The Carbon Clock is currently unavailable, please try again in a few minutes.
Data: Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change (mcc-berlin.net)
Remaining Carbon Budget
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), established in 1988 by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP), evaluates scientific data related to climate change, including estimates of the remaining CO2 emissions budget to limit global warming to 1.5°C / 2°C. This data, last updated in the summer of 2021, underlies the MCC Carbon Clock.
IPCC bases the carbon budget on the near-linear relationship between cumulative emissions and temperature rise, considering the lag between CO2 concentration and its temperature impact. With annual emissions from fossil fuels, industrial processes, and land-use change estimated at 42.2 gigatonnes (1,337 tonnes per second), the 1.5°C / 2°C budgets are expected to be exhausted in approximately 3 and 21 years from January 2026, respectively.
Realtime countdown of the remaining carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions budget until global warming reaches a maximum of 1.5°C / 2°C above pre-industrial levels.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), established in 1988 by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP), evaluates scientific data related to climate change including estimates of the remaining amount of CO2 that can be released into the atmosphere to limit global warming to a maximum of 1.5°C / 2°C. This data was last updated in summer 2021, and is the basis of the MCC Carbon Clock.
IPCC bases the concept of a carbon budget on a nearly linear relationship between the cumulative emissions and the temperature rise. There is, however, a lag between the concentration of emissions in the atmosphere and their impact on temperature to be taken into account. With the starting point of annual emissions of CO2 from burning fossil fuels, industrial processes and land-use change estimated to be 42.2 gigatonnes per year [or 1,337 tonnes per second], the 1.5°C / 2°C budgets would be expected to be exhausted in approximately 5 and 23 years from August 2024, respectively.
Am I also contributing?
Are we thinking about the emission of greenhouse gasses such as methane and carbon when we do day to day activities like: driving a car, using energy to cook or heating our houses? Probably not. But by doing this we are making our small but constant contribution to the problem of Global Warming. We see from worsening weather disasters around the world that this returns as a boomerang back to our houses and families.
>80%
of all natural disasters were related to climate change
24.29%
USA share of global world cumulative CO₂ emission
100 million
people can be pushed into poverty by 2030 because of climate change impact
The overall trend in global average temperature indicates that warming is occurring in an increasing number of regions. Future Earth warming depends on our greenhouse gas emissions in the coming decades.
At present, approximately 11 billion metric tons of carbon are released into the atmosphere each year. As a result, the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is on the rise every year, as it surpasses the natural capacity for removal.
10
warmest years on historical record have occurred since 2010
>2°F
is the total increase in the Earth's temperature since 1880
>2x
warming rate since 1981
Understanding the ultimate consequences of current trends
Observations from both satellites and the Earth’s surface are indisputable — the planet has warmed rapidly over the past 44 years. As far back as 1850, data from weather stations all over the globe make clear the Earth’s average temperature has been rising.
In recent days, as the Earth has reached its highest average temperatures in recorded history, warmer than any time in the last 125,000 years. Paleoclimatologists, who study the Earth’s climate history, are confident that the current decade is warmer than any period since before the last ice age, about 125,000 years ago.
Clean hydrogen has 3 main uses: energy storage, load balancing, and as feedstock/fuel. Used in all sectors, including steel, chemical, oil refining & heavy transport. Actions to accelerate decarbonization & increase clean hydrogen use include:
Invest in clean hydrogen supply;
Increase hydrogen demand as fuel/feedstock;
Use hydrogen for clean high-temperature heat;
Use hydrogen as low-carbon feedstock for ammonia/fertilizer;
Use hydrogen as clean fuel for heavy transport;
Create policies incentivizing electric power decarbonization;
Utilize hydrogen as a means for storing energy over extended periods;
Improve electrolyser technology & readiness in heavy industry/liquid transport fuels;
Increase use of Methane Pyrolysis & Water Electrolysis for clean hydrogen production;
Increase use of wind and solar in electricity production systems.
Increase the usage of Electricity
Reducing greenhouse gas emissions and achieving carbon neutrality requires widespread renewable energy and a huge increase in vehicles, products, and processes powered by electricity.
Electricity generated from increasingly renewable energy sources is the right way to create a clean energy system. Switching from direct use of fossil fuels to electricity improves air quality by reducing emissions of local pollutants.In order to increase the use of electricity, we can do the following:
Use more electric cars. Compared to traditional combustion engine vehicles, electric cars show a 3-5 times increase in energy efficiency;
Increase your electricity consumption within your household;
Upgrade your home with smart technology. Electrical appliances can be digitized with smart technology;
Use electric heat pump heating. Heat pumps use 4 times less energy than oil or gas boilers;
Electrify industrial processes in order to reduce energy intensity.
As the foremost element in the periodic table, hydrogen holds a unique position in the universe, given its status as the lightest and one of the most ancient and abundant chemical elements.
Never alone
Hydrogen, in its pure form, needs to be extracted since it is usually present in more intricate molecules, such as water or hydrocarbons, on Earth.
Fuel of stars
Hydrogen powers stars through nuclear fusion. This creates energy and all the other chemicals elements which are found on Earth.
Hydrogen is an essential part for manufacturing Ammoniam Nitrate fertilizers. Half of the world's food is grown using hydrogen-based ammonia fertilizer.
Hydrogen fuel cells make electricity from combining hydrogen and oxygen. Power plants are showing increased interest in using hydrogen, and gas turbines can convert from natural gas to hydrogen combustion.
Steelmaking is an industry that is beginning to successfully use hydrogen in two ways to eliminate almost all greenhouse emissions from the steelmaking process. First for Direct Reduced Iron (DRI) replacing coke (from coal) with hydrogen to remove oxygen from iron ore. Second for heat to melt the iron ore into DRI and then into low carbon steel.
Hydrogen is used in production of explosives, fertilizers, and other chemicals; to convert heavier hydrocarbons to lightweight hydrocarbons to produce many value-added chemicals; to hydrogenate organic compounds; and to remove impurities like sulfur, halides, oxygen, metals, and/or nitrogen. It's also in household cleaners like ammonium hydroxide.
Using clean hydrogen makes it possible to reduce emissions while "cracking" heavier petroleum into lightweight hydrocarbons to produce many value-added chemicals.
The World needs MORE hydrogen, to move toward Turquoise and Green hydrogen, and away from Grey hydrogen
Where We are Now
The temperature trend shows the increase can reach 5.9°F (3.28°C) by 2050
High CO2 emissions (7-8 kg CO2 /kg H2)
Only 2% produced with carbon capture (2Mt)
Worldwide 98% Hydrogen production (94 Mt) without carbon capture emits CO2(900 Mt)
62% from methane without carbon capture
Fossil Fuel electricity generation pollutes the environment
Fossil Fuel provides 33-35% efficiency
What We Want to Achieve
By 2030
25% Produced(24Mt) with carbon capture
Stop more climate change limiting warming to 2.4°F (1.3°C) by 2050
Hydrogen for low-carbon industrial heat
100% Hydrogen as a sustainable industrial feedstock
Statistics Source: IEA Global Hydrogen Review 2022
Most Common Hydrogen Sources
These methods now produce 85% of the world's Greenhouse Gas carbon emissions
SMR (Steam Methane Reforming) + WGS (Water Gas Shift)
SMR is a way of producing syngas (Hydrogen and Carbon monoxide) by mixing hydrocarbons (like natural gas) with water. This mixture goes into a special container called a reformer vessel where a high-pressure mixture of steam and methane comes into contact with a nickel catalyst. As a result of the reaction, hydrogen and carbon monoxide are produced.
To make more hydrogen, carbon monoxide from the first reaction is mixed with water through the WGS reaction. As a result, we receive more hydrogen and a gas called carbon dioxide. For each unit of hydrogen produced there are 6 units of carbon dioxide produced and in almost all cases released into the atmosphere. Carbon dioxide is a harmful gas causing climate change.
$863 ($0.86 per kilogram of Hydrogen)
(Electricity = $474 + Methane $383 + Water $6 US EIA May 2024*)
SMR + WGS with Carbon Capture
The SMR method involves combining natural gas with high-temperature steam and a catalyst to generate a blend of hydrogen and carbon monoxide. Then, more water is added to the mixture to make more hydrogen and a gas called carbon dioxide.
For each unit of hydrogen produced there are 6 units of carbon dioxide produced. In a few experimental trials, to help the environment, the carbon dioxide is captured and stored underground using a special technology called CCUS (Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage). This leaves almost pure hydrogen.
One of the main problems with carbon capture and storage is that without careful management of storage, the CO2 can flow from these underground reservoirs into the surrounding air and contribute to climate change, or spoil the nearby water supply. Another is the risk of creating earthquake tremors caused by the storage increasing underground pressure, known as human caused seismicity.
$1,253 ($1.25 per kilogram of Hydrogen)
(Electricity $474 + Methane $505 + Water $4 US + CCS $270 EIA May 2024*)
Newer, Clean Hydrogen Sources
Methane Pyrolysis
This technology based on natural gas emits no greenhouse gases as it does not produce CO2. Methane Pyrolysis refers to a method of generating hydrogen by breaking down methane into its basic components, namely hydrogen and solid carbon.
Oxygen is not involved at all within this process (no CO or CO2 is produced). Thus, for the production of hydrogen gas there is no need for an additional of CO or for CO2 separation.
The concept of Green Hydrogen involves generating hydrogen from renewable energy sources by means of electrolysis, a process that splits water into its fundamental constituents, hydrogen and oxygen, using an electric current. This process can be powered by a range of renewable energy sources, such as solar energy, wind power, and hydropower.
The electricity used in the electrolysis process is derived exclusively from renewable sources, ensuring a sustainable and environmentally-friendly production of hydrogen. It generates zero carbon dioxide emissions and, as a result, prevents global warming.
Natural geologic hydrogen refers to hydrogen gas that is naturally present within the Earth's subsurface.
Known as "White" hydrogen, it can be generated through various geological processes. The study of geologic hydrogen and its potential as an energy resource is an active area of research, as it holds promise for renewable energy applications, particularly in the context of hydrogen fuel cells and clean energy production.
It's important to note that the creation of geologic hydrogen is generally a slow and long-term process, occurring over geological timescales. This is because the other methods are human production technology methods and this is creation by a natural phenomena. The availability and abundance of geologic hydrogen can vary significantly depending on the specific geological setting and the interplay of various factors such as rock composition, temperature, pressure, and the presence of suitable reactants.
Here are some of the main sources and mechanisms of geologic hydrogen generation:
01
Serpentinization
Serpentinization is a chemical reaction that occurs when water interacts with certain types of rocks, particularly ultramafic rocks rich in minerals such as olivine and pyroxene. This process results in the formation of serpentine minerals and produces hydrogen gas as a byproduct. Serpentinization typically takes place in environments such as hydrothermal systems, oceanic crust, and certain tectonic settings.
02
Radiolysis
In regions with high concentrations of radioactive elements, such as uranium and thorium, the decay of these elements releases radiation. This radiation can interact with surrounding water or other fluids, splitting the water molecules and generating hydrogen gas through a process called radiolysis. This mechanism is believed to contribute to the production of hydrogen in certain deep geological settings, such as deep groundwater systems and radioactive mineral deposits.
03
Geothermal activity
Geothermal systems, which involve the circulation of hot water or steam through fractured rocks, can generate hydrogen gas as a result of various processes. High-temperature hydrothermal systems can cause the thermal decomposition of hydrocarbons, releasing hydrogen gas. Additionally, the interaction between water and hot rocks in geothermal reservoirs can lead to the production of hydrogen through serpentinization or other geochemical reactions.
04
Abiotic methane cracking
Abiotic methane refers to methane gas that is not directly derived from biological sources, such as microbial activity. In certain geological environments, abiotic methane can be generated through processes like thermal decomposition of organic matter or reactions between carbon dioxide and hydrogen. This methane can subsequently undergo thermal or catalytic cracking, producing hydrogen gas.
Success Stories
Steps Taken by Different Countries to Move Forward to Net Zero Emissions
96
£4 billion
100 MW+
1st place
green hydrogen plants are owned by Australia. It possesses the highest count of establishments globally. Australia is expected to have the lowest costs of green hydrogen production by 2050 due to an abundance of solar and wind resources.
was committed by the UK to hydrogen technology and production facilities by 2030 to cultivate a hydrogen economy and create 9,000 jobs.
green hydrogen production sites are being developed by Canadian company First Hydrogen in Quebec and Manitoba. These plans are being developed in conjunction with Canadian and North American automotive strategies.
in the list of largest hydropower producers in the world belongs to China. It is followed by Brazil, USA and Canada.
By 2047
In 2017
200,000
110 countries
green hydrogen will help India make a quantum leap toward energy independence. The country’s National Hydrogen Mission was launched in 2021.
Japan became the first country to formulate a national hydrogen strategy as part of its ambition to become the world's first "hydrogen society" by deploying this fuel in all sectors.
fuel-cell electric vehicles production by 2025 is the goal stated by South Korea. In 2021, South Korea also approved the Hydrogen Power Economic Development and Safety Control Law, the first in the world to promote hydrogen vehicles, charging stations, and fuel cells.
have legally committed to reach net zero emissions by 2050.
Conclusion
The World needs MORE hydrogen
SMR + WGS
Keep current hydrogen production methods BUT
+
Clean Hydrogen Production Methods
make additional steps to broaden them with cleaner production methods
=
More Hydrogen
And as a result the world will get more vital hydrogen and become one step closer to net zero emission
Сurrent Situation
The market is dominated by grey hydrogen produced from natural gas through a fossil fuel-powered SMR process. Every year, the production of grey hydrogen amounts to approximately 70 to 80 million tons, and it is primarily used in industrial chemistry. More than 80% is used for the synthesis of ammonia and its derivatives (fertilizer for agriculture, 50 perecent of food worldwide) or for oil refining operations. Unfortunately, for every 1 kg of grey hydrogen, almost 6-8 kg of carbon dioxide is emitted into the atmosphere.
More than 95% of the world's hydrogen production is based on fossil fuels with greenhouse gas emissions. Nevertheless, to achieve a more stable future and promote the transition of pure energy, the global goal is to reduce the use of other “colors” of hydrogen and focus on the production of a clean product, such as green or turquoise hydrogen. Reaching the zero carbon footprint will require a gradual transition from grey to green/turquoise hydrogen in the coming years.
It is possible to produce decarbonized hydrogen. An option is to use another feedstock, namely water, and convert it in large electrolyzers into H2 and oxygen (O2), which are returned to the atmosphere. If the electricity used to power the electrolyzers is 100% renewable energy (photovoltaic panels, wind turbines, etc.), then hydrogen becomes green. Currently, it is about 0.1% of the total production of hydrogen, but it is expected that it will increase since the cost of renewable energy continues to fall.
U.S. additions to electric generation capacity from 2000 to 2025. The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) reports that the United States is building power plants at a record pace. As indicated on the chart, nearly all new electric generating capacity either already installed or planned for 2025 is from clean energy sources, while new power plants coming on line 25 years ago, in 2000, were predominantly fueled by natural gas. New wind power plants began to come on line in 2001 and new solar plants, 10 years, later in 2011. Since 2023, the U.S. power industry has built more solar than any other type of power plant. The EIA predicts that clean energy (wind, solar, and battery storage) will deliver 93% of new power-plant capacity in 2025.
Global surface air temperature departures between 1940 and 2024 from the average temperature for the period 1991-2020 (averages below the 11-year average are blue and those above are red). The average in October 2024 was +0.80 degrees Celsius above the reference period average, down from +0.85 degrees Celsius above the reference period average in 2023, which was the warmest October on record.
Large-scale batteries are safer than ever, but a few battery fires have spurred public backlash. Clean energy experts are working to win back trust.
Hi everyone! Welcome back to California Wire. Last Thursday, I took the train up to Sacramento to participate in a panel at the California Energy Storage Alliance’s annual conference. The topic was grid-scale lithium-ion batteries, and how to reassure communities that they’re safe neighbors.
California has more grid batteries than any state except Texas — a massive 21 gigawatts of capacity. But as battery installations have surged, so has public opposition, with city governments moving to limit or ban new battery projects.
In the past few years, a handful of high-profile fires in California have fanned fears about battery safety. Most notably, in January 2025, an installation at Moss Landing burst into flames, forcing nearby residents to evacuate — and then, just last month, it ignited again. Also last month, a fire at a much smaller battery system led to evacuations in the city of La Verne.
These incidents spread like, well, wildfire on social media, where misinformation abounds. But California needs to more than double its current battery capacity by 2045 to meet its climate goals, so it’s important that we figure out how to engage with local communities to make sure they know the facts.
On Thursday, I and my fellow panelists talked about some ideas for how to do this. To start with, California Energy Commissioner Noemí Gallardo cited compelling new data from the Electric Power Research Institute showing a 98% decrease in lithium-ion grid battery failures across the world from 2018 to 2025, making them about as reliable as the big oil-filled transformers at grid substations.
Of course, facts like these falter in the face of scary images of disasters like the Moss Landing fires, Gallardo said. But today’s utility-scale battery installations are built to a much higher safety standard, specifically to prevent Moss Landing–type conflagrations, as my colleague Julian Spector has reported. “Even though there is a minority of people saying batteries are not safe, this data shows they are,” Gallardo said.
California last year also beefed up its battery fire-safety regulations and practices. That’s not just sound policy, it’s also smart community engagement, said Ashanti Washington, media relations director for the Reliable Grid Project. Her organization held focus-group sessions with Data for Progress in three California communities to ask who residents trust on battery safety. “First responders rose to the top,” she said.
Bringing state agencies like the CEC into the permitting process can help ensure that the latest fire-safety practices are being put to use. Take the 400-megawatt Potentia-Viridi project in rural Alameda County, which won CEC approval earlier this year under its new Opt-In Certification program for energy projects seeking expedited state review.
While some locals are leery of this kind of state intervention — in at least one instance when a developer tried to use the CEC process, it backfired — the safety expertise state agencies bring to bear can make a positive difference.
Julia Poska, communications manager for Clearway Energy Group, developer of the Potentia-Viridi project, said Alameda County officials were glad to work with the CEC, which “has a lot of technical understanding” through its participation in a state interagency battery-safety group. “They’re able to ask tough questions about safety,” and work with local fire agencies to ensure they’re prepared for emergencies.
It helped that Potentia-Viridi is in a remote part of the county, Poska added. Batteries in populated areas are a tougher sell. Earlier this year, neighbors of a proposed 320-megawatt project in San Diego County protested so much, the developer abandoned its efforts. Still, other projects have been able to win local support in even more densely populated areas.
Talking up the clean energy benefits that batteries deliver can also help convince neighbors to get on board, said Miranda Ehrlich, senior campaign director at Greenlight America, a nonprofit that supports community organizing on behalf of clean energy. “We’ve seen projects succeed as a result,” she said.
In Chino, the city council flipped last month from opposing a 400-MW battery project not far from a city park to approving it, after the developer made a host of safety commitments. Labor unions and clean energy supporters also voiced support, and Chino Valley Fire Chief Dave William affirmed that his department has been “very well-trained” to respond to battery emergencies.
My take
Local opposition to clean energy projects is a major problem. But we can’t write off opponents as just NIMBYs or peddlers of social-media disinformation. People have legitimate public-safety and environmental concerns about batteries, even if new projects are very unlikely to burst into flames. And communities near polluting fossil-fuel facilities are justified in worrying that a nearby battery project might impose more environmental injustices.
I shared a few of my own ideas during the panel: helping media outlets access relevant data under tight deadlines after there is some kind of accident, and bringing more transparency into how safe modern battery facilities really are. Hey, why not station webcams that stream 24/7 footage of batteries just sitting there, not bursting into flame?
Under the state’s Lithium Valley Vision plan, billions of dollars are being invested in facilities to mine and process the lithium and also capture the region’s geothermal power potential. But Inside Climate News and Columbia Journalism Investigations remind us that the region’s deep-pocketed water-rights holders stand to benefit the most from that development, even as local residents who suffer high rates of poverty struggle to pay for clean drinking water.
By the numbers
This chart, from the EPRI battery safety report mentioned above, has some scale problems: The bars representing how many battery failures happen per year are way bigger than the rising blue curve showing how fast battery deployments are growing. So pay attention to the orange line showing “failure incidents per deployed GWh.” That’s the line that tells the important story, which is that far fewer batteries are failing even as grid battery deployments are experiencing hockey-stick growth.
(Electric Power Research Institute)
Happenings
Don’t forget, tonight starting at 6:00 p.m., I’ll be hanging out with Canary Media Managing Editor Wendy Becktold at Drake’s Dealership in downtown Oakland. (Drake’s is a great brewpub with outdoor seating, not a used-car lot, in case you were wondering.) It’ll be a super-casual affair, with great food, great drinks, and great conversation. Come on by!
You can also catch me, along with many climate and energy luminaries, at our Canary Live Bay Area event on Nov. 10 in Berkeley. Hope to see you there!
And a quick programming note: Starting next week, this newsletter will be published on Thursdays instead of Wednesdays, all in the interest of bringing you the freshest news!
Photo of the week
No water is too cold for Lily the corgi — as long as there’s a stick to swim out to fetch. She particularly loves swimming at Point Isabel, which brings together glorious views of the San Francisco Bay with some of the happiest dogs on earth. (She’s less enthusiastic about the other regular feature of our visits to Point Isabel — getting her nails clipped at Mudpuppy’s — but they do a great job of it.)
Lily swimming at Point Isabel, Richmond, California, Oct. 10, 2026. (Jeff St John)
Owners of the Ford Fathom, starting at under $30,000, can power their homes without buying a costly bidirectional charger. Will other automakers follow?
Electric vehicles can serve as home backup batteries. But so far, most EVs have needed expensive bidirectional chargers to do that — a tough sell for customers.
An artist’s rendering of the charging station and home backup panel that will be compatible with the Ford Fathom electric pickup truck’s alternating current–capable bidirectional charging system. (Ford)
Instead, the Fathom will come equipped with an onboard inverter that can convert its direct-current battery power to home-ready alternating current and deliver it via much cheaper equipment.
Today, most EVs sold in the U.S. lack that capability, instead requiring a DC-to-AC inverter device connected to the home. That gear now costs from just under $7,000 to more than $10,000 — a significant price barrier.
Ford hasn’t yet finalized the exact sum for the home power management tech that will work with the Fathom, but confirmed that it will be a lot cheaper than what’s available today.
“One of the most central points of this whole story is the cost piece,” Dave McCreadie, Ford’s director of grid and energy services, told Canary Media in a Monday interview. “In order to see the adoption rate increase, reduced cost is a big piece of it, not just with the vehicle itself but the charging equipment — and now in this case, the discharging equipment.”
Specifically, Ford said that the new AC-capable bidirectional charger compatible with the Fathom will be roughly half the $1,300 price of the Ford Charge Station Pro, the bidirectional charging system it developed for the F-150 Lightning. Both pieces of equipment allow homes to manage their power consumption when the grid remains up and running.
To back up their homes during grid outages, customers also need to purchase a home backup power panel. That tech combo will cost 60% less than the $5,200 that the Ford Charge Station Pro combined with a home integration system does. (Note: These prices do not include installation costs.)
“This is not going to be Ford’s last EV that is bidirectional capable,” McCreadie added. Other vehicles being produced based on Ford’s Universal EV Platform — the new technology line coming out of its retooled Louisville, Kentucky, factory — will also come with AC bidirectional charging capability, he said.
But the Fathom is a lot cheaper than Tesla’s EVs, and its system doesn’t require costly backup batteries. Meanwhile, DC-based systems from rivals such as General Motors, which makes a number of EVs capable of vehicle-to-home charging, are significantly more expensive — GM’s sale price for its DC V2H bundle is $6,748.
If AC bidirectional charging is so much cheaper, why haven’t more automakers made it available? The reasons boil down to the cost and complexity of enabling EVs to convert their native DC battery power to home-ready AC, along with the uncertain regulatory environment that would allow customers to adopt the technology en masse.
Ford’s onboard inverter tech for the Fathom and the Universal EV platform was developed in partnership with engineers at Auto Motive Power (AMP), a startup it acquired in 2023. Jiaqi Liang, AMP’s former vice president of hardware and now senior director of electrical hardware for Ford’s Advanced Programs team, said the cost of embedding a grid-ready inverter capability in EVs is relatively low.
“The key here is to do it from scratch, so you don’t have the legacy-platform constraint,” he said. “We had the luxury of doing that from the Universal EV platform. It’s all integrated, from charging to discharging.”
To ensure that the AC power flowing from EVs is safe for homes, Ford’s system uses communications technology from a tech standard certified by the automotive standards organization SAE International called SAE J3068.
Embedding power conversion tech in an EV “gives any automaker the ability to have the car and the backup power system in the house communicate all the things you need to for safety,” Kempton explained in a Monday interview.
With that technology in place, the cost of enabling an EV to provide AC power is “in the $200 to $300 range,” he said — if it’s designed into the vehicle from the get-go. “If you want to add it on afterwards, it’s much more.”
Kempton is hopeful that additional automakers will choose to embed AC bidirectional capabilities in their EVs. “I talk with other automakers. They’re interested,” he said. “But when one of their peers announces ‘This is what we’re doing, and we’ll be 60% cheaper,’ … I think that will have a big effect.”
The other challenge is to get utilities to allow AC bidirectional charging. Only California and Maryland have set utility regulations for AC bidirectional charging outside of pilot projects, and most of the country’s 3,000-plus utilities have a “patchwork of rules and procedures” that complicate matters, McCreadie said.
Ford has been engaging with utilities and regulators in states including Michigan and Colorado to adopt clear guidelines for how vehicle-to-home charging can fit in with utility regulations. On Tuesday, it announced that it has been working since July with major utilities American Electric Power, BC Hydro, Consumers Energy, Exelon, and Pacific Gas & Electric to set common standards for how its AC V2H system can be integrated into standard utility interconnection rules.
“We want to make sure that our customers interested in deploying this technology in their homes can get their system interconnected in the lowest-hassle way,” McCreadie said.
The bipartisan bill could cut years off energy development — but a sponsor warns that the Trump administration’s latest wind attacks could blow up negotiations.
It’s been years in the making, but the U.S. Senate finally has a bipartisan permitting bill on the table that could speed up the construction of much-needed energy and grid projects. That is, if the Trump administration’s latest round of offshore wind attacks doesn’t tank the whole thing.
Three weeks ago, a bipartisan group of senators released a bill that could dramatically speed up energy construction timelines. According to a new interactive tool from Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy, it takes nearly 18 years for a transmission project that faces delays and permit challenges to come into service. This legislation could shave as much as eight years off that timeline, in large part because it would allow federal regulators to grant permits when states don’t do so quickly enough.
Solar, wind, and geothermal projects would also get a faster track to completion under the bill — but so would gas pipelines, according to Columbia’s analysis. Pipelines’ speedier processing is one of many reasons some tribal and environmental groups are calling for revisions to the legislation. Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) meanwhile raised concerns that it would allow for swifter data center construction.
Still, some clean energy advocates are taking the good with the bad. This week, Advanced Energy United, the Solar Energy Industries Association, and three other industry groups sent a letter to congressional leaders urging the legislation’s swift passage. A surprising coalition of former officials from the Trump, Biden, Obama, Clinton, and both Bush administrations shared their support for the bill in a letter, too.
But all that advocacy may not mean a thing now that the Trump administration has revived its war on offshore wind. On Tuesday, the Justice Department asked a court to let the federal government reconsider its permit for New England Wind, a 2-gigawatt development off Massachusetts. The administration similarly wants to reconsider a permit for Revolution Wind, which is already producing power, and a few other offshore projects.
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), one of the bill’s sponsors, made it clear what the DOJ’s move means for the legislation’s chances: “This is how you blow up a permitting deal,” he told Politico.
The administration reportedly offered a concession on Thursday morning, with a White House official saying the Defense Department would allow a handful of long-delayed onshore wind projects to proceed. Whitehouse told Punchbowl News that it would only be “a start” to getting negotiations back on track.
The Senate isn’t set to vote on the bill until after the midterm elections. But with lobbying groups lining up to reshape the legislation, and the Trump administration showing it’s capable of upending the deal at a moment’s notice, it looks like the bill has a rocky few weeks ahead.
More big energy stories
Balcony solar mania reaches Capitol Hill
As balcony solar closes out its biggest year yet in the U.S., Rep. Rob Menendez (D-N.J.) is looking to extend its momentum at the federal level. On Monday, Menendez introduced a bill that would require states to consider rules to let Americans use plug-in solar, and that would create a program to help lower-income households access the tech. Congress probably won’t consider the bill before adjourning for the year, but it could be reintroduced in January, Alison F. Takemura reports.
So far, 10 states have passed laws that allow their residents to plug solar panels into conventional 120-volt outlets, with nine of those new laws coming this year. But while balcony solar generation hasn’t made much of a dent on the U.S. grid yet, the combined capacity of other small solar arrays is nothing to sniff at. According to the Energy Information Administration, solar arrays of less than 1 MW produced nearly 93,000 GWh of power in 2025, more than quadrupling their total capacity from a decade ago.
What’s up with the NextEra-Dominion merger?
The proposed merger between Florida’s NextEra Energy and Virginia’s Dominion Energy isn’t attracting many fans.
This week, staff at the Virginia State Corporation Commission officially recommended that regulators reject the $67 billion deal as it stands. SCC staff, who are tasked with researching and making recommendations to the body’s three commissioners, have concluded that the NextEra-Dominion deal doesn’t go far enough to protect customers from reliability and financial risks. Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger (D) highlighted similar points when voicing her skepticism of the merger this week.
And late last week, The Washington Post revealed a detail that may impact the merger’s favorability with federal regulators appointed by the White House. NextEra donated $4 million to President Donald Trump’s ballroom project last year — a move that consumer advocates are calling “convenient” and “very problematic.”
Clean energy news to know this week
Gilded Age 2.0: Data centers have rolled past railroads to become the source of the largest investment boom in U.S. history, a Columbia University report finds. (Stateline)
Pushing through a pipeline: The DOE will use $42 million in Defense Production Act funding to revive plans for the Constitution Pipeline from Pennsylvania to New York — which the White House claims New York Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) allowed to move forward in exchange for offshore wind permissions. (The Hill, news release)
Build-a-VPP: Researchers are tasking roughly 200 California households with designing their own virtual power plant, in hopes of figuring out what motivates people to join these grid-boosting programs. (Canary Media)
Nuclear ambitions: The Nuclear Co. proposes constructing a nuclear energy campus in Kentucky totaling 6.6 GW of generation, while Indiana’s governor says his state is planning to build another 6 GW of nuclear generation. (news release, Indianapolis Star)
You can dig it: Developers Ormat and Invenergy dominated bids in this week’s federal geothermal lease sale, which brought in $4.5 million for parcels in Nevada and sold some plots slated for solar development. (Reuters)
Aluminum’s trashy solution: The U.S. aluminum market is feeling the burn of tariffs and supply shortages, but better sorting technologies and state policies could help keep the metal out of landfills and ready to recycle. (Canary Media)
Float on: The floating offshore wind industry, which has its U.S. roots in Maine, continues to push forward on research despite federal and financial challenges. (Inside Climate News)
.svg)
