Peer-to-peer energy breakthrough could allow solar and wind energy sources to be shared

Nova Scotia EV charging infrastructure remains limited, with only 14 fast chargers across the province. As electric vehicle adoption grows, urgent upgrades are needed to support long-distance travel and public charging convenience.

Nova Scotia EV charging infrastructure

Nova Scotia EV charging infrastructure refers to the province’s public and private network of stations that power electric vehicles (EVs).

✅ Limited availability of fast-charging stations for long-distance travel

✅ Growing demand as EV adoption increases province-wide

✅ Key factor in reducing range anxiety and promoting clean transportation

Nova Scotia’s EV charging network is struggling to keep pace with a growing fleet of electric vehicles. As of today, only 14 public DC fast chargers are operational across the province, a significant shortfall for drivers navigating long distances. This creates not only logistical hurdles but also growing consumer hesitation — particularly as EV sales continue to surge across Canada.

In response, the Canadian government has announced a $1.1 million (US$0.88 million) investment into a new smart-charging pilot program. Led by Nova Scotia Power, this initiative will explore how electric vehicles can better integrate with the local grid using a centralized, utility-managed control system. Up to 200 participants are expected to join the program, which aims to test both smart charging and vehicle-to-grid (V2G) technologies.

These systems allow EVs to act as distributed energy storage, helping to manage electricity demand and improve renewable energy integration — a strategy already being tested in other jurisdictions. For example, Ontario’s charging network expansion has provided a model for scaling fast-charging accessibility. Similarly, British Columbia has recently accelerated its rollout of faster charging stations to support mass EV adoption.

The Nova Scotia pilot will assess local EV charging behaviors, including drivers’ willingness to participate in V2G services based on incentives, driving patterns, and access to clean power. “We know customers want clean, affordable, reliable energy for their homes and businesses,” says Dave Landrigan, VP Commercial at Nova Scotia Power. “Through our electric vehicle smart charging pilot, we will test these technologies to learn how they can benefit all customers, creating clean, smarter options without changing a person’s driving habits.”

The funding comes through Natural Resources Canada’s Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Demonstration program, which supports the development of cutting-edge charging and hydrogen refueling solutions across the country. To date, the federal government has invested over $600 million to support EV affordability and infrastructure deployment, with a particular focus on a coast-to-coast fast-charging network.

At the same time, other provinces are stepping up their leadership roles. In Québec, Hydro-Québec is expanding its EV ecosystem through a strategic partnership with Propulsion Québec, a key industry cluster for sustainable mobility. Their focus includes reliable public charging, clean grid integration, and stakeholder collaboration — all essential factors for scalable transportation electrification.

“In Québec, we are fortunate to be able to make transportation electrification possible by easily replacing gas imported from outside with our clean energy,” said France Lampron, Director – Transportation Electrification at Hydro-Québec. “To do this, we need to develop synergies between various stakeholders in the sustainable mobility sector.”

While Nova Scotia’s current fast-charging availability is limited, the province now has an opportunity to follow a similar trajectory. With funding in place, stakeholder alignment, and public interest growing, the expansion of Nova Scotia EV charging infrastructure could soon match the pace of rising EV demand. As governments and utilities nationwide focus on electrification, Nova Scotia’s pilot may lay the groundwork for a more connected, cleaner transportation future.

Related News

• EV sales continue to surge across Canada

• Ontario’s EV station rollout addresses fast‑charging gaps

• British Columbia rolls out faster charging infrastructure

• Canada’s EV charging networks needed to support coast‑to‑coast adoption

• Electricity Forum News

California NEM-3 Tariff ushers a successor Net Energy Metering framework, revising export compensation, TOU rates, and non-bypassable charges to balance ratepayer impacts, rooftop solar growth, and energy storage adoption across diverse communities.

Key Points

The CPUC's successor NEM policy redefining export credits and rates to sustain customer-sited solar and storage.

✅ Sets export compensation methodology beyond NEM 2.0

✅ Aligns TOU rates and non-bypassable charges with costs

✅ Encourages solar-plus-storage adoption and equity access

The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) has officially commenced its “NEM-3” proceeding, which will establish the successor Net Energy Metering (NEM) tariff to the “NEM 2.0” program in California. This is a highly anticipated, high-stakes proceeding that will effectively modify the rules for the NEM tariff in California, amid ongoing electricity pricing changes that affect residential rooftop solar – arguably the single most important policy mechanism for customer-sited solar over the last decade.

The CPUC’s recent order instituting rule-making (OIR) filing stated that “the major focus of this proceeding will be on the development of a successor to existing NEM 2.0 tariffs. This successor will be a mechanism for providing customer-generators with credit or compensation for electricity generated by their renewable facilities that a) balances the costs and benefits of the renewable electrical generation facility and b) allows customer-sited renewable generation to grow sustainably among different types of customers and throughout California’s diverse communities.”

This successor tariff proceeding was initiated by Assembly Bill 327, which was signed into law in October of 2013. AB 327 is best known as the legislation that directed the CPUC to create the “NEM 2.0” successor tariff, which was adopted by the CPUC in January of 2016.

The original Net Energy Metering program in California (“NEM 1.0”) effectively enabled full-retail value net metering “allowing NEM customers to be compensated for the electricity generated by an eligible customer-sited renewable resource and fed back to the utility over an entire billing period.” Under the NEM 2.0 tariff, customers were required to pay charges that aligned them more closely with non-NEM customer costs than under the original structure. The main changes adopted when the NEM 2.0 was implemented were that NEM 2.0 customer-generators must: (i) pay a one-time interconnection fee; (ii) pay non-bypassable charges on each kilowatt-hour of electricity they consume from the grid; and (iii) customers were required to transfer to a time-of-use (TOU) rate, with potential changes to electric bills for many customers.

NEM 2.0

The commencement of the NEM-3 OIR was preceded by the publishing of a 318-page Net Energy Metering 2.0 Lookback Study, which was published by Itron, Verdant Associates, and Energy and Environmental Economics. The CPUC-commissioned study had been widely anticipated and was expected to act as the starting reference point for the successor tariff proceeding. Verdant also hosted a webinar, which summarized the study’s inputs, assumptions, draft findings and results.

The study utilized several different tests to study the impact of NEM 2.0. The cost effectiveness analysis tests, which estimate costs and benefits attributed to NEM 2.0 include: (i) total resource cost test, (ii) participant cost test, (iii) ratepayer impact measure test, and (iv) program administrator test. The evaluation also included a cost of service analysis, which estimates the marginal cost borne by the utility to serve a NEM 2.0 customer.

The opening paragraph of the report’s executive summary stated that “overall, we found that NEM 2.0 participants benefit from the structure, while ratepayers see increased rates.” In every test that the author’s conducted the results generally supported this conclusion for residential customers. There were some exceptions in their findings. For example, in the cost of service analysis the report stated that “residential customers that install customer-sited renewable resources on average pay lower bills than the utility’s cost to serve them. On the other hand, nonresidential customers pay bills that are slightly higher than their cost of service after installing customer-sited renewable resources. This is largely due to nonresidential customer rates having demand charges (and other fixed fees), and the lower ratio of PV system size to customer load when compared to residential customers.”

Similar debates over solar rate design, including Massachusetts solar demand charges, highlight how demand charges and TOU decisions can affect customer economics.

NEM-3 timeline

Popular content
The preliminary schedule that the CPUC laid out in its OIR estimates that the proceeding will take roughly 15 months in total, starting with a November 2020 pre-hearing conference.

The real meat of the proceeding, where parties will present their proposals for what they believe the successor tariff should be, as the state considers revamping electricity rates to clean the grid, and really show their hand will not begin until the Spring of 2021. So we’re still a little ways away from seeing the proposals that the key parties to this proceeding, like the Investor Owned Utilities (PG&E, SCE, SDG&E), solar and storage advocates such as SEIA, CALSSA, Vote Solar, and ratepayer advocates like TURN) will submit.

While the outcome for the new successor NEM tariff is anyone’s guess at this point, some industry policy folks are starting to speculate. We think it is safe to assume that the value of exported energy will get reduced, with debates over income-based utility charges also influencing rate design. How much and the mechanism for how exports get valued remains to be seen. Based on the findings from the lookback study, it seems like the reduction in export value will be more severe than what happened when NEM 2.0 got implemented. In NEM 2.0, non-bypassable charges, which are volumetric charges that must be paid on all imported energy and cannot be netted-out by exports, only equated to roughly $0.02 to $0.03/kWh.

Given that the value of exports will almost certainly get reduced, we expect that to be bullish for energy storage as America goes electric and load shapes evolve. Energy storage attachment rates with solar are already steadily rising in California. By the time NEM-3 starts getting implemented, likely in 2022, we think storage attachment rates will likely escalate further.

We would not be surprised to see future storage attachment rates in California look like the Hawaiian market today, which are upwards of 80% for certain types of customers and applications. Two big questions on our mind are: (i) will the NEM 3.0 rules be different for different customer class: residential, CARE (e.g., low-income or disadvantaged communities), and commercial & industrial; (ii) will the CPUC introduce some sort of glidepath or phased in implementation approach?

The outcome of this proceeding will have far reaching implications on the future of customer-sited solar and energy storage in California. The NEM-3 outcome in California may likely serve as precedent for other states, as California exports its energy policies across the West, and utility territories that are expected to redesign their Net Energy Metering tariffs in the coming years.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Energy Policy News

Accelerate Kootenays EV charging stations expand along Highway 3, adding DC fast charging and Level 2 plugs to cut range anxiety for electric vehicles in B.C., linking communities like Castlegar, Greenwood, and the Alberta border.

Key Points

A regional network of DC fast and Level 2 chargers along B.C.'s Highway 3 to reduce range anxiety and boost EV adoption.

✅ 13 DC fast chargers plus 40 Level 2 stations across key hubs

✅ 20-minute charging stops reduce range anxiety on Highway 3

✅ Backed by BC Hydro, FortisBC, and regional districts

The Kootenays are B.C.'s electric powerhouse, and as part of B.C.'s EV push the region is making significant advances to put electric cars on the road.

The region's dams generate more than half of the province's electricity needs, but some say residents in the region have not taken to electric cars, for instance.

Trish Dehnel is a spokesperson for Accelerate Kootenays, a multi-million dollar coalition involving the regional districts of East Kootenay, Central Kootenay and Kootenay Boundary, along with a number of corporate partners including Fortis B.C. and BC Hydro.

She says one of the major problems in the region — in addition to the mountainous terrain and winter driving conditions — is "range anxiety."

That's when you're not sure your electric vehicle will be able to make it to your destination without running out of power, she explained.

Now, Accelerate Kootenays is hoping a set of new electric charging stations, part of the B.C. Electric Highway project expanding along Highway 3, will make a difference.

No more 'range anxiety'

The expansion includes 40 Level 2 stations and 13 DC Quick Charging stations, mirroring BC Hydro's expansion across southern B.C. strategically located within the region to give people more opportunities to charge up along their travel routes, Dehnel said.

"We will have DC fast-charging stations in all of the major communities along Highway 3 from Greenwood to the Alberta border. You will be able to stop at a fast-charging station and, thanks to faster EV charging technology, charge your vehicle within 20 minutes," she said.

Castlegar car salesman Terry Klapper — who sells the 2017 Chevy Bolt electric vehicle — says it's a great step for the region as sites like Nelson's new fast-charging station come online.

"I guarantee that you'll be seeing electric cars around the Kootenays," he said.

"The interest the public has shown … [I mean] as soon as people found out we had these Bolts on the lot, we've had people coming in every single day to take a look at them and say when can I finally purchase it."

The charging stations are set to open by the end of next year.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

EV battery supply strategies weigh in-house cell manufacturing against supplier contracts, optimizing costs, scale, and supply-chain resilience for electric vehicles. Automakers like Tesla, GM-LG Chem, VW-Northvolt, and Ford balance gigafactories, joint ventures, and procurement risks.

Key Points

How automakers secure EV battery cells by balancing cost, scale, tech risk, and supply-chain control to meet demand.

✅ In-source cells via gigafactories, JVs, and proprietary chemistries

✅ Contract with LG Chem, Panasonic, CATL, SKI to diversify supply

✅ Manage costs, logistics, IP, and technology obsolescence risks

Auto makers, pumping billions of dollars into developing electric cars, are now facing a critical inflection point as they decide whether to get more involved with manufacturing the core batteries or buy them from others.

Batteries are one of an electric vehicle’s most expensive components, accounting for between a quarter and a third of the car’s value. Driving down their cost is key to profitability, executives say.

But whereas the internal combustion engine traditionally has been engineered and built by auto makers themselves, battery production for electric cars is dominated by Asian electronics and chemical firms, such as LG Chem Ltd. and Panasonic Corp. , and newcomers like China’s Contemporary Amperex Technology Co.

California, the U.S.’s largest car market, said last month it would end the sale of new gasoline- and diesel-powered passenger cars by 2035, putting pressure on the auto industry to accelerate its shift to electric vehicles in the coming years.

The race to lock in supplies for electric cars has auto makers taking varied paths, with growing Canada-U.S. collaboration across supply chains.

While most make the battery pack, a large metal enclosure often lining the bottom of the car, they also need the cells that are bundled together to form the core electricity storage.

Tesla several years ago opened its Gigafactory in Nevada to make batteries with Panasonic, which in the shared space would produce cells for the packs. The electric-car maker wanted to secure production specifically for its own models and lower manufacturing and logistics costs.

Now it is looking to in-source more of that production.

While Tesla will continue to buy cells from Panasonic and other suppliers, it is also working on its own cell technology and production capabilities, aiming for cheaper, more powerful batteries to ensure it can keep up with demand for its cars, said Chief Executive Elon Musk last month.

Following Tesla’s lead, General Motors Co. and South Korea’s LG Chem are putting $2.3 billion into a nearly 3-million-square-foot factory in Lordstown, Ohio, highlighting opportunities for Canada to capitalize on the U.S. EV pivot as supply chains evolve, which GM says will eventually produce enough battery cells to outfit hundreds of thousands of cars each year.

In Europe, Volkswagen AG is taking a similar path, investing about $1 billion in Swedish battery startup Northvolt AB, including some funding to build a cell-manufacturing plant in Salzgitter, Germany, as part of a joint venture, and in North America, EV assembly deals in Canada are putting it in the race as well.

Others like Ford Motor Co. and Daimler AG are steering clear of manufacturing their own cells, with executives saying they prefer contracting with specialized battery makers.

Supply-chain disruptions, including lithium shortages, have already challenged some new model launches and put projects at risk, auto makers say.

For instance, Ford and VW have agreements in place with SK Innovation to supply battery cells for future electric-vehicle models. The South Korean company is building a factory in Georgia to help meet this demand, but a fight over trade secrets has put the plant’s future in jeopardy and could disrupt new model launches, both auto makers have said in legal filings.

GM executives say the risk of relying on suppliers has pushed them to produce their own battery cells, albeit with LG Chem.

“We’ve got to be able to control our own destiny,” said Ken Morris, GM’s vice president of electric vehicles.

Bringing the manufacturing in house will give the company more control over the raw materials it purchases and the battery-cell chemistry, Mr. Morris said.

But establishing production, even in a joint venture, is a costly proposition, and it won’t necessarily ensure a timely supply of cells. There are also risks with making big investments on one battery technology because a breakthrough could make it obsolete.

Ford cites those factors in deciding against a similar investment for now.

The company sees the industry’s conventional model of contracting with independent suppliers to build parts as better suited to its battery-cell needs, Ford executive Hau Thai-Tang told analysts in August.

“We have the competitive tension with dealing with multiple suppliers, which allows us to drive the cost down,” Mr. Thai-Tang said, adding that the company expects to pay prices for cells in line with GM and Tesla.

Meanwhile, Ford can leave the capital-intensive task of conducting the research and setting up manufacturing facilities to the battery companies, Mr. Thai-Tang said.

Germany’s Daimler has tried both strategies.

The car company made its own lithium-ion cells through a subsidiary until 2015. But the capital required to scale up was better spent elsewhere, said Ola Källenius, Daimler’s chief executive officer.

The auto maker instead signed long-term supply agreements with Asian companies like Chinese battery-maker CATL and Farasis Energy (Ganzhou) Co., which Daimler invested in last year.

The company has said it is spending roughly $23.6 billion on purchase agreements but keeping its battery research in-house.

“Let’s rather put that capital into what we do best, cars,” Mr. Källenius said.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

US Renewable Energy Growth drives the US electricity mix as wind, solar, and hydropower rise while coal, natural gas, and nuclear decline, boosting market share month over month and year over year across the grid.

Key Points

US Renewable Energy Growth tracks rising wind, solar, and hydro shares in the mix as coal, gas, and nuclear decline.

✅ Wind and solar surpass nuclear in April share

✅ Renewables reach 29.3% of US electricity in April

✅ Coal and natural gas shares trend lower since 2020

Electricity generated by renewable energy sources continues to grow month over month and year over year in the United States. In April 2022, the share of US electricity coming from renewable energy was up to 29.3%, surpassing a record April level reported previously in national data. That was up from 24.8% in April 2020 and 25.7% in April 2021.

Looking at the first four months of the year, renewables provided 25.5% of US electricity, and were the second-most U.S. source in 2020 as well, while the figure for January–April 2020 was 21.7% and the figure for January–April 2021 was 22.5%.

Coal power (20.2% of US electricity) was down year over year in this time period (from 22% in January–April 2021), even as renewables surpassed coal in 2022 nationwide, but is admittedly still a bit higher than it was in January–April 2020 (16.8%).

Electricity from natural gas is also down year over year, but only very slightly (34.7% for both years). Though, it has dropped significantly since January–April 2020 (39.6%).

Electricity from nuclear power continued to take a steady, step-by-step tumble.

Wind & Solar Power Growth Strong
As reported earlier, April was the first month that wind and solar power provided more electricity than nuclear across the United States. Wind and solar power provided 21% of US electricity, while nuclear power provided 17.8% of US electricity (coal, incidentally, also provided 17.8% of US electricity, but wind and solar had provided more electricity than coal in some previous months as well).

Wind and solar power’s combined market share for the first four months of the year was up from just 14.6% in 2020 and 18.4% in 2021.

Looking at their growth year over year, you can see strong and continuous expansion of solar-provided electricity and wind-provided electricity, amid favorable government plans that have supported deployment.

Solar grew from 2.9% in January–April 2020 to 3.6%in January–April 2021 to, eventually, 4.4% in January–April 2022, with solar's 2022 share rising to 4.7% for the full year. Wind rose from 9.2% to 10.3% to 12.2%.

Together, wind and solar were up from 12.1% in January–April 2020 to 13.9% in January–April 2021, reflecting a surge in wind power within the U.S. electricity mix over this period, to 16.7% January–April 2022.

Hydropower (6.5%) is holding approximately the same position as the same period in 2021 (6.5%), but it is down a significant chunk from April 2020 (8.2%).

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News

Ontario Hydrogen Innovation Fund accelerates clean electricity integration, hydrogen storage, grid balancing, and electrolyzer pilot projects, supporting EV production, green steelmaking, and clean manufacturing under Ontario's Low-Carbon Hydrogen Strategy via IESO-administered funding.

Key Points

A $15M program funding hydrogen storage, grid pilots to integrate low-carbon hydrogen into Ontario's power system.

✅ Administered by IESO; applications opened April 2023.

✅ Supports existing, new, and research hydrogen projects.

✅ Backs grid storage, capacity, demand management pilots.

The Ontario government is establishing a Hydrogen Innovation Fund that will invest $15 million over the next three years to kickstart and develop opportunities for hydrogen to be integrated into Ontario’s clean electricity system, including hydrogen electricity storage. This launch marks another milestone in the implementation of the province’s Low-Carbon Hydrogen Strategy, supporting a growing hydrogen economy across the province, positioning Ontario as a clean manufacturing hub.

“When energy is reliable, affordable and clean our whole province wins,” said Todd Smith, Minister of Energy. “The Hydrogen Innovation Fund will help to lay the groundwork for hydrogen to contribute to our diverse energy supply, supporting game-changing investments in electric vehicle production and charging infrastructure across the province, green steelmaking and clean manufacturing that will create good paying jobs, grow our economy and reduce emissions.”

Hydrogen Innovation Fund projects would support electricity supply, capacity, battery storage and demand management, and support growth in Ontario’s hydrogen economy. The Fund will support projects across three streams:

Existing facilities already built or operational and ready to evaluate how hydrogen can support Ontario’s clean grid amid an energy storage crunch in Ontario.
New hydrogen facilities not yet constructed but could be in-service by a specified date to demonstrate how hydrogen can support Ontario’s clean grid.
Research studies investigating the feasibility of novel applications of hydrogen or support future hydrogen project decision making.

The Hydrogen Innovation Fund will be administered by the Independent Electricity System Operator, which is opening applications for the fund in April 2023. Natural Resources Canada modelling shows that hydrogen could make up about 30 per cent of the country's fuels and feedstock by 2050, as provinces advance initiatives like a British Columbia hydrogen project demonstrating scale and ambition, and create 100,000 jobs in Ontario. By making investments early to explore applications for hydrogen in our clean electricity sector we are paving the way for the growth of our own hydrogen economy.

“As a fuel that can be produced and used with little to no greenhouse gas emissions, hydrogen has tremendous potential to help us meet our long-term economic and environmental goals,” said David Piccini, Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks. “Our government will continue to support innovation and investment in clean technologies that will position Ontario as the clean manufacturing and transportation hub of the future while leading Canada in greenhouse gas emission reductions.”

The province is also advancing work to develop the Niagara Hydrogen Centre, led by Atura Power, which would increase the amount of low-carbon hydrogen produced in Ontario by eight-fold. This innovative project would help balance the electricity grid while using previously unutilized water at the Sir Adam Beck generating station to produce electricity for a hydrogen electrolyzer, reflecting broader electrolyzer investment trends in Canada. To support the implementation of the project, the IESO entered into a contract for grid regulation services at the Sir Adam Beck station starting in 2024, which will support low-carbon hydrogen production at the Niagara Hydrogen Centre.

These investments build on Ontario’s clean energy advantage, which also includes the largest battery storage project planned in southwestern Ontario, as our government makes progress on the Low-Carbon Hydrogen Strategy that laid out eight concrete actions to make Ontario a leader in the latest frontier of energy innovation – the hydrogen economy.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News