Zero-emissions electricity by 2035 is possible

UK Wind Power Leadership in 2020 highlights record renewable energy growth, G20-leading wind share, rapid coal phase-out, and rising solar integration, advancing decarbonization targets under the Paris Agreement and momentum ahead of COP26.

Key Points

The UK led the G20 in wind power share in 2020, displacing coal, expanding solar, and cutting power-sector emissions.

✅ G20-leading wind share; second for combined wind and solar

✅ Fastest coal decline among G20 from 2015 to 2020

✅ Emissions risk rising as post-pandemic demand returns

Nearly a quarter of the UK’s electricity came from wind turbines in 2020 – making the country the leader among the G20 for share of power sourced from the renewable energy, a new analysis finds.

The UK also moved away from coal power at a faster rate than any other G20 country from 2015 to 2020, according to the results.

And it ranked second in the G20, behind Germany, for the proportion of electricity sourced from both wind and solar in 2020, after first surpassing coal in 2016.

“It’s crazy how much wind power has grown in the UK and how much it has offset coal, and how it’s starting to eat at gas,” Dave Jones, Ember’s global lead analyst, told The Independent.

But it is important to bear in mind that “we’re only doing a great job by the standards of the rest of the world”, he added, noting that low-carbon generation stalled in 2019 in the UK.

Ember’s Global Electricity Review notes that the world’s power sector emissions were two per cent higher in 2020 than in 2015 – the year that countries agreed to slash their greenhouse gas pollution as part of the Paris Agreement.

Power generated from coal fell by a record amount from 2019 to 2020, the analysis finds. However, this decline was greatly facilitated by lockdowns introduced to stop the spread of Covid-19, as global electricity demand was temporarily stifled before rebounding, the analysts say.

Coal is the most polluting of the fossil fuels. The UK government hopes to convince all countries to stop building new coal-fired power stations at Cop26, a climate conference that is to be held in Glasgow later this year.

UN chief Antonio Guterres has also called for all countries to end their “deadly addiction to coal”.

At a summit held earlier this month, he described ending the use of coal in electricity generation as the “single most important step” to meeting the Paris Agreement’s goal of limiting global warming to well below 2C above pre-industrial levels by 2100.

“There is definitely a concern that, in the pandemic year of 2020, coal hasn’t fallen as fast as it needed to,” said Mr Jones, even as the UK set coal-free power records recently.

“There is concern that, once electricity demand returns, we won’t be seeing that decline in coal anymore.”

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Power Generation News

nanoFlowcell Bi-ION Flow Battery delivers renewable-energy storage for EVs and grids, using seawater-derived electrolyte, membrane stacks, fast refueling, low-cost materials, scalable tanks, and four-motor performance with long range and lightweight energy density.

Key Points

A flow cell using Bi-ION to power EVs and grids with fast refueling and scalable, low-cost storage.

✅ Seawater-derived Bi-ION electrolyte; safe, nonflammable, low cost

✅ Fast refueling via dual tanks; membrane stack generates power

✅ EV range up to 1200 miles; scalable for grid-scale storage

nanoFlowcell is a European company headquartered in London that focuses on flow battery technology. Flow batteries are an intriguing concept. Unlike lithium batteries or fuel cells, they store electricity in two liquid chambers separated by a membrane. They hold enormous potential for low cost, environmentally friendly energy storage because the basic materials are cheap and abundant. To add capacity, simply make the tanks larger.

While that makes flow batteries ideal for energy storage — whether in the basement of a building or as part of a grid scale installation that utilities weigh against options like hydrogen for power companies today in practice — their size and weight make them a challenge for use in vehicles. That hasn’t stopped nanoFlowcell from designing a number of concept and prototype vehicles over the past 10 years and introducing them to the public at the Geneva auto show. Its latest concept is a tasty little crumpet known as the Quantino 25.

The Flow Battery & Bi-ION Fluid
The thing that makes the nanoFlowcell ecosystem work is an electrically charged fluid called Bi- ION derived from seawater or reclaimed waste water. It works sort of like hydrogen in a fuel cell, a frequent rival in debates over the future of vehicles today for many buyers. Pump hydrogen in, run it through a fuel cell, and get electricity out. With the Quantino 25, which the company calls a “2+2 sports car,” you pump two liquids to the membrane interface to make electricity.

There are two 33-gallon tanks mounted low in the chassis much the way a lithium-ion battery pack fits into a normal electric car. Fill up with Bi-ION, and you have a car that will dash to 100 km/h in 2.5 seconds, thanks to its 4 electric motors with 80 horsepower each. And get this. According to Autoblog, the company says with full tanks, the Quantino 25 has a range of 1200 miles! Goodbye range anxiety, hello happy motoring.

We should point out that water weighs about 8 pounds per gallon, so the “fuel” to travel 1200 miles would weigh roughly 528 pounds. A conventional lithium-ion battery pack with its attendant cooling apparatus that could travel that far would weigh at least 3 times as much, even as EV battery recycling advances aim for a circular economy today. Granted, the Quantino 25 is not a production car and very few people have ever driven one, but that kind of range vs weight ratio has got to get your whiskers twitching a little in anticipation.

Actually, the folks at Autocar did drive an early prototype in 2016 at the TCS test track near Zurich, Switzerland, and determined that it was a real driveable car. My colleague Jennifer Sensiba reported in April of 2019 that the company’s Quantino test vehicle passed the 350,000 km mark (220,000 miles) with no signs of damage to the membrane or the pumps, and didn’t seem to have suffered any wear at all. The vehicle’s engineers pointed out that it had driven for 10,000 hours at this point. The company says it wants to offer its flow battery technology to EV manufacturers and give the system a 50,000-hour guarantee. That translates to well over 1 million miles of driving.

The problem, of course, is that there is no Bi-ION refueling infrastructure just yet, but that doesn’t mean someday there couldn’t be. Tesla had no Supercharger network when it first started either and things turned out reasonably well for Musk and company.

nanoFlowcell USA Announced
nanoFlowcell announced this week that it has established a new division based in New York to bring its flow battery technology to America. The mission of the new division is to adapt the nanoFlowcell process to US-specific applications and develop nanoFlowcell applications in America. Priority one is beginning series production of flow battery vehicles as well as the constructing a large scale bi-ION production facility that will provide transportable renewable energy and could complement vehicle-to-grid power models for communities for nanoFlowcell applications.

The Bi-ION electrolyte is a high density energy carrier that makes renewable energies storable and transportable in large quantities. The company says it will produce the energy carrier bi-ION from 100 percent renewable energy. Flow cell energy technology is an important solution to substantially reduce global greenhouse gas emissions as laid out in the Paris Agreement, the company says. Its many benefits include being a safe and clean energy source for many energy intensive processes and transportation services.

“Our nanoFlowcell flow cell and bi-ION energy carrier are key technologies for a successful energy transition,” says Nunzio La Vecchia, CEO of nanoFlowcell Holdings. “We need to make energy from renewable energy safe, storable and transportable to drive environmentally sustainable economic growth. This requires a well thought out strategy and the development of the appropriate infrastructure. With the establishment of nanoFlowcell USA, we are reaching an important milestone in this regard for our future corporate development.”

Focus On Renewable Energy
The production costs of Bi-ION are directly linked to the cost of electricity from renewable sources. With the accelerated expansion of renewable energy under the Inflation Reduction Act along with EV grid flexibility efforts across markets, nanoFlowcell expects the cost of electricity from solar power to be relatively low in the future which will further strengthen the competitiveness of energy sources such as Bi-ION.

“With the Inflation Reduction Act, the U.S. has made the largest investment in clean energy in U.S. history, and the potential implications for renewable energy are far-reaching.” But La Vecchia points out, “We will not seek government investments for nanoFlowcell USA to expand our manufacturing facilities and infrastructure in the United States. Where appropriate, we will enter into strategic partnerships to build and expand manufacturing and infrastructure, and to integrate nanoFlowcell technologies into all sectors of the economy.”

“More importantly, with nanoFlowcell USA, we want to help accelerate the decarbonization of the global economy and create economic, social and ecological prosperity. After all, estimates suggest that the clean energy sector will create 500,000 additional jobs. We want to do our part to make this happen.”

‍The Takeaway
nanoFlowcell is about more than electric cars. It wants to get involved in grid-scale energy storage, and moves like Mercedes-Benz energy storage venture signal momentum in the sector today. But to those of us soaking in the hot tub warmed by excess heat from a nearby data center here at CleanTechnica global headquarters, it seems that its contribution to emissions-free transportation could be enormous. Maybe some of those companies still chasing the hydrogen fuel cell dream, as a recent hydrogen fuel cell report notes Europe trailing Asia today, might find the company’s flow battery technology cheaper and more durable without all the headaches that go with making, storing, and transporting hydrogen.

A Bi-ION refueling station would probably cost less than a tenth as much as a hydrogen filling station. A link-up with a major manufacturer would make it easier to build out the infrastructure needed to make this dream a reality. Hey, people laughed at Tesla in 2010. If nothing else, this is a company we will be keeping our eye on.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

US Solar Power 2050 Target projects 45% electricity from solar, advancing decarbonization with clean energy, wind, nuclear, hydropower, hydrogen, and scalable energy storage, while modernizing the grid and transmission to cut emissions and create jobs.

Key Points

A goal for solar to supply ~45% of US electricity by 2050, backed by energy storage and other low-carbon generation.

✅ Requires 1,050-1,570 GW solar and matching storage capacity

✅ Utility-scale buildout uses ~10M acres; rooftop 10-20% of capacity

✅ Complemented by wind, nuclear, hydropower, hydrogen, and flexible turbines

President Joe Biden has called for major clean energy investments as a way to curb climate change and generate jobs. On Sept. 8, 2021, the White House released a report produced by the U.S. Department of Energy that found that solar power could generate up to 45% of the U.S. electricity supply by 2050, compared to less than 4% today, with about 3% in 2020 noted by industry observers. The Conversation asked Joshua D. Rhodes, an energy technology and policy researcher at the University of Texas at Austin, what it would take to meet this target.

Why such a heavy focus on solar power? Doesn’t a low-carbon future require many types of clean energy, even though wind and solar could meet about 80% of demand according to some research?
The Energy Department’s Solar Futures Study lays out three future pathways for the U.S. grid: business as usual; decarbonization, meaning a massive shift to low-carbon and carbon-free energy sources; and decarbonization with economy-wide electrification of activities that are powered now by fossil fuels.

It concludes that the latter two scenarios would require approximately 1,050-1,570 gigawatts of solar power, which would meet about 44%-45% of expected electricity demand in 2050, even as renewables approach one-fourth of U.S. generation in the near term. For perspective, one gigawatt of generating capacity is equivalent to about 3.1 million solar panels or 364 large-scale wind turbines.

The rest would come mostly from a mix of other low- or zero-carbon sources, including wind, nuclear, hydropower, biopower, geothermal and combustion turbines run on zero-carbon synthetic fuels such as hydrogen. Energy storage capacity – systems such as large installations of high-capacity batteries – would also expand at roughly the same rate as solar, with record growth in solar and storage anticipated by industry in coming years.

One advantage solar power has over many other low-carbon technologies is that most of the U.S. has lots of sunshine. Wind, hydropower and geothermal resources aren’t so evenly distributed: There are large zones where these resources are poor or nonexistent.

Relying more heavily on region-specific technologies would mean developing them extremely densely where they are most abundant. It also would require building more high-voltage transmission lines to move that energy over long distances, which could increase costs and draw opposition from landowners – a key reason the grid isn't yet 100% renewable according to experts – in many regions.

Is generating 45% of U.S. electricity from solar power by 2050 feasible?
I think it would be technically possible but not easy. It would require an accelerated and sustained deployment far larger than what the U.S. has achieved so far, even as the cost of solar panels has fallen dramatically, and wind, solar and batteries are 82% of the utility-scale pipeline across the country. Some regions have attained this rate of growth, albeit from low starting points and usually not for long periods.

The Solar Futures Study estimates that producing 45% of the nation’s electricity from solar power by 2050 would require deploying about 1,600 gigawatts of solar generation. That’s a 1,450% increase from the 103 gigawatts that are installed in the U.S. today, even as wind and solar trend toward 30% of U.S. electricity in some outlooks. For perspective, there are currently about 1,200 gigawatts of electricity generation capacity of all types on the U.S. power grid.

The report assumes that 10%-20% of this new solar capacity would be deployed on homes and businesses. The rest would be large utility-scale deployments, mostly solar panels, plus some large-scale solar thermal systems that use mirrors to reflect the sun to a central tower.

Assuming that utility-scale solar power requires roughly 8 acres per megawatt, this expansion would require approximately 10.2 million to 11.5 million acres. That’s an area roughly as big as Massachusetts and New Jersey combined, although it’s less than 0.5% of total U.S. land mass.

I think goals like these are worth setting, but are good to reevaluate over time to make sure they represent the most prudent path.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News

Clean Electricity Standard drives Biden's infrastructure, grid decarbonization, and utility mandates, leveraging EPA regulation, renewables, nuclear, and carbon capture via reconciliation to reach 80% clean power by 2030 amid partisan Congress.

Key Points

A federal mandate to reach 80% clean U.S. power by 2030 using incentives and EPA rules to speed grid decarbonization.

✅ Targets 80% clean electricity by 2030 via Congress or reconciliation

✅ Mix of renewables, nuclear, gas with carbon capture allowed

✅ Backup levers: EPA rules, incentives, utility planning shifts

The true measure of President Biden’s climate ambition may be the clean electricity standard he tucked into his massive $2.2 trillion infrastructure spending plan.

Its goal is striking: 80% clean power in the United States by 2030.

The details, however, are vague. And so is Biden’s plan B if it fails—an uncertainty that’s worrisome to both activists and academics. The lack of a clear backup plan underscores the importance of passing a clean electricity standard, they say.

If the clean electricity standard doesn’t survive Congress, it will put pressure on the need to drive climate policy through targeted spending, said John Larsen, a power system analyst with the Rhodium Group, an economic consulting firm.

“I don’t think the game is lost at all if a clean electricity standard doesn’t get through in this round,” Larsen said. “But there’s a difference between not passing a clean electricity standard and passing the right spending package.”

In his few months in office, Biden has outlined plans to bring the United States back into the international Paris climate accord, pause oil and gas leasing on public lands, boost the electric vehicle market, and target clean energy investments in vulnerable communities, including plans to revitalize coal communities across the country, most affected by climate change.

But those are largely executive orders and spending proposals—even as early assessments show mixed results from climate law—and unlikely to last beyond his administration if the next president favors fossil fuel usage over climate policy. The clean electricity standard, which would decarbonize 80% of the electrical grid by 2030, is different.

It transforms Biden’s climate vision from a goal into a mandate. Passing it through Congress makes it that much harder for a future administration to undo. If Biden is in office for two terms, the United States would see a rate of decarbonization unparalleled in its history that would set a new bar for most of the world’s biggest economies.

But for now, the clean electricity standard faces an uncertain path through Congress and steep odds to getting enacted. That means there’s a good chance the administration will need a plan B, observers said.

Exactly what kind of climate spending can pass Congress is the very question the White House and congressional Democrats will be working on in the next few months, including upgrades to an aging power grid that affect renewables and EVs, as the infrastructure bill proceeds through Congress.

Negotiations are fraught already. Congress is almost evenly split between a party that wants to curtail the use of fossil fuels and another that wants to grow them, and even high energy prices have not necessarily triggered a green transition in the marketplace.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said last week that “100% of my focus is on stopping this new administration.” He made similar comments at the start of the Obama administration and blocked climate policy from getting through Congress. He also said last week that no Republican senators would vote for Biden’s infrastructure spending plan.

A clean electricity standard has been referred to as the “backbone” of Biden’s climate policy—a way to ensure his policies to decarbonize the economy outlast a future president who would seek to roll back his climate work. Advocates say hitting that benchmark is an essential milestone in getting to a carbon-free grid by 2035. Much of President Obama’s climate policy, crafted largely through regulations and executive orders, proved vulnerable to President Trump’s rollbacks.

Biden appears to have learned from those lessons and wants to chart a new course to mitigate the worst effects of climate change. He’s using his majority in the House and Senate to lock in whatever he can before the 2022 midterms, when Democrats are expected to lose the House.

To pass a clean electricity standard, virtually every Democrat must be on board, and even then, the only chance of success is to pass a bill through the budget reconciliation process that can carry a clean electricity standard. Some Senate Democrats have recently hinted that they were willing to split the bill into pieces to get it through, while others are concerned that although this approach might win some GOP support on traditional infrastructure such as roads and bridges, it would isolate the climate provisions that make up more than half of the bill.

The most durable scenario for rapid electricity-sector decarbonization is to lock in a bipartisan clean electricity standard into legislation with 60 votes in the Senate, said Mike O’Boyle, the director of electricity policy for Energy Innovation. Because that’s highly unlikely—if not impossible—there are other paths that could get the United States to the 80% goal within the next decade.

“The next best approach is to either, or in combination, pursue EPA regulation of power plant pollution from existing and new power plants as well as to take a reconciliation-based approach to a clean electricity standard where you’re basically spending federal dollars to provide incentives to drive clean electricity deployment as opposed to a mandate per se,” he said.

Either way, O’Boyle said the introduction of the clean electricity standard sets a new bar for the federal government that likely would drive industry response even if it doesn’t get enacted. He compared it to the Clean Power Plan, Obama’s initiative to limit power plant emissions. Even though the plan never came to fruition, because of a Clean Power Plan rollback, it left a legacy that continues years later and wasn’t negated by a president who prioritized fossil fuels over the climate, he said.

“It never got enacted, but it still created a titanic shift in the way utilities plan their systems and proactively reposition themselves for future carbon regulation of their electricity systems,” O’Boyle said. “I think any action by the Biden administration or by Congress through reconciliation would have a similar catalytic function over the next couple years.”

Some don’t think a clean electricity standard has a doomed future. Right now, its provisions are vague. But they can be filled in in a way that doesn’t alienate Republicans or states more hesitant toward climate policy, said Sally Benson, an engineering professor at Stanford University and an expert on low-carbon energy systems. The United States is overdue for a federal mandate that lasts through multiple administrations. The only way to ensure that happens is to get Republican support.

She said that might be possible by making the clean electricity standard more flexible. Mandate the goals, she said, not how states get there. Going 100% renewable is not going to sell in some states or with some lawmakers, she added. For some regions, flexibility will mean keeping nuclear plants open. For others, it would mean using natural gas with carbon capture, Benson said.

While it might not meet the standards some progressives seek to end all fossil fuel usage, it would have a better chance of getting enacted and remaining in place through multiple presidents, she said. In fact, a clean electricity standard would provide a chance for carbon capture, which has been at the center of Republican climate policy proposals. Benson said carbon capture is not economical now, but the mandate of a standard could encourage investments that would drive the sector forward more rapidly.

“If it’s a plan that people see as shutting the door to nuclear or to natural gas plus carbon capture, I think we will face a lot of pushback,” she said. “Make it an inclusive plan with a specific goal of getting to zero emissions and there’s not one way to do it, meaning all renewables—I think that’s the thing that could garner a lot of industrial support to make progress.”

In addition to industry, Biden’s proposed clean electricity standard would drive states to do more, said Larsen of the Rhodium Group. Several states already have their own version of a clean energy standard and have driven much of the national progress on carbon emissions reduction in the last four years, he said. Biden has set a new benchmark that some states, including those with some of the biggest economies in the United States, would now likely exceed, he said.

“It is rare for the federal government to get out in front of leading states in clean energy policy,” he said. “This is not usually how climate policy diffusion works from the state level to the federal level; usually it’s states go ahead and the federal government adopts something that’s less ambitious.”

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Energy Policy News

Utility-Controlled EV Charging shapes who builds charging stations as utilities, regulators, and private networks compete over infrastructure, grid upgrades, and pricing, impacting ratepayers, competition, and EV adoption across states seeking cleaner transport.

Key Points

Utility-controlled EV charging is utilities building charging networks affecting rates, competition and grid costs.

✅ Regulated investment may raise rates before broader savings.

✅ Private firms warn monopolies stifle competition and innovation.

✅ Regulators balance access, equity, and grid upgrade needs.

Electric vehicles are widely seen as the automobile industry’s future, but a battle is unfolding in states across America over who should control the charging stations that could gradually replace fuel pumps.

From Exelon Corp. to Southern California Edison, utilities have sought regulatory approval to invest millions of dollars in upgrading their infrastructure as state power grids adapt to increased charging demand, and, in some cases, to own and operate chargers.

The proposals are sparking concerns from consumer advocates about higher electric rates and oil companies about subsidizing rivals. They are also drawing opposition from startups that say the successors to gas stations should be open to private-sector competition, not controlled by monopoly utilities.

That debate is playing out in regulatory commissions throughout the U.S. as states and utilities promote wider adoption of electric vehicles. At stake are charging infrastructure investments expected to total more than $13 billion over the next five years, as an American EV boom accelerates, according to energy consulting firm Wood Mackenzie. That would cover roughly 3.2 million charging outlets.

Calvin Butler Jr., who leads Exelon’s utilities business, said many states have grown more open to the idea of utilities becoming bigger players in charging as electric vehicles have struggled to take off in the U.S., where they make up only around 2% of new car sales.

“When the utilities are engaged, there’s quicker adoption because the infrastructure is there,” he said.

Major auto makers including General Motors Co. and Ford Motor Co. are accelerating production of electric vehicles, and models like Tesla’s Model 3 are shaping utility planning, and a number of states have set ambitious EV goals—most recently California, which aims to ban the sale of new gasoline-powered cars by 2035. But a patchy charging-station network remains a huge impediment to mass EV adoption.

Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden has called for building more than 500,000 new public charging outlets in a decade as part of his plan to combat climate change, amid Biden’s push to electrify the transportation sector. But exactly how that would happen is unclear. The U.S. currently has fewer than 100,000 public outlets, according to the Energy Department. President Trump, who has weakened federal tailpipe emissions targets, hasn’t put forward an electric-vehicle charging plan, though he backed a 2019 transportation bill that would have provided $1 billion in grants to build alternative fueling infrastructure, including for electric vehicles.

Charging access currently varies widely by state, as does utility involvement, with many utilities bullish course on EV charging to support growth, which can range from providing rebates on home chargers to preparing sites for public charging—and even owning and operating the equipment needed to juice up electric vehicles.

As of September, regulators in 24 states had signed off on roughly $2.6 billion of utility investment in transportation electrification, according to Atlas Public Policy, a Washington, D.C., policy firm. More than half of that spending was authorized in California, where electric vehicle adoption is highest.

Nearly a decade ago, California blocked utilities from owning most charging equipment, citing concerns about potentially stifling competition. But the nation’s most populous state reversed course in 2014, seeking to spur electrification.

Regulators across the country have since been wrestling with similar questions, generating a patchwork of rules.

Maryland regulators signed off last year on a pilot program allowing subsidiaries of Exelon and FirstEnergy Corp. to own and operate public charging stations on government property, provided that the drivers who use them cover at least some of the costs.

Months later, the District of Columbia rejected an Exelon subsidiary’s request to own public chargers, saying independent charging companies had it covered.

Some charging firms argue utilities shouldn’t be given monopolies on car charging, though they might need to play a role in connecting rural customers and building stations where they would otherwise be uneconomical.

“Maybe the utility should be the supplier of last resort,” said Cathy Zoi, chief executive of charging network EVgo Services LLC, which operates more than 800 charging stations in 34 states.

Utility charging investments generally are expected to raise customers’ electricity bills, at least initially. California recently approved the largest charging program by a single utility to date: a $436 million initiative by Southern California Edison, an arm of Edison International, as the state also explores grid stability opportunities from EVs. The company said it expects the program to increase the average residential customer’s bill by around 50 cents a month.

But utilities and other advocates of electrification point to studies indicating greater EV adoption could help reduce electricity rates over time, by giving utilities more revenue to help cover system upgrades.

Proponents of having utilities build charging networks also argue that they have the scale to do so more quickly, which would lead to faster EV adoption and environmental improvements such as lower greenhouse gas emissions and cleaner air. While the investments most directly help EV owners, “they accrue immediate benefits for everyone,” said Jill Anderson, a Southern California Edison senior vice president.

Some consumer advocates are wary of approving extensive utility investment in charging, citing the cost to ratepayers.

“It’s like, ‘Pay me now, and maybe someday your rates will be less,’” said Stefanie Brand, who advocates on behalf of ratepayers for the state of New Jersey, where regulators have yet to sign off on any utility proposals to invest in electric vehicle charging. “I don’t think it makes sense to build it hoping that they will come.”

Groups representing oil-and-gas companies, which stand to lose market share as people embrace electric vehicles, also have criticized utility charging proposals.

“These utilities should not be able to use their monopoly power to use all of their customers’ resources to build investments that definitely won’t benefit everybody, and may or may not be economical at this point,” said Derrick Morgan, who leads federal and regulatory affairs at the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers, a trade organization.

Utility executives said their companies have long been used to further government policy objectives deemed to be in the public interest, drawing on lessons from 2021 to guide next steps, such as improving energy efficiency.

“This isn’t just about letting market forces work,” said Mike Calviou, senior vice president for strategy and regulation at National Grid PLC’s U.S. division.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

EU Renewable Energy Transition accelerates as solar and wind overtake gas, cutting coal reliance and boosting REPowerEU goals; falling electricity demand, hydro and nuclear recovery, and grid upgrades drive a cleaner, secure power mix.

Key Points

It is the EU's shift to solar and wind, surpassing gas and curbing coal to meet REPowerEU targets.

✅ Solar and wind supplied 22% of EU electricity in 2022.

✅ Gas fell behind; coal stayed near 16% with no major rebound.

✅ Demand fell; hydro and nuclear expected to recover in 2023.

European countries were forced to accelerate their renewable energy capacity after Russia's invasion of Ukraine sparked a global energy crisis amid a surge in global power demand that exceeded pre-pandemic levels. The EU’s REPowerEU plan aims to increase the share of renewables in final energy consumption overall to 45 percent by the end of the decade.

However, a new report by energy think tank Ember shows that the EU’s green energy transition is already making a significant difference. Solar and wind power generated more than a fifth (22 percent) of its electricity in 2022, pulling ahead of fossil gas (20 percent) for the first time, according to the European Electricity Review 2023.

Europe also managed to avoid resorting to emissions-intensive coal power for electricity generation as a consequence of the energy crisis, even as renewables to eclipse coal globally by mid-decade. Coal generated just 16 percent of the EU’s electricity last year, an increase of just 1.5 percentage points.

“Europe has avoided the worst of the energy crisis,” says Ember’s Head of Data Insights, Dave Jones. “The shocks of 2022 only caused a minor ripple in coal power and a huge wave of support for renewables. Any fears of a coal rebound are now dead.”

Ember’s analysis reveals that the EU faced a "triple crisis" in the electricity sector in 2022, as stunted hydro and nuclear output compounded the shock. "Just as Europe scrambled to cut ties with its biggest supplier of fossil gas, it faced the lowest levels of hydro and nuclear (power) in at least two decades, which created a deficit equal to 7 percent of Europe’s total electricity demand in 2022," the report says. A severe drought across Europe, French nuclear outages as well as the closure of German nuclear outlets were responsible for the drop.

Solar power shines through
However, the record surge in solar and wind power generation helped compensate for the nuclear and hydropower deficit. Solar power rose the fastest, growing by a record 24 percent last year which almost doubled its previous record, with wind growing by 8.6 percent.

Forty-one gigawatts of solar power capacity was added in 2022, almost 50 percent more than the year before. Ember says that 20 EU countries achieved solar records in 2022, with Germany, Spain, Poland, the Netherlands and France adding the most solar capacity.

The Netherlands and Greece generated more power from solar than coal for the first time. Greece is also predicted to reach its 2030 solar capacity target by the end of this year.

EU electricity demand falls
A significant drop in electricity use in 2022 also helped lessen the impact of Europe’s energy crisis. Demand fell by 7.9 percent in the last quarter of the year, despite the continent heading into winter. This was close to the 9.6 percent fall experienced when Europe was in Covid-19 lockdown in mid-2020.

"Mild weather was a deciding factor, but affordability pressures likely played a role, alongside energy efficiency improvements and citizens acting in solidarity to cut energy demand in a time of crisis," the report says.

A ‘coal comeback’ fails to materialize
The almost 8 percent fall in electricity demand in the last three months of 2022 was the main factor in the 9 percent fall in gas and coal generation during that time. However, Ember says that had France’s nuclear plants been operating at the same capacity as 2021, the EU’s fossil fuel generation would have fallen twice as fast in the last quarter of 2022.

The report says: "Coal power in the EU fell in all four of the final months of 2022, down 6 percent year-on-year. The 26 coal units placed on emergency standby for winter ran at an average of just 18 percent capacity. Despite importing 22 million tonnes of extra coal throughout 2022, the EU only used a third of it."

Gas generation was very similar compared to 2021, up just 0.8 percent. It made up 20 percent of the EU electricity mix in 2022, up from 19 percent the year before.

Fossil fuel generation set to fall in 2023
Ember says low-emissions sources like solar and wind power will continue to accelerate in 2023 and hydropower and French nuclear capacity will also recover. With electricity demand likely to continue to fall, it estimates that fossil fuel-generation "could plummet" by 20 percent in 2023.

Gas generation will fall the fastest, Ember predicts, as it will remain more expensive than coal over the next few years. "The large fall in gas generation means the power sector is likely to be the fastest falling segment of gas demand during 2023, helping to bring calm to European gas markets as Europe adjusts to life without Russian gas."

In order to stick to the 2015 Paris Agreement target of limiting global warming to no more than 1.5 degrees Celsius compared to pre-industrial levels, Ember says Europe must fully decarbonize its power system by the mid-2030s. Its modeling shows that this is possible without compromising the security of supply.

However, the report says "making this vision a reality will require investment above and beyond existing plans, as well as immediate action to address barriers to the expansion of clean energy infrastructure. Such a mobilization would boost the European economy, cement the EU’s position as a climate leader and send a vital international message that these challenges can be overcome."

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Power Generation News