U.S. to work with allies to secure electric vehicle metals


gm ev workers

High Voltage Maintenance Training Online

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

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

US EV Battery Minerals Strategy prioritizes critical minerals with allies, lithium and copper sourcing, battery recycling, and domestic processing, leveraging the Development Finance Corporation to strengthen EV supply chains and reduce reliance on China.

 

Key Points

A US plan to secure critical minerals with allies, boost recycling, and expand domestic processing for EV batteries.

✅ DFC financing for allied lithium and copper projects

✅ Battery recycling to diversify critical mineral supply

✅ Domestic processing with strong environmental standards

 

The United States must work with allies to secure the minerals needed for electric vehicle batteries, addressing pressures on cobalt reserves that could influence supply, and process them domestically in light of environmental and other competing interests, the White House said on Tuesday.

The strategy, first reported by Reuters in late May, will include new funding to expand international investments in electric vehicles (EV) metal projects through the U.S. Development Finance Corporation, as well as new efforts to boost supply from EV battery recycling initiatives.

The U.S. has been working to secure minerals from allied countries, including Canada and Finland, with projects such as Alberta lithium development showing potential. The 250-page report outlining policy recommendations mentioned large lithium supplies in Chile and Australia, the world's two largest producers of the white battery metal.

President Joe Biden's administration will also launch a working group to identify where minerals used in EV batteries and other technologies can be produced and processed domestically.

Securing enough copper, lithium and other raw materials to make EV batteries, amid lithium supply concerns heightened by recent disruptions, is a major obstacle to Biden’s aggressive EV adoption plans, with domestic mines facing extensive regulatory hurdles and environmental opposition.

The White House acknowledged China's role as the world's largest processor of EV metals and said it would expand efforts, including a 100% EV tariff on certain imports, to lessen that dependency.

"The United States cannot and does not need to mine and process all critical battery inputs at home. It can and should work with allies and partners to expand global production and to ensure secure global supplies," it said in the report.

The White House also said the Department of the Interior and others agencies will work to identify gaps in mine permitting laws to ensure any new production "meets strong standards" in terms of both the environment and community input.

The report noted Native American opposition to Lithium Americas Corp's (LAC.TO) Thacker Pass lithium project in Nevada, as well as plans by automaker Tesla Inc (TSLA.O) to produce its own lithium.

The steps come after Biden, who has made fighting climate change and competing with China centerpieces of his agenda, ordered a 100-day review of gaps in supply chains in key areas, including EVs.

Democrats are pushing aggressive climate goals, as Canada EV manufacturing accelerates in parallel, to have a majority of U.S.-manufactured cars be electric by 2030 and every car on the road to be electric by 2040.

As part of the recommendations from four executive branch agencies, Biden is being advised to take steps to restore the country's strategic mineral stockpile and expand funding to map the mineral resources available domestically.

Some of those steps would require the support of Congress, where Biden's fellow Democrats have only slim majorities.

The Energy Department already has $17 billion in authority through its Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing Loan program to fund some investments, and is also launching a lithium-battery workforce initiative to build critical skills.

The program’s administrators will focus on financing battery manufacturers and companies that refine, recycle and process critical minerals, the White House said.

 

Related News

Related News

Canada's largest electricity battery storage project coming to southwestern Ontario

Oneida Energy Storage Project, a 250 MW lithium-ion battery in Haldimand County, enhances Ontario's clean energy capacity, grid reliability, and peak demand management, developed with Six Nations partners and private-public collaboration.

 

Key Points

A 250 MW lithium-ion battery in Ontario storing power to stabilize the grid and deliver clean electricity.

✅ 250 MW lithium-ion grid-scale battery in Haldimand County

✅ Developed with Six Nations, Northland Power, NRStor, Aecon

✅ Enhances grid reliability, peak shaving, emissions reduction

 

The Ontario government announced it is working to build Canada's largest electricity battery storage project in Haldimand County, part of Ontario's push into energy storage amid a looming supply crunch. Ontario Premier Doug Ford and Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland made the announcement in Ohsweken, Ont.

The 250-megawatt Oneida Energy storage project is being developed in partnership with the Six Nations of the Grand River Development Corporation, Northland Power, NRStor and Aecon Group.

The Ontario government announced on Friday it is working to build Canada's largest electricity battery storage project in Haldimand County.

On Friday, Ontario Premier Doug Ford and Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland made the announcement in Ohsweken, Ont.

The 250-megawatt Oneida Energy storage project is being developed in partnership with the Six Nations of the Grand River Development Corporation, Northland Power, NRStor and Aecon Group.

“It will more than double the province's energy storage resources and provide enough electricity to power a city approximately the size of Oshawa,” said Ford, noting Ontario's growing battery storage expansion across the grid.

“We need to continue to find ways to keep our energy clean and green,” said Ford, including initiatives like the Hydrogen Innovation Fund to spur innovation.

The federal government said they are providing a further $50 million in funding, coinciding with national investments such as the B.C. battery plant to scale capacity.

The premier said the project will begin operating in 2025 and will more than double the amount of clean energy storage.

Officials with the Six Nations said they have invested in the project that will provide economic returns and 97 per cent of the construction workforce to build it.

"This project is an example of what is possible when private and public companies, multiple levels of government, and their agencies work alongside a progressive Indigenous partner in pursuit of innovative solutions,” said Matt Jamieson, President and CEO of Six nations of the Grand River Development Corporation. “As with all our development efforts, we have studied the project to ensure it aligns with our community values, we are confident the outcome will create ratepayer savings, and move us closer to a Net Zero future for our coming generations."

According to the province, it has directed the independent electricity system operator to enter into a 20-year contract for this project with a goal to grow the province's clean energy supply, alongside transmission efforts like the Lake Erie Connector to enhance reliability.

The province said the Oneida Energy storage project is expected to reduce emissions by between 2.2 to 4.1 million tonnes, the equivalent to taking up to 40,000 cars off the road.

The project will use large scale lithium batteries, with regional supply bolstered by the Niagara battery plant, to store surplus energy from the power grid then feed it back into the system when it’s needed.

“Power that is generated and it can’t be utilized, this system will help harness that, store it for a period of time, and it will maximize value for the rate payer,” said Jamieson.

Jamieson said he is proud that the Six Nations is a founding developer in the project.

The facility will not actually be in Six Nations. It will be near the community of Jarvis in Haldimand County.
For Six Nationals elected Chief Mark Hill, it’s a major win as Ontario's EV sector grows with the Oakville EV deal and related projects.

“We want to continue to be a driver. We want to show Canada that we can also be a part of green solution,” Hill said.

But Hill admitted the Six Nations Community remains deeply divided over a number of longstanding issues.

“We still have a lot of internal affairs within our own community that we have to deal with. I think it’s really time once and for all to come together and figure this out,” said Hill.

The traditional leadership said they were left out of the decision making.

“No voice of ours was even heard today in that building,” said Deyohowe:to, the chief of the Cayuga Snipe Clan.

According to the Cayuga Snipe Clan, consultation with the Haudenasauene council is required for this type of development but they said it didn't happen.

“We’ve never heard of this before. No one came to the community and said this was going to happen and for the community we are not going to let that happen,” said Deyohowe:to.

The Six Nations Development Corporation said it did reach out to the Haudenosaunee chiefs and sent multiple letters in 2021 inviting them to participate.

 

 

Related News

View more

Ontario Launches Hydrogen Innovation Fund

Ontario Hydrogen Innovation Fund accelerates clean electricity integration, hydrogen storage, grid balancing, and electrolyzer pilot projects, supporting EV production, green steelmaking, and clean manufacturing under Ontario's Low-Carbon Hydrogen Strategy via IESO-administered funding.

 

Key Points

A $15M program funding hydrogen storage, grid pilots to integrate low-carbon hydrogen into Ontario's power system.

✅ Administered by IESO; applications opened April 2023.

✅ Supports existing, new, and research hydrogen projects.

✅ Backs grid storage, capacity, demand management pilots.

 

The Ontario government is establishing a Hydrogen Innovation Fund that will invest $15 million over the next three years to kickstart and develop opportunities for hydrogen to be integrated into Ontario’s clean electricity system, including hydrogen electricity storage. This launch marks another milestone in the implementation of the province’s Low-Carbon Hydrogen Strategy, supporting a growing hydrogen economy across the province, positioning Ontario as a clean manufacturing hub.

“When energy is reliable, affordable and clean our whole province wins,” said Todd Smith, Minister of Energy. “The Hydrogen Innovation Fund will help to lay the groundwork for hydrogen to contribute to our diverse energy supply, supporting game-changing investments in electric vehicle production and charging infrastructure across the province, green steelmaking and clean manufacturing that will create good paying jobs, grow our economy and reduce emissions.”

Hydrogen Innovation Fund projects would support electricity supply, capacity, battery storage and demand management, and support growth in Ontario’s hydrogen economy. The Fund will support projects across three streams:

Existing facilities already built or operational and ready to evaluate how hydrogen can support Ontario’s clean grid amid an energy storage crunch in Ontario.
New hydrogen facilities not yet constructed but could be in-service by a specified date to demonstrate how hydrogen can support Ontario’s clean grid.
Research studies investigating the feasibility of novel applications of hydrogen or support future hydrogen project decision making.

The Hydrogen Innovation Fund will be administered by the Independent Electricity System Operator, which is opening applications for the fund in April 2023. Natural Resources Canada modelling shows that hydrogen could make up about 30 per cent of the country's fuels and feedstock by 2050, as provinces advance initiatives like a British Columbia hydrogen project demonstrating scale and ambition, and create 100,000 jobs in Ontario. By making investments early to explore applications for hydrogen in our clean electricity sector we are paving the way for the growth of our own hydrogen economy.

“As a fuel that can be produced and used with little to no greenhouse gas emissions, hydrogen has tremendous potential to help us meet our long-term economic and environmental goals,” said David Piccini, Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks. “Our government will continue to support innovation and investment in clean technologies that will position Ontario as the clean manufacturing and transportation hub of the future while leading Canada in greenhouse gas emission reductions.”

The province is also advancing work to develop the Niagara Hydrogen Centre, led by Atura Power, which would increase the amount of low-carbon hydrogen produced in Ontario by eight-fold. This innovative project would help balance the electricity grid while using previously unutilized water at the Sir Adam Beck generating station to produce electricity for a hydrogen electrolyzer, reflecting broader electrolyzer investment trends in Canada. To support the implementation of the project, the IESO entered into a contract for grid regulation services at the Sir Adam Beck station starting in 2024, which will support low-carbon hydrogen production at the Niagara Hydrogen Centre.

These investments build on Ontario’s clean energy advantage, which also includes the largest battery storage project planned in southwestern Ontario, as our government makes progress on the Low-Carbon Hydrogen Strategy that laid out eight concrete actions to make Ontario a leader in the latest frontier of energy innovation – the hydrogen economy.

 

Related News

View more

Electric cars don't need better batteries. America needs better charging networks

EV charging anxiety reflects concerns beyond range anxiety, focusing on charging infrastructure, fast chargers, and network reliability during road trips, from Tesla Superchargers to Electrify America stations across highways in the United States.

 

Key Points

EV charging anxiety is worry about finding reliable fast chargers on public networks, not just limited range.

✅ Non-Tesla networks vary in uptime and plug-and-charge reliability.

✅ Charging deserts complicate route planning on long highway stretches.

✅ Sync stops: align rest breaks with fast chargers to save time.

 

With electric cars, people often talk about "range anxiety," and how cars with bigger batteries and longer driving ranges will alleviate that. I just drove an electric car from New York City to Atlanta, a distance of about 950 miles, and it taught me something important. The problem really isn't range anxiety. It's anxiety around finding a convenient and working chargers on America's still-challenged EV charging networks today.

Back in 2019, I drove a Tesla Model S Long Range from New York City to Atlanta. It was a mostly uneventful trip, thanks to Tesla's nicely organized and well maintained network of fast chargers that can fill the batteries with an 80% charge in a half hour or less. Since then, I've wanted to try that trip again with an electric car that wasn't a Tesla, one that wouldn't have Tesla's unified charging network to rely on.
I got my chance with a Mercedes-Benz EQS 450+, a car that is as close to a direct competitor to the Tesla Model S as any. And while I made it to Atlanta without major incident, I encountered glitchy chargers, called the charging network's customer service twice, and experienced some serious charging anxiety during a long stretch of the Carolinas.

Long range
The EPA estimated range for the Tesla I drove in 2019 was 370 miles, and Tesla's latest models can go even further.

The EQS 450+ is officially estimated to go 350 miles on a charge, but I beat that handily without even trying. When I got into the car, its internal displays showed a range estimate of 446 miles. On my trip, the car couldn't stretch its legs quite that far, because I was driving almost entirely on highways at fairly high speeds, but by my calculations, I could have gone between 370 and 390 miles on a charge.

I was going to drive over the George Washington Bridge then down through New Jersey, Delaware, Virginia then North Carolina and South Carolina. I figured three charging stops would be needed and, strictly speaking, that was correct. The driving route laid out by the car's navigation system included three charging stops, but the on-board computers tended push things to the limit. At each stop, the battery would be drained to a little over 10% or so. (I learned later this is a setting I could adjust to be more conservative if I'd wanted.)

But I've driven enough electric cars to have some concerns. I use public chargers fairly often, and I know they're imperfect, and we need to fix these problems to build confidence. Sometimes they aren't working as well as they should. Sometimes they're just plain broken. And even if the car's navigation system is telling you that a charger is "available," that can change at any moment. Someone else can pull into the charging spot just a few seconds before you get there.
I've learned to be flexible and not push things to the limit.

On the first day, when I planned to drive from New York to Richmond, Virginia, no charging stop was called for until Spotsylvania, Virginia, a distance of nearly 300 miles. By that point, I had 16% charge left in the car's batteries which, by the car's own calculation, would have taken me another 60 miles.

As I sat and worked inside the Spotsylvania Town Centre mall I realized I'd been dumb. I had already stopped twice, at rest stops in New Jersey and Delaware. The Delaware stop, at the Biden Welcome Center, had EV fast chargers, as the American EV boom accelerates nationwide. I could have used one even though the car's navigation didn't suggest it.

Stopping without charging was a lost opportunity and it cost me time. If I'm going to stop to recharge myself why not recharge the car, too?
But that's the thing, though. A car can be designed to go 350 miles or more before needing to park whereas human beings are not. Elementary school math will tell you that at highway speeds, that's nearly six hours of driving all at once. We need bathrooms, beverages, food, and to just get out and move around once in a while. Sure, it's physically possible to sit in a car for longer than that in one go, but most people in need of speed will take an airplane, and a driver of an EQS, with a starting price just north of $100,000, can almost certainly afford the ticket.

I stopped for a charge in Virginia but realized I could have stopped sooner. I encountered a lot of other electric cars on the trip, including this Hyundai Ioniq 5 charging next to the Mercedes.

I vowed not to make that strategic error again. I was going to take back control. On the second day, I decided, I would choose when I needed to stop, and would look for conveniently located fast chargers so both the EQS and I could get refreshed at once. The EQS's navigation screen pinpointed available charging locations and their maximum charging speeds, so, if I saw an available charger, I could poke on the icon with my finger and add it onto my route.

For my first stop after leaving Richmond, I pulled into a rest stop in Hillsborough, North Carolina. It was only about 160 miles south from my hotel and I still had half of a full charge.

I sipped coffee and answered some emails while I waited at a counter. I figured I would take as long as I wanted and leave when I was ready with whatever additional electricity the car had gained in that time. In all, I was there about 45 minutes, but at least 15 minutes of that was used trying to get the charger to work. One of the chargers was simply not working at all, and, at another one, a call to Electrify America customer service -- the EV charging company owned by Volkswagen that, by coincidence, operated all the chargers I used on the trip -- I got a successful charging session going at last. (It was unclear what the issue was.)

That was the last and only time I successfully matched my own need to stop with the car's. I left with my battery 91% charged and 358 miles of range showing on the display. I would only need to stop once more on way to Atlanta and not for a long time.

Charging deserts
Then I began to notice something. As I drove through North Carolina and then South Carolina, the little markers on the map screen indicating available chargers became fewer and fewer. During some fairly long stretches there were none showing at all, highlighting how better grid coordination could improve coverage.

It wasn't an immediate concern, though. The EQS's navigation wasn't calling for me to a charge up again until I'd nearly reached the Georgia border. By that point I would have about 11% of my battery charge remaining. But I was getting nervous. Given how far it was between chargers my whole plan of "recharging the car when I recharge myself" had already fallen apart, the much-touted electric-car revolution notwithstanding. I had to leave the highway once to find a gas station to use the restroom and buy an iced tea. A while later, I stopped for lunch, a big plate of "Lexington Style BBQ" with black eyed peas and collard greens in Lexington, North Carolina. None of that involved charging because there no chargers around.

Fortunately, a charger came into sight on my map while I still had 31% charge remaining. I decided I would protect myself by stopping early. After another call to Electrify America customer service, I was able to get a nice, high-powered charging session on the second charger I tried. After about an hour I was off again with a nearly full battery.

I drove the last 150 miles to Atlanta, crossing the state line through gorgeous wetlands and stopping at the Georgia Welcome Center, with hardly a thought about batteries or charging or range.

But I was driving $105,000 Mercedes. What if I'd been driving something that cost less and that, while still going farther than a human would want to drive at a stretch, wouldn't go far enough to make that trip as easily, a real concern for those deciding if it's time to buy an electric car today. Obviously, people do it. One thing that surprised me on this trip, compared to the one in 2019, was the variety of fully electric vehicles I saw driving the same highways. There were Chevrolet Bolts, Audi E-Trons, Porsche Taycans, Hyundai Ioniqs, Kia EV6s and at least one other Mercedes EQS.

Americans are taking their electric cars out onto the highways, as the age of electric cars gathers pace nationwide. But it's still not as easy as it ought to be.

 

Related News

View more

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

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

 

Key Points

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

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

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The oil number is much farther off.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

Related News

View more

Ottawa to release promised EV sales regulations

Canada ZEV Availability Standard sets EV sales targets and zero-emission mandates, using compliance credits, early credits, and charging infrastructure investments under CEPA to accelerate affordable ZEV supply and meet 2035 net-zero goals.

 

Key Points

A federal ZEV policy setting 2026-2035 sales targets, using tradable credits and infrastructure incentives under CEPA.

✅ Applies to automakers; compliance via tradable ZEV credits under CEPA.

✅ Targets: 20% by 2026, 60% by 2030, 100% by 2035.

✅ Early credits up to 10% for 2026; charging investments earn credits.

 

Canadian Automobile manufacturers are on the brink of significant changes as Ottawa prepares to introduce its long-awaited electric vehicle regulations. A reliable source within the government says final regulations are aimed at ensuring that all new passenger vehicles sold in Canada by 2035 are zero-emission vehicles, a goal some critics question through analyses of the 2035 EV mandate in Canada.

These regulations, known as the Electric Vehicle Availability Standard, are designed to encourage automakers to produce more affordable zero-emission vehicles to meet the increasing demand. One of the key concerns for Canada is the potential dominance of zero-emission vehicle supply by other countries, particularly the United States, where several states have already implemented sales targets for such vehicles, and new EPA emission limits are expected to boost EV sales nationwide as well.

It's important to note that these regulations will apply primarily to automakers, rather than dealerships. Under this legislation, manufacturers will be required to accumulate sufficient credits to demonstrate their compliance with the established targets.

Automakers will be able to earn credits based on their sales of low- and no-emissions vehicles. The number of credits earned will depend on how close these vehicles come to meeting a zero-emissions standard. Additionally, manufacturers could earn early credits, amounting to a maximum of 10 percent of their total compliance requirements for 2026, by introducing more electric vehicles to the market ahead of schedule, even amid recent EV shortages and wait times reported across Canada.

Automakers can also increase their credit balance by contributing to the development of electric vehicle charging infrastructure, recognizing that fossil fuels still powered part of Canada's grid in 2019 and that charging availability remains a key enabler. In cases where companies exceed or fall short of their compliance targets, they will have the option to buy or sell credits to other manufacturers or use previously accumulated credits.

Further details regarding these regulations, which will be enacted under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, are set to be unveiled soon and will intersect with provincial approaches such as Quebec's, where experts have questioned the push for EV dominance as policies evolve.

These regulations will become effective starting with the model year 2026, and sales targets will progressively rise each year until 2035. The federal government's ambitious EV goals are to have 20 percent of all vehicles sold in Canada be zero-emission vehicles by 2026, with that figure increasing to 60 percent by 2030 and reaching 100 percent by 2035.

According to a government analysis conducted in 2022, the anticipated total cost to consumers for zero-emission vehicles and chargers over 25 years is estimated at $24.5 billion, though cost remains a primary barrier for many Canadians considering an EV. However, it is projected that Canadians will save approximately $33.9 billion in net energy costs over the same period. Please note that these estimates are part of a draft and may be subject to change upon the government's release of its final analysis.

In terms of environmental impact, these regulations are expected to prevent the release of an estimated 430 million tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions, according to regulatory analysis. Environmental Defence, a Canadian environmental think-tank, has estimated that the policy would also result in a substantial reduction in gasoline consumption, equivalent to filling approximately 73,000 Olympic-sized swimming pools with gasoline.

Nate Wallace, the program manager for clean transportation at Environmental Defence, emphasized the significance of these regulations, stating, "2035 really needs to be the last year that we are selling gasoline cars in Canada brand new if we're going to have any chance of actually, by 2050, reaching net-zero carbon emissions."

 

Related News

View more

Whooping cranes steer clear of wind turbines when selecting stopover sites

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

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.