Deregulation jolts Texas power bills

By Wall Street Journal


Substation Relay Protection Training

Our customized live online or in‑person group training can be delivered to your staff at your location.

  • Live Online
  • 12 hours Instructor-led
  • Group Training Available
Regular Price:
$699
Coupon Price:
$599
Reserve Your Seat Today
Texas had some of the cheapest power rates in the country when it zapped most of the state's electric regulations six years ago, convinced that rollicking competition would drive prices even lower.

This summer, electricity there is some of the nation's priciest.

Power costs are rising in the rest of the U.S., but everything is bigger in Texas: On a hot day in May, wholesale prices rose briefly to more than $4 a kilowatt hour - about 40 times the national average.

"We could end up doubling last year's power prices," says Dan Jones, who monitors the market for the Texas Public Utility Commission to make sure it functions efficiently and is free of manipulation. A Texan shopping for electricity today typically would be quoted a price between 13 and 27 cents a kilowatt hour; the national average is between nine and 10 cents.

Beset by a combination of soaring natural-gas prices for power generators and congested transmission lines that weren't designed to accommodate the new freewheeling market, officials are struggling to figure out what can be done to bring prices back down in a state that consumes more electricity than any other.

"Are my constituents going to be screaming bloody murder in August?" state Rep. Will Hartnett, whose district includes parts of North Dallas, asked at a recent legislative hearing on the electricity market. "I'm worried about what's about to hit us."

Prices in Texas have risen since the industry was freed from regulation, but these recent increases have been quite a shock for America's most audacious experiment in deregulating electric power. Five retail companies that sell electricity to homeowners and small-businesspeople have failed. That has left customers facing unexpectedly high bills when they are quietly and seamlessly switched to other, more-expensive retailers.

Large corporations that buy electricity wholesale from power plants haven't fared any better. A state that once touted its plentiful power sources to energy-intensive industries such as chemical plants and refineries is now seeing "manufacturers look at Georgia and Alabama and see prices that are half what we're paying in Texas," says Tony Bennett, chairman of the Texas Association of Manufacturers.

Still, there is little momentum for big changes. Many Texas officials believe that their system - lots of elbow room and few binding rules - will work out best for consumers in the long run. "The system is working the way it is supposed to work," says state Rep. Phil King, the Republican from Weatherford who is chairman of the House Regulated Industries Committee.

As the nation grapples with the fallout from soaring energy prices, Texas's deregulation roller-coaster offers an example of how a well-intentioned policy can reap unintended consequences. Structuring electricity markets to guarantee both steady supplies and reasonable prices remains one of the biggest challenges for policy makers. Yet deregulation, which has worked with industries as diverse as telecommunications and airlines, hasn't worked as well for electricity.

Some economists argue that power markets pose a special challenge because electricity can't be stored and must be supplied at a moment's notice around the clock, which sometimes gives sellers more leverage than buyers. When California tried to deregulate its electricity market, it stumbled into an energy crisis that bankrupted its biggest utility.

Not long ago, Texas thought it had the answer. When then-Gov. George W. Bush signed the state's deregulation bill in 1999, he assured that "competition in the electric industry will benefit Texans by reducing monthly rates and offering consumers more choices." The law, which took effect in 2002, left few restrictions on what power generators could charge and what consumers could pay.

The utility commission gradually relinquished the authority to set electricity prices in about 75% of the state - those areas not covered by municipal power departments, rural cooperatives or investor-owned companies that were better connected with neighboring states. Competition would govern them.

As part of the plan, utilities couldn't continue to operate as a vertically integrated whole, generating, transmitting and selling power to captive customers. Divisions were spun off or organized into operating units of holding companies.

The specter of having competitors for the first time spurred power-plant owners to modernize. The newest plants are about a third more efficient than the ones they are replacing. What didn't change much is the mix of fuels used to make electricity: Gas still accounts for about half of the state's power generation, compared with about 20% for the U.S. as a whole.

That seemed like a good idea as Texas has plenty of gas and it burns more cleanly than coal. But gas prices are about five times the level they were in 2002, and about twice what they were a year ago. When natural gas rises, the bounce is felt instantly in power prices across the state because wholesale electricity prices are pegged to natural-gas costs. Even power generated from nuclear fission, wind or coal is priced as if it were coming from natural gas because of its dominant position in the Texas marketplace.

Another part of the deregulation plan was encouraging the creation of a slew of retailers that would buy power wholesale from generators and then sell it to businesses and homes. To promote choice, the state intentionally set low requirements, allowing retailers to open up shop with as little $100,000 in capital.

The state soon had nearly 100 retailers, giving Texans more choices than consumers anywhere else in the U.S. - from plans that offered fixed prices to ones that fluctuated with the market. Some retailers tried to lure customers with gimmicks like free golf balls; others offered clean energy from wind turbines.

Bob Zlotnik, co-founder of StarTex Power, had a previous career as a promoter of tractor pulls and rock concerts. He says people came to the business from all walks of life, and not all were prepared. "I'm not sure people know how to assess all the risks" of a deregulated market, says Mr. Zlotnik, whose wife and partner has experience in deregulated power and telecommunications. It's hard for the public to know just how savvy a retailer is.

Things become especially hairy when retailers have to buy electricity on the state's daily spot market - a daily exchange where power is bought and sold. Most retailers try to sign long-term deals with generators to get the power they need. But at times, demand jumps, and retailers need to buy extra power on the spot market.

Larry Kelly, chief operating officer for retailer Texas Power L.P., says that spot-market prices have spiked so much that he raised his prices to between 18 cents and 22 cents a kilowatt hour for electricity, up from about 12 cents last year.

Some retailers report they've had difficulty finding suppliers willing to sign long-term deals to sell them power, raising suspicions that generating companies may be intentionally forcing retailers to get supplies through the expensive daily auction. Generating companies deny this, and Mr. Jones, the utility commission's market monitor, says he's looking into the matter.

Already, high spot-market prices have pushed five electricity retailers, serving about 45,000 customers, into default. More defaults are possible because many retailers are small companies working on thin margins. When retailers go under, customers' lights stay on as their accounts are switched automatically to "providers of last resort" - nearly always with higher rates. Many customers don't find out about it until their next bill.

John Dreese, an aeronautical engineer in Fort Worth, heard his power supplier, National Power Co., had gone bust in May and began shopping for a replacement. Before he could ink a deal, he was automatically switched to TXU Energy, a unit of Energy Future Holdings Corp. of Dallas, formerly TXU Corp. His price jumped 71% overnight, to 18.8 cents a kilowatt hour from 11 cents.

"No way was I going to pay that," says Mr. Dreese. He was able to shop the market and switch to another retailer for 13.3 cents a kilowatt hour.

Mr. Dreese says he lived in California during its energy crisis and has a sense of déjà vu. "I don't think the promise of deregulation can ever be reached," he says. "You just add a lot of middlemen."

Like homeowners unaware of the risks of an adjustable-rate mortgage, some consumers didn't realize how wildly their bills could vary if they chose plans tied to the market. Steve Schwantes, a Round Rock resident who was laid off last winter from his job as a finance manager at Dell Inc., just got his June utility bill and expected it to be similar to his May bill for $189. Instead, it was $488.

"I was completely shocked," he says. His electricity provider raised its prices twice in a single billing cycle, jacking up his cost by 47% to 18.7 cents a kilowatt hour. Hot weather meant he used more electricity to cool his two-story home. He's now closing off part of the house and has found a cheaper plan.

Large customers aren't immune to making bad bets in the deregulated marketplace. Alcoa Inc. got into trouble at its Rockdale aluminum smelter when a nearby power plant it had been relying on began breaking down. The provider, Luminant, a unit of Energy Future Holdings, offered power from other sources but at 16 cents a kilowatt hour instead of the 3.8 cents that Alcoa had been paying. Alcoa opted to take a chance and buy power off the spot market, instead.

It was the wrong move. It sometimes had to pay $2 to $4 a kilowatt hour for electricity. "There are days we've lost millions of dollars," says Alcoa spokesman Kevin Lowery in Pittsburgh. It estimates the toll from lower output and higher costs will top $44 million. "You can't run a business that way," Mr. Lowery says.

The company recently announced that it was cutting 250 of its 900 workers and halving its output in Rockdale.

Luminant says it tried to help Alcoa, but "we told them we couldn't offer a below-market price," says Lisa Singleton, company spokeswoman.

Texas intentionally designed its system to allow for wide price swings. State officials believe that occasional spikes entice companies to build more power plants and transmission lines. Next year, the maximum price generators will be able to seek in the spot market will jump to $3,000 a megawatt hour, or $3 a kilowatt hour, from the current $2,250, or $2.25 per kilowatt hour. Most other deregulated markets in the U.S. have a maximum price of $1,000.

But one of the problems plaguing Texas is that it is still using an electricity grid that was designed to support the old regional power giants, not a dynamic statewide market.

Often, the cheapest power to produce - say, from wind farms in West Texas - can't reach the buyers that might need it most, such as office buildings in Houston. That's because the grid - like a poorly designed freeway - doesn't have enough capacity to move power easily around the state.

Each day, the Electric Reliability Council of Texas, or Ercot - created by the state to operate the grid and the daily power auctions - runs congestion-management software that helps it figure out which plants' electricity to buy. It pays extra money to some plants to run more than they'd proposed, and it pays others to run less.

For reasons that are still not well understood, the mismatch has worsened this summer. The incidence of congestion jumped 270% this May over May 2007. As a result, spot-market prices, at times, have gotten as high as $4,000 a megawatt hour, actually exceeding the price cap of $2,250 a megawatt hour because of the incentive payments.

Mr. Jones, the market monitor, says Ercot has tweaked its software to do a better job holding down prices.

Some power companies have found ways to make a bundle off congestion.

Suez Energy Marketing NA, a division of Paris-based Suez SA, owns a tiny 70-megawatt plant near Houston. On days of high demand, Suez says it offers 60 megawatts at $170 a megawatt hour, a price low enough to guarantee Ercot will ask it to run. Then it offers the final 10 megawatts at the maximum price allowed, $2,250 a megawatt hour.

In Texas's deregulated market, that means if Suez can sell more than 60 megawatts, it can charge the $2,250 rate not just for the last 10 megawatts, but for all the power from the plant.

At that rate, Suez collects $157,500 an hour to run the plant, versus the $12,000 an hour it would get if it priced everything at $170 a megawatt hour.

John Henderson, senior vice president of generation for Suez, says the plant can make a decent return if it garners that $2,250 price at least 15 hours a year. "In this business," explains Mr. Henderson, "you have feast years and you have famine years." He acknowledges that 2008 is shaping up to be a feast year.

The practice is reminiscent of one that played a role in the meltdown of California's electricity market earlier this decade. Afterwards, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission prohibited "hockey-stick bidding," named because a graph of the bid structure makes it look like a hockey stick standing on its blade. The deregulated Texas market, because it has no major connection to other states' grids, is not subject to FERC rules.

Suez spokesman Rob Minter says his firm doesn't practice hockey-stick bidding but uses a rational strategy to operate the plant profitably under the law.

Texas plans to make improvements to its electricity market which officials say will help ease the recent transmission congestion and, hopefully, bring prices down. Early next year, Ercot plans to roll out a new $325 million computer system that will change the way it handles congestion. California has been working on a similar system for seven years and is still not done.

The grid operator also will add a new energy auction for power intended to be delivered the next day instead of on the current day like the spot market, something it hopes will bring more orderliness to the market.

State officials say Texas has gone too far to turn back now. "I don't think we can put the toothpaste back in the tube," says Mr. King, the state representative. "All we can do is go forward."

Related News

Biden calls for 100 percent clean electricity by 2035. Here’s how far we have to go.

Biden Clean Energy Plan 2035 accelerates carbon-free electricity with renewables, nuclear, hydropower, and biomass, invests $2T in EVs, grid and energy efficiency, and tightens fuel economy standards beyond the Clean Power Plan.

 

Key Points

A $2T U.S. climate plan for carbon-free power by 2035, boosting renewables, nuclear, EVs, efficiency, and grid upgrades.

✅ Targets a zero-carbon electric grid nationwide by 2035

✅ Includes renewables, nuclear, hydropower, and biomass in standard

✅ Funds EVs, grid modernization, weatherization, and fuel economy rules

 

This month the Democratic presumptive presidential nominee, Joe Biden, outlined an ambitious plan, including Biden’s solar plan to expand clean energy, for tackling climate change that shows how far the party has shifted on the issue since it controlled the White House.

President Barack Obama’s Clean Power Plan had called for the electricity sector to cut its carbon pollution 32 percent by 2030, and did not lay out a trajectory for phasing out oil, coal or natural gas production.

This year, Democratic 2020 hopefuls such as Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) went much further, suggesting the United States should derive all of its electricity from renewable sources by 2030, moving to 100% renewables as part of a $16.3 trillion plan to wean the nation away from fossil fuels. Many other congressional Democrats have embraced the Green New Deal — the nonbinding resolution calling for a carbon-free power sector by 2030 and more energy efficient buildings and vehicles, along with a massive investment in electric vehicles and high-speed rail.

Last year, 38 percent of U.S. electricity generated came from clean sources, according to a Washington Post analysis of data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration, and in April renewables hit a record 28% nationwide.

Biden’s new plan, which carries a price tag of $2 trillion, would eliminate carbon emissions from the electric sector by 2035, impose stricter gas mileage standards, fund investments to weatherize millions of homes and commercial buildings, and upgrade the nation’s transportation system. To reach its 2035 carbon-free electricity goal, the campaign includes wind, solar and several forms of energy, acknowledging why the grid isn’t yet 100% renewable while balancing reliability, that are not always counted in state renewable portfolio standards, such as nuclear, hydropower and biomass.

“A great appeal of the Biden proposal is that it is much closer to targeting carbon directly, which is the ultimate enemy, and plays fewer favorites with particular technologies,” said Michael Greenstone, who directs the University of Chicago’s Energy Policy Institute. “This will reduce the costs to consumers and give more carbon bang for the buck.”

But some environmentalists, such as Friends of the Earth President Erich Pica, question the idea of including more controversial carbon-free technologies. “There is no role for nuclear in a least-cost, low carbon world. Including these dinosaurs in a clean energy standard is going to incentivize industry efforts to keep aging, dangerous facilities online,” Pica said in an email.

Hydropower, which relies on a system of moving water that constantly recharges, is defined as renewable by the Environmental Protection Agency. Biomass is often considered as carbon neutral because even though it releases carbon dioxide when it is burned, the plants capture nearly the same amount of CO2 while growing.


Both forms of energy have come under fire for their environmental impacts, however. Damming streams and rivers can destroy fish habitat and make it more difficult for them to spawn, and it also seems unlikely that hydropower will expand its current 6 percent share of the nation’s electrical grid.

Many experts argue that classifying biomass energy as carbon neutral provides an incentive to cut down trees that would otherwise remain standing and sequester carbon. “If burning this wood were good for the climate, then we should not recycle paper, we should burn it,” noted Tim Searchinger, a research scholar at the Princeton School of Public and International Affairs.

Illinois lead the nation in the amount of electricity generated from nuclear power

More than half of the country — 30 states, Washington, and three territories — have adopted a renewable portfolio standard (RPS), according to the National Conference of State Legislatures, and seven states and one territory have set renewable energy goals. While 14 states, along with the District, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands, have established requirements of 50 percent or more carbon-free electricity, nearly as many have set theirs at 15 percent or less.

Maine Gov. Janet Mills (D), who has called for 100% renewable electricity in the state, has pushed clean electricity aggressively since taking office in 2019, lifting a wind energy moratorium imposed by her predecessor and signing bills aimed at expanding the state’s carbon-free energy sources. Biomass accounts for a quarter of the state’s electricity, more than any other state.

New York has one of the country’s most ambitious climate targets, which it scaled up last year. It aims to obtain 70 percent of its power from renewable sources within a decade, a period when renewables surpassed coal in U.S. generation, and eliminate carbon altogether by 2040, even as the state is in the process of shutting down a major nuclear plant near New York City, Indian Point, which is slated to cease operating on April 30, 2021.

... while other states are weakening theirs

Last year, Ohio weakened its renewable energy standard from a target of 12.5 percent in 2027 to 8.5 percent by 2026, even as renewables topped coal nationwide for the first time in over a century, without setting any future goals, and jettisoned its energy efficiency standard. West Virginia — which established modest renewable requirements in 2009 — repealed them altogether in 2015, the year they were set to take effect.

 

Related News

View more

Duke Energy Florida's smart-thinking grid improves response, power restoration for customers during Hurricane Ian

Self-healing grid technology automatically reroutes power to reduce outages, speed restoration, and boost reliability during storms like Hurricane Ian in Florida, leveraging smart grid sensors, automation, and grid hardening to support Duke Energy customers.

 

Key Points

Automated smart grid systems that detect faults and reroute power to minimize outages and accelerate restoration.

✅ Cuts outage duration via automated fault isolation

✅ Reroutes electricity with sensors and distribution automation

✅ Supports storm resilience and faster field crew restoration

 

As Hurricane Ian made its way across Florida, where restoring power in Florida can take weeks in hard-hit areas, Duke Energy's grid improvements were already on the job helping to combat power outages from the storm.

Smart, self-healing technology, similar to smart grid improvements elsewhere, helped to automatically restore more than 160,000 customer outages and saved nearly 3.3 million hours (nearly 200 million minutes) of total lost outage time.

"Hurricane Ian is a strong reminder of the importance of grid hardening and storm preparedness to help keep the lights on for our customers," said Melissa Seixas, Duke Energy Florida state president. "Self-healing technology is just one of many grid improvements that Duke Energy is making to avoid outages, restore service faster and increase reliability for our customers."

Much like the GPS in your car can identify an accident ahead and reroute you around the incident to keep you on your way, self-healing technology is like a GPS for the grid. The technology can quickly identify power outages and alternate energy pathways to restore service faster for customers when an outage occurs.

Additionally, self-healing technology provides a smart tool to assist crews in the field with power restoration after a major storm like Ian, helping reduce outage impacts and freeing up resources to help restore power in other locations.

Three days after Hurricane Ian exited the state, Duke Energy Florida wrapped up restoration of approximately 1 million customers. This progress enabled the company to deploy more than 550 Duke Energy workers from throughout Florida, as well as contractors from across the country, to help restore power for Lee County Electric Cooperative customers.

Crews worked in Cape Coral and Pine Island, one of the hardest-hit areas in the storm's path, as Canadian power crews have in past storms, and completed power restoration for the majority of customers on Pine Island within approximately one week after arriving to the island.

Prior to Ian in 2022, smart, self-healing technology had helped avoid nearly 250,000 extended customer outages in Florida, similar to Hydro One storm recovery efforts, saving around 285,000 hours (17.1 million minutes) of total lost outage time.

Duke Energy currently serves around 59% of customers in Florida with self-healing capabilities on its main power distribution lines, with a goal of serving around 80% over the next few years.

 

Related News

View more

New energy projects seek to lower electricity costs in Southeast Alaska

Southeast Alaska Energy Projects advance hydroelectric, biomass, and heat pumps, displacing diesel via grants. Inside Passage Electric Cooperative and Alaska Energy Authority support Kake, Hoonah, Ketchikan with wood pellets, feasibility studies, and rate relief.

 

Key Points

Programs using hydro, biomass, and heat pumps to cut diesel use and lower electricity costs in Southeast Alaska.

✅ Hydroelectric at Gunnuk Creek to replace diesel in Kake

✅ Biomass and wood pellets displacing fuel oil in facilities

✅ Free feasibility studies; heat pumps where economical

 

New projects are under development throughout the region to help reduce energy costs for Southeast Alaska residents. A panel presented some of those during last week’s Southeast Conference annual fall meeting in Ketchikan.

Jodi Mitchell is with Inside Passage Electric Cooperative, which is working on the Gunnuk Creek hydroelectric project for Kake. IPEC is a non-profit, she said, with the goal of reducing electric rates for its members.

The Gunnuk Creek project will be built at an existing dam.

“The benefits for the project will be, of course, renewable energy for Kake. And we estimate it will save about 6.2 million gallons over its 50-year life,” she said. “Although, as you heard earlier, these hydro projects last forever.”

The gallons saved are of diesel fuel, which currently is used to power generators for electricity, though in places with limited options some have even turned to new coal plants to keep the lights on.

IPEC operates other hydro projects in Klukwan and Hoonah. Mitchell said they’re looking into future projects, one near Angoon and another that would add capacity to the existing Hoonah project, even as an independent power project in British Columbia is in limbo.

Mitchell said they fund much of their work through grants, which helps keep electric rates at a reasonable level.

Devany Plentovich with the Alaska Energy Authority talked about biomass projects in the state. She said the goal is to increase wood energy use in Alaska, even as some advocates call for a reduction in biomass electricity in other regions.

“We offer any community, any entity, a free feasibility study to see if they have a potential heating system in their community,” she said. “We do advocate for wood heating, but we are trying to get a community to pick the best heating technology for their situation, including options that use more electricity for heat when appropriate. So in a lot of situations, our consultants will give you the economics on a wood heating system but they’ll also recommend maybe you should look at heat pumps or look at waste energy.”

Plentovich said they recently did a study for Ketchikan’s Holy Name Church and School. The result was a recommendation for a heat pump rather than wood.

But, she said, wood energy is on the rise, and utilities elsewhere are increasing biomass for electricity as well. There are more than 50 systems in the state displacing more than 500,000 gallons of fuel oil annually. Those include systems on Prince of Wales Island and in Ketchikan.

Ketchikan recently experienced a supply issue, though. A local wood-pellet manufacturer closed, which is a problem for the airport and the public library, among other facilities that use biomass heaters.

Karen Petersen is the biomass outreach coordinator for Southeast Conference. She said this opens up a great opportunity for someone.

“Devany and I are working on trying to find a supplier who wants to go into the pellet business,” she said. “Probably importing initially, and then converting over to some form of manufacturing once the demand is stabilized.”

So, Petersen said, if anyone is interested in this entrepreneurial opportunity, contact her through Southeast Conference for more information.

 

Related News

View more

USAID Delivers Mobile Gas Turbine Power Plant to Ukraine

USAID GE Mobile Power Plant Ukraine supplies 28MW of emergency power and distributed generation to bolster energy security, grid resilience, and critical infrastructure reliability across cities and regions amid ongoing attacks.

 

Key Points

A 28MW GE gas turbine from USAID providing mobile, distributed power to strengthen Ukraine's grid resilience.

✅ 28MW GE gas turbine; power for 100,000 homes

✅ Mobile deployment to cities and regions as needed

✅ Supports hospitals, schools, and critical infrastructure

 

Deputy U.S. Administrator Isobel Coleman announced during her visit to Kyiv that the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) has provided the Government of Ukraine with a mobile gas turbine power plant purchased from General Electric (GE), as discussions of a possible agreement on power plant attacks continue among stakeholders.

The mobile power plant was manufactured in the United States by GE’s Gas Power business and has a total output capacity of approximately 28MW, which is enough to provide the equivalent electricity to at least 100,000 homes. This will help Ukraine increase the supply of electricity to homes, hospitals, schools, critical infrastructure providers, and other institutions, as the country has even resumed electricity exports in recent months. The mobile power plant can be operated in different cities or regions depending on need, strengthening Ukraine’s energy security amid the Russian Federation’s continuing strikes against critical infrastructure.   

Since the February 2022 full-scale invasion of Ukraine, and particularly since October 2022, the Russian Federation has deliberately targeted critical civilian heating, power, and gas infrastructure in an effort to weaponize the winter, raising nuclear risks to grid stability noted by international monitors. Ukraine has demonstrated tremendous resilience in the wake of these attacks, with utility workers routinely risking their lives to repair the damage, often within hours of air strikes, even as Russia builds power lines to reactivate the Zaporizhzhia plant to influence the energy situation.

The collaboration between USAID and GE reflects the U.S. government’s emphasis on engaging American private sector expertise and procuring proven and reliable equipment to meet Ukraine’s needs. Since the start of Putin’s full-scale war against Ukraine, USAID has both directly procured equipment for Ukraine from American companies and engaged the private sector in partnerships to meet Ukraine’s urgent wartime needs, with U.S. policy debates such as a proposal on Ukraine’s nuclear plants drawing scrutiny.

This mobile power plant is the latest example of USAID assistance to Ukraine’s energy sector since the start of the Russian Federation’s full-scale invasion, during which Ukraine has resumed electricity exports as conditions improved. USAID has already delivered more than 1,700 generators to 22 oblasts across Ukraine, with many more on the way. These generators ensure electricity and heating for schools, hospitals, accommodation centers for internally-displaced persons, district heating companies, and water systems if and when power is knocked out by the Russian Federation’s relentless, systematic and cruel attacks against critical civil infrastructure. USAID has invested $55 million in Ukraine’s heating infrastructure to help the Ukrainian people get through winter. This support will benefit up to seven million Ukrainians by supporting repairs and maintenance of pipes and other equipment necessary to deliver heating to homes, hospitals, schools, and businesses across Ukraine. USAID’s assistance builds on over two decades of support to Ukraine to strengthen the country’s energy security, complementing growth in wind power that is harder to destroy.

 

Related News

View more

Californians Learning That Solar Panels Don't Work in Blackouts

Rooftop Solar Battery Backup helps Californians keep lights on during PG&E blackouts, combining home energy storage with grid-tied systems for wildfire prevention, outage resilience, and backup power when solar panels cannot supply nighttime demand.

 

Key Points

A home battery paired with rooftop solar, providing backup power and blackout resilience when the grid is down.

✅ Works when grid is down; panels alone stop for safety.

✅ Requires home battery storage; market adoption is growing.

✅ Supports wildfire mitigation and PG&E outage preparedness.

 

Californians have embraced rooftop solar panels more than anyone in the U.S., but amid California's solar boom many are learning the hard way the systems won’t keep the lights on during blackouts.

That’s because most panels are designed to supply power to the grid -- not directly to houses, though emerging peer-to-peer energy models may change how neighbors share power in coming years. During the heat of the day, solar systems can crank out more juice than a home can handle, a challenge also seen in excess solar risks in Australia today. Conversely, they don’t produce power at all at night. So systems are tied into the grid, and the vast majority aren’t working this week as PG&E Corp. cuts power to much of Northern California to prevent wildfires, even as wildfire smoke can dampen solar output during such events.

The only way for most solar panels to work during a blackout is pairing them with solar batteries that store excess energy. That market is just starting to take off. Sunrun Inc., the largest U.S. rooftop solar company, said some of its customers are making it through the blackouts with batteries, but it’s a tiny group -- countable in the hundreds.

“It’s the perfect combination for getting through these shutdowns,” Sunrun Chairman Ed Fenster said in an interview. He expects battery sales to boom in the wake of the outages, as the state has at times reached a near-100% renewables mark that heightens the need for storage.

And no, trying to run appliances off the power in a Tesla Inc. electric car won’t work, at least without special equipment, and widespread U.S. power-outage risks are a reminder to plan for home backup.

 

Related News

View more

N.S. joins Western Climate Initiative for tech support for emissions plan

Nova Scotia Cap-and-Trade Program joins Western Climate Initiative to leverage emissions trading IT systems, track allowances, and manage compliance, while setting in-province caps, carbon pricing signals, and third-party verified reporting for industrial and fuel suppliers.

 

Key Points

A provincial emissions trading system using WCI services to cap GHGs, track allowances, and enforce verified compliance.

✅ Uses WCI IT system to manage allowances and registry

✅ Initial trading limited to in-province participants

✅ Third-party verification and annual reporting deadlines

 

Nova Scotia is yet to set targets for its new cap and trade regime to reduce greenhouse gases, but the province announced Monday that it has joined the Western Climate Initiative Inc. -- a non-profit corporation formed to provide administrative and technical services to states and provinces with emissions trading programs.

Environment Minister Iain Rankin said joining the initiative would allow the province to use its IT system to manage and track its new cap and trade program.

Rankin said the province can join without trading greenhouse gas emission allowances with other jurisdictions -- California, Quebec, and Ontario are currently linked through the program, with Hydro-Québec's U.S. sales highlighting cross-border dynamics. Nova Scotia currently has no plans to trade outside the province as it works on emissions caps Rankin said will be ready sometime in June.

#google#

Nova Scotia is yet to set targets for its new cap and trade regime to reduce greenhouse gases, but the province announced Monday that it has joined the Western Climate Initiative Inc. -- a non-profit corporation formed to provide administrative and technical services to states and provinces with emissions trading programs.

Environment Minister Iain Rankin said joining the initiative would allow the province to use its IT system to manage and track its new cap and trade program.

Rankin said the province can join without trading greenhouse gas emission allowances with other jurisdictions -- California, Quebec, and Ontario are currently linked through the program. Nova Scotia currently has no plans to trade outside the province as it works on emissions caps Rankin said will be ready sometime in June.

"By keeping our system internal it ensures that our greenhouse gas reductions are happening within our province," said Rankin. "But we do have that opportunity (to join) and if there are new entrants or we need more access to credits then that may shift our strategy."

The use of the system will cost Nova Scotia about US$314,000 for 2018-19, with an annual cost in subsequent years of about US$228,000 or more, if the province requests modifications.

"If we were to do something like that internally we would have to build a full database and hire more people, so this was an obvious choice for us," said Rankin.

Nova Scotia has already met the national reduction target of 30 per cent below 2005 levels and says it's on track to have 40 per cent of electricity generation from renewables by 2020, underscoring how cleaning up Canada's electricity supports climate pledges.

Stephen Thomas, energy campaign coordinator for the Ecology Action Centre, called the province's move an "important small step," stressing the importance of using the same administrative rules as the other jurisdictions involved.

But Thomas said Nova Scotia should go further and trade emissions with California, Quebec, and Ontario, and also put a price on carbon by auctioning credits as they do.

Thomas said Nova Scotia's system stands to be volatile because of the smaller number of participants -- about 20 including Nova Scotia Power, Northern Pulp, Lafarge, and large oil and gasoline companies such as ExxonMobil, Imperial and Irving.

"It's very likely to favour Nova Scotia Power as the largest single emitter with the most credits to sell here, and that would change if we had a linked system, at a time when Canada will need more electricity to hit net-zero according to the IEA," Thomas said.

He said it's important to have a linked system and a regional approach in Atlantic Canada, which has more emissions per person and more emissions per GDP than places like Ontario, Quebec and California, and where policies like Newfoundland's rate reduction plan can influence electricity strategy.

"Reducing emissions, because we are so emissions-intensive here, is a little bit cheaper," said Thomas. "So it's possible that Ontario, Quebec and California could pay Nova Scotia to reduce its emissions."

Under its program, Nova Scotia requires industrial facilities generating 50,000 tonnes or more of greenhouse gas emissions per year to report emissions.

Regulations also cover petroleum product suppliers that import or produce 200 litres of fuel or more per year for consumption and natural gas distributors whose products produce at least 10,000 tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions a year.

Companies were to have reported to the Environment Department by May 1 but Rankin said the deadline has been pushed back to June 1, a deadline that was to be followed in subsequent years in any event. Reports must be verified by a third party by Sept. 1 every year.

The Liberal government passed enabling legislation for cap and trade last fall.

As for the upcoming emissions caps, Rankin isn't tipping the province's hand yet, even as B.C.'s 2050 targets face a shortfall in some forecasts.

"Those caps will recognize the investments that have already been made and therefore will be the most cost-effective program that we can put together to meet the federal requirement," he said.

 

Related News

View more

Sign Up for Electricity Forum’s Newsletter

Stay informed with our FREE Newsletter — get the latest news, breakthrough technologies, and expert insights, delivered straight to your inbox.

Electricity Today T&D Magazine Subscribe for FREE

Stay informed with the latest T&D policies and technologies.
  • Timely insights from industry experts
  • Practical solutions T&D engineers
  • Free access to every issue

Download the 2025 Electrical Training Catalog

Explore 50+ live, expert-led electrical training courses –

  • Interactive
  • Flexible
  • CEU-cerified