Electric vehicles can fight climate change, but they’re not a silver bullet: U of T study


ev charging

NFPA 70e Training

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

  • Live Online
  • 6 hours Instructor-led
  • Group Training Available
Regular Price:
$199
Coupon Price:
$149
Reserve Your Seat Today

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

 

Key Points

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

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

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

✅ Battery materials constraints need recycling, supply diversification

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

Related News

Related News

Local study to look at how e-trucks might supply future electricity

Electrified Trucking Grid Integration explores vehicle-to-grid (V2G) strategies where rolling batteries backfeed power during peak demand, optimizing charging infrastructure, time-of-use pricing, and IESO market operations for Ontario shippers like Nature Fresh Farms.

 

Key Points

An approach using V2G-enabled electric trucks to support the grid, cut peak costs, and add revenue streams.

✅ Models charging sites, timing, and local grid impacts.

✅ Evaluates V2G backfeed economics and IESO pricing.

✅ Uses Nature Fresh Farms data for logistics and energy.

 

A University of Windsor project will study whether an electrified trucking industry might not only deliver the goods, but help keep the lights on with the timely off-loading of excess electrons from their powerful batteries via vehicle-to-grid approaches now emerging.

The two-year study is being overseen by Environmental Energy Institute director Rupp Carriveau and associate professor Hanna Moah of the Cross-Border Institute in conjunction with the Leamington-based greenhouse grower Nature Fresh Farms.

“The study will look at what happens if we electrified the transport truck fleet in Ontario to different degrees, considering the power demand for truck fleets that would result,” Carriveau said.

“Where trucks would be charging and how that will affect the electricity grid grid coordination in those locations at specific times. We’ll be able to identify peak times on the demand side.

“On the other side, we have to recognize these are rolling batteries. They may be able to backfeed the grid, sell electricity back to prop the grid up in locations it wasn’t able to in the past.”

The national research organization Mathematics of International Technology and Complex Systems (Mitacs) is funding the $160,000 study, and the Independent Electricity Systems Operator, a Crown corporation responsible for operating Ontario’s electricity market, amid an electricity supply crunch that is boosting storage efforts, is also offering support for the project.

Because of the varying electricity prices in the province based on usage, peak demand and even time of year, Carriveau said there could be times where draining off excess truck battery power will be cheaper than the grid, and vehicle-to-building charging models show how those savings can be realized.

“It could offer the truck owner another revenue stream from his asset, and businesses a cheaper electricity alternative in certain circumstances,” he said.

The local greenhouse industry was a natural fit for the study, said Carriveau, based on the amount of work the university does with the sector along with the fact it is both a large consumer and producer of electricity.

The study will be based on assumptions for electric truck capacity and performance because the low number of such vehicles currently on the road, though large electric bus fleets offer operational insights.

How will an electrified trucking industry affect Ontario’s electricity grid? University of Windsor engineering professor Rupp Carriveau is part of a new study on trucks being used to help deliver electricity as well as their products around Ontario. He is shown on campus on Tuesday, July 6, 2021.

How will an electrified trucking industry affect Ontario’s electricity grid? University of Windsor engineering professor Rupp Carriveau is part of a new study on trucks being used to help deliver electricity as well as their products around Ontario. He is shown on campus on Tuesday, July 6, 2021.

Nature Fresh Farms will supply all its data on power use, logistics, utility costs and shipping schedules to determine if switching to an electrified fleet makes sense for the company.

“As an innovative company, we are always thinking, ‘What is next?’, whether its developments in product varieties, technology or sustainability,” said company CEO Peter Quiring. “Green transportation is the next big focus.

“We were given the opportunity to work closely on this project and offer our operations as a case study to see how we can find feasible alternatives, not only for Nature Fresh Farms or even for companies in agriculture, but for every industry that relies on the transportation of their goods.”

Currently, Nature Fresh Farms doesn’t have any electrified trucks. Carriveau said the second phase of the study might actually involve an electric truck in a pilot project.

 

Related News

View more

Cost is the main reason stopping Canadians from buying an electric car: Survey

Canada EV Incentives drive adoption toward the 2035 zero-emission target, with rebates, federal and provincial programs boosting affordability amid concerns over charging infrastructure, range anxiety, and battery life, according to a BNN Bloomberg-Leger survey.

 

Key Points

Canada EV incentives are rebates and tax credits reducing EV costs to accelerate zero-emission vehicle adoption nationwide.

✅ Federal and provincial rebates reduce EV purchase prices

✅ Incentives offset range, battery, and charging concerns

✅ Larger incentives correlate with higher adoption rates

 

If the federal government wants to meet its ambitious EV goals of having all cars and passenger trucks sold in Canada be zero emissions by 2035, it’s going to have to do something about the cost of these vehicles.

A new survey from BNN Bloomberg and RATESDOTCA has found that cost is the number one reason stopping Canadians from buying an electric car.

The survey, which was conducted by Leger Marketing earlier this month, asked 1,511 Canadians if they were planning to purchase a new electric vehicle in the near future. It found that just over one in four, or 26 per cent of Canadians, are planning to do so, with Atlantic Canada lagging other regions. On the other hand, 19 per cent of Canadians are planning to buy a gas/diesel/hybrid card for their next purchase. 

Those who aren’t planning on buying an EV were asked what the biggest reason for their decision was. By far, it was the price of these vehicles: 31 per cent of this group cited cost as the main reason for not electrifying their ride. Another 59 per cent of respondents cited it as a concern, but not the main one. Other reasons for not wanting to buy an electric vehicle included lack of infrastructure (18 per cent), range concerns (16 per cent), and battery life and replacement (13 per cent), and some report EV shortages and wait times too.

What’s interesting is that it’s clear that government incentives for EVs are the most powerful tool right now to drive adoption, though some argue subsidies are a bad idea for Canada. When asked if further government incentives would convince them to buy an electric vehicle, 78 per cent of those surveyed said yes.

That’s right. If more governments increased the incentives offered for buying electric vehicles, reaching the goal of only selling zero emission vehicles in Canada by 2035 would no longer be a pipe dream, despite 2035 mandate skepticism from some.

At the moment, only Quebec and B.C. offer government incentives to buy an electric vehicle, even as B.C. charging bottlenecks are predicted. The federal government offers up to a $5,000 incentive, with restrictions including a limit on the total price of the vehicle, and has signaled EV sales regulations are forthcoming. Ontario previously offered a rebate of up to $14,000, however, the popular program was cancelled when the Progress Conservative government was elected in 2018.

The cancellation led to a plunge in new electric vehicle sales in Ontario, falling more than 55 per cent in the first six months of 2019 when compared to the same time period in the previous year, according to Electric Mobility Canada.

It’s no surprise that the larger the incentive, the more Canadians will be swayed to buy an electric car. Perhaps what’s surprising is that the incentive doesn’t even have to be as large as the previous Ontario rebate was. The survey found that seven per cent of Canadians would buy an electric vehicle if they got an incentive ranging anywhere from $5,001-$7,250. A full 35 per cent said a $12,500 or higher incentive would convince them.

The majority of Canadians surveyed said they use their vehicles for leisure or commuting to work. Leisure uses include running errands and seeing friends and family, of which 43 per cent of respondents said was the primary way they used their vehicle. Meanwhile, 36 per cent said they primarily used their car to commute to work.

The survey also found that incentives were more effective at convincing younger people to buy an electric vehicle. Eighty-three per cent of those under the age of 55 could be swayed by new incentives. But for those over 55, only 66 per cent said they would change their mind. 

 

Related News

View more

Tesla's lead in China's red-hot electric vehicle market is shrinking, says rival XPeng

China EV Market sees surging deliveries as Tesla, XPeng, Nio, and Li Auto race for market share, driven by tech-forward infotainment, autonomous features, and strong P7 and G3 demand, signaling intensifying competition and rapid growth.

 

Key Points

China EV Market features rapid EV sales growth led by Tesla, XPeng, Nio, and Li Auto amid tech-driven competition.

✅ XPeng deliveries up 617% YoY in June; 459% YTD growth

✅ Nio and Li Auto post triple-digit quarterly gains

✅ Tech focus: infotainment, ADAS; models P7, G3, G3i

 

XPeng President and Vice Chairman Brian Gu is quick to praise the Tesla brand and acknowledge the EV maker's "commanding" market share in China, and in key markets like the California EV market as well. 

But in the same breath, the executive at the upstart China-based EV rival said his company and peers are fast closing the competitive gap with Tesla.

"I think the Chinese players are catching up very quickly," Gu said on Yahoo Finance Live. "Our product as well as some of the other products that are being introduced by the leading players are very good, and have comparable specs — as well as better features I think compared to Tesla."

That point is not lost in the sales data from the main China EV players, and mirrors the global EV surge seen in recent years.

XPeng said this week deliveries in June surged 617% year-over-year to 6,565. So far this year, deliveries have skyrocketed 459% to 30,738 fueled by demand for XPeng's P7 sedan and G3 SUV, despite concerns about the biggest threats to the EV boom among investors. 

June deliveries at Nio rose 116% from a year ago to 8,083, even as mainstream adoption hurdles remain industry-wide. For the quarter ending June 30, Nio delivered 21,896 vehicles marking a growth rate from a year ago of 112%. 

As for Li Auto, its June deliveries rose 321% from a year earlier to 7,713. Second quarter deliveries improved 166% year-over-year to 17,575.

Tesla reportedly sold 33,155 cars in China in June, up 122% year-over-year, even as its energy business outlook remains a focus for investors. 

"In the last few months, our growth has outpaced the industry as well as Tesla in China. But I think it's a long race because ultimately this market will not be dominated by one or two companies. It will probably be a number of players occupying probably large market share positions of 10% and above. That will likely be the trend, and we hope to be one of those top players," Gu explained. 

XPeng — which JPMorgan analysts estimate could grab 8% of China's electric car market by 2025 —currently has two models in the Chinese electric car market, as China's carmakers push into Europe too. They have gained notoriety in an increasingly crowded market for their tech-forward infotainment systems and autonomous technology.

The company's third model dubbed the G3i is expected to see deliveries begin in September, taking aim at smaller sedans such as the Toyota Camry. 

Shares of China's EV makers have cooled off this year despite their strong sales, and the U.S. EV market share dipped in early 2024 as well. XPeng shares are down 7% year-to-date, while Nio has shed 5%. Li Auto's stock is down 11% on the year. 

 

Related News

View more

CEC Allocates $30 Million for 100-Hr Long-Duration Energy Storage Project

California Iron-Air Battery Storage Project delivers 100-hour long-duration energy storage, supported by a $30 CEC grant, using Form Energy technology at a PG&E substation to boost grid reliability, integrate renewables, and cut fossil reliance.

 

Key Points

California's 5 MW/500 MWh iron-air battery delivers 100-hour discharge, boosting reliability and renewable integration.

✅ 5 MW/500 MWh iron-air system at a PG&E substation

✅ 100-hour multiday storage enhances grid reliability

✅ CEC $30M grant backs non-lithium, long-duration tech

 

The California Energy Commission (CEC) has given the green light to a $30 million grant to Form Energy for the construction of an extraordinary long-duration energy storage project that will offer an unparalleled 100 hours of continuous grid discharge.

This ambitious endeavor involves the development of a 5-megawatt (MW) / 500 megawatt-hour iron-air battery storage project, representing the largest long-duration energy storage initiative in California. It also marks the state's inaugural utilization of this cost-effective technology, and joins ongoing procurements by utilities such as San Diego Gas & Electric to expand storage capacity statewide. The project's location is set at a substation owned by the Pacific Gas and Electric Company in Mendocino County, where it will supply power to local residents. The system is scheduled to commence operation by the conclusion of 2025, contributing to grid reliability and showcasing solutions aligned with the state's climate and clean energy objectives.

CEC Chair David Hochschild commented, "A multiday battery system is transformational for California's energy mix. This project will enhance our ability to harness excess renewables during nonpeak hours for use during peak demand, especially as we work toward a goal of 100 percent clean electricity."

This grant award represents one of three approvals within the framework of the CEC's Long-Duration Energy Storage program, a part of Governor Gavin Newsom's historic multi-billion-dollar commitment to combat climate change. This program fosters investment in the demonstration of non-lithium-ion technologies across the state, including green hydrogen microgrids, contributing to the creation of a diverse portfolio of energy storage technologies.

As of August, California had 6,600 MW of battery storage actively deployed statewide, a trend mirrored in regions like Ontario as well, operating within the prevailing industry standard of 4 to 6 hours of discharge. By year-end, this figure is projected to expand to 8,600 MW. Longer-duration storage, spanning from 8 to 100 hours, holds the potential to expedite the state's shift away from fossil fuels while reinforcing grid stability. California estimates that more than 48 gigawatts (GW) of battery storage and 4 GW of long-duration storage will be requisite to achieve the objective of 100 percent clean electricity by 2045.

Energy storage serves as a cornerstone of California's clean energy future, offering a means to capture and store surplus power generated by renewable resources, including emerging virtual power plant models that aggregate distributed assets. The state's battery infrastructure plays a pivotal role during the summer when electricity demand peaks in the early evening hours as solar resources decline, preceding the later surge in wind energy.

Iron-air battery technology operates on the principle of reversible rusting. These battery cells contain iron and air electrodes and are filled with a water-based, nonflammable electrolyte solution. During discharge, the battery absorbs oxygen from the air, converting iron metal into rust. During the charging phase, the application of an electrical current converts the rust back into iron, releasing oxygen. This technology is cost-competitive compared to lithium-ion battery production and complements broader clean energy BESS initiatives seen in New York.

 

Related News

View more

Electric truck fleets will need a lot of power, but utilities aren't planning for it

Electric Fleet Grid Planning aligns utilities, charging infrastructure, distribution upgrades, and substation capacity to meet megawatt loads from medium- and heavy-duty EV trucks and buses, enabling managed charging, storage, and corridor fast charging.

 

Key Points

A utility plan to upgrade feeders and substations for EV fleets, coordinating charging, storage, and load management.

✅ Plans distribution, substation, and transformer upgrades

✅ Supports managed charging and on-site storage

✅ Aligns utility investment with fleet adoption timelines

 

As more electric buses and trucks enter the market, future fleets will require a lot of electricity for charging and will challenge state power grids over time. While some utilities in California and elsewhere are planning for an increase in power demand, many have yet to do so and need to get started.

This issue is critical, because freight trucks emit more than one-quarter of all vehicle emissions. Recent product developments offer growing opportunities to electrify trucks and buses and slash their emissions (see our recent white paper). And just last week, a group of 15 states plus D.C. announced plans to fully electrify truck sales by 2050. Utilities will need to be ready to power electric fleets.

Electric truck fleets need substantial power
Power for trucks and buses is generally more of an issue than for cars because trucks typically have larger batteries and because trucks and buses are often parts of fleets with many vehicles that charge at the same location. For example, a Tesla Model 3 battery stores 54-75 kWh; a Proterra transit bus battery stores 220-660 kWh. In Amsterdam, a 100-bus transit fleet is powered by a set of slow and fast chargers that together have a peak load of 13 MW (megawatts). This is equivalent to the power used by a typical large factory. And they are thinking of expanding the fleet to 250 buses.

California utilities are finding that grid capacity is often adequate in the short term, but that upgrade needs likely will grow in the medium term.
Many other fleets also will need a lot of "juice." For example, a rough estimate of the power needed to serve a fleet of 200 delivery vans at an Amazon fulfillment center is about 4 MW. And for electric 18-wheelers, chargers may need up to 2 MW of power each; a recent proposal calls for charging stations every 100 miles along the U.S. West Coast’s I-5 corridor, highlighting concerns about EVs and the grid as each site targets a peak load of 23.5 MW.

Utilities need distribution planning
These examples show the need for more power at a given site than most utilities can provide without planning and investment. Meeting these needs often will require changes to primary and secondary power distribution systems (feeders that deliver power to distribution transformers and to end customers) and substation upgrades. For large loads, a new substation may be needed. A paper recently released by the California Electric Transportation Coalition estimates that for loads over 5 MW, distribution system and substation upgrades will be needed most of the time. According to the paper, typical utility costs are $1 million to $9 million for substation upgrades, $150,000 to $6 million for primary distribution upgrades, and $5,000 to $100,000 for secondary distribution upgrades. Similarly, Black and Veatch, in a paper on Electric Fleets, also provides some general guidance, shown in the table below, while recognizing that each site is unique.

California policy pushes utilities toward planning
In California, state agencies and a statewide effort called CALSTART have been funding demonstration projects and vehicle and charger purchases for several years to support grid stability as electrification ramps up. The California Air Resources Board voted in June to phase in zero-emission requirements for truck sales, mandating that, beginning in 2024, manufacturers must increase their zero-emission truck sales to 30-50 percent by 2030 and 40-75 percent by 2035. By 2035, more than 300,000 trucks will be zero-emission vehicles.

California utilities operate programs that work with fleet owners to install the necessary infrastructure for electric vehicle fleets. For example, Southern California Edison operates the Charge Ready Transport program for medium- and heavy-duty fleets. Normally, when customers request new or upgraded service from the utility, there are fees associated with the new upgrade. With Charge Ready, the utility generally pays these costs, and it will sometimes pay half the cost of chargers; the customer is responsible for the other half and for charger installation costs. Sites with at least two electric vehicles are eligible, but program managers report that at least five vehicles are often needed for the economics to make sense for the utility.

One way to do this is to develop and implement a phased plan, with some components sized for future planned growth and other components added as needed. Southern California Edison, for example, has 24 commitments so far, and has a five-year goal of 870 sites, with an average of 10 chargers per site. The utility notes that one charger usually can serve several vehicles and that cycling of charging, some storage, and other load management techniques through better grid coordination can reduce capacity needs (a nominal 10 MW load often can be reduced below 5 MW).

Through this program, utility representatives are regularly talking with fleet operators, and they can use these discussions to help identify needed upgrades to the utility grid. For example, California transit agencies are doing the planning to meet a California Air Resources Board mandate for 100 percent electric or fuel cell buses by 2040; utilities are talking with the agencies and their consultants as part of this process. California utilities are finding that grid capacity is often adequate in the short term, but that upgrade needs likely will grow in the medium term (seven to 10 years out). They can manage grid needs with good planning (school buses generally can be charged overnight and don’t need fast chargers), load management techniques and some energy storage to address peak needs.

Customer conversations drive planning elsewhere
We also spoke with a northeastern utility (wishing to be unnamed) that has been talking with customers about many issues, including fleets. It has used these discussions to identify a few areas where grid upgrades might be needed if fleets electrify. It is factoring these findings into a broader grid-planning effort underway that is driven by multiple needs, including fleets. Even within an integrated planning effort, this utility is struggling with the question of when to take action to prepare the electric system for fleet electrification: Should it act on state or federal policy? Should it act when the specific customer request is submitted, or is there something in between? Recognizing that any option has scheduling and cost allocation implications, it notes that there are no easy answers.

Many utilities need to start paying attention
As part of our research, we also talked with several other utilities and found that they have not yet looked at how fleets might relate to grid planning. However, several of these companies are developing plans to look into these issues in the next year. We also talked with a major truck manufacturer, also wishing to remain unnamed, that views grid limitations as a key obstacle to truck electrification. 

Based on these cases, it appears that fleet electrification can have a substantial impact on electric grids and that, while these impacts are small at present, they likely will grow over time. Fleet owners, electric utilities, and utility regulators need to start planning for these impacts now, so that grid improvements can be made steadily as electric fleets grow. Fleet and grid planning should happen in parallel, so that grid upgrades do not happen sooner or later than needed but are in place when needed, including the move toward a much bigger grid as EV adoption accelerates. These grid impacts can be managed and planned for, but the time to begin this planning is now.

 

Related News

View more

Biden's interior dept. acts quickly on Vineyard Wind

Vineyard Wind I advances as BOEM issues a final environmental impact statement for the 800 MW offshore wind farm south of Martha's Vineyard, delivering clean energy, jobs, and carbon reductions to Massachusetts toward net-zero.

 

Key Points

An 800 MW offshore wind project near Martha's Vineyard supplying clean power to Massachusetts.

✅ 800 MW capacity; power for 400,000+ homes and businesses

✅ BOEM final EIS; record of decision pending within 30+ days

✅ 1.68M metric tons CO2 avoided annually; jobs and lower rates

 

Federal environmental officials have completed their review of the Vineyard Wind I offshore wind farm, moving the project that is expected to deliver clean renewable energy to Massachusetts by the end of 2023 closer to becoming a reality.

The U.S. Department of the Interior said Monday morning that its Bureau of Ocean Energy Management completed the analysis it resumed about a month ago, published the project's final environmental impact statement, and said it will officially publish notice of the impact statement in the Federal Register later this week.

"More than three years of federal review and public comment is nearing its conclusion and 2021 is poised to be a momentous year for our project and the broader offshore wind industry," Vineyard Wind CEO Lars Pedersen said. "Offshore wind is a historic opportunity to build a new industry that will lead to the creation of thousands of jobs, reduce electricity rates for consumers and contribute significantly to limiting the impacts of climate change. We look forward to reaching the final step in the federal permitting process and being able to launch an industry that has such tremendous potential for economic development in communities up and down the Eastern seaboard."

The 800-megawatt wind farm planned for 15 miles south of Martha's Vineyard was the first offshore wind project selected by Massachusetts utility companies with input from the Baker administration to fulfill part of a 2016 clean energy law. It is projected to generate cleaner electricity for more than 400,000 homes and businesses in Massachusetts, produce at least 3,600 jobs, reduce costs for Massachusetts ratepayers by an estimated $1.4 billion, and eliminate 1.68 million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions annually.

Offshore wind power, informed by the U.S. offshore wind outlook, is expected to become an increasingly significant part of Massachusetts' energy mix. The governor and Legislature agree on a goal of net-zero carbon emissions by 2050, but getting there is projected to require having about 25 gigawatts of offshore wind power. That means Massachusetts will need to hit a pace in the 2030s where it has about 1 GW of new offshore wind power on the grid coming online each year.

"I think that's why today's announcement is so historic, because it does represent that culmination of work to understand how to permit and build a cost-effective and environmentally-responsible wind farm that can deliver clean energy to Massachusetts ratepayers, but also just how to do this from start to finish," said Energy and Environmental Affairs Secretary Kathleen Theoharides. "As we move towards our goal of probably [25 GW] of offshore wind by 2050 to hit our net-zero target, this does give us confidence that we have a much clearer path in terms of permitting."

She added, "There's a huge pipeline, so getting this project out really should open the door to the many additional projects up and down the East Coast, such as Long Island proposals, that will come after it."

According to the American Wind Energy Association, there are expected to be 14 offshore projects totaling 9,112 MW of capacity in operation by 2026.

Susannah Hatch, the clean energy coalition director for the Environmental League of Massachusetts and a leader of the broad-based New England for Offshore Wind Regional group, called offshore wind farms like Vineyard Wind "the linchpin of our decarbonization efforts in New England." She said the Biden administration's quick action on Vineyard Wind is a positive sign for the burgeoning sector.

"Moving swiftly on responsibly developed offshore wind is critical to our efforts to mitigate climate change, and offshore wind also provides an enormous opportunity to grow the economy, create thousands of jobs, and drive equitable economic benefits through increased minority economic participation in New England," Hatch said.

With the final environmental impact statement published, Vineyard Wind still must secure a record of decision from BOEM, which processes wind lease requests, an air permit from the Environmental Protection Agency and sign-offs from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the National Marine Fisheries Service to officially clear the way for the project that is on track to be the nation's first utility-scale offshore wind farm. BOEM must wait at least 30 days from the publication of the final environmental impact statement to issue a record of decision.

Project officials have said they expect the final impact statement and then a record of decision "sometime in the first half of 2021." That would allow the project to hit its financial close milestone in the second half of this year, begin on-shore work quickly thereafter, start offshore construction in 2022, begin installing turbines in 2023 and begin exporting power to the grid, marking Vineyard Wind first power, by late 2023, Pedersen said in January.

"Offshore energy development provides an opportunity for us to work with Tribal nations, communities, and other ocean users to ensure all decisions are transparent and utilize the best available science," BOEM Director Amanda Lefton said.

The commercial fishing industry has been among the most vocal opponents of aspects of the Vineyard Wind project and the Responsible Offshore Development Alliance (RODA) has repeatedly urged the new administration to ensure the voices of the industry are heard throughout the licensing and permitting process.

In comments submitted earlier this month in response to a BOEM review of an offshore wind project that is expected to deliver power to New York, including the recent New York offshore wind approval, RODA said the present is "a time of significant confusion and change in the U.S. approach to offshore wind energy (OSW) planning" and detailed mitigation measures it wants to see incorporated into all projects.

"To be clear, none of these requests are new -- nor hardly radical. They have simply been ignored again, and again, and again in a political push/pull between multinational energy companies and the U.S. government, leaving world-famous seafood, and the communities founded around its harvest, off the table," the group said in a press release last week. Some of RODA's suggestions were analyzed as part of BOEM's Vineyard Wind review.

Vineyard Wind has certainly taken a circuitous path to get to this point. The timeline for the project was upended in August 2019 when the Trump administration decided to conduct a much broader assessment of potential offshore wind projects up and down the East Coast, which delayed the project by almost a year.

When the Trump administration delayed its action on a final environmental impact statement last year, Vineyard Wind on Dec. 1 announced that it was pulling its project out of the federal review pipeline in order to complete an internal study on whether the decision to use a certain type of turbine would warrant changes to construction and operations plan. The Trump administration declared the federal review of the project "terminated."

Within two weeks of President Joe Biden being inaugurated, Vineyard Wind said its review determined no changes were necessary and the company resubmitted its plans for review. BOEM agreed to pick up where the Trump administration had left off despite the agency previously declaring its review terminated.

"It would appear that fishing communities are the only ones screaming into a void while public resources are sold to the highest bidder, as BOEM has reversed its decision to terminate a project after receiving a single letter from Vineyard Wind," RODA said.

The final environmental impact statement that BOEM published Monday showed that the federal regulators believe the Vineyard Wind I development as proposed will have "moderate" impacts on commercial fisheries and for-hire recreational fishing outfits, and that the project combined with other factors not related to wind energy development will have "major" impacts on commercial and recreational fishing ventures.

Vineyard Wind pointed Monday to the fishery mitigation agreements it has entered into with Massachusetts and Rhode Island, a fishery science collaboration with the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth's School of Marine Science and Technology, and an agreement with leading environmental organizations around the protection of the endangered right whale.

Responding to concerns about safe navigation among RODA and others in the fishing sector, Vineyard Wind and the four other developers holding leases for offshore wind sites off New England agreed to orient their turbines in fixed east-to-west rows and north-to-south columns spaced one nautical mile apart. Last year, the U.S. Coast Guard concluded that the grid layout was the best way to maintain maritime safety and ease of navigation in the offshore wind development areas south of Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket.

Since a 2016 clean energy law kicked off the state's foray into the offshore wind world, Massachusetts utilities have contracted for a total of about 1,600 MW between two projects, Vineyard Wind I and Mayflower Wind.

A joint venture of Shell and Ocean Winds North America, Mayflower Wind was picked unanimously in 2019 by utility executives to build and operate a wind farm approximately 26 nautical miles south of Martha's Vineyard and 20 nautical miles south of Nantucket, with South Coast construction activity expected as the project progresses. The 804-megawatt project is expected to be operational by December 2025.

Massachusetts and its utilities are expected to go out to bid for up to another 1,600 MW of offshore wind generation capacity later this year using authorization granted by the Legislature in 2018.

The climate policy bill that Gov. Charlie Baker returned to the Legislature with amendments more than a month ago would require that the executive branch direct Massachusetts utilities to buy an additional 2,400 MW of offshore wind power.

 

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.