RENEW petitions PSC to improve interconnection rules

222 S. Hamilton, Madison, WI 53704

Immediate Release February 26, 2013
More Information
Don Wichert, Executive Director

608.255.4044, ext. 1

dwichert@renewwisconsin.org

RENEW Petitions PSC to Improve Interconnection Rules

RENEW Wisconsin (RENEW) filed a petition on February 22 asking the Public Service Commission (PSCW) to simplify the process under which distributed generators can connect their generators to Wisconsin’s electrical grid. The vast majority of these small generating facilities are fueled with locally available renewable energy resources like biogas, solar, and wind.

RENEW’s filing grew out of a year-long study that assessed how Wisconsin’s 10-year old interconnection rule (PSC 119) compares with best practices established in other states.

“We found that  Wisconsin’s outdated rules hurts distributed generators by adding complexity, time, and cost to the interconnection process ,” said Don Wichert, RENEW’s interim Executive Director and study coordinator.  “Most of the renewable energy systems coming on line now are owned by non-utility generators. Fixing the problems in PSC 119 will lead to more renewable energy systems going in faster and at a lower cost. Supported by 86 companies, organizations, and individuals, RENEW’s petition identified 10 specific changes that, if adopted by the PSC, would align Wisconsin’s interconnection procedures with national best practices.    

 “Customer-owned renewable energy systems save ratepayers money in many ways”, said Wichert.  “Because they offset electrical needs right where the electricity is being used, distributed renewables supply clean electricity in a reliable and affordable manner, avoiding potentially expensive investments in central generating plants and costly transmission lines. Moreover, they create jobs and support local businesses.  These are all positive public policy goals”, Wichert said.  

RENEW’s petition can be accessed at RENEW’s web site (http://www.renewwisconsin.org/interconnection/interconnectionToolbox.htm) or at the PSCW’s electronic filing system under Docket No. 05-GF-233.

END

RENEW Wisconsin is an independent, nonprofit 501(c)(3) that leads and represents businesses, organizations, and individuals who seek more clean, renewable energy in Wisconsin.  More information on RENEW’s website: www.renewwisconsin.org.

ACTION ALERT: Support Highland Wind Farm

ACTION ALERT – SUPPORT HIGHLAND WIND FARM

DATE:	February 25, 2013
SUBJECT:	Fate of Highland Wind Farm in St. Croix County Hangs in the Balance

In December 2011, Emerging Energies of Wisconsin filed an application with the Wisconsin Public Service Commission (PSC) for permission to construct the $250 million Highland Wind project in St. Croix County. If built, this 102 megawatt (MW) installation would generate enough zero-carbon electricity from its 41-44 turbines to power 30,000 residences.  Constructing Highland Wind would create more than 100 jobs, while operating and maintaining this facility would require six to eight full-time positions. In addition to its job creation impacts, Highland Wind would pump nearly $1 million each year into the local economy, in the form of both lease payments to host landowners as well as shared revenues to host townships and St. Croix County.

To date, Emerging Energies has invested six years and nearly $2 million on this project.  Highland Wind is the only large wind energy project currently in active development in Wisconsin. 

On February 14, 2013, the PSC issued a preliminary decision turning down Emerging Energies’ application to build Highland Wind.  In doing so, the PSC cited concerns over the level of measurable sound propagated by the turbines that could be detected at neighboring residences.  In a nutshell, the PSC wants stronger assurances that Highland Wind’s wind turbines would be able to operate without exceeding the maximum allowable sound emission levels at any time. The PSC will take up the Highland Wind case again at its next open meeting this coming Friday (March 1^st).

On February 22, Emerging Energies filed a request to the PSC to submit additional evidence on the sound propagation issue. The filings came with several affidavits and exhibits to substantiate Emerging Energies’ assurances that the turbines can operate within the sound emissions limits likely to be specified by the PSC. According to Emerging Energies, compliance with sound emission limits will be achieved through the selection of a quieter wind turbine model, one equipped with operational controls that can automatically ramp down output when sensors detect atmospheric conditions conducive to high levels of sound propagation.  Emerging Energies’ filing can be accessed at the link below: http://psc.wi.gov/apps35/ERF_view/viewdoc.aspx?docid=181219

If this filing were accepted into evidence, the PSC would have both the factual foundation and a procedure for approving this project before March 25. As noted in Emerging Energies’ filing, approval of the project by March 25 is necessary to enable the developer to submit the project for consideration in Xcel Energy’s pending solicitation for an additional 200 MW of wind generating capacity.

On Monday February 25^th, RENEW Wisconsin will file comments supporting Emerging Energies’ request to have its February 22 filing entered into the case record as evidence. RENEW also supports Applicant’s request to the Commission not to issue a final denial order in this proceeding, as well as its suggested procedures and related time frames for presenting additional evidence in a manner that allows the Commission to issue a final order by March 25.  The text of RENEW’s two-page filing appear below this Action Alert.

March 1^st is a red-letter day for Highland Wind. Either the PSC will (1) accept Emerging Energies’ filing and with it documentation substantiating Highland Wind’s capacity to operate in full compliance with sound limits established by the PSC in this case, or (2) finalize its denial of Highland Wind.

If the PSC turns down Highland Wind, it’s a pretty safe bet that Emerging Energies will not submit another application to build in that location. A denial would also send a clear signal to all concerned that Wisconsin’s political climate has become positively radioactive for wind development. 

YOU CAN HELP! YOU CAN LET THE GOVERNOR’S OFFICE KNOW THAT YOU ARE AMONG THE 85% OF WISCONSIN RESIDENTS WHO SUPPORT THE DEVELOPMENT OF ENVIRONMENTALLY RESPONSIBLE RENEWABLE ENERGY PROJECTS LIKE HIGHLAND WIND.

Please contact Governor Scott Walker:  Phone (608) 266-1212 or e-mail  govgeneral@wisconsin.gov

ENVIRONMENTALLY RESPONSIBLE WINDPOWER PROJECTS ADVANCE THE PUBLIC INTEREST. NOW IS A GOOD TIME TO COMMUNICATE THAT MESSAGE TO THE GOVERNOR’S OFFICE.

Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of our request.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

BEFORE THE

PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF WISCONSIN

Application of Highland Wind Farm, LLC for a

Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity                                              Docket No. 2535-CE-100

To Construct a 102.5 MW Electric Generation

Facility and Associated Electric Facilities, to be

Located in the Towns of Forest and Cylon,

St. Croix County, Wisconsin

RENEW WISCONSIN’S COMMENTS ON HIGHLAND WIND FARM’S EMERGENCY REQUEST FOR LEAVE TO PRESENT ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE

RENEW Wisconsin respectfully requests the Commission consider the following comments in response to the Emergency Request filed by Highland Wind Farm LLC on February 22, 2013 (PSC REF# 181219). RENEW Wisconsin is an intervener in this proceeding.

RENEW Wisconsin has reviewed the Applicant’s Emergency Request as well as the exhibits and affidavits associated with that filing. Highland Wind’s filings address the central issue—the ability of this project to comply with applicable sound emission limits--that led to the Commission’s motion to deny the Application at its February 14, 2013 open meeting. Applicant’s Emergency Request asks the Commission not to issue a final order denying Highland Wind’s CPCN at its March 1^st open meeting. Instead the Applicant asks the Commission to conduct further discussion of the evidence that is already in the record and, if necessary, to also consider the information contained in the Applicant’s filings as a basis for determining whether the Highland Wind project can comply with the sound limits established by the Commission. Based on our review, RENEW believes that this information warrants Commission consideration. We therefore support Applicant’s request for leave to present additional evidence, as well as its request to allow interveners to respond to its request prior to the next open meeting. RENEW also supports Applicant’s request to the Commission not to issue a final denial order in this proceeding, as well as its suggested procedures and related time frames for presenting additional evidence in a manner that allows the Commission to issue a final order by March 25. 

Discussion: RENEW supports the Applicant’s Emergency Request because we believe that operational curtailment is an appropriate and effective mitigation measure to ensure compliance with applicable sound emissions standards. In fact, we believe that operational curtailment is the most effective tool available to a windpower project operator for reducing sonic output from individual wind turbines to allowable levels. Of the many variables and factors that determine what levels of sound might be measurable at a residence near a wind turbine (e.g., wind speed differential at different elevations, barometric pressure, humidity, background sound levels), the only one that is fully under the project operator’s control is power production.  Operational curtailment limits power generation from turbines, which results in a reduction of sound emissions. The Commission is fully cognizant of the role that operational curtailment can play in controlling sound emissions, as demonstrated by the conditions it imposed on the Glacier Hills wind project in its January 2010 order and by the provisions it approved in the development of PSC 128. In the latter instance, PSC 128.14 explicitly allows project owners to use curtailment procedures to maintain sound emissions below the maximum allowable levels.

Many of today’s utility-scale wind turbines come equipped with automated curtailment protocols that are triggered under a variety of atmospheric conditions. The more sophisticated models can ratchet power production when sensors detect atmospheric conditions that could contribute to long-distance sound propagation. As stated in its Emergency Request, Highland Wind is committed to using only those wind turbine models that are programmed to curtail power output based on real-time atmospheric phenomena such as wind shear. This commitment should remove any lingering uncertainty over whether Highland Wind can operate in full compliance with the sound limits specified by the Commission in this proceeding.

Summary: Apart from the question of whether Highland Wind can comply with sound limits modeled for the Commission’s consideration, this project undeniably advances the public interest in terms of stimulating local economic development, diversifying our region’s resource portfolio, enhancing energy security, and reducing pollution caused by fossil generation sources. We believe that the Applicant is correct that the existing record supports issuance of a CPCN with appropriate conditions.  Moreover, the exhibits and affidavits submitted with Applicant’s Emergency Request fully address any lingering questions that the Commission might have about the project’s sound profile. For that reason, RENEW believes that these filings should be entered into evidence and made a part of the record, so that the Commission has a factually solid foundation for rendering a decision on Highland Wind.

Respectfully submitted this 25^th day of February 2013. 

Wind farm proposal rejected, developer plans another try

More on the Highland Wind Farm PSC decision: an article by Thomas Content of the Journal Sentinel:

State regulators on Thursday rejected an application to build a new wind farm in St. Croix County, citing concerns about turbine noise the project would generate for nearby homes.

The state Public Service Commission voted 2-to-1 to reject Emerging Energies’ proposal to build the Highland wind farm, which was proposed to generate 102.5 megawatts of power from 41 turbines, or eough to supply about 30,000 homes.

Commissioners said that they were rejecting the proposal “without prejudice,” in essence leaving the door open for the developer to file a new application for the project, after it conducts a new noise study using more conservative assumptions about the background noise in the area.

The $250 million Highland project is the first wind farm to be ruled on by the state commission since Republican Gov. Scott Walker appointed two commissioners, a majority of the three-member panel.

Emerging Energies representative Jay Mundinger said after the vote the developer plans to continue its pursuit of a permit for the project.

Commissioner Eric Callisto, the lone remaining appointee of former Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle, said he would have approved the project but would have attached conditions binding the developer to protect nearby landowners from excessive turbine noise.

Noise studies by the applicant found that 20 homes would experience noise levels above the 45 decibel standard at night, but the commission could work with the developer on "micro-siting" issues after new analysis was done, he said.

The Highland project is the only large wind energy project currently in active development in the state. The state’s utilities have already built enough wind farms to comply with the Wisconsin renewable portfolio standard, which requires that 10% of the state’s electricity come from renewable sources by 2015.

During the commission’s meeting in Madison, commissioner Ellen Nowak said the applicant didn’t prove that all the wind project would result in noise levels below 45 decibels at night, the standard that’s in Wisconsin’s wind siting rule.

As a result, she said she concluded the project was not in the public interest.

In their decision, the PSC commissioners decided not to attach special requirements concerning low-frequency noise, after wind consultants studied the impacts of low frequency noise from wind turbines the same developer built near Green Bay.

Reached after the meeting, Mundinger said Emerging Energies would take the commissioners' noise concerns into account but was not giving up on the project.

“We believe that sound, from what we’ve heard, is a big concern, and we believe we can address that and we believe we have a pathway to get the (project permit) in short form,” he said. "We want to make sure we address the sound and be able to move this project forward.”

The company has offered not to use the kind of turbine that it used when developing the Brown County wind farm -- the tallest towers built so far in Wisconsin. Instead, Emerging Emergies has agreed to use two other turbines that don’t generate as much sound, he said.

PSC commissioners said they would not approve the project if it used the loudest of the three turbines Emerging Energies had been considering.

“The turbines are better than ever before,” Mundinger said. “They’re quieter than the ones just 10 years ago.”

Peter McKeever, attorney for the Forest Voice, a group that mobilized in opposition to the wind farm,said he was pleased with the commission’s decision.

Wind farms are difficult to build in Wisconsin because the state’s dairy farming heritage and land use history resulted in smaller farms being closer together rather than large farms that are farther apart on the Great Plains, he said.

“If we want wind to be a really viable energy source we have to get smart about siting wind farms in Wisconsin,” he said.

The state should be leery of developing projects where homeowners could experience problems similar to those found in the Green Bay area project, McKeever said.

At issue in this case is one of the variables in that model – an estimate of how much sound would be absorbed by the ground when the wind turbines are spinning.

In this case, the commission essentially asked Emerging Energies to assume a worst-case scenario:  That the 45-decibel standard will be met at all times, even when there is totally reflective ground – hard frozen ground with no snow or vegetation on it.

The commission adopted a more stringent noise requirement than it did when it approved its most recent wind farm, the We Energies Glacier Hills Wind Park, in 2010, said Katie Nekola, general counsel at the conservation group Clean Wisconsin. However, in that case, there was no challenge to the assumptions used by We Energies in its turbine noise modeling.

She expressed hope that the decision would be a temporary setback for the Highland project.

See the original posting of this article here.

PSC denies Highland Wind Farm

Today, the Public Service Commission denied the Highland Wind Farm application. This is unbelievable, and disappointing. See the press release below:

For Immediate Release
February 14, 2013
Contact: Kristin Ruesch or Matt Pagel, 608-266-9600
Kristin.Ruesch@wisconsin.gov or Matt.Pagel@wisconsin.gov

PSC Issues Decision on Highland Wind Farm Application

MADISON - Today the members of the Public Service Commission decided, on a 2-1 vote, to deny an application of Highland Wind Farm, LLC, for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity to construct a 102.5 Megawatt (MW) Wind Electric Facility in the Towns of Forest and Cylon in St. Croix County.

The majority commissioners determined a clearer record and a better demonstration that noise from the wind turbines would not exceed Commission standards was needed before making a decision to grant a CPCN. Highland Wind Farm, LLC, will be able to reapply to the Commission if an improvement to modeling and additional information is presented in a subsequent application.

Background Information on the Application

In December of 2011, Highland Wind Farm, LLC, filed an application with the Commission for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (CPCN) to construct a new wind electric generation facility. The project would have included the construction of up to 44 wind turbines, with an electric generating capacity of up to 102.5 megawatts.

Since the application was received, the Commission granted requests to intervene in the proceeding to Clean Wisconsin, Forest Voice, Inc., RENEW Wisconsin, and the Town of Forest, and granted intervenor compensation requests to Clean Wisconsin and Forest Voice. The Commission held multiple technical hearings in Madison; held public hearings in the project area, and accepted expert and public comments online and via U.S. mail. All documents, testimony, and comments submitted in the proceeding are available to the public at the PSC web site, http://psc.wi.gov, by entering docket number 2535-CE-100 in the Electronic Regulatory Filing System.

###

Sustainability Summit - Milwaukee

Will we see you at the Sustainability Summit? Register by 1/31/13 for the early bird discount.

The first Net-Zero Energy Hotel in North America

The Green Leaf Inn will be the first net-zero energy hotel in North America... and it's being built in Delavan, Wisconsin. See more about this project in the video below:



Follow the project's facebook page for more updates.

RENEW Plans Honor for SC Johnson

Award Will Recognize Company’s Investment in Wind Energy

SC Johnson, the Racine-based consumer products manufacturer, will be one of several Wisconsin companies and organizations receiving awards from RENEW Wisconsin for their renewable energy investments in 2012. The award will recognize SC Johnson’s two utility-scale wind turbines that are now supplying electricity to its Waxdale production facility. The two turbines were formally commissioned at the plant in a ceremony this morning.

In recognition of forward-looking customer generators, like SC Johnson, and the businesses that serve them, RENEW will present awards at its January 11, 2013, Energy Policy Summit. The event will be held at the University of Wisconsin’s Pyle Center.

Called Powering Positive Action, RENEW’s summit will focus on strategies for expanding Wisconsin’s renewable energy marketplace for businesses and customers.

“Customer generators like SC Johnson have become the engines for clean energy development. The benefits of these investments don’t just flow to the installation owners, rather all of us gain from their contribution to a stronger economy and cleaner environment. For each of these reasons, they deserve recognition as well as our appreciation,” said Michael Vickerman, program and policy director for RENEW Wisconsin, a statewide renewable energy advocacy organization.

“Wisconsin is fortunate to have such innovative and conscientious employers setting examples for others to embrace,” said Vickerman.

“The Summit will help Wisconsin decision-makers decide on a productive mix of policies to sustain further growth in the clean energy marketplace.”
END
Read the news release from SC Johnson.

Legislators set to speak at Powering Positive Action

Neither encouraged nor discouraged by state legislative election results, RENEW Wisconsin will hold its second annual energy policy summit to shape policy initiatives that will increase customer-driven renewable installations in 2013 and beyond.  Register now!

Set for Friday, January 11, 2013 in Madison, RENEW Wisconsin’s  summit, called Powering Positive Action, will synthesize the ideas and aspirations of business leaders, elected officials, and clean energy advocates into an achievable policy agenda.

This year a bipartisan legislative panel will outline their energy policy goals and identify specific initiatives that can move forward in the upcoming session.

Senators Dale Schultz (R-Richland Center) and Jennifer Shilling (D-La Crosse), and Representatives Chris Taylor (D-Madison) and Gary Tauchen (R-Bonduel), and Chris Schoenherr, Deputy Secretary of the Department of Administration, have agreed to take part in the legislative panel. 

Other plenary sessions will focus on policies and practices that advance jobs and economic development through in-state development of renewable energy.  One promising initiative vigorously promoted by RENEW, called Clean Energy Choice, would allow businesses and residential households to directly access clean energy produced on their premises from third party-owned systems.

We would like policymakers to hear company representatives discuss the fit between on-site renewables and their ability to remain competitive in a period of great energy transition.

Over the lunch hour, RENEW will recognize a host of pioneering businesses that are advancing renewable energy use in Wisconsin.  This year several businesses and nonprofits took the reins of the renewable energy marketplace, and we wish to honor their outstanding achievements.

Former Colorado governor Bill Ritter will deliver the keynote address.  During his two terms, Ritter championed several innovative policies that are now fueling one of the healthiest energy economies in the nation.

Click to see registration details and other information about RENEW’s 2013 Energy Policy Summit.

RENEW thanks our current Summit sponsors:

Breakout Sponsors
DVO | Anaerobic Digesters - Bioenergy Session      
American Wind Energy Association - Wind Session            

Champion Sponsors                                    
Cullen Weston Pines and Bach
Organic Valley
W. W. Williams

Advocate Sponsors
Danfoss
Madison Solar
Michael Best and Friedrich, LLP
Prairie Solar Power & Light
Stantec
Western Technical College
         
Supporter Sponsors
Baker Tilly
Clean Wisconsin
C.R. Boardman
Michels Corporation
Midwest Renewable Energy Association
Sierra Club - John Muir Chapter
Werner Electric Supply

Commentary: How Wisconsin regulators ‘tax’ renewable energy

Michael Vickerman's commentary in Midwest Energy News on the recent changes in WI renewable energy. Find the original post here.

Commentary: How Wisconsin regulators ‘tax’ renewable energy

RENEW Wisconsin's Michael Vickerman

Starting next January, the price of purchasing renewable energy voluntarily through monthly utility bills will spike to all-time highs, thanks to recent decisions rendered by the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin (PSCW) on two popular “green pricing” programs.

The thousands of Madison Gas & Electric (MGE) customers participating in the utility’s Green Power Tomorrow program will see their premiums jump from 2.5 cents/kWh to 4 cents/kWh. That’s an increase of 60 percent. To translate this into dollars and cents, an average MGE customer consuming 500 kWh of electricity per month and subscribing at the 100 percent level will pay $90 more in 2013 for the same amount of renewable kWh sold this year.

Residential customers of Milwaukee-based We Energies (WE) will see an even larger percentage increase next year. In that utility’s rate case, the PSCW jacked up the premium paid by Energy for Tomorrow subscribers by nearly 73 percent, from 1.39 cents to 2.4 cents/kWh. Energy for Tomorrow has more than 20,000 subscribers.

Back in 1999, the year both programs were launched, MGE and WE customers paid an extra 3.33 cents and 2.04 cents/kWh, respectively, for the renewable energy they sponsored. Come January 1st, MGE and WE will likely share the dubious distinction of being the only utilities in the country offering renewable energy at a higher rate than they did in the 1990’s. So much for progress.

Adding insult to injury, renewable program subscribers will be subject to general rate increases approved by the PSCW this November. The utilities sought higher rates to recover the costs of retrofitting older coal-fired power stations with modern pollution controls. The fact that the renewable generators leveraged by program participants will never need pollution control retrofits is wholly disregarded in determining the size of the premium.

This is unquestionably a subsidy that flows from program participants to all ratepayers.

How did this happen?
Since 1999, renewable generation costs have tumbled, while productivity has improved.
A frustrated program subscriber might well ask: If base utility rates are going up, and the cost of renewable electricity is declining, why are premiums going up instead of down?

The short answer is that wholesale electricity prices have sagged in recent years, owing to a combination of unsustainably low natural gas prices, stagnant demand, and rapid expansion of wind power displacing higher-cost generation. In contrast, the price of renewable energy procured under long-term contracts held steady. When prices dropped in the wholesale market beginning in late 2008, the gap between system energy and renewable sources widened.

Though accurate, the above explanation is deeply unsatisfying, because the wholesale “market” is concerned about one thing only: the marginal cost of producing electricity into the grid. Nothing else matters, including the expenditures approved by the PSCW to reduce emissions from older generators. Even though retail customers wind up footing the bill for those upgrades, the wholesale market does not treat pollution control retrofits as marginal costs. Not one cent paid by ratepayers for these expenditures is reflected in the prices that renewable generators compete against.

The net effect of this disconnect is to artificially suppress the price of electricity from older and dirtier generators relative to newer and cleaner electricity producers. Real markets factor in the cost of upgrading and replacing capital equipment that manufacture the product bought by customers. What we have instead is an artificial contrivance that sacrifices long-term considerations like clean air, resource diversity and regulatory risk for the short-term reward of low prices.

Indeed, it would be difficult to design a more punitive market structure for renewables than the one we have at present.

‘Swimming up a waterfall’
Pricing renewable energy against a market operating in real time also undermines a valuable attribute of renewable energy, namely its inherent price stability. In this environment, the only way a customer can directly benefit from a fixed-price energy source like solar is to self-generate at his or her premises to reduce consumption of grid-supplied electricity.

In setting the premium size, the PSCW relied on pricing data at a time when the regional wholesale market was near its cyclical bottom. Electricity prices are now edging upward as forward prices of natural gas have rebounded from historic lows earlier this year. It’s a safe bet that wholesale electricity prices will continue to increase in 2013.

This sets up the very real possibility that WE and MGE will collect more revenue than is necessary to cover the cost spread between system energy and the renewable energy supplies servicing their customers. Unfortunately, the next time the base premium for each utility can be adjusted is January 1, 2015.

For at least a century now, fossil fuels have been the default resource option for most utilities. Against this institutional bias, switching to renewable energy is akin to swimming upstream. But given how far backward the PSCW bent to accommodate utilities’ continued reliance on coal and natural gas, quite a few renewable energy subscribers may balk at the prospect of swimming up a waterfall.

In fairness to MGE and WE, the price hikes approved by the PSCW went well beyond the incremental increases proposed by the two utilities. That’s because the agency relies solely on the wholesale “market” metric described above that filters out all societal benefits from the equation. To the agency, renewables are another source of electrons that deserve no special consideration. And, in reaching its decision, the PSCW disregarded the potential impact that abrupt price hikes might have on customer participation.

Programs outliving their usefulness?
A significant loss in subscribership would be a regrettable outcome if the programs were still viable vehicles for leveraging new sources of renewable energy. Sadly, that is no longer the case.

Earlier this decade, WE and MGE pulled the plug on a popular feature of their programs, specifically the special solar energy buyback rates that were funded with participant dollars. This innovation, which spurred the installation of hundreds of solar electric systems in their territories, succeeded in elevating MGE and WE’s stature while achieving the aims of their participating customers. However, when the utilities eliminated their solar incentives, they also removed the principal rationale for subscribing to their programs.

It seems quite clear that the current crop of voluntary renewable energy programs have outlived their usefulness. They are stagnating under a market structure that distorts and amplifies their true costs as well as a regulatory climate that greatly discounts their benefits to ratepayers. What were once dynamic vehicles for increasing supplies of renewable energy are now little more than feel-good marketing exercises running on autopilot. The value proposition to customers just isn’t there anymore.

There is nothing out there to prevent utilities from revitalizing their green pricing programs and making them useful once again. Such an undertaking, however, would require them to do something they haven’t done before: present an affirmative case for adding more renewables into their energy mix.

To do that effectively, utilities would need to recognize that the fossil energy path leads to a dead-end and that renewables ought to be the default resource option going forward. From that starting point, designing a program in which modest customer premiums actually result in additional supplies of renewable energy should be a simple and straightforward exercise.

It’s the very least a responsible utility should do to reduce the impact of generating electricity on the one planet we are privileged to call home.

Michael Vickerman is program and policy director of RENEW Wisconsin, a sustainable energy advocacy organization. RENEW Wisconsin is a member of RE-AMP, which also publishes Midwest Energy News.

Find the original article post here.

Milwaukee Brewing to build solar hot water system

From Energy writer Thomas Content of the Journal Sentinel. Find the original post here.

Green beer apparently isn't brewed only on St. Patrick's Day.

Milwaukee Brewing Co. will install a solar hot water system at its brewery in Walker's Point, with 28 solar panels that will be combined with a system that will preheat water used in the brewing process.

"Here's a good example of a perfect application for solar hot water," said Amy Heart, who runs the City of Milwaukee's solar program, Milwaukee Shines. "Breweries use a lot of water - and a lot of hot water - and so it made sense for them to invest in this."

The project was funded in part with grants from the state Focus on Energy program as well as the ME2 Milwaukee Energy Efficiency program and Milwaukee Shines.

Through the combination of energy-efficiency upgrades that made the operation more efficient as well as the solar hot-water system, Milwaukee Brewing is forecasting a 27% savings in energy used during the brewing process.

"We hope our installation encourages others to make the investment," said Jim McCabe, the brewery's owner, in a statement. He added that the project will help boost the brewery's competitiveness.

The solar system is being supplied by Caleffi Solar, which has its North American headquarters in Milwaukee's Menomonee Valley and is a founding member of a regional solar hot-water business council.

Along with the Midwest Renewable Energy Association, the business council is co-sponsoring a national solar thermal conference that begins Thursday at the downtown Hilton hotel.

"With companies like Caleffi Solar, Milwaukee is at the forefront of this industry with a strong and expanding solar supply chain," Heart said. "Solar for a Milwaukee brewery is the perfect way to showcase how solar is a solution in many applications

The brewery's green and energy-saving initiatives include water conservation measures as well as a biodiesel boiler that is fueled by grease from local residents and the county Parks Department.

Milwaukee Brewing has been at 613 S. 2nd St. since 2006.

See the original posting of this article here.

RENEW Wisconsin’s Energy Summit Plans Policy Actions for 2013

Immediate release:                                              
December 5, 2012
               
More information:
Michael Vickerman
608.255.4044, ext. 2
mvickerman@renewwisconsin.org

RENEW Wisconsin’s Energy Summit Plans Policy Actions for 2013

Neither encouraged nor discouraged by state legislative election results, RENEW Wisconsin will hold its second annual energy policy summit to shape policy initiatives that will accommodate customer-driven renewable installations in 2013 and beyond.

Set for Friday, January 11, 2013 in Madison, RENEW Wisconsin’s  summit, called Powering Positive Action, aims to synthesize the ideas and aspirations of business leaders, elected officials, and clean energy advocates into an achievable policy agenda.

“This year a bipartisan legislative panel will outline their energy policy goals and identify specific initiatives that can move forward in the upcoming session,” said Michael Vickerman, RENEW Wisconsin’s Director of Policy and Programs.

Senator Dale Schultz (R-Richland Center), Representatives Chris Taylor (D-Madison) and Gary Tauchen (R-Bonduel), and Chris Schoenherr, Deputy Secretary of the Department of Administration, have agreed to take part in the legislative panel.

Other plenary sessions will focus on policies and practices that advance jobs and economic development through in-state development of renewable energy.  One promising initiative vigorously promoted by RENEW, called Clean Energy Choice, would allow business and residential customers to directly access clean energy produced on their premises from third party-owned systems.  “We would like policymakers to hear company representatives discuss the fit between on-site renewables and their ability to remain competitive in a period of great energy uncertainty,” Vickerman said.

Over the lunch hour, RENEW will recognize a host of pioneering businesses that are advancing renewable energy use in Wisconsin.

“This year businesses and nonprofits took the reins of the renewable energy marketplace, and we wish to honor their outstanding achievements,” Vickerman said.

Former Colorado governor Bill Ritter, will deliver the keynote address.  During his two terms, Ritter championed several innovative policies that are now fueling one of the healthiest energy economies in the nation.

Registration details and other information about RENEW’s 2013 Energy Policy Summit are posted at www.renewwisconsin.org.
         

-- END --

RENEW Wisconsin is an independent, nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization that acts as a catalyst to advance a sustainable energy future through public policy and private sector initiatives.  More information on RENEW’s Web site at www.renewwisconsin.org.

Come one, Come all!

RENEW Wisconsin is excited to present the 2013 renewable energy policy summit, "Powering Positive Action!". Every business, organization, and individual interested in promoting clean renewable energy in Wisconsin should attend.

At this year's Summit we will lay the policy foundation for Powering Positive Action in 2013 through investments in new renewable infrastructure serving Wisconsin businesses and citizens.

Bill Ritter, Summit Keynote Speaker

We are thrilled to host former Colorado Governor, Bill Ritter, as the keynote speaker for the summit. During his time as governor, his administration made Colorado one of the leading states in the US in renewable energy.

Registration and sponsorship opportunities are now open. Don't wait until it's too late!

Will Wisconsin election results tip scales against renewables?

RENEW Wisconsin's Michael Vickerman weight in on the recent changes in Wisconsin politics, and what they mean for the future of renewable energies. From this article in Midwest Energy News by Dan Haugen.

Will changing political winds in Wisconsin mean another new direction for wind energy policy in the state?

Wisconsin Republicans reclaimed control of the state’s senate last week, five months after recall elections tipped the balance to Democrats. Republicans will now hold power by a wider margin in 2013 than they held in 2011.

A wind farm near Fond du Lac, Wisconsin. Renewable energy advocates are expecting another challenge to the state’s wind siting rules. (Photo by Digidave via Creative Commons)

Wind energy advocates are worried that might mean another attempt to repeal the state’s wind farm siting rules, which limit restrictions that local governments can place on proposed wind developments.

And one Republican state senator has already announced plans to seek a repeal of the state’s renewable electricity standard, though a renewable advocacy group doubts the bill will gain enough support to pass.

Hopes for bipartisanship
Overall, RENEW Wisconsin program and policy director Michael Vickerman expects less hostility and more acceptance of the fact that renewable energy plays a growing role in the state’s economy.

“We are hearing that there are Republican senators that want to introduce positive legislation on renewable energy next year, and they want to do so in a bipartisan fashion,” Vickerman said.

RENEW Wisconsin is a member of RE-AMP, which also publishes Midwest Energy News.

While Republicans haven’t announced their energy agenda, RENEW Wisconsin is concerned about a proposal by Republican state Sen. Frank Lasee that would un-do the state’s wind farm siting policy.

“He’s spearheading a one-person jihad against wind energy,” Vickerman said.

Wisconsin adopted statewide wind siting rules in 2011 that put boundaries on the local zoning and permitting regulations, which had delayed or derailed wind projects in some counties.

In March, Lasee introduced a bill that would have rolled back those rules, putting wind developers back at the mercy of a messy patchwork of local rules, some of which were, in Vickerman’s words, “a never-ending obstacle course” meant to discourage any projects.

Lasee’s effort last spring came up one vote short when Republicans had a 17-16 margin in the state senate. Next year, Lasse’s party is expected to hold an 18-15 majority.

“We survived, really, by the skin of our teeth,” Vickerman said. “All other things being equal, we have to find another Republican senator who will stand [for the wind siting rules.]”

RPS challenge?
The American Legislative Exchange Council, a conservative policy group that promotes identical, model legislation across the country, says it plans to make repealing state renewable mandates a high priority in 2013.

State Sen. Glenn Grothman, a Republican from Sheboygan, has already announced plans for a bill that would freeze Wisconsin’s renewable standard at its 2012 levels.

“The 10 percent renewable portfolio standard imposed on Wisconsin utilities in 2006 was a mistake,” Grothman said in a press release. (The senator’s office didn’t return a phone call last week.)

Vickerman said he is “not particularly worried” about Grothman’s bill. That’s because renewable energy has too many allies — from landfill operators to equipment manufacturers — who understand its importance to growing Wisconsin’s economy.

“He is looking at legislation that would not only scale back commitments to wind energy, but also solar, biogas, landfill gas, hydro — all the resources are covered,” Vickerman said.

The legislation would also have very little practical effect, Vickerman said, because most of the state’s utilities have met their requirements for 2015 already.

Gary Radloff, director of Midwest energy policy analysis for the Wisconsin Bioenergy Initiative at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, said it’s tough to generalize about legislators’ positions on energy.

“My experience has been that there’s a pretty broad continuum of views on energy, and that there’s people within the Republican caucus who see the benefits of renewables, especially bioenergy,” Radloff said.

Renewable energy has broad support from the public and businesses in Wisconsin, Radloff said. He thinks there’s more recognition today that a broad, all-out attack on renewables would not be popular.

His advice for lawmakers: “I would urge elected officials from both parties to go slow on dramatic energy policy change around renewables,” he said. “I think it’s really important that they go slow, keep an open mind, and recognize that the world is changing.”

See the original article and comments here.

State’s Renewable Standard Delivers Positive Results

More information
Michael Vickerman
mvickerman@renewwisconsin.org
608.255.4044,ext. 2

State’s Renewable Standard Delivers Positive Results
Most utilities already meeting 2015 targets
Most Wisconsin electricity providers have already acquired all the renewable energy supplies they need to meet the state’s 10% target in 2015, according to the Public Service Commission (PSCW).

The agency’s annual compliance review showed that nearly 9% of electricity sold by in-state electricity providers in 2011 originated from such renewable energy resources as sunlight, biogas, hydro, landfill gas and wind, compared with 3% in 2006.

“By any measure, the state’s Renewable Energy Standard (RES) has been an unqualified success,” said Michael Vickerman, program and policy director for RENEW Wisconsin. “From the standpoint of job creation, resource diversity, price stability, environmental protection and revenue generation, the RES has delivered  exceptional value to a state that is very dependent on imported fossil fuels for electricity generation.”

Passed in 2006, the RES has been the most powerful policy for driving growth in renewable electricity sales. Yet with so many electricity providers already in compliance with their 2015 requirements, the prospects for new investments in home-grown energy sources are uncertain.
“Right now, we don’t have a policy in place for directing investments into clean energy after 2015,” Vickerman said. “If we want to reap the economic and environmental benefits that come with renewables, state lawmakers will have to extend the Renewable Energy Standard or adopt a successor policy.”

“Investments in renewable resources not only supply Wisconsin utility customers with clean energy, they also generate work opportunities for local manufacturers and businesses, additional revenue for local governments, and income for farmers,” said Vickerman.

“Renewable energy should be the cornerstone of an economic development strategy that aims to increase the state’s workforce and expand investment opportunities,” Vickerman said. “We look forward to working with the Governor and the next Legislature to put in place a realistic, low-cost policy framework that maintains the momentum building from the current RES.”

The Real Meaning of Kewaunee’s Demise

A commentary by Michael Vickerman, Director, Policy and Programs at RENEW Wisconsin: 

 Shock waves reverberated across the Upper Midwest when Dominion Resources announced in late October that it would permanently shut down its Kewaunee nuclear generating station in early 2013. Operational since 1974, the Kewaunee station, located along Lake Michigan 30 miles east of Green Bay, currently generates about 5% of the electricity that originates in Wisconsin.

Virginia-based Dominion, which bought the 560-megawatt Kewaunee plant in 2005 from two Wisconsin utilities, attributed its decision to its inability to secure long-term power purchase agreements to keep the plant going. Without securing purchasing commitments from utilities, Dominion would have to sell Kewaunee’s output into the regional wholesale market at prices well below the plant’s cost of production.

While the pricing environment for all bulk power generators is nothing short of brutal these days, Kewaunee carries the additional burden of being an independently owned power plant, since the entities most likely to buy electricity from that generator—utilities--have power plants of their own that compete for the same set of customers. And a growing number of these utility-owned generators burn natural gas, which is currently the least expensive generation source in most areas of the country.

Dominion’s decision comes down to simple economics. Wisconsin utilities believe that over the foreseeable future natural gas will remain cheap and supplies will remain abundant. That would explain their unwillingness to enter into long-term commitments with Dominion, even though Kewaunee recently acquired a 20-year extension to its operating license and does not need expansive retrofits to comply with environmental standards, unlike a host of utility-owned coal plants in Wisconsin.

But even if Dominion’s managers were convinced that natural gas prices have nowhere to go but up in 2013 and beyond, the company, lacking a retail customer base in the Midwest, could not risk producing power below cost while waiting for the turnaround.

Wisconsin utilities have placed heavy bets on natural gas in the expectation that it will remain the price-setting fuel for years to come. Over the last 12 months, they have bought several combined-cycle generators from independent power producers. Buying power plants enables them to pass through their acquisition and operating costs directly to their customers while generating returns to their shareholders. I suspect these utilities are anything but broken up over the impending demise of a nonutility competitor that could have supplied electricity to Wisconsin customers for 20 more years.

But there is another side to this story; the low-price energy future that Wisconsin utilities are embracing can only materialize if natural gas extraction companies continue to sell their output below production costs. This expectation is unrealistic, given the massive pain being inflicted on these companies in the form of operating losses, write-downs, and credit rating downgrades.

Don’t just take my word for it, ask Exxon Mobil ceo Rex Tillerson, whose company spent $41 billion during the shale gas boom to acquire XTO, a large gas producer that is now yielding more red ink than methane. As reported in a recent New York Times article, Tillerson minced no words in assessing the impact of its recent misadventures on the company’s bottom line. “We’re all losing our shirts today,” Tillerson said. “We’re making no money. It’s all in the red.”

Much of the industry’s woes are self-inflicted. The lease agreements that drillers eagerly signed during the height of the shale gas boom obligate them to extract the resource by a certain deadline, regardless of whether such activity is profitable. That these companies cannot disengage quickly from existing leases is greatly diminishing their appetite for exploring new natural gas prospects. Until a pricing turnaround occurs, they will refrain from spending money on exploring new resource provinces like Ohio and Michigan.

Sooner or later, this slowdown in exploration activity will tip the supply-demand equation in the opposite direction, resulting in lower-than-average gas storage volumes. Barring a repeat of last winter’s unusually mild weather, the crossover point should occur around January 1st . But with so many balance sheets in tatters from this highly unprofitable market environment, nothing short of a strong and sustained price increase will be required to persuade drillers to start taking risks again.

When this corrective price increase begins rippling through the electricity markets, it will be interesting to observe how the customers will respond. Right now Wisconsin utility managers are convinced that they are making the right call on natural gas. So completely have they swallowed the shale gas “game-changing” mystique that they were willing to let a 560 MW nuclear plant fall out of the supply picture for good. In this brave new world of theirs, gas is the new coal, and resource diversity is passé.

In the aftermath of Dominion’s announcement, a few commentators have defended the impending closure as a textbook example of how markets work. But this view ignores the delusional thinking that sent shale gas extraction into overdrive, causing prices to plunge below the cost of production. The real game-changer, as it turns out, here was not the emergence of “fracking” technology but the industry-generated public relations campaign that implanted the narrative of a nation awash in cheap natural gas into virtually every American cranium. But as we now see, this narrative has boomeranged on the natural gas industry, and they are paying for their current woes in ways that guarantee a pronounced pendulum swing in the direction of higher prices.

The question going forward is: will this narrative also boomerang on Wisconsin electricity users, after the last employee leaving Kewaunee turns out the lights?

 Michael Vickerman is program and policy director of RENEW Wisconsin, a sustainable energy advocacy organization. For more information on the global and national petroleum and natural gas supply picture, visit previous posts Madison Peak Oil Group’s blog: http://www.madisonpeakoil-blog.blogspot.com. This commentary is also listed on RENEW Wisconsin's blog: http://www.renewwisconsin-blog.org/

The sickening truth about wind farm syndrome

Hilltop turbines are being blamed for myriad maladies. What is the truth behind these outlandish claims? Simon Chapman debunks these claims in this article from the New Scientist.


NEW technology has long attracted "modern health worries". Microwave ovens, television and computer screens and even early telephony all caused anxiety in their time. More recently, cellphones and towers, Wi-Fi and smart electricity meters have followed suit.

Another is gathering attention; the very modern malaise known as wind turbine syndrome. I set out to collect the conditions attributed to wind farm exposure. Within hours, I'd found 50 often florid assertions about different illnesses. Today my total sits at 198, with a range redolent of Old Testament plagues.

The list includes "deaths, yes, many deaths", none of which have ever come to the attention of a coroner, cancers, congenital malformations, and every manner of psychiatric problem. But mostly, it includes common health problems found in all communities, with wind turbines or not. These include greying hair, energy loss, concentration lapses, weight gain and all the problems of ageing. Sleep problems are mentioned most, but insomnia is incredibly common. Animals get a look in. Chickens won't lay; earthworms vanish; hundreds of cattle and goats die horrible deaths from "stray electricity".

In a 35-year career in public health, I have never encountered anything quite so apocalyptic. I've visited wind farms and compared their gentle swoosh to the noises that all city dwellers live with daily. Quickly, this phenomenon began to tick psychogenic boxes.

There are several reasons to suspect that the unrecognised entity of wind turbine syndrome is psychogenic: a "communicated" disease spread by anti-wind interest groups, sometimes with connections to fossil fuel interests. People can worry themselves sick.

Firstly, there are the temporal problems. Wind farms appeared some 20 years ago in the US. There are now just shy of 200,000 turbines globally. But the first recorded claims that they caused disease came a decade later. Two rural doctors, one in the UK and the other in Australia, made claims repeated widely in newspapers but never published in any journal. Turbines have come to be blamed for chronic conditions like (amazingly) lung and skin cancer, diabetes, multiple sclerosis and stroke. But importantly also acute symptoms, that according to Australia's high priestess of wind turbine syndrome, Sarah Laurie, an unregistered doctor, can commence within 20 minutes of exposure. If true, what happened in the early complaint-free years?

Then there's the issue of clustering. The European wind industry sees the phenomenon as largely anglophone, and even then, only in particular regions and around certain farms. Many sites have run for years without complaint. Others, legendary for their vocal opponents even before start up, are hot beds of disease claims. So if turbines were inherently noxious, why do they cut such a selective path? Why do citizens of community-owned turbines in Germany and Denmark rarely complain? Why are complaints rare in western Australia, but rife in several eastern Australian communities?

Opponents readily concede that only a minority of those exposed report being ill but explain this via the analogy of motion sickness: it only happens to those who are susceptible. How then to explain that whole regions and indeed nations, have no susceptible people? The key factor seems to be the presence or absence of anti-wind activists, generally from outside the area.

It is clear the presence of these anti-wind "vectors" is required. Communities which have for years accepted the farms can erupt when activists arrive, spreading alarm and listing health problems. Prominent among these in Australia are wealthy conservative landowners appalled by the very visible presence of the tall green-energy totems, a constant reminder of bucolic decay and the "upstairs-downstairs" disdain they have for those needing income from their often hilly, poorer quality land.

The fact that money seems to be a magic antidote to these ailments further undermines the claims. Health complaints are as rare as rocking horse excrement among turbine hosts. Complaints are rare from those financially benefitting from communal ownership arrangements. It tends to be neighbours of those hosting turbines who make the link with illness. They see the turbines, dislike them and dwell on their misfortune. The perceived injustice can eat away at some, fomented by organised groups.

Wind companies also report residents approaching them with extensive renovation wish lists. One told me of a request for a house to be moved to a lake shore. In rural Australia, residential buy-outs by mining companies are common. Word spreads about shack owners who got lucky. So when a cashed-up company appears, it is understandable that some may see their ticket out via protracted complaints.

Opponents also claim that confidentiality clauses are used to gag hosts, so they can't speak up about illnesses. I've seen several contracts and, predictably, none involve signing away common law rights to claims of negligence.

Finally, there are the apocryphal tales about many families having to abandon their homes. Mysteriously, address lists are never produced. Abandoning unsaleable properties is a sad part of rural decay, a fact which seems to escape fly-in, fly-out climate change denialists.

Previous modern health worries dissipated when the predicted health mayhem never emerged and the feared exotic agents became thoroughly familiar. Hysteria about cellphone towers had its heyday in the late 1990s, at least in Australia, but is rare today. With 17 reviews of the evidence on harm caused by wind farms consistent in their assessment of insignificant risk, how long can this one last?

Simon Chapman is professor in public health at the University of Sydney, Australia. Find the original article here.

Energy informational meeting & social gathering, Nov. 13, Milwaukee

RENEW Wisconsin and the Sierra Club invite everyone in southeast Wisconsin with an interest in renewable energy to an informational meeting and social gathering on November 13. Don Wichert will give an update on RENEW Wisconsin's current work and tentative plans for 2013 to turn our passion for renewable energy into action, into new public and private programs to support renewable energy. He'll be going over RENEW's initiatives on:

• Third-party ownership (Clean Energy Choice)
• WPSC and We Energies net metering policies and RENEW's rate case intervention
• Focus on Energy funding and planning for next year
• A new non-utility green energy program (http://www.repowernow.org/)
• Streamlining interconnection requirements
• RENEW's 2011 utility scorecard
• RENEW's plan to get We Energies to honor their $6 million per year renewable energy commitment
• Recent wind projects and wind siting rule defense
• Plans to increase the Renewable Electricity Standard in the future.

He'll try to give updates on all of these in one hour (speaking very fast), then we'd like to hear other ideas on positive actions to achieve success in 2013.

So please join RENEW and the Sierra Club on November 13, at 5:30 p.m. at Helios Solar Works, 1207 W. Canal St., Milwaukee, to get caught up and to discuss your own views with others. There will be local brews, cider, and snacks.

RENEW Informational Meeting & Social Gathering
November 13, 2012, 5:30 p.m.
Helios Solar Works
1207 W. Canal St.
Milwaukee, WI

Ask candidates for Legislature about clean energy

Clean Wisconsin's Keith Reopelle emphasizes clean energy and energy efficiency policies in the upcoming elections in this article from The Cap Times:

Now is the time to make sure you know where your candidates stand on the day’s most important issues. Two important issues that will have a major impact on our state’s future are clean energy and energy efficiency.

Voters typically consider energy a national issue, but state-level politics often have as much or more impact on our energy future. In Wisconsin, state laws determine the how much of our electricity comes from renewable sources like wind and solar power. Additionally, programs like Focus on Energy, the statewide energy efficiency program, help homeowners and businesses save millions of dollars on energy bills.

Despite these laws and programs, we still send over $12 billion out of state each year to purchase dirty fossil fuels. Increasing our commitment to clean energy and energy efficiency could help Wisconsin become more energy independent, clean our air and water, and create thousands of jobs.

Unfortunately, legislators voted to significantly cut funding to Focus on Energy in the last legislative session, despite the program’s proven success; it saves homeowners and businesses $2.50 for every $1 invested in the program. Now is the time to move clean energy and energy efficiency policies forward, not backward.

A recent poll by the bipartisan research team of Public Opinion Strategies and Fairbank, Maslin, Metz and Associates found that Wisconsinites overwhelmingly support clean energy and energy efficiency. In fact, the poll found that 85 percent of Wisconsin voters support increasing the use of wind energy to meet our state’s future energy needs, and 89 percent support increasing the use of solar energy. Additionally, 84 percent said they would support policies requiring 30 percent of Wisconsin’s electricity to come from renewable sources. This is well above the current standard of 10 percent by 2015, which utilities have largely met.

By passing clean energy policies and increasing funding for money-saving programs like Focus on Energy in the next legislative session, legislators can help create Wisconsin jobs. Companies like Milwaukee’s Helios SolarWorks, a solar panel manufacturer, Manitowoc’s Orion Energy Systems, a leader in lighting efficiency, Prairie du Sac’s Tower Technologies, a renewable energy installer, and hundreds more can create more jobs if leaders work together to advance clean energy and energy efficiency policies.

In addition, such policies could attract new companies to Wisconsin and make our state a leader in the rapidly expanding clean energy economy. In April, Ibisworld.com listed solar panel manufacturing (No. 2) and green and sustainable building construction (No. 9) among the nation’s top 10 fastest-growing industries. The poll found that more than two-thirds of voters believe clean energy and energy efficiency will create jobs and investing in these industries now can help ensure Wisconsin remains economically strong for decades.

At a time when our state and nation remain deeply divided on many issues, clean energy and energy efficiency unite people of all political stripes. With less than two weeks to the election, now is the time to ask your candidates where they stand on these important issues.

Keith Reopelle is the senior policy director at Clean Wisconsin. For more information, visit www.cleanwisconsin.org. Find the original article here.

Solar powering your community with Clean Energy Choice

Clean Energy Choice (sometimes called third-party ownership) allows a customer to get electricity from a third-party which installs and maintains a renewable energy system on the customer's premises.

With Clean Energy Choice, customers don't have to put any money upfront, the major barrier to installing renewables. The customer either buys the output directly from the third-party owner or pays to host the energy-producing equipment and uses the electricity without any further cost under a long-term contract.

From a presentation by Michael Vickerman, RENEW director of policy and program, at Solar Powering Your Community, October 11, 2012: 

• No up-front capital required from host customers 
• Allows nonprofit entities to partner w/ for-profit companies that can use the 30% federal tax credit 
• Based on a successful model for delivering energy efficiency (performance-based contracts) 
• Could lower energy costs for customers over the contract life 
• Hugely successful in states that allow it (e.g., California and Colorado) 
• It’s your premises, after all 

Dan York: Wisconsin slips down in energy-efficiency ranking

A letter to the editor from Dan York, with a correction to the original article "Wisconsin slips down in energy-efficiency ranking.". It's worth reading the original, and the correction is listed below:

Dear Editor: The Biz Beat article “Wisconsin slips down in energy-efficiency ranking,” published Oct. 6, reveals how Wisconsin has lost its one-time leadership position for policies and programs to achieve greater energy efficiency according to annual rankings performed by my organization, the American Council for an Energy-Efficiency Economy (ACEEE). We are pleased to see this issue raised in Wisconsin.

The article contains one statement, however, that is incorrect. A spokeswoman for the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin, Kristin Ruesch, states that our group (ACEEE) did not look at “achievements” but “spending alone.” Our State Scorecard, in fact, assesses and includes scores both for program spending and savings (achievements). We agree with the PSC that cost-effectiveness and savings impacts are important attributes of programs like Focus on Energy. It is precisely because of the demonstrated cost-effectiveness of Focus on Energy ($2.30 in economic benefits for every program dollar spent) that we believe higher levels of investments in this clean, low-cost energy resource are justified. The PSC reached the same conclusion in its 2010 review of the program, which led to its recommendation to greatly increase funding and associated energy savings goals for Focus on Energy.

Our neighboring states rank higher than Wisconsin because they continue to push for higher energy savings through increased investments in energy efficiency. Wisconsin, by contrast, is standing still and by doing so, is getting left behind. Energy efficiency saves customers money, protects the environment and creates jobs here in Wisconsin. We encourage Wisconsin’s policymakers to take actions to put Wisconsin back in a leadership position for creating a green energy economy for the 21st century.

Dan York, Ph.D., Utilities Program director, American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy