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

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

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News

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

Key Points

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

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

✅ Solar and wind intermittency strains nighttime home charging

✅ Grid upgrades, storage, and load management become critical

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

Harbour Air Electric Seaplanes pioneer zero-emission aviation with battery-powered de Havilland Beaver flights, pursuing Transport Canada certification for safe, fossil fuel-free service across Vancouver Island routes connecting Vancouver, Victoria, Nanaimo, and beyond.

Key Points

Battery-powered, zero-emission floatplanes by Harbour Air pursuing Transport Canada certification to carry passengers.

✅ 29-minute test flight on battery power alone

✅ New lighter, longer-lasting battery supplier partnership

✅ Aiming to electrify entire 42-aircraft Beaver/Otter fleet

Float plane operator Harbour Air is getting closer to achieving its goal of flying to and from Vancouver Island without fossil fuels, following its first point-to-point electric flight milestone.

A recent flight of the company’s electric de Havilland Beaver test plane saw the aircraft remain aloft for 29 minutes on battery power alone, a sign of an emerging aviation revolution underway.

Harbour Air president Randy Wright says the company has joined with a new battery supplier to provide a lighter and longer-lasting power source, a high-flying example of research investment in the sector.

The company hopes to get Transport Canada certification to start carrying passengers on electric seaplanes by 2023, as projects like the electric-ready Kootenay Lake ferry come online.

"This is all new to Transport, so they've got to make sure it's safe just like our aircraft that are running today,” Wright said Wednesday. “They're working very hard at this to get this certified because it's a first in the world."

Parallel advances in marine electrification, such as electric ships on the B.C. coast, are informing clean-transport goals across the province.

Before the pandemic, Harbour Air flew approximately 30,000 commercial flights annually, along corridors also served by BC Ferries hybrid ships today, between Vancouver, Victoria, Nanaimo, Whistler, Seattle, Tofino, Salt Spring Island, the Sunshine Coast and Comox.

Wright says the company plans to eventually electrify its entire fleet of 42 de Havilland Beaver and Otter aircraft, reflecting a broader shift that includes CIB-backed electric ferries in B.C.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

Whooping crane migration near wind turbines shows strong avoidance of stopover habitat within 5 km, reshaping Great Plains siting decisions, reducing collision risk, and altering routes across croplands, grasslands, and wetlands.

Key Points

It examines cranes avoiding stopovers within 5 km of turbines, reshaping habitat use and routing across the Great Plains.

✅ Cranes 20x likelier to rest >5 km from turbines.

✅ About 5% of high-quality stopover habitat is impacted.

✅ Findings guide wind farm siting across Great Plains wetlands.

As gatherings to observe whooping cranes join the ranks of online-only events this year, a new study offers insight into how the endangered bird is faring on a landscape increasingly dotted with wind turbines across regions. The paper, published this week in Ecological Applications, reports that whooping cranes migrating through the U.S. Great Plains avoid “rest stop” sites that are within 5 km of wind-energy infrastructure.

Avoidance of wind turbines can decrease collision mortality for birds, but can also make it more difficult and time-consuming for migrating flocks to find safe and suitable rest and refueling locations. The study’s insights into migratory behavior could improve future siting decisions as wind energy infrastructure continues to expand, despite pandemic-related investment risks for developers.

“In the past, federal agencies had thought of impacts related to wind energy primarily associated with collision risks,” said Aaron Pearse, the paper’s first author and a research wildlife biologist for the U.S. Geological Survey’s Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center in Jamestown, N.D. “I think this research changes that paradigm to a greater focus on potential impacts to important migration habitats.”

Some policymakers have also rejected false health claims about wind turbines and cancer in public debate, underscoring the need for evidence-based decisions.

The study tracked whooping cranes migrating across the Great Plains, a region that encompasses a mosaic of croplands, grasslands and wetlands. The region has seen a rapid proliferation of wind energy infrastructure in recent years: in 2010, there were 2,215 wind towers within the whooping crane migration corridor that the study focused on; by 2016, when the study ended, there were 7,622 wind towers within the same area.

Pearse and his colleagues found that whooping cranes migrating across the study area in 2010 and 2016 were 20 times more likely to select “rest stop” locations at least 5 km away from wind turbines than those closer to turbines, a pattern with implications for developers as solar incentive changes reshape wind market dynamics according to industry analyses.

The authors estimated that 5% of high-quality stopover habitat in the study area was affected by presence of wind towers. Siting wind infrastructure outside of whooping cranes’ migration corridor would reduce the risk of further habitat loss not only for whooping cranes, but also for millions of other birds that use the same land for breeding, migration, and wintering habitat, and real-world siting controversies, such as an Alberta wind farm cancellation, illustrate how local factors shape outcomes for wildlife.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News

Centrica Dyce Battery Storage will deliver 30MW 2hr capacity in Aberdeenshire, capturing North Sea offshore wind to reduce curtailment, enhance grid flexibility, and strengthen UK energy independence with reliable renewable energy balancing.

Key Points

A 30MW 2hr battery in Dyce, Aberdeenshire, storing North Sea wind to cut curtailment and ease UK grid constraints.

✅ 30MW 2hr system near North Sea offshore wind connection

✅ Cuts curtailment and boosts grid flexibility and reliability

✅ Can power 70,000 homes for an hour with daily cycles

CENTRICA Business Solutions has secured the development rights for a fully consented 30MW 2hr battery storage plant in Aberdeenshire that will help maximise the use of renewable energy in the Scottish North Sea.

The site in Dyce, near Aberdeen is located near a connection for North Sea UK offshore wind farms and will contribute towards managing network constraints – by storing electricity when it is abundant for times when it is not, helping improve the energy independence of the UK and reduce our reliance on fossil fuels. 

Last year, the National Grid paid £244million to wind farm operators to shut down turbines, as they risked overloading the Scottish grid, a process known as curtailment. Battery storage is one method of helping to utilise that wasted energy resource, ensuring fewer green electrons are curtailed. 

Once built, the 30MW 2hr Dyce battery storage plant will store enough energy to power 70,000 homes for an hour. This discharge happens up to four hours per day, as seen in other large-scale deployments like France's largest battery platform that optimise grid balancing.

The project was developed by Cragside Energy Limited, backed by Omni Partners LLP, and obtained planning consent in November 2021. The go-live date for the project is mid-2024, construction should last eight months and will be aligned with the grid connection date.

“Battery storage can play a strategic role in helping to transition away from fossil fuels, by smoothing out the peak demand and troughs associated with renewable energy generation,” said Bill Rees, Director of Centrica Energy Assets. “We should treat renewable energy like a precious resource and projects like this can help to maximise its efficacy.” 

The project forms part of Centrica Energy Assets’ plan to deliver 900MW of solar and battery storage assets by 2026, increasingly paired with solar in global deployments. Centrica already owns and operates the 49MW fast response battery at Roosecote, Cumbria. 

Centrica Business Solutions Managing Director Greg McKenna, said: “Improving the energy independence of the UK is essential to help manage energy costs and move away from fossil fuels. The Government has set a target of a green electricity grid by 2035 – that’s only achievable if we build out the level of flexibility in the system, to help manage supply and demand.”

Centrica Energy Assets will work with Cragside Energy to identify new opportunities in the energy storage space. Cragside Energy’s growing pipeline exceeds 200MW, and focuses on low carbon and flexible assets, including energy storage, solar and peaking plant schemes, supported by falling battery costs across the sector.

Ben Coulston, Director of Cragside Energy, added: “Targeted investment into a complementary mix of diverse energy sources and infrastructure is crucial if the UK is to fully harness its renewable energy potential. Battery storage, such as the project in Dyce, will contribute to the upkeep of a stable and resilient network and we have enjoyed partnering with Centrica as the project transitions into the next phase”.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News

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

What is West Wind Clean Energy?

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

✅ Harnesses offshore wind resources for renewable power generation

✅ Expands grid and transmission infrastructure for clean energy exports

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Related Articles

• Canada Electricity News