Vermont's New Governor Sticking with Renewable Energy Goal

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

UPS Tesla Electric Semi Order marks the largest pre-order of all-electric Class-8 big rigs, advancing sustainable freight logistics with lower total cost of ownership, expanded charging infrastructure support, and competitive range versus diesel trucks.

Key Points

UPS's purchase of 125 Tesla all-electric Class-8 semis to cut costs, emissions, and modernize long-haul freight.

✅ Largest public pre-order: 125 electric Class-8 trucks

✅ Aims lower total cost of ownership vs diesel

✅ Includes charging infrastructure consulting by Tesla

United Parcel Service Inc. said on Tuesday it is buying 125 Tesla Inc. all-electric semi-trucks, the largest order for the big rig so far, as the package delivery company expands its fleet of alternative-fuel vehicles, including options like the all-electric Transit cargo van now entering the market.

Tesla is trying to convince the trucking community it can build an affordable electric big rig with the range and cargo capacity to compete with relatively low-cost, time-tested diesel trucks. This is the largest public order of the big rig so far, Tesla said.

The Tesla trucks will cost around $200,000 each for a total order of about $25 million. UPS expects the semi-trucks, the big rigs that haul freight along America's highways, will have a lower total cost of ownership than conventional vehicles, which run about $120,000.

Tesla has received pre-orders from such major companies as Wal-Mart, fleet operator J.B. Hunt Transport Services Inc. and food service distributor Sysco Corp.

Prior to UPS, the largest single pre-order came from PepsiCo Inc, for 100 trucks. 

UPS said it has provided Tesla with real-world routing information as part of its evaluation of the vehicle's expected performance.

"As with any introductory technology for our fleet, we want to make sure it's in a position to succeed," Scott Phillippi, UPS senior director for automotive maintenance and engineering for international operations, told Reuters.

Phillippi said the 125 trucks will allow UPS to conduct a proper test of their abilities. He said the company was still determining their routes, but the semis will "primarily be in the United States." Tesla will provide consultation and support on charging infrastructure, as electric truck fleets will need a lot of power to operate at scale.

"We have high expectations and are very optimistic that this will be a good product and it will have firm support from Tesla to make it work," Phillippi said.

The UPS alternative fuel fleet already includes trucks propelled by electricity, natural gas, propane and other non-traditional fuels, and interest in electric mail trucks underscores how delivery fleets are evolving.

About 260,000 semis, or heavy-duty Class-8 trucks, are produced in North America annually, according to FTR, an industry economics research firm.

Including the UPS order, Tesla has at least 410 pre-orders in hand, according to a Reuters tally.

Navistar International Corp. and Volkswagen AG hope to launch a smaller, electric medium-duty truck by late 2019, while rival Daimler AG has delivered the first of a smaller range of electric trucks to customers in New York, and Volvo Trucks planned a complete range of electric trucks in Europe by 2021.

Tesla unveiled its semi last month, following earlier plans to reveal the truck in October, and expects the truck to be in production by 2019.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

PEI Electric Vehicle Incentives aim to boost EV adoption through subsidies and rebates, advocated by Renewable Transport PEI, with MLAs engagement, modeling Norway's approach, offsetting HST gaps, and making electric cars more competitive for Islanders.

Key Points

PEI Electric Vehicle Incentives are proposed subsidies and rebates to make EVs affordable and competitive for Islanders.

✅ Targets EV adoption with rebates up to 20 percent

✅ Modeled on Norway policies; offsets prior HST-era gaps

✅ Backed by Renewable Transport PEI engaging MLAs

Noah Ellis, assistant director of Renewable Transport P.E.I., is asking government to introduce incentives for Islanders to buy electric cars, as cost barriers remain a key hurdle for many.

RTPEI is a group composed of high school students at Colonel Gray going into their final year."We wanted to give back and contribute to our community and our country and we thought this would be a good way to do so," Ellis told Compass.

Meeting with government

"We want to see the government bring in incentives for electric vehicles, similar to New Brunswick's rebate program, because it would make them more competitive with their gasoline counterparts," Ellis said.

'We wanted to give back and contribute to our community … we thought this would be a good way to do so.'— Noah Ellis

Ellis said the group has spoken with opposition MLAs and is meeting with cabinet ministers soon to discuss subsidies for Islanders to buy electric cars, noting that Atlantic Canadians are less inclined to buy EVs compared to the rest of the country.

He referred to Norway as a prime example for the province to model potential incentives, even as Labrador's EV infrastructure gaps underscore regional challenges — a country that, as of last year, announced nearly 40 per cent of the nation's newly registered passenger vehicles as electric powered.

'Incentives that are fiscally responsible'

Ellis said they group isn't looking for anything less than a 20 per cent incentive on electric vehicles — 10 per cent higher than the provinces cancelled hybrid car tax rebate that existed prior to HST.

"Electric vehicle incentives do work we just have to work with economists and environmentalists, and address critics of EV subsidies, to find the right balance of incentives that are fiscally responsible for the province but will also be effective," Ellis said.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

NB Power seasonal electricity rates face backlash amid smart grid delays, meter reading limits, and billing dispute risks, as consultants recommend AMI smart meters for accurate winter-summer pricing, time-of-use alignment, and consumer protection.

Key Points

NB Power seasonal electricity rates raise winter prices and lower summer prices to match costs, using accurate AMI metering.

✅ Requires midnight meter reads without AMI, increasing billing disputes.

✅ Shifts costs to electric-heat homes during high winter demand.

✅ Recommended to wait for smart grid AMI for time-of-use accuracy.

A consultant hired by NB Power is warning of significant consumer "backlash" if the utility is made to establish seasonal rates for electricity, as seen in B.C. and Quebec smart meter disputes among customers.

The consultant's report even suggests customers might have to read their own power meters at midnight twice a year — on April Fool's and Halloween — to make the system work.

"Virtually all bills will have errors ... billing disputes can be expected to increase, as seen in a $666 smart meter bill in N.S. that raised concerns, possibly dramatically, and there will be no means of resolving disputes in a satisfactory way," reads a report by Elenchus Research Associates that was commissioned by NB Power and filed with the Energy and Utilities Board on Thursday.

NB Power is in the middle of a year-long "rate design" review ordered by the EUB that is focused in part on whether the utility should charge lower prices for electricity in the summer and higher prices in the winter to better reflect the actual cost of serving customers.

New network of meters needed

Elenchus was asked to study how that might work but the company is arguing against any switch until NB Power upgrades its entire network of power meters, given old meters in N.B. have raised concerns.

Elenchus said seasonal rates require an accurate reading of every customer's power meter at midnight on March 31 and again on Oct. 31, the dates when power rates would switch between winter and summer prices.

A consultant's report says NB Power doesn't have the manpower to properly read meters if it brings in seasonal rates. (CBC)

But NB Power does not have the sophisticated infrastructure in place to read meters remotely, or the manpower to visit every customer location on the same day, so Elenchus said the utility would have to guesstimate bills or rely on the technical savvy and honesty of customers themselves.

"Customers could be asked to read their own meters late in the day on March 31 (and October 31)," suggested the report. "Aside from the obvious inconvenience and impracticality of that approach, NB Power would have no means of verifying the customers' meter reads."

Residential customers would see hike

Another looming controversy with seasonal rates is that it would raise costs for residential customers, especially to those who heat with electricity, a pressure seen with a 14% rate increase in Nova Scotia recently.

Elenchus estimated seasonal rates would add nearly $6 million to the cost of residential bills overall, with the largest increases flowing to those with baseboard heat.

Electric heat customers consume the majority of their power during the five months that would have the highest prices and Elenchus said that is another reason to wait for better power meters before proceeding.

NB Power has an ambitious plan to bring in a new meter system, and the consultant's report recommends waiting for that to happen before switching to seasonal rates. (Google Street View)

NB Power has an ambitious plan to upgrade meters and related infrastructure as part of its transformation to a "smart grid," but it is a multi-year plan.

Once in place the utility would be able to read meters remotely hour to hour, allowing power rates to be adjusted for times of the day and days of the week as well as seasonally.

Consumers will also have in-home pricing and consumption displays to help them manage their bills.

Elenchus said waiting for those meters will give electric heat customers a chance to avoid higher seasonal costs by letting them shift power consumption to lower-priced parts of the day.

"The introduction of seasonal rates would be more acceptable once AMI (advanced metering infrastructure) has been deployed," concludes the report.

A final hearing on NB Power's rate design, where seasonal rates and other changes will be considered, amid a power market overhaul debate in Alberta that industry is watching, is scheduled for next April.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Energy Policy News

Cobalt Supply Chain for EV Batteries faces shortages as lithium-ion demand surges; Tesla gigafactories, ethical sourcing, Idaho cobalt mining, and DRC risks intensify pricing, logistics, and procurement challenges for manufacturers and investors.

Key Points

A network supplying cobalt for lithium-ion cathodes, strained by EV demand, ethical sourcing pressures, and DRC risk.

✅ EV growth outpaces cobalt supply, widening deficits

✅ DRC reliance drives ESG scrutiny and sourcing shifts

✅ Idaho projects and stockpiling reshape U.S. supply

A perfect storm is brewing in the 21st Century battery market.

More specifically, it's about what goes into those batteries - and it's not just lithium.

The other element that makes up 35 percent of the lithium-ion batteries mass produced at Tesla's Nevada gigafactory and at a dozen of other behemoths slated to come on line, is cobalt. And it's already in dramatically short supply. A part of the answer to the cobalt deficit is 100 percent American, and this little-known miner is sitting on a prime Idaho cobalt project that is one of only two that looks likely to come online in the U.S. and it's right in Tesla's backyard.

High-Energy Batteries Need More Cobalt Than Lithium 

If you've been focusing your investment on lithium supplies lately you've been missing the even bigger story. EV batteries need about 200 grams of refined cobalt per kilowatt of battery capacity. Power walls need more than twice that. Between March 2016 and April 2017, the cost of the cobalt in that mix nearly tripled. But it isn't just the price that's got manufacturers worried. It's the shortage of availability. Keeping gigafactories stocked with enough cobalt to run at capacity is the challenge of the decade.

Tesla, now with a $50-billion market cap, launched a $5-billion battery gigafactory in Nevada in January. By the end of 2017, it will have doubled the entire global battery production capacity. By next year, it will be producing more batteries than the rest of the world combined.

It is estimated that Tesla's gigafactory alone will need anywhere between 7,000 and 17,500 tonnes of refined cobalt every year.

Tesla used to buy its finished battery cells from Panasonic, which in turn got its processed cathode powders from a Japanese company, Sumitomo was processing its own cobalt in the Philippines. However, that facility is already running at capacity and couldn't even begin to handle Tesla's gigafactory demand. In other words, Tesla's supply chain is no longer secure. And that's just Tesla.

The EV market is fifteen times larger than it was five years ago. The market has experienced a comppound annual growth rate of over 72 percent from 2011-2016, with new sources like Alberta's lithium-laced oil fields drawing investment alongside cobalt. This year, analysts expect it to gain another 25-26 percent. Last year, global EV production grew 41 percent, and sales are up more than 60 per cent year to year.

In addition,the Iron Creek project isn't a new exploration property. It has already seen major historic exploratory work, including 30,000 feet of diamond drilling. Iron Creek has historic (non 43-101 compliant) indications of 1.3 million tons grading 0.59 percent of cobalt with encouraging indications of up to 10 million tons. The 'closeology' is also brilliant. It's right next to the only advanced cobalt project in the U.S., which has a resource of 3 million-plus tonnes of cobalt.

As the battery market hits fever pitch and the supply-chain bottlenecks become unbearable, homegrown exploration is the key-first-movers and first investors will be the biggest beneficiaries.

A Very Precarious Supply Chain 

Supply is already in deficit, and we're also looking at an anticipated 500 percent increase in demand, making EV battery recycling an increasingly important complement to mining. Analysts at Macquarie Research project deficits of 885 tonnes of this resource next year, 3,205 in 2019 and 5,340 in 2020.

Not only is demand set to wildly outstrip supply very soon, but current supply (50 percent) comes primarily from the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). Buyers are coming under increasing pressure to look elsewhere for cobalt as the U.S. moves to work with allies to secure EV metals through diversified supply chains. The DRC has a horrendous record when it comes to labor practices and human rights.

Ask Apple Inc.  The tech giant recently announced it would stop buying unethical DRC cobalt for its iPhones - and as such, it has been forced to look for new suppliers.

The perfect storm continues: Some 95 percent of the world's cobalt is produced as a byproduct of copper and nickel mining, where concerns about ethical sourcing have put a spotlight on Canada's role in sustainable nickel practices worldwide. This means that cobalt supply is dependent on copper and nickel mining, and if those commodities are uneconomic to mine, there are no cobalt by-product results.

Not only is US Cobalt one of the first movers on the All-American ethical cobalt scene, but it's also financed to advance its Idaho Cobalt Belt project, and hopes to prove up 10 million tonnes of cobalt resource.

The Dream Team Behind Pure American Cobalt 

The CEO of US Cobalt, Wayne Tisdale, is a legend in spotting emerging trends with impeccable timing and has created billions in shareholder value. He's already done it with uranium, gold and oil and gas, and his most recent homerun was in lithium, with Pure Energy. When it launched in 2012, lithium was selling for about $5,000 per tonne. Within 18 months, it had increased 450 percent.

His next bet is on cobalt.

Tisdale and his team at Intrepid Financial have, in recent years, created $2.7 billion in value by building and financing 5 companies in completely different industries:

• Rainy River (gold) was worth $1.2 billion at its peak
• Xemplar (uranium) hit $1 billion at its peak
• Ryland Oil (oil and gas) sold for $114 million
• Webtech Wireless (tech) was worth $300 million at its peak
• Pure Energy (lithium) is worth $65 million (and counting)

The bottom line? There is no other commodity on the market right now that we need more.

Just watch what the hedge funds are doing with cobalt because it's unprecedented. The run on physical cobalt started in February in the least expected corner: Major hedge funds started buying up physical cobalt and hoarding it in order to gain exposure, resulting in a major supply shortage for the blue metal. Swiss-based Pala Investments and China's Shanghai Chaos have already hoarded 17 percent of last year's global production. At today's prices that's worth around $280 million. At tomorrow's prices, it will be worth a lot more.

When hedge funds start stockpiling physical cobalt, it sends its traditional buyers into a panic to secure new shipments. Since November, cobalt prices have rallied more than 100 percent, and this is only the beginning. As the cobalt supply problem grows, and EV giants and gigafactories continue to increase demand, a home-grown solution is at hand. As a first principle of investing, where there is a supply problem, there is a massive opportunity for early investors.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

Renewable Energy Market Reform aligns solar and wind with modern grid pricing, tackling intermittency via batteries and demand response, stabilizing wholesale power prices, and enabling capacity markets to finance flexible supply for deep decarbonization.

Key Points

A market overhaul that integrates variable renewables, funds flexibility, and stabilizes grids as solar and wind grow.

✅ Dynamic pricing rewards flexibility and demand response

✅ Capacity markets finance reliability during intermittency

✅ Smart grids, storage, HV lines balance variable supply

ALMOST 150 years after photovoltaic cells and wind turbines were invented, they still generate only 7% of the world’s electricity. Yet something remarkable is happening. From being peripheral to the energy system just over a decade ago, they are now growing faster than any other energy source and their falling costs are making them competitive with fossil fuels. BP, an oil firm, expects renewables to account for half of the growth in global energy supply over the next 20 years. It is no longer far-fetched to think that the world is entering an era of clean, unlimited and cheap, abundant electricity for all. About time, too. 

There is a $20trn hitch, though. To get from here to there requires huge amounts of investment over the next few decades, to replace old smog-belching power plants and to upgrade the pylons and wires that bring electricity to consumers. Normally investors like putting their money into electricity because it offers reliable returns. Yet green energy has a dirty secret. The more it is deployed, the more it lowers the price of power from any source. That makes it hard to manage the transition to a carbon-free future, during which many generating technologies, clean and dirty, need to remain profitable if the lights are to stay on. Unless the market is fixed, subsidies to the industry will only grow.

Policymakers are already seeing this inconvenient truth as a reason to put the brakes on renewable energy. In parts of Europe and China, investment in renewables is slowing as subsidies are cut back, even as Europe’s electricity demand continues to rise. However, the solution is not less wind and solar. It is to rethink how the world prices clean energy in order to make better use of it.

Shock to the system

At its heart, the problem is that government-supported renewable energy has been imposed on a market designed in a different era. For much of the 20th century, electricity was made and moved by vertically integrated, state-controlled monopolies. From the 1980s onwards, many of these were broken up, privatised and liberalised, so that market forces could determine where best to invest. Today only about 6% of electricity users get their power from monopolies. Yet everywhere the pressure to decarbonise power supply has brought the state creeping back into markets. This is disruptive for three reasons. The first is the subsidy system itself. The other two are inherent to the nature of wind and solar: their intermittency and their very low running costs. All three help explain why power prices are low and public subsidies are addictive.

First, the splurge of public subsidy, of about $800bn since 2008, has distorted the market. It came about for noble reasons—to counter climate change and prime the pump for new, costly technologies, including wind turbines and solar panels. But subsidies hit just as electricity consumption in the rich world was stagnating because of growing energy efficiency and the financial crisis. The result was a glut of power-generating capacity that has slashed the revenues utilities earn from wholesale power markets and hence deterred investment.

Second, green power is intermittent. The vagaries of wind and sun—especially in countries without favourable weather—mean that turbines and solar panels generate electricity only part of the time. To keep power flowing, the system relies on conventional power plants, such as coal, gas or nuclear, to kick in when renewables falter. But because they are idle for long periods, they find it harder to attract private investors. So, to keep the lights on, they require public funds.

Everyone is affected by a third factor: renewable energy has negligible or zero marginal running costs—because the wind and the sun are free. In a market that prefers energy produced at the lowest short-term cost, wind and solar take business from providers that are more expensive to run, such as coal plants, depressing wholesale electricity prices, and hence revenues for all.

Get smart

The higher the penetration of renewables, the worse these problems get—especially in saturated markets. In Europe, which was first to feel the effects, utilities have suffered a “lost decade” of falling returns, stranded assets and corporate disruption. Last year, Germany’s two biggest electricity providers, E.ON and RWE, both split in two. In renewable-rich parts of America, power providers struggle to find investors for new plants, reflecting U.S. grid challenges that slow a full transition. Places with an abundance of wind, such as China, are curtailing wind farms to keep coal plants in business.

The corollary is that the electricity system is being re-regulated as investment goes chiefly to areas that benefit from public support. Paradoxically, that means the more states support renewables, the more they pay for conventional power plants, too, using “capacity payments” to alleviate intermittency. In effect, politicians rather than markets are once again deciding how to avoid blackouts. They often make mistakes: Germany’s support for cheap, dirty lignite caused emissions to rise, notwithstanding huge subsidies for renewables. Without a new approach the renewables revolution will stall.

The good news is that new technology can help fix the problem.  Digitalisation, smart meters and batteries are enabling companies and households to smooth out their demand—by doing some energy-intensive work at night, for example. This helps to cope with intermittent supply. Small, modular power plants, which are easy to flex up or down, are becoming more popular, as are high-voltage grids that can move excess power around the network more efficiently, aligning with common goals for electricity networks worldwide.

The bigger task is to redesign power markets to reflect the new need for flexible supply and demand. They should adjust prices more frequently, to reflect the fluctuations of the weather. At times of extreme scarcity, a high fixed price could kick in to prevent blackouts. Markets should reward those willing to use less electricity to balance the grid, just as they reward those who generate more of it. Bills could be structured to be higher or lower depending how strongly a customer wanted guaranteed power all the time—a bit like an insurance policy. In short, policymakers should be clear they have a problem and that the cause is not renewable energy, but the out-of-date system of electricity pricing. Then they should fix it.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News