Higher price of electric cars a concern for more than half of UK consumers

Alberta Renewable Energy Boom highlights corporate investments, power purchase agreements, wind and solar capacity gains, grid decarbonization, and job growth, adding 2 GW and $3.7B construction since 2019 in an open electricity market.

Key Points

Alberta's PPA-driven wind and solar surge adds 2 GW, cuts grid emissions, creates jobs, and accelerates private builds.

✅ 2 GW added since 2019 via corporate PPAs

✅ Open electricity market enables direct deals

✅ Strong wind and solar resources boost output

Alberta has seen a massive increase in corporate investment in renewable energy since 2019, and capacity from those deals is set to increase output by two gigawatts —  enough to power roughly 1.5 million homes. 

“Our analysis shows $3.7 billion worth of renewables construction by 2023 and 4,500 jobs,” Nagwan Al-Guneid, the director of Business Renewables Centre Canada, says. 

The centre is an initiative of the environmental think tank Pembina Institute and provides education and guidance for companies looking to invest in renewable energy or energy offsets across Canada. Its membership is made up of renewable energy companies.

The addition of two gigawatts is over two times the amount of renewable energy added to the grid between 2010 and 2017, according to the Canadian Energy Regulator. 

We’re tripling our Prairies coverage
The Narwhal’s newly minted Prairies bureau is here to bring you stories on energy and the environment you won’t find anywhere else. Stay tapped in by signing up for a weekly dose of our ad‑free, independent journalism.

“This is driven directly by what we call power purchase agreements,” Al-Guneid says. “We have companies from across the country coming to Alberta.”

So far this year, 191 megawatts of renewable energy will be added through purchase agreements, according to the Business Renewables Centre, as diversified energy sources can make better projects overall.

Alberta’s electricity system is unique in Canada — an open market where companies can ink deals directly with private power producers to sell renewable energy and buy a set amount of electricity produced each year, either for use or for offset credits. The financial security provided by those contracts helps producers build out more renewable projects without market risks. Purchasers get cheap renewable energy or credits to meet internal or external emissions goals. 

It differs from other provinces, many of which rely on large hydro capacity and where there is a monopoly, often government-owned, on power supply. 

In those provinces, investment in renewables largely depends on whether the company with the monopoly is in a buying mood, says Blake Shaffer, an economics professor at the University of Calgary who studies electricity markets. 

That’s not the case in Alberta, where the only real regulatory hurdle is applying to connect a project to the grid.

“Once that’s approved, you can just go ahead and build it, and you can sell it,” Shaffer says.

That sort of flexibility has attracted some big investments, including two deals with Amazon in 2021 to purchase 455 megawatts worth of solar power from Calgary-based Greengate Power. There are also big investments from oil companies looking to offset emissions.

The investments are allowing Alberta to decarbonize its grid, largely with the backing of the private sector. 

Shaffer says Alberta is the “renewables capital in Canada,” a powerhouse in both green and fossil energy by many measures.

“That just shocks people because of course their association with Alberta is nothing about renewables, but oil and gas,” Shaffer says. “But it really is the investment centre for renewables in the entire country right now.”

Alberta has ‘embarrassing’ riches in wind energy and solar power
It’s not just the market that is driving Alberta’s renewables boom. According to Shaffer there are three other key factors: an embarrassment of wind and solar riches, the need to transition away from a traditionally dirty, coal-reliant grid and the current high costs of energy. 

Shaffer says the strong and seemingly non-stop winds coming off the foothills of the Rockies in the southwest of the province mean wind power is increasingly competitive and each turbine produces more energy compared to other areas. The same is true for solar, with an abundance of sunny days.

“Southern Alberta and southern Saskatchewan have the best solar insolation,” he says. “You put a panel in Vancouver, or you put a panel in Medicine Hat, and you’re gonna get about 50 per cent more energy out of that panel in Medicine Hat, and they’re gonna cost you the same.”

The spark that set off the surge in investments wasn’t strictly an open-market mechanism. Under the previous NDP government, the province brought in a program that allowed private producers to compete for government contracts, with some solar facilities contracted below natural gas demonstrating cost advantages.

The government agreed to a certain price and the producers were then allowed to sell their electricity on the open market. If the price dropped below what was guaranteed, the province would pay the difference. If, however, the price was higher, the developers would pay the difference to the government. 

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News

California NEM-3 Tariff ushers a successor Net Energy Metering framework, revising export compensation, TOU rates, and non-bypassable charges to balance ratepayer impacts, rooftop solar growth, and energy storage adoption across diverse communities.

Key Points

The CPUC's successor NEM policy redefining export credits and rates to sustain customer-sited solar and storage.

✅ Sets export compensation methodology beyond NEM 2.0

✅ Aligns TOU rates and non-bypassable charges with costs

✅ Encourages solar-plus-storage adoption and equity access

The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) has officially commenced its “NEM-3” proceeding, which will establish the successor Net Energy Metering (NEM) tariff to the “NEM 2.0” program in California. This is a highly anticipated, high-stakes proceeding that will effectively modify the rules for the NEM tariff in California, amid ongoing electricity pricing changes that affect residential rooftop solar – arguably the single most important policy mechanism for customer-sited solar over the last decade.

The CPUC’s recent order instituting rule-making (OIR) filing stated that “the major focus of this proceeding will be on the development of a successor to existing NEM 2.0 tariffs. This successor will be a mechanism for providing customer-generators with credit or compensation for electricity generated by their renewable facilities that a) balances the costs and benefits of the renewable electrical generation facility and b) allows customer-sited renewable generation to grow sustainably among different types of customers and throughout California’s diverse communities.”

This successor tariff proceeding was initiated by Assembly Bill 327, which was signed into law in October of 2013. AB 327 is best known as the legislation that directed the CPUC to create the “NEM 2.0” successor tariff, which was adopted by the CPUC in January of 2016.

The original Net Energy Metering program in California (“NEM 1.0”) effectively enabled full-retail value net metering “allowing NEM customers to be compensated for the electricity generated by an eligible customer-sited renewable resource and fed back to the utility over an entire billing period.” Under the NEM 2.0 tariff, customers were required to pay charges that aligned them more closely with non-NEM customer costs than under the original structure. The main changes adopted when the NEM 2.0 was implemented were that NEM 2.0 customer-generators must: (i) pay a one-time interconnection fee; (ii) pay non-bypassable charges on each kilowatt-hour of electricity they consume from the grid; and (iii) customers were required to transfer to a time-of-use (TOU) rate, with potential changes to electric bills for many customers.

NEM 2.0

The commencement of the NEM-3 OIR was preceded by the publishing of a 318-page Net Energy Metering 2.0 Lookback Study, which was published by Itron, Verdant Associates, and Energy and Environmental Economics. The CPUC-commissioned study had been widely anticipated and was expected to act as the starting reference point for the successor tariff proceeding. Verdant also hosted a webinar, which summarized the study’s inputs, assumptions, draft findings and results.

The study utilized several different tests to study the impact of NEM 2.0. The cost effectiveness analysis tests, which estimate costs and benefits attributed to NEM 2.0 include: (i) total resource cost test, (ii) participant cost test, (iii) ratepayer impact measure test, and (iv) program administrator test. The evaluation also included a cost of service analysis, which estimates the marginal cost borne by the utility to serve a NEM 2.0 customer.

The opening paragraph of the report’s executive summary stated that “overall, we found that NEM 2.0 participants benefit from the structure, while ratepayers see increased rates.” In every test that the author’s conducted the results generally supported this conclusion for residential customers. There were some exceptions in their findings. For example, in the cost of service analysis the report stated that “residential customers that install customer-sited renewable resources on average pay lower bills than the utility’s cost to serve them. On the other hand, nonresidential customers pay bills that are slightly higher than their cost of service after installing customer-sited renewable resources. This is largely due to nonresidential customer rates having demand charges (and other fixed fees), and the lower ratio of PV system size to customer load when compared to residential customers.”

Similar debates over solar rate design, including Massachusetts solar demand charges, highlight how demand charges and TOU decisions can affect customer economics.

NEM-3 timeline

Popular content
The preliminary schedule that the CPUC laid out in its OIR estimates that the proceeding will take roughly 15 months in total, starting with a November 2020 pre-hearing conference.

The real meat of the proceeding, where parties will present their proposals for what they believe the successor tariff should be, as the state considers revamping electricity rates to clean the grid, and really show their hand will not begin until the Spring of 2021. So we’re still a little ways away from seeing the proposals that the key parties to this proceeding, like the Investor Owned Utilities (PG&E, SCE, SDG&E), solar and storage advocates such as SEIA, CALSSA, Vote Solar, and ratepayer advocates like TURN) will submit.

While the outcome for the new successor NEM tariff is anyone’s guess at this point, some industry policy folks are starting to speculate. We think it is safe to assume that the value of exported energy will get reduced, with debates over income-based utility charges also influencing rate design. How much and the mechanism for how exports get valued remains to be seen. Based on the findings from the lookback study, it seems like the reduction in export value will be more severe than what happened when NEM 2.0 got implemented. In NEM 2.0, non-bypassable charges, which are volumetric charges that must be paid on all imported energy and cannot be netted-out by exports, only equated to roughly $0.02 to $0.03/kWh.

Given that the value of exports will almost certainly get reduced, we expect that to be bullish for energy storage as America goes electric and load shapes evolve. Energy storage attachment rates with solar are already steadily rising in California. By the time NEM-3 starts getting implemented, likely in 2022, we think storage attachment rates will likely escalate further.

We would not be surprised to see future storage attachment rates in California look like the Hawaiian market today, which are upwards of 80% for certain types of customers and applications. Two big questions on our mind are: (i) will the NEM 3.0 rules be different for different customer class: residential, CARE (e.g., low-income or disadvantaged communities), and commercial & industrial; (ii) will the CPUC introduce some sort of glidepath or phased in implementation approach?

The outcome of this proceeding will have far reaching implications on the future of customer-sited solar and energy storage in California. The NEM-3 outcome in California may likely serve as precedent for other states, as California exports its energy policies across the West, and utility territories that are expected to redesign their Net Energy Metering tariffs in the coming years.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Energy Policy News

Electricity Alliance Canada champions clean power, electrification, and net-zero, uniting renewable energy, hydropower, nuclear, wind, and solar to decarbonize Canada with sustainable, reliable, affordable electricity across sectors by 2050, economywide growth.

Key Points

A national coalition advancing clean power and electrification to help achieve Canada's net-zero by 2050.

✅ Coalition of six Canadian electricity associations

✅ Promotes electrification and clean, reliable power

✅ Aims net-zero by 2050, coal phase-out by 2030

Six of Canada’s leading electricity associations have created a coalition to promote clean power’s role, amid a looming power challenge for the country, in a sustainable energy future.

The Electricity Alliance Canada’s mandate is to enable, promote and advocate for increased low or no-carbon electricity usage throughout the economy to help achieve the nation’s net-zero emissions target of 100 percent by 2050, with net-zero electricity regulations permitting some natural gas generation along the way.

The founding members are the Canadian Electricity Association, the Canadian Nuclear Association, the Canadian Renewable Energy Association, Electricity Human Resources Canada, Marine Renewables Canada, and WaterPower Canada, and they aim to incorporate lessons from Europe's power crisis as collaboration advances.

“Electricity will power Canada’s energy transition and create many new well-paying jobs,” reads the joint statement by the six entities. “We are pleased to announce this enhanced collaboration to advance discussion and implement strategies that promote greater electrification in a way that is sustainable, reliable and affordable. Electricity Alliance Canada looks forward to working with governments and energy users to capture the full potential of electricity to contribute to Canada’s net-zero target.”

Canada is much further along than many nations when it comes decarbonizing its power generation sector, yet it is expected to miss 2035 clean electricity goals without accelerated efforts. More than 80 percent of its electricity mix is fueled by non-emitting hydroelectric and nuclear as well as wind, solar and marine renewable generation, according to the Alliance. By contrast, the U.S. portion of non-emitting electricity resources is closer to 40 percent or less.

The remainder of its coal-fired power plants are scheduled to be phased out by 2030, according to reports, though scrapping coal-fired electricity could be costly and ineffective according to one report.

Hydropower leads the way in Canada, with nearly 500 generating plant producing an average of 355 TWh per year, according to the Canadian Hydropower Association. Nuclear plants such as Ontario Power Generation’s Darlington station and Bruce Power also contribute massive-scale and carbon-free electricity capacity, as debates over Ontario's renewable future continue.

Observers note that clean, affordable electricity in Ontario should be a prominent election issue this year.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Power Generation News

Nova Scotia Biomass Electricity Policy increases dispatchable renewable generation from Port Hawkesbury and Brooklyn Energy, raising MWh output while critics cite clearcutting, carbon emissions, high costs to ratepayers, and delays replacing Muskrat Falls hydro.

Key Points

Policy directing utilities to maximize biomass power as dispatchable renewable supply during hydro delays.

✅ Port Hawkesbury biomass output up 35% year over year

✅ Brooklyn Energy used as dispatchable renewable supply

✅ Critics cite clearcutting, emissions, high ratepayer costs

A boiler owned by Nova Scotia Power on the grounds of the Port Hawkesbury paper plant, whose discount power rate request has drawn attention, is burning 35% more woody biomass this year than last. 

The year-to-date figures show 126,810 megawatt hours (MWh) of electricity was generated over the first nine months of 2021 compared to 93,934 MWh for the same period in 2020 and 65,891 MWh in 2019. 

The information is contained in monthly fuel cost reports Nova Scotia Power must make to the Utility and Review Board, which regulates how much consumers ultimately pay for electricity and has received a call for major grid changes in Nova Scotia.

Burning biomass  — which includes everything from low-grade pulpwood to bark, shavings, and wood chip waste from sawmills — for the purpose of generating electricity is only about 22% efficient, even as some coal stations have switched to biomass abroad. Nova Scotia Power’s boiler at Port Hawkesbury supplies about 3% of the total electricity used in the province. 

Citizens concerned about climate change have for years opposed the government classifying biomass as “renewable energy” and have echoed calls to reduce biomass use for electricity, because clearcutting, which releases carbon from the ground, remains the dominant form of harvesting on Crown and private land. That’s despite ongoing work to begin implementing 2018 recommendations from Professor Bill Lahey to move toward a more ecological approach. 

In May 2020, after it became obvious renewable hydroelectricity from Muskrat Falls was going to be delayed yet again, the McNeil government passed an Order-in-Council extending until December 2022 the deadline to generate 40% of electricity from renewable sources as it moved to increase wind and solar projects across Nova Scotia. 

To help with the shortfall, Nova Scotia Power was told to “maximize” its use of biomass at both the facility it owns in Port Hawkesbury and another one in Brooklyn owned by its parent company, Emera.

In a letter to Nova Scotia Power dated May 15, then-Energy Minister Derek Mombourquette, amid debate over independent energy planning, added: “Nova Scotia Power shall also maximize the use of dispatchable renewable electricity from its own facilities, as well as those of renewable electricity power producers in Nova Scotia (excluding COMFIT generation sources).” 

By definition, “dispatchable” excludes wind and hydro sources, which are not available 24/7, though a new attempt to harness the Bay of Fundy's tides is underway. Nova Scotia Power claims the only “dispatchable renewable electricity power producer” in the province is Brooklyn Energy, the 35 MW biomass plant near Liverpool. 

The government capped at $7 million a year how much electricity Nova Scotia Power could buy from its affiliate company. Critics of the deal — such as auditors hired by the regulator and the province’s consumer advocate — say electricity generated by Brooklyn is the most expensive power and question why the province would burden ratepayers with its purchase.

The answer became apparent in September 2020 when then-Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Kelliann Dean appeared before the legislature’s standing committee on Natural Resources and Economic Development to praise the Order-in-Council for helping rescue the forestry industry four months after the closure of the Northern Pulp mill. 

“The change to Renewable Energy Standards (May,2020) is enabling Nova Scotia Power to generate more electricity from wood chips and sawmill residuals by operating two biomass plants at capacity until electricity from Muskrat Falls comes onstream,” she said. “We are using all the policy levers at our disposal to support the sector.”

Nova Scotia Power is not required to report to the UARB how much electricity is being produced or how much biomass is being burned at Brooklyn Energy. The company pleads “commercial confidentiality” when asked by The Halifax Examiner. 

Nova Scotia Power does report how much it spends each month to buy power from independent producers — a small group which includes Brooklyn but excludes all wind farms. That dollar amount has also increased over the past year — from $15.9 million for 10 months ending October 2020 compared to $23.3 million for 10 months ending October 2021. Unfortunately, the lack of transparency makes it impossible to know exactly how much of that increase is attributable to purchasing more biomass.

Radio silence
The current Minister of Natural Resources and Renewable Energy ,Tory Rushton, has the authority to reduce the amount of biomass being burned to generate electricity and by extension, the rate of clearcutting.

With a stroke of the pen, the PC government of Tim Houston could issue another Order-in-Council capping the amount of metric tonnes that could be used in the boilers, or, direct Nova Scotia Power to use biomass only when it is the most economical fuel choice. 

But so far, Rushton has not responded to the Halifax Examiner’s question about whether he intends to make any change to stop “maximizing” the use of biomass to produce electricity.

 The Examiner isn’t the only one pushing the Minister for answers to difficult issues. At noon today, Citizens opposed to a controversial clearcut on Crown land near Rocky Point Lake in Digby County will stage a demonstration outside the Department of Natural Resources and Renewable Energy on Hollis Street. The protest led by members of Extinction Rebellion and the Healthy Forest Coalition is to pressure the government to take action to protect the habitat of the mainland moose, an endangered species that ranges overs the Crown land currently being cut by the Westfor consortium. 

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Power Generation News

US Solar Power 2050 Target projects 45% electricity from solar, advancing decarbonization with clean energy, wind, nuclear, hydropower, hydrogen, and scalable energy storage, while modernizing the grid and transmission to cut emissions and create jobs.

Key Points

A goal for solar to supply ~45% of US electricity by 2050, backed by energy storage and other low-carbon generation.

✅ Requires 1,050-1,570 GW solar and matching storage capacity

✅ Utility-scale buildout uses ~10M acres; rooftop 10-20% of capacity

✅ Complemented by wind, nuclear, hydropower, hydrogen, and flexible turbines

President Joe Biden has called for major clean energy investments as a way to curb climate change and generate jobs. On Sept. 8, 2021, the White House released a report produced by the U.S. Department of Energy that found that solar power could generate up to 45% of the U.S. electricity supply by 2050, compared to less than 4% today, with about 3% in 2020 noted by industry observers. The Conversation asked Joshua D. Rhodes, an energy technology and policy researcher at the University of Texas at Austin, what it would take to meet this target.

Why such a heavy focus on solar power? Doesn’t a low-carbon future require many types of clean energy, even though wind and solar could meet about 80% of demand according to some research?
The Energy Department’s Solar Futures Study lays out three future pathways for the U.S. grid: business as usual; decarbonization, meaning a massive shift to low-carbon and carbon-free energy sources; and decarbonization with economy-wide electrification of activities that are powered now by fossil fuels.

It concludes that the latter two scenarios would require approximately 1,050-1,570 gigawatts of solar power, which would meet about 44%-45% of expected electricity demand in 2050, even as renewables approach one-fourth of U.S. generation in the near term. For perspective, one gigawatt of generating capacity is equivalent to about 3.1 million solar panels or 364 large-scale wind turbines.

The rest would come mostly from a mix of other low- or zero-carbon sources, including wind, nuclear, hydropower, biopower, geothermal and combustion turbines run on zero-carbon synthetic fuels such as hydrogen. Energy storage capacity – systems such as large installations of high-capacity batteries – would also expand at roughly the same rate as solar, with record growth in solar and storage anticipated by industry in coming years.

One advantage solar power has over many other low-carbon technologies is that most of the U.S. has lots of sunshine. Wind, hydropower and geothermal resources aren’t so evenly distributed: There are large zones where these resources are poor or nonexistent.

Relying more heavily on region-specific technologies would mean developing them extremely densely where they are most abundant. It also would require building more high-voltage transmission lines to move that energy over long distances, which could increase costs and draw opposition from landowners – a key reason the grid isn't yet 100% renewable according to experts – in many regions.

Is generating 45% of U.S. electricity from solar power by 2050 feasible?
I think it would be technically possible but not easy. It would require an accelerated and sustained deployment far larger than what the U.S. has achieved so far, even as the cost of solar panels has fallen dramatically, and wind, solar and batteries are 82% of the utility-scale pipeline across the country. Some regions have attained this rate of growth, albeit from low starting points and usually not for long periods.

The Solar Futures Study estimates that producing 45% of the nation’s electricity from solar power by 2050 would require deploying about 1,600 gigawatts of solar generation. That’s a 1,450% increase from the 103 gigawatts that are installed in the U.S. today, even as wind and solar trend toward 30% of U.S. electricity in some outlooks. For perspective, there are currently about 1,200 gigawatts of electricity generation capacity of all types on the U.S. power grid.

The report assumes that 10%-20% of this new solar capacity would be deployed on homes and businesses. The rest would be large utility-scale deployments, mostly solar panels, plus some large-scale solar thermal systems that use mirrors to reflect the sun to a central tower.

Assuming that utility-scale solar power requires roughly 8 acres per megawatt, this expansion would require approximately 10.2 million to 11.5 million acres. That’s an area roughly as big as Massachusetts and New Jersey combined, although it’s less than 0.5% of total U.S. land mass.

I think goals like these are worth setting, but are good to reevaluate over time to make sure they represent the most prudent path.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News

Nova Scotia EV charging infrastructure remains limited, with only 14 fast chargers across the province. As electric vehicle adoption grows, urgent upgrades are needed to support long-distance travel and public charging convenience.

Nova Scotia EV charging infrastructure

Nova Scotia EV charging infrastructure refers to the province’s public and private network of stations that power electric vehicles (EVs).

✅ Limited availability of fast-charging stations for long-distance travel

✅ Growing demand as EV adoption increases province-wide

✅ Key factor in reducing range anxiety and promoting clean transportation

Nova Scotia’s EV charging network is struggling to keep pace with a growing fleet of electric vehicles. As of today, only 14 public DC fast chargers are operational across the province, a significant shortfall for drivers navigating long distances. This creates not only logistical hurdles but also growing consumer hesitation — particularly as EV sales continue to surge across Canada.

In response, the Canadian government has announced a $1.1 million (US$0.88 million) investment into a new smart-charging pilot program. Led by Nova Scotia Power, this initiative will explore how electric vehicles can better integrate with the local grid using a centralized, utility-managed control system. Up to 200 participants are expected to join the program, which aims to test both smart charging and vehicle-to-grid (V2G) technologies.

These systems allow EVs to act as distributed energy storage, helping to manage electricity demand and improve renewable energy integration — a strategy already being tested in other jurisdictions. For example, Ontario’s charging network expansion has provided a model for scaling fast-charging accessibility. Similarly, British Columbia has recently accelerated its rollout of faster charging stations to support mass EV adoption.

The Nova Scotia pilot will assess local EV charging behaviors, including drivers’ willingness to participate in V2G services based on incentives, driving patterns, and access to clean power. “We know customers want clean, affordable, reliable energy for their homes and businesses,” says Dave Landrigan, VP Commercial at Nova Scotia Power. “Through our electric vehicle smart charging pilot, we will test these technologies to learn how they can benefit all customers, creating clean, smarter options without changing a person’s driving habits.”

The funding comes through Natural Resources Canada’s Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Demonstration program, which supports the development of cutting-edge charging and hydrogen refueling solutions across the country. To date, the federal government has invested over $600 million to support EV affordability and infrastructure deployment, with a particular focus on a coast-to-coast fast-charging network.

At the same time, other provinces are stepping up their leadership roles. In Québec, Hydro-Québec is expanding its EV ecosystem through a strategic partnership with Propulsion Québec, a key industry cluster for sustainable mobility. Their focus includes reliable public charging, clean grid integration, and stakeholder collaboration — all essential factors for scalable transportation electrification.

“In Québec, we are fortunate to be able to make transportation electrification possible by easily replacing gas imported from outside with our clean energy,” said France Lampron, Director – Transportation Electrification at Hydro-Québec. “To do this, we need to develop synergies between various stakeholders in the sustainable mobility sector.”

While Nova Scotia’s current fast-charging availability is limited, the province now has an opportunity to follow a similar trajectory. With funding in place, stakeholder alignment, and public interest growing, the expansion of Nova Scotia EV charging infrastructure could soon match the pace of rising EV demand. As governments and utilities nationwide focus on electrification, Nova Scotia’s pilot may lay the groundwork for a more connected, cleaner transportation future.

Related News

• EV sales continue to surge across Canada

• Ontario’s EV station rollout addresses fast‑charging gaps

• British Columbia rolls out faster charging infrastructure

• Canada’s EV charging networks needed to support coast‑to‑coast adoption

• Electricity Forum News