Ontario Making it Easier to Build Electric Vehicle Charging Stations

East-West Power Transmission Grid links provinces via hydroelectric interconnects, clean energy exports, and reliable grid infrastructure, requiring federal funding, multibillion-dollar transmission lines, and coordinated planning across Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Ontario, and Newfoundland.

Key Points

A proposed interprovincial grid to share hydro power, improve reliability, and cut emissions with federal funding.

✅ Hydroelectric exports from Manitoba to prairie and eastern provinces

✅ New interconnects and transmission lines require federal funding

✅ Enhances grid reliability and supports coal phase-out

Manitoba's energy minister is recharging the idea of building an east-west power transmission grid and says the federal government needs to help.

Cliff Cullen told the Energy Council of Canada's western conference on Tuesday that Manitoba has "a really clean resource that we're ready to share with our neighbours" as new hydro generation projects, including new turbines come online.

"This is a really important time to have that discussion about the reliability of energy and how we can work together to make that happen," said Cullen, minister of growth, enterprise and trade.

"And, clearly, an important component of that is the transmission side of it. We've been focused on transmission ... north and south, and we haven't had that dialogue about east-west."

Most hydro-producing provinces currently focus on exports to the United States, though transmission constraints can limit incremental deliveries.

Saskatchewan Energy Minister Dustin Duncan said his province, which relies heavily on coal-fired electricity plants, could be interested in getting electricity from Manitoba, even as a Manitoba Hydro warning highlights limits on serving new energy-intensive customers.

"They're big projects. They're multibillion-dollar projects," Duncan said after speaking on a panel with Cullen and Alberta Energy Minister Margaret McCuaig-Boyd.

"Even trying to do the interconnects to the transmission grid, I don't think they're as easy or as maybe low cost as we would just imagine, just hooking up some power lines across the border. It takes much more work than that."

Cullen said there's a lot of work to do on building east-west transmission lines if provinces are going to buy and sell electricity from each other. He suggested that money is a key factor.

"Each province has done their own thing in terms of transmission within their jurisdiction and we have to have that dialogue about how that interconnectivity is going to work. And these things don't happen overnight," he said.

"Hopefully the federal government will be at the table to have a look at that, because it's a fundamental expense, a capital expense, to connect our provinces."

The 2016 federal budget said significant investment in Canada's electricity sector will be needed over the next 20 years to replace aging infrastructure and meet growing demand for electricity, with Manitoba's demand potentially doubling over that period.

The budget allocated $2.5 million over two years to Natural Resources Canada for regional talks and studies to identify the most promising electricity infrastructure projects.

In April, the government told The Canadian Press that Natural Resources Canada has been talking with ministry representatives and electric utilities in the western and Atlantic provinces.

The idea of developing an east-west transmission grid has long been talked about as a way to bring energy reliability to Canadians.

At their annual meeting in 2007, Canada's premiers supported development and enhancement of transmission facilities across the country, although the premiers fell short of a firm commitment to an east-west energy grid.

Manitoba, Ontario and Newfoundland and Labrador are the most vocal proponents of east-west transmission, even as Quebec's electricity ambitions have reopened old wounds in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Manitoba and Newfoundland want the grid because of the potential to develop additional exports of hydro power, while Ontario sees the grid as an answer to its growing power needs.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Power Generation News

Home Solar Cost vs Utility Bills compares electricity rates, ROI, incentives, and battery storage, explaining payback, financing, and grid fees while highlighting long-term savings, rate volatility, and backup power resilience for homeowners.

Key Points

Compares home solar pricing and financing to utility rates, outlining savings, incentives, ROI, and backup power value.

✅ Average retail rates rose 59% in 20 years; volatility persists

✅ Typical 7.15 kW system costs $18,950 before incentives

✅ Federal ITC and state rebates improve ROI and payback

When shopping for a home solar system, sometimes the quoted price can leave you wondering why someone would move forward with something that seems so expensive. 

When compared with the status quo, electricity delivered from the utility, the price may not seem so high after all. First, pv magazine will examine the status quo, and how much you can expect to pay for power if you don’t get solar panels. Then, we will examine the average cost of solar arrays today and introduce incentives that boost home solar value.

The cost of doing nothing

Generally, early adopters have financially benefited from going solar by securing price certainty and stemming the impact of steadily increasing utility-bill costs, particularly for energy-insecure households who pay more for electricity.

End-use residential electric customers pay an average of $0.138/kWh in the United States, according to the Energy Information Administration (EIA). In California, that rate is $0.256/kWh, it averages $0.246/kWh across New England, $0.126/kWh in the South Atlantic region, and $0.124/kWh in the Mountain West region.

EIA reports that the average home uses 893 kWh per month, so based on the average retail rate of $0.138/kWh, that’s an electric bill of about $123 monthly, or $229 monthly in California.

Over the last 20 years, EIA data show that retail electricity prices have increased 59% across the United States, with evidence indicating that renewables are not making electricity more expensive, suggesting other factors have driven costs higher, or 2.95% each year.

This means based on historical rates, the average US homeowner can expect to pay $39,460 over the next 20 years on electricity bills. On average, Californians could pay $73,465 over 20 years.

Recent global events show just how unstable prices can be for commodities, and energy is no exception here, with solar panel sales doubling in the UK as homeowners look to cut soaring bills. What will your utility bill cost in 20 years?

These estimated bills also assume that energy use in the home is constant over 20 years, but as the United States electrifies its homes, adds more devices, and adopts electric vehicles, it is fair to expect that many homeowners will use more electricity going forward.

Another factor that may exacerbate rate raising is the upgrade of the national transmission grid. The infrastructure that delivers power to our homes is aging and in need of critical upgrades, and it is estimated that a staggering $500 billion will be spent on transmission buildout by 2035. This half-trillion-dollar cost gets passed down to homeowners in the form of raised utility bill rates.

The benefit of backup power may increase as time goes on as well. Power outages are on the rise across the United States, and recent assessments of the risk of power outages underscore that outages related to severe weather events have doubled in the last 20 years. Climate change-fueled storms are expected to continue to rise, so the role of battery backup in providing reliable energy may increase significantly.

The truth is, we don’t know how much power will cost in 20 years. Though it has increased 59% across the nation in the last 20 years, there is no way to be certain what it will cost going forward. That is where solar has a benefit over the status quo. By purchasing solar, you are securing price certainty going forward, making it easier to budget and plan for the future.

So how do these costs compare to going solar?

Cost of solar

As a general trend, prices for solar have fallen. In 2010, it cost about $40,000 to install a residential solar system, and since then, prices have fallen by as much as 70%, and about 37% in the last five years. However, prices have increased slightly in 2022 due to shipping costs, materials costs, and possible tariffs being placed on imported solar goods, and these pressures aren’t expected to be alleviated in the near-term.

When comparing quotes, the best metric for an apples-to-apples comparison is the cost per watt. Price benchmarking by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory shows the average cost per watt for the nation was $2.65/W DC in 2021, and the average system size was 7.15 kW. So, an average system would cost about $18,950. With 12.5 kWh of battery energy storage, the average cost was $4.26/W, representing an average price tag of $30,460 with batteries included.

The prices above do not include any incentives. Currently, the federal government applies a 26% investment tax credit to the system, bringing down system costs for those who qualify to $14,023 without batteries, and $22,540 with batteries. Compared to the potential $39,460 in utility bills, buying a solar system outright in cash appears to show a clear financial benefit.

Many homeowners will need financing to buy a solar system. Shorter terms can achieve rates as low as 2.99% or less, but financing for a 20-year solar loan typically lands between 5% to 8% or more. Based on 20-year, 7% annual percentage rate terms, a $14,000 system would total about $26,000 in loan payments over 20 years, and the system with batteries included would total about $42,000 in loan payments.

Often when you adopt solar, the utility will still charge you a grid access fee even if your system produces 100% of your needs. These vary from utility to utility but are often around $10 a month. Over 20 years, that equates to about $2,400 that you’ll still need to pay to the utility, plus any costs for energy you use beyond what your system provides.

Based on these average figures, a homeowner could expect to see as much as $12,000 in savings with a 20-year financed system. Homeowners in regions whose retail energy price exceeds the national average could see savings in multiples of that figure.

Though in this example batteries appear to be marginally more expensive than the status quo over a 20-year term, they improve the home by adding the crucial service of backup power, and as battery costs continue to fall they are increasingly being approved to participate in grid services, potentially unlocking additional revenue streams for homeowners.

Another thing to note is most solar systems are warranted for 25 years rather than the 20 used in the status quo example. A panel can last a good 35 years, and though it will begin to produce less in old age, any power produced by a panel you own is money back in your pocket.

Incentives and home value

Many states have additional incentives to boost the value of solar, too, and federal proposals to increase solar generation tenfold could remake the U.S. electricity system. Checking the Database of State Incentives for Renewables (DSIRE) will show the incentives available in your state, and a solar representative should be able to walk you through these benefits when you receive a quote. State incentives change frequently and vary widely, and in some cases are quite rich, offering thousands of dollars in additional benefits.

Another factor to consider is home value. A study by Zillow found that solar arrays increase a home value by 4.1% on average. For a $375,000 home, that’s an increase of $15,375 in value. In most states home solar is exempt from property taxes, making it a great way to boost value without paying taxes for it.

Bottom line

We’ve shared a lot of data on national averages and the potential cost of power going forward, but is solar for you? In the past, early adopters have been rewarded for going solar, and celebrate when they see $0 electric bills paid to the utility company.

Each home is different, each utility is different, and each homeowner has different needs, so evaluating whether solar is right for your home will take a little time and analysis. Representatives from solar companies will walk you through this analysis, and it’s generally a good rule of thumb to get at least three quotes for comparison.

A great resource for starting your research is the Solar Calculator developed by informational site SolarReviews. The calculator offers a quote and savings estimate based on local rates and incentives available to your area. The website also features reviews of installers, equipment, and more.

Some people will save tens of thousands of dollars in the long run with solar, while others may witness more modest savings. Solar will also provide the home clean, local energy, and U.S. solar generation is projected to reach 20% by 2050 as capacity expands, making an impact both on mitigating climate change and in supporting local jobs.

One indisputable benefit of solar is that it will offer greater clarity into what your electricity bills will cost over the next couple of decades, rather than leaving you exposed to whatever rates the utility company decides to charge in the future.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News

Ontario EV Clean Electricity Plan aligns EV adoption with clean power, natural gas phaseout, and grid decarbonization, cutting greenhouse gas emissions. Parties propose net-zero by 2030 as IESO warns rising gas use undermines climate gains.

Key Points

A plan to link EV growth to a cleaner grid by phasing out gas, boosting renewables, and targeting net-zero power.

✅ Parties back EVs; most pledge gas phaseout by 2030

✅ IESO projects quadrupled grid emissions under more gas

✅ Clean power needed to maximize EV climate benefits

Ontario’s political leaders are unanimously promoting electric vehicles (EVs) in their election platforms, even as Ontario's EV charging network remains only partially complete by a recent deadline. But if the electricity that powers those vehicles continues to come from burning fossil fuels, the province won’t reap the full environmental benefit of EVs, the Ontario Clean Air Alliance says.

“If we’re going to get the maximum benefit of electric vehicles, we’ve got to have a clean electricity supply,” said Jack Gibbons, chair of the alliance.

The environmental advocacy group surveyed the province’s Progressive Conservative, Liberal, NDP and Green parties about where they stand on generating electricity from natural gas, a fossil fuel. Only three committed to phasing out Ontario’s gas plants, a step seen as essential for supporting Canada's EV goals over time.

The NDP promised an electricity grid with net-zero emissions by 2030, while federal targets like the 2035 EV sales mandate shape transport electrification as well. The Liberals pledged to bring electricity emissions "as close to zero as possible by 2030.” The Green Party plans to make Ontario’s electricity “emission-free as quickly as possible,” aiming for a gas phaseout by 2030. The Progressive Conservatives did not answer the survey and did not respond to requests for comment from Canada’s National Observer.

Affordability and reliability were the top concerns for all three parties that responded, including the cost of expanding EV charging stations across the province.

Ontario used to get 25 per cent of its electricity from coal-fired power plants, even as 2019 fossil-fuel electricity share remained significant nationwide. However, in 1997, Gibbons formed the alliance to campaign against coal, and the province’s last coal-fired plant closed in 2014, leaving Ontario with one of North America’s cleanest electricity systems. At the time, Gibbons said, transitioning to gas-fired electricity made sense.

Now, Doug Ford’s Progressive Conservatives plan to double-down on gas-fired electricity generation to meet future demand, despite a looming energy storage supply crunch that is reshaping planning. As a result, planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions from electricity generation will more than quadruple by 2030, according to Ontario’s Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO).

If that happens, Ontario will lose 30 per cent of the progress it made by phasing out coal.

“If you have an increasing percentage of your electricity generated with fossil fuels, that undermines the activities of a variety of sectors in the society,” said Peter Tabuns, NDP candidate for Toronto-Danforth and former NDP energy and climate critic. “Ford's position of not committing to greening the system undermines the goals.”

In 2020, the alliance spearheaded a campaign calling on the Ford government to phase out the province’s gas plants. Thirty-two municipalities supported the campaign, and in Northern Ontario, Sudbury eco groups say sustainability is key to the grid's future. Many cities have said they will not be able to meet their own goals to fight climate change unless Ontario stops using fossil fuels for electricity.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

British Columbia Green Infrastructure Funding expands CleanBC Communities Fund projects, from EV charging stations to sewage heat recovery, delivering low-carbon heat in Vancouver and supporting Indigenous communities and COVID-19 recovery through the Green Infrastructure Stream.

Key Points

A joint federal-provincial program backing CleanBC to fund EV chargers, sewage heat recovery, and low-carbon heat.

✅ Funds EV charging across Vancouver Island and northern B.C.

✅ Expands sewage heat recovery via Vancouver's NEU

✅ Joint federal, provincial, local, and Indigenous partners

The governments of Canada and British Columbia are investing in infrastructure to get projects under way that meet people's needs, address the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, and help communities restart their economies.  

Strategic investments in green infrastructure are key to creating clean healthy communities, making life more affordable, and building a clean electricity future for Canada.

Today, the Honourable Jonathan Wilkinson, Minister of Environment and Climate Change and Member of Parliament for North Vancouver, on behalf of the Honourable Catherine McKenna, Minister of Infrastructure and Communities, and the Honourable George Heyman, B.C. Minister of Environment and Climate Change Strategy, announced funding for 11 projects, alongside initiatives like the province's hydrogen project, to help B.C. communities save energy and reduce pollution.  

In Vancouver, the Sewage Heat Recovery Expansion Project will increase the capacity of the Neighbourhood Energy Utility (NEU) to provide buildings in the False Creek area with low-carbon heat and hot water. The NEU recycles waste heat and uses a mix of renewable and conventional natural gas to reduce harmful emissions.

Funding is also going towards expanding the network of Level-2 electric vehicle (EV) charging stations across the province. More than 80 new stations will be installed in communities across mid-Vancouver Island, as well as northern and central B.C., making clean transportation options, supported by incentives for zero-emission vehicles, more viable for more people.

These, along with the other projects announced today, will create jobs and strengthen local economies now while promoting sustainable growth and residents' long-term health and well-being.

The Government of Canada is investing more than $28.5 million in these projects through the Green Infrastructure Stream (GIS) of the Investing in Canada plan, and local and Indigenous communities are contributing more than $13 million. The Government of British Columbia is contributing nearly $18 million through the CleanBC Communities Fund, part of the federal Investing in Canada plan's Green Infrastructure Stream, which also supports rebates for home and workplace charging initiatives.

Quotes

"Expanding electric vehicle charging stations across Vancouver Island will make clean transportation more viable for more people. Encouraging green energy solutions like this is essential to building strong resilient communities. Canada's Infrastructure plan invests in thousands of projects, creates jobs across the country, and builds stronger communities."

The Honourable Jonathan Wilkinson, Minister of Environment and Climate Change and Member of Parliament for North Vancouver, on behalf of the Honourable Catherine McKenna, Minister of Infrastructure and Communities

"This investment through the Green Infrastructure Stream is a great example of how federal partnerships with all levels of government can ensure a sustainable future for generations. Amidst COVID-19, we can rebuild better with a green recovery."

Hedy Fry, Member of Parliament for Vancouver Centre

"People deserve access to clean air, clean energy and clean economic opportunities and by investing in new clean infrastructure projects, we will reduce pollution, build better buildings, improve transportation options with EV charger rebates and make life more affordable for people. By working together with the City of Vancouver and other B.C. communities, along with the federal government, we're helping build back a stronger, better B.C. for everyone following the impacts of COVID-19 through our CleanBC plan."

The Honourable George Heyman, Minister of Environment and Climate Change Strategy Government

"This is an important investment when it comes to addressing the climate emergency our city is facing. Nearly 60 per cent of carbon pollution created in Vancouver comes from burning natural gas to heat our buildings and provide hot water. This investment from our provincial and federal partners will help us greatly expand the Neighbourhood Energy Utility to reduce our carbon footprint even further."

His Worship, Kennedy Stewart, Mayor of Vancouver

Quick facts

Through the Investing in Canada Plan, the Government of Canada is investing more than $180 billion over 12 years in public transit projects, green infrastructure, social infrastructure, trade and transportation routes, and Canada's rural and northern communities.
The Government of Canada has invested $4.2 billion in 525 infrastructure projects across British Columbia under the Investing in Canada plan.
To support Canadians and communities during the COVID-19 pandemic, a new stream has been added to the over $33-billion Investing in Canada Infrastructure Program to help fund pandemic-resilient infrastructure. Existing program streams have also been adapted to include more eligible project categories.
The new Canada Healthy Communities Initiative will provide up to $31 million in existing federal funding to support communities as they deploy innovative ways to adapt spaces and services to respond to immediate and ongoing needs arising from COVID-19 over the next two years.
The 11 projects are part of the first intake of the CleanBC Communities Fund, which committed more than $63 million in joint federal-provincial funding. Additional projects from the first intake will be announced soon.
The second intake for the CleanBC Communities Fund is now open for applications from local governments, Indigenous groups, not-for-profits and for-profit organizations in B.C.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

USPS Electric Mail Trucks promise zero-emission delivery, lower lifecycle and maintenance costs, and cleaner air. Congressional funding in Build Back Better would modernize the EV fleet and expand charging infrastructure, improving public health nationwide.

Key Points

USPS Electric Mail Trucks are zero-emission delivery vehicles that cut costs, reduce pollution, and improve health.

✅ Lower lifetime fuel and maintenance costs vs gas trucks

✅ Cuts greenhouse gas and NOx emissions in communities

✅ Expands charging infrastructure via federal investments

The U.S. Postal Service faces serious challenges, with billions of dollars in annual losses and total mail volume continuing to decline. Meanwhile, Congress is constantly hamstringing the agency.

But now lawmakers have an opportunity to invest in the Postal Service in a way that would pay dividends for years to come: By electrifying the postal fleet.

Tucked inside the massive social spending and climate package lumbering through the Senate is money for new, cleaner postal delivery trucks. There’s a lot to like about electric postal trucks. They’d significantly improve Americans’ health while also slowing climate change. And it just makes sense for taxpayers over the long term; the Postal Service’s private sector competitors have already made similar investments, as EV adoption reaches an EV inflection point in the market. As Democrats weigh potential areas to cut in President Joe Biden’s Build Back Better plan, this is one provision that should escape the knife.

To call the U.S. Postal Service’s current vehicles “clunkers” would be an understatement. These often decades-old trucks are famous for having no airbags, no air conditioning and a nasty habit of catching fire. So the Postal Service’s recent decision to buy 165,000 replacement trucks is basically a no-brainer. But the main question is whether they will run on electricity or gasoline.

Electric vehicles are newer to the market and still carry a higher sticker price, as seen with electric bus adoption in many cities. But that higher price buys concrete benefits, like lower lifetime fuel and maintenance costs and huge reductions in pollution. Government demand for electric trucks will also push private markets to create better, cheaper vehicles, directly benefiting consumers. So while buying electric postal trucks may be somewhat more costly at first, over the long term, failing to do so could be far costlier.

At some level, this is a straightforward business decision that the Postal Service’s competitors have already made. For instance, Amazon has already deployed some of the 100,000 electric vans it recently ordered, and FedEx has promised a fully electric ground fleet by 2040, while nonprofit investment in electric trucks is accelerating electrification at major ports. In a couple of decades, the Postal Service could be the only carrier still driving dirty gas guzzlers, buying expensive fuel and paying the higher maintenance costs that combustion engines routinely require. Consumers could flock to greener competitors.

Beyond these business advantages, zero-emission vehicles carry other big benefits for the public. The Postal Service recently calculated some of these benefits by estimating the climate harms that going all-electric would avoid, benefits that persist even where electricity generation still includes fossil-generated electricity in nearby grids. Its findings were telling: A fully electric fleet would prevent millions or tens of millions of dollars’ worth of climate-change-related harms to property and human health each year of the trucks’ lifetimes (and this is probably a considerable underestimate). The world leaders that recently gathered at the global climate summit in Glasgow encouraged exactly this type of transition toward low-carbon technologies.

A cleaner postal fleet would benefit Americans in many other important ways. In addition to warming the planet, tailpipe pollutants can have dire health consequences for the people who breathe in the fumes. Mail trucks traverse virtually every neighborhood in the country and often must idle in residential areas, so we all benefit when they stop emitting. And these localized harms are not distributed equally. Some parts of the country — too often, low-income communities of color — already have poor air quality. Removing pollution from dirty mail trucks will especially help these overburdened and underserved populations.

The government’s purchasing power also routinely inspires companies to devise better and cheaper ways to do business. Investments in aerospace technologies, for instance, have spilled over into consumer innovations, giving us GPS technologies and faster, more fuel-efficient passenger jets. Bulk demand for cleaner trucks could inspire similar innovations as companies clamor for government contracts, meaning we all could get cheaper and better green products like car batteries, and the American EV boom could further accelerate those gains.

Additionally, because postal trucks are virtually everywhere in the country, if they go electric, that would mean more charging stations and grid updates everywhere too, and better utility planning for truck fleets to ensure reliable service. Suddenly, that long road trip that discourages many would-be electric car buyers may be simpler, which could boost electric vehicle adoption.

White House climate adviser Gina McCarthy talks with EVgo CEO Cathy Zoi before the start of an event near an EVgo electric car charging station.
ENERGY

The case for electrifying the postal fleet is strong from both a business and a social standpoint. Indeed, even Postmaster General Louis DeJoy, who was appointed during the Trump administration, supports it. But getting there is not so simple. Most private businesses could just borrow the money they need for this investment and pay it back with the long-term savings they would enjoy. But not the Postal Service. Thanks to its byzantine funding structure, it cannot afford electric trucks’ upfront costs unless Congress either provides the money or lets it borrow more. This is the primary reason it has not committed to making more than 10 percent of its fleet electric.

And that returns us to the Build Back Better legislation. The version passed by the House sets aside $7 billion to help the Postal Service buy electric mail trucks — enough to electrify the vast majority of its fleet by the end of the decade.

Biden has made expanding the use of electric vehicles a top priority, setting an ambitious goal of 100 percent zero-emission federal vehicle acquisitions by 2035, and new EPA emission limits aim to accelerate EV adoption. But Sen. Joe Manchin has expressed resistance to some of the climate-related subsidies in the legislation and is also eager to keep costs down. This provision, however, is worthy of the West Virginia Democrat’s support.

Most Americans would see — and benefit from — these trucks on a daily basis. And for an operation that got its start under Benjamin Franklin, it’s a crucial way to keep the Postal Service relevant.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

Wind Turbine Operations and Maintenance Market is expanding as offshore and onshore renewables scale, driven by aging turbines, investment, UAV inspections, and predictive O&M services, despite skills shortages and rising logistics costs.

Key Points

Sector delivering inspection, repair, and predictive services to keep wind assets reliable onshore and offshore.

✅ Aging turbines and investor funding drive service demand

✅ UAV inspections and predictive analytics cut downtime

✅ Offshore growth offsets skills and logistics constraints

Wind turbines are capable of producing vast amounts of electricity at competitive prices, provided they are efficiently maintained and operated. Being a cleaner, greener source of energy, wind energy is also more reliable than other sources of power generation, with growth despite COVID-19 recorded across markets. Therefore, the demand for wind energy is slated to soar over the next few years, fuelling the growth of the global market for wind turbine operations and maintenance. By application, offshore and onshore wind turbine operations and maintenance are the two major segments of the market.

Global Wind Turbine Operations and Maintenance Market: Key Trends

The rising number of aging wind turbines emerges as a considerable potential for the growth of the market. The increasing downpour of funds from financial institutions and public and private investors has also been playing a significant role in the expansion of the market, with interest also flowing toward wave and tidal energy technologies that inform O&M practices. On the other hand, insufficient number of skilled personnel, coupled with increasing costs of logistics, remains a key concern restricting the growth of the market. However, the growing demand for offshore wind turbines across the globe is likely to materialize into fresh opportunities.

Global Wind Turbine Operations and Maintenance Market: Market Potential

A number of market players have been offering diverse services with a view to make a mark in the global market for wind turbine operations and maintenance. For instance, Scotland-based SgurrEnergy announced the provision of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), commonly known as drones, as a part of its inspection services. Detailed and accurate assessments of wind turbines can be obtained through these drones, which are fitted with cameras, with four times quicker inspections than traditional methods, claims the company. This new approach has not only reduced downtime, but also has prevented the risks faced by inspection personnel.

The increasing number of approvals and new projects is preparing the ground for a rising demand for wind turbine operations and maintenance. In March 2017, for example, the Scottish government approved the installation of eight 6-megawatt wind turbines off the coast of Aberdeen, towards the northeast. The state of Maryland in the U.S. will witness the installation of a new offshore wind plant, encouraging greater adoption of wind energy in the country. The U.K., a leader in UK offshore wind deployment, has also been keeping pace with the developments, with the installation of a 400-MW offshore wind farm, off the Sussex coast throughout 2017. The Rampion project will be developed by E.on, who has partnered with Canada-based Enbridge Inc. and the UK Green Investment Bank plc.

Global Wind Turbine Operations and Maintenance Market: Regional Outlook

Based on geography, the global market for wind turbine operations and maintenance has been segmented into Asia Pacific, Europe, North America, and Rest of the World (RoW). Countries such as India, China, Spain, France, Germany, Scotland, and Brazil are some of the prominent users of wind energy and are therefore likely to account for a considerable share in the market. In the U.S., favorable government policies are backing the growth of the market, though analyses note that a prolonged solar ITC extension could pressure wind competitiveness. For instance, in 2013, a legislation that permits energy companies to transfer the costs of offshore wind credits to ratepayers was approved. Asia Pacific is a market with vast potential, with India and China being major contributors aiding the expansion of the market.

Global Wind Turbine Operations and Maintenance Market: Competitive Analysis

Some of the major companies operating in the global market for wind turbine operations and maintenance are Gamesa Corporacion Tecnologica, Xinjiang Goldwind Science & Technologies, Vestas Wind Systems A/S, Upwind Solutions, Inc, GE Wind Turbine, Guodian United Power Technology Company Ltd., Nordex SE, Enercon GmbH, Siemens Wind Power GmbH, and Suzlon Group. A number of firms have been focusing on mergers and acquisitions to extend their presence across new regions.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News