WCA November 2018

From the Americas

This year, the state mandated rooftop solar panels on commercial buildings, which could add another 75,000 systems annually. That type of large-scale adoption will help increased electric demand, although the Next 10 report points out that California lags in “demand response” (ie flexible power provisions) in periods of high demand.

Energy Assessing the effect on the power grid of five million PEVs on the road, California likes the results of its calculations Critics of electric vehicles have said that more electric vehicles (EVs) on the road could stress already over- burdened electric power grids past the breaking point. But a study released in late July by a California non-profit appears to refute the charge. As noted by Aaron Cole, the managing editor of Green Car Reports , San Francisco-based Next 10 published a report suggesting that Governor Jerry Brown’s proposal to multiply the number of electrified vehicles driven in California by more than 13 times would not stress the power grid as much as some have feared. There are 369,000 EVs on the road of the state, according to the think tank, and Mr Brown has recommended a goal of five million plug-in electrics (PEVs) by 2030. In an example presented in the report, a Chevrolet Bolt EV driven 50 miles a day uses less power than an air conditioner does to cool a three-bedroom house for three hours. The Next 10 projection of 3.9 million PEVs adding 15,500 gigawatt hours (GWh) of charging demand would be the equivalent of roughly five per cent of the state’s current power requirements. (“Study: Jump in Electric Vehicles May Not Stress California’s Power Grid,” 2 nd August) To cope with the burden of more PEVs, the group asserts, California will need to update and manage PEV charging, but it said that the benefits of the clean transportation will far outweigh the costs. Those measures would include off-peak charging incentives and smart-charging programmes. According to Green Car Reports , Next 10 acknowledges the challenges to implementing such programmes. Specifically, an energy storage programme that uses the EV as a home battery to supply electricity to the grid would be costly and complex. But Anand Gopal, one of the study’s authors, said in a statement: “If California wants to meet its zero-emission vehicle goals while keeping electricity affordable and reliable, it’s worth considering some policy levers that can help.”  Mr Cole observed that the state’s ability to cope with increased demand is attributable in part to its shift away from investor-owned public utilities toward smaller, residential-sized collectives and home energy programmes. California has more than 800,000 rooftop solar-panel systems and is reported to be adding 100,000 more annually.

BigStockPhoto.com Photographer: Aispl

Steel

The US tariffs on steel and aluminium: as conducive to bafflement as ever as 2018 draws to a close “Ultimately, it went along expected lines,” wrote Sohrab Darabshaw, who contributes an Indian perspective on industrial metals markets to Metal Miner (“US Consultations Fizzle With India, Others Over Metals Tariffs,” 26 th July) The reference was, of course, to what Mr Darabshaw characterised as “the trade tariff imbroglio” deriving from the US imposition, on 1 st June, of 25 per cent and ten per cent tariffs, respectively, on steel and aluminium imports. In Geneva in July, trade officials from India, Canada and Mexico met with their American counterparts on the issue, but won no concessions from the USA. Earlier in the month, the European Union, China and Norway had held similarly fruitless talks with the USA under the aegis of the World Trade Organization (WTO). As noted by Mr Darabshaw, most disputes of this kind fall under Article 4 of the WTO dispute settlement rules. But the USA maintains that its measures on steel and aluminium are “sovereign determinations” that belong under a different WTO category: Article 21 of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (“GATT 1994”). The USA position reportedly rests on Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, which empowers the US Department of Commerce to determine the effect of imports on national security. In the US interpretation, invoking Section 232 effectively insulates an issue from outside review, and thus from resolution under WTO dispute settlement protocols. Representatives of India and other nations refute this view, seeing in the USA tariffs a “disguised safeguard” measure. They note that another US agency, the Department of Defense, has determined that there is no threat to the country’s national security from steel and aluminium imports.  The Indian, Canadian and Mexican delegation in Geneva also sought to learn why Australia, Brazil, Korea and Argentina had been exempted from the US tariffs. Did steel and aluminium imports from those countries pose no national security threat to the United States?

45

www.read-wca.com

Wire & Cable ASIA – November/December 2018