Renewables Poised to Eclipse Coal in Global Power Generation by 2025

California NEM-3 Tariff ushers a successor Net Energy Metering framework, revising export compensation, TOU rates, and non-bypassable charges to balance ratepayer impacts, rooftop solar growth, and energy storage adoption across diverse communities.

Key Points

The CPUC's successor NEM policy redefining export credits and rates to sustain customer-sited solar and storage.

✅ Sets export compensation methodology beyond NEM 2.0

✅ Aligns TOU rates and non-bypassable charges with costs

✅ Encourages solar-plus-storage adoption and equity access

The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) has officially commenced its “NEM-3” proceeding, which will establish the successor Net Energy Metering (NEM) tariff to the “NEM 2.0” program in California. This is a highly anticipated, high-stakes proceeding that will effectively modify the rules for the NEM tariff in California, amid ongoing electricity pricing changes that affect residential rooftop solar – arguably the single most important policy mechanism for customer-sited solar over the last decade.

The CPUC’s recent order instituting rule-making (OIR) filing stated that “the major focus of this proceeding will be on the development of a successor to existing NEM 2.0 tariffs. This successor will be a mechanism for providing customer-generators with credit or compensation for electricity generated by their renewable facilities that a) balances the costs and benefits of the renewable electrical generation facility and b) allows customer-sited renewable generation to grow sustainably among different types of customers and throughout California’s diverse communities.”

This successor tariff proceeding was initiated by Assembly Bill 327, which was signed into law in October of 2013. AB 327 is best known as the legislation that directed the CPUC to create the “NEM 2.0” successor tariff, which was adopted by the CPUC in January of 2016.

The original Net Energy Metering program in California (“NEM 1.0”) effectively enabled full-retail value net metering “allowing NEM customers to be compensated for the electricity generated by an eligible customer-sited renewable resource and fed back to the utility over an entire billing period.” Under the NEM 2.0 tariff, customers were required to pay charges that aligned them more closely with non-NEM customer costs than under the original structure. The main changes adopted when the NEM 2.0 was implemented were that NEM 2.0 customer-generators must: (i) pay a one-time interconnection fee; (ii) pay non-bypassable charges on each kilowatt-hour of electricity they consume from the grid; and (iii) customers were required to transfer to a time-of-use (TOU) rate, with potential changes to electric bills for many customers.

NEM 2.0

The commencement of the NEM-3 OIR was preceded by the publishing of a 318-page Net Energy Metering 2.0 Lookback Study, which was published by Itron, Verdant Associates, and Energy and Environmental Economics. The CPUC-commissioned study had been widely anticipated and was expected to act as the starting reference point for the successor tariff proceeding. Verdant also hosted a webinar, which summarized the study’s inputs, assumptions, draft findings and results.

The study utilized several different tests to study the impact of NEM 2.0. The cost effectiveness analysis tests, which estimate costs and benefits attributed to NEM 2.0 include: (i) total resource cost test, (ii) participant cost test, (iii) ratepayer impact measure test, and (iv) program administrator test. The evaluation also included a cost of service analysis, which estimates the marginal cost borne by the utility to serve a NEM 2.0 customer.

The opening paragraph of the report’s executive summary stated that “overall, we found that NEM 2.0 participants benefit from the structure, while ratepayers see increased rates.” In every test that the author’s conducted the results generally supported this conclusion for residential customers. There were some exceptions in their findings. For example, in the cost of service analysis the report stated that “residential customers that install customer-sited renewable resources on average pay lower bills than the utility’s cost to serve them. On the other hand, nonresidential customers pay bills that are slightly higher than their cost of service after installing customer-sited renewable resources. This is largely due to nonresidential customer rates having demand charges (and other fixed fees), and the lower ratio of PV system size to customer load when compared to residential customers.”

Similar debates over solar rate design, including Massachusetts solar demand charges, highlight how demand charges and TOU decisions can affect customer economics.

NEM-3 timeline

Popular content
The preliminary schedule that the CPUC laid out in its OIR estimates that the proceeding will take roughly 15 months in total, starting with a November 2020 pre-hearing conference.

The real meat of the proceeding, where parties will present their proposals for what they believe the successor tariff should be, as the state considers revamping electricity rates to clean the grid, and really show their hand will not begin until the Spring of 2021. So we’re still a little ways away from seeing the proposals that the key parties to this proceeding, like the Investor Owned Utilities (PG&E, SCE, SDG&E), solar and storage advocates such as SEIA, CALSSA, Vote Solar, and ratepayer advocates like TURN) will submit.

While the outcome for the new successor NEM tariff is anyone’s guess at this point, some industry policy folks are starting to speculate. We think it is safe to assume that the value of exported energy will get reduced, with debates over income-based utility charges also influencing rate design. How much and the mechanism for how exports get valued remains to be seen. Based on the findings from the lookback study, it seems like the reduction in export value will be more severe than what happened when NEM 2.0 got implemented. In NEM 2.0, non-bypassable charges, which are volumetric charges that must be paid on all imported energy and cannot be netted-out by exports, only equated to roughly $0.02 to $0.03/kWh.

Given that the value of exports will almost certainly get reduced, we expect that to be bullish for energy storage as America goes electric and load shapes evolve. Energy storage attachment rates with solar are already steadily rising in California. By the time NEM-3 starts getting implemented, likely in 2022, we think storage attachment rates will likely escalate further.

We would not be surprised to see future storage attachment rates in California look like the Hawaiian market today, which are upwards of 80% for certain types of customers and applications. Two big questions on our mind are: (i) will the NEM 3.0 rules be different for different customer class: residential, CARE (e.g., low-income or disadvantaged communities), and commercial & industrial; (ii) will the CPUC introduce some sort of glidepath or phased in implementation approach?

The outcome of this proceeding will have far reaching implications on the future of customer-sited solar and energy storage in California. The NEM-3 outcome in California may likely serve as precedent for other states, as California exports its energy policies across the West, and utility territories that are expected to redesign their Net Energy Metering tariffs in the coming years.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Energy Policy News

German Wind Power 2030 Outlook highlights onshore and offshore growth, repowering, higher full-load hours, and efficiency gains. Deutsche WindGuard, BWE, and LEE NRW project 200+ TWh, potentially 500 TWh, covering rising electricity demand.

Key Points

Forecast: efficiency and full-load gains could double onshore wind to 200+ TWh; added land could lift output to 500 TWh.

✅ Modern turbines and repowering boost full-load hours and yields

✅ Onshore generation could hit 200+ TWh on existing areas by 2030

✅ Expanding land to 2% may enable 500 TWh; offshore adds more

Wind turbines have become more and more efficient over the past two decades, a trend reflected in Denmark's new green record for wind-powered generation.

A new study by Deutsche WindGuard calculates the effect on the actual generation volumes for the first time, underscoring Germany's energy transition balancing act as targets scale. Conclusion of the analysis: The technical progress enables a doubling of the wind power generation by 2030.

Progressive technological developments make wind turbines more powerful and also enable more and more full-load hours, with wind leading the power mix in many markets today. This means that more electricity can be generated continuously than previously assumed. This is shown by a new study by Deutsche WindGuard, which was commissioned by the Federal Wind Energy Association (BWE) and the State Association of Renewable Energies NRW (LEE NRW).

The study 'Full load hours of wind turbines on land - development, influences, effects' describes in detail for the first time the effects of advances in wind energy technology on the actual generation volumes. It can thus serve as the basis for further calculations and potential assessments, reflecting milestones like UK wind surpassing coal in 2016 in broader analyses.

The results of the investigation show that the use of modern wind turbines with higher full load hours alone on the previously designated areas could double wind power generation to over 200 terawatt hours (TWh) by 2030. With an additional area designation, generation could even be increased to 500 TWh. If the electricity from offshore wind energy is added, the entire German electricity consumption from wind energy could theoretically be covered, and renewables recently outdelivered coal and nuclear in Germany as a sign of momentum: The current electricity consumption in Germany is currently a good 530 TWh, but will increase in the future.

Christian Mildenberger, Managing Director of LEE NRW: 'Wind can do much more: In the past 20 years, technology has made great leaps and bounds. Modern wind turbines produce around ten times as much electricity today as those built at the turn of the millennium. This must also be better reflected in potential studies by the federal and state governments. '

Wolfram Axthelm, BWE Managing Director: 'We need a new look at the existing areas and the repowering. Today in Germany not even one percent of the area is designated for wind energy inland. But even with this we could cover almost 40 percent of the electricity demand by 2030. If this area share were increased to only 2 percent of the federal area, it would be almost 100 percent of the electricity demand! Wind energy is indispensable for a CO2-neutral future. This requires a clever provision of space in all federal states. '

Dr. Dennis Kruse, Managing Director of Deutsche WindGuard: 'It turns out that the potential of onshore wind energy in Germany is still significantly underestimated. Modern wind turbines achieve a significantly higher number of full load hours than previously assumed. That means: The wind can be used more and more efficiently and deliver more income. '

On the areas already designated today, numerous older systems will be replaced by modern ones by 2030 (repowering). However, many old systems will still be in operation. According to Windguard's calculations, the remaining existing systems, together with around 12,500 new, modern wind systems, could generate 212 TWh in 2030. If the area backdrop were expanded from 0.9 percent today to 2 percent of the land area, around 500 TWh would be generated by inland wind, despite grid expansion challenges in Europe that shape deployment.

The ongoing technological development must also be taken into account. The manufacturers of wind turbines are currently working on a new class of turbines with an output of over seven megawatts that will be available in three to five years. According to calculations by the LEE NRW, by 2040 the same number of wind turbines as today could produce over 700 TWh of electricity inland. The electricity demand, which will increase in the future due to electromobility, heat pumps and the production of green hydrogen, can thus be completely covered by a combination of onshore wind, offshore wind, solar power, bioenergy, hydropower and geothermal energy, and a net-zero roadmap for Germany points to significant cost reductions.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Power Generation News

Offshore Wind Vessel Charging System enables renewable energy offshore charging from wind turbines, delivering clean power to electric vessels and crew transfer ships, boosting range, safety, and net zero maritime operations with reliable, efficient infrastructure.

Key Points

A turbine-mounted offshore charger delivering renewable power to electric vessels, extending range and improving safety.

✅ Turbine-mounted, field-proven offshore charging interface

✅ Delivers 100% renewable electricity to electric vessels

✅ Accelerates net zero, cuts maritime fossil fuel use

An offshore charging system will power vessels with 100% renewably generated electricity from wind turbines, aligning with projects like battery-electric high-speed ferries now advancing in the United States.

The system, developed by Teesside marine electrical engineering firm MJR Power and Automation, will be presented at the Global Offshore Wind event in Manchester (21-22 June), alongside interest in EV energy storage for buildings that could complement offshore charging solutions.

Known as the Offshore Wind On-Turbine Electrical Vessel Charging System, MJR says the chargepoints will provide efficient, safe and reliable transfer of clean power for crew vehicles and other offshore support vessels, while emerging vehicle-to-grid capacity on wheels concepts highlight the wider role of electric fleets.

“This innovation will break down the existing range barriers and increase the uptake by vessel owners and operators, as demonstrated by electric ships on the B.C. coast moving to fully electric and green propulsion systems for retrofit and new-build vessels,” an announcement said.

“In combination with other field-proven technologies, the charging system will be an important part for government and offshore wind owners and operators to achieve their net zero maritime operations targets, and switch away from fossil fuels, complemented by port initiatives such as all-electric berth at London Gateway now under development. The ability to charge when in the field will significantly accelerate adoption of current emission-free propulsion systems, which will be a major asset for the decarbonisation of the global maritime sector.”

The firm recently announced that construction and in-house testing of the system had been completed. The development project was part of the Clean Maritime Demonstration Competition, funded by the Department for Transport and delivered in partnership with Innovate UK, reflecting wider interest in reversing the charge to the grid for resilient energy systems.

MJR electrical engineer Mohammed Latif said: “Our system will be absolutely crucial in helping governments to deliver on their net zero carbon targets, supported by plans like new UK-Europe interconnectors that strengthen clean energy supply, and I am looking forward to demonstrating how it works and the benefits it offers.”

As part of the project, MJR Power and Automation led a consortium of partners – Ore Catapult, Xceco, Artemis Technologies and Tidal Transit – that all provided expertise.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure 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

China EV Market sees surging deliveries as Tesla, XPeng, Nio, and Li Auto race for market share, driven by tech-forward infotainment, autonomous features, and strong P7 and G3 demand, signaling intensifying competition and rapid growth.

Key Points

China EV Market features rapid EV sales growth led by Tesla, XPeng, Nio, and Li Auto amid tech-driven competition.

✅ XPeng deliveries up 617% YoY in June; 459% YTD growth

✅ Nio and Li Auto post triple-digit quarterly gains

✅ Tech focus: infotainment, ADAS; models P7, G3, G3i

XPeng President and Vice Chairman Brian Gu is quick to praise the Tesla brand and acknowledge the EV maker's "commanding" market share in China, and in key markets like the California EV market as well. 

But in the same breath, the executive at the upstart China-based EV rival said his company and peers are fast closing the competitive gap with Tesla.

"I think the Chinese players are catching up very quickly," Gu said on Yahoo Finance Live. "Our product as well as some of the other products that are being introduced by the leading players are very good, and have comparable specs — as well as better features I think compared to Tesla."

That point is not lost in the sales data from the main China EV players, and mirrors the global EV surge seen in recent years.

XPeng said this week deliveries in June surged 617% year-over-year to 6,565. So far this year, deliveries have skyrocketed 459% to 30,738 fueled by demand for XPeng's P7 sedan and G3 SUV, despite concerns about the biggest threats to the EV boom among investors. 

June deliveries at Nio rose 116% from a year ago to 8,083, even as mainstream adoption hurdles remain industry-wide. For the quarter ending June 30, Nio delivered 21,896 vehicles marking a growth rate from a year ago of 112%. 

As for Li Auto, its June deliveries rose 321% from a year earlier to 7,713. Second quarter deliveries improved 166% year-over-year to 17,575.

Tesla reportedly sold 33,155 cars in China in June, up 122% year-over-year, even as its energy business outlook remains a focus for investors. 

"In the last few months, our growth has outpaced the industry as well as Tesla in China. But I think it's a long race because ultimately this market will not be dominated by one or two companies. It will probably be a number of players occupying probably large market share positions of 10% and above. That will likely be the trend, and we hope to be one of those top players," Gu explained. 

XPeng — which JPMorgan analysts estimate could grab 8% of China's electric car market by 2025 —currently has two models in the Chinese electric car market, as China's carmakers push into Europe too. They have gained notoriety in an increasingly crowded market for their tech-forward infotainment systems and autonomous technology.

The company's third model dubbed the G3i is expected to see deliveries begin in September, taking aim at smaller sedans such as the Toyota Camry. 

Shares of China's EV makers have cooled off this year despite their strong sales, and the U.S. EV market share dipped in early 2024 as well. XPeng shares are down 7% year-to-date, while Nio has shed 5%. Li Auto's stock is down 11% on the year. 

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

The Netherlands grid crisis exposes how rapid renewable energy growth is straining transmission capacity. Solar, wind, and electric vehicle demand are overloading networks, forcing officials to urge reduced peak-time power use and accelerate national grid modernization plans.

Main Points

The Netherlands grid crisis refers to national electricity congestion caused by surging renewable energy generation and rising consumer demand.

✅ Grid congestion from rapid solar and wind expansion

✅ Strained transmission and distribution capacity

✅ National investment in smart grid upgrades

The Dutch government is urging households to reduce electricity consumption between 16:00 and 21:00 — a signal that the country’s once-stable power grid is under serious stress. The call comes amid an accelerating shift to wind and solar power that is overwhelming transmission infrastructure and creating “grid congestion” across regions, as seen in Nordic grid constraints this year.

In a government television campaign, a narrator warns: “When everyone uses electricity at the same time, our power grid can become overloaded. That could lead to failures — so please try to use less electricity between 4 pm and 9 pm.” The plea reflects a system where supply occasionally outpaces the grid’s ability to distribute it, with some regions abroad issuing summer blackout warnings already.

According to Dutch energy firm Eneco’s CEO, Kys-Jan Lamo, the root of the problem lies in the mismatch between modern renewable generation and a grid built for centralized fossil fuel plants. He notes that 70% of Eneco’s output already comes from solar and wind, and this “grid congestion is like traffic on the power lines.” Lamo explains:

“The grid congestion is caused by too much demand in some areas of the network, or by too much supply being pushed into the grid beyond what the network can carry.”

He adds that many of the transmission lines in residential areas are narrow — a legacy of when fewer and larger power plants fed electricity through major feeder lines, underscoring grid vulnerabilities seen elsewhere today. Under the new model, renewable generation occurs everywhere: “This means that electricity is now fed into the grid even in peripheral areas with relatively fine lines — and those lines cannot always cope.”

Experts warn that resolving these issues will demand years of planning and immense investment in smarter grid infrastructure over the coming years. Damien Ernst, an electrical engineering professor at Liège University and respected voice on European grids, states that the Netherlands is experiencing a “grid crisis” brought on by “insufficient investment in distribution and transmission networks.” He emphasizes that the speed of renewable deployment has outpaced the grid’s capacity to absorb it.

Eneco operates a “virtual power plant” control system — described by Lamo as “the brain we run” — that dynamically balances supply and demand. During periods of oversupply, the system can curtail wind turbines or shut down solar panels. Conversely, during peak demand, the system can throttle back electricity provision to participating customers in exchange for lower tariffs. However, these techniques only mitigate strain — they cannot replace the need for physical upgrades or bolster resilience to extreme weather outages alone.

The bottleneck has begun limiting new connections: “Consumers often want to install heat pumps or charge electric vehicles, but they increasingly find it difficult to get the necessary network capacity,” Lamo warns. Businesses too are struggling. “Companies often want to expand operations, but cannot get additional capacity from grid operators. Even new housing developments are affected, since there’s insufficient infrastructure to connect whole communities.”

Currently, thousands of businesses are queuing for network access. TenneT, the national grid operator, estimates that 8,000 firms await initial connection approval, and another 12,000 seek to increase their capacity allocations. Stakeholders warn that unresolved congestion risks choking economic growth.

According to Kys-Jan Lamo: “Looking back, almost all of this could have been prevented.” He acknowledges that post-2015 climate commitments placed heavy emphasis on adding generation and on grid modernization costs more broadly, but “we somewhat underestimated the impact on grid capacity.”

In response, the government has introduced a national “Grid Congestion Action Plan,” aiming to accelerate approvals for infrastructure expansions and to refine regulations to promote smarter grid use. At the same time, feed-in incentives for solar power are being scaled back in some regions, and certain areas may even impose charges to integrate new solar systems into the grid.

The scale of what’s needed is vast. TenneT has proposed adding roughly 100,000 km of new power lines by 2050 and investing in doubling or tripling existing capacity in many areas. However, permit processes can take eight years before construction begins, and many projects require an additional two years to complete. As Lamo points out, “the pace of energy transition far exceeds the grid’s existing capacity — and every new connection request simply extends waiting lists.”

Unless grid expansion keeps up, and as climate pressures intensify, the very clean energy future the Netherlands is striving for may remain constrained by the physics of distribution.

Related Articles

• Electricity Forum World News