Michigan solar supporters make new push to eliminate rooftop solar caps


solar workers

NFPA 70e Training

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

  • Live Online
  • 6 hours Instructor-led
  • Group Training Available
Regular Price:
$199
Coupon Price:
$149
Reserve Your Seat Today

Michigan Distributed Energy Cap Repeal advances a bipartisan bill to boost rooftop solar and net metering, countering DTE and Consumers Energy claims, expanding energy freedom, jobs, and climate resilience across investor-owned utility territories.

 

Key Points

A Michigan bill to remove the 1% distributed energy cap, expanding rooftop solar, net metering, and clean energy jobs.

✅ Removes 1% distributed generation cap statewide

✅ Supports rooftop solar, net metering, and job growth

✅ Counters utility cost-shift claims with updated tariffs

 

A bipartisan group of Michigan lawmakers has introduced legislation to eliminate a 1% cap on distributed energy in the state’s investor-owned utility territories.

It’s the third time in recent years that such legislation has been introduced. Though utilities and their political allies have successfully blocked it to date, through tactics some critics say reflect utilities tilting the solar market by incumbents, advocates see an opportunity with a change in state Republican caucus leadership and Michigan’s burgeoning solar industry approaching the cap in some utility territories.

The bill also has support from a broad swath of legislators for reasons having to do with job creation, energy freedom and the environment, amid broader debates over states' push for renewables and affordability. Already the bill has received multiple hearings, even as DTE Energy and Consumers Energy, Michigan’s largest private utilities, are ramping up attacks in an effort to block the bill. 

“It’s going to be vehemently opposed by the utilities but there are only benefits to this if you are anybody but DTE,” said Democratic state Rep. Yousef Rabhi, who cosigned HB 4236 and has helped draft language in previous bills. “If we remove the cap, then we’re putting the public’s interest first, and we’re putting DTE’s interest first if we keep the cap in place.” 

The Michigan Legislature enacted the cap as part of a sweeping 2016 energy bill that clean energy advocates say included a number of provisions that have kneecapped the small-scale distributed energy industry, particularly home solar. The law caps distributed energy production at 1% of a utility’s average in-state peak load for the past five years. 

Republicans have controlled the Legislature and committees since the law was enacted, amid parallel moves such as the Wyoming clean energy bill in another state, and previous attempts to cut the language haven’t received House committee hearings. However, former Republican House leader Lee Chatfield has been replaced, and already the new bill, introduced by Republican state Rep. Gregory Markkanen, the energy committee’s vice chair, has had two hearings. 

Previous attempts to cut the language were also a part of a larger package of bills, and this time around the bill is a standalone. The legislation is also moving as Consumers and Upper Peninsula Power Co. have voluntarily doubled their cap to two percent, which advocates say highlights the need to repeal the cap . 

Rabhi said there’s bipartisan support because many conservatives and progressives view it as an infringement on customers’ energy freedom since the cap will eventually effectively prohibit new distributed energy generation. Legislators say the existing law kills jobs because it severely limits the clean energy industry’s growth, and Rabhi said he’s also strongly motivated by increasing renewable energy production to address climate change. 

In February, Michigan Public Service Commission Chairman Dan Scripps testified to the House committee, with observers also pointing to FERC action on aggregated DERs as relevant context, that the commission is “supportive in taking steps to ensure solar developers in Michigan are able to continue operating and thus support in concept the idea of lifting or eliminating the cap” in order to protect the home solar industry. 

The state’s solar industry has long criticized the cap, and removing it is a “no brainer,” said Dave Strenski, executive director of Solar Ypsi, which promotes rooftop solar in Ypsilanti. 

“If they have a cap and we reach that cap, then rooftop solar is shut down in Michigan,” he said. “The utilities don’t mind solar as long as they own it, and that’s what it boils down to.”  

The state’s utilities see the situation differently. Spokespeople for DTE and Consumers told the Energy News Network that lifting the cap would shift the cost burden of maintaining their territory-wide infrastructure from all customers to low income customers who can’t afford to install solar panels, often invoking reliability examples such as California's reliance on fossil generation to justify caution.

The bill “doesn’t address the subsidy certain customers are paid at the expense of those who cannot afford to put solar panels on their homes,” said Katie Carey, Consumers Energy’s spokesperson. 

However, clean energy advocates argue that studies have found that to be untrue. And even if it were true, Rabhi said, the utilities told lawmakers in 2016 that a new inflow/outflow tariff that the companies successfully pushed for to replace net metering dramatically reduced compensation for home solar users and would address that inequality. 

“DTE’s and Consumers’ own argument is that by making that change, distributed generation is no longer a ‘burden’ on low income customers, so now we have inflow/outflow and the problem should be solved,” Rabhi said. 

He added that claims that DTE and Consumers are looking out for low-income customers are disingenuous because they have repeatedly fought larger allowances for programs that help those customers, and refuse to “dip into their massive corporate profits and make sure poor people don’t have to pay as much for electricity.”

“I don’t want to hear a sob story from DTE about how putting solar panels on the house is going to hurt poor people,” he said. “That is entirely the definition of hypocrisy — that’s the utilities using poor people as a pawn and that’s why people are sick of these corporations.” 

The companies have already begun their public relations attack designed to help thwart the bill. DTE and Consumers spread money generously among Republicans and Democrats in the Legislature each cycle, and the two companies’ dark money nonprofits launched a round of ads targeting Democratic lawmakers, reflecting the broader solar wars playing out nationally. Several sit on the House Energy Committee, which must approve the bill before it can go in front of the full Legislature. 

The DTE-backed Alliance For Michigan Power and Consumers Energy-funded Citizens Energizing Michigan’s Economy have purchased dozens of Facebook ads alluding to action by the legislators, though there hasn’t been a vote. 

Facebook ads aren’t uncommon as they get “bang for their buck,” said Matt Kasper, research director with utility industry watchdog Energy And Policy Institute. Already hundreds of thousands of people have potentially viewed the ads and the groups have only spent thousands of dollars. The ads are likely designed to get Facebook users to interact with the legislators on the issue, Kasper said, even if there’s little information in the ad, and the info in the ad that does exist is highly misleading.

DTE and Consumers spokespersons declined to comment on the spending and directed questions to the dark money nonprofits. No one there could be reached for comment.

 

Related News

Related News

Use of electric vehicles associated with fewer asthma-related ER visits on a local level, study shows

Electric Vehicle Adoption Benefits include reduced air pollution, lower greenhouse gas emissions, and improved respiratory health, as regional studies show, with equity considerations for low-income communities and policy mandates accelerating zero-emission vehicles.

 

Key Points

The environmental and health gains from wider EV uptake, including cleaner air, lower emissions, and fewer asthma cases.

✅ Regional EV growth linked to lower NO2 and PM2.5 levels

✅ Fewer asthma ER visits in higher EV-adoption areas

✅ Address adoption gap to ensure equity in low-income communities

 

In an effort to mitigate the effects of climate change, countries across the globe are involving electric vehicles in their plans to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, citing the EV climate and cost benefits highlighted by recent analyses.

A federal mandate in Canada, for instance, aims to ensure that one-fifth of all passenger cars, SUVs and trucks sold in Canada are electrically-powered by 2026, with Ottawa set to release EV sales regulations to guide industry. By 2035, if this mandate is carried out, every passenger vehicle sold in Canada will need to be electric, though some critics deem the 2035 target unrealistic based on current conditions.

But what will this shift to electric vehicles actually do for the environment, especially given that 18% of Canada's 2019 electricity came from fossil fuels which affects lifecycle emissions?

One team of researchers with the Keck School of Medicine of USC aimed to find out, conducting what it describes as one of the first studies to analyze the environmental and health impacts of electric vehicles on a regional scale. Their research linked the wider integration of zero-emission vehicles with lower levels of local air pollution and some respiratory problems, a pattern consistent with analyses showing EVs are greener across all 50 states in the U.S.

“When we think about the actions related to climate change, often it’s on a global level,” Erika Garcia, an assistant professor of population and public health at the Keck School of Medicine, said in a press release.

“But the idea that changes being made at the local level can improve the health of your own community could be a powerful message to the public and to policy makers.”

Using data that spanned from 2013 to 2019, Garcia and the team of researchers compared the registration of zero-emissions vehicles with air pollution levels and asthma-related emergency room visits in California. They found that in regions where more electric vehicles were adopted, emergency room visits dropped, along with with pollution levels.

Sandrah Eckel, an associate professor of population and public health sciences and the study’s senior author, said their findings offer hope among a reality of climate anxieties.

“We’re excited about shifting the conversation towards climate change mitigation and adaptation, and these results suggest that transitioning to [electric vehicles] is a key piece of that.”

Garcia added that the study also evaluated disadvantages faced by those living in lower-income communities, which often see higher pollution levels and related respiratory problems, underscoring that EVs are not a silver bullet in broader climate and health policy.

Researchers discovered that adoption of zero-emissions vehicles in low-resource neighbourhoods was slower compared to more affluent areas, amid ongoing debate over whether EV purchase subsidies are an effective tool for Canada.

The study attributes this disparity to what the researchers call an “adoption gap” – referring to groups of people that cannot afford newer vehicles that are electrically-powered.


According to the study, which was published in the journal Science of the Total Environment, the adoption gap “threatens the equitable distribution of possible co-benefits.”

“Should continuing research support our findings, we want to make sure that those communities that are overburdened with traffic-related air pollution are truly benefiting from this climate mitigation effort,” Garcia said in the release.

 

Related News

View more

Most planned U.S. battery storage additions in next three years to be paired with solar

U.S. Solar-Plus-Storage Growth 2021-2024 highlights rising battery storage co-location with solar PV, grid flexibility, RTO/ISO market signals, and ITC incentives, enabling peak shaving, firming renewable output, and reliable night-time power.

 

Key Points

Summary of U.S. plans pairing battery storage with solar PV, guided by RTO/ISO markets, grid needs, and ITC policy.

✅ 9.4 GW (63%) co-located with solar PV by 2024

✅ 97% of standalone capacity sited in RTO/ISO regions

✅ ITC improves project economics and grid services revenue

 

Of the 14.5 gigawatts (GW) of battery storage power capacity planned to come online amid anticipated growth in solar and storage in the United States from 2021 to 2024, 9.4 GW (63%) will be co-located with a solar photovoltaic (PV) solar-plus-storage power plant, based on data reported to us and published in our Annual Electric Generator Report. Another 1.3 GW of battery storage will be co-located at sites with wind turbines or fossil fuel-fired generators, such as natural gas-fired plants. The remaining 4.0 GW of planned battery storage will be located at standalone sites.

Historically, most U.S. battery systems have been located at standalone sites. Of the 1.5 GW of operating battery storage capacity in the United States at the end of 2020, 71% was standalone, and 29% was located onsite with other power generators.

Most standalone battery energy storage sites have been planned or built in power markets that are governed by regional transmission organizations (RTOs) and independent system operators (ISOs). RTOs and ISOs can enforce standard market rules that lay out clear revenue streams for energy storage projects in their regions, which promotes the deployment of battery storage systems. Of the utility-scale pipeline battery systems announced to come online from 2021 to 2024, 97% of the standalone battery capacity and 60% of the co-located battery capacity are in RTO/ISO regions.

Over 90% of the planned battery storage capacity outside of RTO and ISO regions will be co-located with a solar PV plant. At some solar PV co-located plants, the batteries can charge directly from the onsite solar generator when electricity demand and prices are low. They can then discharge electricity to the grid when peak demand is higher or when solar generation is unavailable, such as at night.

Although factors such as cloud cover can affect solar generation output, solar generators, now the number three renewable source in the U.S., in particular can effectively pair with battery storage because of their relatively regular daily generation patterns. This predictability works well with battery systems because battery systems are limited in how long they can discharge their power capacity before needing to recharge. If paired with a wind turbine, for example, a battery system could go days before having the opportunity to fully recharge.

Another advantage of pairing batteries with renewable generators is the ability to take advantage of tax incentives such as the Investment Tax Credit (ITC), which is available for solar projects, and other favorable government plans supporting deployment.

 

Related News

View more

25.5% Of US Electricity Coming From Renewable Energy

US Renewable Energy Growth drives the US electricity mix as wind, solar, and hydropower rise while coal, natural gas, and nuclear decline, boosting market share month over month and year over year across the grid.

 

Key Points

US Renewable Energy Growth tracks rising wind, solar, and hydro shares in the mix as coal, gas, and nuclear decline.

✅ Wind and solar surpass nuclear in April share

✅ Renewables reach 29.3% of US electricity in April

✅ Coal and natural gas shares trend lower since 2020

 

Electricity generated by renewable energy sources continues to grow month over month and year over year in the United States. In April 2022, the share of US electricity coming from renewable energy was up to 29.3%, surpassing a record April level reported previously in national data. That was up from 24.8% in April 2020 and 25.7% in April 2021.

Looking at the first four months of the year, renewables provided 25.5% of US electricity, and were the second-most U.S. source in 2020 as well, while the figure for January–April 2020 was 21.7% and the figure for January–April 2021 was 22.5%.

Coal power (20.2% of US electricity) was down year over year in this time period (from 22% in January–April 2021), even as renewables surpassed coal in 2022 nationwide, but is admittedly still a bit higher than it was in January–April 2020 (16.8%).

Electricity from natural gas is also down year over year, but only very slightly (34.7% for both years). Though, it has dropped significantly since January–April 2020 (39.6%).

Electricity from nuclear power continued to take a steady, step-by-step tumble.

Wind & Solar Power Growth Strong
As reported earlier, April was the first month that wind and solar power provided more electricity than nuclear across the United States. Wind and solar power provided 21% of US electricity, while nuclear power provided 17.8% of US electricity (coal, incidentally, also provided 17.8% of US electricity, but wind and solar had provided more electricity than coal in some previous months as well).

Wind and solar power’s combined market share for the first four months of the year was up from just 14.6% in 2020 and 18.4% in 2021.

Looking at their growth year over year, you can see strong and continuous expansion of solar-provided electricity and wind-provided electricity, amid favorable government plans that have supported deployment.

Solar grew from 2.9% in January–April 2020 to 3.6%in January–April 2021 to, eventually, 4.4% in January–April 2022, with solar's 2022 share rising to 4.7% for the full year. Wind rose from 9.2% to 10.3% to 12.2%.

Together, wind and solar were up from 12.1% in January–April 2020 to 13.9% in January–April 2021, reflecting a surge in wind power within the U.S. electricity mix over this period, to 16.7% January–April 2022.

Hydropower (6.5%) is holding approximately the same position as the same period in 2021 (6.5%), but it is down a significant chunk from April 2020 (8.2%).

 

Related News

View more

California Wants Cars to Run on Electricity. It’s Going to Need a Much Bigger Grid

California EV mandate will phase out new gas cars, raising power demand and requiring renewable energy, grid upgrades, fast chargers, time-of-use rates, and vehicle-to-grid to stabilize loads and reduce emissions statewide.

 

Key Points

California's order ends new gas-car sales by 2035, driving grid upgrades, charging infrastructure, and cleaner transport.

✅ 25% higher power demand requires new generation and storage

✅ Time-of-use pricing and midday charging reduce grid stress

✅ Vehicle-to-grid and falling battery costs enable reliability

 

Leaning on the hood of a shiny red electric Ford Mustang, California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed an executive order Wednesday to end the sale of new gas-burning cars in his state in 15 years, a move with looming challenges for regulators and industry.

Now comes the hard part.

Energy consultants and academics say converting all passenger cars and trucks to run on electricity in California could raise power demand by as much as 25%. That poses a major challenge to state power grids as California is already facing periodic rolling blackouts as it rapidly transitions to renewable energy.

California will need to boost power generation, scale up its network of fast charging stations, enhance its electric grid to handle the added load and hope that battery technology continues to improve enough that millions in America’s most populous state can handle long freeway commutes to schools and offices without problems.

“We’ve got 15 years to do the work,” said Pedro Pizarro, chief executive of Edison International, owner of Southern California Edison, a utility serving 15 million people in the state. “Frankly the state agencies are going to have to do their part. We’ve got to get to the permitting processes, the approvals; all of that work is going to have to get accelerated to meet [Wednesday’s] target.”

Switching from petroleum fuels to electricity to phase out the internal combustion engine won’t happen all at once—Mr. Newsom’s order applies to sales of new vehicles, so older gas-powered cars will be on the road in California for many years to come. But the mandate means the state will face a growing demand for megawatts.

California is already facing a shortfall of power supplies over the next couple of years. The problem was highlighted last month when a heat wave blanketed the western U.S. and the state’s grid operator instituted rolling blackouts on two occasions.

“It is too early to tell what kind of impact the order will have on our power grid, and we don’t have any specific analysis or projections,” said Anne Gonzalez, a spokeswoman for the California Independent System Operator, which runs the grid.

Currently, California faces a crunchtime in the early evening as solar power falls off and demand to power air conditioners remains relatively high. Car charging presents a new potential issue: what happens if surging demand threatens to crash the grid during peak hours?

Caroline Winn, the chief executive of San Diego Gas & Electric, a utility owned by Sempra Energy that serves 3.6 million people, said there will need to be rules and rates that encourage people to charge their cars at certain times of the day, amid broader control over charging debates.

“We need to get the rules right and the markets right, informed by lessons from 2021, in order to resolve this issue because certainly California is moving that way,” she said.

The grid will need to be upgraded to prepare for millions of new electric vehicles. The majority of people who own them usually charge them at home, which would mean changes to substations and distribution circuits to accommodate multiple homes in a neighborhood drawing power to fill up batteries. The state’s three main investor-owned utilities are spending billions of dollars to harden the grid to prevent power equipment from sparking catastrophic wildfires.


“We have a hell of a lot of work to do nationally. California is ahead of everybody and they have a hell of a lot of work to do,” said Chris Nelder, who studies EV-grid integration at the Rocky Mountain Institute, an energy and environment-policy organization that promotes clean-energy solutions.

Mr. Nelder believes the investment will be worth it, because internal combustion engines generate so much waste heat and emissions of uncombusted hydrocarbons that escape out of tailpipes. Improving energy efficiency by upgrading the electrical system could result in lower bills for customers. “We will eliminate a vast amount of waste from the energy system and make it way more efficient,” he said.

Some see the growth of electric vehicles as an opportunity more than a challenge. In the afternoon, when electricity demand is high but the sun is setting and solar power drops off quickly, batteries in passenger cars, buses and other vehicles could release power back into the electric grid to help grid stability across the system, said Matt Petersen, chairman of the Transportation Electrification Partnership, a public-private effort in Los Angeles to accelerate the deployment of electric vehicles.

The idea is known as “vehicle-to-grid” and has been discussed in a number of countries expanding EV use, including the U.K. and Denmark.

“We end up with rolling batteries that can discharge power when needed,” Mr. Petersen said, adding, “The more electric vehicles we add to the grid, the more renewable energy we can add to the grid.”

One big hurdle for the widespread deployment of electric cars is driving down the cost of batteries to make the cars more affordable. This week, Tesla Inc. Chief Executive Elon Musk said he expected to have a $25,000 model ready by about 2023, signaling a broader EV boom in the U.S.

Shirley Meng, director of the Sustainable Power and Energy Center at the University of California, San Diego, said she believed batteries would continue to provide better performance at a lower cost.

“I am confident the battery technology is ready,” she said. Costs are expected to fall as new kinds of materials and metals can be used in the underlying battery chemistry, dropping prices. “Batteries are good now, and they will be better in the next 10 years.”

John Eichberger, executive director of the Fuels Institute, a nonprofit research group launched by the National Association of Convenience Stores, said he hoped that the California Air Resources Board, which is tasked with developing new rules to implement Mr. Newsom’s order, will slow the timeline if the market and electric build-out is running behind.

“We need to think about these critical infrastructure issues because transportation is not optional,” he said. “How do we develop a system that can guarantee consumers that they can get the energy when they need it?”

 

Related News

View more

Biden seen better for Canada’s energy sector

Biden Impact on Canadian Energy Exports highlights shifts in trade policy, tariffs, carbon pricing, and Keystone XL, with implications for aluminum, softwood lumber, electricity trade, fracking limits, and small modular nuclear reactors.

 

Key Points

How Biden-era trade, climate rules, and tariffs may reshape Canadian energy and exports.

✅ Reduced tariff volatility and friendlier trade policy toward allies

✅ Climate alignment: carbon pricing, clean power, cross-border electricity

✅ Potential gains for oil, gas, aluminum, and softwood lumber exporters

 

There is little doubt among industry associations, the Conference Board of Canada and C.D. Howe Institute that a Joe Biden White House will be better for Canadian resource and energy exporters – even Alberta’s beleaguered oil industry, despite Biden’s promise to kill the Keystone XL pipeline.

The consensus among industry observers in the lead-up to the November 3 U.S. presidential election was that a re-elected Donald Trump would become even more pugnacious on trade and protectionism, putting electricity exports at risk for Canadian utilities, which would be bad for Canadian exporters. The Justin Trudeau government would likely come under increased pressure to lower Canadian business taxes to compete with Trump’s low-tax climate.

“A Joe Biden victory would likely lead to higher taxes for both corporations and wealthy Americans to help pay down the gigantic fiscal deficit that is currently running at plus-US$5 trillion,” the conference board concluded in a recent analysis.

On trade and tariffs, the conference board said: “Many but not all of these ongoing trade disputes would wither away under a Joe Biden administration. He would likely run a broad trade policy favouring strategic allies like Canada.

While Canadian industries like forestry and aluminum smelting benefited from strong demand and prices in the U.S. under Trump, the forced renegotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement failed end tariffs and duties on things like softwood lumber and aluminum ingots, even as Canadians backed tariffs on energy and minerals during the dispute.

The uncertainty over trade issues, and Trump’s tax cuts, which made Canada’s tax regime less competitive, have contributed to a period of low business investment in Canada during Trump's presidency.

“For Canada, we’ve seen a period, since this administration has been in power, where investment has eroded steadily,” conference board chief economist Pedro Antunes said. “We are not doing well at all, in terms of private capital investment in Canada.”

Alberta’s oil industry has been hit particularly hard, with a slew of divestments by big energy giants, and cancellations of major projects, like the $20 billion Frontier oilsands project, scrubbed by Teck Resources.

While domestic policies and global market forces are partly to blame for falling investments in Canada’s oil and gas sector, up until the pandemic hit, investment in oil and gas increased significantly in the U.S., while declining in Canada, during Trump’s first term.

Biden is also expected to level the playing field with respect to climate change policies. Canadian industries pay carbon taxes and face regulations that their counterparts in the U.S. don’t. That has disadvantaged energy-intensive, trade-exposed industries like mines and pulp mills in Canada.

“With Biden in office, Canada will once again have a partner at the federal level in the states in the transition to a decarbonized economy,” said Josha MacNab, national policy director for the Pembina Institute.

Biden’s policies might also favour importing aluminum, cross-laminated timber, fuel cells and other lower-carbon products and commodities from Canada.

At least one observer believes that Canada’s oil and gas sector might benefit more from a Biden White House, despite Biden’s pledge to kill the Keystone XL pipeline.

“I think Joe Biden could be very good for Alberta,” Christopher Sands, director of the Wilson International Center’s Canada Institute, said in a recent discussion hosted by the C.D. Howe Institute.

Sands added that the presidential permit Biden has promised to tear up on the Keystone XL pipeline project is a construction permit, not an operating permit.

“The segment of that pipeline that crosses the U.S.-Canada border, which is the only place that the presidential permit applies, has been built,” Sands said. “So I think that’s somewhat of an empty threat.”

He added that, if Biden bans fracking on federal lands, as he has promised, and implements other restrictions that make it more costly for American oil and gas producers, it might increase the demand for Canadian oil and gas in the U.S. The demand would be highest in the U.S. Midwest, which depends largely on Marcellus Shale production, notably in Pennsylvania, and Western Canada for its oil and gas.

One of the Canadian industries directly affected by the Trump administration was aluminum smelting, which is relevant for B.C. because Rio Tinto plc’s Kitimat smelter exports aluminum to the U.S.

Jean Simard, president of the Aluminum Association of Canada, said one of Trump’s legacies was the reactivation of a little-used mechanism – Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act – to hit Canada and other countries, notably China, with import tariffs.

The 10 per cent tariffs on aluminum cost Canadian aluminum producers US$15 million in the month of August alone, Simard said.

The Trump administration eventually exempted Canadian aluminum exports from the tariffs, then reintroduced them, and then, one week before the election, exempted them again.

These on-again, off-again tariff threats create tremendous uncertainty, not just for Canadian producers, but also for U.S. buyers. That kind of uncertainty is likely to ease under a Biden presidency.

Simard said Biden’s track record suggests he is well-disposed towards Canada and less confrontational with allies and trade partners in general, and some in Washington have called for a stronger U.S.-Canada energy partnership as well.

Meanwhile, softwood lumber tariffs have been imposed by Democrats and Republicans alike. But there are compelling reasons for ending the Canada-U.S. softwood lumber war.

Home renovation and repair in the United States has done surprisingly well during the pandemic.

As a result of sawmill curtailments in the U.S. due to pandemic restrictions and high demand for lumber in the U.S. housing sector, North American lumbers prices broke records this summer, soaring as high as US$900 per thousand board feet.

“It shows that there’s very strong demand for our product,” said Susan Yurkovich, president of the Council of Forest Industries.

Ultimately, the duties Canadian lumber exporters pay are passed on to U.S. consumers.

Sands said Biden’s climate action pledges, including a clean electricity standard, could increase opportunities for trading electricity between Canada in the U.S., as the U.S. increasingly looks to Canada for green power, and could also be good for Canadian nuclear power technology.

Strong climate change policies necessarily result in an increased demand for low-carbon electricity, and advancing clean grids, which Canada has in abundance, thanks to both hydro and nuclear power.

“[Biden] does share the desire to act on climate change, but unlike some of his fellow party members who are more signed on to a Green New Deal, he’s open to pragmatic solutions that might get the job done quickly and efficiently,” Sands said.

“This is a huge opportunity for small, modular nuclear reactors, and Atomic Energy Canada has some great designs. There’s a real opportunity for a nuclear revival.” 

 

Related News

View more

Germany to Exempt Electric Cars from Vehicle Tax Until 2035

Germany is extending its vehicle tax exemption for electric cars until 2035, a federal move aimed at boosting EV sales, supporting the auto industry, and advancing the country’s transition to cleaner, more sustainable transportation.

 

Why is Germany Exempting EVs from Vehicle Tax Until 2035?

Germany is exempting electric vehicles from vehicle tax until 2035 to boost EV adoption, support its auto industry, and meet national climate targets.

✅ Encourages consumers to buy zero-emission cars

✅ Protects jobs in the automotive sector

✅ Advances Germany’s clean energy transition

Germany’s federal government has confirmed plans to extend the country’s vehicle tax exemption for electric cars until 2035, as part of a renewed push to accelerate the nation’s e-mobility transition and support its struggling automotive industry. The move, announced by Finance Minister Lars Klingbeil, comes just weeks before the existing exemption was set to expire.

“In order to get many more electric cars on the road in the coming years, we need to provide the right incentives now,” Klingbeil told the German Press Agency (DPA). “That is why we will continue to exempt electric cars from vehicle tax.”

Under the proposed law, the exemption will apply to new fully electric vehicles registered until December 31, 2030, with benefits lasting until the end of 2035. According to the Finance Ministry, the measure aims to “provide an incentive for the early purchase of a purely electric vehicle.” While popular among consumers and automakers, the plan is expected to cost the federal budget several hundred million euros in lost revenue.

Without the extension, the tax relief for new battery-electric vehicles (BEVs) would have ended on January 1, 2026, creating uncertainty for automakers and potential buyers. The urgency to pass the new legislation reflects the government’s goal to maintain Germany’s momentum toward electrification, even as the age of electric cars accelerates amid economic headwinds and fierce international competition.

The exemption’s renewal was originally included in the coalition agreement between the Christian Democratic Union (CDU), the Christian Social Union (CSU), and the Social Democratic Party (SPD). It follows two other measures from the government’s “investment booster” package—raising the maximum gross price for EV tax incentives to €100,000 and allowing special depreciation for electric vehicles. However, the vehicle tax measure was previously in jeopardy due to Germany’s tight fiscal situation. The Finance Ministry had cautioned that every proposal in the coalition deal was “subject to financing,” and a plan to end EV subsidies led to speculation that the EV tax break could be dropped altogether.

Klingbeil’s announcement coincides with an upcoming “automotive dialogue” summit at the Chancellery, hosted by Chancellor Friedrich Merz. The meeting will bring together representatives from federal ministries, regional governments, automakers advancing initiatives such as Daimler’s electrification plan across their portfolios, and trade unions to address both domestic and international challenges facing Germany’s car industry. Topics will include slowing EV sales growth in China, the ongoing tariff dispute with the United States, where EPA emissions rules are expected to boost EV sales, and strategies for strengthening Germany’s global competitiveness.

“We must now put together a strong package to lead the German automotive industry into the future and secure jobs,” Klingbeil said. “We want the best cars to continue to be built in Germany. Everyone knows that the future is electric.”

The government is also expected to revisit a proposed program to help low- and middle-income households access electric cars, addressing affordability concerns that persist across markets, modelled on France’s “social leasing” initiative. Though included in the coalition agreement, progress on that program has stalled, and few details have emerged since its announcement.

Germany’s latest tax policy move signals renewed confidence in its electric vehicle transition, despite budget constraints and a turbulent global market, as the 10-year EV outlook points to most cars being electric worldwide. Extending the exemption until 2035 sends a clear message to consumers and manufacturers alike: the country remains committed to building its clean transport future—one electric car at a time.

 

Related Articles

 

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