Nevada to Power Clean Vehicles with Clean Electricity

UK Grid Connection Fast-Track would let the Energy Secretary instruct network operators and National Grid ESO to accelerate substation upgrades and transmission links for Tata's gigafactory, electric arc furnaces, and ready-to-build renewable projects.

Key Points

A UK plan letting the energy secretary fast-track grid connections via priority substation and transmission upgrades.

✅ Prioritizes substations and lines for strategic projects

✅ Supports Tata gigafactory and electric arc furnace conversions

✅ Complements Ofgem queue reforms and National Grid ESO changes

The UK energy secretary could be handed powers to fast-track connecting electricity-hungry projects, such as Jaguar Land Rover’s owner Tata’s planned electric battery factory, to the grid, under plans being discussed between government and regulators as part of the government’s green industrial revolution strategy.

Amid concerns about supply delays of up to 15 years in hooking up large schemes, the Guardian understands the move would allow Claire Coutinho to request that energy network companies accelerate upgrades to substations and power lines to connect specific new developments.

It is understood that the government and the regulator Ofgem have told National Grid’s electricity systems operator that they are “minded” to adopt its grid reform proposals to change the model for connections, which now moves at a pace set by each network operator.

A source said: “Foreign investors need assurances that, if these things are going to be built, then they can be hooked up quickly. There are physical assets, like substations and cross-Channel cables that transmission companies will need to build or upgrade.”

The government is belatedly attempting to tackle a logjam that has resulted in some developments facing a 10- to 15-year wait for a connection to the grid. Ofgem announced on Monday plans to remove “zombie” projects from the queue to connect up to speed up those ready to produce renewable power for the grid, with wind leading the power mix.

Although no equivalent queue exists for those looking to take power from the grid, ministers and officials are concerned that large projects could struggle to secure final investment and proceed without guarantees over their connection to the electricity supply.

Sources said changes to the rules had been proposed with several big projects in mind: Tata’s new £4bn electric battery factory, expected to be built in Somerset; and the switch to electric arc furnaces at Britain’s biggest steelworks at Port Talbot in south Wales, also owned by the Indian group.

The £1.25bn plan from British Steel, which is owned by China’s Jingye, to replace two blast furnaces at Scunthorpe steelworks, with an electric arc furnace at the north Lincolnshire plant and another at a site in Teesside, North Yorkshire, has also formed part of the proposals. Negotiations over the closure of blast furnaces at Port Talbot and Scunthorpe are expected to lead to thousands of job losses.

All three projects are likely to involve significant investment from the UK government, where a state-owned generation firm has been touted as a cost-saving option, alongside the companies’ overseas owners.

Britain has 10 distribution network operators, including National Grid and Northern Powergrid, which operate monopolies in their regions and handle transmission of power from the grid to end users.

Sources said the move could be announced as soon as this month, and may be included within the “connections action plan”, a broader overhaul of Britain’s network connections.

The plan, which is expected to be announced alongside the chancellor’s autumn statement next week, will rebalance the planning system to help speed up the connection of new solar and windfarms to the grid, as the biggest offshore windfarm begins UK supply this week.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Grid Technologies News

EV Adoption Limits highlight that electric vehicles alone cannot meet emissions targets; life cycle assessment, carbon budgets, clean grids, public transit, and battery materials constraints demand broader decarbonization strategies, city redesign, and active travel.

Key Points

EV Adoption Limits show EVs alone cannot hit climate targets; modal shift, clean grids, and travel demand are essential.

✅ 350M EVs by 2050 still miss 2 C goals without major mode shift

✅ Grid demand rises 41%, requiring clean power and smart charging

✅ Battery materials constraints need recycling, supply diversification

Today there are more than seven million electric vehicles (EVs) in operation around the world, compared with only about 20,000 a decade ago. It’s a massive change – but according to a group of researchers at the University of Toronto’s Faculty of Applied Science & Engineering, it won’t be nearly enough to address the global climate crisis. 

“A lot of people think that a large-scale shift to EVs will mostly solve our climate problems in the passenger vehicle sector,” says Alexandre Milovanoff, a PhD student and lead author of a new paper published in Nature Climate Change. 

“I think a better way to look at it is this: EVs are necessary, but on their own, they are not sufficient.” 

Around the world, many governments are already going all-in on EVs. In Norway, for example, where EVs already account for half of new vehicle sales, the government has said it plans to eliminate sales of new internal combustion vehicles by 2025. The Netherlands aims to follow suit by 2030, with France and Canada's EV goals aiming to follow by 2040. Just last week, California announced plans to ban sales of new internal combustion vehicles by 2035.

Milovanoff and his supervisors in the department of civil and mineral engineering – Assistant Professor Daniel Posen and Professor Heather MacLean – are experts in life cycle assessment, which involves modelling the impacts of technological changes across a range of environmental factors. 

They decided to run a detailed analysis of what a large-scale shift to EVs would mean in terms of emissions and related impacts. As a test market, they chose the United States, which is second only to China in terms of passenger vehicle sales. 

“We picked the U.S. because they have large, heavy vehicles, as well as high vehicle ownership per capita and high rate of travel per capita,” says Milovanoff. “There is also lots of high-quality data available, so we felt it would give us the clearest answers.” 

The team built computer models to estimate how many electric vehicles would be needed to keep the increase in global average temperatures to less than 2 C above pre-industrial levels by the year 2100, a target often cited by climate researchers. 

“We came up with a novel method to convert this target into a carbon budget for U.S. passenger vehicles, and then determined how many EVs would be needed to stay within that budget,” says Posen. “It turns out to be a lot.” 

Based on the scenarios modelled by the team, the U.S. would need to have about 350 million EVs on the road by 2050 in order to meet the target emissions reductions. That works out to about 90 per cent of the total vehicles estimated to be in operation at that time. 

“To put that in perspective, right now the total proportion of EVs on the road in the U.S. is about 0.3 per cent,” says Milovanoff. 

“It’s true that sales are growing fast, but even the most optimistic projections of an electric-car revolution suggest that by 2050, the U.S. fleet will only be at about 50 per cent EVs.” 

The team says that, in addition to the barriers of consumer preferences for EV deployment, there are technological barriers such as the strain that EVs would place on the country’s electricity infrastructure, though proper grid management can ease integration. 

According to the paper, a fleet of 350 million EVs would increase annual electricity demand by 1,730 terawatt hours, or about 41 per cent of current levels. This would require massive investment in infrastructure and new power plants, some of which would almost certainly run on fossil fuels in some regions. 

The shift could also impact what’s known as the demand curve – the way that demand for electricity rises and falls at different times of day – which would make managing the national electrical grid more complex, though vehicle-to-grid strategies could help smooth peaks. Finally, there are technical challenges stemming from the supply of critical materials for batteries, including lithium, cobalt and manganese. 

The team concludes that getting to 90 per cent EV ownership by 2050 is an unrealistic scenario. Instead, what they recommend is a mix of policies, rather than relying solely on a 2035 EV sales mandate as a singular lever, including many designed to shift people out of personal passenger vehicles in favour of other modes of transportation. 

These could include massive investment in public transit – subways, commuter trains, buses – as well as the redesign of cities to allow for more trips to be taken via active modes such as bicycles or on foot. They could also include strategies such as telecommuting, a shift already spotlighted by the COVID-19 pandemic. 

“EVs really do reduce emissions, which are linked to fewer asthma-related ER visits in local studies, but they don’t get us out of having to do the things we already know we need to do,” says MacLean. “We need to rethink our behaviours, the design of our cities, and even aspects of our culture. Everybody has to take responsibility for this.” 

The research received support from the Hatch Graduate Scholarship for Sustainable Energy Research and the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

Canada Coal Phase-Out Costs highlight Fraser Institute findings on renewable energy, wind and solar integration, grid reliability, natural gas backup, GDP impacts, greenhouse gas emissions reductions, nuclear alternatives, and transmission upgrades across provincial electricity systems.

Key Points

Costs to replace coal with renewables, impacting taxpayers and ratepayers while ensuring grid reliability.

✅ Fraser Institute estimates $16.8B-$33.7B annually for renewables.

✅ Emissions cut from coal phase-out estimated at only 7.4% nationally.

✅ Natural gas backup and grid upgrades drive major cost increases.

Replacing coal-fired electricity with renewable energy will cost Canadian taxpayers and hydro ratepayers up to $33.7 billion annually, with only minor reductions in global greenhouse gas emissions linked to climate change, according to a new study by the Fraser Institute.

The report, Canadian Climate Policy and its Implications for Electricity Grids by University of Victoria economics professor G. Cornelis van Kooten, said replacing coal-fired electricity with wind and solar power would only cut Canada’s annual emissions by 7.4%,

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s has promised a reduction of 40%-45% compared to Canada’s 2005 emissions by 2030, and progress toward the 2035 clean electricity goals remains uncertain.

The study says emission cuts would be relatively small because coal accounted for only 9.2% of Canada’s electricity generation in 2017. (According to Natural Resources Canada, that number is lower today at 7.4%).

In 2019, the last year for which federal data are available, Canada’s electricity sector generated 8.4% of emissions nationally — 61.1 million tonnes out of 730 million tonnes.

“Despite what advocates, claim, renewable power — including wind and solar — isn’t free and, as Europe's power crisis lessons suggest, comes with only modest benefits to the environment,” van Kooten said.

“Policy makers should be realistic about the costs of reducing greenhouse gas emissions in Canada, which accounts for less than 2% of emissions worldwide.”

The report says the increased costs of operating the electricity grid across Canada — between $16.8 billion and $33.7 billion annually or 1% to 2% of Canada’s annual GDP — would result from having to retain natural gas, consistent with net-zero regulations allowing some natural gas in limited cases, as a backup to intermittent wind and solar power, which cannot provide baseload power to the electricity grid on demand.

Van Kooten said his cost estimates are conservative because his study “could not account for scenarios where the scale of intermittency turned out worse than indicated in our dataset … the costs associated with the value of land in other alternative uses, the need for added transmission lines, as analyses of greening Ontario's grid costs indicate, environmental and human health costs and the life-cycle costs of using intermittent renewable sources of energy, including costs related to the disposal of hazardous wastes from solar panels and wind turbines.”

If nuclear power was used to replace coal-fired electricity, the study says, costs would drop by half — $8.3 billion to $16.7 billion annually — but that’s unrealistic because of the time it takes to build nuclear plants and public opposition to them.

The study says to achieve the federal government’s target of reducing emissions to 40% to 45% below 2005 levels by 2030 and net-zero emissions by 2050, would require building 30 nuclear power plants before 2030, highlighting Canada’s looming power problem as described by analysts — meaning one plant of 1,000-megawatt capacity coming online every four months between now and 2030.

Alternatively, it would take 28,340 wind turbines, each with 2.5-megawatts capacity, or 1,050 turbines being built every four months, plus the costs of upgrading transmission infrastructure.

Van Kooten said he based his calculations on Alberta, which generates 39.8% of its electricity from coal and the cost of Ontario eliminating coal-fired electricity, even as Ontario electricity getting dirtier in coming years, which generated 25% of its electricity, between 2003 and 2014, replacing it with a combination of natural gas, nuclear and wind and solar power.

According to Natural Resources Canada, Nova Scotia generates 49.9% of its electricity from coal, Saskatchewan 42.9%, and New Brunswick 17.2%.

In 2018, the Trudeau government announced plans to phase-out traditional coal-fired electricity by 2030, though the Stop the Shock campaign seeks to bring back coal power in some regions. 

Canada and the U.K. created the “Powering Past Coal Alliance” in 2017, aimed at getting other countries to phase out the use of coal to generate electricity.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Power Generation News

Ukraine Wind Energy Resilience shields the grid with wind power along the Black Sea, dispersing turbines to withstand missile attacks, accelerate clean energy transition, aid EU integration, and strengthen energy security and rapid recovery.

Key Points

A strategy in Ukraine using wind farms to harden the grid, ensure clean power, and speed recovery from missile strikes.

✅ Distributed turbines reduce single-point-of-failure risk

✅ Faster repair of substations and lines than power plants

✅ Supports EU-aligned clean energy and grid security goals

The giants catch the wind with their huge arms, helping to keep the lights on in Ukraine — newly built windmills, on plains along the Black Sea.

In 15 months of war, Russia has launched countless missiles and exploding drones at power plants, hydroelectric dams and substations, trying to black out as much of Ukraine as it can, as often as it can, even amid talk of limiting attacks on energy sites that has surfaced, in its campaign to pound the country into submission.

The new Tyligulska wind farm stands only a few dozen miles from Russian artillery, but Ukrainians say it has a crucial advantage over most of the country’s grid, helping stabilize the system even as electricity exports have occasionally resumed under fire.

A single, well-placed missile can damage a power plant severely enough to take it out of action, but Ukrainian officials say that doing the same to a set of windmills — each one tens of meters apart from any other — would require dozens of missiles. A wind farm can be temporarily disabled by striking a transformer substation or transmission lines, but these are much easier to repair than power plants.

“It is our response to Russians,” said Maksym Timchenko, CEO of DTEK Group, the company that built the turbines in the southern Mykolaiv region — the first phase of what is planned as Eastern Europe’s largest wind farm. “It is the most profitable and, as we know now, most secure form of energy.”

Ukraine has had laws in place since 2014 to promote a transition to renewable energy, both to lower dependence on Russian energy imports, with periods when electricity exports resumed to neighbors, and because it was profitable. But that transition still has a long way to go, and the war makes its prospects, like everything else about Ukraine’s future, murky.

In 2020, 12% of Ukraine’s electricity came from renewable sources — barely half the percentage for the European Union. Plans for the Tyligulska project call for 85 turbines producing up to 500 megawatts of electricity. That’s enough for 500,000 apartments — an impressive output for a wind farm, but less than 1% of the country’s prewar generating capacity.

After the Kremlin began its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the need for new power sources became acute, prompting deliveries such as a mobile gas turbine power plant to bolster capacity. Russia has bombarded Ukraine’s power plants and cut off delivery of the natural gas that fueled some of them.

Russian occupation forces have seized a large part of the country’s power supply, and Russia has built power lines to reactivate the Zaporizhzhia plant in occupied territory, ensuring that its output does not reach territory still held by Ukraine. They hold the single largest generator, the 5,700-megawatt Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant, which has been damaged repeatedly in fighting and has stopped transmitting energy to the grid, with UN inspectors warning of mines at the site during recent visits. They also control 90% of Ukraine’s renewable energy plants, which are concentrated in the southeast.

The postwar recovery plans Ukraine has presented to supporters including the European Union, which it hopes to join, feature a major new commitment to clean energy, even as a controversial proposal on Ukraine’s nuclear plants continues to stir debate.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Power Generation News

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

Key Points

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

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

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

✅ Aims to keep electricity costs low with renewable policy

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

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

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

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News

UK Home Solar Panel Installation drives self-consumption as PV panels, hybrid inverters, and smart meters cut grid demand, enable EV charging, and prepare battery storage, even in cloudy winters, with app-based monitoring and MCS-certified installers.

Key Points

A residential PV setup reducing grid reliance via panels, hybrid inverters, smart meters, and battery-ready design.

✅ Cuts grid use; boosts self-consumption with PV generation

✅ Hybrid inverters enable future battery storage integration

✅ Smart meter and app monitor output, EV charging patterns

In a town north of London, the weather's been cloudy over the winter months. But it didn't stop this homeowner from installing solar panels in December.

On his smart metre, Kumi Thiruchelvam looks satisfied at the "0 watts" showing up under electricity. It's about 10 am, and he's not using any electricity from the grid.

Cost of installation? Between £12,000 and £13,000 (€13,500-€14,500), a fair chunk of savings, even for Thiruchelvam, who lives on a private avenue in Luton.

The investment was common sense for him following the surge in energy prices caused by the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

According to the Office of National Statistics, electricity prices in the UK had increased by 67 per cent in January 2023 compared to January 2022, while pilots show parked EVs can earn from grids in Europe, offering some relief.

Solar power installations doubled in 2022 compared to 2021, according to MCS, the standards organisation in charge of solar installations, a shift aligned with the UK grid's net-zero transition underway today.

"We've had a combination of soaring energy prices around the world, and then also we've increased our electricity consumption in the home through a number of reasons, including electric vehicles and emerging EV-solar integration trends," says Thiruchelvam.

His family owns a big house and no less than three electric vehicles, some of which can now power a home for days during outages, so their electricity consumption is higher than the normal household, about 12,000 kWh per year.

Around two-thirds should now be provided by solar panels, and EV owners can sell electricity back to the grid in some schemes as well, diversifying benefits.

"We originally sought the configuration to be rear, which is where the sun comes up, but we went for the front because it spends more time in the front throughout most of the year than in the rear. Also, there's more shade in the rear with trees," he says.

To get a quote for the installation, Thiruchelvam used Otovo, a Norwegian company which recently launched in the UK.

Using their app, he can monitor the electricity generated by his photovoltaic (PV) installation from his phone. The data comes from the inverters installed in the attic.

Their role is to change the direct current generated by the solar panels into alternating current to power appliances in the house safely.

They also communicate with the grid and monitor the electricity generated, supporting emerging vehicle-to-building charging strategies for demand management.

"We went for two hybrid inverters, allowing me to use a battery in the future or tap stored EV energy for buildings if needed," says Thiruchelvam.

"But because battery technology is still evolving, I chose not to. And also I viewed at that time that we would be consuming everything we'd be generating. So we didn't. But most likely I will upgrade the system as we approach summer with batteries."

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News