Rhode Island issues its plan to achieve 100% renewable electricity by 2030


rhode island sign

Substation Relay Protection Training

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

  • Live Online
  • 12 hours Instructor-led
  • Group Training Available
Regular Price:
$699
Coupon Price:
$599
Reserve Your Seat Today

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

 

Key Points

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

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

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

Related News

Related News

Electric cars won't solve our pollution problems – Britain needs a total transport rethink

UK Transport Policy Overhaul signals bans on petrol and diesel cars, rail franchising reform, 15-minute cities, and active travel, tackling congestion, emissions, microplastics, urban sprawl, and public health with systemic, multimodal planning.

 

Key Points

A shift toward EVs, rail reform, and 15-minute cities to reduce emissions, congestion, and health risks.

✅ Phase-out of petrol and diesel car sales by 2030

✅ National rail franchising replaced with integrated operations

✅ Urban design: 15-minute cities, cycling, and active travel

 

Could it be true? That this government will bring all sales of petrol and diesel cars to an end by 2030, even as a 2035 EV mandate in Canada is derided by critics? That it will cancel all rail franchises and replace them with a system that might actually work? Could the UK, for the first time since the internal combustion engine was invented, really be contemplating a rational transport policy? Hold your horses.

Before deconstructing it, let’s mark this moment. Both announcements might be a decade or two overdue, but we should bank them as they’re essential steps towards a habitable nation.

We don’t yet know exactly what they mean, as the government has delayed its full transport announcement until later this autumn. But so far, nothing that surrounds these positive proposals makes any sense, and the so-called EV revolution often proves illusory in practice.

If the government has a vision for transport, it appears to be plug and play. We’ll keep our existing transport system, but change the kinds of vehicles and train companies that use it. But when you have a system in which structural failure is embedded, nothing short of structural change will significantly improve it.

A switch to electric cars will reduce pollution, though the benefits depend on the power mix; in Canada, Canada’s grid was 18% fossil-fuelled in 2019, for example. It won’t eliminate it, as a high proportion of the microscopic particles thrown into the air by cars, which are highly damaging to our health, arise from tyres grating on the surface of the road. Tyre wear is also by far the biggest source of microplastics pouring into our rivers and the sea. And when tyres, regardless of the engine that moves them, come to the end of their lives, we still have no means of properly recycling them.

Cars are an environmental hazard long before they leave the showroom. One estimate suggests that the carbon emissions produced in building each one equate to driving it for 150,000km. The rise in electric vehicle sales has created a rush for minerals such as lithium and copper, with devastating impacts on beautiful places. If the aim is greatly to reduce the number of vehicles on the road, and replace those that remain with battery-operated models, alongside EV battery recycling efforts, then they will be part of the solution. But if, as a forecast by the National Grid proposes, the current fleet is replaced by 35m electric cars, a University of Toronto study warns they are not a silver bullet, and we’ll simply create another environmental disaster.

Switching power sources does nothing to address the vast amount of space the car demands, which could otherwise be used for greens, parks, playgrounds and homes. It doesn’t stop cars from carving up community and turning streets into thoroughfares and outdoor life into a mortal hazard. Electric vehicles don’t solve congestion, or the extreme lack of physical activity that contributes to our poor health.

So far, the government seems to have no interest in systemic change. It still plans to spend £27bn on building even more roads, presumably to accommodate all those new electric cars. An analysis by Transport for Quality of Life suggests that this road-building will cancel out 80% of the carbon savings from a switch to electric over the next 12 years. But everywhere, even in the government’s feted garden villages and garden towns, new developments are being built around the car.

Rail policy is just as irrational, even though lessons from large electric bus fleets offer cleaner mass transit options. The construction of HS2, now projected to cost £106bn, has accelerated in the past few months, destroying precious wild places along the way, though its weak business case has almost certainly been destroyed by coronavirus.

If one thing changes permanently as a result of the pandemic, it is likely to be travel. Many people will never return to the office. The great potential of remote technologies, so long untapped, is at last being realised. Having experienced quieter cities with cleaner air, few people wish to return to the filthy past.

Like several of the world’s major cities, our capital is being remodelled in response, though why electric buses haven’t taken over remains a live question. The London mayor – recognising that, while fewer passengers can use public transport, a switch to cars would cause gridlock and lethal pollution – has set aside road space for cycling and walking. Greater Manchester hopes to build 1,800 miles of protected pedestrian and bicycle routes.

Cycling to work is described by some doctors as “the miracle pill”, massively reducing the chances of early death: if you want to save the NHS, get on your bike. But support from central government is weak and contradictory, and involves a fraction of the money it is spending on new roads. The major impediment to a cycling revolution is the danger of being hit by a car.

Even a switch to bicycles (including electric bikes and scooters) is only part of the answer. Fundamentally, this is not a vehicle problem but an urban design problem. Or rather, it is an urban design problem created by our favoured vehicle. Cars have made everything bigger and further away. Paris, under its mayor Anne Hidalgo, is seeking to reverse this trend, by creating a “15-minute city”, in which districts that have been treated by transport planners as mere portals to somewhere else become self-sufficient communities – each with their own shops, parks, schools and workplaces, within a 15-minute walk of everyone’s home.

This, I believe, is the radical shift that all towns and cities need. It would transform our sense of belonging, our community life, our health and our prospects of local employment, while greatly reducing pollution, noise and danger. Transport has always been about much more than transport. The way we travel helps to determine the way we live. And at the moment, locked in our metal boxes, we do not live well.

 

Related News

View more

'Consumer Reports' finds electric cars really do save money in the long run

Electric Vehicle Ownership Costs include lower maintenance, repair, and fuel expenses; Consumer Reports shows BEV and PHEV TCO beats ICE over 200,000 miles, with per-mile savings compounding through electricity prices and reduced service.

 

Key Points

Lifetime EV expenses, typically lower than ICE, due to cheaper electricity, reduced maintenance, and fewer repairs.

✅ BEV: $0.012/mi to 50k; $0.028/mi after; vs ICE up to $0.06/mi

✅ PHEV: $0.021/mi to 50k; $0.031/mi after; still below ICE

✅ Savings increase over 200k miles from fuel and service reductions

 

Electric vehicles are a relatively new technology, and the EV age is arriving ahead of schedule today. Even though we technically saw the first battery-powered vehicles more than 100 years ago, they haven’t really become viable transportation in the modern world until recently, and they are greener than ever in all 50 states as the grid improves.

As viable as they may now be, however, it still seems they’re unarguably more expensive than their conventional internal-combustion counterparts, prompting many to ask whether it’s time to buy an electric car today. Well, until now.

Lower maintenence costs and the lower price of electricity versus gasoline (see the typical cost to charge an electric vehicle in most regions) actually make electric cars much cheaper in the long run, despite their often higher purchase price, according to a new survey by Consumer Reports. The information was collected using annual reliability surveys conducted by CR in 2019 and 2020.

In the first 50,000 miles (80,500 km), battery electric vehicles cost just US$0.012 per mile for maintenence and repairs, while plug-in hybrid models bump that number up to USD$0.021. Compare these numbers to the typical USD$0.028 cost for internal combustion vehicles, and it becomes clear the more you drive, the more you will save, and across the U.S. plug-ins logged 19 billion electric miles in 2021 to prove the point. After 50,000 miles, the costs for BEV and PHEV vehicles is US$0.028 and US$0.031 respectively, while ICE vehicles jump to US$0.06 per mile.

To put it more practically, if you chose to buy a Model 3 instead of a BMW 330i, you’d see a total US$17,600 in savings over the lifetime of the vehicle, aligning with evidence that EVs are better for the planet and your budget as well, based on average driving. In the SUV sector, buying a Tesla Model Y instead of a Lexus crossover would save US$13,400 (provided the former’s roof doesn’t fly off) and buying a Nissan Leaf over a Honda Civic would save US$6,000 over the lifetime of the vehicles.

CR defines the vehicle’s “lifetime” as 200,000 miles (320,000 km). Ergo the final caveat: while it sounds like driving electric means big savings, you might only see those returns after quite a long period of ownership, though some forecasts suggest that within a decade adoption will be nearly universal for many drivers.

 

Related News

View more

Should California accelerate its 100% carbon-free electricity mandate?

California 100% Clean Energy by 2030 proposes accelerating SB 100 with solar, wind, offshore wind, and battery storage to decarbonize the grid, enhance reliability, and reduce blackouts, leveraging transmission upgrades and long-duration storage solutions.

 

Key Points

Proposal to accelerate SB 100 to 2030, delivering a carbon-free grid via renewables, storage, and new transmission.

✅ Accelerates SB 100 to a 2030 carbon-free electricity target

✅ Scales solar, wind, offshore wind, and battery storage capacity

✅ Requires transmission build-out and demand response for reliability

 

Amid a spate of wildfires that have covered large portions of California with unhealthy air, an environmental group that frequently lobbies the Legislature in Sacramento is calling on the state to accelerate by 15 years California's commitment to derive 100 percent of its electricity from carbon-free sources.

But skeptics point to last month's pair of rolling blackouts and say moving up the mandate would be too risky.

"Once again, California is experiencing some of the worst that climate change has to offer, whether it's horrendous air quality, whether it's wildfires, whether it's scorching heat," said Dan Jacobson, state director of Environment California. "This should not be the new normal and we shouldn't allow this to become normal."

Signed by then-Gov. Jerry Brown in 2018, Senate Bill 100 commits California by 2045 to use only sources of energy that produce no greenhouse gas emissions to power the electric grid, a target that echoes Minnesota's 2050 carbon-free plan now under consideration.

Implemented through the state's Renewable Portfolio Standard, SB 100 mandates 60 percent of the state's power will come from renewable sources such as solar and wind within the next 10 years. By 2045, the remaining 40 percent can come from other zero-carbon sources, such as large hydroelectric dams, a strategy aligned with Canada's electricity decarbonization efforts toward climate pledges.

SB 100 also requires three state agencies _ the California Energy Commission, the California Public Utilities Commission and the California Air Resources Board _ to send a report to the Legislature reviewing various aspects of the legislation.

The topics include scenarios in which SB 100's requirements can be accelerated. Following an Energy Commission workshop earlier this month, Environment California sent a six-page note to all three agencies urging a 100 percent clean energy standard by 2030.

The group pointed to comments by Gov. Gavin Newsom after he toured the devastation in Butte County caused by the North Complex fire.

"Across the entire spectrum, our (state) goals are inadequate to the reality we are experiencing," Newsom said Sept. 11 at the Oroville State Recreation Area.

Newsom "wants to look at his climate policies and see what he can accelerate," Jacobson said. "And we want to encourage him to take a look at going to 100 percent by 2030."

Jacobson said Newsom cam change the policy by issuing an executive order but "it would probably take some legislative action" to codify it.

However, Assemblyman Jim Cooper, a Democrat from the Sacramento suburb of Elk Grove, is not on board.

"I think someday we're going to be there but we can't move to all renewable sources right now," Cooper said. "It doesn't work. We've got all these burned-out areas that depend upon electricity. How is that working out? They don't have it."

In mid-August, California experienced statewide rolling blackouts for the first time since 2001.

The California Independent System Operator _ which manages the electric grid for about 80 percent of the state _ ordered utilities to ratchet back power, fearing the grid did not have enough supply to match a surge in demand as people cranked up their air conditioners during a stubborn heat wave that lingered over the West.

The outages affected about 400,000 California homes and businesses for more than an hour on Aug. 14 and 200,000 customers for about 20 minutes on Aug. 15.

The grid operator, known as the CAISO for short, avoided two additional days of blackouts in August and two more in September thanks to household utility customers and large energy users scaling back demand.

CAISO Chief Executive Officer Steve Berberich said the outages were not due to renewable energy sources in California's power mix. "This was a matter of running out of capacity to serve load" across all hours, Berberich told the Los Angeles Times.

California has plenty of renewable resources _ especially solar power _ during the day. The challenge comes when solar production rapidly declines as the sun goes down, especially between 7 p.m. and 8 p.m. in what grid operators call the "net load peak."

The loss of those megawatts of generation has to be replaced by other sources. And in an electric grid, system operators have to balance supply and demand instantaneously, generating every kilowatt that is demanded by customers who expect their lighting/heating/air conditioning to come on the moment they flip a switch.

Two weeks after the rotating outages, the State Water Resources Control Board voted to extend the lives of four natural gas plants in the Los Angeles area. Natural gas accounts for the largest single source of California's power mix _ 34.23 percent. But natural gas is a fossil fuel, not a carbon-free resource.

Jacobson said moving the mandate to 2030 can be achieved by more rapid deployment of renewable sources across the state.

The Public Utilities Commission has already directed power companies to ramp up capacity for energy storage, such as lithium-ion batteries that can be used when solar production falls off.

Long-term storage is another option. That includes pumped hydro projects in which hydroelectric facilities pump water from one reservoir up to another and then release it. The ensuing rush of water generates electricity when the grid needs it.

Environment California also pointed to offshore wind projects along the coast of Central and Northern California that it estimates could generate as much as 3 gigawatts of power by 2030 and 10 gigawatts by 2040. Offshore wind supporters say its potential is much greater than land-based wind farms because ocean breezes are stronger and steadier.

Gary Ackerman, a utilities and energy consultant with more than four decades of experience in power issues affecting states in the West, said the 2045 mandate was "an unwise policy to begin with" and to accommodate a "swift transition (to 2030), you're going to put the entire grid and everybody in it at risk."

But Ackerman's larger concern is whether enough transmission lines can be constructed in California to bring the electricity where it needs to go.

"I believe Californians consider transmission lines in their backyard about the same way they think about low-income housing _ it's great to have, but not in my backyard," Ackerman said. "The state is not prepared to build the infrastructure that will allow this grandiose build-out."

Cooper said he worries about how much it will cost the average utility customer, especially low and middle-income households. The average retail price for electricity in California is 16.58 cents per kilowatt-hour, compared to 10.53 nationally, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

"What's sad is, we've had 110-degree days and there are people up here in the Central Valley that never turned their air conditioners on because they can't afford that bill," Cooper said.

Jacobson said the utilities commission can intervene if costs get too high. He also pointed to a recent study from the Goldman School of Public Policy at UC Berkeley that predicted the U.S. can deliver 90 percent clean, carbon-free electric grid by 2035 that is reliable and at no extra cost in consumers' bills.

"Every time we wait and say, 'Oh, what about the cost? Is it going to be too expensive?' we're just making the cost unbearable for our kids and grandkids," Jacobson said. "They're the ones who are going to pay the billions of dollars for all the remediation that has to happen ... What's it going to cost if we do nothing, or don't go fast enough?"

The joint agency report on SB 100 from the Energy Commission, the Public Utilities Commission and the Air Resources Board is due at the beginning of next year.

 

Related News

View more

Wind is main source of UK electricity for first time

UK Renewable Energy Milestones: wind outpacing gas, record solar output, offshore wind growth, National Grid data, and a net-zero grid by 2035, despite planning reforms, connection queues, and grid capacity constraints.

 

Key Points

Key UK advances where wind beat gas, solar set records, and policies target a 2035 net-zero electricity grid.

✅ Wind generated one-third of electricity, outpacing gas

✅ Record solar output reported by National Grid in April

✅ Onshore wind easing via planning reforms; grid delays persist

 

In the first three months of this year a third of the country's electricity came from wind farms, with the UK leading the G20 for wind power according to research from Imperial College London has shown.

National Grid has also confirmed that April saw a record period of solar energy generation, and wind generation set new records earlier in the year.

By 2035 the UK aims for all of its electricity to have net zero emissions, though progress stalled in 2019 in some areas.

"There are still many hurdles to reaching a completely fossil fuel-free grid, but wind out-supplying gas for the first time, a sign of wind leading the power mix, is a genuine milestone event," said Iain Staffell, energy researcher at Imperial College and lead author of the report.

The research was commissioned by Drax Electrical Insights, which is funded by Drax energy company.

The majority of the UK's wind power has come from offshore wind farms, and wind generated more electricity than coal in 2016 marking an early shift. Installing new onshore wind turbines has effectively been banned since 2015 in England.

Under current planning rules, companies can only apply to build onshore wind turbines on land specifically identified for development in the land-use plans drawn up by local councils. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak agreed in December to relax these planning restrictions to speed up development.

Scientists say switching to renewable power is crucial to curb the impacts of climate change, with milestones like wind and solar topping nuclear underscoring the shift, which are already being felt, including in the UK, which last year recorded its hottest year since records began.

Solar and wind have seen significant growth in the UK. In the first quarter of 2023, 42% of the UK's electricity came from renewable energy, with 33% coming from fossil fuels like gas and record-low coal shares.

Some new solar and wind sites are waiting up to 10 to 15 years to be connected because of a lack of capacity in the electricity system.

And electricity only accounts for 18% of the UK's total power needs. There are many demands for energy which electricity is not meeting, such as heating our homes, manufacturing and transport.

Currently the majority of UK homes use gas for their heating - the government is seeking to move households away from gas boilers and on to heat pumps which use electricity.

 

Related News

View more

0 to 180 km in 10 minutes: B.C. Hydro rolls out faster electric vehicle charging

B.C. Hydro fast EV charging stations roll out 180 kW DC fast chargers, power sharing, and rural network expansion in Surrey, Manning Park, Mackenzie, and Tumbler Ridge to ease range anxiety across northern B.C.

 

Key Points

180 kW DC chargers with power sharing, expanding B.C.'s rural EV network to cut range anxiety and speed up recharging.

✅ 180 kW DC fast charging: ~180 km added in about 10 minutes

✅ Power sharing enables two vehicles to use one unit simultaneously

✅ Expands rural charging coverage to cut range anxiety for northern B.C.

 

B.C. Hydro has unveiled plans to install new charging stations it says can add as much as 180 kilometres worth of range to the average electric vehicle in 10 minutes.

The utility says the new 180-kilowatt units will be added to its network, expanding stations in southern B.C. as soon as this fall, with even more scheduled to arrive in 2024.

The first communities to get the new faster-charge stations are Surrey, Manning Park and, north of Prince George, Mackenzie and Tumbler Ridge, while the Lillooet fast-charging site is already operational.

B.C. Hydro president Chris O'Riley says both current and prospective electric vehicle owners have said they want improved coverage in more rural parts of the province in order to address range anxiety, as the utility has warned of a potential EV charging bottleneck if demand outpaces infrastructure.

"We are listening to feedback from our customers," he said.

The new stations will also be the first from B.C. Hydro to offer power sharing, which lets two different vehicles use the same unit to charge at the same time.

The adoption of electric vehicles in B.C. is much higher in southern urban areas than rural, northern ones, according to statistics from the provincial government made available in 2022, as the province leads the country in going electric according to recent reports.

The figures showed about one in every 45 people owns a zero-emission vehicle in the southwest regions of the province, but that number drops to one in 232 in the Kootenays, where the region makes electric cars a priority through local initiatives, and one in 414 in northern B.C.

The number of public charging stations closely corresponds to the number of zero-emission vehicles in various regions.

The Vancouver area has more than 500 fast-charging ports, according to ChargeHub, a website that tracks charging stations in North America. 

In contrast, the route from Prince George to Fort Nelson via Dawson Creek along Highway 97, part of the B.C. Electric Highway network connecting the region — a distance of more than 800 kilometres — has just three locations where a vehicle can be charged to 80 per cent power in an hour or less, creating challenges for people hoping to travel the route.

The disparity is also clear in a just-published analysis from the non-profit Community Energy Association, which acts as an advisory group to government associations. 

It found that while there is roughly one charging port every three square kilometres in Metro Vancouver, the number drops to one every 250 square kilometres in the Regional District of East Kootenay and one every 3,500 square kilometres in the Peace River Regional District, in the province's northeast.

"The more infrastructure we can get across the region ... the more the adoption of electric vehicles will increase," said the association's director of transportation initiatives, Danielle Weiss.

"We are excited to hear that B.C. Hydro is also viewing rural areas as a key focus for their new, enhanced charging technology."

B.C. Hydro says it currently has 153 charging units at 84 locations across the province with plans to add an additional 3,000 ports over the next 10 years, with provincial EV charger rebates supporting home and workplace installations as well.

 

Related News

View more

German steel powerhouse turns to 'green' hydrogen produced using huge wind turbines

Green Hydrogen for Steelmaking enables decarbonization in Germany by powering electrolyzers with wind turbines at Salzgitter. Partners Vestas, Avacon, and Linde support renewable hydrogen for iron ore reduction, cutting CO2 in heavy industry.

 

Key Points

Hydrogen from renewable-powered electrolysis replacing coal in iron ore reduction, cutting CO2 emissions from steelmaking

✅ 30 MW Vestas wind farm powers 2x1.25 MW electrolyzers.

✅ Salzgitter, Avacon, Linde link sectors to replace fossil fuels.

✅ Targets CO2 cuts in iron ore reduction and steel smelting.

 

A major green hydrogen facility in Germany has started operations, with those behind the project hoping it will help to decarbonize the energy-intensive steel industry in the years ahead. 

The "WindH2" project involves German steel giant Salzgitter, E.ON subsidiary Avacon and Linde, a firm specializing in engineering and industrial gases, and aligns with calls for hydrogen-ready power plants in Germany today.

Hydrogen can be produced in a number of ways. One method includes using electrolysis, with an electric current splitting water into oxygen and hydrogen, and advances in PEM hydrogen technology continue to improve efficiency worldwide.

If the electricity used in the process comes from a renewable source such as wind or solar, as underscored by recent German renewables gains, then it's termed "green" or "renewable" hydrogen.

The development in Germany is centered around seven new wind turbines operated by Avacon and two 1.25 megawatt (MW) electrolyzer units installed by Salzgitter Flachstahl, which is part of the wider Salzgitter Group. The facilities were presented to the public this week. 

The turbines, from Vestas, have a hub height of 169 meters and a combined capacity of 30 MW. All are located on premises of the Salzgitter Group, with three situated on the site of a steel mill in the city of Salzgitter, Lower Saxony, northwest Germany, where grid expansion woes can affect project timelines.

The hydrogen produced using renewables will be utilized in processes connected to the smelting of iron ore. Total costs for the project come to roughly 50 million euros (around $59.67 million), with the building of the electrolyzers subsidized by state-owned KfW, while a national net-zero roadmap could reduce electricity costs over time.

"Green gases have the wherewithal to become 'staple foodstuff' for the transition to alternative energies and make a considerable contribution to decarbonizing industry, mobility and heat," E.ON's CEO, Johannes Teyssen, said in a statement issued Thursday.

"The jointly realized project symbolizes a milestone on the path to virtually CO2 free production and demonstrates that fossil fuels can be replaced by intelligent cross-sector linking," he added.

According to the International Energy Agency, the iron and steel sector is responsible for 2.6 gigatonnes of direct carbon dioxide emissions each year, a figure that, in 2019, was greater than the direct emissions from sectors such as cement and chemicals. 

It adds that the steel sector is "the largest industrial consumer of coal, which provides around 75% of its energy demand."

The project in Germany is not unique in focusing on the role green hydrogen could play in steel manufacturing.

Across Europe, projects are also exploring natural gas pipe storage to balance intermittent renewables and enable sector coupling.

H2 Green Steel, a Swedish firm backed by investors including Spotify founder Daniel Ek, plans to build a steel production facility in the north of the country that will be powered by what it describes as "the world's largest green hydrogen plant."

In an announcement last month the company said steel production would start in 2024 and be based in Sweden's Norrbotten region.

Other energy-intensive industries are also looking into the potential of green hydrogen, and examples such as Schott's green power shift show parallel decarbonization. A subsidiary of multinational building materials firm HeidelbergCement has, for example, worked with researchers from Swansea University to install and operate a green hydrogen demonstration unit at a site in the U.K.

 

Related News

View more

Sign Up for Electricity Forum’s Newsletter

Stay informed with our FREE Newsletter — get the latest news, breakthrough technologies, and expert insights, delivered straight to your inbox.

Electricity Today T&D Magazine Subscribe for FREE

Stay informed with the latest T&D policies and technologies.
  • Timely insights from industry experts
  • Practical solutions T&D engineers
  • Free access to every issue

Download the 2025 Electrical Training Catalog

Explore 50+ live, expert-led electrical training courses –

  • Interactive
  • Flexible
  • CEU-cerified