Intersolar Europe restart 2021: solar power is becoming increasingly popular in Poland

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

100% Renewable Energy Transition unites solar, wind, hydropower, geothermal, and bioenergy with storage, smart grids, and sector coupling, delivering decarbonization, energy security, and lower LCOE amid post-Fukushima policy shifts and climate resilience goals.

Key Points

It is a pathway using all renewables plus storage and grids to fully decarbonize power, heat, transport, and industry.

✅ Integrates solar, wind, hydro, geothermal, and bioenergy

✅ Uses storage, smart grids, and sector coupling for reliability

✅ Requires enabling policies, finance, and rapid deployment

Renewable energy organizations representing different spheres of the renewable energy community have gathered on the occasion of the tenth anniversary of the Great East Japan Earthquake and Fukushima nuclear accident to emphasize that renewable energies are not only available in abundance, with global renewable power on course to shatter more records, but ready to deliver a renewable world.

The combination of all renewable technologies, be it bioenergy, geothermal energy, hydropower, ocean energy, solar energy or wind power, in particular in combination with storage options, can satisfy all energy needs of mankind, be it for power, heating/cooling, transportation, or industrial processes.

Renewables have seen tremendous growth rates and cost reduction over the past two decades, but there are still many barriers that need to be addressed for a faster renewable energy deployment to eventually achieve global 100% renewable energy, as outlined in an on the road to 100% renewables initiative that charts the path. It is up to political decision-makers to create the legislative and regulatory conditions so that the renewable energy community can act as fast as needed.

Such rapid switch towards renewables is not only a must in light of nuclear risks and the growing threats of climate change, but also the necessary response to the current pandemic situation. And it will allow those hundreds of millions of humans in unserved areas to get for the first time ever access to modern energy services, as noted by a new IRENA report that details how renewables can decarbonise the energy sector and improve lives.

Speakers from the renewable energy community presented today in a joint webinar that a renewable future is a realistic vision, representing:

Energy Watch Group, Global100RE Platform, Global100RE Strategy Group, International Geothermal Association, ISEP Japan, REN Alliance, World Bioenergy Association, World Wind Energy Association.

Dr. Tetsunari Iida, Director of the Institute for Sustainable Energy Policies ISEP Japan:

Ten years ago, on 11 March 2021, the Great East Japan Earthquake and Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant accident occurred. It is a "coincidence of global history" that it now coincides with the starting point of the 100% renewable energy initiative that is accelerating around the world.

The world has changed dramatically since 311. Germany, Italy, Switzerland, Taiwan, South Korea, China and many other countries were all shocked by 311 and shifted their focus from nuclear power to renewable energy, and in the U.S. clean energy industries are setting sights on market majority to accelerate this trend. The next ten years will be the decade in which this perception will rapidly become the "new reality". 311 was the "starting point" for a structural energy shift in world history.

Hans-Josef Fell, former MP, President of the Energy Watch Group and co-initiator of the Global100RE Strategy Group:

The disasters of Fukushima and Chernobyl are urging the entire world to quickly end the use of atomic energy, and many call for a fossil fuel lockdown to catalyze a climate revolution alongside the transition. Contrary to what is often claimed, nuclear energy cannot make a contribution to climate protection, but only creates immense problems with toxic radioactivity emissions, nuclear waste, atomic bomb material and the dangers of a nuclear catastrophe. In contrast, 100% renewable energies until 2030 can help achieve climate protection and a simultaneous nuclear phase-out, according to a recently published statement by a world-leading group of energy researchers from the USA, EU and Australia.

Their research suggests that a 100% renewable energy supply, including storage systems, can provide full energy security for all of mankind by 2030 and will even be cheaper than the existing nuclear and fossil energy supply, and with over 30% of global electricity already from renewables, momentum is strong. The only requirement for implementation is the right decisions taken by decision makers both in governments and industry. All technical and economic prerequisites for a disruptive conversion of the global energy supply to 100% renewable energies are already in place.

Hon. Peter Rae AO, President of WWEA and Honorary Chairman of the REN Alliance:

40 years ago, the idea of developing nuclear power appealed to me as a non-polluting method of generating electricity. So I studied it. How to deal with waste and how to ensure it would not create a danger to life. Along came Chernobyl and other accidents. Storage of waste was leaving dangerous hiding places while some waste was alleged to be dumped at sea. I became more and more concerned. There were demonstrations that the existing methods were dangerous and required very strict construction and operational tolerances - up went the cost. Long delays and huge cost increases. I had visited nuclear power stations and talked to expert proponents in UK, France, US, Taiwan and Australia, and debates such as New Zealand's electricity future reflect similar concerns. The more I did the more certain I became that it was not the way to go. Then Fukushima put the dangers and cost beyond doubt.

Let's get on with the rollover to renewables.

Dr. Marit Brommer, Executive Director of the International Geothermal Association IGA:

The IGA is proud to work with all renewable energy associations to continuously provide a unified voice to a cleaner energy future. The Geothermal sector is proven to be a partner of choice for many locations in the world serving baseload power and clean heat to customers. We are particularly interested in the increased attention system integration gets, which underpins the importance of all renewables coming together at events such as the webinar organised by the WWEA.

Christian Rakos, President of the World Bioenergy Association:

The IPCC has emphasized the important role of sustainable bioenergy for climate protection. Recent advances in technology allow us to use feedstock from forestry, wood processing and agricultural production in an efficient and clean way. Today, bioenergy already contributes 12 - 13% to global final energy demand. Importantly, contribution from bioenergy is more than 5 times as much as nuclear energy worldwide. Together with other renewable energy technologies such as solar, wind, geothermal and hydropower, bioenergy can increase the contribution in a substantial way to meet the energy demands of all end use sectors and meet the international energy and climate goals.

Stefan Gsanger, Secretary General of the World Wind Energy Association and Co-chair of the Global100RE Platform:

The switch to a renewable energy future requires new political and economic thinking: from centralised structures with few large actors towards decentralised, participatory models with millions of communities and citizens playing an active role, not only as consumers but also as producers of energy. To make this new paradigm the predominant energy paradigm is the true challenge of the energy transformation which we as the world community are facing. If we manage this shift well and on time, billions of people across the globe, in industrialised and developing countries alike, will benefit and will face a bright future.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy 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

Pyroelectric Energy Harvesting captures low-grade heat via thin-film materials, converting temperature fluctuations into power for waste heat recovery in electronics, vehicles, and industrial machinery, offering a thermoelectric alternative for microelectronics and exascale systems.

Key Points

Thin-film pyroelectric harvesting turns temperature changes into electricity, enabling low-grade waste heat recovery.

✅ Converts low-grade heat fluctuations into usable power

✅ Thin-film design suits microelectronics and edge devices

✅ Alternative to thermoelectrics for waste heat recovery

The electronic device you are reading this on is currently producing a modest to significant amount of waste heat that emerging thermoelectric materials could help recover in principle. In fact, nearly 70% of the energy produced annually in the US is ultimately wasted as heat, much of it less than 100 degrees Celsius. The main culprits are computers and other electronic devices, vehicles, as well as industrial machinery. Heat waste is also a big problem for supercomputers, because as more circuitry is condensed into smaller and smaller areas, the hotter those microcircuits get.

It’s also been estimated that a single next-generation exascale supercomputer could feasibly use up to 10% of the energy output of just one coal-fired power station, and that nearly all of that energy would ultimately be wasted as heat.

What if it were possible to convert that heat energy into a useable energy source, and even to generate electricity at night from temperature differences as well?

#google#

It’s not a new idea, of course. In fact the possibility of thermoelectric energy generation, where thermal energy is turned into electricity was recognised as early as 1821, around the same time that Michael Faraday developed the electric motor.

Unfortunately, when the heat source is ‘low grade’, aka less than 100 degrees Celsius, a number of limitations arise, and related approaches for nighttime renewable generation face similar challenges as well. For it to work well, you need materials that have quite high electrical conductivity, but low thermal conductivity. It’s not an easy combination to come by.

Taking a different approach, researchers at the University of California, Berkeley, have developed thin-film that uses pyroelectric harvesting to capture heat-waste and convert heat to electricity in prototype demonstrations. The findings were published today in Nature Materials.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Power Generation News

France EV Bonus Eligibility Rules prioritize lifecycle carbon footprint, manufacturing emissions, battery sourcing, and transport impacts, reshaping electric car incentives and excluding many China-made EVs while aiming for WTO-compliant, low-emission industrial policy.

Key Points

France's EV bonus rules score lifecycle emissions to favor low-carbon models and limit incentives for China-made EVs.

✅ Scores energy, assembly, transport, and battery criteria

✅ Likely excludes China-made EVs with coal-heavy production

✅ Aims to align incentives with WTO-compliant climate goals

France has published new eligibility rules for electric car incentives to exclude EVs made in China, even though carmakers in Europe do not have more affordable rival models on the French market.

WHY IS FRANCE REVISING ITS EV BONUS ELIGIBILITY RULES?
The French government currently offers buyers a cash incentive of between 5,000 and 7,000 euros in cash for eligible models to get more electric cars on the road, at a total cost of 1 billion euros ($1.07 billion) per year.

However, in the absence of cheap European-made EVs, a third of all incentives are going to consumers buying EVs made in China, a French finance ministry source said. The trend has helped spur a Chinese EV push into Europe and a growing competitive gap with domestic producers.

The scheme will be revamped from Dec. 15 to take into account the carbon emitted in a model's manufacturing process.

President Emmanuel Macron and government ministers have made little secret that they want to make sure French state cash is not benefiting Chinese carmakers.

WHAT DO THE NEW RULES DO?
Under the new rules, car models will be scored against government-set thresholds for the amount of energy used to make their materials, in their assembly and transport to market, as well as what type of battery the vehicle has.

Because Chinese industry generally relies heavily on coal-generated electricity, the criteria are likely to put the bonus out of Chinese carmakers' reach.

The government, which is to publish in December the names of models meeting the new standards, says that the criteria are compliant with WTO rules because exemptions are allowed for health and environmental reasons, and similar Canada EV sales regulations are advancing as well.

WILL IT DO ANYTHING?
With Chinese cars estimated to cost 20% less than European-made competitors, the bonus could make a difference for vehicles with a price tag of less than 25,000 euros, amid an accelerating global transition to EVs that is reshaping price expectations.

But French car buyers will have to wait because Stellantis' (STLAM.MI) Slovakia-made e-C3 city car and Renault's (RENA.PA) France-made R5 are not due to hit the market until 2024.

Nonetheless, many EVs made in China will remain competitive even without the cash incentive, reflecting projections that within a decade many drivers could be in EVs.

With a starting price of 30,000 euros, SAIC group's (600104.SS) MG4 will be less expensive than Renault's equivalent Megane compact car, which starts at 38,000 euros - or 33,000 euros with a 5,000-euro incentive.

Since its 46,000-euro starting price is just below the 47,000-euro price threshold for the bonus, Tesla's (TSLA.O) Y model - one of the best selling electric vehicles in France - could in theory also be impacted by the new rules for vehicles made in China.

S&P Global Mobility analyst Lorraine Morard said that even if most Chinese cars are ineligible for the bonus they would probably get 7-8% of France's electric car market next year, even as the EU's EV share continues to rise, instead of 10% otherwise.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure 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