Shanghai Electric Signs Agreement to Launch PEM Hydrogen Production Technology R&D Center, Empowering Green Hydrogen Development in China

Clean Energy Transition spans hydrogen strategies, offshore wind and undersea cables, decarbonization pledges, and net-zero targets, including green vs blue hydrogen, carbon capture, sustainable aviation fuel, forest conservation, and wetland protection in Canadian policy.

Key Points

A shift to low-carbon systems via hydrogen, renewables, net-zero policies, carbon capture, and conservation.

✅ Hydrogen pathways: green vs blue with carbon capture

✅ Grid expansion: offshore wind and undersea cables in Japan

✅ Policy and corporate moves: net-zero, SAF, forests, wetlands

The Canadian federal government is set to sign a new agreement with Germany to strategize on a “clean-energy transition,” with clean hydrogen in Canada expected to be a key player the Globe and Mail reports.

“Germany is probably the world’s most interesting market for hydrogen right now, and Canada is potentially a very big power in its production,” Sabine Sparwasser, Germany’s ambassador to Canada, said in an interview.

However, some friction is expected as Natural Resources Minister Seamus O’Regan has been endorsing “blue” hydrogen, while Germany has been more interested in “green” hydrogen. The former hydrogen is produced from natural gas or other fossil fuels, while simultaneously “using carbon-capture technology to minimize emissions from the process.” In contrast, “green” hydrogen, is manufactured from non-fossil fuel sources, and cleaning up Canada's electricity is critical to meeting climate pledges.

“How the focus on blue hydrogen will be aligned with Canada’s goal of reaching climate neutrality by 2050 is not spelled out in detail,” says an executive summary of the report by the Berlin-based think tank and consultancy Adelphi. “As a result, the strategy seems to be more of a vision for the future of those provinces with large fossil fuel resources.”

According to an IEA report Canada will need more electricity to hit net-zero, underscoring the strategy questions.

Internationally

Japan is in talks to develop undersea cables that would bring offshore wind energy to Tokyo and the Kansai region, as the country hopes to more than quadrable its wind capacity from 10 gigawatts in 2030 to 45 gigawatts in 2040. The construction of the cables would cost about US$9.2 billion.

In Western Canada, bridging the electricity gap between Alberta and B.C. makes similar climate sense, proponents argue.

Approximately 80 per cent of that offshore power is expected to be built in Hokkaido, Tohoku, and Kyushu regions. The project is part of the country’s pledge to achieve decarbonization by 2050, according to BNN Bloomberg.

Meanwhile, Russia is falling behind in the world’s transition to clean energy.

“What’s the alternative? Russia can’t be an exporter of clean energy, that path isn’t open for us,” says Konstantin Simonov, director of the National Energy Security Fund, a Moscow consultancy whose clients include major oil and gas companies. “We can’t just swap fossil fuel production for clean energy production, because we don’t have any technology of our own.” Ultimately, natural gas will always be cheaper than renewable energy in Russia, Simonov added. This story also from BNN Bloomberg.

Finally, New Zealand’s Tilt Renewables Ltd., an electricity company, has announced it would be acquired by Powering Australian Renewables (PowAR) for NZ$2.94 billion (US$2.10 billion). PowAR is Australia’s largest owner of wind and solar energy, and the deal will give the energy giant access to Tilt’s 20 wind farms. Reuters has the story.

In Canada  

Air Canada has unveiled plans to fight climate change. Specifically, the airlines giant has committed to reducing greenhouse gases (GHG) by 20 per cent from flights by 2030, investing $50 million in sustainable aviation fuel (SAF), and ensuring net-zero emissions by 2050.

In other news, B.C. is facing mounting pressure to abstain from logging “old growth forests” while the government transitions to more sustainable forestry policies. A report titled A New Future for Old Forests called on the provincial government to act within six months to protect such forests in April 2020.

The province's Site C mega dam is billions over budget but will go ahead, the premier said, highlighting the energy sector's complexity.

Last September, the province announced, “it would temporarily defer old growth harvesting in close to 353,000 hectares in nine different areas.” The B.C. government will hold consultations with First Nations and other forestry stakeholders “to determine the next areas where harvesting may be deferred,” according to Forests Minister Katrine Conroy. The Canadian Press has more.

Separately, LNG powered with electricity could be a boon for B.C.'s independent power producers, analysts say.

Finally, Pickering Developments Inc. has come forward saying it will not “alter or remove the wetland” that was meant to house an Amazon facility, according to CBC News.

The announcement comes after CBC News’s previously reported that the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) was pressured to issue a construction permit to Pickering Developments Inc. by Doug Ford’s provincial government. However, on March 12, an official with Amazon Canada told CBC News that the company no longer wished to build a warehouse on the site.

“In light of a recent announcement that a new fulfilment centre will no longer be located on this property, this voluntary undertaking ensures that no work, legally authorized by that permit, will occur,” Pickering Development Inc. said in a statement provided to CBC Toronto.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Climate Change News

Electric Fleet Grid Planning aligns utilities, charging infrastructure, distribution upgrades, and substation capacity to meet megawatt loads from medium- and heavy-duty EV trucks and buses, enabling managed charging, storage, and corridor fast charging.

Key Points

A utility plan to upgrade feeders and substations for EV fleets, coordinating charging, storage, and load management.

✅ Plans distribution, substation, and transformer upgrades

✅ Supports managed charging and on-site storage

✅ Aligns utility investment with fleet adoption timelines

As more electric buses and trucks enter the market, future fleets will require a lot of electricity for charging and will challenge state power grids over time. While some utilities in California and elsewhere are planning for an increase in power demand, many have yet to do so and need to get started.

This issue is critical, because freight trucks emit more than one-quarter of all vehicle emissions. Recent product developments offer growing opportunities to electrify trucks and buses and slash their emissions (see our recent white paper). And just last week, a group of 15 states plus D.C. announced plans to fully electrify truck sales by 2050. Utilities will need to be ready to power electric fleets.

Electric truck fleets need substantial power
Power for trucks and buses is generally more of an issue than for cars because trucks typically have larger batteries and because trucks and buses are often parts of fleets with many vehicles that charge at the same location. For example, a Tesla Model 3 battery stores 54-75 kWh; a Proterra transit bus battery stores 220-660 kWh. In Amsterdam, a 100-bus transit fleet is powered by a set of slow and fast chargers that together have a peak load of 13 MW (megawatts). This is equivalent to the power used by a typical large factory. And they are thinking of expanding the fleet to 250 buses.

California utilities are finding that grid capacity is often adequate in the short term, but that upgrade needs likely will grow in the medium term.
Many other fleets also will need a lot of "juice." For example, a rough estimate of the power needed to serve a fleet of 200 delivery vans at an Amazon fulfillment center is about 4 MW. And for electric 18-wheelers, chargers may need up to 2 MW of power each; a recent proposal calls for charging stations every 100 miles along the U.S. West Coast’s I-5 corridor, highlighting concerns about EVs and the grid as each site targets a peak load of 23.5 MW.

Utilities need distribution planning
These examples show the need for more power at a given site than most utilities can provide without planning and investment. Meeting these needs often will require changes to primary and secondary power distribution systems (feeders that deliver power to distribution transformers and to end customers) and substation upgrades. For large loads, a new substation may be needed. A paper recently released by the California Electric Transportation Coalition estimates that for loads over 5 MW, distribution system and substation upgrades will be needed most of the time. According to the paper, typical utility costs are $1 million to $9 million for substation upgrades, $150,000 to $6 million for primary distribution upgrades, and $5,000 to $100,000 for secondary distribution upgrades. Similarly, Black and Veatch, in a paper on Electric Fleets, also provides some general guidance, shown in the table below, while recognizing that each site is unique.

California policy pushes utilities toward planning
In California, state agencies and a statewide effort called CALSTART have been funding demonstration projects and vehicle and charger purchases for several years to support grid stability as electrification ramps up. The California Air Resources Board voted in June to phase in zero-emission requirements for truck sales, mandating that, beginning in 2024, manufacturers must increase their zero-emission truck sales to 30-50 percent by 2030 and 40-75 percent by 2035. By 2035, more than 300,000 trucks will be zero-emission vehicles.

California utilities operate programs that work with fleet owners to install the necessary infrastructure for electric vehicle fleets. For example, Southern California Edison operates the Charge Ready Transport program for medium- and heavy-duty fleets. Normally, when customers request new or upgraded service from the utility, there are fees associated with the new upgrade. With Charge Ready, the utility generally pays these costs, and it will sometimes pay half the cost of chargers; the customer is responsible for the other half and for charger installation costs. Sites with at least two electric vehicles are eligible, but program managers report that at least five vehicles are often needed for the economics to make sense for the utility.

One way to do this is to develop and implement a phased plan, with some components sized for future planned growth and other components added as needed. Southern California Edison, for example, has 24 commitments so far, and has a five-year goal of 870 sites, with an average of 10 chargers per site. The utility notes that one charger usually can serve several vehicles and that cycling of charging, some storage, and other load management techniques through better grid coordination can reduce capacity needs (a nominal 10 MW load often can be reduced below 5 MW).

Through this program, utility representatives are regularly talking with fleet operators, and they can use these discussions to help identify needed upgrades to the utility grid. For example, California transit agencies are doing the planning to meet a California Air Resources Board mandate for 100 percent electric or fuel cell buses by 2040; utilities are talking with the agencies and their consultants as part of this process. California utilities are finding that grid capacity is often adequate in the short term, but that upgrade needs likely will grow in the medium term (seven to 10 years out). They can manage grid needs with good planning (school buses generally can be charged overnight and don’t need fast chargers), load management techniques and some energy storage to address peak needs.

Customer conversations drive planning elsewhere
We also spoke with a northeastern utility (wishing to be unnamed) that has been talking with customers about many issues, including fleets. It has used these discussions to identify a few areas where grid upgrades might be needed if fleets electrify. It is factoring these findings into a broader grid-planning effort underway that is driven by multiple needs, including fleets. Even within an integrated planning effort, this utility is struggling with the question of when to take action to prepare the electric system for fleet electrification: Should it act on state or federal policy? Should it act when the specific customer request is submitted, or is there something in between? Recognizing that any option has scheduling and cost allocation implications, it notes that there are no easy answers.

Many utilities need to start paying attention
As part of our research, we also talked with several other utilities and found that they have not yet looked at how fleets might relate to grid planning. However, several of these companies are developing plans to look into these issues in the next year. We also talked with a major truck manufacturer, also wishing to remain unnamed, that views grid limitations as a key obstacle to truck electrification. 

Based on these cases, it appears that fleet electrification can have a substantial impact on electric grids and that, while these impacts are small at present, they likely will grow over time. Fleet owners, electric utilities, and utility regulators need to start planning for these impacts now, so that grid improvements can be made steadily as electric fleets grow. Fleet and grid planning should happen in parallel, so that grid upgrades do not happen sooner or later than needed but are in place when needed, including the move toward a much bigger grid as EV adoption accelerates. These grid impacts can be managed and planned for, but the time to begin this planning is now.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

East-West Power Transmission Grid links provinces via hydroelectric interconnects, clean energy exports, and reliable grid infrastructure, requiring federal funding, multibillion-dollar transmission lines, and coordinated planning across Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Ontario, and Newfoundland.

Key Points

A proposed interprovincial grid to share hydro power, improve reliability, and cut emissions with federal funding.

✅ Hydroelectric exports from Manitoba to prairie and eastern provinces

✅ New interconnects and transmission lines require federal funding

✅ Enhances grid reliability and supports coal phase-out

Manitoba's energy minister is recharging the idea of building an east-west power transmission grid and says the federal government needs to help.

Cliff Cullen told the Energy Council of Canada's western conference on Tuesday that Manitoba has "a really clean resource that we're ready to share with our neighbours" as new hydro generation projects, including new turbines come online.

"This is a really important time to have that discussion about the reliability of energy and how we can work together to make that happen," said Cullen, minister of growth, enterprise and trade.

"And, clearly, an important component of that is the transmission side of it. We've been focused on transmission ... north and south, and we haven't had that dialogue about east-west."

Most hydro-producing provinces currently focus on exports to the United States, though transmission constraints can limit incremental deliveries.

Saskatchewan Energy Minister Dustin Duncan said his province, which relies heavily on coal-fired electricity plants, could be interested in getting electricity from Manitoba, even as a Manitoba Hydro warning highlights limits on serving new energy-intensive customers.

"They're big projects. They're multibillion-dollar projects," Duncan said after speaking on a panel with Cullen and Alberta Energy Minister Margaret McCuaig-Boyd.

"Even trying to do the interconnects to the transmission grid, I don't think they're as easy or as maybe low cost as we would just imagine, just hooking up some power lines across the border. It takes much more work than that."

Cullen said there's a lot of work to do on building east-west transmission lines if provinces are going to buy and sell electricity from each other. He suggested that money is a key factor.

"Each province has done their own thing in terms of transmission within their jurisdiction and we have to have that dialogue about how that interconnectivity is going to work. And these things don't happen overnight," he said.

"Hopefully the federal government will be at the table to have a look at that, because it's a fundamental expense, a capital expense, to connect our provinces."

The 2016 federal budget said significant investment in Canada's electricity sector will be needed over the next 20 years to replace aging infrastructure and meet growing demand for electricity, with Manitoba's demand potentially doubling over that period.

The budget allocated $2.5 million over two years to Natural Resources Canada for regional talks and studies to identify the most promising electricity infrastructure projects.

In April, the government told The Canadian Press that Natural Resources Canada has been talking with ministry representatives and electric utilities in the western and Atlantic provinces.

The idea of developing an east-west transmission grid has long been talked about as a way to bring energy reliability to Canadians.

At their annual meeting in 2007, Canada's premiers supported development and enhancement of transmission facilities across the country, although the premiers fell short of a firm commitment to an east-west energy grid.

Manitoba, Ontario and Newfoundland and Labrador are the most vocal proponents of east-west transmission, even as Quebec's electricity ambitions have reopened old wounds in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Manitoba and Newfoundland want the grid because of the potential to develop additional exports of hydro power, while Ontario sees the grid as an answer to its growing power needs.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Power Generation News

American Wind Power Statement on Biden highlights collaboration on renewable energy policy, clean energy jobs, carbon-free power, climate action, and a modern grid to grow the economy while keeping electricity costs low.

Key Points

AWEA commits to work with Biden on renewable policy, clean energy jobs, and a carbon-free U.S. grid.

✅ AWEA cites over 120,000 U.S. wind jobs ready to scale

✅ Supports 100% carbon-free power target by mid-century

✅ Aims to keep electricity costs low with renewable policy

American wind power congratulates President-elect Biden on his victory. "We look forward to collaborating with his administration and Congress, after pledges to scrap offshore wind in recent years, as we work together to shape a cleaner and more prosperous energy future for America, where wind and solar surpass coal in generation across the country.

The President-elect and his team have laid out an ambitious, comprehensive approach to energy policy that recognizes renewable energy's ability to grow America's economy and create a cleaner environment, as market majority for clean energy becomes a realistic prospect, while keeping electricity costs low and combating the threat of climate change as wind power surges across many regions.

The U.S. wind sector and its growing workforce of over 120,000 Americans stand ready to help put that plan into action and support the Biden administration in delivering on the immense promise of renewable energy to add well-paying jobs to the U.S. economy, with quarter-million wind jobs forecast in coming years, and reach the President-elect's 100% target for a carbon-free America by the middle of this century, alongside a 100% clean electricity by 2035 goal that charts the near-term path." - Tom Kiernan, CEO of the American Wind Energy Association.

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

Manitoba ZEV Roadblocks highlight EV charging station gaps, rural infrastructure limits, dealership supply shortages, and ZEV mandate timelines, pushing mode shift to transit, cycling, and walking while hampering zero-emission vehicle adoption across the province.

Key Points

EV charging gaps, rural access limits, and supply constraints slow Manitoba's progress toward ZEV targets.

✅ Sparse Level 3 fast chargers outside Winnipeg

✅ Rural infrastructure limits long-distance confidence

✅ Dealership supply lags; long pre-order wait times

The federal government’s push toward zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs), including forthcoming EV sales regulations, is hitting some roadblocks in Manitoba.

Earlier this year, Ottawa set a sales target to encourage Canadians to choose ZEVs. By 2026, their goal is to have ZEVs make up 20 per cent of new vehicle purchases. By 2035, they want all new vehicles sold to be ZEVs, a target that has sparked 2035 EV mandate debate among industry observers.

READ MORE: Ottawa sets 2026 target for mandating electric vehicle sales

Connie Blixhavn with the Manitoba Electric Vehicle Association (MEVA) doesn’t think Manitoba is on track.

“We’re not, not at all,” she said.

Blixhavn lives in Killarney, Man., and bought an electric vehicle last year. She plans her trips to Brandon and Winkler around the life of her car’s battery, but finds the charging infrastructure to be lacking and unreliable, a challenge echoed by Labrador's lagging infrastructure in Newfoundland and Labrador.

“Brandon is my closest place to get a level three charge, and when they’re not working, it limits where you can go,” she said.

Level three is the fastest type of EV charger, taking about 15-45 minutes to fully charge a vehicle’s batteries.

According to CAA, 68 of the province’s 94 EV charging stations are in Winnipeg. Blixhavn says it limits options for rural people to confidently adopt EVs, even as jurisdictions like the N.W.T. encourage EV adoption through targeted programs.

“I know we’re a big area, but they need to strategically plan where they put these so we all have access,” she said.

ZEVs are often not found on dealership lots – they have to be pre-ordered. One dealership employee told Global News demand far outweighs supply, amid EV shortages and wait times reported nationally, with some customers waiting one to two years for their new vehicle to arrive.

Mel Marginet with the Green Action Centre’s Sustainable Transporation Team is also wary of Manitoba’s ability to meet the 2026 goal, noting that even as experts question Quebec's EV push there are broader challenges. She believes the only way to come close is to change how much Manitobans use personal vehicles altogether.

“If we’re really concerned about the environment, we need to double and triple down on just reducing personal vehicle trips by and large,” she said.

Marginet points to transit, walking and cycling as ways to reduce reliance on driving.

“We depend on personal vehicles a lot in this province, and far more than we should have to,” she said. “My biggest worry is that we’ll take resources away from what we need to build to get people to use personal vehicles less.”

For Blixhavn, the lack of charging stations in her area has caused her to reduce her vehicle use. While she says she’s fine with the extra planning it takes to travel, she believes the lack of infrastructure is preventing Manitobans, especially those in rural areas, from catching up with other provinces, as Atlantic Canada EV interest lags the rest of the country, when it comes to choosing electric vehicles.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News