Solar Is Now 33% Cheaper Than Gas Power in US, Guggenheim Says

Nova Scotia’s West Wind Clean Energy Project aims to harness offshore wind power to deliver renewable electricity, expand transmission infrastructure, and position Canada as a global leader in sustainable energy generation.

What is West Wind Clean Energy?

The West Wind Clean Energy Project is Nova Scotia’s $60-billion offshore wind initiative to generate up to 66 GW of clean electricity for Canada’s growing energy needs.

✅ Harnesses offshore wind resources for renewable power generation

✅ Expands grid and transmission infrastructure for clean energy exports

✅ Supports Canada’s transition to a sustainable, low-carbon economy

Nova Scotia has launched one of the most ambitious clean energy projects in Canadian history — a $60-billion plan to build 66 gigawatts (GW) of offshore wind capacity, as countries like the UK expand offshore wind, capable of meeting up to 27 per cent of the nation’s total electricity demand.

Premier Tim Houston unveiled the project, called West Wind, in June, positioning it as a cornerstone of Canada’s broader energy transition and aligning it with Prime Minister Mark Carney’s goal of making the country both a clean energy and conventional energy superpower. Three months later, Carney announced a slate of “nation-building” infrastructure projects the federal government would fast-track. While West Wind was not on the initial list, it was included in a second tier of high-potential proposals still under development.

The plan’s scale is unprecedented for Canada’s offshore energy industry, as organizations like Marine Renewables Canada pivot toward offshore wind to accelerate growth. However, enormous logistical, financial, and market challenges remain. Turbines will not be in the water for years, and the global offshore wind industry itself is facing one of its most difficult periods in over a decade.

“Right now is probably the worst time in 15 years to launch a project like this,” said an executive at a Canadian energy company who requested anonymity. “It’s not Nova Scotia’s fault. It’s just really bad timing.” He pointed to failed offshore wind auctions in Europe, rising costs, and policy reversals in the United States as troubling signals for investors, even as New York’s largest offshore wind project moved ahead this year. “You can’t build the wind and hope the lines come later. You have to build both — together.”

Indeed, transmission infrastructure is emerging as the project’s biggest obstacle. Nova Scotia’s local electricity demand is limited, meaning most of the power would need to be sold to markets in Ontario, Quebec, and New England. Of the $60 billion budgeted for West Wind, $40 billion is allocated to generation, and $20 billion to new transmission — massive sums that require close federal-provincial coordination and long-term investment planning.

Despite the economic headwinds, advocates argue that West Wind could transform Atlantic Canada’s energy landscape and strengthen national energy security, building on recent tidal power investments in Nova Scotia. Peter Nicholson, chair of the Canadian Climate Institute and author of Catching the Wind: How Atlantic Canada Can Become an Energy Superpower, believes the project could redefine Nova Scotia’s role in Canada’s energy transition.

“It’s very well understood where the world is headed,” Nicholson said, noting that wind power is becoming increasingly competitive worldwide. “We’re moving toward an electrical future that’s cleanly generated for economic, environmental, and security reasons. But for that to happen, the economics have to work.” He added that the official “nation-building” designation could give Nova Scotia “a seat at the table” with major utilities in other provinces.

The governments of Canada and Nova Scotia recently issued a notice of strategic direction to the Canada–Nova Scotia Offshore Energy Regulator, aligning with Ottawa’s plan to regulate offshore wind as it begins a prequalification process and designs a call for bids later this year. The initial round will cover just 3 GW of capacity — smaller than the originally envisioned 5 GW — but officials describe it as a first step in a multi-decade plan.

While timing and economics remain uncertain, supporters insist the long-term potential of offshore wind in Nova Scotia is too significant to ignore. As global demand for clean electricity grows and offshore wind moves toward a trillion-dollar global market, they argue, West Wind could help secure Canada’s place as a renewable energy leader — if government and industry can find a way to make the numbers work.

Related Articles

• Canada Electricity News

Space-Based Solar Power enables wireless energy transfer from orbital solar arrays, using microwave beaming to rectennas on Earth, delivering clean baseload power beyond weather and night limits, as demonstrated by Caltech and NASA.

Key Points

Space-based solar power beams microwaves from arrays to rectennas, delivering clean electricity beyond weather and night.

✅ Caltech demo proved wireless power transfer in space.

✅ Microwaves beam to rectennas for grid-scale clean energy.

✅ Operates above clouds, enabling continuous baseload supply.

Ali Hajimiri thinks there’s a better way to power the planet — one that’s not getting the attention it deserves. The Caltech professor of electrical engineering envisages thousands of solar panels floating in space, unobstructed by clouds and unhindered by day-night cycles, effectively generating electricity from the night sky for continuous delivery, wirelessly transmitting massive amounts of energy to receivers on Earth.

This year, that vision moved closer to reality when Mr. Hajimiri, together with a team of Caltech researchers, proved that wireless power transfer in space was possible: Solar panels they had attached to a Caltech prototype in space successfully converted electricity into microwaves and beamed those microwaves to receivers, as a demonstration of beaming power from space to devices about a foot away, lighting up two LEDs.

The prototype also beamed a tiny but detectable amount of energy to a receiver on top of their lab’s building in Pasadena, Calif. The demonstration marks a first step in the wireless transfer of usable power from space to Earth, and advances in low-cost solar batteries could help store and smooth that power flow — a power source that Mr. Hajimiri believes will be safer than direct sun rays. “The beam intensity is to be kept less than solar intensity on earth,” he said.

Finding alternative energy sources is one of the topics that will be discussed by leaders in business, science and public policy, including wave energy, during The New York Times Climate Forward event on Thursday. The Caltech demonstration was a significant moment in the quest to realize space-based solar power, amid policy moves such as a proposed tenfold increase in U.S. solar that would remake the U.S. electricity system — a clean energy technology that has long been overshadowed by other long-shot clean energy ideas, such as nuclear fusion and low-cost clean hydrogen.

If space-based solar can be made to work on a commercial scale, said Nikolai Joseph, a NASA Goddard Space Flight Center senior technology analyst, and integrate with peer-to-peer energy sharing networks, such stations could contribute as much as 10 percent of global power by 2050.

The idea of space-based solar energy has been around since at least 1941, when the science-fiction writer Isaac Asimov set one of his short stories, “Reason,” on a solar station that beamed energy by microwaves to Earth and other planets.

In the 1970s, when a fivefold increase in oil prices sparked interest in alternative energy, NASA and the Department of Energy conducted the first significant study on the topic. In 1995, under the direction of the physicist John C. Mankins, NASA took another look and concluded that investments in space-launch technology were needed to lower the cost and move closer to cheap abundant electricity before space-based solar power could be realized.

“There was never any doubt about it being technically feasible,” said Mr. Mankins, now president of Artemis Innovation Management Solutions, a technology consulting group. “The cost was too prohibitive.”

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News

Canada EV Supply Chain aligns electric vehicle manufacturing, batteries, and autonomous tech with cross-border trade, leveraging lithium, cobalt, and rare earths as GM, Ford, and Project Arrow scale zero-emissions innovation and domestic sourcing.

Key Points

Canada's integrated resources, battery tech, and manufacturing network supporting EV production and cross-border trade.

✅ Leverages lithium, cobalt, and rare earths for battery supply

✅ Integrates GM, Ford, and Project Arrow manufacturing hubs

✅ Aligns with autonomous tech, hydrogen, and zero-emissions goals

The storied North American automotive industry, the ultimate showcase of Canada’s high-tensile trade ties with the United States, is about to navigate a dramatic hairpin turn.

But as the Big Three veer into the all-electric, autonomous era, some Canadians want to seize the moment to capitalize on the U.S. pivot and take the wheel.

“There’s a long shadow between the promise and the execution, but all the pieces are there,” says Flavio Volpe, president of the Automotive Parts Manufacturers’ Association.

“We went from a marriage on the rocks to one that both partners are committed to. It could be the best second chapter ever.”

Volpe is referring specifically to GM, which announced late last month an ambitious plan to convert its entire portfolio of vehicles to an all-electric platform by 2035, even as a 2035 EV mandate debate unfolds.

But that decision is just part of a market inflection point across the industry, with existential ramifications for one of the most tightly integrated cross-border manufacturing and supply-chain relationships in the world.

China is already working hard to become the “source of a new way” to power vehicles, President Joe Biden warned last week.

“We just have to step up.”

Canada has both the resources and expertise to do the same, says Volpe, whose ambitious Project Arrow concept — a homegrown zero-emissions vehicle named for the 1950s-era Avro interceptor jet — is designed to showcase exactly that.

“We’re going to prove to the market, we’re going to prove to the (manufacturers) around the planet, that everything that goes into your zero-emission vehicle can be made or sourced here in Canada,” he says.

“If somebody wants to bring what we did over the line and make 100,000 of them a year, I’ll hand it to them.”

GM earned the ire of Canadian auto workers in 2018 by announcing the closure of its assembly plant in Oshawa, Ont. It later resurrected the facility with a $170-million investment to retool it for autonomous vehicles.

“It was, ‘You closed Oshawa, how dare you?’ And I was one of the ‘How dare you’ people,” Volpe says.

“Well, now that they’ve reopened Oshawa, you sit there and you open your eyes to the commitment that General Motors made.”

Ford, too, has entered the fray, promising $1.8 billion to retool its sprawling landmark facility in Oakville, Ont., to build EVs, as EV assembly deals help put Canada in the race.

‘Range anxiety’
It’s a leap of faith of sorts, considering what market experts say is ongoing consumer doubt about EVs, including shortages and wait times that persist.

“Range anxiety” — the persistent fear of a depleted battery at the side of the road — remains a major concern, even though it’s less of a problem than most people think.

Consulting firm Deloitte Canada, which has been tracking automotive consumer trends for more than a decade, found three-quarters of future EV buyers it surveyed planned to charge their vehicles at home overnight.

“The difference between what is a perceived issue in a consumer’s mind and what is an actual issue is actually quite negligible,” Ryan Robinson, Deloitte’s automotive research leader, says in an interview.

“It’s still an issue, full stop, and that’s something that the industry is going to have to contend with.”

So, too, is price, especially with the end of the COVID-19 pandemic still a long way off. Deloitte’s latest survey, released last month, found 45 per cent of future buyers in Canada hope to spend less than $35,000 — a tall order when most base electric-vehicle models hover between $40,000 and $45,000.

“You put all of that together and there’s still some major challenges that a lot of stakeholders that touch the automotive industry face,” Robinson says.

“It’s not just government, it’s not just automakers, but there are a variety of stakeholders that have a role to play in making sure that Canadians are ready to make the transition over to electric mobility.”

With protectionism no longer a dirty word in the United States and Biden promising to prioritize American workers and suppliers, the Canadian government’s job remains the same as it ever was: making sure the U.S. understands Canada’s mission-critical role in its own economic priorities.

“We’re both going to be better off on both sides of the border, as we have been in the past, if we orient ourselves toward this global competition as one force,” says Gerald Butts, vice-chairman of the political-risk consultancy Eurasia Group and a former principal secretary to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

“It served us extraordinarily well in the past ... and I have no reason to believe it won’t serve us well in the future.”

EV battery industry
Last month, GM announced a billion-dollar plan to build its new all-electric BrightDrop EV600 van in Ingersoll, Ont., at Canada’s first large-scale EV manufacturing plant for delivery vehicles.

That investment, Volpe says, assumes Canada will take the steps necessary to help build a homegrown battery industry out of the country’s rare-earth resources like lithium and cobalt that are waiting to be extracted in northern Ontario, Quebec and elsewhere, including projects such as a $1.6B battery plant in Niagara that signal momentum.

Given that the EV industry is still in his infancy, the free market alone won’t be enough to ensure those resources can be extracted and developed, he says.

“General Motors made a billion-dollar bet on Canada because it’s going to assume that the Canadian government — this one or the next one — is going to commit” to building that business.

Such an investment would pay dividends well beyond the auto sector, considering the federal Liberal government’s commitment to lowering greenhouse gas-emissions and meeting targets set out in the Paris climate accord.

“If you make investments in renewable energy and energy storage in Ontario using battery technology, you can build an industry at scale that the auto industry can borrow,” Volpe says.

Major manufacturing, retail and office facilities would be able to use that technology to help “shave the peak” off Canada’s GHG emissions and achieve those targets, all the while paving the way for a self-sufficient electric-vehicle industry.

“You’d be investing in the exact same technology you’d use in a car.”

There’s one problem, says Robinson: the lithium-ion batteries on roads right now might not be where the industry ultimately lands.

“We’re not done with with battery technology,” Robinson says. “What you don’t want to do is invest in a technology that is that is rapidly evolving, and could potentially become obsolete going forward.”

Fuel cells — energy-efficient, hydrogen-powered units that work like batteries, but without the need for constant recharging — continue to be part of the conversation, he adds.

“The amount of investment is huge, and you want to be sure that you’re making the right decision, so you don’t find yourself behind the curve just as all that capacity is coming online.”

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

USDA Rural Clean Energy Programs drive climate-smart infrastructure, energy efficiency, and smart grid upgrades, delivering REAP grants, renewable power, and cost savings that boost rural development, create jobs, and modernize electric systems nationwide.

Key Points

USDA programs funding renewable upgrades, efficiency projects, and grid resilience to cut costs and spur rural growth.

✅ REAP grants fund renewable and efficiency upgrades

✅ Smart grid loans strengthen rural electric resilience

✅ Projects cut energy costs and support good-paying jobs

When rural communities lean into clean energy, the path to economic prosperity is clear. Cleaner power options like solar and electric guided by decarbonization goals provide new market opportunities for producers and small businesses. They reduce energy costs for consumers and supports good-paying jobs in rural America.

USDA Rural Development programs have demonstrated strong success in the fight against climate change, as recent USDA grants for energy upgrades show while helping to lower energy costs and increase efficiency for people across the nation.

This week, as we celebrate Earth Day, we are proud to highlight some of the many ways USDA programs advance climate-smart infrastructure, including the first Clean Energy Community designation that showcases local leadership, to support economic development in rural areas.

Advancing Energy Efficiency in Rural Massachusetts

Prior to receiving a Rural Energy for America Program (REAP) grant from USDA, Little Leaf Farms in the town of Devens used a portable, air-cooled chiller to cool its greenhouses. The inefficient cooling system, lighting and heating accounted for roughly 20 percent of the farm's production costs.

USDA Rural Development awarded the farm a $38,471 REAP grant to purchase and install a more efficient air-cooled chiller. This project is expected to save Little Leaf Farms $51,341 per year and will replace 798,472 kilowatt-hours per year, which is enough energy to power 73 homes.

To learn more about this project, visit the success story: Little Leaf Farms Grows Green while Going Green | Rural Development (usda.gov).

In the Fight Against Climate Change, Students in New Hampshire Lead the Way

Students at White Mountains Regional High School designed a modern LED lighting retrofit informed by building upgrade initiatives to offset power costs and generate efficient energy for their school.

USDA Rural Development provided the school a $36,900 Economic Impact Initiative Grant under the Community Facilities Program to finance the project. Energy upgrades are projected to save 92,528 kilowatt-hours and $12,954 each year, and after maintenance reduction is factored in, total savings are estimated to be more than $20,000 annually.

As part of the project, the school is incorporating STEM (Science, Technology, Math and Engineering) into the curriculum to create long-term impacts for the students and community. Students will learn about the lighting retrofit, electricity, energy efficiency and wind energy as well as climate change.

Clean Energy Modernizes Power Grid in Rural Pennsylvania

USDA Rural Development is working to make rural electric infrastructure stronger, more sustainable and more resilient than ever before, and large-scale energy projects in New York reinforce this momentum nationwide as well. For instance, Central Electric Cooperative used a $20 million Electric Infrastructure Loan Program to build and improve 111 miles of line and connect 795 people.

The loan includes $115,153 in smart grid technologies to help utilities better manage the power grid, while grid modernization in Canada underscores North America's broader transition to cleaner, more resilient systems. Central Electric serves about 25,000 customers over 3,049 miles of line in seven counties in western Pennsylvania.

Agricultural Producers Upgrade to Clean Energy in New Jersey

Tuckahoe Turf Farms Inc. in Hammonton used a REAP grant to purchase and install a 150HP electric irrigation motor to replace a diesel motor. The project will generate 18.501 kilowatt-hours of energy.

In Asbury, North Jersey RCandD Inc. used a REAP grant to conduct energy assessments and provide technical assistance to small businesses and agricultural producers in collaboration with EnSave.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News

USPS Electric Mail Trucks promise zero-emission delivery, lower lifecycle and maintenance costs, and cleaner air. Congressional funding in Build Back Better would modernize the EV fleet and expand charging infrastructure, improving public health nationwide.

Key Points

USPS Electric Mail Trucks are zero-emission delivery vehicles that cut costs, reduce pollution, and improve health.

✅ Lower lifetime fuel and maintenance costs vs gas trucks

✅ Cuts greenhouse gas and NOx emissions in communities

✅ Expands charging infrastructure via federal investments

The U.S. Postal Service faces serious challenges, with billions of dollars in annual losses and total mail volume continuing to decline. Meanwhile, Congress is constantly hamstringing the agency.

But now lawmakers have an opportunity to invest in the Postal Service in a way that would pay dividends for years to come: By electrifying the postal fleet.

Tucked inside the massive social spending and climate package lumbering through the Senate is money for new, cleaner postal delivery trucks. There’s a lot to like about electric postal trucks. They’d significantly improve Americans’ health while also slowing climate change. And it just makes sense for taxpayers over the long term; the Postal Service’s private sector competitors have already made similar investments, as EV adoption reaches an EV inflection point in the market. As Democrats weigh potential areas to cut in President Joe Biden’s Build Back Better plan, this is one provision that should escape the knife.

To call the U.S. Postal Service’s current vehicles “clunkers” would be an understatement. These often decades-old trucks are famous for having no airbags, no air conditioning and a nasty habit of catching fire. So the Postal Service’s recent decision to buy 165,000 replacement trucks is basically a no-brainer. But the main question is whether they will run on electricity or gasoline.

Electric vehicles are newer to the market and still carry a higher sticker price, as seen with electric bus adoption in many cities. But that higher price buys concrete benefits, like lower lifetime fuel and maintenance costs and huge reductions in pollution. Government demand for electric trucks will also push private markets to create better, cheaper vehicles, directly benefiting consumers. So while buying electric postal trucks may be somewhat more costly at first, over the long term, failing to do so could be far costlier.

At some level, this is a straightforward business decision that the Postal Service’s competitors have already made. For instance, Amazon has already deployed some of the 100,000 electric vans it recently ordered, and FedEx has promised a fully electric ground fleet by 2040, while nonprofit investment in electric trucks is accelerating electrification at major ports. In a couple of decades, the Postal Service could be the only carrier still driving dirty gas guzzlers, buying expensive fuel and paying the higher maintenance costs that combustion engines routinely require. Consumers could flock to greener competitors.

Beyond these business advantages, zero-emission vehicles carry other big benefits for the public. The Postal Service recently calculated some of these benefits by estimating the climate harms that going all-electric would avoid, benefits that persist even where electricity generation still includes fossil-generated electricity in nearby grids. Its findings were telling: A fully electric fleet would prevent millions or tens of millions of dollars’ worth of climate-change-related harms to property and human health each year of the trucks’ lifetimes (and this is probably a considerable underestimate). The world leaders that recently gathered at the global climate summit in Glasgow encouraged exactly this type of transition toward low-carbon technologies.

A cleaner postal fleet would benefit Americans in many other important ways. In addition to warming the planet, tailpipe pollutants can have dire health consequences for the people who breathe in the fumes. Mail trucks traverse virtually every neighborhood in the country and often must idle in residential areas, so we all benefit when they stop emitting. And these localized harms are not distributed equally. Some parts of the country — too often, low-income communities of color — already have poor air quality. Removing pollution from dirty mail trucks will especially help these overburdened and underserved populations.

The government’s purchasing power also routinely inspires companies to devise better and cheaper ways to do business. Investments in aerospace technologies, for instance, have spilled over into consumer innovations, giving us GPS technologies and faster, more fuel-efficient passenger jets. Bulk demand for cleaner trucks could inspire similar innovations as companies clamor for government contracts, meaning we all could get cheaper and better green products like car batteries, and the American EV boom could further accelerate those gains.

Additionally, because postal trucks are virtually everywhere in the country, if they go electric, that would mean more charging stations and grid updates everywhere too, and better utility planning for truck fleets to ensure reliable service. Suddenly, that long road trip that discourages many would-be electric car buyers may be simpler, which could boost electric vehicle adoption.

White House climate adviser Gina McCarthy talks with EVgo CEO Cathy Zoi before the start of an event near an EVgo electric car charging station.
ENERGY

The case for electrifying the postal fleet is strong from both a business and a social standpoint. Indeed, even Postmaster General Louis DeJoy, who was appointed during the Trump administration, supports it. But getting there is not so simple. Most private businesses could just borrow the money they need for this investment and pay it back with the long-term savings they would enjoy. But not the Postal Service. Thanks to its byzantine funding structure, it cannot afford electric trucks’ upfront costs unless Congress either provides the money or lets it borrow more. This is the primary reason it has not committed to making more than 10 percent of its fleet electric.

And that returns us to the Build Back Better legislation. The version passed by the House sets aside $7 billion to help the Postal Service buy electric mail trucks — enough to electrify the vast majority of its fleet by the end of the decade.

Biden has made expanding the use of electric vehicles a top priority, setting an ambitious goal of 100 percent zero-emission federal vehicle acquisitions by 2035, and new EPA emission limits aim to accelerate EV adoption. But Sen. Joe Manchin has expressed resistance to some of the climate-related subsidies in the legislation and is also eager to keep costs down. This provision, however, is worthy of the West Virginia Democrat’s support.

Most Americans would see — and benefit from — these trucks on a daily basis. And for an operation that got its start under Benjamin Franklin, it’s a crucial way to keep the Postal Service relevant.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

California Gas Car Ban 2035 signals a shift to electric vehicles, raising grid reliability concerns, charging demand, and renewable energy challenges across solar, wind, and storage, amid rolling blackouts and carbon-free power mandates.

Key Points

An order ending new gasoline car sales by 2035 in California, accelerating EV adoption and pressuring the power grid.

✅ 25% EV fleet could add 232.5 GWh/day charging demand by 2040

✅ Solar and wind intermittency strains nighttime home charging

✅ Grid upgrades, storage, and load management become critical

On September 23, California Gov. Gavin Newsom issued an executive order that will ban the sale of gasoline-powered cars in the Golden State by 2035. Ignoring the hard lessons of this past summer, when California’s solar- and wind-reliant electric grid underwent rolling blackouts, Newsom now adds a huge new burden to the grid in the form of electric vehicle charging, underscoring the need for a much bigger grid to meet demand. If California officials follow through and enforce Newsom’s order, the result will be a green new car version of a train wreck.

In parallel, the state is moving on fleet transitions, allowing electric school buses only from 2035, which further adds to charging demand.

Let’s run some numbers. According to Statista, there are more than 15 million vehicles registered in California. Per the U.S. Department of Energy, there are only 256,000 electric vehicles registered in the state—just 1.7 percent of all vehicles, a share that will challenge state power grids as adoption grows.

Using the Tesla Model3 mid-range model as a baseline for an electric car, you’ll need to use about 62 kilowatt-hours (KWh) of power to charge a standard range Model 3 battery to full capacity. It will take about eight hours to fully charge it at home using the standard Tesla NEMA 14-50 charger, a routine that has prompted questions about whether EVs could crash the grid by households statewide.

Now, let’s assume that by 2040, five years after the mandate takes effect, also assuming no major increase in the number of total vehicles, California manages to increase the number of electric vehicles to 25 percent of the total vehicles in the state. If each vehicle needs an average of 62 kilowatt-hours for a full charge, then the total charging power required daily would be 3,750,000 x 62 KWh, which equals 232,500,000 KWh, or 232.5 gigawatt-hours (GWh) daily.

Utility-scale California solar electric generation according to the energy.ca.gov puts utility-scale solar generation at about 30,000 GWh per year currently. Divide that by 365 days and we get 80 GWh/day, predicted to double, to 160 GWh /day. Even if we add homeowner rooftop solar, and falling prices for solar and home batteries in the wake of blackouts, about half the utility-scale, at 40 GWh/day we come up to 200 GW/h per day, still 32 GWh short of the charging demand for a 25% electric car fleet in California. Even if rooftop solar doubles by 2040, we are at break-even, with 240GWh of production during the day.

Bottom-line, under the most optimistic best-case scenario, where solar operates at 100% of rated capacity (it seldom does), it would take every single bit of the 2040 utility-scale solar and rooftop capacity just to charge the cars during the day. That leaves nothing left for air conditioning, appliances, lighting, etc. It would all go to charging the cars, and that’s during the day when solar production peaks.

But there’s a much bigger problem. Even a grade-schooler can figure out that solar energy doesn’t work at night, when most electric vehicles will be charging at homes, even as some officials look to EVs for grid stability through vehicle-to-grid strategies. So, where does Newsom think all this extra electric power is going to come from?

The wind? Wind power lags even further behind solar power. According to energy.gov, as of 2019, California had installed just 5.9 gigawatts of wind power generating capacity. This is because you need large amounts of land for wind farms, and not every place is suitable for high-return wind power.

In 2040, to keep the lights on with 25 percent of all vehicles in California being electric, while maintaining the state mandate requiring all the state’s electricity to come from carbon-free resources by 2045, California would have to blanket the entire state with solar and wind farms. It’s an impossible scenario. And the problem of intermittent power and rolling blackouts would become much worse.

And it isn’t just me saying this. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) agrees. In a letter sent by EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler to Gavin Newsom on September 28, Wheeler wrote:

“[It] begs the question of how you expect to run an electric car fleet that will come with significant increases in electricity demand, when you can’t even keep the lights on today.

“The truth is that if the state were driving 100 percent electric vehicles today, the state would be dealing with even worse power shortages than the ones that have already caused a series of otherwise preventable environmental and public health consequences.”

California’s green new car wreck looms large on the horizon. Worse, can you imagine electric car owners’ nightmares when California power companies shut off the power for safety reasons during fire season? Try evacuating in your electric car when it has a dead battery.

Gavin Newsom’s “no more gasoline cars sold by 2035” edict isn’t practical, sustainable, or sensible, much like the 2035 EV mandate in Canada has been criticized by some observers. But isn’t that what we’ve come to expect with any and all of these Green New Deal-lite schemes?

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News