University of Regina unveils province's 1st microgrid lab for clean energy research
The Microgrid Living Lab, a first-of-its-kind facility in the province, was launched as a hub for clean energy research, development and education in Saskatchewan.
"About six per cent of generated power is lost in transmission. So in microgrids, we don't have that," said Irfan Al-Anbagi, an associate professor in electronic systems engineering and the lab's director.
The lab functions off the main power grid. It's capable of generating, storing and distributing its own electricity, according to the university.
"Everything is located in one area: generation, storage and control, and loads," Al-Anbagi said.
"So less power dissipation, less power burned out in transmission. And this can be beneficial to locations where you have difficulty supplying power and you can utilize renewable generation as well in these locations."
The lab draws power from renewable sources including solar panels, wind and hydro power. It emulates how microgrids could perform in real-world conditions, with the hope of identify more sustainable and flexible models for powering homes, businesses and remote communities in the province, the university says.
Al-Anbagi said. "Supplying electricity to these locations can be expensive and hard and sometimes impossible."
Multiple functions
Al-Anbagi expects the microgrid to play a major role in teaching, experimental setups and research.
"Currently I have two students, my colleague has two students. So in the future, we want to increase that number," Al-Anbagi said.
He hopes students will use the micogrid as a hands-on tool.
"The students appreciate the concept when they come and see it, compared to when they look at it in pictures, and they can also do some lab experiments."
Al-Anbagi has also reached out to small- and medium-sized enterprises in the city that may be interested in using the lab for their own development and testing.
"If an organization or company develops solar panels and they want to integrate the power into the control system, do real-time monitoring, real-time connectivity, they're welcome to use this system," Al-Anbagi said.
The lab currently generates 10 kilowatts of solar power, enough to power a residential building or multiple homes. When the energy isn't being used for teaching or research, it's stored in "islanded mode," meaning it's kept separate from the university's main power grid.
"We don't want to disrupt the main power supply of the university," Al-Anbagi said.
"I think it's safer to disconnect the microgrid from the main university supply to do our own experiments."
That energy is sometimes then sent into the university system to help power lights, air conditioning and other infrastructure.
Powering Saskatchewan
The biggest potential for the lab lies not in its present use, but in how it could shape the future of energy in Saskatchewan, according to Al-Anbagi.
The province's unique energy challenges, from isolated northern communities to growing urban centers, make it a prime testing ground for microgrid solutions, he said.
"It's not a lot of power, but I think it adds up," Al-Anbagi said.
While microgrids aren't entirely new to Western Canada, this marks the first fully functional one of its kind in Saskatchewan.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Globe and Mail
an hour ago
- Globe and Mail
Down Over 30%, Should Investors Buy the Dip on Lucid Stock?
Lucid (NASDAQ: LCID) investors are hopeful the new Gravity SUV will spur sales for the EV start-up. Where to invest $1,000 right now? Our analyst team just revealed what they believe are the 10 best stocks to buy right now. Learn More » *Stock prices used were the afternoon prices of June 30, 2025. The video was published on July 2, 2025. Should you invest $1,000 in Lucid Group right now? Before you buy stock in Lucid Group, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy now… and Lucid Group wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $697,627!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $939,655!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor 's total average return is1,045% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to178%for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of June 30, 2025 Parkev Tatevosian, CFA has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Parkev Tatevosian is an affiliate of The Motley Fool and may be compensated for promoting its services. If you choose to subscribe through his link, he will earn some extra money that supports his channel. His opinions remain his own and are unaffected by The Motley Fool.
Globe and Mail
2 hours ago
- Globe and Mail
"Magnificent Seven" Makeover: Which Stocks Have Earned a Spot, and Which Haven't?
The so-called "Magnificent Seven" stocks -- Alphabet, Apple (NASDAQ: AAPL), Amazon, Meta Platforms, Microsoft, Nvidia, and Tesla (NASDAQ: TSLA) -- provided much of the driving force behind the market's strong growth over the past several years. However, these tech stocks are seeing some uneven performance in 2025, and it may be time for this informal group -- first labeled by a Bank of America analyst in 2023 -- to get a makeover. I think it's time to give Apple and Tesla the boot and replace them with Palantir Technologies (NASDAQ: PLTR) and Broadcom (NASDAQ: AVGO). Here's why it should be out with the old and in with the new when it comes to the Magnificent Seven. Time to toss Apple aside Both Apple and Tesla stocks have had poor starts to 2025. The reason for Apple's share price underperformance is that its revenue growth has slowed to a glacial pace, and investors' hopes for a strong smartphone upgrade cycle driven by its artificial intelligence (AI) offerings have faded. In fact, Apple's revenue of $391 billion for its fiscal 2024 (which ended in September) was less than the $394.3 billion it generated in its fiscal 2022. Through the first half of fiscal 2025, its revenue is up 4% year over year, but that is still a slow pace. A big part of Apple's issues is that it has not innovated. It has had no new breakout products in the last several years, and the company is behind in AI. While Apple dedicated a lot of resources to AI, it has thus far very little to show for it. Apple Intelligence's introduction did little to convince most users to upgrade their iPhones, and it hasn't even launched Apple Intelligence in China yet. The Chinese market, meanwhile, remains a consistent weak spot for the company. Apple is losing smartphone market share to local rivals, and its revenue in the country has been on the decline. Xiaomi and Huawei have both launched smartphones to compete at the high-end of the market, and Apple has been forced to roll out sales incentives in China to try to spur demand. For a company that built its reputation not just as a technology company but as a luxury brand, that's a difficult path to go down. Apple has been generating solid growth in its high-margin services business, but it faces a unique risk: It is possible that regulators and the courts may force Alphabet to end the deal that makes Google the default search engine on Apple devices. Alphabet currently pays Apple an estimated $20 billion a year for that privileged positioning, which is pure profit for Apple. Any change to the deal could result in a big hit to its earnings. Tesla looks to be in trouble Tesla, meanwhile, has its own problems. Its electronic vehicle (EV) deliveries and revenue fell last year, and it looks like things are getting worse. In the first quarter, its EV deliveries sank by 13% while auto revenue dropped by 20%. In the second quarter, EV deliveries fell an even worse 14%. Increased competition (especially in China) and the rising popularity of hybrid vehicles have played roles in Tesla's struggles, but some of the blame can also be pinned directly on the actions of CEO Elon Musk. Musk's support and financial backing of President Donald Trump and various Republicans in recent elections, and the subsequent leadership role he took on at Trump's "Department of Government Efficiency" (DOGE) have angered a lot of current and potential vehicle buyers. The constituencies Musk angered have political views that generally make them more likely to buy EVs than the demographic that supports President Trump. Musk's political actions led to protests and boycotts of Tesla in the U.S. and in several European countries where Tesla operates. More recently, Musk has become an outspoken critic of Trump's legislative efforts, irritating the president and his supporters. Musk even went so far as to threaten to start his own political party, potentially alienating all sides of the political spectrum. Not surprisingly, Tesla sales have been sinking in the U.S., Europe, and China. Tesla bulls are still betting that its robotaxi business will be a game changer. However, the recent pilot launch of the service in its first city has been met with skepticism and some well-documented potential safety issues. Meanwhile, Alphabet's Waymo has established the early lead in the driverless ride-sharing race. Time to add Palantir In my opinion, two of the best stocks to replace Apple and Tesla in the Magnificent Seven would be Palantir and Broadcom, both of which have had strong starts to the year. Palantir has become a growth machine. In Q1, it recorded its seventh straight quarter of accelerating revenue growth, with its top line climbing by 39% year over year. The greatest contributor to that growth was its largest customer -- the U.S. government. Revenue from federal government sources grew by 45% year over year (or about $116 million) to $373 million. Its sales to U.S. commercial customers grew at an even faster rate, but from a smaller base. They climbed by 71% (or about $106 million) to $255 million. Meanwhile, it recently landed a significant contract with NATO, showing that international defense has the potential to become a third meaningful growth pillar for the company. Much of Palantir's success stems from its Artificial Intelligence Platform (AIP), which it is positioning to be an AI operating system for its clients. AIP gathers data from various sources and puts it into an "ontology" that connects digital assets with their real-world counterparts, allowing organizations to use AI to help solve their real-world problems. The platform is already being used by clients across a wide swath of industries to manage an array of different issues, and the opportunities for it appear to be huge. Meanwhile, Palantir recently introduced new agentic AI tools that not only suggest actions but can also carry them out. Why Broadcom belongs Broadcom has also been seeing solid growth. Last quarter, its revenue climbed 20% year over year while adjusted earnings per share (EPS) soared 44%. The growth is being led by its AI networking portfolio, where it provides networking components such as Ethernet switches, optical receivers, DSPs, and NICs -- critical hardware for moving huge amounts of data across AI clusters. Last quarter, its AI networking revenue surged 70%. However, Broadcom's biggest opportunity lies in custom AI chips. The company helps customers design application-specific integrated circuits (ASICs) that can be used to power AI workloads. After its success in helping Alphabet design its tensor processing units (TPUs), Broadcom has been gaining more and more new custom AI chip customers. Three of its hyperscaler customers are well advanced in the ASIC design process, and Broadcom has stated that each one of them intends to deploy fabrics of 1 million AI chip clusters in 2027, representing a total serviceable opportunity for the company of $60 billion to $90 billion in that year alone. That's a huge opportunity, and it doesn't even include Broadcom's newer customers, such as Apple. Given the growth opportunities ahead for both Broadcom and Palantir, they look today like better candidates than Apple or Tesla to form a new and improved Magnificent Seven. Should you invest $1,000 in Palantir Technologies right now? Before you buy stock in Palantir Technologies, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy now… and Palantir Technologies wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $697,627!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $939,655!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor 's total average return is1,045% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to178%for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of June 30, 2025 John Mackey, former CEO of Whole Foods Market, an Amazon subsidiary, is a member of The Motley Fool's board of directors. Bank of America is an advertising partner of Motley Fool Money. Suzanne Frey, an executive at Alphabet, is a member of The Motley Fool's board of directors. Randi Zuckerberg, a former director of market development and spokeswoman for Facebook and sister to Meta Platforms CEO Mark Zuckerberg, is a member of The Motley Fool's board of directors. Geoffrey Seiler has positions in Alphabet. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, Bank of America, Meta Platforms, Microsoft, Nvidia, Palantir Technologies, and Tesla. The Motley Fool recommends Broadcom and recommends the following options: long January 2026 $395 calls on Microsoft and short January 2026 $405 calls on Microsoft. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.
CTV News
2 hours ago
- CTV News
New supply management law won't save the system from Trump, experts say
OTTAWA — A new law meant to protect supply management might not be enough to shield the system in trade talks with a Trump administration bent on eliminating it, trade experts say. 'It's certainly more difficult to strike a deal with the United States now with the passage of this bill that basically forces Canada to negotiate with one hand tied behind its back,' said William Pellerin, a trade lawyer and partner at the firm McMillan LLP. 'Now that we've removed the digital service tax, dairy and supply management is probably the number 1 trade irritant that we have with the United States. That remains very much unresolved.' When Trump briefly paused trade talks with Canada on June 27 over the digital services tax — shortly before Ottawa capitulated by dropping the tax — he zeroed in on Canada's system of supply management. In a social media post, Trump called Canada a 'very difficult country to TRADE with, including the fact that they have charged our Farmers as much as 400% Tariffs, for years, on Dairy Products.' Canada can charge about 250 per cent tariffs on U.S. dairy imports over a set quota established by the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement. The International Dairy Foods Association, which represents the U.S. dairy industry, said in March the U.S. has never come close to reaching those quotas, though the association also said that's because of other barriers Canada has erected. When Bill C-202 passed through Parliament last month, Bloc Québécois MPs hailed it as a clear win protecting Quebec farmers from American trade demands. The Bloc's bill, which received royal assent on June 26, prevents the foreign affairs minister from making commitments in trade negotiations to either increase the tariff rate quota or reduce tariffs for imports over a set threshold. On its face, that rule would prevent Canadian trade negotiators from offering to drop the import barriers that shield dairy and egg producers in Canada from price shocks. But while the law appears to rule out using supply management as a bargaining chip in trade talks with the U.S., it doesn't completely constrain the government. Pellerin said that if Prime Minister Mark Carney is seeking a way around C-202, he might start by looking into conducting the trade talks personally, instead of leaving them to Foreign Affairs Minister Anita Anand. Carney dismissed the need for the new law during the recent election but vowed to keep supply management off the table in negotiations with the U.S. Pellerin said the government could also address the trade irritant by expanding the number of players who can access dairy quotas beyond 'processors.' '(C-202) doesn't expressly talk about changing or modifying who would be able to access the quota,' he said. Expanding access to quota, he said, would likely 'lead to companies like grocery stores being able to import U.S. cheeses, and that would probably please the United States to a significant degree.' Carleton University associate professor Philippe Lagassé, an expert on Parliament and the Crown, said the new law doesn't extend past something called the 'royal prerogative' — the ability of the executive branch of government to carry out certain actions in, for example, the conduct of foreign affairs. That suggests the government isn't constrained by the law, he said. 'I have doubts that the royal prerogative has been displaced by the law. There is no specific language binding the Crown and it would appear to run contrary to the wider intent of the (law that it modifies),' he said by email. 'That said, if the government believes that the law is binding, then it effectively is. As defenders of the bill insisted, it gives the government leverage in negotiation by giving the impression that Parliament has bound it on this issue.' He said a trade treaty requires enabling legislation, so a new bill could remove the supply management constraints. 'The bill adds an extra step and some constraints, but doesn't prevent supply management from eventually being removed or weakened,' he said. Trade lawyer Mark Warner, principal at MAAW Law, said Canada could simply dispense with the law through Parliament if it decides it needs to make concessions to, for example, preserve the auto industry. 'The argument for me that the government of Canada sits down with another country, particularly the United States, and says we can't negotiate that because Parliament has passed a bill — I have to tell you, I've never met an American trade official or lawyer who would take that seriously,' Warner said. 'My sense of this is it would just go through Parliament, unless you think other opposition parties would bring down the government over it.' While supply management has long been a target for U.S. trade negotiators, the idea of killing it has been a non-starter in Canadian politics for at least as long. Warner said any attempt to do away with it would be swiftly met with litigation, Charter challenges and provinces stepping up to fill a federal void. 'The real cost of that sort of thing is political, so if you try to take it away, people are screaming and they're blocking the highways and they are calling you names and the Bloc is blocking anything through Parliament — you pay a cost that way,' he said. But a compromise on supply management might not be that far-fetched. 'The system itself won't be dismantled. I don't think that's anywhere near happening in the coming years and even decades,' said Pellerin. 'But I think that there are changes that could be made, particularly through the trade agreements, including by way of kind of further quotas. Further reduction in the tariffs for outside quota amounts and also in terms of who can actually bring in product.' The United States trade representative raised specific concerns about supply management in the spring, citing quota rules established under the CUSMA trade pact that are not being applied as the U.S. expected and ongoing frustration with the pricing of certain types of milk products. Former Canadian diplomat Louise Blais said that if Canada were to 'respect the spirit' of CUSMA as the Americans understand it, the problem might actually solve itself. 'We jump to the conclusion that it's dismantlement or nothing else, but in fact there's a middle ground,' she said. This report by The Canadian Press was first published July 3, 2025. Kyle Duggan, The Canadian Press
