Harbour Air's electric aircraft a high-flying example of research investment

Canada EV Incentives drive adoption toward the 2035 zero-emission target, with rebates, federal and provincial programs boosting affordability amid concerns over charging infrastructure, range anxiety, and battery life, according to a BNN Bloomberg-Leger survey.

Key Points

Canada EV incentives are rebates and tax credits reducing EV costs to accelerate zero-emission vehicle adoption nationwide.

✅ Federal and provincial rebates reduce EV purchase prices

✅ Incentives offset range, battery, and charging concerns

✅ Larger incentives correlate with higher adoption rates

If the federal government wants to meet its ambitious EV goals of having all cars and passenger trucks sold in Canada be zero emissions by 2035, it’s going to have to do something about the cost of these vehicles.

A new survey from BNN Bloomberg and RATESDOTCA has found that cost is the number one reason stopping Canadians from buying an electric car.

The survey, which was conducted by Leger Marketing earlier this month, asked 1,511 Canadians if they were planning to purchase a new electric vehicle in the near future. It found that just over one in four, or 26 per cent of Canadians, are planning to do so, with Atlantic Canada lagging other regions. On the other hand, 19 per cent of Canadians are planning to buy a gas/diesel/hybrid card for their next purchase. 

Those who aren’t planning on buying an EV were asked what the biggest reason for their decision was. By far, it was the price of these vehicles: 31 per cent of this group cited cost as the main reason for not electrifying their ride. Another 59 per cent of respondents cited it as a concern, but not the main one. Other reasons for not wanting to buy an electric vehicle included lack of infrastructure (18 per cent), range concerns (16 per cent), and battery life and replacement (13 per cent), and some report EV shortages and wait times too.

What’s interesting is that it’s clear that government incentives for EVs are the most powerful tool right now to drive adoption, though some argue subsidies are a bad idea for Canada. When asked if further government incentives would convince them to buy an electric vehicle, 78 per cent of those surveyed said yes.

That’s right. If more governments increased the incentives offered for buying electric vehicles, reaching the goal of only selling zero emission vehicles in Canada by 2035 would no longer be a pipe dream, despite 2035 mandate skepticism from some.

At the moment, only Quebec and B.C. offer government incentives to buy an electric vehicle, even as B.C. charging bottlenecks are predicted. The federal government offers up to a $5,000 incentive, with restrictions including a limit on the total price of the vehicle, and has signaled EV sales regulations are forthcoming. Ontario previously offered a rebate of up to $14,000, however, the popular program was cancelled when the Progress Conservative government was elected in 2018.

The cancellation led to a plunge in new electric vehicle sales in Ontario, falling more than 55 per cent in the first six months of 2019 when compared to the same time period in the previous year, according to Electric Mobility Canada.

It’s no surprise that the larger the incentive, the more Canadians will be swayed to buy an electric car. Perhaps what’s surprising is that the incentive doesn’t even have to be as large as the previous Ontario rebate was. The survey found that seven per cent of Canadians would buy an electric vehicle if they got an incentive ranging anywhere from $5,001-$7,250. A full 35 per cent said a $12,500 or higher incentive would convince them.

The majority of Canadians surveyed said they use their vehicles for leisure or commuting to work. Leisure uses include running errands and seeing friends and family, of which 43 per cent of respondents said was the primary way they used their vehicle. Meanwhile, 36 per cent said they primarily used their car to commute to work.

The survey also found that incentives were more effective at convincing younger people to buy an electric vehicle. Eighty-three per cent of those under the age of 55 could be swayed by new incentives. But for those over 55, only 66 per cent said they would change their mind. 

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

Rhode Island 100% Renewable Electricity by 2030 outlines pathways via offshore wind, retail solar, RECs, and policy reforms, balancing decarbonization, grid reliability, economics, and equity to close a 4,600 GWh supply gap affordably.

Key Points

A statewide plan to meet all electricity demand with renewables by 2030 via offshore wind, solar, and REC policies.

✅ Up to 600 MW offshore wind could add 2,700 GWh annually

✅ Retail solar programs may supply around 1,500 GWh per year

✅ Amend RES to retain RECs and align supply with real-time demand

A year ago, Executive Order 20-01 cemented in a place Rhode Island’s goal to meet 100% of the state’s electricity demand with renewable energy by 2030, aligning with the road to 100% renewables seen across states. The Rhode Island Office of Energy Resources (OER) worked through the year on an economic and energy market analysis, and developed policy and programmatic pathways to meet the goal.

In the most recent development, OER and The Brattle Group co-authored a report detailing how this goal will be achieved, The Road to 100% Renewable Electricity – The Pathways to 100%.

The report includes economic analysis of the key factors that will guide Rhode Island as it accelerates adoption of carbon-free renewable resources, complementing efforts that are tracking progress on 100% clean energy targets nationwide.

The pathway rests on three principles: decarbonization, economics and policy implementation, goals echoed in Maine’s 100% renewable electricity target planning.

The report says the state needs to address the gap between projected electricity demand in 2030 and projected renewable generation capacity. The report predicts a need for 4,600 GWh of additional renewable energy to close the gap. Deploying that much capacity represents a 150% increase in the amount of renewable energy the state has procured to date. The final figure could as much as 600-700 GWh higher or lower.

Addressing the gap
The state is making progress to close the gap.

Rhode Island recently announced plans to solicit proposals for up to 600 MW of additional offshore wind resources. A draft request for proposals (RFP) is expected to be filed for regulatory review in the coming months, aligning with forecasts that one-fourth of U.S. electricity will soon be supplied by renewables as markets mature. Assuming the procurement is authorized and the full 600 MW is acquired, new offshore wind would add about 2,700 GWh per year, or about 35% of 2030 electricity demand.

Beyond this offshore wind procurement, development of retail solar through existing programs could add another 1,500 GWh per year. That leaves a smaller–though still sizable–gap of around 400 GWh per year of renewable electricity.

All this capacity will come with a hefty price. The report finds that rate impacts would likely boost e a typical 2030 monthly residential bill by about $11 to $14 with utility-scale renewables, or by as much as $30 if the entire gap were to be filled with retail solar.

The upside is that if the renewable resources are developed in-state, the local economic activity would boost Rhode Island’s gross domestic product and local jobs, especially when compared to procuring out-of-state resources or buying Renewable Energy Credits (RECs), and comes as U.S. renewable electricity surpassed coal in 2022 across the national grid.

Policy recommendations
One policy item that has to be addressed is the state’s Renewable Energy Standard (RES), which currently calls for meeting 38.5% of electricity deliveries with renewables by 2035, even as the federal 2035 clean electricity goal sets a broader benchmark for decarbonization. For example, RES compliance at present does not require the physical procurement of power produced by renewable energy facilities. Instead, electricity providers meet their requirements by purchasing RECs.

The report recommends amending the state’s RES to seek methods by which Rhode Island can retain all of the RECs procured through existing policy and program channels, along with RECs resulting from ratepayer investment in net metered projects, while Nevada’s 50% by 2030 RPS provides a useful interim comparison.

The report also recognizes that the RES alone is unlikely to drive sufficient investment renewable generation and should be paired with programs and policies to ensure sufficient renewable generation to meet the 100% goal. The state also needs to address the RECs created by behind-the-meter systems that add mechanisms to better match the timing of renewable energy generation with real-time demand. The policy would have the 100% RES remain in effect beyond 2030 and also match shifts in energy demand, particularly as other parts of the economy electrify.

Fostering equity
The state also is putting a high priority on making sure the transition to renewables is an equitable one.

The report recommends partnering with and listening to frontline communities about their needs and goals in the clean energy transition. This will include providing traditionally underserved communities with expert consultation to help guide decision making. The report also recommends holding listening sessions to increase accessibility to and understanding of energy system basics.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News

Electric Vehicle Charging Costs and Times explain kWh usage, electricity rates, Level 2 vs DC fast charging, per-mile expense, and tax credits, with examples by region and battery size to estimate home and public charging.

Key Points

They measure EV charging price and duration based on kWh rates, charger level, efficiency, and location.

✅ Costs vary by kWh price, region, and charger type.

✅ Efficiency (mi/kWh) sets per-mile cost and range.

✅ Tax credits and utility rates impact total ownership.

More and more car manufacturing companies dip their toes in the world of electric vehicles every year, making it a good time to buy an EV for many shoppers, and the U.S. government is also offering incentives to turn the tides on car purchasing. Electric vehicles bought between 2010 and 2022 may be eligible for a tax credit of up to $7,500. 

And according to the Consumer Reports analysis on long-term ownership, the cost of charging an electric vehicle is almost always cheaper than fueling a gas-powered car – sometimes by hundreds of dollars.

But that depends on the type of car and where in the country you live, in a market many expect to be mainstream within a decade across the U.S. Here's everything you need to know.

How much does it cost to charge an electric car?
An electric vehicle’s fuel efficiency can be measured in kilowatt-hours per 100 miles, and common charging-efficiency myths have been fact-checked to correct math errors.

For example, if electricity costs 10.7 cents per kilowatt-hour, charging a 200-mile range 54-kWh battery would cost about $6. Charging a vehicle that consumes 27 kWh to travel 100 miles would cost three cents a mile. 

The national average cost of electricity is 10 cents per kWh and 11.7 cents per kWh for residential use. Idaho National Laboratory’s Advanced Vehicle Testing compares the energy cost per mile for electric-powered and gasoline-fueled vehicles.

For example, at 10 cents per kWh, an electric vehicle with an efficiency of 3 miles per kWh would cost about 3.3 cents per mile. The gasoline equivalent cost for this electricity cost would be just under $2.60 per gallon.

Prices vary by location as well. For example, Consumer Report found that West Coast electric vehicles tend to be less expensive to operate than gas-powered or hybrid cars, and are often better for the planet depending on local energy mix, but gas prices are often lower than electricity in New England.

Public charging networks in California cost about 30 cents per kWh for Level 2 and 40 cents per kWh for DCFC. Here’s an example of the cost breakdown using a Nissan LEAF with a 150-mile range and 40-kWh battery:

Level 2, empty to full charge: $12
DCFC, empty to full charge: $16

Many cars also offer complimentary charging for the first few years of ownership or provide credits to use for free charging. You can check the full estimated cost using the Department of Energy’s Vehicle Cost Calculator as the grid prepares for an American EV boom in the years ahead.

How long does it take to charge an electric car?
This depends on the type of charger you're using. Charging with a Level 1 charger takes much longer to reach full battery than a level 2 charger or a DCFC, or Direct Current Fast Charger. Here's how much time you can expect to spend charging your electric vehicle:

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

Canada EV Supply Chain aligns electric vehicle manufacturing, batteries, and autonomous tech with cross-border trade, leveraging lithium, cobalt, and rare earths as GM, Ford, and Project Arrow scale zero-emissions innovation and domestic sourcing.

Key Points

Canada's integrated resources, battery tech, and manufacturing network supporting EV production and cross-border trade.

✅ Leverages lithium, cobalt, and rare earths for battery supply

✅ Integrates GM, Ford, and Project Arrow manufacturing hubs

✅ Aligns with autonomous tech, hydrogen, and zero-emissions goals

The storied North American automotive industry, the ultimate showcase of Canada’s high-tensile trade ties with the United States, is about to navigate a dramatic hairpin turn.

But as the Big Three veer into the all-electric, autonomous era, some Canadians want to seize the moment to capitalize on the U.S. pivot and take the wheel.

“There’s a long shadow between the promise and the execution, but all the pieces are there,” says Flavio Volpe, president of the Automotive Parts Manufacturers’ Association.

“We went from a marriage on the rocks to one that both partners are committed to. It could be the best second chapter ever.”

Volpe is referring specifically to GM, which announced late last month an ambitious plan to convert its entire portfolio of vehicles to an all-electric platform by 2035, even as a 2035 EV mandate debate unfolds.

But that decision is just part of a market inflection point across the industry, with existential ramifications for one of the most tightly integrated cross-border manufacturing and supply-chain relationships in the world.

China is already working hard to become the “source of a new way” to power vehicles, President Joe Biden warned last week.

“We just have to step up.”

Canada has both the resources and expertise to do the same, says Volpe, whose ambitious Project Arrow concept — a homegrown zero-emissions vehicle named for the 1950s-era Avro interceptor jet — is designed to showcase exactly that.

“We’re going to prove to the market, we’re going to prove to the (manufacturers) around the planet, that everything that goes into your zero-emission vehicle can be made or sourced here in Canada,” he says.

“If somebody wants to bring what we did over the line and make 100,000 of them a year, I’ll hand it to them.”

GM earned the ire of Canadian auto workers in 2018 by announcing the closure of its assembly plant in Oshawa, Ont. It later resurrected the facility with a $170-million investment to retool it for autonomous vehicles.

“It was, ‘You closed Oshawa, how dare you?’ And I was one of the ‘How dare you’ people,” Volpe says.

“Well, now that they’ve reopened Oshawa, you sit there and you open your eyes to the commitment that General Motors made.”

Ford, too, has entered the fray, promising $1.8 billion to retool its sprawling landmark facility in Oakville, Ont., to build EVs, as EV assembly deals help put Canada in the race.

‘Range anxiety’
It’s a leap of faith of sorts, considering what market experts say is ongoing consumer doubt about EVs, including shortages and wait times that persist.

“Range anxiety” — the persistent fear of a depleted battery at the side of the road — remains a major concern, even though it’s less of a problem than most people think.

Consulting firm Deloitte Canada, which has been tracking automotive consumer trends for more than a decade, found three-quarters of future EV buyers it surveyed planned to charge their vehicles at home overnight.

“The difference between what is a perceived issue in a consumer’s mind and what is an actual issue is actually quite negligible,” Ryan Robinson, Deloitte’s automotive research leader, says in an interview.

“It’s still an issue, full stop, and that’s something that the industry is going to have to contend with.”

So, too, is price, especially with the end of the COVID-19 pandemic still a long way off. Deloitte’s latest survey, released last month, found 45 per cent of future buyers in Canada hope to spend less than $35,000 — a tall order when most base electric-vehicle models hover between $40,000 and $45,000.

“You put all of that together and there’s still some major challenges that a lot of stakeholders that touch the automotive industry face,” Robinson says.

“It’s not just government, it’s not just automakers, but there are a variety of stakeholders that have a role to play in making sure that Canadians are ready to make the transition over to electric mobility.”

With protectionism no longer a dirty word in the United States and Biden promising to prioritize American workers and suppliers, the Canadian government’s job remains the same as it ever was: making sure the U.S. understands Canada’s mission-critical role in its own economic priorities.

“We’re both going to be better off on both sides of the border, as we have been in the past, if we orient ourselves toward this global competition as one force,” says Gerald Butts, vice-chairman of the political-risk consultancy Eurasia Group and a former principal secretary to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

“It served us extraordinarily well in the past ... and I have no reason to believe it won’t serve us well in the future.”

EV battery industry
Last month, GM announced a billion-dollar plan to build its new all-electric BrightDrop EV600 van in Ingersoll, Ont., at Canada’s first large-scale EV manufacturing plant for delivery vehicles.

That investment, Volpe says, assumes Canada will take the steps necessary to help build a homegrown battery industry out of the country’s rare-earth resources like lithium and cobalt that are waiting to be extracted in northern Ontario, Quebec and elsewhere, including projects such as a $1.6B battery plant in Niagara that signal momentum.

Given that the EV industry is still in his infancy, the free market alone won’t be enough to ensure those resources can be extracted and developed, he says.

“General Motors made a billion-dollar bet on Canada because it’s going to assume that the Canadian government — this one or the next one — is going to commit” to building that business.

Such an investment would pay dividends well beyond the auto sector, considering the federal Liberal government’s commitment to lowering greenhouse gas-emissions and meeting targets set out in the Paris climate accord.

“If you make investments in renewable energy and energy storage in Ontario using battery technology, you can build an industry at scale that the auto industry can borrow,” Volpe says.

Major manufacturing, retail and office facilities would be able to use that technology to help “shave the peak” off Canada’s GHG emissions and achieve those targets, all the while paving the way for a self-sufficient electric-vehicle industry.

“You’d be investing in the exact same technology you’d use in a car.”

There’s one problem, says Robinson: the lithium-ion batteries on roads right now might not be where the industry ultimately lands.

“We’re not done with with battery technology,” Robinson says. “What you don’t want to do is invest in a technology that is that is rapidly evolving, and could potentially become obsolete going forward.”

Fuel cells — energy-efficient, hydrogen-powered units that work like batteries, but without the need for constant recharging — continue to be part of the conversation, he adds.

“The amount of investment is huge, and you want to be sure that you’re making the right decision, so you don’t find yourself behind the curve just as all that capacity is coming online.”

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

Poland Solar PV Boom drives record installations, rooftop and utility-scale growth, EU-aligned incentives, net metering, PPAs, and auctions, pushing capacity toward 8.3 GW by 2024 while prosumers, grid upgrades, and energy management expand.

Key Points

A rapid expansion of Poland's PV market, driven by incentives, PPAs, and prosumers across rooftop and utility-scale.

✅ 2.2 GW added in 2020, triple 2019, led by small-scale prosumers

✅ Incentives: My Current, Clean Air, Agroenergia, net metering

✅ Growth toward 8.3 GW by 2024; PPAs and auctions scale utility

Photovoltaics (PV) is booming in Poland. According to SolarPower Europe, 2.2 gigawatts (GW) of solar power was installed in the country in 2020 - nearly three times as much as the 823 megawatts (MW) installed in 2019. This places Poland fourth across Europe, behind Germany, where a solar power boost has been underway (4.8 GW added in 2020), the Netherlands (2.8 GW) and Spain (2.6 GW). So all eyes in the industry are on the up-and-coming Polish market. The solar industry will come together at Intersolar Europe Restart 2021, taking place from October 6 to 8 at Messe München. As part of The smarter E Europe Restart 2021, manufacturers, suppliers, distributors and service providers will all present their products and innovations at the world's leading exhibition for the solar industry.

All signs point to continued strong growth, with renewables on course to set records across markets. An intermediate, more conservative EU Market Outlook forecast from SolarPower Europe expects the Polish solar market to grow by 35 percent annually, meaning that it will have achieved a PV capacity of 8.3 GW by 2024 as solar reshapes Northern Europe's power prices over the medium term. "PV in Poland is booming at every level - from private and commercial PV rooftop systems to large free-standing installations," says Dr. Stanislaw Pietruszko, President of the Polish Society for Photovoltaics (PV Poland). According to the PV Poland, the number of registered small-scale systems - those under 50 kilowatts (kW) - with an average capacity of 6.5 kilowatts (kW) grew from 155,000 (992 MW) at the end of 2019 to 457,400 (3 GW) by the end of 2020. These small-scale systems account for 75 percent of all PV capacity installed in Poland. Larger PV projects with a capacity of 4 GW have already been approved for grid connection, further attesting to the forecast growth.

8,000 people employed in the PV industry
Andrzej Kazmierski, Deputy Director of the Department for Low-emission Economy within the Polish Ministry of Economic Development, Labour and Technology, explained in the Intersolar Europe webinar "A Rising Star: PV Market Poland" at the end of March 2021 that the PV market volume in Poland currently amounts to 2.2 billion euros, with 8,000 people employed in the industry. According to Kazmierski, the implementation of the Renewable Energy Directive (RED II) in the EU, intended to promote energy communities and collective prosumers as well as long-term power purchase agreements (PPAs), will be a critical challenge, and ongoing Berlin PV barriers debates highlight the importance of regulatory coordination. Renewable energy must be integrated with greater focus into the energy system, and energy management and the grids themselves must be significantly expanded as researchers work to improve solar and wind integration. The government seeks to create a framework for stable market growth as well as to strengthen local value creation.

Government incentive programs in Poland
In addition to drastically reduced PV costs, reinforced by China's rapid PV expansion, and growing environmental consciousness, the Polish PV market is being advanced by an array of government-funded incentive programs such as My Current (230 million euros) and Clean Air as well as thermo-modernization. The incentive program Agroenergia (50 million euros) is specifically geared toward farmers and offers low-interest loans or direct subsidies for the construction of solar installations with capacities between 50 kW and 1 MW. Incentive programs for net metering have been extended to small and medium enterprises to provide stronger support for prosumers. Solar installations producing less than 50 kW benefit from a lower value-added tax of just eight percent (compared to the typical 23 percent). The acquisition and installation costs can be offset against income, in turn reducing income tax.
Government-funded auctions are also used to finance large-scale facilities, where the government selects operators of systems running on renewable energy who offer the lowest electricity price and funds the construction of their facilities. The winner of an auction back in December was an investment project for the construction of a 200 MW solar park in the Pomeranian Voivodeship.

Companies turn to solar power for self-consumption
Furthermore, Poland is now playing host to larger solar projects that do not rely on subsidies, as Europe's demand lifts US equipment makers amid supply shifts, such as a 64 MW solar farm in Witnica being built on the border to Germany whose electricity will be sold to a cement factory via a multi-year power purchase agreement. A new factory in Konin (Wielkopolska Voivodeship) for battery cathode materials to be used in electric cars will be powered with 100-percent renewable electricity. Plus, large companies are increasingly turning to solar power for self-consumption. For example, a leading manufacturer of metal furniture in Suwalki (Podlaskie Voivodeship) in northeastern Poland has recently started meeting its demand using a 2 MW roof-mounted and free-standing installation on the company premises.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News

NC WARN Solar Case tests third-party solar rights as North Carolina Supreme Court reviews Utilities Commission fines over a Greensboro church's rooftop power deal, challenging Duke Energy's monopoly, onsite electricity sales, and potential rate impacts.

Key Points

A North Carolina Supreme Court test of third-party solar could weaken Duke Energy's monopoly and change utility rules.

✅ NC Supreme Court weighs Utilities Commission penalty on NC WARN

✅ Case could permit onsite third-party solar sales statewide

✅ Outcome may pressure Duke Energy's monopoly and rates

North Carolina's highest court is taking up a case that could force new competition on the state's electricity monopolies.

The state Supreme Court on Tuesday will consider the Utilities Commission's decision to fine clean-energy advocacy group NC WARN for putting solar panels on a Greensboro church's rooftop and then charging it below-market rates for power.

The commission told NC WARN that it was producing electricity illegally and fined the group $60,000. The group said it was acting privately and appealed to the high court.

If the group prevails, it could put new pressure on Duke Energy's monopoly, which has seen an oversubscribed solar solicitation in recent procurements. State regulators say a ruling for NC WARN would allow companies to install solar equipment and sell power on site, shaving away customers and forcing Duke Energy to raise rates on everyone else.

#google#

That's because if NC WARN's deal with Faith Community Church is allowed, the precedent could open the door for others to lure away from Duke Energy, as debates over how solar owners are paid continue, "the customers with the highest profit potential, such as commercial and industrial customers with large energy needs and ample rooftop space," attorney Robert Josey Jr. wrote in a court filing.

Losing those power sales would force the country's No. 2 electricity company to make it up by charging remaining customers more to cover the cost of all of its power plants, transmission lines and repair crews, a dynamic echoed in New England's grid upgrade debates as solar grows, wrote Josey, an attorney for the Public Staff, the state's official utilities consumer advocate.

The dispute is whether NC WARN is producing electricity "for the public," which would mean it's intruding on the territory of the publicly regulated monopoly utility, or whether the move was allowed because it was a private power deal with the church alone.

NC WARN installed the church's power panels in 2015 as part of what it described as a test case, amid wider debates like Nova Scotia's delayed solar charge for customers, challenging Duke Energy's monopoly position to generate and sell electricity.

North Carolina was one of nine states that as of last year explicitly disallowed residential customers from buying electricity generated by solar panels on their roof from a third party that owns the system, even as Maryland opens solar subscriptions more broadly, according to the North Carolina Clean Energy Technology Center. State law allows purchased or leased solar panels, but not payments simply for the power they generate.

NC WARN's goals included "reducing the effects of Duke Energy's monopoly control that has such negative impacts on power bills, clean air and water, and climate change," the church's pastor, Rev. Nelson Johnson, said in a statement the same day the clean-energy group asked state regulators to clear the plan.

Instead, the North Carolina Utilities Commission ruled the arrangement violated the state's system of legal electricity monopolies and hit the group with nearly $60,000 in fines, which would be suspended if the church's payments were refunded with interest and the solar equipment donated. The group has set aside the money and will donate the gear if it loses the Supreme Court case, NC WARN Executive Director Jim Warren said.

NC WARN's three-year agreement saw the group mount a rooftop solar array for which the church would pay about half the average retail electricity price, state officials said. The agreement states plainly that it is not a contract for the sale or lease of the $20,000 solar system, the church never owns the panels, and the low electricity price means its payback for the equipment would take 60 years, Josey wrote.

"Clearly, the only thing of value (the church) is obtaining for its payments under this agreement is the electricity created," he wrote.

In court filings, the group's attorneys have stuck to the argument that NC WARN isn't selling to the public because the deal involved a single customer only.

The deal "is not open to any other member of the public ... A private, bargained-for contract under which only one party receives electricity is not a sale of electricity 'to or for the public,' " attorney Matthew Quinn wrote to the court.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News