Premier warns NDP, Greens that delaying Site C dam could cost $600M

Uber Elevate eVTOL Batteries enable electric air taxis with advanced energy storage, lithium-ion cell quality, safety engineering, and zero-emissions performance for urban air mobility, ride-hailing aviation, and scalable battery pack development.

Key Points

Battery systems for Uber's electric air taxis, maximizing energy density, safety, and cycle life for urban air mobility.

✅ Ex-Tesla battery leader guides pack design and cell quality

✅ All-electric eVTOL targets zero-emissions urban air mobility

✅ Focus on safety, energy density, fast charge, and lifecycle

Celina Mikolajczak, a senior manager for battery pack development at Tesla, has been hired by Uber to help the ride-hail company’s “flying car” project get off the ground. It’s an important hire because it signals that Uber plans to get more involved in the engineering aspects of this outlandish-sounding project.

For six years, Mikolajczak served as senior manager and technical lead for battery technology, cell quality, and materials analysis. She worked with Tesla’s suppliers, tested the car company’s lithium-ion batteries for long-term use as the age of electric cars accelerates, oversaw quality assurance, and conducted “failure analysis” to drive battery cell production and design improvements. In other words, Mikolajczak was in charge of making sure the most crucial component in Tesla’s entire assembly line was top of the line.

Now she works for Uber — and not just for Uber, but for Uber Elevate, the absurdly ambitious air taxi service that hinges on the successful development of electric vertical take-off and landing (eVTOL) vehicles. There are practically zero electric planes in service today, and definitely none being used in a commercial ride-hail service. The hurdles to getting this type of service off the ground are enormous.

Her title at Uber is director of engineering and energy storage systems, and today marks her first week on the job. She joins Mark Moore, the former chief technologist for on-demand mobility at NASA’s Langley Research Center, who joined Uber almost a year ago to help lend a professional appearance to Elevate. Both serve under Jeff Holden, Uber’s head of product, who oversees the air taxi project.

Uber first introduced its plan to bring ride-sharing to the skies in a white paper last year. At the time, Uber said it wasn’t going to build its own eVTOL aircraft, but stood ready to “contribute to the nascent but growing VTOL ecosystem and to start to play whatever role is most helpful to accelerate this industry’s development.”

Instead, Uber said it would be partnering with a handful of aircraft manufacturers, real estate firms, and government regulators to better its chances of developing a fully functional, on-demand flying taxi service. It held a day-long conference on the project in Dallas in April, and plans to convene another one later this year in Los Angeles. In 2020, Uber says its aerial service will take off in three cities: LA, Dallas-Fort Worth, and Dubai.

UBER’S TAKING A MORE PROMINENT ROLE

Now, Uber’s taking a more prominent role in the design and manufacturing of its fleet of air taxis, which signals a stronger commitment to making this a reality — and also more of a responsibility if things eventually go south, as setbacks like Eviation's collapse underscore.

Perhaps most ambitiously, Uber says the aircraft it plans to use (but, importantly, do not exist yet) will run on pure battery-electric power, and not any hybrid of gasoline and electricity. Most of the companies exploring eVTOL admit that battery’s today aren’t light enough or powerful enough to sustain flights longer than just a few minutes, but many believe that battery technology will eventually catch up, with Elon Musk suggesting a three-year timeline for cheaper, more powerful cells.

Uber believes that in order to sustain a massive-scale new form of transportation, it will need to commit to an all-electric, zero-operational emissions approach from the start, even as potential constraints threaten the EV boom overall. And since the technology isn’t where it needs to be yet, the ride-hail company is taking a more prominent role in the development of the battery pack for its air taxi vehicles. Mikolajczak certainly has her work cut out for her.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

California Natural Gas Plant Rethink signals a shift toward clean energy, renewables, distributed solar, battery storage, and grid modernization as LADWP and regulators pause repowering plans amid an electricity oversupply and rising ratepayer costs.

Key Points

California pauses new gas plants to assess renewables, storage, and grid solutions for reliability.

✅ LADWP delays $2.2B gas repowers to study clean alternatives

✅ CEC weighs halting Oxnard plant amid grid oversupply

✅ Distributed solar, batteries, demand response boost reliability

California energy officials are, for the first time, rethinking plans to build expensive natural gas power plants in the face of an electricity glut and growing use of cleaner and cheaper energy alternatives.

The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power announced Tuesday that it has put a hold on a $2.2-billion plan to rebuild several old natural gas power plants while it studies clean energy alternatives to meet electricity demands. And the California Energy Commission may decide as early as Thursday to halt a natural gas project in Ventura County.

The scrutiny comes after an investigation found that the state is operating with an oversupply of electricity, driven largely by the construction of gas-fueled generating plants, leading to higher rates as regulators consider a rate overhaul to clean the grid. The state’s power plants are on track to be able to produce at least 21% more electricity than needed by 2020, according to the Times report.

Californians are footing a $40-billion annual bill while using less electricity, paying $6.8 billion more than they did in 2008 when power use in the state was at its all-time high. Electricity consumption has since fallen and remained largely flat.

Utilities in California have been on a years-long building binge, adding new natural gas plants even as the nation’s electricity system has undergone significant change, including consumer choice reforms that are reshaping the market.

Where utilities once delivered all electrical services from huge power plants along miles of transmission lines, the industry now must consider power delivered to the electric grid not only from its own sources, but also from solar systems and batteries at homes and businesses.

At the same time, utilities have been aggressively upgrading or rebuilding their aging natural gas plants — a move critics have said is unnecessary because consumers are using less power and clean energy technology is making those plants obsolete.

The DWP and energy commission moves involve as many as seven natural gas plant projects proposed for Southern California, despite warnings about a looming shortage if capacity is retired too fast, from Oxnard to Carlsbad, at a cost of more than $6 billion.

Reiko Kerr, the DWP’s senior assistant general manager of power systems, said given the changes in the energy world, the assessment is necessary to protect ratepayer dollars and the environment.

“The whole utility paradigm has shifted,” Kerr said in an interview. “We really are doing our ratepayers a disservice by not considering all viable options.

“We’re just looking at everything,” she said. “What can help us solve this reliability, renewable and greenhouse gas challenge that we all have?”

State and local governments have felt a heightened sense of urgency to deal with climate change after President Trump decided last week to withdraw the United States from the Paris climate accord.

California already has mandated that at least 50% of the state’s electricity come from clean energy sources by 2030. Senate leader Kevin de León (D-Los Angeles) wants to increase that to 100% by 2045.

Building or overhauling natural gas plants throughout Southern California, environmentalists argue, isn’t helping achieve those goals, even as some contend the state can't keep the lights on without gas during the transition.

The DWP’s move to delay plans for the fossil fuel plants, which seemed all but set to be built, came as a surprise to clean-energy advocates, who hailed the decision.

“This is a great first step toward smart energy investments that save customers money, ensure the lights stay on and protect our health and environment,” Graciela Geyer of the Sierra Club said.

The environmental group said that if the utility had moved ahead with the $2.2-billion investment in repowering natural gas plants, it “would have blown an irreparable hole in the city and the state’s hopes to achieve 100% generation” from clean energy sources.

Angela Johnson Meszaros, attorney at EarthJustice, said in a statement: "As our city struggles with the worst smog we’ve seen in years, we appreciate that LADWP is taking some much-needed time to reassess its plans to build fossil fuel power plants. We look forward to the day that LADWP announces that we are going to power our city with 100% clean energy.”

The gas-fired generating units slated for demolition and rebuilding are at the Scattergood, Haynes and Harbor electricity plants, which range from 34 to 67 years old.

As a group, the three plants have generated less than 20% of their combined capacity since 2001. The Harbor facility has operated on the low end at just 7%, while Haynes ran on the high end at 22%.

“The old model, the old legacy clunkers, won’t get us into the future we want,” DWP’s Kerr said.

DWP staff members told the utility’s’ commissioners Tuesday that their analysis of possible alternatives would be completed no later than early 2018.

Separately, the California Energy Commission this week is evaluating whether to halt a natural gas project in Ventura County after the state’s electric grid operator offered to conduct a study of clean energy alternatives to the roughly $250-million project on Mandalay Bay in Oxnard.

An energy commission committee has been deliberating since a hearing Monday during which Southern California Edison and the project’s developer, NRG Energy, argued that a study is simply a delay tactic that probably would kill a project needed to ensure reliable electric service and to avoid blackouts during peak demand.

The California Independent System Operator, which runs the state’s electric grid, told the energy commission that it would take three to four weeks to conduct its study on alternatives to the Oxnard natural gas project.

“Here we have an actual offer by the ISO to do such an analysis,” Ellison Folk, a lawyer representing the city of Oxnard, told the energy commission as she pushed for the study. “Its view that this is an analysis worth doing is something worth taking seriously.”

Energy commission members reviewing the study proposal are scheduled to meet again Thursday to consider the offer.

The board of governors for the California Independent System Operator made the unusual offer at its May 1 meeting to conduct a eleventh-hour study of clean-energy alternatives to building a new natural gas plant.

“If we’re going to be moving forward with a gas plant at this time, in this juncture, in the context of everything that’s going on, not evaluating other alternatives that are viable, noncombustion alternatives, is a missed opportunity,” Angelina Galetiva. a commission board member, said during the May 1 meeting.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Energy Policy News

National Electricity Market review calls for clear coal-fired closure schedules to safeguard energy security, backing a technology-agnostic clean energy and low emissions target with tradeable certificates to stabilise prices and support a smoother transition.

Key Points

A review proposing orderly coal closures and a technology-agnostic clean energy target to protect grid reliability.

✅ Mandates advance notice of coal plant closure schedules

✅ Supports clean energy and low emissions target with certificates

✅ Aims to stabilise prices and ensure system security

THE Latrobe Valley’s coal-fired power stations could be forced to give details of planned closures well in advance to help governments avoid major threats to electricity supply, amid an AEMO warning on reduced reserves across the grid.

The much-anticipated review of the national electricity market, to be released on Friday, will outline the need for clear schedules for the closure of coal-fired power stations to avoid rushed decisions on ­energy security.

It is believed the Turnbull government, which has ruled out taxpayer-funded power plants in the current energy debate, will move toward either a clean-energy or a low-emissions target that aims to bolster power security while reducing household bills and emissions.

The system, believed to be also favoured by industry, would likely provide a more stable transition to clean energy by engaging with the just transition concept seen in other markets, because coal-fired power would not be driven out of the market as quickly.

Sources said that would lead to greater investment in the energy sector, a surplus of production and, as seen in Alberta's shift to gas and price cap debate driving market changes, a cut in prices.

It is likely most coal-fired power stations, such as Yallourn and Loy Yang in the Latrobe Valley, would see out their “natural lives” under the government’s favoured system, rather than be forced out of business by an EIS.

The new target would be separate from the Renewable Energy Target which have come under fire because of ad hoc federal and state targets.

The Herald Sun has been told the policy would provide tradeable clean-energy certificates for low-emissions generation, such as wind, solar and gas and coal which used carbon capture and storage technology.

Energy retailers and large industrial users would then be ­required to source a mandated amount of certified clean power.

Federal Energy Minister Josh Frydenberg has repeatedly said any solution must be “technology agnostic” including gas, renewable energy and coal, amid ongoing debates over whether to save or close nuclear plants such as the Three Mile Island debate in other markets.

Energy Networks Australia’s submission to the review, chaired by Chief Scientist Alan Finkel, acknowledged the challenges in identifying potential generation closures, particularly with uncertain and poorly integrated state and national carbon policy settings.

The group said given the likelihood of further closures of coal fired generation units a new mechanism was needed to better manage changes in the generation mix, well in advance of the closure of the plant.

It said the implications for system stability were “too significant” to rely on the past short-term closures, such as Hazelwood, particularly when the amount of power generated could drive energy security to “tipping point”.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Power Generation News

Alberta Electricity Rate Cap shields RRO customers with a 6.8 cents/kWh price ceiling, stabilizing power bills amid capacity market transition, using carbon tax funding to offset spikes and enhance consumer protection from volatility.

Key Points

A four-year 6.8 cents/kWh ceiling on Alberta's RRO power price, backed by carbon tax to stabilize bills.

✅ Applies to RRO customers from Jun 2017 to May 2021

✅ Caps rates at 6.8 cents/kWh; lower RRO still applies

✅ Funded by carbon tax when market prices exceed cap

The Alberta government introduced a bill Tuesday, part of new electricity rules that will allow it to place a cap on regulated electricity rates for the next four years.

The move to cap consumer power rates at a maximum of 6.8 cents per kilowatt-hour for four years was announced in November 2016 by Premier Rachel Notley, although it was later scrapped by the UCP during a subsequent policy shift.

The cap is intended to protect consumers from price fluctuations from June 1, 2017, to May 31, 2021, as the province moves from a deregulated to a capacity power market amid a power market overhaul that is underway.

The price ceiling will apply to people with a regulated rate option. If the RRO is below 6.8 cents, they will still pay the lower rate.

The government isn't forecasting price fluctuations above 6.8 cents in this four-year period. If the price goes above that amount, funding would come from the carbon tax if required.

Funding may come from carbon tax

"We're taking a number of steps to keep prices low," said Energy Minister Marg McCuaig-Boyd. "But in the event that prices were to spike, the cap would automatically prevent the energy rate from going over 6.8 cents to give Albertans even more peace of mind." 

The government isn't forecasting price fluctuations above 6.8 cents in this four-year period. If the price goes above that amount, funding would come from the carbon tax.

McCuaig-Boyd said this would be an appropriate use for the carbon tax as the cap helps Albertans move to a greener energy system and change how the province produces and pays for electricity without relying as much on coal-fired electricity. 

The government estimates the program will cost $10 million a month for each cent the rate goes above 6.8 cents per kilowatt-hour. If rates remain below that amount, the program may not cost anything.

Wildrose electricity and renewables critic Don MacInytre said the move shows the government expects retail electricity rates will double over the next four years. 

MacIntyre argued a rate cap simply shifts increasing electricity costs away from consumers to the Alberta government. But ultimately everyone pays. 

"It's simply a shift of a burden from the ratepayer to the taxpayer, which is essentially the same person," he said. 

The City of Medicine Hat runs its own electrical system without a regulated rate option. The government will talk with the city to see if it is interested in taking part in the price cap protection.

About 60 per cent of eligible Albertans or one million households use the regulated rate option in their electricity contracts.

The current regulated rate option averages less than three cents per kilowatt-hour.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Energy Policy News

San Diego Gas & Electric EV incentives deliver $10,000 utility discounts plus a $200 EV Climate Credit, stackable with California rebates and federal tax credits on BMW i3 and Nissan Leaf purchases through participating dealers.

Key Points

Utility-backed rebates that cut EV purchase costs and stack with California and federal tax credits for added savings.

✅ $10,000 off BMW i3 or Nissan Leaf via SDG&E partner dealers

✅ Stack with $7,500 federal and up to $4,500 California rebates

✅ $200 annual EV Climate Credit for eligible account holders

For southern California residents, it's an excellent time to start considering the purchase of a BMW i3 or Nissan Leaf electric car as EV sales top 20% in California today.

San Diego Gas & Electric has joined a host of other utility companies in the state in offering incentives towards the purchase of an i3 or a Leaf as part of broader efforts to pursue EV grid stability initiatives in California.

In total, the incentives slash $10,000 from the purchase price of either electric car, and an annual $200 credit to reduce the buyer's electricity bill is included through the EV Climate Credit program, which can complement home solar and battery options for some households.

SDG&E's incentives may be enough to sway some customers into either electric car, but there's better news: the rebates can be combined with state and federal incentives.

The state of California offers a $4,500 purchase rebate for qualified low-income applicants, while others are eligible for $2,500

Additionally, the federal government income-tax credit of up to $7,500 can bring the additional incentives to $10,000 on top of the utility's $10,000.

While the federal and state incentives are subject to qualifications and paperwork established by the two governments, the utility company's program is much more straight forward.

SDG&E simply asks a customer to provide a copy of their utility bill and a discount flyer to any participating BMW or Nissan dealership.

Additional buyers who live in the same household as the utility's primary account holder are also eligible for the incentives, although proof of residency is required.

Nissan is likely funding some of the generous incentives to clear out remaining first-generation Nissan Leafs.

The 2018 Nissan Leaf will be revealed next month and is expected to offer a choice of two battery packs—one of which should be rated at 200 miles of range or more.

SDG&E joins Southern California Edison as the latest utility company to offer discounts on electric cars as California aims for widespread electrification and will need a much bigger grid to support it, though SCE has offered just $450 towards a purchase.

However, the $450 incentive can be applied to new and used electric cars.

Up north, California utility company Pacific Gas & Electric offers $500 towards the purchase of an electric car as well, and is among utilities plotting a bullish course for EV charging infrastructure across the state today.

Two Hawaiian utilities—Kaua'i Island Utility Cooperative and the Hawaiian Electric Company—offered $10,000 rebates similar to those in San Diego from this past January through March.

Those rebates once again were destined for the Nissan Leaf.

SDG&E's program runs through September 30, 2017, or while supplies of the BMW i3 and Nissan Leaf last at participating local dealers.

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