Texas battery rush: Oil state's power woes fuel energy storage boom


Battery Energy Storage System

Electrical Testing & Commissioning of Power Systems

Our customized live online or in‑person group training can be delivered to your staff at your location.

  • Live Online
  • 12 hours Instructor-led
  • Group Training Available
Regular Price:
$599
Coupon Price:
$499
Reserve Your Seat Today

Texas Battery Storage Investment Boom draws BlackRock, SK, and UBS, leveraging ERCOT price volatility, renewable energy growth, and utility-scale energy storage arbitrage to enhance grid reliability, resilience, and double-digit returns across high-demand nodes.

 

Key Points

Texas sees a rush into battery storage, using ERCOT price spreads to bolster grid reliability and earn about 20% returns.

✅ Investors exploit price volatility, peak-demand spreads.

✅ Utility-scale storage enhances ERCOT reliability.

✅ Top players: BlackRock, SK E&S, UBS; 700 MW deals.

 

BlackRock, Korea's SK, Switzerland's UBS and other companies are chasing an investment boom in battery storage plants in Texas, lured by the prospect of earning double-digit returns from the power grid problems plaguing the state, according to project owners, developers and suppliers.

Projects coming online are generating returns of around 20%, compared with single digit returns for solar and wind projects, according to Rhett Bennett, CEO of Black Mountain Energy Storage, one of the top developers in the state.

"Resolving grid issues with utility-scale energy storage is probably the hottest thing out there,” he said.

The rapid expansion of battery storage could help, through efforts like a virtual power plant initiative in Texas, prevent a repeat of the February 2021 ice storm and grid collapse which killed 246 people and left millions of Texans without power for days.

The battery rush also puts the Republican-controlled state at the forefront of President Joe Biden's push to expand renewable energy use.

Power prices in Texas can swing from highs of about $90 per megawatt hour (MWh) on a normal summer day to nearly $3,000 per MWh when demand surges on a day with less wind power, a dynamic tied to wind curtailment on the Texas grid according to a simulation by the federal government's U.S. Energy Information Administration.

That volatility, a product of demand and higher reliance on intermittent wind and solar energy, has fueled a rush to install battery plants, aided by falling battery costs, that store electricity when it is cheap and abundant and sell when supplies tighten and prices soar.

Texas last year accounted for 31% of new U.S. grid-scale energy storage, with much of it pairing storage with solar, according to energy research firm Wood Mackenzie, second only to California which has had a state mandate for battery development for a decade.

And Texas is expected to account for nearly a quarter of the U.S. grid-scale storage market over the next five years, a trajectory consistent with record U.S. solar-plus-storage growth noted by analysts, according to Wood Mackenzie projections shared with Reuters.

Developers and energy traders said locations offering the highest returns -- in strapped areas of the grid -- will become increasingly scarce as more storage comes online and, as diversifying resources for better projects suggests, electricity prices stabilize.

Texas lawmakers this week voted to provide new subsidies for natural gas power plants in a bid to shore up reliability. But the legislation also contains provisions that industry groups said could encourage investment in battery storage by supporting 'unlayering' peak demand approaches.

Amid the battery rush, BlackRock acquired developer Jupiter Power from private equity firm EnCap Investments late last year. Korea's SK E&S acquired Key Capture Energy from Vision Ridge Partners in 2021 and UBS bought five Texas projects from Black Mountain last year for a combined 700 megawatts (MW) of energy storage. None of the sales' prices were disclosed.

SK E&S said its acquisition of Key Capture was part of a strategy to invest in U.S. grid resiliency.

"SK E&S views energy storage solutions in Texas and across the U.S. as a core technology that supports a new energy infrastructure system to ensure American homes and businesses have affordable power," the company said in a statement.

 

Related News

Related News

Fact check: Claim on electric car charging efficiency gets some math wrong

EV Charging Coal and Oil Claim: Fact-check of kWh, CO2 emissions, and electricity grid mix shows 70 lb coal or ~8 gallons oil per 66 kWh, with renewables and natural gas reducing lifecycle emissions.

 

Key Points

A viral claim on EV charging overstates oil use; accurate figures depend on grid mix: ~70 lb coal or ~8 gallons oil.

✅ About 70 lb coal or ~8 gal oil per 66 kWh, incl. conversion losses

✅ EVs average ~100 g CO2 per mile vs ~280 g for 30 mpg cars

✅ Grid mix includes renewables, nuclear, natural gas; oil use is low

 

The claim: Average electric car requires equivalent of 85 pounds of coal or six barrels of oil for a single charge

The Biden administration has pledged to work towards decarbonizing the U.S. electricity grid by 2035. And the recently passed $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill provides funding for more electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure, including EV charging networks across the country under current plans.

However, a claim that electric cars require an inordinate amount of oil or coal energy to charge has appeared on social media, even as U.S. plug-ins traveled 19 billion miles on electricity in 2021.

“An average electric car takes 66 KWH To charge. It takes 85 pounds of coal or six barrels of oil to make 66 KWH,” read a Dec 1 Facebook post that was shared nearly 500 times in a week. “Makes absolutely no sense.” 

The post included a stock image of an electric car charging, though actual charging costs depend on local rates and vehicle efficiency.

This claim is in the ballpark for the coal comparison, but the math on the oil usage is wildly inaccurate.

It would take roughly 70 pounds of coal to produce the energy required to charge a 66 kWh electric car battery, said Ian Miller, a research associate at the MIT Energy Initiative. That's about 15 pounds less than is claimed in the post.

The oil number is much farther off.

While the post claims that it takes six barrels of oil to charge a 66 kWh battery, Miller said the amount is closer to 8 gallons  — the equivalent of 20% of one barrel of oil.

He said both of his estimates account for energy lost when fossil fuels are converted into electricity. 

"I think the most important question is, 'How do EVs and gas cars compare on emissions per distance?'," said Miller. "In the US, using average electricity, EVs produce roughly 100 grams of CO2 per mile."

He said this is more than 60% less than a typical gasoline-powered car that gets 30 mpg, aligning with analyses that EVs are greener in all 50 states today according to recent studies. Such a vehicle produces roughly 280 grams of CO2 per mile.

Lifecycle analyses also show that the CO2 from making an EV battery is not equivalent to driving a gasoline car for years, which often counters common misconceptions.

"If you switch to an electric vehicle, even if you're using fossil fuels (to charge), it's just simply not true that you'll be using more fossil fuel," said Jessika Trancik, a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who studies the environmental impact of energy systems.  

However, she emphasized electric cars in the U.S. are not typically charged using only energy from coal or oil, and that electricity grids can handle EVs with proper management.

The U.S. electricity grid relies on a diversity of energy sources, of which oil and coal together make up about 20 percent, according to a DOE spokesperson. This amount is likely to continue to drop as renewable energy proliferates in the U.S., even as some warn that state power grids will be challenged by rapid EV adoption. 

"Switching to an electric vehicle means that you can use other sources, including less carbon-intensive natural gas, and even less carbon-intensive electricity sources like nuclear, solar and wind energy, which also carry with them health benefits in the form of reduced air pollutant emissions," said Trancik. 

Our rating: Partly false
Based on our research, we rate PARTLY FALSE the claim that the average electric car requires the equivalent of 85 pounds of coal or six barrels of oil for a single charge. The claim is in the ballpark on coal consumption, as an MIT researcher estimates that around 70 pounds. But the oil usage is only about 8 gallons, which is 20% of one barrel. And the actual sources of energy for an electric car vary depending on the energy mix in the local electric grid. 

 

Related News

View more

Is residential solar worth it?

Home Solar Cost vs Utility Bills compares electricity rates, ROI, incentives, and battery storage, explaining payback, financing, and grid fees while highlighting long-term savings, rate volatility, and backup power resilience for homeowners.

 

Key Points

Compares home solar pricing and financing to utility rates, outlining savings, incentives, ROI, and backup power value.

✅ Average retail rates rose 59% in 20 years; volatility persists

✅ Typical 7.15 kW system costs $18,950 before incentives

✅ Federal ITC and state rebates improve ROI and payback

 

When shopping for a home solar system, sometimes the quoted price can leave you wondering why someone would move forward with something that seems so expensive. 

When compared with the status quo, electricity delivered from the utility, the price may not seem so high after all. First, pv magazine will examine the status quo, and how much you can expect to pay for power if you don’t get solar panels. Then, we will examine the average cost of solar arrays today and introduce incentives that boost home solar value.

The cost of doing nothing

Generally, early adopters have financially benefited from going solar by securing price certainty and stemming the impact of steadily increasing utility-bill costs, particularly for energy-insecure households who pay more for electricity.

End-use residential electric customers pay an average of $0.138/kWh in the United States, according to the Energy Information Administration (EIA). In California, that rate is $0.256/kWh, it averages $0.246/kWh across New England, $0.126/kWh in the South Atlantic region, and $0.124/kWh in the Mountain West region.

EIA reports that the average home uses 893 kWh per month, so based on the average retail rate of $0.138/kWh, that’s an electric bill of about $123 monthly, or $229 monthly in California.

Over the last 20 years, EIA data show that retail electricity prices have increased 59% across the United States, with evidence indicating that renewables are not making electricity more expensive, suggesting other factors have driven costs higher, or 2.95% each year.

This means based on historical rates, the average US homeowner can expect to pay $39,460 over the next 20 years on electricity bills. On average, Californians could pay $73,465 over 20 years.

Recent global events show just how unstable prices can be for commodities, and energy is no exception here, with solar panel sales doubling in the UK as homeowners look to cut soaring bills. What will your utility bill cost in 20 years?

These estimated bills also assume that energy use in the home is constant over 20 years, but as the United States electrifies its homes, adds more devices, and adopts electric vehicles, it is fair to expect that many homeowners will use more electricity going forward.

Another factor that may exacerbate rate raising is the upgrade of the national transmission grid. The infrastructure that delivers power to our homes is aging and in need of critical upgrades, and it is estimated that a staggering $500 billion will be spent on transmission buildout by 2035. This half-trillion-dollar cost gets passed down to homeowners in the form of raised utility bill rates.

The benefit of backup power may increase as time goes on as well. Power outages are on the rise across the United States, and recent assessments of the risk of power outages underscore that outages related to severe weather events have doubled in the last 20 years. Climate change-fueled storms are expected to continue to rise, so the role of battery backup in providing reliable energy may increase significantly.

The truth is, we don’t know how much power will cost in 20 years. Though it has increased 59% across the nation in the last 20 years, there is no way to be certain what it will cost going forward. That is where solar has a benefit over the status quo. By purchasing solar, you are securing price certainty going forward, making it easier to budget and plan for the future.

So how do these costs compare to going solar?

Cost of solar

As a general trend, prices for solar have fallen. In 2010, it cost about $40,000 to install a residential solar system, and since then, prices have fallen by as much as 70%, and about 37% in the last five years. However, prices have increased slightly in 2022 due to shipping costs, materials costs, and possible tariffs being placed on imported solar goods, and these pressures aren’t expected to be alleviated in the near-term.

When comparing quotes, the best metric for an apples-to-apples comparison is the cost per watt. Price benchmarking by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory shows the average cost per watt for the nation was $2.65/W DC in 2021, and the average system size was 7.15 kW. So, an average system would cost about $18,950. With 12.5 kWh of battery energy storage, the average cost was $4.26/W, representing an average price tag of $30,460 with batteries included.

The prices above do not include any incentives. Currently, the federal government applies a 26% investment tax credit to the system, bringing down system costs for those who qualify to $14,023 without batteries, and $22,540 with batteries. Compared to the potential $39,460 in utility bills, buying a solar system outright in cash appears to show a clear financial benefit.

Many homeowners will need financing to buy a solar system. Shorter terms can achieve rates as low as 2.99% or less, but financing for a 20-year solar loan typically lands between 5% to 8% or more. Based on 20-year, 7% annual percentage rate terms, a $14,000 system would total about $26,000 in loan payments over 20 years, and the system with batteries included would total about $42,000 in loan payments.

Often when you adopt solar, the utility will still charge you a grid access fee even if your system produces 100% of your needs. These vary from utility to utility but are often around $10 a month. Over 20 years, that equates to about $2,400 that you’ll still need to pay to the utility, plus any costs for energy you use beyond what your system provides.

Based on these average figures, a homeowner could expect to see as much as $12,000 in savings with a 20-year financed system. Homeowners in regions whose retail energy price exceeds the national average could see savings in multiples of that figure.

Though in this example batteries appear to be marginally more expensive than the status quo over a 20-year term, they improve the home by adding the crucial service of backup power, and as battery costs continue to fall they are increasingly being approved to participate in grid services, potentially unlocking additional revenue streams for homeowners.

Another thing to note is most solar systems are warranted for 25 years rather than the 20 used in the status quo example. A panel can last a good 35 years, and though it will begin to produce less in old age, any power produced by a panel you own is money back in your pocket.

Incentives and home value

Many states have additional incentives to boost the value of solar, too, and federal proposals to increase solar generation tenfold could remake the U.S. electricity system. Checking the Database of State Incentives for Renewables (DSIRE) will show the incentives available in your state, and a solar representative should be able to walk you through these benefits when you receive a quote. State incentives change frequently and vary widely, and in some cases are quite rich, offering thousands of dollars in additional benefits.

Another factor to consider is home value. A study by Zillow found that solar arrays increase a home value by 4.1% on average. For a $375,000 home, that’s an increase of $15,375 in value. In most states home solar is exempt from property taxes, making it a great way to boost value without paying taxes for it.

Bottom line

We’ve shared a lot of data on national averages and the potential cost of power going forward, but is solar for you? In the past, early adopters have been rewarded for going solar, and celebrate when they see $0 electric bills paid to the utility company.

Each home is different, each utility is different, and each homeowner has different needs, so evaluating whether solar is right for your home will take a little time and analysis. Representatives from solar companies will walk you through this analysis, and it’s generally a good rule of thumb to get at least three quotes for comparison.

A great resource for starting your research is the Solar Calculator developed by informational site SolarReviews. The calculator offers a quote and savings estimate based on local rates and incentives available to your area. The website also features reviews of installers, equipment, and more.

Some people will save tens of thousands of dollars in the long run with solar, while others may witness more modest savings. Solar will also provide the home clean, local energy, and U.S. solar generation is projected to reach 20% by 2050 as capacity expands, making an impact both on mitigating climate change and in supporting local jobs.

One indisputable benefit of solar is that it will offer greater clarity into what your electricity bills will cost over the next couple of decades, rather than leaving you exposed to whatever rates the utility company decides to charge in the future.

 

Related News

View more

Manitoba has clean energy to help neighboring provinces

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

View more

The N.L. government is pushing the electric car but Labrador's infrastructure is lagging behind

Labrador EV Charging Infrastructure faces gaps, with few fast chargers; Level 2 dominates, fueling range anxiety for Tesla and Chevrolet Bolt drivers, despite rebates and Newfoundland's network linking St. John's to Port aux Basques.

 

Key Points

It refers to the current and planned network of Level 2 and Level 3 charging sites across Labrador.

✅ 2 public Level 2 chargers: Happy Valley-Goose Bay and Churchill Falls

✅ Phase 2: 3 fast chargers planned for HV-GB, Churchill Falls, Labrador City

✅ $2,500 rebates offered; rural range anxiety still deters buyers

 

Retired pilot Allan Carlson is used to crossing Labrador by air.

But he recently traversed the Big Land in an entirely new way, driving for hours on end in his electric car.

The vehicle in question is a Tesla Model S P100D, which Carlson says he can drive up to 500 kilometres on a full charge — and sometimes even a little more.

After catching a ferry to Blanc-Sablon, Que., earlier this month, he managed to reach Happy Valley-Goose Bay, over 600 kilometres away.

To get there, though, he had to use the public charging station in Blanc-Sablon. He also had to push the limits of what his car could muster. 

But more affordable mass-market electric vehicles don't have the battery power of a top-of-the-range Tesla, prompting the Big Land's first EV owner to wonder when Labrador infrastructure will catch up to the high-speed charging network recently unveiled across Newfoundland this summer.

Phillip Rideout, an electrician who lives in Nain, bought a Chevrolet Bolt EV for his son — the range of which tops out at under 350 kilometres, depending on driving patterns and weather conditions.

He's comfortable driving the car within Nain but said he's concerned about traveling to southern Labrador on a single charge.

"It's a start in getting these 14 charging stations across the island," Rideout said of Newfoundland's new network, "but there is still more work to be done."

The provincial government continues to push an electric-vehicle future, however, even as energy efficiency rankings trail the national average, despite Labradorians like Rideout feeling left out of the loop.

Bernard Davis, minister of environment and climate change, earlier this month announced that government is accepting applications for its electric-vehicle rebate program, as the N.W.T. EV initiative pursues similar goals.

Under the $500,000 program, anyone looking to buy a new or used EV would be entitled to $2,500 in rebates, an attempt by the provincial government to increase EV adoption.

But according to a survey conducted this year by polling firm Leger for the Canadian Vehicle Manufacturer's Association, 51 per cent of rural Canadians found a lack of fast-charging public infrastructure to be a major deterrent to buying an electric car, even as Atlantic EV interest lags overall, according to recent data.

While Newfoundland's 14-charger network, operated by N.L. Hydro and Newfoundland Power, allows drivers to travel from St. John's to Port aux Basques, and 10 new fast-charging stations are planned along the Trans-Canada in New Brunswick, Labrador in contrast has just two publicly available charging locations: one at the YMCA in Happy Valley-Goose Bay and the other near the town office of Churchill Falls.

This is the proposed second phase of additional Level 2 and Level 3 charging locations across Labrador. (TakeChargeNL)
These are slower, Level 2 chargers, as opposed to newer Level 3 charging stations on the island. A Level 2 system averages 50 kilometres of range per hour, and a Level 3 systems can add up to 250 kilometres within the same time frame, making them about five times faster.

Even though all of the fast-charging stations have gone to Newfoundland, MHA for Lake Melville Perry Trimper is optimistic about Labrador's electric future.

Trimper has owned an EV in St. Johns since 2016, but told CBC he'd be comfortable driving it in Happy Valley-Goose Bay.

He acknowledged, however, that prospective owners in Labrador might not be able to drive far from their home charging outlet. 

More promises
If rural skepticism driven by poor infrastructure continues, the urban population could lead the way in adoption, allowing the new subsidies to disproportionately go toward larger population centres, Davis acknowledged.

"Obviously people are not going to purchase electric vehicles if they don't believe they can charge them where they want to be or where they want to go," Davis said in an interview in early September.

Under the provincial government's Phase 2 proposal, Newfoundland and Labrador is projected to get 19 charging stations, with three going to Labrador in Happy Valley-Goose Bay, Churchill Falls and Labrador City, taking cues from NB Power's public network in building regional coverage.

Davis would not commit to a specific cutoff period for the rebate program or a timeline for the first fast-charging stations in Labrador to be built.

"At some point, we are not going to need to place any subsidy on electric vehicles," he said, "but that time is not today and that's why these subsidies are important right now."

Future demand 
Goose Bay Motors manager Joel Hamlen thinks drivers in Labrador could shift away from gas vehicles eventually, even as EV shortages and wait times persist.

But he says it'll take investment into a charging network to get there.

"If we can get something set up where these people can travel down the roads and use these vehicles in the province … I am sure there will be even more of a demand," Hamlen said.

 

Related News

View more

Electric-ready ferry for Kootenay Lake to begin operations in 2023

Kootenay Lake Electric-Ready Ferry advances clean technology in BC, debuting as a hybrid diesel-electric vessel with shore power conversion planned, capacity and terminal upgrades to cut emissions, reduce wait times, and modernize inland ferry service.

 

Key Points

Hybrid diesel-electric ferry replacing MV Balfour, boosting capacity, and aiming for full electric conversion by 2030.

✅ Doubles vehicle capacity; runs with MV Osprey 2000 in summer

✅ Hybrid-ready systems installed; shore power to enable full electric

✅ Terminal upgrades at Balfour and Kootenay Bay improve reliability

 

An electric-ready ferry for Kootenay Lake is scheduled to begin operations in 2023, aligning with first electric passenger flights planned by Harbour Air, the province announced in a Sept. 3 press release.

Construction of the $62.9-million project will begin later this year, which will be carried out by Western Pacific Marine Ltd., reflecting broader CIB-supported ferry investments in B.C. underway.

“With construction beginning here in Canada on the new electric-ready ferry for Kootenay Lake, we are building toward a greener future with made-in-Canada clean technology,” said Catherine McKenna, the federal minister of infrastructure and communities.

The new ferry — which is designed to provide passengers with a cleaner vessel informed by advances in electric ships and more accessibility — will replace and more than double the capacity of the MV Balfour, which will be retired from service.

“This is an exciting milestone for a project that will significantly benefit the Kootenay region as a whole,” said Michelle Mungall, MLA for Nelson-Creston. “The new, cleaner ferry will move more people more efficiently, improving community connections and local economies.”

Up to 55 vehicles can be accommodated on the new ship, and will run in tandem with the larger MV Osprey 2000 to help reduce wait times, a strategy also seen with Washington State Ferries hybrid-electric upgrades, during the summer months.

“The vessel will be fully converted to electric propulsion by 2030, once shore power is installed and reliability of the technology advances for use on a daily basis, as demonstrated by Harbour Air's electric aircraft testing on B.C.'s coast,” said the province.

They noted that they are working to electrify their inland ferry fleet by 2040, as part of their CleanBC initiative.

“The new vessel will be configured as a hybrid diesel-electric with all the systems, equipment and components for electric propulsion,” they said.

Other planned projects include upgrades to the Balfour and Kootenay Bay terminals, and minor dredging has been completed in the West Arm.

 

Related News

View more

Europe's Green Surge: Renewables Soar, Emissions Plummet, but Challenges Remain

EU Renewable Energy Transition accelerates wind and solar growth, slashes fossil fuels and carbon emissions via the ETS, strengthens energy security with LNG diversification, and advances grid resilience toward 2030 climate targets.

 

Key Points

EU shift to wind, solar, and efficiency that cuts fossil fuels while boosting energy security and grid stability

✅ Fossil fuels at 29% of EU power in 2023, coal and gas down sharply

✅ Renewables hit 44% share; wind 18%, solar 9% and rising

✅ ETS, LNG diversification, and efficiency cut demand and emissions

 

Europe's energy landscape is undergoing a dramatic transformation, fueled by a surge in renewable energy and a corresponding decline in fossil fuel dependence. This shift, documented in both a report from the energy think tank Ember and the European Commission's State of the Energy Union report, paints a picture of progress, but also highlights the challenges that lie ahead on the path to a sustainable future.

 

Fossil Fuels Facing an Unprecedented Decline:

Fossil fuels dipped to their lowest point in recorded history, making up only 29% of EU electricity generation in 2023. This represents a significant 19% decrease in both fossil fuel generation and carbon emissions compared to 2022, exceeding even the reductions witnessed during the pandemic. Coal, the dirtiest fossil fuel, saw the steepest decline, dropping by 26%, while gas generation fell by 15%. This decline is attributed to a combination of factors, including:

Increased deployment of renewables: As renewable energy sources like wind and solar become more affordable and efficient, they are increasingly displacing fossil fuels in the energy mix.

Carbon pricing: The EU's Emissions Trading System (ETS) puts a price on carbon emissions, incentivizing generators to switch to cleaner sources of energy.

Geopolitical tensions: The war in Ukraine and subsequent sanctions on Russia have accelerated Europe's efforts to diversify its energy sources away from Russian fossil fuels across the bloc.


Renewables Ascending to New Heights:

Renewable energy is now the dominant force in the EU, as renewables surpassed fossil fuels in the power mix, contributing a record-breaking 44% of the electricity mix. Wind energy leads the charge, generating 18% of electricity – the equivalent of France's entire demand – and surpassing gas for the first time. Solar power also continues to grow, reaching a 9% share, as solar reshapes electricity prices in Northern Europe and hydropower recovered from its 2022 dry spell. This remarkable growth is driven by factors such as:

Favorable policy frameworks: The EU has set ambitious renewable energy targets and implemented supportive policies, including feed-in tariffs and auctions.

Technological advancements: Advancements in wind turbine and solar panel technologies have made them more efficient and cost-effective.
Public support: There is growing public support for renewable energy, driven by concerns about climate change and energy security.

Beyond generation, energy efficiency is playing a critical role in reducing overall energy demand. Electricity demand in the EU fell by 3.4% in 2023, thanks to factors such as improved building insulation and more efficient appliances.

 

EU on Track to Quit Russian Fossil Fuels:

The report underscores Europe's progress in reducing dependence on Russian fossil fuels. Imports of Russian gas have plummeted to 40-45 billion cubic metres, compared to a staggering 155 bcm in 2021. This represents a remarkable 70% reduction in just one year. This shift has been achieved through a combination of increased LNG imports, diversification of gas suppliers, and accelerated deployment of renewable energy sources.

Overall greenhouse gas emissions decreased by 3% in 2022, putting the EU on track to achieve its ambitious 55% reduction target by 2030. These achievements demonstrate the EU's commitment to climate action and its ability to respond decisively to geopolitical challenges.

 

Success, But Not Complacency:

Despite the positive developments, the Commission warns against complacency. Energy markets remain volatile, fossil fuel subsidies are rising in some countries, and critical infrastructure vulnerabilities persist, while some advocates call for a fossil fuel lockdown to accelerate the transition. The bloc needs to accelerate renewable energy expansion to reach the legally binding 42.5% target by 2030. Additionally, ensuring affordability and security of energy supply will be crucial to maintaining public support for the transition.

 

Challenges and Opportunities:

While some countries like Denmark, Finland, and the Netherlands fall short of EU climate and energy goals, others like Spain, Portugal, and Belgium showcase success with renewables. The Commission is taking action with a plan to support the wind industry, where investments in European wind continue, even as it faces challenges from high inflation and increasing competition from China. Additionally, ensuring timely updates to national energy and climate plans is crucial for achieving the EU's overall objectives.

 

NGOs Urge Faster Action:

NGOs like the Climate Action Network (CAN) express concern about the adequacy of national plans, highlighting the gap between ambition and concrete action. They urge member states to accelerate efforts to meet the 2030 targets and avoid a "lost decade" in climate action. CAN emphasizes the need for more ambitious national energy and climate plans, increased investment in renewables, and accelerated energy efficiency measures.

Europe's energy transition is progressing rapidly, with renewables taking center stage and emissions declining. However, significant challenges remain, necessitating continued commitment, national-level action, and a focus on affordability, security, and sustainability. As 2030 approaches, Europe's green surge must translate into concrete results to secure a climate-neutral future.

 

Looking ahead, several key areas will define the success of Europe's energy transition:

  • Accelerating renewable energy deployment: The EU needs to maintain its momentum in building wind, solar, and other renewable energy sources. This requires sustained clean energy investment, streamlined permitting processes, and addressing grid integration challenges.
  • Ensuring affordability and security of supply: The energy transition must be just and inclusive, ensuring that energy remains affordable for all citizens and businesses. Additionally, diversifying energy sources and enhancing grid resilience are crucial to guarantee energy security.
  • Enhancing energy efficiency: Reducing energy demand remains crucial to achieving climate goals and reducing reliance on fossil fuels. This requires continued investments in building energy efficiency, promoting energy-efficient appliances and technologies, and encouraging behavioral changes.
  • International cooperation: Climate change and energy security are global challenges. The EU must continue to lead by example as renewables exceed 30% globally and collaborate with other countries on technological advancements, policy innovations, and financial support for developing nations undergoing their own energy transitions.

Europe's green surge is a testament to its ambition and collective action. By addressing the remaining challenges and seizing the opportunities ahead, the EU can pave the way for a sustainable and secure energy future for itself and the world.

 

 

Related News

View more

Sign Up for Electricity Forum’s Newsletter

Stay informed with our FREE Newsletter — get the latest news, breakthrough technologies, and expert insights, delivered straight to your inbox.

Electricity Today T&D Magazine Subscribe for FREE

Stay informed with the latest T&D policies and technologies.
  • Timely insights from industry experts
  • Practical solutions T&D engineers
  • Free access to every issue

Live Online & In-person Group Training

Advantages To Instructor-Led Training – Instructor-Led Course, Customized Training, Multiple Locations, Economical, CEU Credits, Course Discounts.

Request For Quotation

Whether you would prefer Live Online or In-Person instruction, our electrical training courses can be tailored to meet your company's specific requirements and delivered to your employees in one location or at various locations.