Record numbers of solar panels were shipped in the United States during 2021


NFPA 70b Training - Electrical Maintenance

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

U.S. Solar Panel Shipments 2021 surged to 28.8 million kW of PV modules, tracking utility-scale and small-scale capacity additions, driven by imports from Asia, resilient demand, supply chain constraints, and declining prices.

 

Key Points

Record 28.8M kW PV modules shipped in 2021; 80% imports; growth in utility- and small-scale capacity with lower prices.

✅ 28.8M kW shipped, up from 21.8M kW in 2020 (record capacity)

✅ 80% of PV module shipments were imports, mainly from Asia

✅ Utility-scale +13.2 GW; small-scale +5.4 GW; residential led

 

U.S. shipments of solar photovoltaic (PV) modules (solar panels) rose to a record electricity-generating capacity of 28.8 million peak kilowatts (kW) in 2021, from 21.8 million peak kW in 2020, based on data from our Annual Photovoltaic Module Shipments Report. Continued demand for U.S. solar capacity drove this increase in solar panel shipments in 2021, as solar's share of U.S. electricity continued to rise.

U.S. solar panel shipments include imports, exports, and domestically produced and shipped panels. In 2021, about 80% of U.S. solar panel module shipments were imports, primarily from Asia, even as a proposed tenfold increase in solar aims to reshape the U.S. electricity system.

U.S. solar panel shipments closely track domestic solar capacity additions; differences between the two usually result from the lag time between shipment and installation, and long-term projections for solar's generation share provide additional context. We categorize solar capacity additions as either utility-scale (facilities with one megawatt of capacity or more) or small-scale (largely residential solar installations).

The United States added 13.2 gigawatts (GW) of utility-scale solar capacity in 2021, an annual record and 25% more than the 10.6 GW added in 2020, according to our Annual Electric Generator Report. Additions of utility-scale solar capacity reached a record high, reflecting strong growth in solar and storage despite project delays, supply chain constraints, and volatile pricing.

Small-scale solar capacity installations in the United States increased by 5.4 GW in 2021, up 23% from 2020 (4.4 GW), as solar PV and wind power continued to grow amid favorable government plans. Most of the small-scale solar capacity added in 2021 was installed on homes. Residential installations totaled more than 3.9 GW in 2021, compared with 2.9 GW in 2020.

The cost of solar panels has declined significantly since 2010. The average value (a proxy for price) of panel shipments has decreased from $1.96 per peak kW in 2010 to $0.34 per peak kW in 2021, as solar became the third-largest renewable source and markets scaled. Despite supply chain constraints and higher material costs in 2021, the average value of solar panels decreased 11% from 2020.

In 2021, the top five destination states for U.S. solar panel shipments were:

California (5.09 million peak kW)
Texas (4.31 million peak kW)
Florida (1.80 million peak kW)
Georgia (1.15 million peak kW)
Illinois (1.12 million peak kW)
These five states accounted for 46% of all U.S. shipments, and 2023 utility-scale project pipelines point to continued growth.

 

Related News

Related News

Electric Cars 101: How EV Motors Work, Tech Differences, and More

Electric Car Motors convert electricity to torque via rotor-stator magnetic fields, using AC/DC inverters, permanent magnets or induction designs; they power EV powertrains efficiently and enable regenerative braking for energy recovery and control.

 

Key Points

Electric car motors turn electrical energy into wheel torque using rotor-stator fields, inverters, and AC or DC control.

✅ AC induction, PMSM, BLDC, and reluctance architectures explained

✅ Inverters manage AC/DC, voltage, and motor speed via frequency

✅ Regenerative braking recovers energy and reduces wear

 

When was the last time you stopped to think about how electric cars actually work, especially if you're wondering whether to buy an electric car today? We superfans of the car biz have mostly developed a reasonable understanding of how combustion powertrains work. Most of us can visualize fuel and air entering a combustion chamber, exploding, pushing a piston down, and rotating a crankshaft that ultimately turns the wheels. We generally understand the differences between inline, flat, vee-shaped, and maybe even Wankel rotary combustion engines.

Mechanical engineering concepts such as these are comparatively easy to comprehend. But it's probably a fair bet to wager that only a minority of folks reading this can explain on a bar napkin exactly how invisible electrons turn a car's wheels or how a permanent-magnet motor differs from an AC induction one. Electrical engineering can seem like black magic and witchcraft to car nuts, so it's time to demystify this bold new world of electromobility, with the age of electric cars arriving ahead of schedule.

How Electric Cars Work: Motors
It has to do with magnetism and the natural interplay between electric fields and magnetic fields. When an electrical circuit closes allowing electrons to move along a wire, those moving electrons generate an electromagnetic field complete with a north and a south pole. When this happens in the presence of another magnetic field—either from a different batch of speeding electrons or from Wile E. Coyote's giant ACME horseshoe magnet, those opposite poles attract, and like poles repel each other.


 

Electric motors work by mounting one set of magnets or electromagnets to a shaft and another set to a housing surrounding that shaft. By periodically reversing the polarity (swapping the north and south poles) of one set of electromagnets, the motor leverages these attracting and repelling forces to rotate the shaft, thereby converting electricity into torque and ultimately turning the wheels, in a sector where the electric motor market is growing rapidly worldwide. Conversely—as in the case of regenerative braking—these magnetic/electromagnetic forces can transform motion back into electricity.

How Electric Cars Work: AC Or DC?
The electricity supplied to your home arrives as alternating current (AC), and bidirectional charging means EVs can power homes for days as needed, so-called because the north/south or plus/minus polarity of the power changes (alternates) 60 times per second. (That is, in the United States and other countries operating at 110 volts; countries with a 220-volt standard typically use 50-Hz AC.) Direct current (DC) is what goes into and comes out of the + and - poles of every battery. As noted above, motors require alternating current to spin. Without it, the electromagnetic force would simply lock their north and south poles together. It's the cycle of continually switching north and south that keeps a motor spinning.


 

Today's electric cars are designed to manage both AC and DC energy on board. The battery stores and dispenses DC current, but again, the motor needs AC. When recharging the battery, and with increasing grid coordination enabling flexibility, the energy comes into the onboard charger as AC current during Level 1 and Level 2 charging and as DC high-voltage current on Level 3 "fast chargers." Sophisticated power electronics (which we will not attempt to explain here) handle the multiple onboard AC/DC conversions while stepping the voltage up and down from 100 to 800 volts of charging power to battery/motor system voltages of 350-800 volts to the many vehicle lighting, infotainment, and chassis functions that require 12-48-volt DC electricity.

How Electric Cars Work: What Types Of Motors?
DC Motor (Brushed): Yes, we just said AC makes the motor go around, and these old-style motors that powered early EVs of the 1900s are no different. DC current from the battery is delivered to the rotor windings via spring-loaded "brushes" of carbon or lead that energize spinning contacts connected to wire windings. Every few degrees of rotation, the brushes energize a new set of contacts; this continually reverses the polarity of the electromagnet on the rotor as the motor shaft turns. (This ring of contacts is known as the commutator).

The housing surrounding the rotor's electromagnetic windings typically features permanent magnets. (A "series DC" or so-called "universal motor" may use an electromagnetic stator.) Advantages are low initial cost, high reliability, and ease of motor control. Varying the voltage regulates the motor's speed, while changing the current controls its torque. Disadvantages include a lower lifespan and the cost of maintaining the brushes and contacts. This motor is seldom used in transportation today, save for some Indian railway locomotives.

Brushless DC Motor (BLDC): The brushes and their maintenance are eliminated by moving the permanent magnets to the rotor, placing the electromagnets on the stator (housing), and using an external motor controller to alternately switch the various field windings from plus to minus, thereby generating the rotating magnetic field.

Advantages are a long lifespan, low maintenance, and high efficiency. Disadvantages are higher initial cost and more complicated motor speed controllers that typically require three Hall-effect sensors to get the stator-winding current phased correctly. That switching of the stator windings can result in "torque ripple"—periodic increases and decreases in the delivered torque. This type of motor is popular for smaller vehicles like electric bikes and scooters, and it's used in some ancillary automotive applications like electric power steering assist.


 

Permanent-Magnet Synchronous Motor (PMSM): Physically, the BLDC and PMSM motors look nearly identical. Both feature permanent magnets on the rotor and field windings in the stator. The key difference is that instead of using DC current and switching various windings on and off periodically to spin the permanent magnets, the PMSM functions on continuous sinusoidal AC current. This means it suffers no torque ripple and needs only one Hall-effect sensor to determine rotor speed and position, so it's more efficient and quieter.

The word "synchronous" indicates the rotor spins at the same speed as the magnetic field in the windings. Its big advantages are its power density and strong starting torque. A main disadvantage of any motor with spinning permanent magnets is that it creates "back electromotive force" (EMF) when not powered at speed, which causes drag and heat that can demagnetize the motor. This motor type also sees some duty in power steering and brake systems, but it has become the motor design of choice in most of today's battery electric and hybrid vehicles.


 

Note that most permanent-magnet motors of all kinds orient their north-south axis perpendicular to the output shaft. This generates "radial (magnetic) flux." A new class of "axial flux" motors orients the magnets' N-S axes parallel to the shaft, usually on pairs of discs sandwiching stationary stator windings in between. The compact, high-torque axial flux orientation of these so-called "pancake motors" can be applied to either BLDC or PMSM type motors.


 

AC Induction: For this motor, we toss out the permanent magnets on the rotor (and their increasingly scarce rare earth materials) and keep the AC current flowing through stator windings as in the PMSM motor above.

Standing in for the magnets is a concept Nikola Tesla patented in 1888: As AC current flows through various windings in the stator, the windings generate a rotating field of magnetic flux. As these magnetic lines pass through perpendicular windings on a rotor, they induce an electric current. This then generates another magnetic force that induces the rotor to turn. Because this force is only induced when the magnetic field lines cross the rotor windings, the rotor will experience no torque or force if it rotates at the same (synchronous) speed as the rotating magnetic field.

This means AC induction motors are inherently asynchronous. Rotor speed is controlled by varying the alternating current's frequency. At light loads, the inverter controlling the motor can reduce voltage to reduce magnetic losses and improve efficiency. Depowering an induction motor during cruising when it isn't needed eliminates the drag created by a permanent-magnet motor, while dual-motor EVs using PMSM motors on both axles must always power all motors. Peak efficiency may be slightly greater for BLDC or PMSM designs, but AC induction motors often achieve higher average efficiency. Another small trade-off is slightly lower starting torque than PMSM. The GM EV1 of the mid-1990s and most Teslas have employed AC Induction motors, despite skepticism about an EV revolution in some quarters.


 

Reluctance Motor: Think of "reluctance" as magnetic resistance: the degree to which an object opposes magnetic flux. A reluctance motor's stator features multiple electromagnet poles—concentrated windings that form highly localized north or south poles. In a switched reluctance motor (SRM), the rotor is made of soft magnetic material such as laminated silicon steel, with multiple projections designed to interact with the stator's poles. The various electromagnet poles are turned on and off in much the same way the field windings in a BLDC motor are. Using an unequal number of stator and rotor poles ensures some poles are aligned (for minimum reluctance), while others are directly in between opposite poles (maximum reluctance). Switching the stator polarity then pulls the rotor around at an asynchronous speed.


 

A synchronous reluctance motor (SynRM) doesn't rely on this imbalance in the rotor and stator poles. Rather, SynRM motors feature a more distributed winding fed with a sinusoidal AC current as in a PMSM design, with speed regulated by a variable-frequency drive, and an elaborately shaped rotor with voids shaped like magnetic flux lines to optimize reluctance.

The latest trend is to place small permanent magnets (often simpler ferrite ones) in some of these voids to take advantage of both magnetic and reluctance torque while minimizing cost and the back EMF (or counter-electromotive force) high-speed inefficiencies that permanent-magnet motors suffer.

Advantages include lower cost, simplicity, and high efficiency. Disadvantages can include noise and torque ripple (especially for switched reluctance motors). Toyota introduced an internal permanent-magnet synchronous reluctance motor (IPM SynRM) on the Prius, and Tesla now pairs one such motor with an AC induction motor on its Dual Motor models. Tesla also uses IPM SynRM as the single motor for its rear-drive models.


 

Electric motors may never sing like a small-block or a flat-plane crank Ferrari. But maybe, a decade or so from now, we'll regard the Tesla Plaid powertrain as fondly as we do those engines, even as industry leaders note that mainstream adoption faces hurdles, and every car lover will be able to describe in intimate detail what kind of motors it uses.
 

 

Related News

View more

Solar is now ‘cheapest electricity in history’, confirms IEA

IEA World Energy Outlook 2020 highlights solar power as the cheapest electricity, projects faster renewables growth, models net-zero pathways, assesses COVID-19 impacts, oil and gas demand, and policy scenarios including STEPS, SDS, and NZE2050.

 

Key Points

A flagship IEA report analyzing energy trends, COVID-19 impacts, renewables growth, and pathways to net-zero in 2050.

✅ Solar now the cheapest electricity in most major markets

✅ Scenarios: STEPS, SDS, NZE2050, plus delayed recovery case

✅ Oil and gas demand uncertain; CO2 peak needs stronger policy

 

The world’s best solar power schemes now offer the “cheapest…electricity in history” with the technology cheaper than coal and gas in most major countries.

That is according to the International Energy Agency’s World Energy Outlook 2020. The 464-page outlook, published today by the IEA, also outlines the “extraordinarily turbulent” impact of coronavirus and the “highly uncertain” future of global energy use and progress in the global energy transition over the next two decades.

Reflecting this uncertainty, this year’s version of the highly influential annual outlook offers four “pathways” to 2040, all of which see a major rise in renewables across markets. The IEA’s main scenario has 43% more solar output by 2040 than it expected in 2018, partly due to detailed new analysis showing that solar power is 20-50% cheaper than thought.

Despite a more rapid rise for renewables and a “structural” decline for coal, the IEA says it is too soon to declare a peak in global oil use, unless there is stronger climate action. Similarly, it says demand for gas could rise 30% by 2040, unless the policy response to global warming steps up.

This means that, while global CO2 emissions have effectively peaked flatlining in 2019 according to the IEA, they are “far from the immediate peak and decline” needed to stabilise the climate. The IEA says achieving net-zero emissions will require “unprecedented” efforts from every part of the global economy, not just the power sector.

For the first time, the IEA includes detailed modeling of a 1.5C pathway that reaches global net-zero CO2 emissions by 2050. It says individual behaviour change, such as working from home “three days a week”, would play an “essential” role in reaching this new “net-zero emissions by 2050 case” (NZE2050).

Future scenarios
The IEA’s annual World Energy Outlook (WEO) arrives every autumn and contains some of the most detailed and heavily scrutinised analysis of the global energy system. Over hundreds of densely packed pages, it draws on thousands of datapoints and the IEA’s World Energy Model.

The outlook includes several different scenarios, to reflect uncertainty over the many decisions that will affect the future path of the global economy, as well as the route taken out of the coronavirus crisis during the “critical” next decade. The WEO also aims to inform policymakers by showing how their plans would need to change if they want to shift onto a more sustainable path, including creating the right clean electricity investment incentives to accelerate progress.

This year it omits the “current policies scenario” (CPS), which usually “provides a baseline…by outlining a future in which no new policies are added to those already in place”. This is because “[i]t is difficult to imagine this ‘business as-usual’ approach prevailing in today’s circumstances”.

Those circumstances are the unprecedented fallout from the coronavirus pandemic, which remains highly uncertain as to its depth and duration. The crisis is expected to cause a dramatic decline in global energy demand in 2020, with oil demand also dropping sharply as fossil fuels took the biggest hit.

The main WEO pathway is again the “stated policies scenario” (STEPS, formerly NPS). This shows the impact of government pledges to go beyond the current policy baseline. Crucially, however, the IEA makes its own assessment of whether governments are credibly following through on their targets.

The report explains:

“The STEPS is designed to take a detailed and dispassionate look at the policies that are either in place or announced in different parts of the energy sector. It takes into account long-term energy and climate targets only to the extent that they are backed up by specific policies and measures. In doing so, it holds up a mirror to the plans of today’s policy makers and illustrates their consequences, without second-guessing how these plans might change in future.”

The outlook then shows how plans would need to change to plot a more sustainable path, highlighting efforts to replace fossil fuels with electricity in time to meet climate goals. It says its “sustainable development scenario” (SDS) is “fully aligned” with the Paris target of holding warming “well-below 2C…and pursuing efforts to limit [it] to 1.5C”. (This interpretation is disputed.)

The SDS sees CO2 emissions reach net-zero by 2070 and gives a 50% chance of holding warming to 1.65C, with the potential to stay below 1.5C if negative emissions are used at scale.

The IEA has not previously set out a detailed pathway to staying below 1.5C with 50% probability, with last year’s outlook only offering background analysis and some broad paragraphs of narrative.

For the first time this year, the WEO has “detailed modelling” of a “net-zero emissions by 2050 case” (NZE2050). This shows what would need to happen for CO2 emissions to fall to 45% below 2010 levels by 2030 on the way to net-zero by 2050, with a 50% chance of meeting the 1.5C limit, with countries such as Canada's net-zero electricity needs in focus to get there.

The final pathway in this year’s outlook is a “delayed recovery scenario” (DRS), which shows what might happen if the coronavirus pandemic lingers and the global economy takes longer to recover, with knock-on reductions in the growth of GDP and energy demand.

 

Related News

View more

Michigan solar supporters make new push to eliminate rooftop solar caps

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

View more

'Consumer Reports' finds electric cars really do save money in the long run

Electric Vehicle Ownership Costs include lower maintenance, repair, and fuel expenses; Consumer Reports shows BEV and PHEV TCO beats ICE over 200,000 miles, with per-mile savings compounding through electricity prices and reduced service.

 

Key Points

Lifetime EV expenses, typically lower than ICE, due to cheaper electricity, reduced maintenance, and fewer repairs.

✅ BEV: $0.012/mi to 50k; $0.028/mi after; vs ICE up to $0.06/mi

✅ PHEV: $0.021/mi to 50k; $0.031/mi after; still below ICE

✅ Savings increase over 200k miles from fuel and service reductions

 

Electric vehicles are a relatively new technology, and the EV age is arriving ahead of schedule today. Even though we technically saw the first battery-powered vehicles more than 100 years ago, they haven’t really become viable transportation in the modern world until recently, and they are greener than ever in all 50 states as the grid improves.

As viable as they may now be, however, it still seems they’re unarguably more expensive than their conventional internal-combustion counterparts, prompting many to ask whether it’s time to buy an electric car today. Well, until now.

Lower maintenence costs and the lower price of electricity versus gasoline (see the typical cost to charge an electric vehicle in most regions) actually make electric cars much cheaper in the long run, despite their often higher purchase price, according to a new survey by Consumer Reports. The information was collected using annual reliability surveys conducted by CR in 2019 and 2020.

In the first 50,000 miles (80,500 km), battery electric vehicles cost just US$0.012 per mile for maintenence and repairs, while plug-in hybrid models bump that number up to USD$0.021. Compare these numbers to the typical USD$0.028 cost for internal combustion vehicles, and it becomes clear the more you drive, the more you will save, and across the U.S. plug-ins logged 19 billion electric miles in 2021 to prove the point. After 50,000 miles, the costs for BEV and PHEV vehicles is US$0.028 and US$0.031 respectively, while ICE vehicles jump to US$0.06 per mile.

To put it more practically, if you chose to buy a Model 3 instead of a BMW 330i, you’d see a total US$17,600 in savings over the lifetime of the vehicle, aligning with evidence that EVs are better for the planet and your budget as well, based on average driving. In the SUV sector, buying a Tesla Model Y instead of a Lexus crossover would save US$13,400 (provided the former’s roof doesn’t fly off) and buying a Nissan Leaf over a Honda Civic would save US$6,000 over the lifetime of the vehicles.

CR defines the vehicle’s “lifetime” as 200,000 miles (320,000 km). Ergo the final caveat: while it sounds like driving electric means big savings, you might only see those returns after quite a long period of ownership, though some forecasts suggest that within a decade adoption will be nearly universal for many drivers.

 

Related News

View more

ABB claims its Terra 360 is the "world's fastest electric car charger"

ABB Terra 360 EV Charger offers 360 kW DC fast charging, ultra-fast top-ups, and multi-vehicle capability for Ionity, Electrify America, and depot installations, adding 100 km in under 3 minutes with compact footprint.

 

Key Points

ABB's Terra 360 is a 360 kW DC fast charger for EVs, powering up to four vehicles simultaneously with a compact footprint.

✅ 360 kW DC output; adds 100 km in under 3 minutes

✅ Charges up to four vehicles at once; small footprint

✅ Rolling out in Europe 2021; US and beyond in 2022

 

Swiss company ABB, which supplies EV chargers to Ionity and Electrify America amid intensifying charging network competition worldwide, has unveiled what it calls the "world's fastest electric car charger." As its name suggests, the Terra 360 has a 360 kW capacity, and as electric-car adoption accelerates, it could fully charge a (theoretical) EV in 15 minutes. More realistically, it can charge four vehicles simultaneously, saving space at charging stations. 

The Terra 360 isn't the most powerful charger by much, as companies like Electrify America, Ionity and EVGo have been using 350 kW chargers manufactured by ABB and others since at least 2018. However, it's the "only charger designed explicitly to charge up to four vehicles at once," the company said. "This gives owners the flexibility to charge up to four vehicles overnight or to give a quick refill to their EVs in the day." They also have a relatively small footprint, allowing installation in small depots or parking lots, helping as US automakers plan 30,000 new chargers nationwide. 

There aren't a lot of EVs that can handle that kind of charge. The only two approaching it are Porsche's Taycan, with 270 kW of charging capacity and the new Lucid Air, which allows for up to 300 kW fast-charging. Tesla's Model 3 and Model Y EVs can charge at up to 250 kW, while Hyundai's Ioniq 5 is rated for 232 kW DC fast charging in optimal conditions. 

Such high charging levels aren't necessarily great for an EV's battery, and the broader grid capacity question looms as the American EV boom gathers pace. Porsche, for instance, has a battery preservation setting on its Plug & Charge Taycan feature that lowers power to 200 kW from the maximum 270 kW allowed — so it's essentially acknowledging that faster charging degrades the battery. On top of that, extreme charging levels don't necessarily save you much time, as Car and Driver found. Tesla recently promised to upgrade its own Supercharger V3 network from 250kW to 300kW, with energy storage solutions emerging to buffer high-power sites. 

ABB's new chargers will be able to add 100 km (62 miles) of range in less than three minutes. They'll arrive in Europe by the end of the year and start rolling out in the US and elsewhere in 2022.

 

Related News

View more

Major investments by Canada and Quebec in electric vehicle battery assembly

Lion Electric Battery Plant Quebec secures near $100M public investment for an automated battery-pack assembly in Saint-Jérôme, fueling EV manufacturing, R&D, local supply chains, and heavy-duty zero-emission vehicle competitiveness and jobs.

 

Key Points

Automated battery-pack plant in Saint-Jérôme boosting EV manufacturing and strengthening Quebec's supply chain.

✅ $100M joint federal-provincial investment announced

✅ 135 jobs in 2023; 150 more long-term positions

✅ R&D hub to enhance heavy-duty EV battery performance

 

Canadian Prime Minister of Canada, Justin Trudeau, and the Premier of Quebec, François Legault, have announced an equal investment totalling nearly $100 million to Lion Electric, as a B.C. battery plant announcement has done in another province, for the establishment of a highly automated battery-pack assembly plant in Saint–Jérôme, in the Laurentians. This project, valued at nearly $185 million, will create 135 jobs when construction of the plant is completed in 2023. It is also expected that 150 additional jobs will be created over the longer term.

For the announcement, Mr. Trudeau and Mr. Legault were accompanied by the Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry, François-Philippe Champagne, by Quebec's Minister of Economy and Innovation, Pierre Fitzgibbon, and by Marc Bédard, President and Founder of Lion Electric.

The battery packs assembled at the new plant will be used in Lion Electric vehicles. This strategic investment will allow the company to improve its cost structure, and better control the design and shape of its batteries, making it more competitive in the heavy-duty electric vehicle market, as EV assembly deals put Canada in the race. Ultimately, the company will be able to increase the volume of its vehicle production. Lion Electric will be the first Canadian manufacturer of medium and heavy-duty vehicles to have state-of-the-art, automated battery-pack manufacturing facilities.

The company will also establish a research and development innovation centre within its manufacturing plant, which will allow it to test and refine products for future use, including batteries for emergency vehicles such as ambulances. The company will test innovations from research and development, including energy storage capacity and battery performance. The results will make these products more competitive in the North American market, where a Niagara Region battery plant signals growing demand.

The company said it expects to employ 135 people at the plant when it is operational by 2023. It also plans to invest in a research and development facility that could create a number of spinoff jobs.

"When we talk about an economic recovery that's good for workers, for families and for the environment, this is exactly the kind of project we mean," Trudeau said at a news conference in Montreal.

Trudeau toured Lion Electric's factory in Saint-Jérôme, Que., last March, just before the pandemic. (Ryan Remiorz/The Canadian Press)
It was the prime minister's first trip to Montreal in more than a year. He said one of the reasons he decided to attend the announcement was to illustrate the importance of the green economy and how Canada can capitalize on the U.S. EV pivot for future job growth.

The project also aligns with the Legault government's desire to create a supply chain within Quebec that is able to feed the electric vehicle industry, where Canada-U.S. collaboration could accelerate progress.

At Monday's announcement, Economy Minister Pierre Fitzgibbon spoke at length about the province's deposits of lithium and nickel — key components in electric vehicle batteries — as well as its supply of low-emission hydroelectricity.

"If we play our cards right, we could become world leaders in this market of the future," Fitzgibbon said.

Currently, many of those strategic minerals found in Quebec are exported to Asia where they are turned into battery cells, and then imported back to Quebec by companies like Lion, said Mickaël Dollé, a chemistry professor at the Université de Montréal.

By opening a battery assembly plant in Quebec, Lion could help stimulate more cell-makers, such as the Northvolt project near Montreal, to set up shop in the province. Further localizing the supply chain, Dollé said, means better value and a greener product. 

But other countries have the same goal in mind, he said, and the window for the province to establish itself as an important player in the emerging electric vehicle battery industry is closing quickly, as major Ford Oakville deal commitments accelerate competition.

"The decision has to be taken now, or in the coming months, but if we wait too long we may miss our main goal which is to get our own supply chain in Canada," Dollé said.

What's in a name?
Monday's announcement was closely watched in Quebec for what it foretold about the political future as well as the economic one.

By coming to Montreal and touring a vaccination clinic before making the funding announcement, Trudeau fed speculation in the province that he is preparing to call an election soon.

Intrigue also surrounded the informal meeting Trudeau had with Legault on Monday. The Quebec premier and members of his government have repeatedly expressed frustration with Trudeau during the pandemic.

 

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

Download the 2025 Electrical Training Catalog

Explore 50+ live, expert-led electrical training courses –

  • Interactive
  • Flexible
  • CEU-cerified