More than half of new U.S. electric-generating capacity in 2023 will be solar

Electric vehicles may cost more upfront but often save money long-term. A new MIT study shows the total cost of EV ownership is lower than gas cars when factoring in fuel, maintenance, and emissions.

Total cost of EV ownership is the focus of new MIT research showing electric vehicles offer both financial and environmental benefits over time.

✅ Electric vehicles cost more upfront but save money over their lifetime through lower fuel and maintenance costs

✅ MIT study confirms EVs have lower emissions and total ownership costs than most gas-powered cars

✅ New interactive tool helps consumers compare climate and cost impacts of EVs, hybrids, and traditional vehicles

Electric vehicles are better for the climate than gas‑powered cars, but many Americans are still reluctant to buy them. One reason: The larger upfront cost.

New data published Thursday shows that despite the higher sticker price, electric cars may actually save drivers money in the long-run.

To reach this conclusion, a team at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology calculated both the carbon dioxide emissions and full lifetime cost — including purchase price, maintenance and fuel — for nearly every new car model on the market.

They found electric cars were easily more climate friendly than gas-burning ones. Over a lifetime, they were often cheaper, too.

Jessika Trancik, an associate professor of energy studies at M.I.T. who led the research, said she hoped the data would “help people learn about how those upfront costs are spread over the lifetime of the car.”

For electric cars, lower maintenance costs and the lower costs of charging compared with gasoline prices tend to offset the higher upfront price over time. (Battery-electric engines have fewer moving parts that can break compared with gas-powered engines and they don’t require oil changes. Electric vehicles also use regenerative braking, which reduces wear and tear.)

As EV adoption continues to boom, more consumers are realizing the long-term savings and climate benefits. Ontario’s investment in EV charging stations reflects how infrastructure is beginning to catch up with demand. Despite regional energy pricing differences, EV charging costs remain lower than gasoline in nearly every U.S. city.

The cars are greener over time, too, despite the more emissions-intensive battery manufacturing process. Dr. Trancik estimates that an electric vehicle’s production emissions would be offset in anywhere from six to 18 months, depending on how clean the energy grid is where the car is charging.

In some areas, EVs are even being used to power homes, enhancing their value as a sustainable investment. Recent EPA rules aim to boost EV sales, further signaling government support. California leads the nation in EV charging infrastructure, setting a model for nationwide adoption.

The new data showed hybrid cars, which run on a combination of fuel and battery power, and can sometimes be plugged in, had more mixed results for both emissions and costs. Some hybrids were cheaper and spewed less planet-warming carbon dioxide than regular cars, but others were in the same emissions and cost range as gas-only vehicles.

Traditional gas-burning cars were usually the least climate friendly option, though long-term costs and emissions spanned a wide range. Compact cars were usually cheaper and more efficient, while gas-powered SUVs and luxury sedans landed on the opposite end of the spectrum.

Dr. Trancik’s team released the data in an interactive online tool to help people quantify the true costs of their car-buying decisions — both for the planet and their budget. The new estimates update a study published in 2016 and add to a growing body of research underscoring the potential lifetime savings of electric cars.

Take the Tesla Model 3, the most popular electric car in the United States. The M.I.T. team estimated the lifetime cost of the most basic model as comparable to a Nissan Altima that sells for $11,000 less upfront. (That’s even though Tesla’s federal tax incentive for electric vehicles has ended.)

Toyota’s Hybrid RAV4 S.U.V. also ends up cheaper in the long run than a similar traditional RAV4, a national bestseller, despite a higher retail price.

Hawaii, Alaska and parts of New England have some of the highest average electricity costs, while parts of the Midwest, West and South tend to have lower rates. Gas prices are lower along the Gulf Coast and higher in California. But an analysis from the Union of Concerned Scientists still found that charging a vehicle was more cost effective than filling up at the pump across 50 major American cities. “We saw potential savings everywhere,” said David Reichmuth, a senior engineer for the group’s Clean Transportation Program.

Still, the upfront cost of an electric vehicle continues to be a barrier for many would-be owners.

The federal government offers a tax credit for some new electric vehicle purchases, but that does nothing to reduce the initial purchase price and does not apply to used cars. That means it disproportionately benefits wealthier Americans. Some states, like California, offer additional incentives. President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr. has pledged to offer rebates that help consumers swap inefficient, old cars for cleaner new ones, and to create 500,000 more electric vehicle charging stations, too.

EV sales projections for 2024 suggest continued acceleration, especially as costs fall and policy support expands. Chris Gearhart, director of the Center for Integrated Mobility Sciences at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, said electric cars will become more price competitive in coming years as battery prices drop. At the same time, new technologies to reduce exhaust emissions are making traditional cars more expensive. “With that trajectory, you can imagine that even immediately at the purchase price level, certain smaller sedans could reach purchase price parity in the next couple of years,” Dr. Gearhart said.

Related Pages:

EV Boom Unexpectedly Benefits All Electricity Customers

Ontario Invests in New EV Charging Stations

EV Charging Cost Still Beats Gasoline, Study Finds

EPA Rules Expected to Boost U.S. Electric Vehicle Sales

California Takes the Lead in Electric Vehicle and Charging Station Adoption

EVs to Power Homes: New Technology Turns Cars Into Backup Batteries

U.S. Electric Vehicle Sales Soar Into 2024

East-West Power Transmission Grid links provinces via hydroelectric interconnects, clean energy exports, and reliable grid infrastructure, requiring federal funding, multibillion-dollar transmission lines, and coordinated planning across Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Ontario, and Newfoundland.

Key Points

A proposed interprovincial grid to share hydro power, improve reliability, and cut emissions with federal funding.

✅ Hydroelectric exports from Manitoba to prairie and eastern provinces

✅ New interconnects and transmission lines require federal funding

✅ Enhances grid reliability and supports coal phase-out

Manitoba's energy minister is recharging the idea of building an east-west power transmission grid and says the federal government needs to help.

Cliff Cullen told the Energy Council of Canada's western conference on Tuesday that Manitoba has "a really clean resource that we're ready to share with our neighbours" as new hydro generation projects, including new turbines come online.

"This is a really important time to have that discussion about the reliability of energy and how we can work together to make that happen," said Cullen, minister of growth, enterprise and trade.

"And, clearly, an important component of that is the transmission side of it. We've been focused on transmission ... north and south, and we haven't had that dialogue about east-west."

Most hydro-producing provinces currently focus on exports to the United States, though transmission constraints can limit incremental deliveries.

Saskatchewan Energy Minister Dustin Duncan said his province, which relies heavily on coal-fired electricity plants, could be interested in getting electricity from Manitoba, even as a Manitoba Hydro warning highlights limits on serving new energy-intensive customers.

"They're big projects. They're multibillion-dollar projects," Duncan said after speaking on a panel with Cullen and Alberta Energy Minister Margaret McCuaig-Boyd.

"Even trying to do the interconnects to the transmission grid, I don't think they're as easy or as maybe low cost as we would just imagine, just hooking up some power lines across the border. It takes much more work than that."

Cullen said there's a lot of work to do on building east-west transmission lines if provinces are going to buy and sell electricity from each other. He suggested that money is a key factor.

"Each province has done their own thing in terms of transmission within their jurisdiction and we have to have that dialogue about how that interconnectivity is going to work. And these things don't happen overnight," he said.

"Hopefully the federal government will be at the table to have a look at that, because it's a fundamental expense, a capital expense, to connect our provinces."

The 2016 federal budget said significant investment in Canada's electricity sector will be needed over the next 20 years to replace aging infrastructure and meet growing demand for electricity, with Manitoba's demand potentially doubling over that period.

The budget allocated $2.5 million over two years to Natural Resources Canada for regional talks and studies to identify the most promising electricity infrastructure projects.

In April, the government told The Canadian Press that Natural Resources Canada has been talking with ministry representatives and electric utilities in the western and Atlantic provinces.

The idea of developing an east-west transmission grid has long been talked about as a way to bring energy reliability to Canadians.

At their annual meeting in 2007, Canada's premiers supported development and enhancement of transmission facilities across the country, although the premiers fell short of a firm commitment to an east-west energy grid.

Manitoba, Ontario and Newfoundland and Labrador are the most vocal proponents of east-west transmission, even as Quebec's electricity ambitions have reopened old wounds in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Manitoba and Newfoundland want the grid because of the potential to develop additional exports of hydro power, while Ontario sees the grid as an answer to its growing power needs.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Power Generation 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

EV Adoption Limits highlight that electric vehicles alone cannot meet emissions targets; life cycle assessment, carbon budgets, clean grids, public transit, and battery materials constraints demand broader decarbonization strategies, city redesign, and active travel.

Key Points

EV Adoption Limits show EVs alone cannot hit climate targets; modal shift, clean grids, and travel demand are essential.

✅ 350M EVs by 2050 still miss 2 C goals without major mode shift

✅ Grid demand rises 41%, requiring clean power and smart charging

✅ Battery materials constraints need recycling, supply diversification

Today there are more than seven million electric vehicles (EVs) in operation around the world, compared with only about 20,000 a decade ago. It’s a massive change – but according to a group of researchers at the University of Toronto’s Faculty of Applied Science & Engineering, it won’t be nearly enough to address the global climate crisis. 

“A lot of people think that a large-scale shift to EVs will mostly solve our climate problems in the passenger vehicle sector,” says Alexandre Milovanoff, a PhD student and lead author of a new paper published in Nature Climate Change. 

“I think a better way to look at it is this: EVs are necessary, but on their own, they are not sufficient.” 

Around the world, many governments are already going all-in on EVs. In Norway, for example, where EVs already account for half of new vehicle sales, the government has said it plans to eliminate sales of new internal combustion vehicles by 2025. The Netherlands aims to follow suit by 2030, with France and Canada's EV goals aiming to follow by 2040. Just last week, California announced plans to ban sales of new internal combustion vehicles by 2035.

Milovanoff and his supervisors in the department of civil and mineral engineering – Assistant Professor Daniel Posen and Professor Heather MacLean – are experts in life cycle assessment, which involves modelling the impacts of technological changes across a range of environmental factors. 

They decided to run a detailed analysis of what a large-scale shift to EVs would mean in terms of emissions and related impacts. As a test market, they chose the United States, which is second only to China in terms of passenger vehicle sales. 

“We picked the U.S. because they have large, heavy vehicles, as well as high vehicle ownership per capita and high rate of travel per capita,” says Milovanoff. “There is also lots of high-quality data available, so we felt it would give us the clearest answers.” 

The team built computer models to estimate how many electric vehicles would be needed to keep the increase in global average temperatures to less than 2 C above pre-industrial levels by the year 2100, a target often cited by climate researchers. 

“We came up with a novel method to convert this target into a carbon budget for U.S. passenger vehicles, and then determined how many EVs would be needed to stay within that budget,” says Posen. “It turns out to be a lot.” 

Based on the scenarios modelled by the team, the U.S. would need to have about 350 million EVs on the road by 2050 in order to meet the target emissions reductions. That works out to about 90 per cent of the total vehicles estimated to be in operation at that time. 

“To put that in perspective, right now the total proportion of EVs on the road in the U.S. is about 0.3 per cent,” says Milovanoff. 

“It’s true that sales are growing fast, but even the most optimistic projections of an electric-car revolution suggest that by 2050, the U.S. fleet will only be at about 50 per cent EVs.” 

The team says that, in addition to the barriers of consumer preferences for EV deployment, there are technological barriers such as the strain that EVs would place on the country’s electricity infrastructure, though proper grid management can ease integration. 

According to the paper, a fleet of 350 million EVs would increase annual electricity demand by 1,730 terawatt hours, or about 41 per cent of current levels. This would require massive investment in infrastructure and new power plants, some of which would almost certainly run on fossil fuels in some regions. 

The shift could also impact what’s known as the demand curve – the way that demand for electricity rises and falls at different times of day – which would make managing the national electrical grid more complex, though vehicle-to-grid strategies could help smooth peaks. Finally, there are technical challenges stemming from the supply of critical materials for batteries, including lithium, cobalt and manganese. 

The team concludes that getting to 90 per cent EV ownership by 2050 is an unrealistic scenario. Instead, what they recommend is a mix of policies, rather than relying solely on a 2035 EV sales mandate as a singular lever, including many designed to shift people out of personal passenger vehicles in favour of other modes of transportation. 

These could include massive investment in public transit – subways, commuter trains, buses – as well as the redesign of cities to allow for more trips to be taken via active modes such as bicycles or on foot. They could also include strategies such as telecommuting, a shift already spotlighted by the COVID-19 pandemic. 

“EVs really do reduce emissions, which are linked to fewer asthma-related ER visits in local studies, but they don’t get us out of having to do the things we already know we need to do,” says MacLean. “We need to rethink our behaviours, the design of our cities, and even aspects of our culture. Everybody has to take responsibility for this.” 

The research received support from the Hatch Graduate Scholarship for Sustainable Energy Research and the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

ONroute EV Charging Stations now live on Ontario's Highways 401 and 400, powered by Ivy Charging Network with 150 kW fast chargers, Tesla-compatible ports, Canadian Tire support, and government-backed clean transportation infrastructure.

Key Points

ONroute EV Charging Stations are Ivy-managed 150 kW fast-charging hubs along Highways 401/400, compatible with all EVs.

✅ Up to 150 kW DC fast charging; ~100 km added in about 10 minutes

✅ Compatible with all EV models, including Tesla-compatible ports

✅ Located along Highways 401/400; 2-4 chargers per ONroute site

Electric vehicle (EV) drivers can now charge at 10 ONroute locations along Highways 401 and 400, reflecting progress on the province's charging network rollout to date.

Ivy Charging Network, ONroute and their partners, Canadian Tire Corporation (CTC) and the Ministry of Transportation (MTO) announced the opening of four Charge & Go EV fast-charging stations today: Ingleside, Innisfil, Tilbury North, Woodstock

Each of Ivy's Charge & Go level 3 fast-chargers at ONroute locations will support the charging of all EV models, including charging ports for Tesla drivers.

Quick Facts

Ivy Charging Network is installing 69 level 3 fast-chargers across all ONroute locations, with the possibility of further expansion as Ontario makes it easier to build charging stations through supportive measures.

Ivy's ONroute Charge & Go locations will offer charging speeds of up-to 150 kWs, delivering up to a 100 km charge in 10 minutes.

This partnership is part of CTC's ongoing expansion of EV charging infrastructure across Canada, as utilities like BC Hydro add more stations across southern B.C.

Ivy Charging Network is a joint venture between Hydro One and Ontario Power Generation.

Natural Resources Canada, through its Electric Vehicle and Alternative Fuel Infrastructure Deployment Initiative, invested $8-million to help build the broader Ivy Charging Network, alongside other federal funding for smart chargers supporting deployments, providing access to 160 level 3 fast-chargers across Ontario including these ONroute locations.

'Our partnership with ONroute, Canadian Tire and the Ontario Ministry of Transportation will end range anxiety for EV drivers travelling on the province's major highways. These new fast-charging locations will give drivers the confidence they need on their road trips, to get them where they need to go this summer,' said Michael Kitchen, General Manager, Ivy Charging Network.

'ONroute is proud to now offer EV charging stations to our customers, in partnership with Ivy and Canadian Tire. We are focused on supporting the growth of electric cars and offering this convenience for our customers as we strive to be the recharge destination for all travelers across Ontario,' said Melanie Teed-Murch, Chief Executive Officer of ONroute.

'Together with our partners, CTC is proud to announce the opening of EV fast-charging stations at four additional ONroute locations along the 400-series highways. Our network of EV charging stations is just one of the ways CTC is supporting EV drivers of today and tomorrow to make life in Canada better, with growth similar to NB Power's public charging network underway,' said Micheline Davies, SVP, Automotive, Canadian Tire Corporation. 'We will have approximately 140 sites across the country by the end of the year, making CTC one of the largest retail networks of EV fast charging stations in Canada.'

'We're giving Canadians cleaner transportation options to get to where they need to go by making zero-emission charging and alternative-fuels refueling infrastructure more accessible, as seen with new fast-charging stations in N.B. announced recently. Investments like the ones announced today in Ontario will put Canadians in the driver's seat on the road to a net-zero future and help achieve our climate goals,' said the Honourable Jonathan Wilkinson, Minister of Natural Resources.

'Ontario is putting shovels in the ground to build critical infrastructure that will boost EV ownership, support Ontario's growing EV manufacturing industry and reduce emissions, complementing progress such as the first fast-charging network in N.L. now in place,' said Todd Smith, Minister of Energy. 'With EV fast chargers now available at ten ONroute stations along our province's business highways it's even more convenient than ever for workers and families to grab a coffee or a meal while charging their car.'

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

Canada Coal Phase-Out Costs highlight Fraser Institute findings on renewable energy, wind and solar integration, grid reliability, natural gas backup, GDP impacts, greenhouse gas emissions reductions, nuclear alternatives, and transmission upgrades across provincial electricity systems.

Key Points

Costs to replace coal with renewables, impacting taxpayers and ratepayers while ensuring grid reliability.

✅ Fraser Institute estimates $16.8B-$33.7B annually for renewables.

✅ Emissions cut from coal phase-out estimated at only 7.4% nationally.

✅ Natural gas backup and grid upgrades drive major cost increases.

Replacing coal-fired electricity with renewable energy will cost Canadian taxpayers and hydro ratepayers up to $33.7 billion annually, with only minor reductions in global greenhouse gas emissions linked to climate change, according to a new study by the Fraser Institute.

The report, Canadian Climate Policy and its Implications for Electricity Grids by University of Victoria economics professor G. Cornelis van Kooten, said replacing coal-fired electricity with wind and solar power would only cut Canada’s annual emissions by 7.4%,

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s has promised a reduction of 40%-45% compared to Canada’s 2005 emissions by 2030, and progress toward the 2035 clean electricity goals remains uncertain.

The study says emission cuts would be relatively small because coal accounted for only 9.2% of Canada’s electricity generation in 2017. (According to Natural Resources Canada, that number is lower today at 7.4%).

In 2019, the last year for which federal data are available, Canada’s electricity sector generated 8.4% of emissions nationally — 61.1 million tonnes out of 730 million tonnes.

“Despite what advocates, claim, renewable power — including wind and solar — isn’t free and, as Europe's power crisis lessons suggest, comes with only modest benefits to the environment,” van Kooten said.

“Policy makers should be realistic about the costs of reducing greenhouse gas emissions in Canada, which accounts for less than 2% of emissions worldwide.”

The report says the increased costs of operating the electricity grid across Canada — between $16.8 billion and $33.7 billion annually or 1% to 2% of Canada’s annual GDP — would result from having to retain natural gas, consistent with net-zero regulations allowing some natural gas in limited cases, as a backup to intermittent wind and solar power, which cannot provide baseload power to the electricity grid on demand.

Van Kooten said his cost estimates are conservative because his study “could not account for scenarios where the scale of intermittency turned out worse than indicated in our dataset … the costs associated with the value of land in other alternative uses, the need for added transmission lines, as analyses of greening Ontario's grid costs indicate, environmental and human health costs and the life-cycle costs of using intermittent renewable sources of energy, including costs related to the disposal of hazardous wastes from solar panels and wind turbines.”

If nuclear power was used to replace coal-fired electricity, the study says, costs would drop by half — $8.3 billion to $16.7 billion annually — but that’s unrealistic because of the time it takes to build nuclear plants and public opposition to them.

The study says to achieve the federal government’s target of reducing emissions to 40% to 45% below 2005 levels by 2030 and net-zero emissions by 2050, would require building 30 nuclear power plants before 2030, highlighting Canada’s looming power problem as described by analysts — meaning one plant of 1,000-megawatt capacity coming online every four months between now and 2030.

Alternatively, it would take 28,340 wind turbines, each with 2.5-megawatts capacity, or 1,050 turbines being built every four months, plus the costs of upgrading transmission infrastructure.

Van Kooten said he based his calculations on Alberta, which generates 39.8% of its electricity from coal and the cost of Ontario eliminating coal-fired electricity, even as Ontario electricity getting dirtier in coming years, which generated 25% of its electricity, between 2003 and 2014, replacing it with a combination of natural gas, nuclear and wind and solar power.

According to Natural Resources Canada, Nova Scotia generates 49.9% of its electricity from coal, Saskatchewan 42.9%, and New Brunswick 17.2%.

In 2018, the Trudeau government announced plans to phase-out traditional coal-fired electricity by 2030, though the Stop the Shock campaign seeks to bring back coal power in some regions. 

Canada and the U.K. created the “Powering Past Coal Alliance” in 2017, aimed at getting other countries to phase out the use of coal to generate electricity.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Power Generation News