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

Utility-Controlled EV Charging shapes who builds charging stations as utilities, regulators, and private networks compete over infrastructure, grid upgrades, and pricing, impacting ratepayers, competition, and EV adoption across states seeking cleaner transport.

Key Points

Utility-controlled EV charging is utilities building charging networks affecting rates, competition and grid costs.

✅ Regulated investment may raise rates before broader savings.

✅ Private firms warn monopolies stifle competition and innovation.

✅ Regulators balance access, equity, and grid upgrade needs.

Electric vehicles are widely seen as the automobile industry’s future, but a battle is unfolding in states across America over who should control the charging stations that could gradually replace fuel pumps.

From Exelon Corp. to Southern California Edison, utilities have sought regulatory approval to invest millions of dollars in upgrading their infrastructure as state power grids adapt to increased charging demand, and, in some cases, to own and operate chargers.

The proposals are sparking concerns from consumer advocates about higher electric rates and oil companies about subsidizing rivals. They are also drawing opposition from startups that say the successors to gas stations should be open to private-sector competition, not controlled by monopoly utilities.

That debate is playing out in regulatory commissions throughout the U.S. as states and utilities promote wider adoption of electric vehicles. At stake are charging infrastructure investments expected to total more than $13 billion over the next five years, as an American EV boom accelerates, according to energy consulting firm Wood Mackenzie. That would cover roughly 3.2 million charging outlets.

Calvin Butler Jr., who leads Exelon’s utilities business, said many states have grown more open to the idea of utilities becoming bigger players in charging as electric vehicles have struggled to take off in the U.S., where they make up only around 2% of new car sales.

“When the utilities are engaged, there’s quicker adoption because the infrastructure is there,” he said.

Major auto makers including General Motors Co. and Ford Motor Co. are accelerating production of electric vehicles, and models like Tesla’s Model 3 are shaping utility planning, and a number of states have set ambitious EV goals—most recently California, which aims to ban the sale of new gasoline-powered cars by 2035. But a patchy charging-station network remains a huge impediment to mass EV adoption.

Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden has called for building more than 500,000 new public charging outlets in a decade as part of his plan to combat climate change, amid Biden’s push to electrify the transportation sector. But exactly how that would happen is unclear. The U.S. currently has fewer than 100,000 public outlets, according to the Energy Department. President Trump, who has weakened federal tailpipe emissions targets, hasn’t put forward an electric-vehicle charging plan, though he backed a 2019 transportation bill that would have provided $1 billion in grants to build alternative fueling infrastructure, including for electric vehicles.

Charging access currently varies widely by state, as does utility involvement, with many utilities bullish course on EV charging to support growth, which can range from providing rebates on home chargers to preparing sites for public charging—and even owning and operating the equipment needed to juice up electric vehicles.

As of September, regulators in 24 states had signed off on roughly $2.6 billion of utility investment in transportation electrification, according to Atlas Public Policy, a Washington, D.C., policy firm. More than half of that spending was authorized in California, where electric vehicle adoption is highest.

Nearly a decade ago, California blocked utilities from owning most charging equipment, citing concerns about potentially stifling competition. But the nation’s most populous state reversed course in 2014, seeking to spur electrification.

Regulators across the country have since been wrestling with similar questions, generating a patchwork of rules.

Maryland regulators signed off last year on a pilot program allowing subsidiaries of Exelon and FirstEnergy Corp. to own and operate public charging stations on government property, provided that the drivers who use them cover at least some of the costs.

Months later, the District of Columbia rejected an Exelon subsidiary’s request to own public chargers, saying independent charging companies had it covered.

Some charging firms argue utilities shouldn’t be given monopolies on car charging, though they might need to play a role in connecting rural customers and building stations where they would otherwise be uneconomical.

“Maybe the utility should be the supplier of last resort,” said Cathy Zoi, chief executive of charging network EVgo Services LLC, which operates more than 800 charging stations in 34 states.

Utility charging investments generally are expected to raise customers’ electricity bills, at least initially. California recently approved the largest charging program by a single utility to date: a $436 million initiative by Southern California Edison, an arm of Edison International, as the state also explores grid stability opportunities from EVs. The company said it expects the program to increase the average residential customer’s bill by around 50 cents a month.

But utilities and other advocates of electrification point to studies indicating greater EV adoption could help reduce electricity rates over time, by giving utilities more revenue to help cover system upgrades.

Proponents of having utilities build charging networks also argue that they have the scale to do so more quickly, which would lead to faster EV adoption and environmental improvements such as lower greenhouse gas emissions and cleaner air. While the investments most directly help EV owners, “they accrue immediate benefits for everyone,” said Jill Anderson, a Southern California Edison senior vice president.

Some consumer advocates are wary of approving extensive utility investment in charging, citing the cost to ratepayers.

“It’s like, ‘Pay me now, and maybe someday your rates will be less,’” said Stefanie Brand, who advocates on behalf of ratepayers for the state of New Jersey, where regulators have yet to sign off on any utility proposals to invest in electric vehicle charging. “I don’t think it makes sense to build it hoping that they will come.”

Groups representing oil-and-gas companies, which stand to lose market share as people embrace electric vehicles, also have criticized utility charging proposals.

“These utilities should not be able to use their monopoly power to use all of their customers’ resources to build investments that definitely won’t benefit everybody, and may or may not be economical at this point,” said Derrick Morgan, who leads federal and regulatory affairs at the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers, a trade organization.

Utility executives said their companies have long been used to further government policy objectives deemed to be in the public interest, drawing on lessons from 2021 to guide next steps, such as improving energy efficiency.

“This isn’t just about letting market forces work,” said Mike Calviou, senior vice president for strategy and regulation at National Grid PLC’s U.S. division.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

Texas Battery Storage Investment Boom draws BlackRock, SK, and UBS, leveraging ERCOT price volatility, renewable energy growth, and utility-scale energy storage arbitrage to enhance grid reliability, resilience, and double-digit returns across high-demand nodes.

Key Points

Texas sees a rush into battery storage, using ERCOT price spreads to bolster grid reliability and earn about 20% returns.

✅ Investors exploit price volatility, peak-demand spreads.

✅ Utility-scale storage enhances ERCOT reliability.

✅ Top players: BlackRock, SK E&S, UBS; 700 MW deals.

BlackRock, Korea's SK, Switzerland's UBS and other companies are chasing an investment boom in battery storage plants in Texas, lured by the prospect of earning double-digit returns from the power grid problems plaguing the state, according to project owners, developers and suppliers.

Projects coming online are generating returns of around 20%, compared with single digit returns for solar and wind projects, according to Rhett Bennett, CEO of Black Mountain Energy Storage, one of the top developers in the state.

"Resolving grid issues with utility-scale energy storage is probably the hottest thing out there,” he said.

The rapid expansion of battery storage could help, through efforts like a virtual power plant initiative in Texas, prevent a repeat of the February 2021 ice storm and grid collapse which killed 246 people and left millions of Texans without power for days.

The battery rush also puts the Republican-controlled state at the forefront of President Joe Biden's push to expand renewable energy use.

Power prices in Texas can swing from highs of about $90 per megawatt hour (MWh) on a normal summer day to nearly $3,000 per MWh when demand surges on a day with less wind power, a dynamic tied to wind curtailment on the Texas grid according to a simulation by the federal government's U.S. Energy Information Administration.

That volatility, a product of demand and higher reliance on intermittent wind and solar energy, has fueled a rush to install battery plants, aided by falling battery costs, that store electricity when it is cheap and abundant and sell when supplies tighten and prices soar.

Texas last year accounted for 31% of new U.S. grid-scale energy storage, with much of it pairing storage with solar, according to energy research firm Wood Mackenzie, second only to California which has had a state mandate for battery development for a decade.

And Texas is expected to account for nearly a quarter of the U.S. grid-scale storage market over the next five years, a trajectory consistent with record U.S. solar-plus-storage growth noted by analysts, according to Wood Mackenzie projections shared with Reuters.

Developers and energy traders said locations offering the highest returns -- in strapped areas of the grid -- will become increasingly scarce as more storage comes online and, as diversifying resources for better projects suggests, electricity prices stabilize.

Texas lawmakers this week voted to provide new subsidies for natural gas power plants in a bid to shore up reliability. But the legislation also contains provisions that industry groups said could encourage investment in battery storage by supporting 'unlayering' peak demand approaches.

Amid the battery rush, BlackRock acquired developer Jupiter Power from private equity firm EnCap Investments late last year. Korea's SK E&S acquired Key Capture Energy from Vision Ridge Partners in 2021 and UBS bought five Texas projects from Black Mountain last year for a combined 700 megawatts (MW) of energy storage. None of the sales' prices were disclosed.

SK E&S said its acquisition of Key Capture was part of a strategy to invest in U.S. grid resiliency.

"SK E&S views energy storage solutions in Texas and across the U.S. as a core technology that supports a new energy infrastructure system to ensure American homes and businesses have affordable power," the company said in a statement.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Energy Policy News

Canadian Electric Bus Fleet leads North America as Toronto's TTC deploys 59 battery-electric, zero-emission buses, advancing public transit decarbonization with charging infrastructure, federal funding, lower maintenance, and lifecycle cost savings for a low-carbon urban future.

Key Points

Canada's leading battery-electric transit push, led by Toronto's TTC, scaling zero-emission buses and charging.

✅ Largest battery-electric bus fleet in North America

✅ TTC trials BYD, New Flyer, Proterra for range and reliability

✅ Charging infrastructure, funding, and specs drive 2040 zero-emissions

The largest battery-powered electric bus fleet in North America is Canadian. Toronto's transit system is now running 59 electric buses from three suppliers, and Edmonton's first electric bus is now on the road as well. And Canadian pioneers such as Toronto offer lessons for other transit systems aiming to transition to greener fleets for the low-carbon economy of the future.

Diesel buses are some of the noisier, more polluting vehicles on urban roads. Going electric could have big benefits, even though 18% of Canada's 2019 electricity from fossil fuels remains a factor.

Emissions reductions are the main reason the federal government aims to add 5,000 electric buses to Canada's transit and school fleets by the end of 2024. New funding announced this week as part of the government's fall fiscal update could also give programs to electrify transit systems a boost.

"You are seeing huge movement towards all-electric," said Bem Case, the Toronto Transit Commission's head of vehicle programs. "I think all of the transit agencies are starting to see what we're seeing ... the broader benefits."

While Vancouver has been running electric trolley buses (more than 200, in fact), many cities (including Vancouver) are now switching their diesel buses to battery-electric buses in Metro Vancouver that don't require overhead wires and can run on regular bus routes.

The TTC got approval from its board to buy its first 30 battery-electric buses in November 2017. Its plan is to have a zero-emissions fleet by 2040.

That's a crucial part of Toronto's plan to meet its 2050 greenhouse gas targets, which requires 100 per cent of vehicles to transition to low-carbon energy by then.

But Case said the transition can't happen overnight. 

Finding the right bus
For one thing, just finding the right bus isn't easy.

"There's no bus, by any manufacturer, that's been in service for the entire life of a bus, which is 12 years," Case said.

"And so really, until then, we don't have enough experience, nor does anyone else in the industry, have enough experience to commit to an all-electric fleet immediately."

In fact, Case said, there are only three manufacturers that make suitable long-range buses — the kind needed in a city the size of Toronto.

Having never bought electric buses before, the city had no specifications for what it needed in an electric bus, so it decided to try all three suppliers: Winnipeg-based New Flyer; BYD, which is headquartered in Shenzhen, China, but built the TTC buses at its Newmarket, Ont. facility; and California-based Proterra.

They all had their strengths and weaknesses, based on their backgrounds as a traditional non-electric bus manufacturer, a battery maker and a vehicle technology and design startup, respectively.

"Each bus type has its own potential challenges." Case said all three manufacturers are working to resolve any adoption challenges as quickly as possible.

But the biggest challenge of all, Case said, is getting the infrastructure in place. 

"There's no playbook, really, for implementing charging infrastructure," he said.

Each bus type needed their own chargers, in some cases using different types of current. Each type has been installed in a different garage in partnership with local utility Toronto Hydro.

Buying and installing them represented about $70 million, or about half the cost of acquiring Toronto's first 60 electric buses. The $140 million project was funded by the federal Public Transit Infrastructure Fund.

Case said it takes about three hours to charge a battery that has been fully depleted. To maximize use of the bus, it's typically put on a long route in the morning, covering 200 to 250 kilometres. Then it's partially charged and put on a shorter run in the late afternoon.

"That way we get as much mileage on the buses as we can."

Cost and reliability?
Besides the infrastructure cost of chargers, each electric bus can cost $200,000 to $500,000 more per bus than an average $750,000 diesel bus. 

Case acknowledges that is "significantly" more expensive, but it is offset by fuel savings over time, as electricity costs are cheaper. Because the electric buses have fewer parts than diesel buses, maintenance costs are also about 25 per cent lower and the buses are expected to be more reliable.

As with many new technologies, the cost of electric buses is also falling over time.

Case expects they will eventually get to the point where the total life-cycle cost of an electric and a diesel bus are comparable, and the electric bus may even save money in the long run.

As of this fall, all but one of the 60 new electric buses have been put into service. The last one is expected to hit the road in early December.

Summer testing showed that air conditioning the buses reduced the battery capacity by about 15 per cent. 

But the TTC needs to see how much of the battery capacity is consumed by heating in winter, at least when the temperature is above 5 C. Below that, a diesel-powered heater kicks in.

Once testing is complete, the TTC plans to develop specifications for its electric bus fleet and order 300 more in 2023, for delivery between 2023 and 2025.

Potential benefits
Even with some diesel heating, the TTC estimates electric buses reduce fuel usage by 70 to 80 per cent. If its whole fleet were switched to electric buses, it could save $50 million to $70 million in fuel a year and 150 tonnes of greenhouse gases per bus per year, or 340,000 tonnes for the entire fleet.

Other than greenhouse gases, electric buses also generate fewer emissions of other pollutants. They're also quieter, creating a more comfortable urban environment for pedestrians and cyclists.

But the benefits could potentially go far beyond the local city.

"If the public agencies start electrifying their fleet and their service is very demanding, I think they'll demonstrate to the broader transportation industry that it is possible," Case said.

"And that's where you'll get the real gains for the environment."

Alex Milovanoff, a postdoctoral researcher in the University of Toronto's department of civil engineering, did a U of T EV study that suggested electrified transit has a crucial role to play in the low-carbon economy of the future.

His calculations show that 90 per cent of U.S. passenger vehicles — 300 million — would need to be electric by 2050 to reach targets under the global Paris Agreement to fight climate change.

And that would put a huge strain on resources, including both the mining of metals, such as lithium and cobalt, that are used in electric vehicle batteries and the electrical grid itself.

A better solution, he showed, was combining the transition to electric vehicles with a reduction in the number of private vehicles, and higher usage of transit, cycling and walking.

"Then that becomes a feasible picture," he said.

What's needed to make the transition
But in order to make that happen, governments need to make investments and navigate the 2035 EV mandate debate on timelines, he added.

That includes subsidies for buying electric buses and building charging stations so transit agencies don't need to make fares too high. But it also includes more general improvements to the range and reliability of transit infrastructure.

"Electrifying the bus fleet is only efficient if we have a large public transit fleet and if we have many buses on the road and if people take them," Milovanoff said.

In its fall economic update on Monday, the federal government announced $150 million over three years to speed up the installation of zero-emission vehicle infrastructure.

Josipa Petrunic, CEO of the Canadian Urban Transit Research and Innovation Consortium, a non-profit organization focused on zero-carbon mobility and transportation, said that in the past, similar funding has paid for high-powered charging systems for transit systems in B.C. and Ontario. But that's only a small part of what's needed, she said.

"Infrastructure Canada needs to come to the table with the cash for the buses and the whole rest of the system."

She said funding is needed for:

Feasibility studies to figure out how many and what kinds of buses are needed for different routes in different transit systems.

Targets and incentives to motivate transit systems to make the switch.

Incentives to encourage Canadian procurement to build the industry in Canada.

Technology to collect and share data on the performance of electric vehicles so transit systems can make the best-possible decisions to meet the needs of their riders.

Petrunic said that a positive side-effect of electrifying transit systems is that the infrastructure can support, in addition to buses, electric trucks for moving freight.

"It's not a lot given that we have 15,000 buses out there in the transit fleet," she said.

"But we should be able to get a lot further ahead if we match the city commitments to zero emissions with federal and provincial funding for jobs creating zero-emissions technologies."

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

Alberta Renewable Energy Boom highlights corporate investments, power purchase agreements, wind and solar capacity gains, grid decarbonization, and job growth, adding 2 GW and $3.7B construction since 2019 in an open electricity market.

Key Points

Alberta's PPA-driven wind and solar surge adds 2 GW, cuts grid emissions, creates jobs, and accelerates private builds.

✅ 2 GW added since 2019 via corporate PPAs

✅ Open electricity market enables direct deals

✅ Strong wind and solar resources boost output

Alberta has seen a massive increase in corporate investment in renewable energy since 2019, and capacity from those deals is set to increase output by two gigawatts —  enough to power roughly 1.5 million homes. 

“Our analysis shows $3.7 billion worth of renewables construction by 2023 and 4,500 jobs,” Nagwan Al-Guneid, the director of Business Renewables Centre Canada, says. 

The centre is an initiative of the environmental think tank Pembina Institute and provides education and guidance for companies looking to invest in renewable energy or energy offsets across Canada. Its membership is made up of renewable energy companies.

The addition of two gigawatts is over two times the amount of renewable energy added to the grid between 2010 and 2017, according to the Canadian Energy Regulator. 

We’re tripling our Prairies coverage
The Narwhal’s newly minted Prairies bureau is here to bring you stories on energy and the environment you won’t find anywhere else. Stay tapped in by signing up for a weekly dose of our ad‑free, independent journalism.

“This is driven directly by what we call power purchase agreements,” Al-Guneid says. “We have companies from across the country coming to Alberta.”

So far this year, 191 megawatts of renewable energy will be added through purchase agreements, according to the Business Renewables Centre, as diversified energy sources can make better projects overall.

Alberta’s electricity system is unique in Canada — an open market where companies can ink deals directly with private power producers to sell renewable energy and buy a set amount of electricity produced each year, either for use or for offset credits. The financial security provided by those contracts helps producers build out more renewable projects without market risks. Purchasers get cheap renewable energy or credits to meet internal or external emissions goals. 

It differs from other provinces, many of which rely on large hydro capacity and where there is a monopoly, often government-owned, on power supply. 

In those provinces, investment in renewables largely depends on whether the company with the monopoly is in a buying mood, says Blake Shaffer, an economics professor at the University of Calgary who studies electricity markets. 

That’s not the case in Alberta, where the only real regulatory hurdle is applying to connect a project to the grid.

“Once that’s approved, you can just go ahead and build it, and you can sell it,” Shaffer says.

That sort of flexibility has attracted some big investments, including two deals with Amazon in 2021 to purchase 455 megawatts worth of solar power from Calgary-based Greengate Power. There are also big investments from oil companies looking to offset emissions.

The investments are allowing Alberta to decarbonize its grid, largely with the backing of the private sector. 

Shaffer says Alberta is the “renewables capital in Canada,” a powerhouse in both green and fossil energy by many measures.

“That just shocks people because of course their association with Alberta is nothing about renewables, but oil and gas,” Shaffer says. “But it really is the investment centre for renewables in the entire country right now.”

Alberta has ‘embarrassing’ riches in wind energy and solar power
It’s not just the market that is driving Alberta’s renewables boom. According to Shaffer there are three other key factors: an embarrassment of wind and solar riches, the need to transition away from a traditionally dirty, coal-reliant grid and the current high costs of energy. 

Shaffer says the strong and seemingly non-stop winds coming off the foothills of the Rockies in the southwest of the province mean wind power is increasingly competitive and each turbine produces more energy compared to other areas. The same is true for solar, with an abundance of sunny days.

“Southern Alberta and southern Saskatchewan have the best solar insolation,” he says. “You put a panel in Vancouver, or you put a panel in Medicine Hat, and you’re gonna get about 50 per cent more energy out of that panel in Medicine Hat, and they’re gonna cost you the same.”

The spark that set off the surge in investments wasn’t strictly an open-market mechanism. Under the previous NDP government, the province brought in a program that allowed private producers to compete for government contracts, with some solar facilities contracted below natural gas demonstrating cost advantages.

The government agreed to a certain price and the producers were then allowed to sell their electricity on the open market. If the price dropped below what was guaranteed, the province would pay the difference. If, however, the price was higher, the developers would pay the difference to the government. 

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News

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

Key Points

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News

U.S. 2023 Utility-Scale Capacity Additions highlight surging solar power, expanding battery storage, wind projects, natural gas plants, and new nuclear reactors, boosting grid reliability in Texas and California with record planned installations.

Key Points

Planned grid expansions led by solar and battery storage, with wind, natural gas, and nuclear increasing U.S. capacity.

✅ 29.1 GW solar planned; Texas and California lead installations.

✅ 9.4 GW battery storage to more than double current capacity.

✅ Natural gas, wind, and 2.2 GW nuclear round out additions.

Developers plan to add 54.5 gigawatts (GW) of new utility-scale electric-generating capacity to the U.S. power grid in 2023, according to our Preliminary Monthly Electric Generator Inventory. More than half of this capacity will be solar power (54%), even as coal generation increase has been reported, followed by battery storage (17%).

Solar

U.S. utility-scale solar capacity has been rising rapidly EIA summer outlook since 2010. Despite its upward trend over the past decade 2018 milestone, additions of utility-scale solar capacity declined by 23% in 2022 compared with 2021. This drop in solar capacity additions was the result of supply chain disruptions and other pandemic-related challenges. We expect that some of those delayed 2022 projects will begin operating in 2023, when developers plan to install 29.1 GW of solar power in the United States. If all of this capacity comes online as planned, 2023 will have the most new utility-scale solar capacity added in a single year, more than doubling the current record (13.4 GW in 2021).

In 2023, the most new solar capacity, by far, will be in Texas (7.7 GW) and California (4.2 GW), together accounting for 41% of planned new solar capacity.

Battery storage

U.S. battery storage capacity has grown rapidly January generation jump over the past couple of years. In 2023, U.S. battery capacity will likely more than double. Developers have reported plans to add 9.4 GW of battery storage to the existing 8.8 GW of battery storage capacity.

Battery storage systems are increasingly installed with wind and solar power projects. Wind and solar are intermittent sources of generation; they only produce electricity when the wind is blowing or the sun is shining. Batteries can store excess electricity from wind and solar generators for later use. In 2023, we expect 71% of the new battery storage capacity will be in California and Texas, states with significant solar and wind capacity.

Natural gas

Developers plan to build 7.5 GW of new natural-gas fired capacity record natural gas output in 2023, 83% of which is from combined-cycle plants. The two largest natural gas plants expected to come online in 2023 are the 1,836 megawatt (MW) Guernsey Power Station in Ohio and the 1,214 MW CPV Three Rivers Energy Center in Illinois.

Wind

In 2023, developers plan to add 6.0 GW of utility-scale wind capacity, as renewables poised to eclipse coal in global power generation. Annual U.S. wind capacity additions have begun to slow, following record additions of more than 14 GW in both 2020 and 2021.

The most wind capacity will be added in Texas in 2023, at 2.0 GW. The only offshore wind capacity expected to come online this year is a 130.0 MW offshore windfarm in New York called South Fork Wind.

Nuclear

Two new nuclear reactors at the Vogtle nuclear power plant in Georgia nuclear and net-zero are scheduled to come online in 2023, several years later than originally planned. The reactors, with a combined 2.2 GW of capacity, are the first new nuclear units built in the United States in more than 30 years.

Developers and power plant owners report planned additions to us in our annual and monthly electric generator surveys. In the annual survey, we ask respondents to provide planned online dates for generators coming online in the next five years. The monthly survey tracks the status of generators coming online based on reported in-service dates.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Power Generation News