Renewables Projected to Soon Be One-Fourth of US Electricity Generation

USDA Rural Clean Energy Programs drive climate-smart infrastructure, energy efficiency, and smart grid upgrades, delivering REAP grants, renewable power, and cost savings that boost rural development, create jobs, and modernize electric systems nationwide.

Key Points

USDA programs funding renewable upgrades, efficiency projects, and grid resilience to cut costs and spur rural growth.

✅ REAP grants fund renewable and efficiency upgrades

✅ Smart grid loans strengthen rural electric resilience

✅ Projects cut energy costs and support good-paying jobs

When rural communities lean into clean energy, the path to economic prosperity is clear. Cleaner power options like solar and electric guided by decarbonization goals provide new market opportunities for producers and small businesses. They reduce energy costs for consumers and supports good-paying jobs in rural America.

USDA Rural Development programs have demonstrated strong success in the fight against climate change, as recent USDA grants for energy upgrades show while helping to lower energy costs and increase efficiency for people across the nation.

This week, as we celebrate Earth Day, we are proud to highlight some of the many ways USDA programs advance climate-smart infrastructure, including the first Clean Energy Community designation that showcases local leadership, to support economic development in rural areas.

Advancing Energy Efficiency in Rural Massachusetts

Prior to receiving a Rural Energy for America Program (REAP) grant from USDA, Little Leaf Farms in the town of Devens used a portable, air-cooled chiller to cool its greenhouses. The inefficient cooling system, lighting and heating accounted for roughly 20 percent of the farm's production costs.

USDA Rural Development awarded the farm a $38,471 REAP grant to purchase and install a more efficient air-cooled chiller. This project is expected to save Little Leaf Farms $51,341 per year and will replace 798,472 kilowatt-hours per year, which is enough energy to power 73 homes.

To learn more about this project, visit the success story: Little Leaf Farms Grows Green while Going Green | Rural Development (usda.gov).

In the Fight Against Climate Change, Students in New Hampshire Lead the Way

Students at White Mountains Regional High School designed a modern LED lighting retrofit informed by building upgrade initiatives to offset power costs and generate efficient energy for their school.

USDA Rural Development provided the school a $36,900 Economic Impact Initiative Grant under the Community Facilities Program to finance the project. Energy upgrades are projected to save 92,528 kilowatt-hours and $12,954 each year, and after maintenance reduction is factored in, total savings are estimated to be more than $20,000 annually.

As part of the project, the school is incorporating STEM (Science, Technology, Math and Engineering) into the curriculum to create long-term impacts for the students and community. Students will learn about the lighting retrofit, electricity, energy efficiency and wind energy as well as climate change.

Clean Energy Modernizes Power Grid in Rural Pennsylvania

USDA Rural Development is working to make rural electric infrastructure stronger, more sustainable and more resilient than ever before, and large-scale energy projects in New York reinforce this momentum nationwide as well. For instance, Central Electric Cooperative used a $20 million Electric Infrastructure Loan Program to build and improve 111 miles of line and connect 795 people.

The loan includes $115,153 in smart grid technologies to help utilities better manage the power grid, while grid modernization in Canada underscores North America's broader transition to cleaner, more resilient systems. Central Electric serves about 25,000 customers over 3,049 miles of line in seven counties in western Pennsylvania.

Agricultural Producers Upgrade to Clean Energy in New Jersey

Tuckahoe Turf Farms Inc. in Hammonton used a REAP grant to purchase and install a 150HP electric irrigation motor to replace a diesel motor. The project will generate 18.501 kilowatt-hours of energy.

In Asbury, North Jersey RCandD Inc. used a REAP grant to conduct energy assessments and provide technical assistance to small businesses and agricultural producers in collaboration with EnSave.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News

Vehicle-to-Grid V2G unlocks EV charging flexibility and grid services, integrating renewable energy, demand response, and peak shaving to displace stationary storage and firm generation while lowering system costs and enhancing reliability.

Key Points

Vehicle-to-Grid V2G lets EV batteries discharge to grid, balancing renewables and cutting storage and firm generation.

✅ Displaces costly stationary storage and firm generation

✅ Enables demand response and peak shaving at scale

✅ Supports renewable integration and grid reliability

Owners of electric vehicles (EVs) are accustomed to plugging into charging stations at home and at work and filling up their batteries with electricity from the power grid. But someday soon, when these drivers plug in, their cars will also have the capacity to reverse the flow and send electrons back to the grid. As the number of EVs climbs, the fleet’s batteries could serve as a cost-effective, large-scale energy source, with potentially dramatic impacts on the energy transition, according to a new paper published by an MIT team in the journal Energy Advances.

“At scale, vehicle-to-grid (V2G) can boost renewable energy growth, displacing the need for stationary energy storage and decreasing reliance on firm [always-on] generators, such as natural gas, that are traditionally used to balance wind and solar intermittency,” says Jim Owens, lead author and a doctoral student in the MIT Department of Chemical Engineering. Additional authors include Emre Gençer, a principal research scientist at the MIT Energy Initiative (MITEI), and Ian Miller, a research specialist for MITEI at the time of the study.

The group’s work is the first comprehensive, systems-based analysis of future power systems, drawing on a novel mix of computational models integrating such factors as carbon emission goals, variable renewable energy (VRE) generation, and costs of building energy storage, production, and transmission infrastructure.

“We explored not just how EVs could provide service back to the grid — thinking of these vehicles almost like energy storage on wheels providing flexibility — but also the value of V2G applications to the entire energy system and if EVs could reduce the cost of decarbonizing the power system,” says Gençer. “The results were surprising; I personally didn’t believe we’d have so much potential here.”

Displacing new infrastructure

As the United States and other nations pursue stringent goals to limit carbon emissions, electrification of transportation has taken off, with the rate of EV adoption rapidly accelerating. (Some projections show EVs supplanting internal combustion vehicles over the next 30 years.) With the rise of emission-free driving, though, there will be increased demand for energy on already stressed state power grids nationwide. “The challenge is ensuring both that there’s enough electricity to charge the vehicles and that this electricity is coming from renewable sources,” says Gençer.

But solar and wind energy is intermittent. Without adequate backup for these sources, such as stationary energy storage facilities using lithium-ion batteries, for instance, or large-scale, natural gas- or hydrogen-fueled power plants, achieving clean energy goals will prove elusive. More vexing, costs for building the necessary new energy infrastructure runs to the hundreds of billions.

This is precisely where V2G can play a critical, and welcome, role, the researchers reported. In their case study of a theoretical New England power system meeting strict carbon constraints, for instance, the team found that participation from just 13.9 percent of the region’s 8 million light-duty (passenger) EVs displaced 14.7 gigawatts of stationary energy storage. This added up to $700 million in savings — the anticipated costs of building new storage capacity.

Their paper also described the role EV batteries could play at times of peak demand, such as hot summer days. “With proper grid coordination practices in place, V2G technology has the ability to inject electricity back into the system to cover these episodes, so we don’t need to install or invest in additional natural gas turbines,” says Owens. “The way that EVs and V2G can influence the future of our power systems is one of the most exciting and novel aspects of our study.”

Modeling power

To investigate the impacts of V2G on their hypothetical New England power system, the researchers integrated their EV travel and V2G service models with two of MITEI’s existing modeling tools: the Sustainable Energy System Analysis Modeling Environment (SESAME) to project vehicle fleet and electricity demand growth, and GenX, which models the investment and operation costs of electricity generation, storage, and transmission systems. They incorporated such inputs as different EV participation rates, costs of generation for conventional and renewable power suppliers, charging infrastructure upgrades, travel demand for vehicles, changes in electricity demand, and EV battery costs.

Their analysis found benefits from V2G applications in power systems (in terms of displacing energy storage and firm generation) at all levels of carbon emission restrictions, including one with no emissions caps at all. However, their models suggest that V2G delivers the greatest value to the power system when carbon constraints are most aggressive — at 10 grams of carbon dioxide per kilowatt hour load. Total system savings from V2G ranged from $183 million to $1,326 million, reflecting EV participation rates between 5 percent and 80 percent.

“Our study has begun to uncover the inherent value V2G has for a future power system, demonstrating that there is a lot of money we can save that would otherwise be spent on storage and firm generation,” says Owens.

Harnessing V2G

For scientists seeking ways to decarbonize the economy, the vision of millions of EVs parked in garages or in office spaces and plugged into the grid via vehicle-to-building charging for 90 percent of their operating lives proves an irresistible provocation. “There is all this storage sitting right there, a huge available capacity that will only grow, and it is wasted unless we take full advantage of it,” says Gençer.

This is not a distant prospect. Startup companies are currently testing software that would allow two-way communication between EVs and grid operators or other entities. With the right algorithms, EVs would charge from and dispatch energy to the grid according to profiles tailored to each car owner’s needs, never depleting the battery and endangering a commute.

“We don’t assume all vehicles will be available to send energy back to the grid at the same time, at 6 p.m. for instance, when most commuters return home in the early evening,” says Gençer. He believes that the vastly varied schedules of EV drivers will make enough battery power available to cover spikes in electricity use over an average 24-hour period. And there are other potential sources of battery power down the road, such as electric school buses that are employed only for short stints during the day and then sit idle, with the potential to power buildings during peak hours.

The MIT team acknowledges the challenges of V2G consumer buy-in. While EV owners relish a clean, green drive, they may not be as enthusiastic handing over access to their car’s battery to a utility or an aggregator working with power system operators. Policies and incentives would help.

“Since you’re providing a service to the grid, much as solar panel users do, you could get paid to sell electricity back for your participation, and paid at a premium when electricity prices are very high,” says Gençer.

“People may not be willing to participate ’round the clock, but as states like California explore EVs for grid stability programs and incentives, if we have blackout scenarios like in Texas last year, or hot-day congestion on transmission lines, maybe we can turn on these vehicles for 24 to 48 hours, sending energy back to the system,” adds Owens. “If there’s a power outage and people wave a bunch of money at you, you might be willing to talk.”

“Basically, I think this comes back to all of us being in this together, right?” says Gençer. “As you contribute to society by giving this service to the grid, you will get the full benefit of reducing system costs, and also help to decarbonize the system faster and to a greater extent.”

Actionable insights

Owens, who is building his dissertation on V2G research, is now investigating the potential impact of heavy-duty electric vehicles in decarbonizing the power system. “The last-mile delivery trucks of companies like Amazon and FedEx are likely to be the earliest adopters of EVs,” Owen says. “They are appealing because they have regularly scheduled routes during the day and go back to the depot at night, which makes them very useful for providing electricity and balancing services in the power system.”

Owens is committed to “providing insights that are actionable by system planners, operators, and to a certain extent, investors,” he says. His work might come into play in determining what kind of charging infrastructure should be built, and where.

“Our analysis is really timely because the EV market has not yet been developed,” says Gençer. “This means we can share our insights with vehicle manufacturers and system operators — potentially influencing them to invest in V2G technologies, avoiding the costs of building utility-scale storage, and enabling the transition to a cleaner future. It’s a huge win, within our grasp.”

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

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

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

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

Canada’s clean energy sector is expanding as Indigenous communities lead electricity transmission projects, drive sustainable growth, and strengthen energy independence through renewable power, community ownership, and grid connections across remote and regional areas of Canada.

What is Canada’s Clean Energy Sector?

Canada’s clean energy sector encompasses industries and initiatives that generate, transmit, and manage low-carbon electricity to meet the country's national climate goals. It emphasizes Indigenous participation, renewable innovation, and equitable economic growth.

✅ Expands renewable electricity generation and transmission

✅ Builds Indigenous-led ownership and partnerships

✅ Reduces emissions through sustainable energy transition

Canada’s clean energy sector is entering a pivotal era of transformation, with Indigenous communities emerging as leading partners in expanding electricity transmission and renewable infrastructure, including grid modernization projects that are underway nationwide. These communities are not only driving projects that connect remote regions to the grid but also redefining what energy leadership and equity look like in Canada.

At a recent webinar co-hosted by the Canadian Climate Institute and the Indigenous Power Coalition, panellists discussed the growing wave of Indigenous-led electricity transmission projects and the policies needed to strengthen Indigenous participation. The event, moderated by Frank Busch, featured Margaret Kenequanash, CEO of Wataynikaneyap Power; Kahsennenhawe Sky-Deer, Grand Chief of the Mohawk Council of Kahnawà:ke; and Blaise Fontaine, Co-Founder of ProACTIVE Planning Inc. and Indigenous Power Coalition.

The discussion comes at a crucial moment for Canada’s clean energy transition. As the country races to meet its climate commitments and zero-emissions electricity by 2035 targets, demand for clean power is rising rapidly. Historically, energy development in Canada occurred on Indigenous lands without consent or fair participation, but today, Indigenous communities collectively represent the largest clean energy asset owners outside Crown and private utilities.

“There is a genuine appetite for Indigenous communities to not just own transmission projects but to also lead,” said Fontaine. He noted that Indigenous communities are increasingly setting the terms of engagement, selecting partners, and shaping projects in line with their cultural and environmental values.

One of the strongest examples of this transformation is the Wataynikaneyap (Watay) Power Project in northern Ontario, a 1,800-kilometre transmission line connecting 17 remote First Nations communities to the provincial grid. “Communities must fully understand what they are getting into, since it is their homelands that will be impacted,” said Kenequanash. She emphasized that the project’s success came from five years of inter-community meetings to agree on shared principles before any external engagement.

The panel also highlighted the Hertel–New York Interconnection Line, co-owned by Hydro-Québec and the Mohawk Council of Kahnawà:ke, as another milestone in Indigenous energy leadership. Sky-Deer noted that the project’s co-ownership model required Quebec’s National Assembly to pass Bill 13, a first-of-its-kind legal framework. “That was a breakthrough,” she said, “but it also shows that true partnership still depends on one-off exceptions rather than standard policy.”

Panellists agreed that Canada’s regulatory systems have not kept pace with Indigenous leadership. Fontaine called on governments to “think outside the box to avoid staying stuck in the status quo,” emphasizing the need for enabling policies that align with an electric, connected and clean vision for Canada while making Indigenous-led ownership the norm rather than the exception.

Financial readiness is another key factor driving Indigenous participation. Communities are now accessing capital through partnerships with financial institutions and government loan programs, and growing evidence that a 2035 zero-emissions grid is practical and profitable is strengthening investor confidence. The collaboration between the Mohawk Council of Kahnawà:ke and the Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec exemplifies tailored financing and long-term investment that supports community ownership and sustainable growth.

True equity, however, goes beyond financial participation. “It’s not just about having a percentage stake,” Fontaine explained. “True equity means meaningful decision-making power and control.” Indigenous leaders are insisting on co-governance structures that align with their worldviews, prioritizing environmental protection, cultural respect, and intergenerational stewardship.

The benefits of this approach extend far beyond project economics. Communities involved in ownership experience tangible local benefits, including employment and training opportunities, as well as new investments in education and culture. Hydro-Québec’s $10 million contribution to the Kahnawà:ke Cultural Arts Center is one example of how partnerships can support cultural renewal and community development.

As Canada looks to build east–west electricity interties and expand renewable energy generation, including solar where Canada has lagged in deployment nationwide, Indigenous leadership is becoming increasingly central to national energy policy. Fontaine noted that this shift offers “even greater opportunities for Indigenous-led transmission as Canada connects its provinces rather than just exporting power south.”

In particular, Alberta's energy profile highlights both rapid growth in renewables and ongoing fossil fuel strength, informing intertie planning and market design.

On the National Truth and Reconciliation Day, panellists urged reflection on both the barriers that remain and the opportunities ahead. Indigenous leadership in Canada’s clean energy sector is proving that reconciliation can take tangible form, through ownership, partnership, and shared prosperity.

This transformation represents more than an energy transition; it’s a rebalancing of power, respect, and responsibility, carried out “in a good way,” as the panellists emphasized, and essential to building a clean, inclusive energy future for all Canadians while strengthening the global electricity market position of the country.

Related Articles

• Canada Electricity News

U.S. Offshore Wind Power Strategy leverages UK offshore wind lessons, contract auctions, and supply chains to scale renewable energy, build wind farms, cut emissions, create jobs, and modernize the grid to meet 2030 climate goals.

Key Points

U.S. plan to scale offshore wind via UK-style contracts, turbines, and supply chains to meet 2030 clean energy goals

✅ Contract-for-difference price guarantees de-risk projects

✅ Scale turbines and ports to cut LCOE and boost capacity

✅ Build coastal grids, transmission, and workforce by 2030

As President Joe Biden’s administration puts its muscle behind wind power with plans to develop large-scale wind farms along the entire United States coastline, the administration can look at how the windiest nation in Europe is transforming its energy grid for an example of how to proceed.

In the search for renewable sources of energy, the United Kingdom has embraced wind power. In 2020, the country generated as much as 24 percent of its electricity from wind power across the grid — enough to supply 18.5 million homes, according to government statistics. 

With usually reliable winds, the U.K. currently has the highest number of offshore turbines installed in the world, with China at a close second.

Experts and industry leaders say it offers valuable lessons on creating a viable market for wind power at the ambitious scale the Biden administration hopes to meet in order to confront climate change and help transition the U.S. economy to renewable energy.

“The U.S. is going to benefit hugely from the early investment that European governments have put into offshore wind,” said Oliver Metcalfe, a wind power analyst at BloombergNEF in London, an independent research group.

Big American plans
On Oct. 13, the White House announced ambitious offshore wind plans to lease federal waters off of the East and West Coasts and Gulf of Mexico to develop commercial wind farms.

The move is part of Biden’s goal to have 30,000 megawatts of offshore wind power produced in the United States by 2030, with projects such as New York's record-setting approval highlighting the momentum. The White House says that would generate enough electricity to power more than 10 million homes and in the process create 77,000 jobs. 

But there is a chasm between where the U.S. is now and where it wants to be within the next decade when it comes to offshore wind power.

“We’re the first generation to understand the science and implications of climate change and we’re the last generation to be able to do something about it.”

The U.S. is not new to wind power; onshore wind in states such as Texas, Oklahoma and Iowa supplied 8.2 percent of the country’s total electricity generation in 2020, according to the U.S. Department of Energy. 

But despite its long coastlines, offshore wind has been a largely untapped resource in the U.S. With a population of about 332 million people, the U.S. currently has just two operational offshore wind farms — off Rhode Island and Virginia — with the capacity to produce 42 megawatts of electricity between them, far from the 1 gigawatt on-grid milestone many are watching. 

In contrast, the U.K., with a population of 67 million people, has 2,297 offshore wind turbines with the capacity to produce 10,415 megawatts of electricity.

Power station or a park?
Just outside of central Glasgow, the host city for the U.N. climate change conference known as COP26, the fruits of years of effort to move away from fossil fuels can be seen and heard

International financiers, including the World Bank are helping developing countries scale wind projects to meet climate goals.

Whitelee Windfarm, the U.K.’s largest onshore wind farm, spreads across 30 square miles on the Eaglesham Moor and includes more than 80 miles of trails for walking, cycling and horseback riding.

With its 539 megawatt capacity, it generates enough electricity for 350,000 homes — more than half the population of Glasgow. 

On a recent gusty fall day, Ian and Fiona Gardner, both 71, were walking their dogs among the wind farm’s 360-foot-tall turbines  

“This is a major contribution to Scotland, to become independent from oil by 2035,” Ian Gardner, an accountant, said. 

Thanks to the rapid technological advances in turbine technology, this wind farm that was completed in 2009, is now practically old school. The latest crop of onshore turbines typically generate double the current capacity of Whitelee’s turbines.

“It took us 20 years to build 2 gigawatts of power. And we’re going to double that in five  years,” said McQuade, an economist. “We can do that because machines are big, efficient, cheap and the supply chain is there.” 

The biggest operational offshore wind farm in the world right now, Hornsea Project One, is about 75 miles off England’s Yorkshire coast in the North Sea.

Owned and operated by Orsted, a former Danish oil and gas giant, in partnership with Global Infrastructure Partners, its 174 turbines have the capacity to generate 1.2 gigawatts — enough to power over 1 million homes and roughly equivalent to a nuclear power plant. 

Benj Sykes, Vice President of U.K. Offshore Wind at Orsted, called Hornsea One a “game changer” in a recent phone interview, citing it as an example of how the industry has scaled up its output to compete with traditional power plants.

But massive projects like Hornsea One took decades to get up and running, as well as government help. According to Malte Jansen, a research associate at the Centre of Environmental Policy at Imperial College London, the British government helped facilitate a “paradigm shift” in renewable energy in 2013.

The electricity market reform policy set up a framework to incentivize investment in offshore wind farms by creating an auction system that guarantees electricity prices to developers in 15-year contracts, alongside new contract awards that add 10 GW to the U.K. grid. 

This means there is no upside in terms of market price fluctuation, but there is no downside either. The policy essentially “de-risked the investment,” Jansen said.

The state contracts allowed the industry to innovate and learn how to develop even larger and more efficient turbines with blades that stretch as long as 267 feet, about three-quarters the size of a U.S. football field. 

While this approach helped companies and investors, it will also have an unintended beneficiary — the U.S., Metcalfe from BloombergNEF said. 

Developers are “taking the lessons they’ve learned building projects in Europe, the cost reductions that they’ve achieved building projects in Europe and are now bringing those to the U.S. market,” he said.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News