St. Albert touts green goals with three new electric buses

UPS Tesla Electric Semi Order marks the largest pre-order of all-electric Class-8 big rigs, advancing sustainable freight logistics with lower total cost of ownership, expanded charging infrastructure support, and competitive range versus diesel trucks.

Key Points

UPS's purchase of 125 Tesla all-electric Class-8 semis to cut costs, emissions, and modernize long-haul freight.

✅ Largest public pre-order: 125 electric Class-8 trucks

✅ Aims lower total cost of ownership vs diesel

✅ Includes charging infrastructure consulting by Tesla

United Parcel Service Inc. said on Tuesday it is buying 125 Tesla Inc. all-electric semi-trucks, the largest order for the big rig so far, as the package delivery company expands its fleet of alternative-fuel vehicles, including options like the all-electric Transit cargo van now entering the market.

Tesla is trying to convince the trucking community it can build an affordable electric big rig with the range and cargo capacity to compete with relatively low-cost, time-tested diesel trucks. This is the largest public order of the big rig so far, Tesla said.

The Tesla trucks will cost around $200,000 each for a total order of about $25 million. UPS expects the semi-trucks, the big rigs that haul freight along America's highways, will have a lower total cost of ownership than conventional vehicles, which run about $120,000.

Tesla has received pre-orders from such major companies as Wal-Mart, fleet operator J.B. Hunt Transport Services Inc. and food service distributor Sysco Corp.

Prior to UPS, the largest single pre-order came from PepsiCo Inc, for 100 trucks. 

UPS said it has provided Tesla with real-world routing information as part of its evaluation of the vehicle's expected performance.

"As with any introductory technology for our fleet, we want to make sure it's in a position to succeed," Scott Phillippi, UPS senior director for automotive maintenance and engineering for international operations, told Reuters.

Phillippi said the 125 trucks will allow UPS to conduct a proper test of their abilities. He said the company was still determining their routes, but the semis will "primarily be in the United States." Tesla will provide consultation and support on charging infrastructure, as electric truck fleets will need a lot of power to operate at scale.

"We have high expectations and are very optimistic that this will be a good product and it will have firm support from Tesla to make it work," Phillippi said.

The UPS alternative fuel fleet already includes trucks propelled by electricity, natural gas, propane and other non-traditional fuels, and interest in electric mail trucks underscores how delivery fleets are evolving.

About 260,000 semis, or heavy-duty Class-8 trucks, are produced in North America annually, according to FTR, an industry economics research firm.

Including the UPS order, Tesla has at least 410 pre-orders in hand, according to a Reuters tally.

Navistar International Corp. and Volkswagen AG hope to launch a smaller, electric medium-duty truck by late 2019, while rival Daimler AG has delivered the first of a smaller range of electric trucks to customers in New York, and Volvo Trucks planned a complete range of electric trucks in Europe by 2021.

Tesla unveiled its semi last month, following earlier plans to reveal the truck in October, and expects the truck to be in production by 2019.

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

US Shift From Coal to Renewables accelerates as natural gas, solar, and wind power gain market share, driven by the Paris climate agreement, clean energy mandates, smart grid upgrades, and energy efficiency.

Key Points

An industry trend where power producers replace coal with natural gas, solar, and wind to meet clean energy goals.

✅ Shareholders and customers demand cleaner power portfolios

✅ Natural gas, solar, and wind outcompete coal on cost and risk

✅ Smart grid and efficiency investments reduce emissions further

President Trump once again promised to revive the U.S. coal industry when he announced his intention to withdraw the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement.

But that reversal seems as unlikely as ever as electric power producers, the biggest consumers of coal in the U.S., continue to shift to natural gas and renewable energy sources like solar and wind power. In 2016, natural gas became the leading fuel for U.S. electricity generation for the first time, responsible for 33.8% of the output, compared with 30.4% for coal, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, even as coal-fired generation was projected to rise in 2021 in the short term.

Nick Akins, the CEO of American Electric Power, one of the largest utilities in the U.S., says the preference for gas, renewables and energy efficiency, will only grow in response to increasing demands from shareholders and customers for cleaner energy, regardless of changes in national energy policy.

With 5.4 million customers in 11 states, AEP plans to spend $1.5 billion on renewable energy from 2017 through 2019, and $13 billion on transmission and distribution improvements, including new “smart” technologies that will make the grid more resilient and efficient, AEP says.

We spoke with Akins on Thursday, just after Trump’s announcement. The transcript is edited for length and clarity.

What do you think of Trump’s decision to pull the U.S. from the climate agreement?

I don’t think it’s unexpected. He obviously made the point that he’s willing to renegotiate or have further dialogue about it. That’s a good sign. From our perspective, we’re going to continue along the path we’re already on toward a cleaner energy economy.

AEP and the U.S. electric power industry in general have been moving away from coal in favor of natural gas and renewable energy. Will this decision by the Trump administration have any impact on that trend?

If you look at our resource plans in all of the states we serve, they are focused on renewables, natural gas and transmission, as declining returns from coal generation pressure investment choices across the industry. And big-data analytics improves the efficiency of the grid, so energy efficiency is obviously a key component, as Americans use less electricity overall.

Our carbon dioxide emissions in 2016 were 44% below 2000 levels, and that progress will continue with the additions of more renewables, energy efficiency and natural gas.

So, you don’t see coal making a comeback at AEP or other utilities?

No, I don’t think so. … You wouldn’t make a decision (to build a coal power plant) at this point because it’s heavily capital-intensive, and involves a longer-term process and risk to build. And, of course, you can add renewables that are very efficient and natural gas that’s efficient and much less expensive and risky, in terms of construction and operation.

Do you plan to close any more coal-powered plants soon? 

I suspect we’ll see some more retirements in the future, with coal and nuclear closures test just transition in many communities, and as we progress towards that cleaner energy economy, and consider the expectations of our customers and shareholders for us to mitigate risk, you’ll continue to see that happen.

But on the other hand, I want to make sure there’s an understanding that coal will remain a part of the portfolio, even though in rare cases new coal plants are still being built where options are limited, but it will be of a lesser degree because of these other resources that are available to us now that weren’t available to us just a few years ago.

Do you find yourself under more or less pressure from customers and shareholders to move to cleaner forms of energy?

I think there’s more pressure. Investors are looking for the sustainability of the company going forward and mitigation of risks … From a customer standpoint, we have some large customers interested in moving into our service territory who are looking for cleaner energy, and want to know if we’re focused on that. Some of them want to be supplied entirely by those clean sources. So, we’re clearly responding to our customers’ and our shareholders’ expectations.

What’s the solution for workers at coal mines and coal power plants who have lost their jobs?

Certainly, the skill sets of employees in mining and around machinery are transferable to other areas of manufacturing, like aerospace and defense. So, we’re really focusing on economic-development efforts in our service territories … particularly in the coal states … to bring coal miners back to work, not necessarily in coal mines but certainly (in manufacturing).

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Power Generation 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

Revolution Wind Massachusetts will assemble turbine foundations in New Bedford, Fall River, or Somerset, building a local offshore wind supply chain, creating regional jobs, and leveraging pumped storage and an offshore transmission backbone.

Key Points

An offshore wind project assembling MA foundations, building a local supply chain, jobs, and peak clean power.

✅ 400 MW offshore wind; local fabrication of 1,500-ton foundations

✅ 300+ direct jobs, 600 indirect; MA crew vessel builds and operations

✅ Expandable offshore transmission; pumped storage for peak power

Deepwater Wind will assemble the wind turbine foundations for its Revolution Wind in Massachusetts, and it has identified three South Coast cities – New Bedford, Fall River and Somerset – as possible locations for this major fabrication activity, the company is announcing today.

Deepwater Wind is committed to building a local workforce and supply chain for its 400-megawatt Revolution Wind project, now under review by state and utility officials as Massachusetts advances projects like Vineyard Wind statewide.

“No company is more committed to building a local offshore wind workforce than us,” said Deepwater Wind CEO Jeffrey Grybowski. “We launched America’s offshore wind industry right here in our backyard. We know how to build offshore wind in the U.S. in the right way, and our smart approach will be the most affordable solution for the Commonwealth. This is about building a real industry that lasts.”

#google#

The construction activity will involve welding, assembly, painting, commissioning and related work for the 1,500-ton steel foundations supporting the turbine towers. This foundation-related work will create more than 300 direct jobs for local construction workers during Revolution Wind’s construction period. An additional 600 indirect and induced jobs will support this effort.

In addition, Deepwater Wind is now actively seeking proposals from Massachusetts boat builders for the construction of purpose-built crew vessels for Revolution Wind. Several dozen workers are expected to build the first of these vessels at a local boat-building facility, and another dozen workers will operate this specialty vessel over the life of Revolution Wind. (Deepwater Wind commissioned America’s only offshore wind crew vessel – Atlantic Wind Transfer’s Atlantic Pioneer – to serve the Block Island Wind Farm.)

The company will issue a formal Request for Information to local suppliers in the coming weeks. Deepwater Wind’s additional wind farms serving Massachusetts will require the construction of additional vessels, as will growth along Long Island’s South Shore in the coming years.

These commitments are in addition to Deepwater Wind’s previously-announced plans to use the New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal for significant construction and staging operations, and to pay $500,000 per year to the New Bedford Port Authority to use the facility. During construction, the turbine marshaling activity in New Bedford is expected to support approximately 700 direct regional construction jobs.

“Deepwater Wind is building a sustainable industry on the South Coast of Massachusetts,” said Matthew Morrissey, Deepwater Wind Vice President Massachusetts. “With Revolution Wind, we are demonstrating that we can build the industry in Massachusetts while enhancing competition and keeping costs low.”

The Revolution Wind project will be built in Deepwater Wind’s federal lease site, under the BOEM lease process, southwest of Martha’s Vineyard. If approved, local construction work on Revolution Wind would begin in 2020, with the project in operations in 2023. Survey work is already underway at Deepwater Wind’s offshore lease area.

Revolution Wind will deliver “baseload” power, allowing a utility-scale renewable energy project for the first time to replace the retiring fossil fuel-fired power plants closing across the region, a transition echoed by Vineyard Wind’s first power milestones elsewhere.

Revolution Wind will be capable of delivering clean energy to Massachusetts utilities when it’s needed most, during peak hours of demand on the regional electric grid. A partnership with FirstLight Power, using its Northfield Mountain hydroelectric pumped storage in Northfield, Massachusetts, makes this peak power offering possible. This is the largest pairing of hydroelectric pumped storage and offshore wind in the world.

The Revolution Wind offshore wind farm will also be paired with a first-of-its-kind offshore transmission backbone. Deepwater Wind is partnering with National Grid Ventures on an expandable offshore transmission network that supports not just Revolution Wind, but also future offshore wind farms, as New York’s biggest offshore wind farm moves forward across the region, even if they’re built by our competitors.

This cooperation is in the best interest of Massachusetts electric customers because it will reduce the amount of electrical infrastructure needed to support the state’s 1,600 MW offshore wind goal. Instead of each subsequent developer building its own standalone cable network, other offshore wind companies could use expandable infrastructure already installed for Revolution Wind, reducing project costs and saving ratepayers money.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News

Site C Project Delay raises BC Hydro costs as Christy Clark warns $600 million impact; NDP and Greens seek BCUC review of the hydroelectric dam on the Peace River, challenging evictions and construction contracts.

Key Points

A potential slowdown of B.C.'s Site C dam, risking $600M overruns, evictions, and schedule delays pending a BCUC review.

✅ Clark warns $600M cost if river diversion slips a year

✅ NDP-Green seek BCUC review; request to pause contracts, evictions

✅ Peace River hydro dam; schedule critical to budget, ratepayers

Premier Christy Clark is warning the NDP and Greens that delaying work on the Site C project in northeast British Columbia could cost taxpayers $600 million.

NDP Leader John Horgan wrote to BC Hydro last week asking it to suspend the evictions of two homeowners and urging it not to sign any new contracts on the $8.6-billion hydroelectric dam until a new government has gained the confidence of the legislature.

But Clark says in letters sent to Horgan and Green Leader Andrew Weaver on Tuesday that the evictions are necessary as part of a road and bridge construction project that are needed to divert a river in September 2019.

Any delay could postpone the diversion by a year and cost taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars, she says.

“With a project of this size and scale, keeping to a tight schedule is critical to delivering a completed project on time and on budget,” she says. “The requests contained in your letter are not without consequences to the construction schedule and ultimately have financial ramifications to ratepayers.”

The premier has asked Horgan and Weaver to reply by Saturday on whether they still want to put the evictions on hold.

She also asks whether they want the government to issue a “tools down” request to BC Hydro on other decisions that she says are essential to maintaining the budget and construction schedule.

An agreement between the NDP and Green party was signed last week that would allow the New Democrats to form a minority government, ousting Clark's Liberals.

The agreement includes a promise to refer the Site C project to the B.C. Utilities Commission to determine its economic viability.

Some analysts argue that better B.C.-Alberta power integration could improve climate outcomes and market flexibility.

But Clark says the project is likely to progress past the “point of no return” before a review can be completed.

Clark did not define what she meant by “point of no return,” nor did she explain how she reached the $600-million figure. Her press secretary Stephen Smart referred questions to BC Hydro, which did not immediately respond.

During prolonged drought conditions, BC Hydro has had to adapt power generation across the province, affecting planning assumptions.

In a written response to Clark, Weaver says before he can comment on her assertions he requires access to supporting evidence, including signed contracts, the project schedule and potential alternative project timelines.

“Please let me express my disappointment in how your government is choosing to proceed with this project,” he says.

“Your government is turning a significant capital project that potentially poses massive economic risks to British Columbians into a political debate rather than one informed by evidence and supported by independent analysis.”

The dam will be the third on the Peace River, flooding an 83-kilometre stretch of valley, and local First Nations, landowners and farmers have fiercely opposed the project.

Construction began two years ago.

A report written by University of British Columbia researchers in April argued it wasn't too late to press pause on the project and that the electricity produced by Site C won't be fully required for nearly a decade after it's complete.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Climate Change News