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

Nova Scotia Biomass Electricity Policy increases dispatchable renewable generation from Port Hawkesbury and Brooklyn Energy, raising MWh output while critics cite clearcutting, carbon emissions, high costs to ratepayers, and delays replacing Muskrat Falls hydro.

Key Points

Policy directing utilities to maximize biomass power as dispatchable renewable supply during hydro delays.

✅ Port Hawkesbury biomass output up 35% year over year

✅ Brooklyn Energy used as dispatchable renewable supply

✅ Critics cite clearcutting, emissions, high ratepayer costs

A boiler owned by Nova Scotia Power on the grounds of the Port Hawkesbury paper plant, whose discount power rate request has drawn attention, is burning 35% more woody biomass this year than last. 

The year-to-date figures show 126,810 megawatt hours (MWh) of electricity was generated over the first nine months of 2021 compared to 93,934 MWh for the same period in 2020 and 65,891 MWh in 2019. 

The information is contained in monthly fuel cost reports Nova Scotia Power must make to the Utility and Review Board, which regulates how much consumers ultimately pay for electricity and has received a call for major grid changes in Nova Scotia.

Burning biomass  — which includes everything from low-grade pulpwood to bark, shavings, and wood chip waste from sawmills — for the purpose of generating electricity is only about 22% efficient, even as some coal stations have switched to biomass abroad. Nova Scotia Power’s boiler at Port Hawkesbury supplies about 3% of the total electricity used in the province. 

Citizens concerned about climate change have for years opposed the government classifying biomass as “renewable energy” and have echoed calls to reduce biomass use for electricity, because clearcutting, which releases carbon from the ground, remains the dominant form of harvesting on Crown and private land. That’s despite ongoing work to begin implementing 2018 recommendations from Professor Bill Lahey to move toward a more ecological approach. 

In May 2020, after it became obvious renewable hydroelectricity from Muskrat Falls was going to be delayed yet again, the McNeil government passed an Order-in-Council extending until December 2022 the deadline to generate 40% of electricity from renewable sources as it moved to increase wind and solar projects across Nova Scotia. 

To help with the shortfall, Nova Scotia Power was told to “maximize” its use of biomass at both the facility it owns in Port Hawkesbury and another one in Brooklyn owned by its parent company, Emera.

In a letter to Nova Scotia Power dated May 15, then-Energy Minister Derek Mombourquette, amid debate over independent energy planning, added: “Nova Scotia Power shall also maximize the use of dispatchable renewable electricity from its own facilities, as well as those of renewable electricity power producers in Nova Scotia (excluding COMFIT generation sources).” 

By definition, “dispatchable” excludes wind and hydro sources, which are not available 24/7, though a new attempt to harness the Bay of Fundy's tides is underway. Nova Scotia Power claims the only “dispatchable renewable electricity power producer” in the province is Brooklyn Energy, the 35 MW biomass plant near Liverpool. 

The government capped at $7 million a year how much electricity Nova Scotia Power could buy from its affiliate company. Critics of the deal — such as auditors hired by the regulator and the province’s consumer advocate — say electricity generated by Brooklyn is the most expensive power and question why the province would burden ratepayers with its purchase.

The answer became apparent in September 2020 when then-Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Kelliann Dean appeared before the legislature’s standing committee on Natural Resources and Economic Development to praise the Order-in-Council for helping rescue the forestry industry four months after the closure of the Northern Pulp mill. 

“The change to Renewable Energy Standards (May,2020) is enabling Nova Scotia Power to generate more electricity from wood chips and sawmill residuals by operating two biomass plants at capacity until electricity from Muskrat Falls comes onstream,” she said. “We are using all the policy levers at our disposal to support the sector.”

Nova Scotia Power is not required to report to the UARB how much electricity is being produced or how much biomass is being burned at Brooklyn Energy. The company pleads “commercial confidentiality” when asked by The Halifax Examiner. 

Nova Scotia Power does report how much it spends each month to buy power from independent producers — a small group which includes Brooklyn but excludes all wind farms. That dollar amount has also increased over the past year — from $15.9 million for 10 months ending October 2020 compared to $23.3 million for 10 months ending October 2021. Unfortunately, the lack of transparency makes it impossible to know exactly how much of that increase is attributable to purchasing more biomass.

Radio silence
The current Minister of Natural Resources and Renewable Energy ,Tory Rushton, has the authority to reduce the amount of biomass being burned to generate electricity and by extension, the rate of clearcutting.

With a stroke of the pen, the PC government of Tim Houston could issue another Order-in-Council capping the amount of metric tonnes that could be used in the boilers, or, direct Nova Scotia Power to use biomass only when it is the most economical fuel choice. 

But so far, Rushton has not responded to the Halifax Examiner’s question about whether he intends to make any change to stop “maximizing” the use of biomass to produce electricity.

 The Examiner isn’t the only one pushing the Minister for answers to difficult issues. At noon today, Citizens opposed to a controversial clearcut on Crown land near Rocky Point Lake in Digby County will stage a demonstration outside the Department of Natural Resources and Renewable Energy on Hollis Street. The protest led by members of Extinction Rebellion and the Healthy Forest Coalition is to pressure the government to take action to protect the habitat of the mainland moose, an endangered species that ranges overs the Crown land currently being cut by the Westfor consortium. 

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Power Generation News

ABB Terra 360 EV Charger offers 360 kW DC fast charging, ultra-fast top-ups, and multi-vehicle capability for Ionity, Electrify America, and depot installations, adding 100 km in under 3 minutes with compact footprint.

Key Points

ABB's Terra 360 is a 360 kW DC fast charger for EVs, powering up to four vehicles simultaneously with a compact footprint.

✅ 360 kW DC output; adds 100 km in under 3 minutes

✅ Charges up to four vehicles at once; small footprint

✅ Rolling out in Europe 2021; US and beyond in 2022

Swiss company ABB, which supplies EV chargers to Ionity and Electrify America amid intensifying charging network competition worldwide, has unveiled what it calls the "world's fastest electric car charger." As its name suggests, the Terra 360 has a 360 kW capacity, and as electric-car adoption accelerates, it could fully charge a (theoretical) EV in 15 minutes. More realistically, it can charge four vehicles simultaneously, saving space at charging stations. 

The Terra 360 isn't the most powerful charger by much, as companies like Electrify America, Ionity and EVGo have been using 350 kW chargers manufactured by ABB and others since at least 2018. However, it's the "only charger designed explicitly to charge up to four vehicles at once," the company said. "This gives owners the flexibility to charge up to four vehicles overnight or to give a quick refill to their EVs in the day." They also have a relatively small footprint, allowing installation in small depots or parking lots, helping as US automakers plan 30,000 new chargers nationwide. 

There aren't a lot of EVs that can handle that kind of charge. The only two approaching it are Porsche's Taycan, with 270 kW of charging capacity and the new Lucid Air, which allows for up to 300 kW fast-charging. Tesla's Model 3 and Model Y EVs can charge at up to 250 kW, while Hyundai's Ioniq 5 is rated for 232 kW DC fast charging in optimal conditions. 

Such high charging levels aren't necessarily great for an EV's battery, and the broader grid capacity question looms as the American EV boom gathers pace. Porsche, for instance, has a battery preservation setting on its Plug & Charge Taycan feature that lowers power to 200 kW from the maximum 270 kW allowed — so it's essentially acknowledging that faster charging degrades the battery. On top of that, extreme charging levels don't necessarily save you much time, as Car and Driver found. Tesla recently promised to upgrade its own Supercharger V3 network from 250kW to 300kW, with energy storage solutions emerging to buffer high-power sites. 

ABB's new chargers will be able to add 100 km (62 miles) of range in less than three minutes. They'll arrive in Europe by the end of the year and start rolling out in the US and elsewhere in 2022.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

Germany Solar Boom is accelerating amid energy security pressures, with photovoltaic capacity surging as renewables displace gas. Policy incentives, grid upgrades, and storage, plus agrivoltaics and rooftop systems, position solar as cornerstone of decarbonization.

Key Points

Germany Solar Boom is rapid PV growth enhancing energy security, cutting emissions, and expanding domestic, low-carbon electricity.

✅ Targets 250 GW PV by 2032 to meet rising electricity demand.

✅ Rooftop, agrivoltaics, and BIPV reduce land use and grid stress.

✅ Diversifies supply chains beyond China; boosts storage and flexibility.

Europe is in crisis mode. Climate change, increasing demand for energy, the war in Ukraine and Russia's subsequent throttling of oil and gas deliveries have pushed the continent into a new era.

Germany has been trapped in a corner. The country relies heavily on cheap imported natural gas to run its industries. Some power plants also use gas to produce electricity. Finding enough substitutes quickly is nearly impossible.

Ideas to prevent a looming power crisis in Germany have ranged from reducing demand to keeping nuclear power plants online past their official closing date at the end of the year. Large wind turbines are doing their part, but many people don't want them in their backyard.

Green activists have long believed renewable energies are the answer to keeping the lights on. But building up these capabilities takes time. Now many experts once again see solar power as a shining light at the end of the tunnel, as global renewables set fresh records worldwide. Some say a solar boom is in the making.

Before the war in Ukraine put energy security at the forefront, the new German government had already pledged that renewable sources — wind and solar — would make up 80% of electricity production by 2030 instead of 42% today. By 2035, electricity generation should be carbon neutral.

It is an ambitious plan, but the country seems to be on its way. July was the third month in a row when solar power output soared to a record level, trade publication pv magazine reported, and clean energy's share reached about 50% in Germany according to recent assessments. For the month, photovoltaic (PV) systems generated 8.23 ​​terawatt hours of power, around a fifth of net electricity production. They were only behind lignite-fired power plants, which brought in nearly 22% of net production. 

Solar cells hanging on a modular solar house during the Solar Decathlon Europe in Wuppertal, Germany
Solar panels can come in many different shapes and sizes, and be used in many different ways

Last year, Germany added more than 5 gigawatts of solar power capacity, 10% more than in 2020. That took the total solar power capacity to 59 gigawatts, overtaking installed onshore wind power capacity in Germany, pv magazine said in January. Last year's solar production was about 9% of gross electricity consumption, according to Harry Wirth, who is head of photovoltaic modules and power plant research at the Fraunhofer Institute for Solar Energy Systems in Freiburg.

"For 2032, the government target is around 250 gigawatts of solar energy. According to their estimates, electricity consumption will increase to 715 terawatt hours by 2030," Wirth told DW. A different study by consultancy McKinsey says this is the lower limit. "So if we assume 730 terawatt hours for 2032, we would be at around 30% photovoltaic electricity in gross electricity consumption," he added. 

The energy expert also envisions great potential to install more solar panels without taking up valuable land. Besides adding them on top of parking garages or buildings, photovoltaic parts can be integrated into the exterior of buildings or even on the outside of e-vehicles. This would "not only produce electricity on surfaces already in use, but it would also create synergies in its own application," said Wirth.

Foreign investment in German solar
It is not just researchers that are taking note. Big businesses are stepping in too. In July, Portuguese clean energy firm EDP Renovaveis (EDPR) announced it had agreed to take a 70% interest in Germany's Kronos Solar Projects, a solar developer, for €250 million ($254 million).

The Munich-based company has a portfolio of 9.4 gigawatts of solar projects in different stages of development in Germany, France, the Netherlands and the UK, according to the press release announcing the purchase. Germany represents close to 50% of the acquired solar portfolio.

EDPR, which claims to be the fourth-largest renewable energy producer worldwide, said it generated 17.8 terawatt hours of clean energy in the first half of 2022.

Miguel Stilwell d'Andrade, chief executive of EDPR and its parent EDP, said they have great expectations from Germany in particular as "it is a key market in Europe with reinforced renewable growth targets." 

Fabian Karthaus is one of the first farmers in Germany to grow raspberries and blueberries under photovoltaic panels. His solar field near the city of Paderborn in northwestern Germany is 0.4 hectares (about 1 acre), but he would like to expand it to 10. He could then generate enough electricity for around 4,000 households — and provide more berries for supermarkets.

Germany was once a leader in solar power. For many years the country enjoyed a large share of the world's total solar capacities. A lot of that early success had to do with innovative government support. That support, however, proved too successful for some as a fall in wholesale electricity prices in Northern Europe hurt the profits of power companies, leading to calls for a change in the rules.

Updated regulations, and changes to the Renewable Energy Sources Act that reduced feed-in tariffs slowed things down. Feed-in tariffs usually grant long-term grid access and above-market price guarantees in an effort to support fledgling industries.

With less direct financial incentives, the industry was neglected leaving it open for competitors. The pace of solar infrastructure growth has also been hampered by issues of red tape, supply chain backlogs, a lack of skilled technicians and, despite solar-plus-storage now undercutting conventional power in Germany, a shortage of storage for electricity produced when it is not needed.

Now the war in Ukraine and Europe's dependency on Russia is refocusing efforts and "will strengthen the determination for an ambitious PV expansion," said Wirth. But the biggest challenge to the region's solar industry remains China.

Public buildings can play a big role, not just because of their size, but because the government is in charge of them

An overreliance on China
China took an early interest in photovoltaic technology and soon galloped past countries like the US, Japan and Germany thanks to huge state subsidies that manufacturers enjoyed. Today, it has become the place to go for all things solar, even as Europe turns to US solar equipment suppliers to diversify procurement.

A new report from the International Energy Agency puts it into numbers. "China has invested over $50 billion in new PV supply capacity — 10 times more than Europe — and created more than 300,000 manufacturing jobs across the solar PV value chain since 2011."

Today China has over 80% of all solar panel manufacturing capacity and is home to the top-10 suppliers of photovoltaic manufacturing equipment. Such a high concentration has led to some incredible realities, like the fact that "one out of every seven panels produced worldwide is manufactured by a single facility," according to the report.

These economies of scale have brought down costs, and the country can make solar components 35% cheaper than in Europe. This gives China outsized power and makes the industry susceptible to supply chain bottlenecks. To diversify the industry and get back some of this market, Europe needs to invest in innovation and make solar growth a top priority.

Germany has several high-tech photovoltaic manufacturers and research institutes. But it only has one manufacturer of solar cells specializing in high-performance heterojunction technology, says Wirth. Yet even though the European photovoltaic industry is fragmented and not what it once was, he is still counting on big demand for solar technology in the foreseeable future, with markets like Poland accelerating adoption across the region. 

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News

US electric vehicle momentum is slowing as tax credits expire, tariffs increase costs, and interest rates rise, while Europe and China accelerate EV adoption through stronger incentives, enhanced charging infrastructure, and growth in battery manufacturing.

Why has US Electric Vehicle Momentum Slowed as Globe Surges?

US electric vehicle momentum has slowed due to expiring subsidies, rising costs, and global competition from faster-moving markets.

✅ End of federal tax credits weakened buyer demand

✅ Tariffs and high interest rates raised EV prices

✅ Europe and China expanded incentives and infrastructure

You could be forgiven for thinking that electric cars might finally be gaining momentum in the United States. Last year, battery-powered vehicle sales topped 1.2 million—more than five times the number sold just four years earlier, amid an early-2024 EV surge in deliveries. Hybrid sales tripled over the same period, and in August, battery cars accounted for 10 percent of all new vehicle sales, a record high according to S&P Global Mobility.

Major automakers, including General Motors, Ford, and Tesla, reported record electric-vehicle deliveries this quarter, a rare bright spot in an industry still contending with high interest rates, inflation, and tariffs, and a sign the age of electric cars is arriving.

Yet analysts warn the apparent boom may be short-lived, noting a market share dip in early 2024 that could foreshadow slower growth. Much of the recent surge was driven by buyers rushing to take advantage of a federal subsidy worth up to $7,500 per vehicle—a credit that expired at the end of September. Without it, automakers expect demand to dip sharply.

"It's going to be a vibrant industry, but it's going to be smaller, way smaller than we thought," Ford CEO Jim Farley said Tuesday. General Motors’ CFO Paul Jacobson echoed that concern: "I expect that EV demand is going to drop off pretty precipitously," he told a conference last month.

Even with those gains, the US—still the world’s second-largest car market—remains a laggard compared with global peers, where global EV adoption has accelerated rapidly. Electric and hybrid vehicles accounted for nearly 30 percent of new sales in the UK last year and approximately one in five across Europe. In China, electric models accounted for almost half of all car sales in 2023 and are expected to become the majority this year, according to the International Energy Agency.

Analysts say policy differences largely explain the gap. Other regions have offered stronger incentives, stricter emissions rules, and more aggressive trade-in programs. President Joe Biden tried to close the gap, tightening emissions standards, offering loans for EV investments, and spending billions on charging networks while expanding the $7,500 credit. His goal was to have half of all US vehicle sales be electric by 2030.

Supporters argue that such measures are crucial to keeping American carmakers competitive with Chinese and European manufacturers. But former President Donald Trump, who recently dismissed climate change as a "con job," has vowed to roll back many of those initiatives, echoing arguments that the EV revolution is overstated by proponents. "We're saying ... you're not going to be forced to make all of those cars," Trump said this summer, while signing a bill to strike down California’s plan to phase out gasoline-only car sales by 2035. "You can make them, but it'll be by the market, judged by the market."

Although EVs have become cheaper, they still cost more than comparable gasoline models, and sales remain behind gas cars in most segments. The average US electric car sold for approximately $57,000 in August, which is roughly 16 percent higher than the overall average, according to Kelley Blue Book.

Chinese EV giants such as BYD have been blocked from the US market by tariffs supported by both Biden and Trump, further limiting price competition. Automakers now face the twin challenges of rising tariffs and disappearing subsidies.

"It would have been difficult enough if all you had to deal with were new tariffs, but with new tariffs and the incentive going away, there are two impacts," said Stephanie Brinley of S&P Global Mobility.

Researchers warn that the policy shift could further reduce EV investment. "It's a big hit to the EV industry—there's no tiptoeing around it," said Katherine Yusko of the American Security Project. "The subsidies were initially a way to level the playing field, and now that they're gone, the US has a lot of ground to make up."

Still, Brinley urged caution before declaring the race lost, even as some argue EVs have hit an inflection point in adoption. "Is [electric] really the right thing?" she asked. "Saying that we're behind assumes that this is the only and best solution, and I think it's a little early to say that."

Related Articles

• USA Electricity 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

UK Wind Power Leadership in 2020 highlights record renewable energy growth, G20-leading wind share, rapid coal phase-out, and rising solar integration, advancing decarbonization targets under the Paris Agreement and momentum ahead of COP26.

Key Points

The UK led the G20 in wind power share in 2020, displacing coal, expanding solar, and cutting power-sector emissions.

✅ G20-leading wind share; second for combined wind and solar

✅ Fastest coal decline among G20 from 2015 to 2020

✅ Emissions risk rising as post-pandemic demand returns

Nearly a quarter of the UK’s electricity came from wind turbines in 2020 – making the country the leader among the G20 for share of power sourced from the renewable energy, a new analysis finds.

The UK also moved away from coal power at a faster rate than any other G20 country from 2015 to 2020, according to the results.

And it ranked second in the G20, behind Germany, for the proportion of electricity sourced from both wind and solar in 2020, after first surpassing coal in 2016.

“It’s crazy how much wind power has grown in the UK and how much it has offset coal, and how it’s starting to eat at gas,” Dave Jones, Ember’s global lead analyst, told The Independent.

But it is important to bear in mind that “we’re only doing a great job by the standards of the rest of the world”, he added, noting that low-carbon generation stalled in 2019 in the UK.

Ember’s Global Electricity Review notes that the world’s power sector emissions were two per cent higher in 2020 than in 2015 – the year that countries agreed to slash their greenhouse gas pollution as part of the Paris Agreement.

Power generated from coal fell by a record amount from 2019 to 2020, the analysis finds. However, this decline was greatly facilitated by lockdowns introduced to stop the spread of Covid-19, as global electricity demand was temporarily stifled before rebounding, the analysts say.

Coal is the most polluting of the fossil fuels. The UK government hopes to convince all countries to stop building new coal-fired power stations at Cop26, a climate conference that is to be held in Glasgow later this year.

UN chief Antonio Guterres has also called for all countries to end their “deadly addiction to coal”.

At a summit held earlier this month, he described ending the use of coal in electricity generation as the “single most important step” to meeting the Paris Agreement’s goal of limiting global warming to well below 2C above pre-industrial levels by 2100.

“There is definitely a concern that, in the pandemic year of 2020, coal hasn’t fallen as fast as it needed to,” said Mr Jones, even as the UK set coal-free power records recently.

“There is concern that, once electricity demand returns, we won’t be seeing that decline in coal anymore.”

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Power Generation News