Connect with us

Published

on

High winds, a beaming sun, a remote landscape — the National Renewable Energy Laboratory’s (NREL’s) Flatirons Campus might be a familiar environment to military servicemembers. Here at “Fort Renewable,” down a dirt road from the main research campus, military Quonset huts are dispersed among energy assets like solar photovoltaics and battery storage.

Compared to a real military base, the Fort Renewable setup is not so much forward-operating as forward-thinking, with its own critical mission: to design high-renewable systems for secure applications. With unique cyber and physical capabilities, NREL’s microgrid research platform is the scene of large-scale grid demonstrations that are helping the military, microgrid, and energy storage industries transition past technical barriers toward extreme renewable integration.

Quonset huts at NREL replicate military microgrid environments so that DOD and partners can reliably evaluate energy security with renewables and battery storage.

Quonset huts at NREL replicate military microgrid environments so that DOD and partners can reliably evaluate energy security with renewables and battery storage.

Quonset huts at NREL replicate military microgrid environments so that DOD and partners can reliably evaluate energy security with renewables and battery storage.

A Competition To Create Quality Microgrids

Microgrids are nothing new to the military, and especially nothing new for NREL–Department of Defense (DOD) collaborations. But as new threats emerge on energy systems — generally cyber and environmental — the DOD is now looking to bolster its backup power with battery storage, in place of a current preference for diesel generators.

“We’ve had military microgrids for 20 years now,” said Brian Miller, a senior NREL researcher and microgrid research lead. “But we didn’t have batteries back then, and very little solar.”

Relying on diesel generators alone could put microgrids at risk. If a true disaster scenario takes down the grid for an extended period, the military’s old diesel generators would not survive multiweek outages.

“Renewables and battery storage have the potential to last longer on fuel supplies and provide important energy diversity,” Miller said.

To discover the best microgrid-storage implementations across its diverse sites, the DOD arranged a unique program that is half competition, half technology accelerator. Under the program, the early-stage companies have been invited to validate their microgrid solutions on progressively more realistic grid systems, and progressively more challenging platforms. This way, companies can quickly gain field experience, DOD can confidently invest in its own microgrid improvements, and the experimental results will be widely available as stakeholder resources.

The project is facilitated through the DOD Environmental Security Technology Certification Program (ESTCP) and therefore inherits the program’s goal of assisting early-stage commercial products past the difficulties of breaking into the market. Each participating company is matched with an industry principal investigator, forming teams of two that apply the commercial concepts to real microgrid operations.

The validations got underway in 2020. While each of the participating teams are ultimately striving to prove their technologies at an actual DOD base, they first must advance through two lower-fidelity trials. These initial validations are taking place at NREL, where energy systems can be emulated to exact similarity under most any scenario.

Building Military Microgrids at a Replica Base

In preparation for the program, NREL refashioned its world-class power systems research platform ARIES into a distributed military microgrid — off-grid as a DOD base might be, but with high-performance experimental assets like weather stations and six-strand fiber optic communication links. At NREL’s Fort Renewable, DOD and participating companies have now been able to truly validate and derisk commercial microgrid systems.

Each team’s microgrid-battery storage solution is tested against emulated power outages, which the microgrid controls must be capable of managing.

Each team’s microgrid-battery storage solution is tested against emulated power outages, which the microgrid controls must be capable of managing.

Phase 1 of the program brought seven teams to NREL, where their microgrid-storage concepts were plugged into virtual systems and analyzed with simulated operations. This first phase validated teams’ technologies on a model military base, testing whether the devices could respond with a baseline level of performance, and filtered the number of participating teams down to four. Phase 1 results are available on the ESTCP website.

Phase 2 of the project raised the bar higher: Teams have submitted their technologies to more rigorous validations on a near-exact approximation of DOD’s Naval Air Station Patuxent River (NAS Patuxent River) — a 34-MW Air Force base in Maryland — replicated right inside NREL.

“Our platform is built such that users can prove their designs for islandable microgrids that are able to provide power in a long-duration emergency at a reasonable cost,” said Miller, who led the development of the military microgrid research platform. “Doing a study is one thing, but you can’t pencil whip whether a power hardware is successful. That’s why these companies come to NREL. If they can leverage our capabilities, it’s huge.”

Miller, himself once a major in the U.S. Air Force, has a career’s worth of energy resilience experience drawn from service overseas and across the United States, and used his background to build out the replica research environment.

The research platform involves about 250 kW of hardware, which is variously swapped with teams’ technologies — everything from microgrid switches and controllers to batteries. The teams rely on NREL for the rest of the microgrid environment: power and grid emulators, SCADA networks, switchgear, load banks, renewable resources, and a replica of the NAS Patuxent River grid.

And that covers just the hardware. The full platform crosses nearly every lab space in NREL’s Energy Systems Integration Facility and connects out to the Flatirons assets miles away. An integrated Cyber-Energy Emulation Platform (CEEP) digitally emulates communications and controls for the microgrids, while a vast sensor network simultaneously collects power data at all points throughout the microgrid and visualizes interactive metrics in real time. All told, the military microgrid research platform is as close to real as the teams will experience until Phase 3.

Microgrid Lessons for a Larger Grid

Each team has a different approach to microgrid-storage solutions: One is using redox-flow batteries, others bring their own microgrid controllers, and another is validating lithium iron phosphate battery storage. As of Phase 2, the participating teams are led by Ameresco, the Energy Power Research Institute, Raytheon, and SRI and Arizona State University. Cummins, which helped NREL build out the military microgrid research platform and contributed its microgrid controller to the design, has also thrown its hat into the program. NREL could not resist entering the action as well.

The teams have an important stake in the program — successful validations could carry their products from relative obscurity to energy markets anywhere, with the bonus of being proven in highly demanding applications. But the larger energy industry stands to gain something more: The demonstrations are establishing first-ever data around what works for critical applications of energy storage in microgrids.

“This project is about learning how critical loads can survive disaster and outage scenarios,” said Martha Symko-Davies, laboratory program manager of the ESIF. “We’re not validating microgrids for the military only; we want to do this for the whole country. Future campuses and microgrid systems will look to this project for examples, and to NREL for microgrid research capabilities that exist nowhere else.”

In this perspective, project teams endure the hardest tests so that future microgrids can better survive worst-case scenarios. NREL validations force difficult decisions that a critical microgrid could encounter, like choosing between multiple critical loads. For participating teams, their early-stage concepts that have scarcely seen commercial applications are up against disasters that any system would hope to never see, but nevertheless must prepare for.

“Some universities maintain billion-dollar inventories of temperature-controlled cell cultures, for example. This is a critical load compared to other buildings on campus, and a functional microgrid should be able to allocate power accordingly,” Miller said.

NREL is advancing distributed grid and microgrid control and optimization solutions through research such as Autonomous Energy Systems and products like OptGrid.

Beyond specific technologies, this ESTCP evaluation program is creating important knowledge for microgrids generally. Networked microgrids are an upcoming approach for accommodating distributed energy while enhancing resilience against future threats. Likewise, the Autonomous Energy Systems portfolio of work is developing microgrid controls for autonomous configuration and operation of connected microgrid systems. In each topic, the ESTCP program is showing what critical microgrid operations look like — the real results of applying renewable energy assets to resilience events.

As the participants move to Phase 3 of the program — installation at one of seven DOD microgrid sites — industry moves one step closer to resilient renewable microgrids. For all the expectations that microgrids and renewables could reliably support critical loads, a new class of commercial players is arriving with the first data to show exactly how.

Article courtesy of NREL.

Appreciate CleanTechnica’s originality? Consider becoming a CleanTechnica Member, Supporter, Technician, or Ambassador — or a patron on Patreon.


 



 


Have a tip for CleanTechnica, want to advertise, or want to suggest a guest for our CleanTech Talk podcast? Contact us here.

Continue Reading

Environment

The aluminum sector isn’t moving to the U.S. despite tariffs — due to one key reason

Published

on

By

The aluminum sector isn't moving to the U.S. despite tariffs — due to one key reason

HAWESVILLE, KY – May 10

Plant workers drive along an aluminum potline at Century Aluminum Company’s Hawesville plant in Hawesville, Ky. on Wednesday, May 10, 2017. (Photo by Luke Sharrett /For The Washington Post via Getty Images)

Aluminum

The Washington Post | The Washington Post | Getty Images

Sweeping tariffs on imported aluminum imposed by U.S. President Donald Trump are succeeding in reshaping global trade flows and inflating costs for American consumers, but are falling short of their primary goal: to revive domestic aluminum production.

Instead, rising costs, particularly skyrocketing electricity prices in the U.S. relative to global competitors, are leading to smelter closures rather than restarts.

The impact of aluminum tariffs at 25% is starkly visible in the physical aluminum market. While benchmark aluminum prices on the London Metal Exchange provide a global reference, the actual cost of acquiring the metal involves regional delivery premiums.

This premium now largely reflects the tariff cost itself.

In stark contrast, European premiums were noted by JPMorgan analysts as being over 30% lower year-to-date, creating a significant divergence driven directly by U.S. trade policy.

This cost will ultimately be borne by downstream users, according to Trond Olaf Christophersen, the chief financial officer of Norway-based Hydro, one of the world’s largest aluminum producers. The company was formerly known as Norsk Hydro.

“It’s very likely that this will end up as higher prices for U.S. consumers,” Christophersen told CNBC, noting the tariff cost is a “pass-through.” Shares of Hydro have collapsed by around 17% since tariffs were imposed.

Stock Chart IconStock chart icon

hide content

The downstream impact of the tariffs is already being felt by Thule Group, a Hydro customer that makes cargo boxes fitted atop cars. The company said it’ll raise prices by about 10% even though it manufactures the majority of the goods sold in the U.S locally, as prices of raw materials, such as steel and aluminum, have shot up.

But while tariffs are effectively leading to prices rise in the U.S., they haven’t spurred a revival in domestic smelting, the energy-intensive process of producing primary aluminum.

The primary barrier remains the lack of access to competitively priced, long-term power, according to the industry.

“Energy costs are a significant factor in the overall production cost of a smelter,” said Ami Shivkar, principal analyst of aluminum markets at analytics firm Wood Mackenzie.  “High energy costs plague the US aluminium industry, forcing cutbacks and closures.”

“Canadian, Norwegian, and Middle Eastern aluminium smelters typically secure long-term energy contracts or operate captive power generation facilities. US smelter capacity, however, largely relies on short-term power contracts, placing it at a disadvantage,” Shivkar added, noting that energy costs for U.S. aluminum smelters were about $550 per tonne compared to $290 per tonne for Canadian smelters.

Recent events involving major U.S. producers underscore this power vulnerability.

In March 2023, Alcoa Corp announced the permanent closure of its 279,000 metric ton Intalco smelter, which had been idle since 2020. Alcoa said that the facility “cannot be competitive for the long-term,” partly because it “lacks access to competitively priced power.”

Similarly, in June 2022, Century Aluminum, the largest U.S. primary aluminum producer, was forced to temporarily idle its massive Hawesville, Kentucky smelter – North America’s largest producer of military-grade aluminum – citing a “direct result of skyrocketing energy costs.”

Century stated the power cost required to run the facility had “more than tripled the historical average in a very short period,” necessitating a curtailment expected to last nine to twelve months until prices normalized.

The industry has also not had a respite as demand for electricity from non-industrial sources has risen in recent years.

Hydro’s Christophersen pointed to the artificial intelligence boom and the proliferation of data centers as new competitors for power. He suggested that new energy production capacity in the U.S., from nuclear, wind or solar, is being rapidly consumed by the tech sector.

“The tech sector, they have a much higher ability to pay than the aluminium industry,” he said, noting the high double-digit margins of the tech sector compared to the often low single-digit margins at aluminum producers. Hydro reported an 8.3% profit margin in the first quarter of 2025, an increase from the 3.5% it reported for the previous quarter, according to Factset data.

“Our view, and for us to build a smelter [in the U.S.], we would need cheap power. We don’t see the possibility in the current market to get that,” the CFO added. “The lack of competitive power is the reason why we don’t think that would be interesting for us.”

How the massive power draw of generative AI is overtaxing our grid

While failing to ignite domestic primary production, the tariffs are undeniably causing what Christophersen termed a “reshuffling of trade flows.”

When U.S. market access becomes more costly or restricted, metal flows to other destinations.

Christophersen described a brief period when exceptionally high U.S. tariffs on Canadian aluminum — 25% additional tariffs on top of the aluminum-specific tariffs — made exporting to Europe temporarily more attractive for Canadian producers. Consequently, more European metals would have made their way into the U.S. market to make up for the demand gap vacated by Canadian aluminum.

The price impact has even extended to domestic scrap metal prices, which have adjusted upwards in line with the tariff-inflated Midwest premium.

Hydro, also the world’s largest aluminum extruder, utilizes both domestic scrap and imported Canadian primary metal in its U.S. operations. The company makes products such as window frames and facades in the country through extrusion, which is the process of pushing aluminum through a die to create a specific shape.

“We are buying U.S. scrap [aluminium]. A local raw material. But still, the scrap prices now include, indirectly, the tariff cost,” Christophersen explained. “We pay the tariff cost in reality, because the scrap price adjusts to the Midwest premium.”

“We are paying the tariff cost, but we quickly pass it on, so it’s exactly the same [for us],” he added.

RBC Capital Markets analysts confirmed this pass-through mechanism for Hydro’s extrusions business, saying “typically higher LME prices and premiums will be passed onto the customer.”

This pass-through has occurred amid broader market headwinds, particularly downstream among Hydro’s customers.

RBC highlighted the “weak spot remains the extrusion divisions” in Hydro’s recent results and noted a guidance downgrade, reflecting sluggish demand in sectors like building and construction.

— CNBC’s Greg Kennedy contributed reporting.

Continue Reading

Environment

One of the world’s largest wind farms just got axed – here’s why

Published

on

By

One of the world’s largest wind farms just got axed – here’s why

Danish energy giant Ørsted has canceled plans for the Hornsea 4 offshore wind farm, dealing a major blow to the UK’s renewable energy ambitions.

Hornsea 4, at a massive 2.4 gigawatts (GW), would have become one of the largest offshore wind farms in the world, generating enough clean electricity to power over 1 million UK homes. But Ørsted announced that it’s abandoning the project “in its current form.”

“The adverse macroeconomic developments, continued supply chain challenges, and increased execution, market, and operational risks have eroded the value creation,” said Rasmus Errboe, group president and CEO of Ørsted.

Reuters reported that Ørsted’s cancellation of Hornsea 4 would result in a projected loss of up to 5.5 billion Danish crowns ($837.85 million) in breakaway fees and asset write-downs. The company’s market value has declined by 80% since its peak in 2021.

The cancellation highlights significant challenges currently facing offshore wind development in Europe, particularly in the UK. The combination of higher material costs, inflation, and global financial instability has made large-scale renewable projects increasingly difficult to finance and complete.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

Ørsted’s decision is a significant setback to the UK’s energy transition goals. The UK currently has around 15 GW of offshore wind, and Hornsea 4’s size would have provided almost 7% of the additional capacity needed for the UK’s 50 GW by 2030 target, according to The Times. Losing this immense project off the Yorkshire coast could hamper the UK’s pace of reducing dependency on fossil fuels, especially amid volatile global energy markets.

The UK government reiterated its commitment to renewable energy, promising to work closely with industry leaders to overcome financial and logistical hurdles. Energy Secretary Ed Miliband told reporters in Norway that the UK is “still committed to working with Orsted to seek to make Hornsea 4 happen by 2030.”

Ørsted says it remains committed to its other UK-based projects, including the Hornsea 3 wind farm, which is expected to generate around 2.9 GW once completed at the end of 2027. Despite the challenges, the company emphasized its ongoing commitment to the British renewable market, pointing to the critical need for policy support and economic stability to ensure future developments.

Yet, the cancellation of Hornsea 4 demonstrates that even flagship renewable projects are vulnerable in the face of economic pressures and global uncertainties, which have been heightened under the Trump administration in the US.

Read more: The world’s single-largest wind farm gets the green light


If you live in an area that has frequent natural disaster events, and are interested in making your home more resilient to power outages, consider going solar and adding a battery storage system. To make sure you find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. They have hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and share your phone number with them.

Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisers to help you every step of the way. Get started here. –trusted affiliate link*

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

Is the Tesla Roadster ever going to be made?

Published

on

By

Is the Tesla Roadster ever going to be made?

The Tesla Roadster appears to be quietly disappearing after years of delay. is it ever going to be made?

I may have jinxed it with Betteridge’s Law of Headlines, which suggests any headline ending in a question mark can be answered with “no.”

The prototype for the next-generation Tesla Roadster was first unveiled in 2017, and it was supposed to come into production in 2020, but it has been delayed every year since then.

It was supposed to get 620 miles (1,000 km) of range and accelerate from 0 to 60 mph in 1.9 seconds.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

Site default logo image

It has become a sort of running joke, and there are doubts that it will ever come to market despite Tesla’s promise of dozens of free new Roadsters to Tesla owners who participated in its referral program years ago.

Tesla uses the promise of free Roadsters to help generate billions of dollars worth of sales, which Tesla owners delivered, but the automaker never delivered on its part of the agreement.

Furthermore, many people placed deposits ranging from $50,000 to $250,000 to reserve the vehicle, which was supposed to hit the market 5 years ago.

The official timelines from Tesla are pretty useless at this point since they haven’t stuck to any of them, but the latest official one dates back to July 2024 when CEO Elon Musk said this:

“With respect to Roadster, we’ve completed most of the engineering. And I think there’s still some upgrades we want to make to it, but we expect to be in production with Roadster next year. It will be something special.”

He said that Tesla had completed “most of the engineering”, but he initially said the engineering would be done in 2021 and that was already 3 years after the prototype was unveiled and a year after it was supposed to be in production:

Musk commented on the Roadster again in October 2024, but he didn’t reiterate the 2025 timeline. Instead, he called the new Roadster “the cherry on the icing on the cake.”

Tesla’s leadership has been virtually silent about the new Roadster since. Two Tesla executives even had to be reminded about the Roadster by Jay Leno after they “forgot” about it when listing upcoming new Tesla vehicles with tri-motor powertrain.

There was one small update about the Roadster in Tesla’s financial results last month.

The automaker has a table of all its vehicle production, and the Roadster was updated from “in development” to “design development” in the table:

It’s not clear if that’s progress or Tesla is just rephrasing it. Either way, it is not “construction”, which makes it unlikely that the Roadster is going into production this year.

If ever…

Electrek’s Take

It looks like Tesla owes about 80 Tesla Roadsters for free to Tesla owners who referred purchases, and it owes significant discounts on hundreds of units.

It’s hard for me to believe that Tesla is not delivering the new Roadster because the vehicle program would start about $100 million in the red, but at this point, I have no idea. It very well might be the reason.

However, I think it’s more likely that Tesla is just terrible at bringing multiple vehicle programs to market simultaneously. Case in point: it launched a single new vehicle in the last five years.

At this point, I think it’s more likely that the Roadster will never happen. It will join other Tesla products like the Cybertruck Range Extender.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Trending