San Diego utility offers $10,000 off Nissan Leaf, BMW i3 electric cars

Cobalt Supply Chain for EV Batteries faces shortages as lithium-ion demand surges; Tesla gigafactories, ethical sourcing, Idaho cobalt mining, and DRC risks intensify pricing, logistics, and procurement challenges for manufacturers and investors.

Key Points

A network supplying cobalt for lithium-ion cathodes, strained by EV demand, ethical sourcing pressures, and DRC risk.

✅ EV growth outpaces cobalt supply, widening deficits

✅ DRC reliance drives ESG scrutiny and sourcing shifts

✅ Idaho projects and stockpiling reshape U.S. supply

A perfect storm is brewing in the 21st Century battery market.

More specifically, it's about what goes into those batteries - and it's not just lithium.

The other element that makes up 35 percent of the lithium-ion batteries mass produced at Tesla's Nevada gigafactory and at a dozen of other behemoths slated to come on line, is cobalt. And it's already in dramatically short supply. A part of the answer to the cobalt deficit is 100 percent American, and this little-known miner is sitting on a prime Idaho cobalt project that is one of only two that looks likely to come online in the U.S. and it's right in Tesla's backyard.

High-Energy Batteries Need More Cobalt Than Lithium 

If you've been focusing your investment on lithium supplies lately you've been missing the even bigger story. EV batteries need about 200 grams of refined cobalt per kilowatt of battery capacity. Power walls need more than twice that. Between March 2016 and April 2017, the cost of the cobalt in that mix nearly tripled. But it isn't just the price that's got manufacturers worried. It's the shortage of availability. Keeping gigafactories stocked with enough cobalt to run at capacity is the challenge of the decade.

Tesla, now with a $50-billion market cap, launched a $5-billion battery gigafactory in Nevada in January. By the end of 2017, it will have doubled the entire global battery production capacity. By next year, it will be producing more batteries than the rest of the world combined.

It is estimated that Tesla's gigafactory alone will need anywhere between 7,000 and 17,500 tonnes of refined cobalt every year.

Tesla used to buy its finished battery cells from Panasonic, which in turn got its processed cathode powders from a Japanese company, Sumitomo was processing its own cobalt in the Philippines. However, that facility is already running at capacity and couldn't even begin to handle Tesla's gigafactory demand. In other words, Tesla's supply chain is no longer secure. And that's just Tesla.

The EV market is fifteen times larger than it was five years ago. The market has experienced a comppound annual growth rate of over 72 percent from 2011-2016, with new sources like Alberta's lithium-laced oil fields drawing investment alongside cobalt. This year, analysts expect it to gain another 25-26 percent. Last year, global EV production grew 41 percent, and sales are up more than 60 per cent year to year.

In addition,the Iron Creek project isn't a new exploration property. It has already seen major historic exploratory work, including 30,000 feet of diamond drilling. Iron Creek has historic (non 43-101 compliant) indications of 1.3 million tons grading 0.59 percent of cobalt with encouraging indications of up to 10 million tons. The 'closeology' is also brilliant. It's right next to the only advanced cobalt project in the U.S., which has a resource of 3 million-plus tonnes of cobalt.

As the battery market hits fever pitch and the supply-chain bottlenecks become unbearable, homegrown exploration is the key-first-movers and first investors will be the biggest beneficiaries.

A Very Precarious Supply Chain 

Supply is already in deficit, and we're also looking at an anticipated 500 percent increase in demand, making EV battery recycling an increasingly important complement to mining. Analysts at Macquarie Research project deficits of 885 tonnes of this resource next year, 3,205 in 2019 and 5,340 in 2020.

Not only is demand set to wildly outstrip supply very soon, but current supply (50 percent) comes primarily from the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). Buyers are coming under increasing pressure to look elsewhere for cobalt as the U.S. moves to work with allies to secure EV metals through diversified supply chains. The DRC has a horrendous record when it comes to labor practices and human rights.

Ask Apple Inc.  The tech giant recently announced it would stop buying unethical DRC cobalt for its iPhones - and as such, it has been forced to look for new suppliers.

The perfect storm continues: Some 95 percent of the world's cobalt is produced as a byproduct of copper and nickel mining, where concerns about ethical sourcing have put a spotlight on Canada's role in sustainable nickel practices worldwide. This means that cobalt supply is dependent on copper and nickel mining, and if those commodities are uneconomic to mine, there are no cobalt by-product results.

Not only is US Cobalt one of the first movers on the All-American ethical cobalt scene, but it's also financed to advance its Idaho Cobalt Belt project, and hopes to prove up 10 million tonnes of cobalt resource.

The Dream Team Behind Pure American Cobalt 

The CEO of US Cobalt, Wayne Tisdale, is a legend in spotting emerging trends with impeccable timing and has created billions in shareholder value. He's already done it with uranium, gold and oil and gas, and his most recent homerun was in lithium, with Pure Energy. When it launched in 2012, lithium was selling for about $5,000 per tonne. Within 18 months, it had increased 450 percent.

His next bet is on cobalt.

Tisdale and his team at Intrepid Financial have, in recent years, created $2.7 billion in value by building and financing 5 companies in completely different industries:

• Rainy River (gold) was worth $1.2 billion at its peak
• Xemplar (uranium) hit $1 billion at its peak
• Ryland Oil (oil and gas) sold for $114 million
• Webtech Wireless (tech) was worth $300 million at its peak
• Pure Energy (lithium) is worth $65 million (and counting)

The bottom line? There is no other commodity on the market right now that we need more.

Just watch what the hedge funds are doing with cobalt because it's unprecedented. The run on physical cobalt started in February in the least expected corner: Major hedge funds started buying up physical cobalt and hoarding it in order to gain exposure, resulting in a major supply shortage for the blue metal. Swiss-based Pala Investments and China's Shanghai Chaos have already hoarded 17 percent of last year's global production. At today's prices that's worth around $280 million. At tomorrow's prices, it will be worth a lot more.

When hedge funds start stockpiling physical cobalt, it sends its traditional buyers into a panic to secure new shipments. Since November, cobalt prices have rallied more than 100 percent, and this is only the beginning. As the cobalt supply problem grows, and EV giants and gigafactories continue to increase demand, a home-grown solution is at hand. As a first principle of investing, where there is a supply problem, there is a massive opportunity for early investors.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

Kemper County power plant costs and delays highlight lignite coal gasification, syngas production, carbon capture targets, and looming rate plans as Mississippi Power navigates Public Service Commission oversight and shareholder-ratepayer risk.

Key Points

Costs exceed $7.5B with repeated delays; rate impacts loom as syngas, lignite, and carbon capture systems mature.

✅ Estimate tops $7.5B; customers could fund about $4.3B

✅ Carbon capture target: 65% CO2 via syngas from lignite

✅ Rate plans pending before the Public Service Commission

A Mississippi utility on Monday delayed making proposals for how its customers should pay for an ever-more-expensive power plant, even as the estimated cost of the facility crossed $7.5 billion.

The Kemper County power plant will be tasked with mining lignite coal a few hundred yards away from the plant. That coal is moved through a process that will convert it to syngas. The syngas is then used to drive the energy output of the plant, and the resulting electricity is then moved into the grid, where transmission projects influence regional reliability and capacity.

Thomas Fanning, CEO of parent Southern Co., told shareholders in May that Mississippi Power would file rate plans for its Kemper County power plant this month. But still unable to operate the plant steadily enough to declare it finished, Mississippi Power punted, instead asking to hold rates level for 11 months to pay off costs that have already been approved by regulators.

Mississippi Power says it now hopes to reach commercial operation in June. The plant is more than three years behind schedule, with 10 delays announced in the past 18 months. It was originally supposed to cost $2.9 billion.

The company also said monday that it will have to replace troublesome parts of the facility much sooner than expected, including units that cool the synthetic gas produced from soft lignite coal by two gasifier units, plus ash handling systems in the gasifiers.

Kemper is designed to take synthetic gas, pipe it through a chemical plant to remove carbon dioxide and other chemicals, and then burn the gas in turbines to generate electricity. It’s designed to capture 65 percent of carbon dioxide from the coal, releasing only as much of the climate-warming gas as a typical natural gas plant. It’s a key effort nationally to maintain coal as a viable fuel source, even as coal unit retirements proceed in other states.

Mississippi Power raised its estimate of Kemper’s cost by $209.4 million, with shareholders absorbing $185.9 million, while ratepayers could be asked to pay $23.5 million. Overall, customers could be asked to pay $4.3 billion. Southern shareholders have agreed to absorb $3.1 billion, which has risen by $500 million since November.

The elected three-member Public Service Commission in 2015 allowed the company to raise rates on its 188,000 customers by $126 million a year. That paid for $840 million in Kemper work, which began generating electricity in 2014 using piped-in natural gas. Some items covered by that 15 percent rate increase will be paid off in coming months, but Mississippi Power now proposes to repay costs from regulatory proceedings earlier than originally projected.

In testimony filed with the Public Service Commission, Mississippi Power Chief Financial Officer Moses Fagin said that keeping rates level would reduce whiplash to customers when rates rise later to pay for Kemper, would pay off accumulated costs more quickly and would help the company wean itself off financial support from Southern Co. while maintaining credit ratings and positioning for a possible bond rating upgrade over time.

“Cash flow is important to the company in maintaining its current ratings and beginning to rebuild its credit strength on a more independent basis apart from the extraordinary parental support that has been required in recent years to maintain financial integrity,” Fagin testified.

Spokesman Jeff Shepard said Mississippi Power is still drawing up two rate plans — one requiring a sharp, immediate rate increase, and a “rate mitigation plan” that might cushion increases amid declining returns in coal markets. He said the company isn’t sure when it will file them. Fagin suggested the Public Service Commission set a new deadline of March 2, 2018.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Power Generation News

Vancouver 100% EV-Ready Policy mandates EV charging in new multi-unit residential buildings, expands DC fast charging, and supports zero-emission vehicles, reducing carbon pollution and improving air quality with BC Hydro and citywide infrastructure upgrades.

Key Points

A city rule making new multi-unit homes EV-ready and expanding DC fast charging to accelerate zero-emission adoption.

✅ 100% EV-ready stalls in all new multi-unit residential builds

✅ Citywide DC fast charging within 10 minutes by 2021

✅ Preferential parking policies for zero-emission vehicles

Vancouver is now one of the first cities in North America to adopt a 100 per cent Electric Vehicle (EV)-ready policy for all new multi-unit residential buildings, aligning with B.C.'s EV expansion efforts across the province.

Vancouver City Council approved the recommendations made in the EV Ecosystem Program Update last week. The previous requirement of 20 per cent EV parking spots meant a limited number of residents had access to an outlet, reflecting charging challenges in MURBs across Canada. The actions will help reduce carbon pollution and improve air quality by increasing opportunities for residents to move away from fossil fuel vehicles.

Vancouver is also expanding charging station infrastructure across the city, and developing a preferential parking policy for zero emissions vehicles, while residents can tap EV charger rebates to support home and workplace charging. Plans are to add more DC fast charging points, which can provide up to 200 kilometres of range in an hour. The goal is to put all Vancouver residents within a 10 minute drive of a DC fast-charging station by 2021.

#google#

A DC fast charger will be installed at Science World, and the number of DC fast chargers available at Empire Fields in east Vancouver will be expanded. BC Hydro will also add DC fast chargers at their head office and in Kerrisdale, as part of a faster charging rollout across the network.

The cost of adding charging infrastructure in the construction phase of a building is much lower than retrofitting a building later on, and EV owners can access home and workplace charging rebates to offset costs, which will save residents up to $3,300 and avoid the more complex process of increasing electrical capacity in the future. Since 2014, the existing requirements have resulted in approximately 20,000 EV-ready stalls in buildings.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

US Shift From Coal to Renewables accelerates as natural gas, solar, and wind power gain market share, driven by the Paris climate agreement, clean energy mandates, smart grid upgrades, and energy efficiency.

Key Points

An industry trend where power producers replace coal with natural gas, solar, and wind to meet clean energy goals.

✅ Shareholders and customers demand cleaner power portfolios

✅ Natural gas, solar, and wind outcompete coal on cost and risk

✅ Smart grid and efficiency investments reduce emissions further

President Trump once again promised to revive the U.S. coal industry when he announced his intention to withdraw the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement.

But that reversal seems as unlikely as ever as electric power producers, the biggest consumers of coal in the U.S., continue to shift to natural gas and renewable energy sources like solar and wind power. In 2016, natural gas became the leading fuel for U.S. electricity generation for the first time, responsible for 33.8% of the output, compared with 30.4% for coal, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, even as coal-fired generation was projected to rise in 2021 in the short term.

Nick Akins, the CEO of American Electric Power, one of the largest utilities in the U.S., says the preference for gas, renewables and energy efficiency, will only grow in response to increasing demands from shareholders and customers for cleaner energy, regardless of changes in national energy policy.

With 5.4 million customers in 11 states, AEP plans to spend $1.5 billion on renewable energy from 2017 through 2019, and $13 billion on transmission and distribution improvements, including new “smart” technologies that will make the grid more resilient and efficient, AEP says.

We spoke with Akins on Thursday, just after Trump’s announcement. The transcript is edited for length and clarity.

What do you think of Trump’s decision to pull the U.S. from the climate agreement?

I don’t think it’s unexpected. He obviously made the point that he’s willing to renegotiate or have further dialogue about it. That’s a good sign. From our perspective, we’re going to continue along the path we’re already on toward a cleaner energy economy.

AEP and the U.S. electric power industry in general have been moving away from coal in favor of natural gas and renewable energy. Will this decision by the Trump administration have any impact on that trend?

If you look at our resource plans in all of the states we serve, they are focused on renewables, natural gas and transmission, as declining returns from coal generation pressure investment choices across the industry. And big-data analytics improves the efficiency of the grid, so energy efficiency is obviously a key component, as Americans use less electricity overall.

Our carbon dioxide emissions in 2016 were 44% below 2000 levels, and that progress will continue with the additions of more renewables, energy efficiency and natural gas.

So, you don’t see coal making a comeback at AEP or other utilities?

No, I don’t think so. … You wouldn’t make a decision (to build a coal power plant) at this point because it’s heavily capital-intensive, and involves a longer-term process and risk to build. And, of course, you can add renewables that are very efficient and natural gas that’s efficient and much less expensive and risky, in terms of construction and operation.

Do you plan to close any more coal-powered plants soon? 

I suspect we’ll see some more retirements in the future, with coal and nuclear closures test just transition in many communities, and as we progress towards that cleaner energy economy, and consider the expectations of our customers and shareholders for us to mitigate risk, you’ll continue to see that happen.

But on the other hand, I want to make sure there’s an understanding that coal will remain a part of the portfolio, even though in rare cases new coal plants are still being built where options are limited, but it will be of a lesser degree because of these other resources that are available to us now that weren’t available to us just a few years ago.

Do you find yourself under more or less pressure from customers and shareholders to move to cleaner forms of energy?

I think there’s more pressure. Investors are looking for the sustainability of the company going forward and mitigation of risks … From a customer standpoint, we have some large customers interested in moving into our service territory who are looking for cleaner energy, and want to know if we’re focused on that. Some of them want to be supplied entirely by those clean sources. So, we’re clearly responding to our customers’ and our shareholders’ expectations.

What’s the solution for workers at coal mines and coal power plants who have lost their jobs?

Certainly, the skill sets of employees in mining and around machinery are transferable to other areas of manufacturing, like aerospace and defense. So, we’re really focusing on economic-development efforts in our service territories … particularly in the coal states … to bring coal miners back to work, not necessarily in coal mines but certainly (in manufacturing).

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Power Generation News

EPA Wastewater Rule Rollback signals a move to rewrite 2015 Clean Water Act guidelines for coal-fired power plants, easing wastewater rules as heavy metals, mercury, lead, arsenic, and selenium threaten rivers, lakes, public health.

Key Points

A planned EPA rewrite of 2015 wastewater limits for coal plants, weakening protections against toxic heavy metals.

✅ Targets 2015 Clean Water Act wastewater guidelines

✅ Affects coal-fired steam electric power plants

✅ Raises risks from mercury, lead, arsenic, selenium

The Environmental Protection Agency says it plans to scrap an Obama-era measure limiting water pollution from coal-fired power plants, mirroring moves to replace the Clean Power Plan elsewhere in power-sector policy.

A letter from EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt released Monday as part of a legal appeal and amid a broader rewrite of NEPA rules said he will seek to revise the 2015 guidelines mandating increased treatment for wastewater from steam electric power-generating plants.

Acting at the behest of energy groups and electric utilities who opposed the stricter standards, Pruitt first moved in April to delay implementation of the new guidelines. The wastewater flushed from the coal-fired plants into rivers and lakes typically contains traces of such highly toxic heavy metals as lead, arsenic, mercury and selenium.

“After carefully considering your petitions, I have decided that it is appropriate and in the public interest to conduct a rulemaking to potentially revise (the regulations),” Pruitt wrote in the letter addressed to the pro-industry Utility Water Act Group and the U.S. Small Business Administration.

Pruitt’s letter, dated Friday, was filed Monday with the Fifth Circuit U. S. Court of Appeals in New Orleans, which is hearing legal challenges of the wastewater rule. With Pruitt now moving to rewrite the standards, EPA has asked to court to freeze the legal fight.

While that process moves ahead, EPA’s existing guidelines from 1982 remian in effect. Those standards were set when far less was known about the detrimental impacts of even tiny levels of heavy metals on human health and aquatic life.

“Power plants are by far the largest offenders when it comes to dumping deadly toxics into our lakes and rivers,” said Thomas Cmar, a lawyer for the legal advocacy group Earthjustice. “It’s hard to believe that our government officials right now are so beholden to big business that they are willing to let power plants continue to dump lead, mercury, chromium and other dangerous chemicals into our water supply.”

EPA estimates that the 2015 rule, if implemented, would reduce power plant pollution, consistent with new pollution limits proposed for coal and gas plants, by about 1.4 billion pounds a year. Only about 12 per cent of the nation’s steam electric power plants would have to make new investments to meet the higher standards, according to the agency.

Utilities would need to spend about $480 million on new wastewater treatment systems, resulting in about $500 million in estimated public benefits, such as fewer incidents of cancer and childhood developmental defects.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Energy Policy News

Revolution Wind Massachusetts will assemble turbine foundations in New Bedford, Fall River, or Somerset, building a local offshore wind supply chain, creating regional jobs, and leveraging pumped storage and an offshore transmission backbone.

Key Points

An offshore wind project assembling MA foundations, building a local supply chain, jobs, and peak clean power.

✅ 400 MW offshore wind; local fabrication of 1,500-ton foundations

✅ 300+ direct jobs, 600 indirect; MA crew vessel builds and operations

✅ Expandable offshore transmission; pumped storage for peak power

Deepwater Wind will assemble the wind turbine foundations for its Revolution Wind in Massachusetts, and it has identified three South Coast cities – New Bedford, Fall River and Somerset – as possible locations for this major fabrication activity, the company is announcing today.

Deepwater Wind is committed to building a local workforce and supply chain for its 400-megawatt Revolution Wind project, now under review by state and utility officials as Massachusetts advances projects like Vineyard Wind statewide.

“No company is more committed to building a local offshore wind workforce than us,” said Deepwater Wind CEO Jeffrey Grybowski. “We launched America’s offshore wind industry right here in our backyard. We know how to build offshore wind in the U.S. in the right way, and our smart approach will be the most affordable solution for the Commonwealth. This is about building a real industry that lasts.”

#google#

The construction activity will involve welding, assembly, painting, commissioning and related work for the 1,500-ton steel foundations supporting the turbine towers. This foundation-related work will create more than 300 direct jobs for local construction workers during Revolution Wind’s construction period. An additional 600 indirect and induced jobs will support this effort.

In addition, Deepwater Wind is now actively seeking proposals from Massachusetts boat builders for the construction of purpose-built crew vessels for Revolution Wind. Several dozen workers are expected to build the first of these vessels at a local boat-building facility, and another dozen workers will operate this specialty vessel over the life of Revolution Wind. (Deepwater Wind commissioned America’s only offshore wind crew vessel – Atlantic Wind Transfer’s Atlantic Pioneer – to serve the Block Island Wind Farm.)

The company will issue a formal Request for Information to local suppliers in the coming weeks. Deepwater Wind’s additional wind farms serving Massachusetts will require the construction of additional vessels, as will growth along Long Island’s South Shore in the coming years.

These commitments are in addition to Deepwater Wind’s previously-announced plans to use the New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal for significant construction and staging operations, and to pay $500,000 per year to the New Bedford Port Authority to use the facility. During construction, the turbine marshaling activity in New Bedford is expected to support approximately 700 direct regional construction jobs.

“Deepwater Wind is building a sustainable industry on the South Coast of Massachusetts,” said Matthew Morrissey, Deepwater Wind Vice President Massachusetts. “With Revolution Wind, we are demonstrating that we can build the industry in Massachusetts while enhancing competition and keeping costs low.”

The Revolution Wind project will be built in Deepwater Wind’s federal lease site, under the BOEM lease process, southwest of Martha’s Vineyard. If approved, local construction work on Revolution Wind would begin in 2020, with the project in operations in 2023. Survey work is already underway at Deepwater Wind’s offshore lease area.

Revolution Wind will deliver “baseload” power, allowing a utility-scale renewable energy project for the first time to replace the retiring fossil fuel-fired power plants closing across the region, a transition echoed by Vineyard Wind’s first power milestones elsewhere.

Revolution Wind will be capable of delivering clean energy to Massachusetts utilities when it’s needed most, during peak hours of demand on the regional electric grid. A partnership with FirstLight Power, using its Northfield Mountain hydroelectric pumped storage in Northfield, Massachusetts, makes this peak power offering possible. This is the largest pairing of hydroelectric pumped storage and offshore wind in the world.

The Revolution Wind offshore wind farm will also be paired with a first-of-its-kind offshore transmission backbone. Deepwater Wind is partnering with National Grid Ventures on an expandable offshore transmission network that supports not just Revolution Wind, but also future offshore wind farms, as New York’s biggest offshore wind farm moves forward across the region, even if they’re built by our competitors.

This cooperation is in the best interest of Massachusetts electric customers because it will reduce the amount of electrical infrastructure needed to support the state’s 1,600 MW offshore wind goal. Instead of each subsequent developer building its own standalone cable network, other offshore wind companies could use expandable infrastructure already installed for Revolution Wind, reducing project costs and saving ratepayers money.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News