Tesla's lead in China's red-hot electric vehicle market is shrinking, says rival XPeng

Oxford Battery Energy Storage Project will store surplus renewable power near South-West Oxford and Woodstock, improving grid stability, peak shaving, and reliability, pending IESO approval and Hydro One transmission interconnection in Ontario.

Key Points

A Boralex battery project in South-West Oxford storing surplus power for Woodstock at peak demand pending IESO approval.

✅ 2028 commercial operation target

✅ Connects to Hydro One transmission line

✅ Peak shaving to stabilize grid costs

A Quebec-based renewable energy company is proposing to build a battery energy storage system in Oxford County near Woodstock.

The Oxford battery energy storage project put forward by Boralex Inc., if granted approval, would be ready for commercial operation in 2028. The facility would be in the Township of South-West Oxford, but also would serve Woodstock businesses and residences, supported by provincial disconnect moratoriums for customers, due to the city’s proximity to the site.

Battery storage systems charge when energy sources produce more energy than customers need, and, complementing Ontario’s energy-efficiency programs across the province, discharge during peak demand to provide a reliable, steady supply of energy.

Darren Suarez, Boralex’s vice-president of public affairs and communications in North America, said, “The system we’re talking about is a very large battery that will help at times when the electric grid has too much energy on the system. We’ll be able to charge our batteries, and when there’s a need, we can discharge the batteries to match the needs of the electric grid.”

South-West Oxford is a region Boralex has pinpointed for a battery storage project. “We look at grid needs as a whole, and where there is a need for battery storage, and we’ve identified this location as being a real positive for the grid, to help with its stability, a priority underscored by the province’s nuclear alert investigation and public safety focus,” Suarez said.

Suarez could not provide an estimated cost for the proposed facility but said the project would add about 75 jobs during the construction phase, in a sector where the OPG credit rating remains stable. Once the site is operational, only one or two employees will be necessary to maintain the facility, he said.

Boralex requires approval from the Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO), the corporation that co-ordinates and integrates Ontario’s electricity system operations across the province, for the Oxford battery energy storage project.

Upon approval, the project will connect with an existing Hydro One transmission line located north of the proposed site. “[Hydro One] has a process to review the project and review the location and ensure we are following safety standards and protocols in terms of integrating the project into the grid, with broader policy considerations like Ottawa’s hydro heritage also in view, but they are not directly involved in the development of the project itself,” Suarez said.

The proposal has been presented to South-West Oxford council. South-West Oxford Mayor David Mayberry said, “(Council) is still waiting to see what permits are necessary to be addressed if the proposal moves forward.”

Mayberry said the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry also would be reviewing the proposed project.

Thornton Sand and Gravel, the location of the proposed facility, was viewed positively by Mayberry. “From a positive perspective, they’re not using farmland. There is a plus we’re not using farmland, but there is concern something could leak into the aquifer. These questions need to be answered before it can be to the satisfaction of the community,” Mayberry said.

An open house was held on Sept. 14 to provide information to residents. Suarez said about 50 people showed up and the response was positive. “Many people came out to see what we planned for the project and there was a lot of support for the location because of where it actually is, and how it integrates into the community. It’s considered good use of the land by many of the people that were able to join us on that day,” Suarez said.

The Quebec-based energy company has been operating in Ontario for nearly 15 years and has wind farms in the Niagara and Chatham-Kent regions.

Boralex also is involved in two other battery storage projects in Ontario. The Hagersville project is a 40-minute drive northwest of Hamilton, and the other is in Tilbury, a community in Chatham-Kent. Commercial operation for both sites is planned to begin in 2025.

South-West Oxford and Woodstock will see some financial benefits from the energy storage system, Suarez said.

“It will help to stabilize energy costs. It will contribute to really shaving the most expensive energy on the system off the system. They’re going to take electricity when it’s the least costly, taking advantage of Ontario’s ultra-low overnight pricing options and utilize that least costly energy and displace the most costly energy.”

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Utility Operations News

UK Home Solar Panel Installation drives self-consumption as PV panels, hybrid inverters, and smart meters cut grid demand, enable EV charging, and prepare battery storage, even in cloudy winters, with app-based monitoring and MCS-certified installers.

Key Points

A residential PV setup reducing grid reliance via panels, hybrid inverters, smart meters, and battery-ready design.

✅ Cuts grid use; boosts self-consumption with PV generation

✅ Hybrid inverters enable future battery storage integration

✅ Smart meter and app monitor output, EV charging patterns

In a town north of London, the weather's been cloudy over the winter months. But it didn't stop this homeowner from installing solar panels in December.

On his smart metre, Kumi Thiruchelvam looks satisfied at the "0 watts" showing up under electricity. It's about 10 am, and he's not using any electricity from the grid.

Cost of installation? Between £12,000 and £13,000 (€13,500-€14,500), a fair chunk of savings, even for Thiruchelvam, who lives on a private avenue in Luton.

The investment was common sense for him following the surge in energy prices caused by the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

According to the Office of National Statistics, electricity prices in the UK had increased by 67 per cent in January 2023 compared to January 2022, while pilots show parked EVs can earn from grids in Europe, offering some relief.

Solar power installations doubled in 2022 compared to 2021, according to MCS, the standards organisation in charge of solar installations, a shift aligned with the UK grid's net-zero transition underway today.

"We've had a combination of soaring energy prices around the world, and then also we've increased our electricity consumption in the home through a number of reasons, including electric vehicles and emerging EV-solar integration trends," says Thiruchelvam.

His family owns a big house and no less than three electric vehicles, some of which can now power a home for days during outages, so their electricity consumption is higher than the normal household, about 12,000 kWh per year.

Around two-thirds should now be provided by solar panels, and EV owners can sell electricity back to the grid in some schemes as well, diversifying benefits.

"We originally sought the configuration to be rear, which is where the sun comes up, but we went for the front because it spends more time in the front throughout most of the year than in the rear. Also, there's more shade in the rear with trees," he says.

To get a quote for the installation, Thiruchelvam used Otovo, a Norwegian company which recently launched in the UK.

Using their app, he can monitor the electricity generated by his photovoltaic (PV) installation from his phone. The data comes from the inverters installed in the attic.

Their role is to change the direct current generated by the solar panels into alternating current to power appliances in the house safely.

They also communicate with the grid and monitor the electricity generated, supporting emerging vehicle-to-building charging strategies for demand management.

"We went for two hybrid inverters, allowing me to use a battery in the future or tap stored EV energy for buildings if needed," says Thiruchelvam.

"But because battery technology is still evolving, I chose not to. And also I viewed at that time that we would be consuming everything we'd be generating. So we didn't. But most likely I will upgrade the system as we approach summer with batteries."

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

Chinese EV Makers in Europe target the EU market with electric SUVs, battery swapping, competitive pricing, and subsidies, led by NIO, Xpeng, MG, and BYD, starting in Norway amid Europe's zero-emissions push.

Key Points

Chinese EV makers expanding into EU markets with tech, pricing, and lean retail to gain share.

✅ Early launches in Norway leverage EV incentives

✅ Compete via battery swapping, OTA tech, and price

✅ Mix of importers, online sales, and lean dealerships

China's electric carmakers are darting into Europe, hoping to catch traditional auto giants cold and seize a slice of a market supercharged by the continent's EV transition towards zero emissions.

Nio Inc (NIO.N), among a small group of challengers, launches its ES8 electric SUV in Oslo on Thursday - the first foray outside China for a company that is virtually unheard of in Europe even though it's valued at about $57 billion.

Other brands unfamiliar to many Europeans that have started selling or plan to sell cars on the continent include Aiways, BYD's (002594.SZ) Tang, SAIC's (600104.SS) MG, Dongfeng's VOYAH, and Great Wall's (601633.SS) ORA.

Yet Europe, a crowded, competitive car market dominated by famous brands, has proved elusive for Chinese carmakers in the past. They made strategic slips and also contended with a perception that China, long associated with cheap mass-production, could not compete on quality.

Indeed, Nio Chief Executive William Li told Reuters he foresees a long road to success in a mature market where it is "very difficult to be successful".

Chinese carmakers may need up to a decade to "gain a firm foothold" in Europe, the billionaire entrepreneur said - a forecast echoed by He Xiaopeng, CEO of electric vehicle (EV) maker Xpeng (9868.HK) who told Reuters his company needs 10 years "to lay a good foundation" on the continent.

These new players, many of which have only ever made electric vehicles, believe they have a window of opportunity to finally crack the lucrative market.

While electric car sales in the European Union more than doubled last year and jumped 130% in the first half of this year, even as threats to the EV boom persist, traditional manufacturers are still gradually shifting their large vehicle ranges over to electric and have yet to flood the thirsty market with models.

"The market is not that busy yet, if you compare it with combustion-engine models where each of the major carmakers has a whole range of vehicles," said Alexander Klose, who heads the foreign operations of Chinese electric vehicle maker Aiways.

"That is where we think we have an opportunity," he added on a drive around Munich in a U5, a crossover SUV on sale in Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium and France, where new EV rules are aimed at discouraging purchases of Chinese models.

The U5 starts at 30,000 euros ($35,000) in Germany - below the average new car price and most local EV prices - before factoring in 9,000 euros in EV subsidies, though France's EV incentives have tightened for Chinese models - and comes in just four colours and two trim levels to minimize costs.

'GERMAN PEOPLE BUY GERMAN CARS'
As Chinese carmakers gear up to enter Europe, they are trying out different business models, from relying on importers, low-cost retail options or building up more traditional dealerships.

The new reality that top Western carmakers like BMW (BMWG.DE) and Tesla Inc (TSLA.O) now produce cars in technological powerhouse China, where the EV market is intensely competitive, has likely undermined past perceptions of low quality workmanship - though they can be hard to shake.

Antje Levers, a teacher who lives in western Germany near the Dutch border, and her husband owned a diesel Chevrolet Orlando but wanted a greener option. They bought an Aiways U5 last year after plenty of research to fend off criticism for not buying local, and loves its handling and low running costs.

She said people had told her: "You can't buy a Chinese car, they're plastic and cheap and do not support German jobs." But she feels that is no longer true in a global car industry where you find German auto parts in Chinese cars and vice versa.

"German people buy German cars, so to buy a Chinese car you need to have a little courage," the 47-year-old added. "Sometimes you just have to be open for new things."

NIO LANDS IN NORWAY WITH NOMI
Nio launches its ES8 electric SUV alongside a NIO House - part-showroom, part-cafe and workspace for customers in the capital of Norway, a country that's also the initial base for Xpeng.

Norwegian state support for EVs has put the country at the forefront of the shift to electric. It makes sense as a European entry point because customers are used to electric vehicles so only have to be sold on an unknown Chinese brand, said Christina Bu, secretary general of the Norwegian EV Association.

"If you go to another European country you may struggle to sell both," said Bu, adding that her organisation has talked extensively with a number of Chinese EV makers keen to learn market specifics and consumer culture before launching there.

She is uncertain, though, how consumers will react to Nio's approach of swapping out batteries for customers rather than stopping to charge them, a contrast to other EV battery strategies in the industry, or the carmaker's strategy of leasing rather than selling batteries to customers.

"But where the Chinese are really at the forefront is the technology," she added, referring in particular to Nomi, the digital assistant in the dashboard of Nio's cars.

NEWCOMERS' STRATEGIES DIVERGE
One size does not fit all. While Nio and Xpeng have been hiring staff building up their organizations in Norway, SAIC's MG works through a car importer to sell cars in a handful of European markets.

Aiways is trying an lower-cost approach to selling cars in Europe, though Klose says it varies by market.

In Germany, for instance, the company sells its cars through Euronics, an association of independent electronics retailers, rather than building traditional dealerships.

It aims to sell across the EU by next year and to enter the U.S. market by 2023, said Klose, a former Volvo and Ford executive.

Past failed attempts by Chinese carmakers to conquer Europe are unlikely to hurt Chinese EV makers today, as consumers have grown accustomed to electronics coming from China, he added.

Such failures included Brilliance in 2007, whose vehicle received one out of five stars in a German car crash test, damaging the brand.

"The fact there are more Chinese carmakers entering the market will also help us, as it will make Chinese brands more accepted by consumers," Klose said.

Selling cars to Europeans is a "tough business, especially if your product isn't well known," said Arnie Richters, chairman of Brussels-based industry group Platform for Electromobility.

"But if they bring a lot of innovation they have a lot of opportunity."

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

EV Charging Infrastructure accelerates with federal funding, NEVI corridors, and Level 2/3 DC fast charging to cut range anxiety, support apartment dwellers, and scale to 500,000 public chargers alongside tax credits and state mandates.

Key Points

The network of public and private hardware, software, and policies enabling reliable Level 2/3 EV charging at scale.

✅ $7,500/$4,000 tax credits spur adoption and charger demand

✅ NEVI funding builds 500,000 public, reliable DC fast chargers

✅ Equity focus: apartment, curbside, bidirectional and inductive tech

Speaking in front of a line of the latest electric vehicles (EVs) at this month’s North American International Auto Show, President Joe Biden declared: “The great American road trip is going to be fully electrified.”

Most vehicles on the road are still gas guzzlers, but Washington is betting big on change, with EV charging networks competing to expand as it hopes that major federal investment will help reach a target set by the White House for 50% of new cars to be electric by 2030. But there are roadblocks – specifically when it comes to charging them all. “Range anxiety,” or how far one can travel before needing to charge, is still cited as a major deterrent for potential EV buyers.

The auto industry recently passed the 5% mark of EV market share – a watershed moment, arriving ahead of schedule according to analysts, before rapid growth. New policies at the state and local level could very well spur that growth: the Inflation Reduction Act, which passed this summer, offers tax credits of $4,000 to purchase a used EV and up to $7,500 for certain new ones. In August, California, the nation’s largest state and economy, announced rules that would ban all new gas-powered cars by 2035, as part of broader grid stability efforts in the state. New York plans to follow.

So now, the race is on to provide chargers to power all those new EVs.

The administration’s target of 500,000 public charging units by 2030 is a far cry from the current count of nearly 50,000, according to the Department of Energy’s estimate. And those new chargers will have to be fast – what’s known as Level 2 or 3 charging – and functional in order to create a truly reliable system, even as state power grids face added demands across regions. Today, many are not.

Last week, the White House approved plans for all 50 states, along with Washington DC, and Puerto Rico, to set up chargers along highways, unlocking $1.5bn in federal funding to that end, as US automakers’ charger buildout to complement public funds. The money comes from the landmark infrastructure bill passed last year, which invests $7.5bn for EV charging in total.

But how much of that money is spent is largely going to be determined at the local level, amid control over charging debates among stakeholders. “It’s a difference between policy and practice,” said Drew Lipsher, the chief development officer at Volta, an EV charging provider. “Now that the federal government has these policies, the question becomes, OK, how does this actually get implemented?” The practice, he said, is up to states and municipalities.

As EV demand spikes, a growing number of cities are adopting policies for EV charging construction. In July, the city of Columbus passed an “EV readiness” ordinance, which will require new parking structures to host charging stations proportionate to the number of total parking spots, with at least one that is ADA-accessible. Honolulu and Atlanta have passed similar measures.

One major challenge is creating a distribution model that can meet a diversity of needs.

At the moment, most EV owners charge their cars at home with a built-in unit, which governments can help subsidize. But for apartment dwellers or those living in multi-family homes, that’s less feasible. “When we’re thinking about the largest pieces of the population, that’s where we need to really be focusing our attention. This is a major equity issue,” said Alexia Melendez Martineau, the policy manager at Plug-In America, an EV consumer advocacy group.

Bringing power to people is one such solution. In Hoboken, New Jersey, Volta is working with the city to create a streetside charging network. “The network will be within a five-minute walk of every resident,” said Lipsher. “Hopefully this is a way for us to really import it to cities who believe public EV charging infrastructure on the street is important.” Similarly, in parts of Los Angeles – as in Berlin and London – drivers can get a charge from a street lamp.

And there may be new technologies that could help, exciting experts and EV enthusiasts alike. That could include the roads themselves charging EVs through a magnetizable concrete technology being piloted in Indiana and Detroit. And bidirectional charging, where, similar to solar panels, drivers can put their electricity back into the grid – or perhaps even to another EV, through what’s known as electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE). Nissan approved the technology for their Leaf model this month.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

US Renewable Energy Transition is the shift from fossil fuels to wind, solar, and nuclear, targeting net-zero emissions via grid modernization, battery storage, and new transmission to replace legacy plants and meet rising electrification.

Key Points

The move to decarbonize electricity by scaling wind, solar, and nuclear with storage and transmission upgrades.

✅ Falling LCOE makes wind and solar competitive with gas and coal.

✅ 4-hour lithium-ion storage shifts solar to evening peak demand.

✅ New high-voltage transmission links resource-rich regions to load.

Generating electricity to power homes and businesses is a significant contributor to climate change. In the United States, one quarter of greenhouse gas emissions come from electricity production, according to the Environmental Protection Agency.

Solar panels and wind farms can generate electricity without releasing any greenhouse gas emissions, and recent research suggests wind and solar could meet about 80% of U.S. demand with supportive infrastructure. Nuclear power plants can too, although today’s plants generate long-lasting radioactive waste, which has no permanent storage repository.

But the U.S. electrical sector is still dependent on fossil fuels. In 2021, 61 percent of electricity generation came from burning coal, natural gas, or petroleum. Only 20 percent of the electricity in the U.S. came from renewables, mostly wind energy, hydropower and solar energy, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, and in 2022 renewable electricity surpassed coal nationwide as portfolios shifted. Another 19 percent came from nuclear power.

The contribution from renewables has been increasing steadily since the 1990s, and the rate of increase has accelerated, with renewables projected to reach one-fourth of U.S. generation in the near term. For example, wind power provided only 2.8 billion kilowatt-hours of electricity in 1990, doubling to 5.6 billion in 2000. But from there, it skyrocketed, growing to 94.6 billion in 2010 and 379.8 billion in 2021.

That’s progress, as the U.S. moves toward 30% electricity from wind and solar this decade, but it’s not happening fast enough to eliminate the worst effects of climate change for our descendants.

“We need to eliminate global emissions of greenhouse gases by 2050,” philanthropist and technologist Bill Gates wrote in his 2023 annual letter. “Extreme weather is already causing more suffering, and if we don’t get to net-zero emissions, our grandchildren will grow up in a world that is dramatically worse off.”

And the problem is actually bigger than it looks, even as pathways to zero-emissions electricity by 2035 are being developed.

“We need not just to create as much electricity as we have now, but three times as much,” says Saul Griffith, an entrepreneur who’s sold companies to Google and Autodesk and has written books on mass electrification. To get to zero emissions, all the cars and heating systems and stoves will have to be powered with electricity, said Griffith. Electricity is not necessarily clean, but at least it it can be, unlike gas-powered stoves or gasoline-powered cars.

The technology to generate electricity with wind and solar has existed for decades. So why isn’t the electric grid already 100% powered by renewables? And what will it take to get there?

First of all, renewables have only recently become cost-competitive with fossil fuels for generating electricity. Even then, prices depend on the location, Paul Denholm of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory told CNBC.

In California and Arizona, where there is a lot of sun, solar energy is often the cheapest option, whereas in places like Maine, solar is just on the edge of being the cheapest energy source, Denholm said. In places with lots of wind like North Dakota, wind power is cost-competitive with fossil fuels, but in the Southeast, it’s still a close call.

Then there’s the cost of transitioning the current power generation infrastructure, which was built around burning fossil fuels, and policymakers are weighing ways to meet U.S. decarbonization goals as they plan grid investments.

“You’ve got an existing power plant, it’s paid off. Now you need renewables to be cheaper than running that plant to actually retire an old plant,” Denholm explained. “You need new renewables to be cheaper just in the variable costs, or the operating cost of that power plant.”

There are some places where that is true, but it’s not universally so.

“Primarily, it just takes a long time to turn over the capital stock of a multitrillion-dollar industry,” Denholm said. “We just have a huge amount of legacy equipment out there. And it just takes awhile for that all to be turned over.”

Intermittency and transmission
One of the biggest barriers to a 100% renewable grid is the intermittency of many renewable power sources, the dirty secret of clean energy that planners must manage. The wind doesn’t always blow and the sun doesn’t always shine — and the windiest and sunniest places are not close to all the country’s major population centers.

Wind resources in the United States, according to the the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy.
Wind resources in the United States, according to the the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy.
National Renewable Energy Laboratory, a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy.
The solution is a combination of batteries to store excess power for times when generation is low, and transmission lines to take the power where it is needed.

Long-duration batteries are under development, but Denholm said a lot of progress can be made simply with utility-scale batteries that store energy for a few hours.

“One of the biggest problems right now is shifting a little bit of solar energy, for instance, from say, 11 a.m. and noon to the peak demand at 6 p.m. or 7 p.m. So you really only need a few hours of batteries,” Denholm told CNBC. “You can actually meet that with conventional lithium ion batteries. This is very close to the type of batteries that are being put in cars today. You can go really far with that.”

So far, battery usage has been low because wind and solar are primarily used to buffer the grid when energy sources are low, rather than as a primary source. For the first 20% to 40% of the electricity in a region to come from wind and solar, battery storage is not needed, Denholm said. When renewable penetration starts reaching closer to 50%, then battery storage becomes necessary. And building and deploying all those batteries will take time and money.
 

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News