Wind Turbine Operations and Maintenance Industry Detailed Analysis and Forecast by 2025

Canada Coal Phase-Out Costs highlight Fraser Institute findings on renewable energy, wind and solar integration, grid reliability, natural gas backup, GDP impacts, greenhouse gas emissions reductions, nuclear alternatives, and transmission upgrades across provincial electricity systems.

Key Points

Costs to replace coal with renewables, impacting taxpayers and ratepayers while ensuring grid reliability.

✅ Fraser Institute estimates $16.8B-$33.7B annually for renewables.

✅ Emissions cut from coal phase-out estimated at only 7.4% nationally.

✅ Natural gas backup and grid upgrades drive major cost increases.

Replacing coal-fired electricity with renewable energy will cost Canadian taxpayers and hydro ratepayers up to $33.7 billion annually, with only minor reductions in global greenhouse gas emissions linked to climate change, according to a new study by the Fraser Institute.

The report, Canadian Climate Policy and its Implications for Electricity Grids by University of Victoria economics professor G. Cornelis van Kooten, said replacing coal-fired electricity with wind and solar power would only cut Canada’s annual emissions by 7.4%,

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s has promised a reduction of 40%-45% compared to Canada’s 2005 emissions by 2030, and progress toward the 2035 clean electricity goals remains uncertain.

The study says emission cuts would be relatively small because coal accounted for only 9.2% of Canada’s electricity generation in 2017. (According to Natural Resources Canada, that number is lower today at 7.4%).

In 2019, the last year for which federal data are available, Canada’s electricity sector generated 8.4% of emissions nationally — 61.1 million tonnes out of 730 million tonnes.

“Despite what advocates, claim, renewable power — including wind and solar — isn’t free and, as Europe's power crisis lessons suggest, comes with only modest benefits to the environment,” van Kooten said.

“Policy makers should be realistic about the costs of reducing greenhouse gas emissions in Canada, which accounts for less than 2% of emissions worldwide.”

The report says the increased costs of operating the electricity grid across Canada — between $16.8 billion and $33.7 billion annually or 1% to 2% of Canada’s annual GDP — would result from having to retain natural gas, consistent with net-zero regulations allowing some natural gas in limited cases, as a backup to intermittent wind and solar power, which cannot provide baseload power to the electricity grid on demand.

Van Kooten said his cost estimates are conservative because his study “could not account for scenarios where the scale of intermittency turned out worse than indicated in our dataset … the costs associated with the value of land in other alternative uses, the need for added transmission lines, as analyses of greening Ontario's grid costs indicate, environmental and human health costs and the life-cycle costs of using intermittent renewable sources of energy, including costs related to the disposal of hazardous wastes from solar panels and wind turbines.”

If nuclear power was used to replace coal-fired electricity, the study says, costs would drop by half — $8.3 billion to $16.7 billion annually — but that’s unrealistic because of the time it takes to build nuclear plants and public opposition to them.

The study says to achieve the federal government’s target of reducing emissions to 40% to 45% below 2005 levels by 2030 and net-zero emissions by 2050, would require building 30 nuclear power plants before 2030, highlighting Canada’s looming power problem as described by analysts — meaning one plant of 1,000-megawatt capacity coming online every four months between now and 2030.

Alternatively, it would take 28,340 wind turbines, each with 2.5-megawatts capacity, or 1,050 turbines being built every four months, plus the costs of upgrading transmission infrastructure.

Van Kooten said he based his calculations on Alberta, which generates 39.8% of its electricity from coal and the cost of Ontario eliminating coal-fired electricity, even as Ontario electricity getting dirtier in coming years, which generated 25% of its electricity, between 2003 and 2014, replacing it with a combination of natural gas, nuclear and wind and solar power.

According to Natural Resources Canada, Nova Scotia generates 49.9% of its electricity from coal, Saskatchewan 42.9%, and New Brunswick 17.2%.

In 2018, the Trudeau government announced plans to phase-out traditional coal-fired electricity by 2030, though the Stop the Shock campaign seeks to bring back coal power in some regions. 

Canada and the U.K. created the “Powering Past Coal Alliance” in 2017, aimed at getting other countries to phase out the use of coal to generate electricity.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Power Generation News

Ontario EV Charging Network Delay highlights permitting hurdles, grid limitations, and public-private rollout challenges across 250 sites, as two-thirds of 475 chargers go live while full provincewide infrastructure deployment slips to fall.

Key Points

A provincial rollout setback where permitting and grid issues delay full activation of Ontario's 475 public EV chargers.

✅ Two-thirds of 475 chargers live by the initial deadline

✅ Remaining stations expected online by fall

✅ Delays tied to permits, site conditions, and grid capacity

The Ontario government admitted Wednesday that it will fall short of meeting its deadline this Friday of creating a network of 475 electric vehicle charging stations in 250 locations across the province, and it's blaming unforeseen problems for the delay.

"We know some of our partners have encountered difficulties around permitting and some of the technical aspects of having some of the chargers up and running, even as we work to make it easier to build EV charging stations across Ontario," said Transportation Minister Steven Del Duca.

Two-thirds of the network will be live on Friday with the rest of the stations expected to be up and running by fall, according to the Ministry of Transportation. 

"Each of our partners' individual charging stations are subject to different site conditions, land ownership, municipal permitting, electrical grid limitations, as seen in regions where EV infrastructure lags, and other factors which have influenced timelines," said Bob Nichols, senior media liaison officer for the Transportation Ministry, in a statement. 

Because the stations are located in various community centres, retail outlets and other public spaces, Del Duca said the government's public and private sector partners are facing challenges in obtaining permits but are "motivated to get it right."

Cara Clairman, president and CEO of Plug'n Drive, an organization dedicated to accelerating the rollout of electric vehicles, says she isn't concerned about the delay.

"It was a pretty aggressive timeline. The EV community is pretty happy with the fact that it is going to happen. It might be slightly delayed but I think overall the mood is positive," she said.

Clairman said there are now more than 10,000 electric vehicles in the province and that more growth is expected as Ontario's next EV wave emerges in the market. She doesn't believe the delay in the rollout of charging stations will deter anyone from purchasing electric vehicles, even amid EV shortages and wait times in some segments.

"It certainly does help to persuade new folks to get on board but I think since they know it is coming, I don't see it having a big impact." 

Horwath not surprised

NDP Leader Andrea Horwath said she's not surprised the government didn't meet its target.

"You shouldn't be making these promises if you can't fulfil them, that's the bottom line," she said. "Let's be realistic with
what you're able to achieve."

Progressive Conservative transportation critic Michael Harris suggested the Liberals don't have their priorities straight when it comes to electric vehicles.

"I think the focus for Kathleen Wynne was handing out $14,000 rebates to owners of Teslas, while they really should have been focusing their time and energy on ensuring that the infrastructure for electric vehicles has actually been rolled out," Harris said.

Covering every corner

Del Duca said the ministry has seen "some fairly tremendous success" despite the delays but that there have been a few challenges in building a network that ranges across the province, even as N.L.'s first fast-charging network is touted as just the beginning elsewhere. 

"We definitely want to make sure we're building a network that covers every corner of Ontario. Yes, we have some challenges and we are slightly delayed," the minister said.

"We anticipate being able to provide more resources in the coming months to continue to deploy an even broader network of charging infrastructure, including in northern Ontario."

Del Duca said a map on the ministry's website showing where the charging stations are installed should be updated in the next few days.

Premier Wynne committed to building a charging network for electric vehicles across Ontario at the 2015 climate change talks in Paris.

The $20 million in funding for the charging stations comes from Ontario's $325 million Green Investment Fund, which supports projects that fight climate change.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

U.S. Solar-Plus-Storage Growth 2021-2024 highlights rising battery storage co-location with solar PV, grid flexibility, RTO/ISO market signals, and ITC incentives, enabling peak shaving, firming renewable output, and reliable night-time power.

Key Points

Summary of U.S. plans pairing battery storage with solar PV, guided by RTO/ISO markets, grid needs, and ITC policy.

✅ 9.4 GW (63%) co-located with solar PV by 2024

✅ 97% of standalone capacity sited in RTO/ISO regions

✅ ITC improves project economics and grid services revenue

Of the 14.5 gigawatts (GW) of battery storage power capacity planned to come online amid anticipated growth in solar and storage in the United States from 2021 to 2024, 9.4 GW (63%) will be co-located with a solar photovoltaic (PV) solar-plus-storage power plant, based on data reported to us and published in our Annual Electric Generator Report. Another 1.3 GW of battery storage will be co-located at sites with wind turbines or fossil fuel-fired generators, such as natural gas-fired plants. The remaining 4.0 GW of planned battery storage will be located at standalone sites.

Historically, most U.S. battery systems have been located at standalone sites. Of the 1.5 GW of operating battery storage capacity in the United States at the end of 2020, 71% was standalone, and 29% was located onsite with other power generators.

Most standalone battery energy storage sites have been planned or built in power markets that are governed by regional transmission organizations (RTOs) and independent system operators (ISOs). RTOs and ISOs can enforce standard market rules that lay out clear revenue streams for energy storage projects in their regions, which promotes the deployment of battery storage systems. Of the utility-scale pipeline battery systems announced to come online from 2021 to 2024, 97% of the standalone battery capacity and 60% of the co-located battery capacity are in RTO/ISO regions.

Over 90% of the planned battery storage capacity outside of RTO and ISO regions will be co-located with a solar PV plant. At some solar PV co-located plants, the batteries can charge directly from the onsite solar generator when electricity demand and prices are low. They can then discharge electricity to the grid when peak demand is higher or when solar generation is unavailable, such as at night.

Although factors such as cloud cover can affect solar generation output, solar generators, now the number three renewable source in the U.S., in particular can effectively pair with battery storage because of their relatively regular daily generation patterns. This predictability works well with battery systems because battery systems are limited in how long they can discharge their power capacity before needing to recharge. If paired with a wind turbine, for example, a battery system could go days before having the opportunity to fully recharge.

Another advantage of pairing batteries with renewable generators is the ability to take advantage of tax incentives such as the Investment Tax Credit (ITC), which is available for solar projects, and other favorable government plans supporting deployment.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News

North Sea Offshore Wind Farms will deliver 150 GW by 2050 as EU partners scale renewable energy, offshore turbines, grid interconnectors, and REPowerEU goals to cut emissions, boost energy security, and reduce Russian fossil dependence.

Key Points

A joint EU initiative to build 150 GW of offshore wind by 2050, advancing REPowerEU, decarbonization, and energy security.

✅ Targets at least 150 GW of offshore wind by 2050

✅ Backed by Belgium, Netherlands, Germany, and Denmark

✅ Aligns with REPowerEU, grid integration, and emissions cuts

Four European Union countries plan to build North Sea wind farms capable of producing at least 150 gigawatts of energy by 2050 to help cut carbon emissions that cause climate change, with EU wind and solar surpassing gas last year, Danish media have reported.

Under the plan, wind turbines would be raised off the coasts of Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany and Denmark, where a recent green power record highlighted strong winds, daily Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten said.

The project would mean a tenfold increase in the EU's current offshore wind capacity, underscoring how renewables are crowding out gas across Europe today.

“The North Sea can do a lot," Danish Prime Minister Frederiksen told the newspaper, adding the close cooperation between the four EU nations "must start now.”

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte and Belgian Prime Minister Alexander De Croo are scheduled to attend a North Sea Summit on Wednesday in Esbjerg, 260 kilometers (162 miles) west of Copenhagen.

In Brussels, the European Commission moved Wednesday to jump-start plans for the whole 27-nation EU to abandon Russian energy amid the Kremlin’s war in Ukraine. The commission proposed a nearly 300 billion-euro ($315 billion) package that includes more efficient use of fuels and a faster rollout of renewable power, even as stunted hydro and nuclear output may hobble recovery efforts.

The investment initiative by the EU's executive arm is meant to help the bloc start weaning themselves off Russian fossil fuels this year, even as Europe is losing nuclear power during the transition. The goal is to deprive Russia, the EU’s main supplier of oil, natural gas and coal, of tens of billions in revenue and strengthen EU climate policies.

“We are taking our ambition to yet another level to make sure that we become independent from Russian fossil fuels as quickly as possible,” von der Leyen said in Brussels when announcing the package, dubbed REPowerEU.

The EU has pledged to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 55% compared with 1990 levels by 2030, and to get to net zero emissions by 2050, with a recent German renewables milestone underscoring the pace of change.

The European Commission has set an overall target of generating 300 gigawatts of offshore energy of by 2050, though grid expansion challenges in Germany highlight hurdles.

Along with climate change, the war in Ukraine has made EU nations eager to reduce their dependency on Russian natural gas and oil. In 2021, the EU imported roughly 40% of its gas and 25% of its oil from Russia.

At a March 11 summit, EU leaders agreed in principle to phase out Russian gas, oil and coal imports by 2027.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Power Generation News

Ukraine Green Fightback advances renewable energy, energy independence, and EU integration, rebuilding war-damaged grids with solar, wind, and storage, exporting power to Europe, and scaling community microgrids for resilient, low-carbon recovery and REPowerEU alignment.

Key Points

Ukraine Green Fightback shifts to renewables and resilient grids, aiming 50% clean power by 2035 despite wartime damage.

✅ 50% renewable electricity target by 2035, up from 15% in 2021

✅ Community solar and microgrids secure hospitals and schools

✅ Wind and solar rebuild capacity; surplus exports to EU grids

Two years after severing ties with Russia's power grid, Ukraine stands defiant, rebuilding its energy infrastructure with a resolute focus on renewables. Amidst the ongoing war's devastation, a remarkable green fightback is taking shape, driven by a vision of a self-sufficient, climate-conscious future.

Energy Independence, Forged in Conflict:

Ukraine's decision to unplug from Russia's grid in 2022 was both a strategic move and a forced necessity, aligning with a wider pushback from Russian oil and gas across the continent. While it solidified energy independence aspirations, the full-scale invasion pushed the country into "island mode," highlighting vulnerabilities of centralized infrastructure.

Today, Ukraine remains deeply intertwined with Europe, inching towards EU accession and receiving global support, as Europe's green surge in clean energy gathers pace. This aligns perfectly with the country's commitment to environmental responsibility, further bolstered by the EU's own "REPowerEU" plan to ditch fossil fuels.

Rebuilding with Renewables:

The war's impact on energy infrastructure has been significant, with nearly half damaged or destroyed. Large-scale renewables have borne the brunt, with 30% of solar and 90% of wind farms facing disruption.

Yet, the spirit of resilience prevails. Surplus electricity generated by solar plants is exported to Poland, showcasing the potential of renewable sources and mirroring Germany's solar power boost across the region. Ambitious projects are underway, like the Tyligulska wind farm, Ukraine's first built in a conflict zone, already supplying clean energy to thousands.

The government's vision is bold: 50% renewable energy share by 2035, a significant leap from 2021's 15%, and informed by the fact that over 30% of global electricity already comes from renewables. This ambition is echoed by civil society groups who urge even higher targets, with calls for 100% renewable energy worldwide continuing to grow.

Community-Driven Green Initiatives:

Beyond large-scale projects, community-driven efforts are flourishing. Villages like Horenka and Irpin, scarred by the war, are rebuilding hospitals and schools with solar panels, ensuring energy security and educational continuity.

These "bright examples," as Svitlana Romanko, founder of Razom We Stand, calls them, pave the way for a broader green wave. Research suggests replacing all coal plants with renewables would cost a manageable $17 billion, paving the way for a future free from dependence on fossil fuels, with calls for a fossil fuel lockdown gaining traction.

Environmental Cost of War:

The war's ecological footprint is immense, with damages exceeding €56.7 billion. The Ministry of Environmental Protection and Natural Resources is meticulously documenting this damage, not just for accountability but for post-war restoration.

Their efforts extend beyond documentation. Ukraine's "EcoZagroza" app allows citizens to report environmental damage and monitor pollution levels, fostering a collaborative approach to environmental protection.

Striving for a Greener Future:

President Zelenskyy's peace plan highlights ecocide prevention and environmental restoration. The ministry itself is undergoing a digitalization push, tackling corruption and implementing EU-aligned reforms.

While the European Commission's recent progress report acknowledges Ukraine's strides, set against a Europe where renewable power has surpassed fossil fuels for the first time, the "crazy rhythm" of change, as Ecoaction's Anna Ackermann describes it, reflects the urgency of the situation. Finding the right balance between war efforts and green initiatives remains a crucial challenge.

Conclusion:

Ukraine's green fightback is a testament to its unwavering spirit. Amidst the darkness of war, hope shines through in the form of renewable energy projects and community-driven initiatives. By embracing a green future, Ukraine not only rebuilds but sets an example for the world, demonstrating that even in the face of adversity, sustainability can prevail.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News

Nature-friendly offshore wind energy supports climate neutrality by reducing greenhouse gases while safeguarding marine biodiversity through EU marine spatial planning, ecosystem-based approaches, cross-border coordination, and zero-use zones for resilient seas.

Key Points

An approach to offshore wind that cuts emissions while respecting ecological limits and protecting marine biodiversity.

✅ Aligns buildout with ecological limits and marine spatial plans

✅ Minimizes noise, collision, and habitat loss for sensitive species

✅ Coordinates EU-wide monitoring, data, and cross-border siting

Offshore wind power can help reduce greenhouse gas emissions, but it poses risks for the seas. Germany will hold the EU Council Presidency and the North Sea Energy Cooperation Presidency in 2020. What must be done to contain the climate and species crises, as it were?

Offshore wind power is an important regenerative energy source with a $1 trillion market outlook in the coming decades. However, the construction, operation and maintenance of the systems put marine mammals, birds and fish at considerable risk. Photo: Siemens AG

In order to achieve the German and EU climate and energy goals by 2030 and climate neutrality by 2050, we need a nature-friendly energy transition. At present, the European energy system is largely based on fossil fuels. This is changing, as renewables surge across Europe for end consumers and industry and the large-scale electrification of the energy consumption sectors. Offshore wind energy is an element for future power generation.

A nature-friendly energy transition is only possible if energy consumption is reduced and energy efficiency is maximized in all applications and sectors. Emissions reductions through offshore wind energy In 2019, Europe had an installed offshore wind energy capacity of around 22 gigawatts from 5,047 grid-connected wind turbines in twelve countries. In Germany, the nominal output of the offshore wind turbines feeding into the German power grid was around 7.5 gigawatts, with clean energy accounting for about 50% of electricity nationwide. The wind blows much stronger and more steadily at sea than on land.

The power capacity of the turbines has also almost doubled in the last five years, which has led to a higher energy yield. Offshore wind energy is a building block for replacing fossil fuels, and markets like the U.S. offshore sector are about to soar as well. Wind turbines at sea provide electricity almost every hour of the year and have operating hours that are as high as conventional power plants. They can contribute to significant reductions in CO2 emissions and to mitigate the climate crisis.

It must be ensured that offshore wind turbines and parks as well as the grid infrastructure make a positive contribution to climate protection through their expansion and that the overall condition of marine ecosystems improves. The expansion of offshore wind energy is necessary from the point of view of climate science and must take place within the framework of the ecological load limits and under nature conservation aspects.

Seas and marine ecosystems suffer from years of overfishing, pollution and industrial use. The conservation status of sea birds, marine mammals and fish stocks is poor. Ecosystem services and productivity of the oceans are decreasing as a result of massive species extinction and unfavorable habitats. Changes in sea temperature, oxygen levels and acidification of the oceans reduce their resilience to the climate crisis.

The latest reports from the European Environment Agency show in black and white that the good environmental status and other goals of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive are not being achieved. The primary goal must therefore be to meet the obligations of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive and the EU nature conservation directives.

With the expansion of offshore wind energy, the pressure on the already polluted marine ecosystems is increasing. Offshore wind turbines also harbor risks for marine ecosystems, especially if they are built in unfavorable locations. Studies show harmful effects on marine mammals, birds, fish and the ocean floor. In Europe, where wind power investments hit $29.4 billion last year, a regulatory framework must be created for the expansion of offshore wind energy within the ecological limits and taking into account zero-use zones. The European Union urgently needs to take coherent measures for healthy and resilient seas.

New strategy of the European Commission The EU Commission plans to present a strategy for the expansion of renewable energies at sea on November 18, 2020.

The strategy will address the opportunities and challenges associated with the expansion of renewable energies at sea, such as effects on energy networks and markets, management of the maritime space, the technological transfer of research projects, regional and international cooperation and industrial policy dimensions, as well as political headwinds in some countries that can affect project pipelines. NABU welcomes the strategy, but worries about insufficient consideration of marine protection, ecological load-bearing capacity and the marine spatial planning that regulates interests in the use of the sea. All EU member states have to submit their marine spatial planning plans by March 2021.

Conclusions of the European Council Shortly before the end of 2020, the European Council plans to adopt conclusions for cooperation among European member states on the subject of offshore wind energy and other renewable energy sources at sea. It is important that the planning and development of offshore wind energy is coordinated across national borders, including alignment with the UK's offshore wind growth, also to protect marine ecosystems.

However, the ecosystem approach must not be left out. It must be ensured that the Council conclusions focus on the implementation of EU marine and nature conservation directives for the expansion of offshore wind energy within the load limits. EU-wide monitoring systems can help protect marine species and ecosystems. Germany holds the EU Council Presidency and the North Sea Energy Cooperation Presidency for 2020 and can make a decisive contribution.

NABU demands on offshore wind energy in Europe Expansion targets for offshore wind energy across Europe should be based on the ecological load limits of the seas. Development of concrete concepts for the ecological upgrading of areas in marine spatial planning and operationalization of the ecosystem-based approach.

For the nature-friendly expansion of offshore – Wind energy systems must take into account avoidance distances from seabirds to turbines, habitat loss, collision risks and cumulative effects. Implementation / obligation to sensitivity analyzes – they allow targeted conclusions about the best possible locations for offshore wind energy without conflicts with marine protection.

Targeted keeping of areas free for species and their Habitats of anthropogenic use – this increases planning security and can lower investment thresholds for EU funding programs. Ensuring regional cooperation between the European member states for nature Protection and with the involvement of nature conservation authorities – after all, the marine ecosystem does not stop at borders.

Adjustment of priorities: If offshore wind energy is prioritized over other renewable energy sources across Europe, other industrial forms of use of the seas must be given a lower priority.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News