after installing customer-sited renewable resources. This is largely due to nonresidential customer rates having demand charges (and other fixed fees), and the lower ratio of PV system size to customer load when compared to residential customers.”

Similar debates over solar rate design, including Massachusetts solar demand charges, highlight how demand charges and TOU decisions can affect customer economics.

NEM-3 timeline

Popular content
The preliminary schedule that the CPUC laid out in its OIR estimates that the proceeding will take roughly 15 months in total, starting with a November 2020 pre-hearing conference.

The real meat of the proceeding, where parties will present their proposals for what they believe the successor tariff should be, as the state considers revamping electricity rates to clean the grid, and really show their hand will not begin until the Spring of 2021. So we’re still a little ways away from seeing the proposals that the key parties to this proceeding, like the Investor Owned Utilities (PG&E, SCE, SDG&E), solar and storage advocates such as SEIA, CALSSA, Vote Solar, and ratepayer advocates like TURN) will submit.

While the outcome for the new successor NEM tariff is anyone’s guess at this point, some industry policy folks are starting to speculate. We think it is safe to assume that the value of exported energy will get reduced, with debates over income-based utility charges also influencing rate design. How much and the mechanism for how exports get valued remains to be seen. Based on the findings from the lookback study, it seems like the reduction in export value will be more severe than what happened when NEM 2.0 got implemented. In NEM 2.0, non-bypassable charges, which are volumetric charges that must be paid on all imported energy and cannot be netted-out by exports, only equated to roughly $0.02 to $0.03/kWh.

Given that the value of exports will almost certainly get reduced, we expect that to be bullish for energy storage as America goes electric and load shapes evolve. Energy storage attachment rates with solar are already steadily rising in California. By the time NEM-3 starts getting implemented, likely in 2022, we think storage attachment rates will likely escalate further.

We would not be surprised to see future storage attachment rates in California look like the Hawaiian market today, which are upwards of 80% for certain types of customers and applications. Two big questions on our mind are: (i) will the NEM 3.0 rules be different for different customer class: residential, CARE (e.g., low-income or disadvantaged communities), and commercial & industrial; (ii) will the CPUC introduce some sort of glidepath or phased in implementation approach?

The outcome of this proceeding will have far reaching implications on the future of customer-sited solar and energy storage in California. The NEM-3 outcome in California may likely serve as precedent for other states, as California exports its energy policies across the West, and utility territories that are expected to redesign their Net Energy Metering tariffs in the coming years.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Energy Policy News