Centrica acquires battery storage project that could "unlock North Sea wind energy potential"

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

IEA Grid Expansion Warning highlights stalled investment in power lines and transmission infrastructure, risking renewable energy rollout for solar, wind, EVs, and heat pumps, and jeopardizing climate targets under the Paris Agreement amid connection bottlenecks.

Key Points

IEA alert urging grid investment to expand transmission, connect renewables, and keep 1.5 C climate goals on track.

✅ 80 million km of lines needed by 2040, per IEA

✅ Investment must double to $600B annually by 2030

✅ Permitting delays stall major cross-border projects

Stalled spending on electrical grids worldwide is slowing the rollout of renewable energy and could put efforts to limit climate change at risk if millions of miles of power lines are not added or refurbished in the next few years, the International Energy Agency said.

The Paris-based organization said in the report Tuesday that the capacity to connect to and transmit electricity is not keeping pace with the rapid growth of clean energy technologies such as solar and wind power, electric cars and heat pumps being deployed to move away from fossil fuels, a gap reflected in why the U.S. grid isn't 100% renewable today.

IEA Executive Director Fatih Birol told The Associated Press in an interview that there is a long line of renewable projects waiting for the green light to connect to the grid, including UK renewable backlog worth billions. The stalled projects could generate 1,500 gigawatts of power, or five times the amount of solar and wind capacity that was added worldwide last year, he said.

“It’s like you are manufacturing a very efficient, very speedy, very handsome car — but you forget to build the roads for it,” Birol said.

If spending on grids stayed at current levels, the chance of holding the global increase in average temperature to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels — the goal set by the 2015 Paris climate accords — “is going to be diminished substantially,” he said.

The IEA assessment of electricity grids around the globe found that achieving the climate goals set by the world’s governments would require adding or refurbishing 80 million kilometers (50 million miles) of power lines by 2040 — an amount equal to the existing global grid in less than two decades.

Annual investment has been stagnant but needs to double to more than $600 billion a year by 2030, the agency said, with U.S. grid overhaul efforts aiming to accelerate upgrades.

It’s not uncommon for a single high-voltage overhead power line to take five to 13 years to get approved through bureaucracy in advanced economies, while lead times are significantly shorter in China and India, according to the IEA, though a new federal rule seeks to boost transmission planning.

The report cited the South Link transmission project to carry wind power from northern to southern Germany. First planned in 2014, it was delayed after political opposition to an overhead line meant it was buried instead, while more pylons in Scotland are being urged to keep the lights on, industry says. Completion is expected in 2028 instead of 2022.

Other important projects that have been held up: the 400-kilometer (250-mile) Bay of Biscay connector between Spain and France, now expected for 2028 instead of 2025, and the SunZia high-voltage line to bring wind power from New Mexico to Arizona and California, while Pacific Northwest goals are hindered by grid limits. Construction started only last month after years of delays.

On the East Coast, the Avangrid line to bring hydropower from Canada to New England was interrupted in 2021 following a referendum in Maine, as New England's solar growth is also creating tension over who pays for grid upgrades. A court overturned the statewide vote rejecting the project in April.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News

Microgrid solar outage algorithms optimize renewable energy during blackouts using grid-forming inverters, islanding control, demand forecasting, and energy storage from batteries and EVs, improving reliability by up to 35% for resilient power sharing.

Key Points

Algorithms that island homes, forecast demand, and prioritize critical loads using storage and grid-forming inverters.

✅ Disconnects inverters to form resilient neighborhood microgrids

✅ Forecasts solar, wind, and demand; allocates energy fairly

✅ Uses EVs and batteries; boosts reliability by up to 35%

Some people who have solar panels on their roof are under the impression that they can use them to power their home in the case of an outage, but that simply is not the case. Homes do remain connected to the grid during outages, as U.S. power outage risks grow, but the devices tasked with managing solar panels are normally turned off due to safety concerns. This permanent grid connection essentially prevents homeowners from drawing on the power that their own renewable energy resources generate.

This could be about to change, however, thanks to the efforts of a team of University of California San Diego engineers who have come up with algorithms that would enable homes to share and use their power in outages by disconnecting solar inverters from the grid. Their algorithms work with the existing technology and would have the added benefit of boosting the system’s reliability by as much as 35 percent.

The genius of their work lies in the ability of the algorithm to prioritize the distribution of power from the renewable resources in outages. Their equation considers forecasts for wind and solar power generation to address clean energy intermittency challenges and the available energy storage, including batteries and electric vehicles. It combines this information with the projected energy usage of residents and the amount of energy the homes are able to produce. It can be programmed to prioritize in several different ways, the most vital of which is by favoring those who need power urgently, such as those using life support equipment. It could also prioritize those who are willing to pay extra or reward those who typically generate an energy surplus during normal operations.

Learning lessons from past outages

Lead author Abdulelah H. Habib said the engineers were inspired to find a way to use the renewable power in outages by the events of Hurricane Sandy. This storm affected more than eight million people on the nation’s East Coast, some of whom were left without power for as long as two weeks.

According to the researchers, most customers prefer sharing community-scale storage systems over having systems in each home because of the lower costs. One of the paper’s senior authors, Raymond de Callafon, said that homes that are connected together are not only more resilient in power outages but they also happen to be more resilient to price fluctuations.

Each home needs to be equipped with special circuit breakers that can be remotely controlled, while utilities would need to install some communications methods so the power systems within a particular residential cluster can communicate amongst themselves. They also need a “grid forming inverter” to help them connect to one another and manage excess solar on networks safely.

One stumbling block that will have to be overcome is the current regulations. Most states do not allow individual homeowners to sell power to other homeowners, so there would have to be some adjustments to make this a reality.

Solar power growing in popularity

Solar power’s popularity is currently on the rise, and reductions in cost as the technology improves are only expected to drive this growth even further. REC CEO Steve O’Neil told CNBC that the installation rates of solar double every two years, a trend that informs residential solar economics for homeowners even though just two percent of the planet’s electricity comes from converting sunlight to energy. This means there is plenty of room for expansion. The world’s current solar capacity is 305 gigawatts, compared to just 50 gigawatts in 2010.

In addition, he pointed out that the price of solar energy has dropped by 70 percent since the year 2010 and continues to fall; it costs around eight cents per kilowatt hour at the moment. Another factor that could boost adoption is storage improvements, driven by affordable solar batteries that expand capacity, which will allow solar energy to be used even on overcast days.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News

Nevada EV Charging Plan will invest $100 million in highway, urban, and public charging, bus depots, and Lake Tahoe sites, advancing NV Energy's SB 448 goals for clean energy, air quality, equity, and tourism recovery.

Key Points

Program invests $100M in EV infrastructure under SB 448, led by NV Energy, expanding clean charging across Nevada.

✅ $100M for statewide charging over 3 years

✅ 50% invested in overburdened communities

✅ Supports SB 448, climate and air quality goals

The Public Utilities Commission of Nevada approved a $100 million program that will deploy charging stations for electric vehicles (EVs) along highways, in urban areas, at public buildings, in school and transit bus depots, and at Red Rocks and Lake Tahoe, as charging networks compete to expand access. Combined with the state's clean vehicle standards and its aggressive renewable energy requirements, this means cars, trucks, buses, and boats in Nevada will be powered by increasingly clean electricity, reflecting how electricity is changing across the country.

The “Economic Recovery Transportation Electrification Plan” proposed by NV Energy, aligning with utilities' bullish plans for EV charging, was required by Senate Bill (SB) 448 (Brooks). Nevada’s tourism-centric economy was hit hard by the pandemic, and, as an American EV boom accelerates nationwide, the $100 million investment in charging infrastructure for light, medium, and heavy-duty EVs over the next three years was designed to provide much needed economic stimulus without straining the state’s budget.

Half of those investments will be made in communities that have borne a disproportionate share of transportation pollution and have suffered most from COVID-19—a disease that is made more deadly by exposure to local air pollution—and, amid evolving state grid challenges that planners are addressing, ensuring equitable deployment will help protect reliability and health.

SB 448 also requires NV Energy to propose subsequent “Transportation Electrification Plans” to keep the state on track to meet its climate, air quality, and equity goals, recognizing that a much bigger grid may be needed as adoption grows. A  report from MJ Bradley & Associates commissioned by NRDC, Southwest Energy Efficiency Project, and Western Resource Advocates demonstrates Nevada could realize $21 billion in avoided expenditures on gasoline and maintenance, reduced utility bills, and environmental benefits, with parallels to New Mexico's projected benefits highlighted in recent analyses, by 2050 if more drivers make the switch to EVs.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

U.S. Solar-Plus-Storage Growth 2021-2024 highlights rising battery storage co-location with solar PV, grid flexibility, RTO/ISO market signals, and ITC incentives, enabling peak shaving, firming renewable output, and reliable night-time power.

Key Points

Summary of U.S. plans pairing battery storage with solar PV, guided by RTO/ISO markets, grid needs, and ITC policy.

✅ 9.4 GW (63%) co-located with solar PV by 2024

✅ 97% of standalone capacity sited in RTO/ISO regions

✅ ITC improves project economics and grid services revenue

Of the 14.5 gigawatts (GW) of battery storage power capacity planned to come online amid anticipated growth in solar and storage in the United States from 2021 to 2024, 9.4 GW (63%) will be co-located with a solar photovoltaic (PV) solar-plus-storage power plant, based on data reported to us and published in our Annual Electric Generator Report. Another 1.3 GW of battery storage will be co-located at sites with wind turbines or fossil fuel-fired generators, such as natural gas-fired plants. The remaining 4.0 GW of planned battery storage will be located at standalone sites.

Historically, most U.S. battery systems have been located at standalone sites. Of the 1.5 GW of operating battery storage capacity in the United States at the end of 2020, 71% was standalone, and 29% was located onsite with other power generators.

Most standalone battery energy storage sites have been planned or built in power markets that are governed by regional transmission organizations (RTOs) and independent system operators (ISOs). RTOs and ISOs can enforce standard market rules that lay out clear revenue streams for energy storage projects in their regions, which promotes the deployment of battery storage systems. Of the utility-scale pipeline battery systems announced to come online from 2021 to 2024, 97% of the standalone battery capacity and 60% of the co-located battery capacity are in RTO/ISO regions.

Over 90% of the planned battery storage capacity outside of RTO and ISO regions will be co-located with a solar PV plant. At some solar PV co-located plants, the batteries can charge directly from the onsite solar generator when electricity demand and prices are low. They can then discharge electricity to the grid when peak demand is higher or when solar generation is unavailable, such as at night.

Although factors such as cloud cover can affect solar generation output, solar generators, now the number three renewable source in the U.S., in particular can effectively pair with battery storage because of their relatively regular daily generation patterns. This predictability works well with battery systems because battery systems are limited in how long they can discharge their power capacity before needing to recharge. If paired with a wind turbine, for example, a battery system could go days before having the opportunity to fully recharge.

Another advantage of pairing batteries with renewable generators is the ability to take advantage of tax incentives such as the Investment Tax Credit (ITC), which is available for solar projects, and other favorable government plans supporting deployment.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News

Electric Vehicle Charging Costs and Times explain kWh usage, electricity rates, Level 2 vs DC fast charging, per-mile expense, and tax credits, with examples by region and battery size to estimate home and public charging.

Key Points

They measure EV charging price and duration based on kWh rates, charger level, efficiency, and location.

✅ Costs vary by kWh price, region, and charger type.

✅ Efficiency (mi/kWh) sets per-mile cost and range.

✅ Tax credits and utility rates impact total ownership.

More and more car manufacturing companies dip their toes in the world of electric vehicles every year, making it a good time to buy an EV for many shoppers, and the U.S. government is also offering incentives to turn the tides on car purchasing. Electric vehicles bought between 2010 and 2022 may be eligible for a tax credit of up to $7,500. 

And according to the Consumer Reports analysis on long-term ownership, the cost of charging an electric vehicle is almost always cheaper than fueling a gas-powered car – sometimes by hundreds of dollars.

But that depends on the type of car and where in the country you live, in a market many expect to be mainstream within a decade across the U.S. Here's everything you need to know.

How much does it cost to charge an electric car?
An electric vehicle’s fuel efficiency can be measured in kilowatt-hours per 100 miles, and common charging-efficiency myths have been fact-checked to correct math errors.

For example, if electricity costs 10.7 cents per kilowatt-hour, charging a 200-mile range 54-kWh battery would cost about $6. Charging a vehicle that consumes 27 kWh to travel 100 miles would cost three cents a mile. 

The national average cost of electricity is 10 cents per kWh and 11.7 cents per kWh for residential use. Idaho National Laboratory’s Advanced Vehicle Testing compares the energy cost per mile for electric-powered and gasoline-fueled vehicles.

For example, at 10 cents per kWh, an electric vehicle with an efficiency of 3 miles per kWh would cost about 3.3 cents per mile. The gasoline equivalent cost for this electricity cost would be just under $2.60 per gallon.

Prices vary by location as well. For example, Consumer Report found that West Coast electric vehicles tend to be less expensive to operate than gas-powered or hybrid cars, and are often better for the planet depending on local energy mix, but gas prices are often lower than electricity in New England.

Public charging networks in California cost about 30 cents per kWh for Level 2 and 40 cents per kWh for DCFC. Here’s an example of the cost breakdown using a Nissan LEAF with a 150-mile range and 40-kWh battery:

Level 2, empty to full charge: $12
DCFC, empty to full charge: $16

Many cars also offer complimentary charging for the first few years of ownership or provide credits to use for free charging. You can check the full estimated cost using the Department of Energy’s Vehicle Cost Calculator as the grid prepares for an American EV boom in the years ahead.

How long does it take to charge an electric car?
This depends on the type of charger you're using. Charging with a Level 1 charger takes much longer to reach full battery than a level 2 charger or a DCFC, or Direct Current Fast Charger. Here's how much time you can expect to spend charging your electric vehicle:

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News