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

Scotland Green Recovery Strategy centers on renewable energy, onshore wind, energy efficiency, battery storage, hydrogen, and electric vehicles, alongside public transport and digital infrastructure, local manufacturing, and grid flexibility to decarbonize industry and communities.

Key Points

A plan to cut emissions by scaling renewables, efficiency, storage, and infrastructure for resilient, low-carbon growth.

✅ Prioritize energy efficiency retrofits in homes and workplaces

✅ Invest in battery storage, hydrogen, and EV charging networks

✅ Support local manufacturing and circular economy supply chains

THE “green recovery” joins the growing list of Covid-era political maxims, while green energy investment could drive recovery, suggesting a bright and environmentally sustainable post-pandemic future lies ahead.

The Prime Minister once again alluded to it recently when he expressed his ambition to see the UK become the “world leader in clean wind energy”. In his typically bombastic style, Boris Johnson declared that everything from our kettles to electric vehicles, with offshore wind energy central to that vision, will be powered by “breezes that blow around these islands” by the next decade.

These comments create a misleading impression about how we can achieve a green recovery, particularly as Covid-19 hit renewables and exposed systemic challenges. While wind turbines have a key role to play, they are just one part of a comprehensive solution requiring a far more in-depth focus on how and why we use energy. We must concentrate our efforts and resources on reducing our overall consumption and increasing energy capture.

This includes making significant energy efficiency improvements to the buildings where we live and work and grasping the lessons of lockdown, including proposals for a fossil fuel lockdown to accelerate climate action, to ensure we operate in a more effective and less environmentally-damaging fashion. Do we really want to return to a world where people commute daily half way across the country for work or fly to New York for a two-hour meeting?

Businesses will need to adapt to new ways of operating outwith the traditional nine-to-five working week to reduce congestion and pollution levels. To make this possible requires Government investment in critical areas such as public transport and digital infrastructure, alongside more pylons to strengthen the grid, across all parts of Scotland to decentralise the economy and enable more people to live and work outside the main cities.

A Government-supported green recovery must rest on making it financially viable for businesses to manufacture here to reduce our reliance on imported goods. This includes processing recycleable materials here rather than shipping them abroad. It also means using locally generated energy to support local jobs and industry. We miss a trick if Scotland simply becomes a power generator for the rest of the UK.

MOVING transport from fossil fuels to renewable fuels will require a step-change that also requires support across all levels. The increased use of electric vehicles and hydrogen fuel cells are all encouraging developments, but these will rely on investment in infrastructure throughout the country if we’re to achieve significant benefits to our environment and our economy.

This brings us to the role of onshore wind power; still the cheapest form of renewable energy, and a sector marked by wind growth despite Covid-19 around the world today. Repowering existing sites with newer and more efficient turbines will certainly increase capacity rapidly, but we must also invest into development projects that will further enhance the capacity and efficiency of existing equipment. This includes improving on the current practice of the National Grid paying operators to switch off wind turbines when excess electricity is produced and instead developing new and innovative means to capture this energy. Government-primed investment into battery storage could help ensure we achieve and further reduce our reliance on traditional, non-sustainable sources.

We need a level playing field so that all forms of energy are judged on their lifetime cost in terms of emissions as well as construction and decommissioning costs to ensure fiscal incentives are applied on a fairer basis.

Turning the maxim of a green recovery into reality will require more than extra wind turbines, and the UK's wind lessons underscore the importance of policy and scale. We need a significant investment and commitment from business and government to limit existing emissions and ensure we capture and use energy more efficiently.

Andy Drane is projects partner and head of renewables at law firm Davidson Chalmers Stewart.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News

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

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

Electrified Trucking Grid Integration explores vehicle-to-grid (V2G) strategies where rolling batteries backfeed power during peak demand, optimizing charging infrastructure, time-of-use pricing, and IESO market operations for Ontario shippers like Nature Fresh Farms.

Key Points

An approach using V2G-enabled electric trucks to support the grid, cut peak costs, and add revenue streams.

✅ Models charging sites, timing, and local grid impacts.

✅ Evaluates V2G backfeed economics and IESO pricing.

✅ Uses Nature Fresh Farms data for logistics and energy.

A University of Windsor project will study whether an electrified trucking industry might not only deliver the goods, but help keep the lights on with the timely off-loading of excess electrons from their powerful batteries via vehicle-to-grid approaches now emerging.

The two-year study is being overseen by Environmental Energy Institute director Rupp Carriveau and associate professor Hanna Moah of the Cross-Border Institute in conjunction with the Leamington-based greenhouse grower Nature Fresh Farms.

“The study will look at what happens if we electrified the transport truck fleet in Ontario to different degrees, considering the power demand for truck fleets that would result,” Carriveau said.

“Where trucks would be charging and how that will affect the electricity grid grid coordination in those locations at specific times. We’ll be able to identify peak times on the demand side.

“On the other side, we have to recognize these are rolling batteries. They may be able to backfeed the grid, sell electricity back to prop the grid up in locations it wasn’t able to in the past.”

The national research organization Mathematics of International Technology and Complex Systems (Mitacs) is funding the $160,000 study, and the Independent Electricity Systems Operator, a Crown corporation responsible for operating Ontario’s electricity market, amid an electricity supply crunch that is boosting storage efforts, is also offering support for the project.

Because of the varying electricity prices in the province based on usage, peak demand and even time of year, Carriveau said there could be times where draining off excess truck battery power will be cheaper than the grid, and vehicle-to-building charging models show how those savings can be realized.

“It could offer the truck owner another revenue stream from his asset, and businesses a cheaper electricity alternative in certain circumstances,” he said.

The local greenhouse industry was a natural fit for the study, said Carriveau, based on the amount of work the university does with the sector along with the fact it is both a large consumer and producer of electricity.

The study will be based on assumptions for electric truck capacity and performance because the low number of such vehicles currently on the road, though large electric bus fleets offer operational insights.

How will an electrified trucking industry affect Ontario’s electricity grid? University of Windsor engineering professor Rupp Carriveau is part of a new study on trucks being used to help deliver electricity as well as their products around Ontario. He is shown on campus on Tuesday, July 6, 2021.

How will an electrified trucking industry affect Ontario’s electricity grid? University of Windsor engineering professor Rupp Carriveau is part of a new study on trucks being used to help deliver electricity as well as their products around Ontario. He is shown on campus on Tuesday, July 6, 2021.

Nature Fresh Farms will supply all its data on power use, logistics, utility costs and shipping schedules to determine if switching to an electrified fleet makes sense for the company.

“As an innovative company, we are always thinking, ‘What is next?’, whether its developments in product varieties, technology or sustainability,” said company CEO Peter Quiring. “Green transportation is the next big focus.

“We were given the opportunity to work closely on this project and offer our operations as a case study to see how we can find feasible alternatives, not only for Nature Fresh Farms or even for companies in agriculture, but for every industry that relies on the transportation of their goods.”

Currently, Nature Fresh Farms doesn’t have any electrified trucks. Carriveau said the second phase of the study might actually involve an electric truck in a pilot project.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure 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

US Solar Power 2050 Target projects 45% electricity from solar, advancing decarbonization with clean energy, wind, nuclear, hydropower, hydrogen, and scalable energy storage, while modernizing the grid and transmission to cut emissions and create jobs.

Key Points

A goal for solar to supply ~45% of US electricity by 2050, backed by energy storage and other low-carbon generation.

✅ Requires 1,050-1,570 GW solar and matching storage capacity

✅ Utility-scale buildout uses ~10M acres; rooftop 10-20% of capacity

✅ Complemented by wind, nuclear, hydropower, hydrogen, and flexible turbines

President Joe Biden has called for major clean energy investments as a way to curb climate change and generate jobs. On Sept. 8, 2021, the White House released a report produced by the U.S. Department of Energy that found that solar power could generate up to 45% of the U.S. electricity supply by 2050, compared to less than 4% today, with about 3% in 2020 noted by industry observers. The Conversation asked Joshua D. Rhodes, an energy technology and policy researcher at the University of Texas at Austin, what it would take to meet this target.

Why such a heavy focus on solar power? Doesn’t a low-carbon future require many types of clean energy, even though wind and solar could meet about 80% of demand according to some research?
The Energy Department’s Solar Futures Study lays out three future pathways for the U.S. grid: business as usual; decarbonization, meaning a massive shift to low-carbon and carbon-free energy sources; and decarbonization with economy-wide electrification of activities that are powered now by fossil fuels.

It concludes that the latter two scenarios would require approximately 1,050-1,570 gigawatts of solar power, which would meet about 44%-45% of expected electricity demand in 2050, even as renewables approach one-fourth of U.S. generation in the near term. For perspective, one gigawatt of generating capacity is equivalent to about 3.1 million solar panels or 364 large-scale wind turbines.

The rest would come mostly from a mix of other low- or zero-carbon sources, including wind, nuclear, hydropower, biopower, geothermal and combustion turbines run on zero-carbon synthetic fuels such as hydrogen. Energy storage capacity – systems such as large installations of high-capacity batteries – would also expand at roughly the same rate as solar, with record growth in solar and storage anticipated by industry in coming years.

One advantage solar power has over many other low-carbon technologies is that most of the U.S. has lots of sunshine. Wind, hydropower and geothermal resources aren’t so evenly distributed: There are large zones where these resources are poor or nonexistent.

Relying more heavily on region-specific technologies would mean developing them extremely densely where they are most abundant. It also would require building more high-voltage transmission lines to move that energy over long distances, which could increase costs and draw opposition from landowners – a key reason the grid isn't yet 100% renewable according to experts – in many regions.

Is generating 45% of U.S. electricity from solar power by 2050 feasible?
I think it would be technically possible but not easy. It would require an accelerated and sustained deployment far larger than what the U.S. has achieved so far, even as the cost of solar panels has fallen dramatically, and wind, solar and batteries are 82% of the utility-scale pipeline across the country. Some regions have attained this rate of growth, albeit from low starting points and usually not for long periods.

The Solar Futures Study estimates that producing 45% of the nation’s electricity from solar power by 2050 would require deploying about 1,600 gigawatts of solar generation. That’s a 1,450% increase from the 103 gigawatts that are installed in the U.S. today, even as wind and solar trend toward 30% of U.S. electricity in some outlooks. For perspective, there are currently about 1,200 gigawatts of electricity generation capacity of all types on the U.S. power grid.

The report assumes that 10%-20% of this new solar capacity would be deployed on homes and businesses. The rest would be large utility-scale deployments, mostly solar panels, plus some large-scale solar thermal systems that use mirrors to reflect the sun to a central tower.

Assuming that utility-scale solar power requires roughly 8 acres per megawatt, this expansion would require approximately 10.2 million to 11.5 million acres. That’s an area roughly as big as Massachusetts and New Jersey combined, although it’s less than 0.5% of total U.S. land mass.

I think goals like these are worth setting, but are good to reevaluate over time to make sure they represent the most prudent path.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News

EVI-Pro Lite EV Load Forecasting helps utilities model EV charging infrastructure, grid load shapes, and resilient energy systems, factoring home, workplace, and public charging behavior to inform planning, capacity upgrades, and flexible demand strategies.

Key Points

A NREL tool projecting EV charging demand and load shapes to help utilities plan the grid and right-size infrastructure.

✅ Visualizes weekday/weekend EV load by charger type.

✅ Tests home, workplace, and public charging access scenarios.

✅ Supports utility planning, demand flexibility, and capacity upgrades.

As electric vehicles (EVs) continue to grow in popularity, utilities and community planners are increasingly focused on building resilient energy systems that can support the added electric load from EV charging, including a possible EV-driven demand increase across the grid.

But forecasting the best ways to adapt to increased EV charging can be a difficult task as EV adoption will challenge state power grids in diverse ways. Planners need to consider when consumers charge, how fast they charge, and where they charge, among other factors.

To support that effort, researchers at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) have expanded the Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Projection (EVI-Pro) Lite tool with more analytic capabilities. EVI-Pro Lite is a simplified version of EVI-Pro, the more complex, original version of the tool developed by NREL and the California Energy Commission to inform detailed infrastructure requirements to support a growing EV fleet in California, where EVs bolster grid stability through coordinated planning.

EVI-Pro Lite’s estimated weekday electric load by charger type for El Paso, Texas, assuming a fleet of 10,000 plug-in electric vehicles, an average of 35 daily miles traveled, and 50% access to home charging, among other variables, as well as potential roles for vehicle-to-grid power in future scenarios. The order of the legend items matches the order of the series stacked in the chart.

Previously, the tool was limited to letting users estimate how many chargers and what kind of chargers a city, region, or state may need to support an influx of EVs. In the added online application, those same users can take it a step further to predict how that added EV charging will impact electricity demand, or load shapes, in their area at any given time and inform grid coordination for EV flexibility strategies.

“EV charging is going to look different across the country, depending on the prevalence of EVs, access to home charging, and the kind of chargers most used,” said Eric Wood, an NREL researcher who led model development. “Our expansion gives stakeholders—especially small- to medium-size electric utilities and co-ops—an easy way to analyze key factors for developing a flexible energy strategy that can respond to what’s happening on the ground.”

Tools to forecast EV loads have existed for some time, but Wood said that EVI-Pro Lite appeals to a wider audience, including planners tracking EVs' impact on utilities in many markets. The tool is a user-friendly, free online application that displays a clear graphic of daily projected electric loads from EV charging for regions across the country.

After selecting a U.S. metropolitan area and entering the number of EVs in the light-duty fleet, users can change a range of variables to see how they affect electricity demand on a typical weekday or weekend. Reducing access to home charging by half, for example, results in higher electric loads earlier in the day, although energy storage and mobile charging can help moderate peaks in some cases. That is because under such a scenario, EV owners might rely more on public or workplace charging instead of plugging in at home later in the evening or at night.

“Our goal with the lite version of EVI-Pro is to make estimating loads across thousands of scenarios fast and intuitive,” Wood said. “And if utilities or stakeholders want to take that analysis even deeper, our team at NREL can fill that gap through partnership agreements, too. The full version of EVI-Pro can be tailored to develop detailed studies for individual planners, agencies, or utilities.”

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News