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

Hydrogen vs Battery-Electric Vehicles compare FCEV and BEV tech for range, charging and refueling, zero-emissions, infrastructure in Canada, highlighting urban commuting, heavy-duty use, fast 5-minute fills, 30-minute fast charging, and renewable hydrogen from surplus wind.

Key Points

Hydrogen FCEVs suit long range and heavy-duty use; BEVs excel in urban commutes with overnight charging.

✅ FCEVs refuel in about 5 minutes; ideal for long range and heavy duty.

✅ BEVs fit urban commuting with home or night charging; fewer stops.

✅ Hydrogen enables energy storage from surplus wind and hydro power.

We’re constantly hearing that battery-electric cars are the future, as automakers pursue Canada-U.S. collaboration on EVs across the industry, so I was surprised to see that companies like Toyota, Honda and Hyundai are making hydrogen fuel-cell cars. Which technology is better? Could hydrogen still win? – Pete, Kingston

They’re both in their electric youth, relatively speaking, but the ultimate winner in the race between hydrogen and battery electric will likely be both.

“It’s not really a competition – they’ll both co-exist and there will also be plug-in hydrogen hybrids,” said Walter Merida, director of the Clean Energy Research Centre at the University of British Columbia. “Battery-electric vehicles [BEVs] are better for an urban environment where you have time to recharge and fuel-cell electric vehicles [FCEVs] are better-suited for long range and heavy duty.”

Last year, there were 9,840 BEVs sold in Canada, up from 5,130 the year before. If you include plug-in hybrids, the number sold in 2017 grows to 18,560, though many buyers now face EV shortages and wait times amid high gasoline prices.

And how many hydrogen vehicles were sold in Canada last year?

#google#

None – although Hyundai leased out about a half-dozen hydrogen Tucsons in British Columbia for $599 a month, which included fuel from Powertech labs in Surrey.

In January, Toyota announced it will be selling the Mirai in Quebec later this year. And Hyundai said it will offer about 25 Nexos for sale.

“It’s chicken or egg,” said Michael Fowler, a professor of chemical engineering at the University of Waterloo. “Car manufacturers won’t release cars into the market unless there’s a refuelling station and companies won’t build a refuelling station unless there are cars to fuel.”

Right now, there are no retail hydrogen refuelling stations in Canada. While there are plans under way to add stations in B.C., Ontario and Quebec, we’re still behind Japan, Europe and California, though experts outline how Canada can capitalize on the U.S. EV pivot to accelerate progress.

“In 2007, Ontario had a hydrogen strategy and they were starting to develop hydrogen vehicles and they dropped that in favour of the Green Energy Act and it was a complete disaster,” Fowler said. “The reality is the government of the day listened to the wrong people.”

It’s tough to pinpoint a single reason why governments focused on building charging stations instead of hydrogen stations, Merida said.

“It’s ironic, you know – the fuel cell was invented in Vancouver. Geoffrey Ballard was one of the pioneers of this technology,” Merida said. “And for a while, Canada was a global leader, but eventually government programs were discontinued and that was very disruptive to the sector.”

HYDROGEN FOR THE MASSES?

While we tend to think of BEVs when we think of electric cars, fuel-cell vehicles are electric, too; the hydrogen passes through a fuel cell stack, where it mixes with oxygen from the atmosphere to produce an electric current.

That current powers electric motors to drive the wheels and extra energy goes to a battery pack that’s used to boost acceleration (it’s also charged by regenerative braking).

Except for water that drips out of the hydrogen car, they’re both zero-emission on the road.

But a big advantage for hydrogen is that, if you can find a station, you can pull up to a pump and fill up in five minutes or less – the same way we do now at nearly 12,000 gas stations.

Compare that with fast-charging stations that can charge a battery to 80 per cent in 30 minutes – each station only handles one car at a time. What if you get there and it’s busy – or broken? And right now, there are only 139 of them in Canada.

And at slower, Level 2 stations, cars have to be plugged in for hours to recharge.

In a 2018 KPMG survey of auto executives, 55 per cent said that moves to switch entirely to pure battery-electric vehicles will fail because there won’t be enough charging stations, and some critics argue the 2035 EV mandate is delusional given infrastructure constraints.

“Ontario just invested $20-million in public charging stations and that’s going to service 100 or 200 cars a day,” Fowler said. “If you were to invest that in hydrogen stations, you’d be able to service thousands of cars a day.”

And when you do charge at a station, you might not be using clean power, as 18% of Canada’s 2019 electricity came from fossil fuels according to national data, Fowler said.

“At least in Ontario, in order to charge at a public station during the day, you have to rev up a natural-gas plant somewhere,” Fowler said. “So the only way you’re getting zero emissions is when you can charge at night using excess nuclear, hydro or wind that’s not being used.”

But hydrogen can be made when surplus green energy is stored, Fowler said.

“In Ontario, we have lots of wind in the spring and the fall, when we don’t need the electricity,” he said.

And eventually, you’ll be able to connect your fuel-cell vehicle to the grid and sell the power it produces, Merida said.

“The amount of power generation you have in these moving platforms is quite significant,” Merida said.

There are other strikes against battery-electric, including reduced range by 30 per cent or more in the winter and the need to upgrade infrastructure such as electrical transformers so they can handle more than just a handful of cars on each street charging at night, Fowler said.

In that KPMG survey, executives predicted a nearly equal split between BEVs, FCEVs, hybrids and gasoline engines by 2040.

“Battery-electric vehicles will serve a certain niche – they’ll be small commuter vehicles in certain cities,” Fowler said. “But for the way we use cars today – the family car, the suburban car, buses and probably trucks – it will be the fuel cell.”

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

EPA Auto Emissions Proposal 2027-2032 sets strict tailpipe emissions limits, accelerating electric vehicle adoption, cutting greenhouse gases, advancing climate policy, and reducing oil dependence through battery-electric cars and trucks across U.S. markets.

Key Points

An EPA plan setting strict tailpipe limits to drive EV adoption, cut greenhouse gases, and reduce oil use in vehicles.

✅ Cuts GHGs 56% vs. 2026 standards; improves national air quality.

✅ Targets up to two-thirds EV sales by 2032 nationwide.

✅ Reduces oil imports by about 20 billion barrels; lowers costs.

The Biden administration is proposing strict new automobile pollution limits that would require up to two-thirds of new vehicles sold in the U.S. to be electric by 2032, a nearly tenfold increase over current electric vehicle sales.

The proposed regulation, announced Wednesday by the Environmental Protection Agency, would set tailpipe emissions limits for the 2027 through 2032 model years that are the strictest ever imposed — and call for far more new EV sales than the auto industry agreed to less than two years ago, a shift aligned with U.S. EV sales momentum in early 2024.

If finalized next year as expected, the plan would represent the strongest push yet toward a once almost unthinkable shift from gasoline-powered cars and trucks to battery-powered vehicles, as the market approaches an inflection point in adoption.

The Biden administration is proposing strict new automobile pollution limits that would require up to two-thirds of new vehicles sold in the U.S. to be electric by 2032, a nearly tenfold increase over current electric vehicle sales.

The proposed regulation, announced Wednesday by the Environmental Protection Agency, would set tailpipe emissions limits for the 2027 through 2032 model years that are the strictest ever imposed — and call for far more new EV sales than the auto industry agreed to less than two years ago, a direction mirrored by Canada's EV sales regulations now being finalized.

If finalized next year as expected, the plan would represent the strongest push yet toward a once almost unthinkable shift from gasoline-powered cars and trucks to battery-powered vehicles, with many analysts forecasting widespread adoption within a decade among buyers.

Reaching half was always a “stretch goal," given that EVs still trail gas cars in market share and contingent on manufacturing incentives and tax credits to make EVs more affordable, he wrote.

“The question isn’t can this be done, it’s how fast can it be done,” Bozzella wrote. “How fast will depend almost exclusively on having the right policies and market conditions in place.”

European car maker Stellantis said that, amid broader EV mandate debates across North America, officials were “surprised that none of the alternatives” proposed by EPA "align with the president’s previously announced target of 50% EVs by 2030.''

Q. How will the proposal benefit the environment?

A. The proposed standards for light-duty cars and trucks are projected to result in a 56% reduction in projected greenhouse gas emissions compared with existing standards for model year 2026, the EPA said. The proposals would improve air quality for communities across the nation, and, with actual benefits influenced by grid mix — for example, Canada's fossil electricity share affects lifecycle emissions — avoiding nearly 10 billion tons of carbon dioxide emissions by 2055, more than twice the total U.S. CO2 emissions last year, the EPA said.

The plan also would save thousands of dollars over the lives of the vehicles sold and reduce U.S. reliance on approximately 20 billion barrels of oil imports, the agency said.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

Canada EV demand surge is driven by record gas prices, zero-emission policies, and tight dealer inventory, while microchip shortages, ZEV mandates abroad, and lithium supply concerns extend wait times for new and used models.

Key Points

Canada EV demand surge is rising interest in zero-emission cars due to high gas prices and limited EV supply.

✅ Gas at $2/litre spurs zero-emission interest

✅ Dealer inventory scarce; waits up to 3 years

✅ Microchip and lithium constraints limit output

Price shock at the pump is driving  Canadians toward buying an ev. But manufacturers are having trouble keeping up with consumer demand, even as the U.S. auto sector pivots to EVs across North America.

In parts of the country, gas prices exceeded $2 per litre last month amid strong global demand for oil combined with Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Halifax-based electric vehicle salesperson Jeremie Bernardin said he's noticed an explosion of interest in zero-emission vehicles since the price of fuel started to take off.

"I think there's a lot of people that were considering electric vehicles for a very long time, and they needed that extra little push," Bernardin, who is also the president of the Electric Vehicle Association of Atlantic Canada, where Atlantic EV demand has lagged the national average, told CTVNews.ca over the phone on Wednesday.

With so few electric vehicles on dealership lots, Canadians looking to buy a brand-new zero-emission car will have to put down a deposit and get onto a waiting list. Bernardin said the wait times can be as long as three years, depending on the manufacturer and the dealership.

Tesla, which makes Canada's best-selling electric car according to the automotive publication Motor Illustrated, says delivery times for its vehicles range between three months to one year, depending on the model. But some manufacturers like Nissan have already completely sold out of their electric vehicle inventory for the 2022 model year, though recent EV assembly deals in Canada aim to expand capacity over time.

Shortages of electric vehicles have been around long before the recent spike in gas prices. In March 2021, a report commissioned by Transport Canada found that more than half of Canadian dealerships had no electric vehicles in stock. The report also found that wait times exceeded six months at 31 per cent of dealerships that had no zero-emission cars in their inventory.

Interest in used electric vehicles has also surged amid the high gas prices. Used car marketplace AutoTrader.ca says searches for electric cars in March 2022 increased 89 per cent compared to the previous year, while the number of inquiries sent to electric vehicle sellers through its platform jumped 567 per cent.

"It's understandable that when the gas prices are expensive, consumers are looking to buy and get into electric vehicles, though upfront cost remains a major barrier for many buyers today," Baris Akyurek, AutoTrader.ca's director of marketing intelligence, told CTVNews.ca in a phone interview on Wednesday.

SUPPLY CHAIN ISSUES PERSIST
The surging interest in electric vehicles also comes at a time when pandemic-induced shortages of microchips have been affecting the automotive industry at large since late 2020. Modern automobiles can have hundreds of microchips that control everything from the air conditioning to the power steering system, and a shortage of these crucial components have resulted in fewer vehicles being manufactured.

"Electric vehicles are subject to supply chain issues, just like anything else. Right now, the COVID pandemic has disrupted global supply chains. The auto industry specifically is seeing a microchip shortage that it's been struggling with for the past year or two. So those things are at play," said Joanna Kyriazis, senior policy advisor with Simon Fraser University’s Clean Energy Canada, in a phone interview with CTVNews.ca on Tuesday.

On top of that, Kyriazis says more than 80 per cent of the world's supply of electric vehicles are shipped to consumers in China and the European Union.

China has a strict zero-emission vehicle (ZEV) mandate that requires automakers to ensure that a certain minimum percentage of their vehicles are electric or hydrogen-powered. In Europe, automakers are also forced to sell more electric vehicles there in order to meet the EU's stringent fleetwide emissions standards, and in Canada, Ottawa is preparing EV sales regulations to guide adoption in the coming years.

"We don't have the same aggressive regulations in place yet to really force automakers to prioritize the Canadian market when they're deciding where to allocate their EV inventory and where to sell EVs," said Kyriazis, though Ottawa's 2035 EV mandate remains debated by some industry observers today.

Kyriazis also said she believes it's possible that a shortage of lithium and other minerals required for battery production could be a potential issue within the next five years.

"But my understanding is that the global market is not hitting a supply crunch just yet," she said. "There could be a near-term supply issue. But we're not there yet."

In order to ensure adequate supply of minerals for battery production, the federal government in its most recent budget committed to providing up to $3.8 billion over eight years to create "Canada's first critical minerals strategy." The strategy is aimed at boosting extraction and production of Canadian nickel, lithium and other minerals used as components in electric vehicles and their batteries, and it aligns with opportunities for Canada-U.S. collaboration as companies electrify.

"Canada has a lot of natural resources and a lot of experience with natural resource extraction. We really can stand to be a leader in battery production," said Harry Constatine, president of the Vancouver Electric Vehicles Association, in an interview with CTVNews.ca over the phone on Monday.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

Michigan Distributed Energy Cap Repeal advances a bipartisan bill to boost rooftop solar and net metering, countering DTE and Consumers Energy claims, expanding energy freedom, jobs, and climate resilience across investor-owned utility territories.

Key Points

A Michigan bill to remove the 1% distributed energy cap, expanding rooftop solar, net metering, and clean energy jobs.

✅ Removes 1% distributed generation cap statewide

✅ Supports rooftop solar, net metering, and job growth

✅ Counters utility cost-shift claims with updated tariffs

A bipartisan group of Michigan lawmakers has introduced legislation to eliminate a 1% cap on distributed energy in the state’s investor-owned utility territories.

It’s the third time in recent years that such legislation has been introduced. Though utilities and their political allies have successfully blocked it to date, through tactics some critics say reflect utilities tilting the solar market by incumbents, advocates see an opportunity with a change in state Republican caucus leadership and Michigan’s burgeoning solar industry approaching the cap in some utility territories.

The bill also has support from a broad swath of legislators for reasons having to do with job creation, energy freedom and the environment, amid broader debates over states' push for renewables and affordability. Already the bill has received multiple hearings, even as DTE Energy and Consumers Energy, Michigan’s largest private utilities, are ramping up attacks in an effort to block the bill. 

“It’s going to be vehemently opposed by the utilities but there are only benefits to this if you are anybody but DTE,” said Democratic state Rep. Yousef Rabhi, who cosigned HB 4236 and has helped draft language in previous bills. “If we remove the cap, then we’re putting the public’s interest first, and we’re putting DTE’s interest first if we keep the cap in place.” 

The Michigan Legislature enacted the cap as part of a sweeping 2016 energy bill that clean energy advocates say included a number of provisions that have kneecapped the small-scale distributed energy industry, particularly home solar. The law caps distributed energy production at 1% of a utility’s average in-state peak load for the past five years. 

Republicans have controlled the Legislature and committees since the law was enacted, amid parallel moves such as the Wyoming clean energy bill in another state, and previous attempts to cut the language haven’t received House committee hearings. However, former Republican House leader Lee Chatfield has been replaced, and already the new bill, introduced by Republican state Rep. Gregory Markkanen, the energy committee’s vice chair, has had two hearings. 

Previous attempts to cut the language were also a part of a larger package of bills, and this time around the bill is a standalone. The legislation is also moving as Consumers and Upper Peninsula Power Co. have voluntarily doubled their cap to two percent, which advocates say highlights the need to repeal the cap . 

Rabhi said there’s bipartisan support because many conservatives and progressives view it as an infringement on customers’ energy freedom since the cap will eventually effectively prohibit new distributed energy generation. Legislators say the existing law kills jobs because it severely limits the clean energy industry’s growth, and Rabhi said he’s also strongly motivated by increasing renewable energy production to address climate change. 

In February, Michigan Public Service Commission Chairman Dan Scripps testified to the House committee, with observers also pointing to FERC action on aggregated DERs as relevant context, that the commission is “supportive in taking steps to ensure solar developers in Michigan are able to continue operating and thus support in concept the idea of lifting or eliminating the cap” in order to protect the home solar industry. 

The state’s solar industry has long criticized the cap, and removing it is a “no brainer,” said Dave Strenski, executive director of Solar Ypsi, which promotes rooftop solar in Ypsilanti. 

“If they have a cap and we reach that cap, then rooftop solar is shut down in Michigan,” he said. “The utilities don’t mind solar as long as they own it, and that’s what it boils down to.”  

The state’s utilities see the situation differently. Spokespeople for DTE and Consumers told the Energy News Network that lifting the cap would shift the cost burden of maintaining their territory-wide infrastructure from all customers to low income customers who can’t afford to install solar panels, often invoking reliability examples such as California's reliance on fossil generation to justify caution.

The bill “doesn’t address the subsidy certain customers are paid at the expense of those who cannot afford to put solar panels on their homes,” said Katie Carey, Consumers Energy’s spokesperson. 

However, clean energy advocates argue that studies have found that to be untrue. And even if it were true, Rabhi said, the utilities told lawmakers in 2016 that a new inflow/outflow tariff that the companies successfully pushed for to replace net metering dramatically reduced compensation for home solar users and would address that inequality. 

“DTE’s and Consumers’ own argument is that by making that change, distributed generation is no longer a ‘burden’ on low income customers, so now we have inflow/outflow and the problem should be solved,” Rabhi said. 

He added that claims that DTE and Consumers are looking out for low-income customers are disingenuous because they have repeatedly fought larger allowances for programs that help those customers, and refuse to “dip into their massive corporate profits and make sure poor people don’t have to pay as much for electricity.”

“I don’t want to hear a sob story from DTE about how putting solar panels on the house is going to hurt poor people,” he said. “That is entirely the definition of hypocrisy — that’s the utilities using poor people as a pawn and that’s why people are sick of these corporations.” 

The companies have already begun their public relations attack designed to help thwart the bill. DTE and Consumers spread money generously among Republicans and Democrats in the Legislature each cycle, and the two companies’ dark money nonprofits launched a round of ads targeting Democratic lawmakers, reflecting the broader solar wars playing out nationally. Several sit on the House Energy Committee, which must approve the bill before it can go in front of the full Legislature. 

The DTE-backed Alliance For Michigan Power and Consumers Energy-funded Citizens Energizing Michigan’s Economy have purchased dozens of Facebook ads alluding to action by the legislators, though there hasn’t been a vote. 

Facebook ads aren’t uncommon as they get “bang for their buck,” said Matt Kasper, research director with utility industry watchdog Energy And Policy Institute. Already hundreds of thousands of people have potentially viewed the ads and the groups have only spent thousands of dollars. The ads are likely designed to get Facebook users to interact with the legislators on the issue, Kasper said, even if there’s little information in the ad, and the info in the ad that does exist is highly misleading.

DTE and Consumers spokespersons declined to comment on the spending and directed questions to the dark money nonprofits. No one there could be reached for comment.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Energy Policy News

France EV Incentive Rules prioritize EU-made electric vehicles, tying subsidies to manufacturing emissions and carbon footprint, making Stellantis, Renault, and Tesla Model Y eligible while excluding many China-built models under a new eligibility list.

Key Points

Links EV subsidies to manufacturing emissions, favoring EU-made models and restricting many China-built cars.

✅ Subsidies tied to lifecycle manufacturing emissions.

✅ EU production favored; many China-built EVs excluded.

✅ Eligible: Stellantis, Renault, Tesla Model Y; not Model 3.

France's revamped new EV rules on consumer cash incentives for electric car purchases favour vehicles made in France and Europe over models manufactured in China, a government list of eligible car types published recently has showed.

Some 65% of electric cars sold in France will be eligible for the scheme, which from Friday will include new criteria covering the amount of carbon emitted in the manufacturing of an electric vehicle (EV).

The list of eligible models includes 24 produced by Franco-Italian group Stellantis (STLAM.MI) and five by French carmaker Renault (RENA.PA). Elon Musk's Tesla (TSLA.O) Model Y will be eligible but not its Model 3.

Electric vehicle brand MG Motors, owned by China's SAIC, said it expects the new rules to weigh on the French EV market, despite the global surge in EV sales seen in recent years.

"There are cars that will entirely lose their competitiveness", an MG spokesperson told Reuters, adding that the brand had decided not to apply for the bonus scheme for its MG4 model because it was "designed to exclude us".

French Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire hailed what he called the new rules' incentive for automakers to reduce their carbon footprint.

"We will no longer be subsidising car production that emits too much CO2," he said in a statement.

President Emmanuel Macron's government has wanted to make French and European-made EVs more affordable for domestic consumers relative to cheaper vehicles produced in China, amid a record EV market share in the country.

The average retail price of an EV in Europe, even as the EU EV share grew during lockdown months, was more than 65,000 euros ($71,000) in the first half of 2023, compared with just over 31,000 euros in China, according to research by Jato Dynamics.

The French government already offered buyers a cash incentive of between 5,000 and 7,000 euros to get more electric cars on the road, at a total cost of 1 billion euros ($1.1 billion) per year.

However, in the absence of cheap European-made EVs, a third of all incentives are going to consumers buying EVs made in China, French finance ministry officials say. The trend has helped spur a surge in imports and a growing competitive gap with domestic producers.

China's auto industry relies heavily on coal-generated electricity, meaning many Chinese-made EVs will henceforth not qualify.

The Ademe agency overseeing the process studied the eligibility of almost 500 EV models and their variants to include in the scheme.

Dacia, the low-cost Renault brand, saw its Spring model imported from China excluded from the list.

Tesla's Model 3 is made in China. The Model Y, which is larger and more expensive, is made mainly in Berlin and was the top selling EV in France over the first 11 months of the year, amid forecasts that EVs could dominate within a decade in many markets.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

Tidal Energy harnesses ocean currents with tidal turbines to deliver predictable, renewable power. From Scotland's Orkney to New York's East River, clean baseload electricity complements wind and solar in decarbonizing grids.

Key Points

Tidal energy uses underwater turbines to capture predictable ocean currents, delivering reliable, low-carbon power.

✅ Predictable 2-way flows enable forecastable baseload

✅ Higher energy density than wind, slower flow speeds

✅ Costs remain high; scaling and deployment are challenging

As the world looks to curb climate change and reduce fossil fuel emissions, some companies are focusing on a relatively untapped but vast and abundant source of energy — tidal waves.

On opposite sides of the Atlantic, two firms are working to harness ocean currents in different ways to try to generate reliable clean energy.

Off the coast of Scotland, Orbital Marine Power operates what it says is the "most powerful tidal turbine in the world." The turbine is approximately the size of a passenger airplane and even looks similar, with its central platform floating on the water and two wings extending downwards on either side. At the ends of each wing, about 60 feet below the surface, are large rotors whose movement is dictated by the waves.

"The energy itself of tidal streams is familiar to people, it's kinetic energy, so it's not too dissimilar to something like wind," Andrew Scott, Orbital's CEO, told CNN Business. "The bits of technology that generate power look not too different to a wind turbine."

But there are some key differences to wind energy, primarily that waves are far more predictable than winds. The ebb and flow of tides rarely differs significantly and can be timed far more precisely.

Orbital Marine Power's floating turbines off the Scottish coast produce enough energy to power 2,000 homes a year, while another Scottish tidal project recently produced enough for nearly 4,000 homes.

Orbital Marine Power's floating turbines off the Scottish coast produce enough energy to power 2,000 homes a year.

"You can predict those motions years and decades [in] advance," Scott said. "But also from a direction perspective, they only really come from two directions and they're almost 180 degrees," he added, unlike wind turbines that must account for wind from several different directions at once.

Tidal waves are also capable of generating more energy than wind, Scott says.

"Seawater is 800 times the density of wind," he said. "So the flow speeds are far slower, but they generate far more energy."

The Orbital turbine, which is connected to the electricity grid in Scotland's Orkney, can produce up to two megawatts — enough to power 2,000 homes a year — according to the company.

Scott acknowledges that the technology isn't fully mainstream yet and some challenges remain including the high cost of the technology, but the reliability and potential of tidal energy could make it a useful tool in the fight against climate change, as projects like Sustainable Marine in Nova Scotia begin delivering power to the grid.

"It is becoming increasingly apparent that ... climate change is not going to be solved with one silver bullet," he said.

'Could be 24/7 power'
Around 3,000 miles away from Orbital's turbines, Verdant Power is using similar technology to generate power near Roosevelt Island in New York City's East River. Although not on the market yet, Verdant's turbines set up as part of a pilot project help supply electricity to New York's grid. But rather than float near the surface, they're mounted on a frame that's lowered to the bottom of the river.

"The best way to envision what Verdant Power's technology is, is to think of wind turbines underwater," the company's founder, Trey Taylor, told CNN Business. And river currents tend to provide the same advantages for energy generation as ocean currents, he explained (though the East River is also connected to the Atlantic).

"What's nice about our rivers and systems is that could be 24/7 power," he said, even as U.S. offshore wind aims to compete with gas. "Not to ding wind or solar, but the wind doesn't always blow and the sun doesn't always shine. But river currents, depending on the river, could be 24/7."

Verdant Power helps supply electricity to New York City
Over the course of eight months, Verdant has generated enough electricity to power roughly 60 homes — though Taylor says a full-fledged power plant built on its technology could generate enough for 6,000 homes. And by his estimate, the global capacity for tidal energy is enormous, with regions like the Bay of Fundy pursuing new attempts around Nova Scotia.

A costly technology
The biggest obstacle to reaching that goal at the moment is how expensive it is to set up and scale up tidal power systems.

"Generating electricity from ocean waves is not the challenge, the challenge is doing it in a cost-effective way that people are willing to pay for that competes with ... other sources of energy," said Jesse Roberts, Environmental Analysis Lead at the US government-affiliated Sandia National Laboratories. "The added cost of going out into the ocean and deploying in the ocean... that's very expensive to do," he added. According to 2019 figures from the US Department of Energy, the average commercial tidal energy project costs as much as $280 per megawatt hour. Wind energy, by comparison, currently costs roughly $20 per megawatt hour and is "one of the lowest-priced energy sources available today," with major additions like the UK's biggest offshore wind farm starting to supply the grid, according to the agency.

When operational, the Orbital turbine's wing blades drop below the surface of the water and generate power from ocean currents.

When operational, the Orbital turbine's wing blades drop below the surface of the water and generate power from ocean currents.

Roberts estimates that tidal energy is two or three decades behind wind energy in terms of adoption and scale.

The costs and challenges of operating underwater are something both Scott and Taylor acknowledge.
"Solar and wind are above ground. It's easy to work with stuff that you can see," Taylor said. "We're underwater, and it's probably easier to get a rocket to the moon than to get these to work underwater."
But the goal of tidal power is not so much to compete with those two energy sources as it is to grow the overall pie, alongside innovations such as gravity power that can help decarbonize grids.

"The low hanging fruit of solar and wind were quite obvious," Scott said. "But do they have to be the only solution? Is there room for other solutions? I think when the energy source is there, and you can develop technologies that can harness it, then absolutely."
 

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News