Vermont's New Governor Sticking with Renewable Energy Goal

Toronto EV Discovery Centre offers hands-on EV education, on-site test drives, and guidance on Ontario incentives, rebates, charging, and dealerships, helping drivers switch to electric vehicles and cut emissions through provincial climate programs.

Key Points

A public hub in Toronto for EV education, test drives, and guidance on Ontario incentives, rebates, and charging options.

✅ Free entry; neutral info on EV models and charging.

✅ On-site test drives; referrals to local dealerships.

✅ Backed by Ontario's cap-and-trade, utilities, and partners.

A centre where people can learn about electric vehicles and take them for a test drive has opened in Toronto, as similar EV events in Regina highlight growing public interest.

Ontario's Environment Minister Glen Murray says the Plug'n Drive Electric Vehicle Discovery Centre is considered the first of its kind and his government has pitched in $1 million to support it, alongside efforts to expand charging stations across Ontario.

Ontario's Environment Minister Glen Murray helps cut the ribbon on the first ever electric vehicle discovery centre. (CBC News)

Murray says the goal of the centre is to convince people to switch to electric vehicles in order to fight climate change, a topic gaining momentum in southern Alberta as well.

Visitors to the centre learn about how electric vehicles work and about Ontario government subsidies and rebates for electric car owners, as well as the status of the provincial charging network and infrastructure.

Visitors can test-drive vehicles from different companies and those who see something they like will receive a referral to an electric car dealership in their area.

The province hopes to have electric vehicles make up five per cent of all new vehicles sold by 2020. (Oliver Walters/CBC)

The Ontario government's Climate Change Action Plan includes a goal to have electric vehicles make up five per cent of all new vehicles sold by 2020, amid debate over whether the next wave will run on clean power in Ontario, and the discovery centre is part of that plan.

The centre is free for visitors. It's a public-private partnership funded from the provincial government's cap-and-trade revenue, with other funding from TD Bank Group, Ontario Power Generation, Power Workers' Union, Toronto Hydro and Bruce Power.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

EV Opportunity for Utilities spans EV charging infrastructure, grid modernization, demand response, time-of-use rates, and customer engagement, enabling predictable load growth, flexible charging, and stronger utility branding amid electrification and resilience challenges.

Key Points

It is the strategy to leverage EV adoption for load growth, grid flexibility, and branded charging services.

✅ Monetizes EV load via TOU rates, managed charging, and V2G.

✅ Uses rate-based infrastructure to expand equitable charging access.

✅ Enhances resilience and DER integration through smart grid upgrades.

Tesla recently announced delivery of the first 30 production units of its Model 3 electric vehicle (EV). EV technology has generated plenty of buzz in the electric utility industry over the past decade and, with last week’s announcement, it would appear that projections of a significant market presence for EVs could give way to rapid growth.

Tesla’s announcement could not have come at a more critical time for utilities, which face unprecedented challenges. For the past 15 years, utilities have been grappling with increasingly frequent “100-year storms,” including hurricanes, snowstorms and windstorms, underscoring the reality that the grid’s aging infrastructure is not fit to withstand increasingly extreme weather, along with other threats, such as cyber attacks.

Coupled with flat or declining load growth, changing regulations, increasing customer demand, and new technology penetration, these challenges have given the electric utility industry good reason to describe its future as “threatened.” These trends, each exacerbating the others, mean essentially that utilities can no longer rely on traditional ways of doing business.

EVs have significant potential to help relieve the industry’s pessimistic outlook. This article will explore what EV growth could mean for utilities and how they can begin establishing critical foundations today to help ensure their ability to exploit this opportunity.

The opportunity

At the Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF) Global Summit 2017, BNEF Advisory Board Chairman Michael Liebreich announced the group’s prediction that electric vehicles will comprise 35-47 percent of new vehicle sales globally by 2040.

U.S. utilities have good reason to be optimistic about this potential new revenue source, as EV-driven demand growth could be substantial according to federal lab analyses. If all 236 million gas-powered cars in the U.S. — average miles driven per year: 12,000 — were replaced with electric vehicles, which travel an average of 100 miles on 34 kWh, they would require 956 billion kWh each year. At a national average cost of $0.12 / kWh, the incremental energy sold by utilities in the U.S. would bring in around $115 billion per year in new revenues. A variety of factors could increase or decrease this number, but it still represents an attractive opportunity for the utility sector.

Capturing this burgeoning market is not simply a matter of increased demand; it will also require utilities to be predictable, adaptable and brandable. Moreover, while the aggregate increase in demand might be only 3-4 percent, demand can come as a flexible and adaptable load through targeted programming. Also, if utilities target the appropriate customer groups, they can brand themselves as the providers of choice for EV charging. The power of stronger branding, in a sector that’s experiencing significant third-party encroachment, could be critical to the ongoing financial health of U.S. utilities.

Many utilities are already keenly aware of the EV opportunity and are speeding down this road (no pun intended) as part of their plans for utility business model reinvention. Following are several questions to be asked when evaluating the EV opportunity.

Is the EV opportunity feasible with today’s existing grid?

According to a study conducted by the U.S. Department of Energy’s Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, the grid is already capable of supporting more than 150 million pure electric vehicles, even as electric cars could challenge state grids in the years ahead, a number equal to at least 63 percent of all gas-powered cars on the road today. This is significant, considering that a single EV plugged into a Level 2 charger can double a home’s peak electricity demand. Assuming all 236 million car owners eventually convert to EVs, utilities will need to increase grid capacity. However, today’s grid already has the capacity to accommodate the most optimistic prediction of 35-47 percent EV penetration by 2040, which is great news.

Should the EV opportunity be owned by utilities?

There’s significant ongoing debate among regulators and consumer advocacy groups as to whether utilities should own the EV charging infrastructure, with fights for control over charging reflecting broader market concerns today. Those who are opposed to this believe that the utilities will have an unfair pricing advantage that will inhibit competition. Similarly, if the infrastructure is incorporated into the rate base, those who do not own electric vehicles would be subsidizing the cost for those who do.

If the country is going to meet the future demands of electric cars, the charging infrastructure and power grid will need help, and electric utilities are in the best position to address the problem, as states like California explore EVs for grid stability through utility-led initiatives that can scale. By rate basing the charging infrastructure, utilities can provide charging services to a wider range of customers. This would not favor one economic group over another, which many fear would happen if the private sector were to control the EV charging market.

If you build it, will they come?

At this point, we can conclude that growth in EV market penetration is a tremendous opportunity for utilities, one that’s most advantageous to electricity customers if utilities own some, if not all, of the charging infrastructure. The question is, if you build it, will they come — and what are the consequences if they don’t?

With any new technology, there’s always a debate centered around adoption timing — in this case, whether to build the infrastructure ahead of demand for EV or wait for adoption to spike. Either choice could have disastrous consequences if not considered properly. If utilities wait for the adoption to spike, their lack of EV charging infrastructure could stunt the growth of the EV sector and leave an opening for third-party providers. Moreover, waiting too long will inhibit GHG emissions reduction efforts and generally complicate EV technology adoption. On the other hand, building too soon could lead to costly stranded assets. Both problems are rooted in the inability to control adoption timing, and, until recently, utilities didn’t have the means or the savvy to influence adoption directly.

How should utilities prepare for the EV?

Beyond the challenges of developing the hardware, partnerships and operational programs to accommodate EV, including leveraging energy storage and mobile chargers for added flexibility, influencing the adoption of the infrastructure will be a large part of the challenge. A compelling solution to this problem is to develop an engaged customer base.

A more engaged customer base will enable utilities to brand themselves as preferred EV infrastructure providers and, similarly, empower them to influence the adoption rate. There are five key factors in any sector that influence innovation adoption:

1. Relative advantage – how improved an innovation is over the previous generation.

2. Compatibility – the level of compatibility an innovation has with an individual’s life.

3. Complexity – if the innovation is to difficult to use, individuals will not likely adopt it.

4. Trialability – how easily an innovation can be experimented with as it’s being adopted.

5. Observability – the extent that an innovation is visible to others.

Although much of EV adoption will depend on the private vehicle sector influencing these five factors, there’s a huge opportunity for utilities to control the compatibility, complexity and observability of the EV. According to  “The New Energy Consumer: Unleashing Business Value in a Digital World,” utilities can influence customers’ EV adoption through digital customer engagement. Studies show that digitally engaged customers:

• have stronger interest and greater likelihood to be early EV adopters;

• are 16 percent more likely to purchase home-based electric vehicle charging stations and installation services;

• are 17 percent more likely to sign up for financing for home-based electric vehicle charging stations; and

• increase the adoption of consumer-focused programs.

These findings suggest that if utilities are going to seize the full potential of the EV opportunity, they must start engaging customers now so they can appropriately influence the timing and branding of EV charging assets.

How can utilities engage consumers in preparation?

If utilities establish the groundwork to engage customers effectively, they can reduce the risks of waiting for an adoption spike and of building and investing in the asset too soon. To improve customer engagement, utilities need to:

1. Change their customer conversations from bills, kWh, and outages, to personalized, interesting topics, communicated at appropriate intervals and via appropriate communication channels, to gain customers’ attention.

2. Establish their roles as trusted advisors by presenting useful, personalized recommendations that benefit customers. These tips should change dynamically with changing customer behavior, or they risk becoming stagnant and redundant, thereby causing customers to lose interest.

3. Convert the perception of the utility as a monopolistic, inflexible entity to a desirable, consumer-oriented brand through appropriate EV marketing.

It’s critical to understand that this type of engagement strategy doesn’t even have to provide EV-specific messaging at first. It can start by engaging customers through topics that are relevant and unique, through established or evolving customer-facing programs, such as EE, BDR, TOU, HER.

As lines of communication open up between utility and users, utilities can begin to understand their customers’ energy habits on a more granular level. This intelligence can be used by business analysts to help educate program developers on the optimal EV program timing. For example, as customers become interested in services in which EV owners typically enlist, utilities can target them for EV program marketing. As the number of these customers grows, the window for program development opens, and their levels of interest can be used to inform program and marketing timelines.

While all this may seem like an added nuisance to an EV asset development strategy, there’s significant risk of losing this new asset to third-party providers. This is a much greater burden to utilities than spending the time to properly own the EV opportunity.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

St. Albert electric buses debut as zero-emission, quiet public transit, featuring BYD technology, long-range batteries, and charging stations, serving Edmonton routes while advancing sustainable transportation goals and a future fleet expansion.

Key Points

They are zero-emission BYD transit buses that cut noise and air pollution, with long-range batteries and city charging.

✅ Up to 250-280 km range per charge

✅ Quiet, zero-emission operations reduce urban pollution

✅ Backed by provincial GreenTRIP funding and BYD tech

The city of St. Albert is going green — both literally and esthetically — with three electric buses on routes in and around the city this week.

"They're virtually silent," Wes Brodhead, chair of the Capital Region Board transit committee and a St. Albert city councillor, said. "This, as opposed to the diesel buses and the roar that accompanies them as they drive down the street."

You may not hear them coming but you'll definitely see them, as electric school buses in B.C. hit the road as well.

The 35-foot electric buses are painted bright green to represent the city's goal of adopting sustainable transportation.

"There's no noise pollution, there's no air pollution, and it just kind of fit with the whole theme of the city," said St. Albert Transit director Kevin Bamber.

'The conversation around the conference was not if but when the industry will fully embrace electrification,' - Wes Brodhead, St. Albert city councillor

The buses cost about $970,000 each. Adding in the required infrastructure, including charging stations, the project cost a total of $3.1 million, with two-thirds of the funding coming from the provincial government's Green Transit Incentives Program. 

The electric buses are estimated to go between 250 and 280 kilometres on a single charge.

"That would mean any of the routes that we currently have through St. Albert or into Edmonton, an electric bus could do the morning route, come back, park in the afternoon and go back out and do the afternoon route without a charge," Bamber said. 

St. Albert councillor Wes Brodhead envisions having a full fleet of 60 electric buses in years to come, a scale informed by examples like the TTC's electric bus fleet operating in North America. (Supplied)

Brodhead went to an international transit conference in Montreal, where STM electric buses have begun rolling out and he said manufacturers presented various electric bus designs. 

"The conversation around the conference was not if but when the industry will fully embrace electrification," Brodhead said.

The vehicles were built in California by BYD Ltd., one of only two companies making the long-endurance electric buses.

The city has ordered four more of the buses and hopes to be running all seven by the end of the year, as battery-electric buses in Metro Vancouver continue to hit the roads nationwide.

Eventually, Brodhead envisions having a full fleet of 60 electric buses in St. Albert.

Edmonton is expected to operate as many as 40 electric buses, and while city staff are still in the planning stages, Edmonton's first electric bus has already hit city streets.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

National Electricity Market review calls for clear coal-fired closure schedules to safeguard energy security, backing a technology-agnostic clean energy and low emissions target with tradeable certificates to stabilise prices and support a smoother transition.

Key Points

A review proposing orderly coal closures and a technology-agnostic clean energy target to protect grid reliability.

✅ Mandates advance notice of coal plant closure schedules

✅ Supports clean energy and low emissions target with certificates

✅ Aims to stabilise prices and ensure system security

THE Latrobe Valley’s coal-fired power stations could be forced to give details of planned closures well in advance to help governments avoid major threats to electricity supply, amid an AEMO warning on reduced reserves across the grid.

The much-anticipated review of the national electricity market, to be released on Friday, will outline the need for clear schedules for the closure of coal-fired power stations to avoid rushed decisions on ­energy security.

It is believed the Turnbull government, which has ruled out taxpayer-funded power plants in the current energy debate, will move toward either a clean-energy or a low-emissions target that aims to bolster power security while reducing household bills and emissions.

The system, believed to be also favoured by industry, would likely provide a more stable transition to clean energy by engaging with the just transition concept seen in other markets, because coal-fired power would not be driven out of the market as quickly.

Sources said that would lead to greater investment in the energy sector, a surplus of production and, as seen in Alberta's shift to gas and price cap debate driving market changes, a cut in prices.

It is likely most coal-fired power stations, such as Yallourn and Loy Yang in the Latrobe Valley, would see out their “natural lives” under the government’s favoured system, rather than be forced out of business by an EIS.

The new target would be separate from the Renewable Energy Target which have come under fire because of ad hoc federal and state targets.

The Herald Sun has been told the policy would provide tradeable clean-energy certificates for low-emissions generation, such as wind, solar and gas and coal which used carbon capture and storage technology.

Energy retailers and large industrial users would then be ­required to source a mandated amount of certified clean power.

Federal Energy Minister Josh Frydenberg has repeatedly said any solution must be “technology agnostic” including gas, renewable energy and coal, amid ongoing debates over whether to save or close nuclear plants such as the Three Mile Island debate in other markets.

Energy Networks Australia’s submission to the review, chaired by Chief Scientist Alan Finkel, acknowledged the challenges in identifying potential generation closures, particularly with uncertain and poorly integrated state and national carbon policy settings.

The group said given the likelihood of further closures of coal fired generation units a new mechanism was needed to better manage changes in the generation mix, well in advance of the closure of the plant.

It said the implications for system stability were “too significant” to rely on the past short-term closures, such as Hazelwood, particularly when the amount of power generated could drive energy security to “tipping point”.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Power Generation News

Site C Project Delay raises BC Hydro costs as Christy Clark warns $600 million impact; NDP and Greens seek BCUC review of the hydroelectric dam on the Peace River, challenging evictions and construction contracts.

Key Points

A potential slowdown of B.C.'s Site C dam, risking $600M overruns, evictions, and schedule delays pending a BCUC review.

✅ Clark warns $600M cost if river diversion slips a year

✅ NDP-Green seek BCUC review; request to pause contracts, evictions

✅ Peace River hydro dam; schedule critical to budget, ratepayers

Premier Christy Clark is warning the NDP and Greens that delaying work on the Site C project in northeast British Columbia could cost taxpayers $600 million.

NDP Leader John Horgan wrote to BC Hydro last week asking it to suspend the evictions of two homeowners and urging it not to sign any new contracts on the $8.6-billion hydroelectric dam until a new government has gained the confidence of the legislature.

But Clark says in letters sent to Horgan and Green Leader Andrew Weaver on Tuesday that the evictions are necessary as part of a road and bridge construction project that are needed to divert a river in September 2019.

Any delay could postpone the diversion by a year and cost taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars, she says.

“With a project of this size and scale, keeping to a tight schedule is critical to delivering a completed project on time and on budget,” she says. “The requests contained in your letter are not without consequences to the construction schedule and ultimately have financial ramifications to ratepayers.”

The premier has asked Horgan and Weaver to reply by Saturday on whether they still want to put the evictions on hold.

She also asks whether they want the government to issue a “tools down” request to BC Hydro on other decisions that she says are essential to maintaining the budget and construction schedule.

An agreement between the NDP and Green party was signed last week that would allow the New Democrats to form a minority government, ousting Clark's Liberals.

The agreement includes a promise to refer the Site C project to the B.C. Utilities Commission to determine its economic viability.

Some analysts argue that better B.C.-Alberta power integration could improve climate outcomes and market flexibility.

But Clark says the project is likely to progress past the “point of no return” before a review can be completed.

Clark did not define what she meant by “point of no return,” nor did she explain how she reached the $600-million figure. Her press secretary Stephen Smart referred questions to BC Hydro, which did not immediately respond.

During prolonged drought conditions, BC Hydro has had to adapt power generation across the province, affecting planning assumptions.

In a written response to Clark, Weaver says before he can comment on her assertions he requires access to supporting evidence, including signed contracts, the project schedule and potential alternative project timelines.

“Please let me express my disappointment in how your government is choosing to proceed with this project,” he says.

“Your government is turning a significant capital project that potentially poses massive economic risks to British Columbians into a political debate rather than one informed by evidence and supported by independent analysis.”

The dam will be the third on the Peace River, flooding an 83-kilometre stretch of valley, and local First Nations, landowners and farmers have fiercely opposed the project.

Construction began two years ago.

A report written by University of British Columbia researchers in April argued it wasn't too late to press pause on the project and that the electricity produced by Site C won't be fully required for nearly a decade after it's complete.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Climate Change News

California Natural Gas Plant Rethink signals a shift toward clean energy, renewables, distributed solar, battery storage, and grid modernization as LADWP and regulators pause repowering plans amid an electricity oversupply and rising ratepayer costs.

Key Points

California pauses new gas plants to assess renewables, storage, and grid solutions for reliability.

✅ LADWP delays $2.2B gas repowers to study clean alternatives

✅ CEC weighs halting Oxnard plant amid grid oversupply

✅ Distributed solar, batteries, demand response boost reliability

California energy officials are, for the first time, rethinking plans to build expensive natural gas power plants in the face of an electricity glut and growing use of cleaner and cheaper energy alternatives.

The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power announced Tuesday that it has put a hold on a $2.2-billion plan to rebuild several old natural gas power plants while it studies clean energy alternatives to meet electricity demands. And the California Energy Commission may decide as early as Thursday to halt a natural gas project in Ventura County.

The scrutiny comes after an investigation found that the state is operating with an oversupply of electricity, driven largely by the construction of gas-fueled generating plants, leading to higher rates as regulators consider a rate overhaul to clean the grid. The state’s power plants are on track to be able to produce at least 21% more electricity than needed by 2020, according to the Times report.

Californians are footing a $40-billion annual bill while using less electricity, paying $6.8 billion more than they did in 2008 when power use in the state was at its all-time high. Electricity consumption has since fallen and remained largely flat.

Utilities in California have been on a years-long building binge, adding new natural gas plants even as the nation’s electricity system has undergone significant change, including consumer choice reforms that are reshaping the market.

Where utilities once delivered all electrical services from huge power plants along miles of transmission lines, the industry now must consider power delivered to the electric grid not only from its own sources, but also from solar systems and batteries at homes and businesses.

At the same time, utilities have been aggressively upgrading or rebuilding their aging natural gas plants — a move critics have said is unnecessary because consumers are using less power and clean energy technology is making those plants obsolete.

The DWP and energy commission moves involve as many as seven natural gas plant projects proposed for Southern California, despite warnings about a looming shortage if capacity is retired too fast, from Oxnard to Carlsbad, at a cost of more than $6 billion.

Reiko Kerr, the DWP’s senior assistant general manager of power systems, said given the changes in the energy world, the assessment is necessary to protect ratepayer dollars and the environment.

“The whole utility paradigm has shifted,” Kerr said in an interview. “We really are doing our ratepayers a disservice by not considering all viable options.

“We’re just looking at everything,” she said. “What can help us solve this reliability, renewable and greenhouse gas challenge that we all have?”

State and local governments have felt a heightened sense of urgency to deal with climate change after President Trump decided last week to withdraw the United States from the Paris climate accord.

California already has mandated that at least 50% of the state’s electricity come from clean energy sources by 2030. Senate leader Kevin de León (D-Los Angeles) wants to increase that to 100% by 2045.

Building or overhauling natural gas plants throughout Southern California, environmentalists argue, isn’t helping achieve those goals, even as some contend the state can't keep the lights on without gas during the transition.

The DWP’s move to delay plans for the fossil fuel plants, which seemed all but set to be built, came as a surprise to clean-energy advocates, who hailed the decision.

“This is a great first step toward smart energy investments that save customers money, ensure the lights stay on and protect our health and environment,” Graciela Geyer of the Sierra Club said.

The environmental group said that if the utility had moved ahead with the $2.2-billion investment in repowering natural gas plants, it “would have blown an irreparable hole in the city and the state’s hopes to achieve 100% generation” from clean energy sources.

Angela Johnson Meszaros, attorney at EarthJustice, said in a statement: "As our city struggles with the worst smog we’ve seen in years, we appreciate that LADWP is taking some much-needed time to reassess its plans to build fossil fuel power plants. We look forward to the day that LADWP announces that we are going to power our city with 100% clean energy.”

The gas-fired generating units slated for demolition and rebuilding are at the Scattergood, Haynes and Harbor electricity plants, which range from 34 to 67 years old.

As a group, the three plants have generated less than 20% of their combined capacity since 2001. The Harbor facility has operated on the low end at just 7%, while Haynes ran on the high end at 22%.

“The old model, the old legacy clunkers, won’t get us into the future we want,” DWP’s Kerr said.

DWP staff members told the utility’s’ commissioners Tuesday that their analysis of possible alternatives would be completed no later than early 2018.

Separately, the California Energy Commission this week is evaluating whether to halt a natural gas project in Ventura County after the state’s electric grid operator offered to conduct a study of clean energy alternatives to the roughly $250-million project on Mandalay Bay in Oxnard.

An energy commission committee has been deliberating since a hearing Monday during which Southern California Edison and the project’s developer, NRG Energy, argued that a study is simply a delay tactic that probably would kill a project needed to ensure reliable electric service and to avoid blackouts during peak demand.

The California Independent System Operator, which runs the state’s electric grid, told the energy commission that it would take three to four weeks to conduct its study on alternatives to the Oxnard natural gas project.

“Here we have an actual offer by the ISO to do such an analysis,” Ellison Folk, a lawyer representing the city of Oxnard, told the energy commission as she pushed for the study. “Its view that this is an analysis worth doing is something worth taking seriously.”

Energy commission members reviewing the study proposal are scheduled to meet again Thursday to consider the offer.

The board of governors for the California Independent System Operator made the unusual offer at its May 1 meeting to conduct a eleventh-hour study of clean-energy alternatives to building a new natural gas plant.

“If we’re going to be moving forward with a gas plant at this time, in this juncture, in the context of everything that’s going on, not evaluating other alternatives that are viable, noncombustion alternatives, is a missed opportunity,” Angelina Galetiva. a commission board member, said during the May 1 meeting.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Energy Policy News