PSCW Decisions “Tax” Renewable Energy 

Voluntary Programs to Be Priced At All-Time Highs

A commentary by Michael Vickerman, Director, Programs and Policy, December 4, 2012:
 
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 per kilowatt-hour (kWh) to 4 cents/kWh. That’s an increase of 60%. To translate this into dollars and cents, an average MGE customer consuming 500 kWh of electricity per month and subscribing at the 100% 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%, 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.

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 windpower 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. 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.

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. For more information on the global and national petroleum and natural gas supply picture, visit "The End of Cheap Oil" section in RENEW Wisconsin's web site: www.renewwisconsin.org. These commentaries also posted on RENEW’s blog: http://renewwisconsinblog.org and Madison Peak Oil Group’s blog: http://www.madisonpeakoil-blog.blogspot.com

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.”   

           

END

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

RENEW Raps We Energies’ Radical Proposal to Restrict Net Metering

Immediate release
September 27, 2012

More information
Michael Vickerman
Director, Program and Policy
608.255.4044, ext. 2
mvickerman@renewwisconsin.org

(Madison) -  In testimony submitted to the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin (PSCW) on Wednesday, RENEW Wisconsin objected to We Energies’ proposal to weaken its net-metering service to new customers seeking to generate electricity on-site using solar panels and other renewable energy systems.

In its current rate proceeding, We Energies proposes not to pay a new customer-generator for any electricity produced in excess of the amount consumed on site.

“We Energies’ proposal is a radical departure from its current practice paying the full retail rate for energy that’s fed back to the utility’s system,” said Michael Vickerman, director of programs and policy for RENEW Wisconsin, a statewide renewable energy advocacy organization.

“This proposal is the most extreme example yet of We Energies’ ongoing retreat from customer-sited renewables, and we urge the PSCW to reject it.

Net metering allows customers to sell the unused output from their solar electric or other renewable energy systems back to the utility at the full retail rate each month, so long as the total amount of electricity produced is less than or equal to the customers’ usage.

“Utilities routinely pay for all the energy supplied by non-utility generators to its system.

"By refusing to purchase the small amounts of electricity they may export to the utility, We Energies is abusing its monopoly power in a way that discriminates against its own customers.” Vickerman said.

In its proposal, We Energies would limit its net metering service to systems no larger than 20 kilowatts. In contrast, Madison Gas & Electric, Xcel Energy, and Wisconsin Public Service provide net metering to systems as large as 100 kilowatts.

“When you take into account what other in-state utilities are offering, it seems obvious that We Energies is asking for special treatment from the PSC.

Yet, it has provided nothing in its rate case to demonstrate that a higher net metering ceiling would cause it any more harm than to the other utilities,” said Vickerman.

Vickerman pointed to Michigan as a better model for setting net-metering service standards.

“Thanks to legislation passed in 2008, We Energies’ Michigan customers enjoy a much higher standard of service than what the utility proposes for its Wisconsin customers,” Vickerman said.

“Along with all other investor-owned utilities in Michigan, We Energies must provide full retail credit for all electricity produced by renewable energy systems up to 20 kW and must provide a reasonable net metering rate for systems up to 150 kW.”

In the most recent Freeing the Grid: Best Practices in State Metering Policies report prepared for the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Michigan rated an “A” for its net-metering policies. By comparison, Wisconsin earned a “C.” The report can be viewed here.

Earlier this month, RENEW issued a report card grading individual utility performance on renewable energy, in which We Energies received a “C” for its 2011 performance.

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

We Energies Gets Lowest Score on Renewable Energy Report Card

More information
Don Wichert
Executive Director
608.255.4044, ext. 1
dwichert@renewwisconsin.org

We Energies Gets Lowest Score on Renewable Energy Report Card
Churches and other nonprofits in We Energies’ service area will have difficulty following the renewable-energy example of the Unitarian Universalist Church West in Brookfield, because the utility unilaterally ended the incentive program which helped the church absorb the cost of a solar system installed in 2008.

The end of the utility program resulted in WE receiving a C on a renewable energy report card issued by RENEW Wisconsin, a statewide renewable energy advocacy organization.

“We Energies agreed with RENEW and other groups to spend $6 million/year over 10 years to encourage the use of renewable energy in its service area. As part of the program, over 100 nonprofit organizations installed renewable energy systems.

In 2011, however, WE simply announced the end of the program after only five years,” said Don Wichert, RENEW’s executive director and the report card director, at a news conference in front of the church.

“The money was critically important to our ability to install a solar system and was needed because nonprofits are not eligible for the federal tax credits” said Amy Taivalkoski, a congregation member who headed up the project along with Dennis Briley, another member. “The grant of $27,500 covered about a third of the total cost.”

“We were very thankful to receive the grant, which allowed us to show other congregations how to fulfill a vision for a just, sustainable world. It’s unfortunate that the WE program won’t be there to help them as it helped us,” added Rev. Suzelle Lynch, minister of the more than 700-person congregation.

WE earned a C (2.4 out of 5) overall on the report card for its renewable energy efforts in 2011, but had the lowest score of all utilities graded. The state’s other major utilities’ grades ranged from C to B/C -- Alliant, C (2.6); Madison Gas & Electric, B/C (3.0); Wisconsin Public Service Corporation, C (2.7); and Xcel, B/C (3.0).

“2011 was a year in which Wisconsin’s investor owned utilities cut back on their previous good performance supporting renewable energy,” said Wichert. “At this point in 2012 it appears that this poor performance trend continues.”

“It’s surprising and disappointing because recent opinion surveys indicate that the vast majority of Wisconsin’s population, including utilities ratepayers and stockholders, prefer renewable energy,” according to Wichert.

RENEW graded utilities on six criteria: amount of renewable electricity sold; green energy purchasing programs; ease of connecting to the utility system; prices paid for renewable electricity; legislative activities; and other programs offered voluntarily to customers.

Wisconsin utilities performed best in meeting the state’s renewable electricity standard. All of the utilities already meet or expect to meet the 10% standard by 2015, although some have the majority of the power coming from out of Wisconsin.

RENEW scored gave WE the following grades for 2011:
B Amount of renewable electricity sold (also called renewable energy standard)
B Green energy purchasing program for customers
B Ease of interconnecting to the utility system
F Price paid for electricity purchased from renewable energy systems
F Legislative activities on renewable energy policy
C- Other programs offered voluntarily to customers.

This was the first time RENEW conducted a grading system, but RENEW plans to continue the process in the future because people are interested in how well their utilities support renewable energy.

“The annual survey can be used by Wisconsin utilities and others to see which areas are lacking and how they can improve their grades. Adoption of renewable energy supports local jobs, lower emissions of pollutants, and energy security. These are attributes everybody wants. There is no reason that Wisconsin utilities should be performing at average levels in clean energy,” said Wichert.

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

Utilities Get C on Renewable Energy Report Card

More information
Don Wichert
Executive Director
608.255.4044, ext. 1
dwichert@renewwisconsin.org
 

Utilities Get C on Renewable Energy Report Card 

No Wisconsin utility graded higher than a B/C on a report card issued by a renewable energy advocacy group, and C was the overall average for the state’s five major utilities.

We Energies, headquartered in Milwaukee, earned a C (2.4 out of 5) on the report card for its renewable energy efforts in 2011 and had the lowest score of all utilities graded. The state’s other major utilities received similar or slightly higher grades: Alliant (aka Wisconsin Power and Light), C (2.6); Madison Gas & Electric, B/C (3.0); Wisconsin Public Service Corporation, C (2.7); and Xcel Energy, B/C (3.0).

“2011 was a year in which Wisconsin’s investor owned utilities cut back on their previous good performance supporting renewable energy,” said Don Wichert, RENEW Wisconsin’s executive director and the report card director. “At this point in 2012, it appears that this poor performance trend continues.”

“It’s surprising because recent opinion surveys indicate that the vast majority of Wisconsin’s population, including utilities ratepayers and stockholders, prefer renewable energy,” according to Wichert.

RENEW graded utilities on six criteria: amount of renewable electricity sold; green energy purchasing programs; ease of connecting to the utility system; prices paid for renewable electricity; legislative activities; and other programs offered voluntarily to customers.

Wisconsin utilities performed best in meeting the state’s renewable electricity standard, the amount of renewable electricity sold to its customers. All of the utilities already meet or expect to meet the 10% standard by 2015, although some have the majority of the power coming from out of Wisconsin.

We Energies scored at the bottom, because it had “agreed with RENEW and other groups to spend $6 million/year over 10 years to encourage the use of renewable energy in its service area. As part of the program, over 100 nonprofit organizations installed renewable energy systems. In 2011, however, WE simply announced the end of the program after only five years,” said Wichert at a news conference in from of a Milwaukee church that had a solar electric system installed as party of We Energies now-discontinued program.

RENEW gave the state’s investor owned utilities the following grades: C Alliant, Madison; B/C Madison Gas & Electric, Madison; C We Energies, Milwaukee; C Wisconsin Public Service Corporation, Green Bay; B/C Xcel Energy, Eau Claire.

This was the first time RENEW conducted a grading system, but RENEW plans to continue the process in the future because people are interested in how well their utilities support renewable energy.

“The annual survey can be used by Wisconsin utilities and others to see which areas are lacking and how they can improve their grades. Adoption of renewable energy supports local jobs, lower emissions of pollutants, and energy security. These are attributes everybody wants. There is no reason that Wisconsin has to lag the rest of the country in clean energy,” said Wichert.

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

RENEW says renewable energy can reduce greenhouse gases

From a presentation on July 11, 2012, at a news conference in the state Capitol:

Pathways to Increase Renewable Energy

1. Allow private companies to sell renewable energy to home and building occupants if the renewable system is on private property;
2. Allow fair and uniform net energy billing and interconnection policies;
3. Increase Focus on Energy funding for renewables;
4. Reinstate utility renewable energy commitments;
5. Increase renewable energy requirements.

RENEW Announces New Members of Board of Directors

Immediate release
July 11, 2012

More information
Jenny Heinzen,President
715.592.6595
jennyh@midwestrenew.org

RENEW Announces New Members of Board of Directors
RENEW Wisconsin (RENEW) members elected new directors to its governing board in July.

“The new board represents a wide range of talents and interests in supporting RENEW’s mission of leading and representing businesses, organizations, and individuals that seek more clean renewable energy in Wisconsin,” said Jenny Heinzen, RENEW’s board president. The new board offers a healthy mix of new and familiar faces, Heinzen said.

RENEW is an independent, nonprofit organization that leads and represents businesses, organizations, and individuals who seek more clean renewable energy in Wisconsin.

The following were elected to three-year terms on RENEW’s board:
• Jeff Anthony, Director of Business Development, American Wind Energy Association, Milwaukee;
• Alex DePillis, principal, Clean Energy Partners, specializing in commercial wind and solar thermal systems, Madison;
• Maureen Faller, co-owner, Kettle View Renewable Energy, LLC, installer of wind and solar systems, Random Lake;
• Jim Funk, owner and engineer for Energize, LLC, specializing in providing high quality, high performing solar PV systems, Winneconne;
• Gary Haltaufderheide, Sun Prairie;
• Duane Kexel, President, Duane T. Kexel Consulting, LLC, Madison;
• Jeff Peterson, executive director, Polk County Energy Fair and director at the Polk-Burnett Electric Cooperative, Luck;
• Pam Porter, owner, P Squared Group, energy consulting, Madison; and,
• Carl Siegrist, Managing Partner, Carl Siegrist Consulting LLC, Whitefish Bay.

The new directors will serve three-year terms and join existing board members to form the group that sets overall direction for the organization.
-END-
RENEW Wisconsin is an independent, nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization that leads and represents businesses, organizations, and individuals who seek more clean renewable energy in Wisconsin. More information on RENEW’s Web site at www.renewwisconsin.org.

Empower customers to overcome institutional and cultural barriers to renewables in Wisconsin!

From a presentation by Michael Vickerman, Program and Policy Director, titled Progress or Retreat? Constructing a Viable Policy Road Map for Renewables in Wisconsin at the MREA Energy Fair, Custer, WI, June 16: 

• Climate change issue losing currency
• Natural gas emerging as the new silver bullet.  100 years’ supply at rock bottom prices?--NOT!!!!
• RE incentives have been rebranded as subsidies
• Utilities groaning under excess generating capacity 
• Revenue growth no longer a certainty 
• Investment is passé – cost-cutting now the rage.  Consequently, utilities are backpedaling from renewables 

 See the full presentation here.

RENEW Rips WPS’s Net Metering Proposal

For immediate release
May 23, 2012

More information
Michael Vickerman
608.255.4044, ext. 2  

Another example of company backsliding on renewables 

In documents filed in conjunction with its pending rate case, Green Bay-based Wisconsin Public Service Corporation (WPS) proposed several rollbacks to its net metering service that would, if approved, sharply restrict a customer’s ability to generate electricity from renewable energy resources and sell a portion of it back to the utility.

Net metering allows customers to sell the unused output from their solar electric or other renewable energy system back to the utility at the full retail rate from month to month, so long as the surplus electricity is less than or equal to the customers’ usage in a 12-month period.

Currently, WPS customers may install solar or wind energy systems on their premises up to 100 kilowatts (kW). Beginning in January 2013, WPS would roll back that capacity limit to 20 kW.

WPS has also proposed to cap the overall size of its net metering offering at one-half of one percent of 2011 summer peak. No other Wisconsin utility has ever sought to impose capacity-based limits to its net metering service.

“What WPS proposes would be a really bad deal for customers installing small renewable energy systems serving their homes or businesses,” said Michael Vickerman, program and policy director for RENEW Wisconsin, a nonprofit advocacy organization promoting renewable energy use in Wisconsin.

“These service changes are clearly intended to discourage its customers from investing in solar and small wind energy systems,” Vickerman said. “If WPS gets its way, the renewable energy marketplace in that part of Wisconsin will slow down significantly.”

“At a time when the customers and communities in WPS territory are looking to renewable energy to support new jobs and manage their energy costs, the company is doing its level best to take that option away from them,” Vickerman said.

As an intervenor in WPS’s rate case, RENEW Wisconsin will ask the Public Service Commission to:
• Reject WPS’s proposal to impose a system-wide cap on net metering service;
• Maintain the current maximum system size at 100 kW; and
• Base WPS’s calculation of net energy on annual usage instead of monthly usage.

“What we will ask for is a standard of service that is already offered by two Wisconsin utilities: Madison Gas & Electric (MGE) and Xcel Energy,” Vickerman said. “WPS’s proposal is a particularly egregious example of company backsliding.”

Vickerman noted that MGE, which also has a pending rate proceeding before the Public Service Commission, did not propose any changes to its net metering service for 2013 and 2014.

 “We urge the PSC to work toward a uniform net metering policy for the state using MGE’s and Xcel’s service as a template,” Vickerman said.

Vickerman added: “WPS, it should be remembered, was the driving force behind the “Outsource Renewable Energy to Canada Act,” which was signed into law in 2011. That law lets utilities apply the energy they purchase from large Canadian hydropower sources toward their renewable energy requirements, at the expense of in-state renewable energy providers. Within that context, WPS’s net metering proposal constitutes another slight to Wisconsin’s renewable energy marketplace.”

END 

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

Coal Critic Coming to Madison to Speak on Effective Renewable Energy Advocacy, January 13, 2012

For immediate release
December 7, 2011

More information
Michael Vickerman
608.255.4044
mvickerman@renewwisconsin.org

Leslie Glustrom, research director of Colorado-based Clean Energy Action, and an unwavering critic of utility reliance on coal for electricity generation, will be the featured speaker at RENEW Wisconsin’s Energy Policy Summit.

The Summit will be held on Friday, January 13, 2012, at the University of Wisconsin-Extension’s Pyle Center located on the UW-Madison campus. Summit attendees will spend the day discussing and selecting renewable energy strategies that make sense in the current political environment in Wisconsin. More information on the Summit can be found on the RENEW Wisconsin website at http://www.renewwisconsin.org.

As research director, Glustrom authored in 2009 an extensively referenced report on U.S. coal supplies titled, “Coal—Cheap and Abundant—Or Is It? Why Americans Should Stop Assuming that the US has a 200-Year Supply of Coal,” available for free at http://www.cleanenergyaction.org.

Since 2009, Glustrom has traveled to numerous states helping them to understand the likely constraints on their coal supplies.

Glustrom’s on-going research illuminates a future in which coal prices will likely continue to escalate, driven by a combination of less accessible coal supplies, increasing demand from Asian countries, and rising diesel fuel costs for hauling coal to distant markets like Wisconsin.

Clean Energy Action is spearheading a campaign to shut down Colorado’s coal-fired power plants and replace them with locally generated renewable electricity.

“Leslie’s experiences with Clean Energy Action can help Wisconsin renewable energy advocates formulate effective strategies for 2012 and beyond,” said Michael Vickerman, executive director of RENEW Wisconsin, a statewide sustainable energy advocacy organization headquartered in Madison.

“Even though Colorado is a coal-producing state, it has adopted some of the most aggressive policies in the country for advancing renewable energy,” said Vickerman. “Colorado’s commitment to clean energy is driving its economy at a time when its coal output is diminishing. For example, Vestas, the world’s largest manufacturer of wind turbines with four plants employing 1,700 people in Colorado, supplied 90 turbines this year to Wisconsin’s largest wind project, the Glacier Hills Wind Park in Columbia County.”

“Leslie will inspire us to reverse the retreat from renewables and retake the initiative going forward,” Vickerman said.

In Boulder, Glustrom was part of the team that led the successful 2010 and 2011 ballot initiatives allowing Boulder to move ahead with plans to municipalize and break away from the long term commitment to coal plants made by their incumbent utility, Xcel Energy.

-- END --

Renewable Energy in Wisconsin: Anatomy of a Long, Strange Trip and Where We’re Headed Next

From a presentation by Michael Vickerman to Sierra Club – Great Waters Group in Milwaukee, WI on October 17, 2011:

The most agonizing decisions that await us will involve determining which elements of our built environment can be supported with renewable energy and which elements cannot. With a lower EROEI (energy return on energy invested), we will not be able to run a world that formerly ran on cheap, abundant fossil fuels. We have little choice but to downsize our buildings, downscale our communities, and reorganize the economy.

[The large file may take a minute or two to download.]

RENEW asks PSC to stop We Energies' termination of renewable program

From the testimony of RENEW presented by Michael Vickerman, who draws attention to the fact that We Energies is trying to defund its $6 million/year renewable energy development program without any justification. In fact We Energies doesn't say anything about their actions. RENEW asks the PSC not to sanction this sleight of hand maneuver:

Q. What is the purpose of your testimony?
A. The purpose of my testimony is to discuss the May 2011 decision by We Energies to cancel a 10-year, $60 million commitment to support renewable energy development in its service territory. [***BEGIN CONFIDENTIAL***] [***END CONFIDENTIAL***] (Exhibit __ (MJV-1)).

My testimony includes a recommendation to the Commission that it not allow We Energies to reallocate in 2012 the $6 million per year it had committed to spend on renewable energy development activities for other purposes. [***BEGIN CONFIDENTIAL***] [***END CONFIDENTIAL***]

Q. What is RENEW’s interest in this proceeding?
A. [***BEGIN CONFIDENTIAL***][***END CONFIDENTIAL***] RENEW is also a founding member of the We Energies Renewable Energy Collaborative (“WEREC”), the stakeholder body that has helped We Energies to achieve its voluntary renewable energy goal (5% by 2011) and maximize the value of its 10-year commitment to build, largely from scratch, a strong renewable energy infrastructure within its service territory. The collaborative, consisting of Midwest Renewable Energy Association, Citizens Utility Board, American Wind Energy Association, Wisconsin Energy Conservation Corporation, Customers First Coalition, and the 16th Street Community Health Center, has been working since 2002 to shape and guide We Energies’ renewable energy program. I think I can speak for all of the nonprofits in the collaborative when I say that our combined efforts and resources produced the strongest and most innovative utility-run renewable energy program in the state. Until We Energies announced its decision to terminate it, the program it had developed was widely regarded as one of the most successful utility-administered renewable energy initiatives in the nation.

Q. What was the basis of We Energies’ $6 million per year commitment to renewable energy?
A. I will quote from Jeff Anthony, who, as a We Energies manager in 2005, submitted testimony in the utility’s 2005 rate case (Docket No. 05-UR-102) providing details regarding We Energies’ request to recover $6 million per year in costs associated with planned renewable energy development activities:

In its first “Power the Future” filing in early 2002, [We Energies] made several commitments to renewable energy. Among those commitments was that, subject to regulatory approval and cost recovery, the Company would spend an additional $6 million per year to achieve a target of 5 percent of Wisconsin retail load served by the year 2011. With reference to this commitment, the PSCW in its November 10, 2003, Order in the “Power the Future” docket, stated: “As part of the PTF proposal, WEPCO has committed to a goal of obtaining 5 percent of its energy from renewable resources by 2011. This is more than twice the renewable portfolio standard set forth under Wis. Stats. § 196.378, which requires that at least 2.2 percent of each electric provider’s retail energy must be from renewable energy resources by this date. WEC has also declared its intent to spend up to $6 million per year for ten years on emerging technologies and activities, to encourage the development of renewable resources.

Q. We Energies launched its Renewable Energy Development program in 2002. Why did the utility wait until 2006 to begin spending $6 million per year on the program?
A. As a condition of its WICOR merger, the Commission imposed a five-year rate freeze on We Energies that expired on January 1, 2006.

Q. Did We Energies receive approval on its request to recover $6 million for renewable energy development costs?
A. Yes, it did. It also received approval from the Commission in 2007 to spend $6 million per year on its renewable energy development program in 2008 and 2009, and it also received approval in 2009 to spend $6 million per year on its renewable energy development program in 2010 and 2011. All told, We Energies has sought and received permission to spend up to $36 million on the renewable energy program it has developed in consultation with WEREC.

Q. Did We Energies produce a “Renewable Energy Development” program plan for the PSC’s review?
A. Yes. In 2006, We Energies created a fully fleshed-out program plan and presented it to the PSC that September, building on the summary table it had submitted in the previous rate case. The program plan contained a diverse portfolio of renewable energy projects and initiatives. We Energies also committed to hiring an outside firm to perform an independent assessment of all of the elements and initiatives set forth in the Renewable Energy Development program plan.

Q. What elements of We Energies’ Renewable Energy Development program do you consider to be particularly successful?
A. Several of We Energies’ customer incentives and tariffs were unique in the way they complemented Focus on Energy’s renewable energy program. For example, We Energies was the first utility to: (1) offer a solar energy-specific buyback rate; (2) increase the net energy billing capacity ceiling for small wind systems generators to 100 kW; and (3) support renewable energy-specific conferences and events such as Solar Decade held in Milwaukee. Perhaps the most innovative element in We Energies’ program, however, was its special incentive for nonprofit customers seeking to install renewable energy systems. Every three months, We Energies would solicit proposals from schools, religious institutions, local governments, nature centers and other nonprofit entities to co-fund new renewable energy systems on their premises. This We Energies incentive supplemented Focus on Energy grants and cash-back awards. It was designed to overcome the inability of these nonprofit entities to capture federal renewable energy tax credits to offset their own system acquisition costs. As a result of this unique incentive, there are more renewable energy systems serving nonprofit customers in We Energies territory than in any other utility territory. This initiative has an educational component to it as well; We Energies posts real-time production data from these systems on its web site. (Exhibit __ (MJV-2)).

We Energies was also the first Wisconsin utility to field a large solar initiative which supported a total of one megawatt of photovoltaic generating capacity on seven customer rooftops. All told, We Energies’ support of solar energy, including solar hot water systems, helped foster the convergence of a solar industry cluster in southeast Wisconsin consisting of such companies as Helios USA, Johnson Controls, Caleffi Solar, Hot Water Products, and Sunvest.

Q. In what other ways did We Energies’ program benefit ratepayers?
A. We Energies has a number of renewable energy systems 10 kW and above that are interconnected to its distribution system. (Exhibit __ (MJV-3)). Depending on the specific tariff through which We Energies acquires the generation, many of these installations, including most if not all of the biogas generation facilities in its service territory, are a source of Renewable Energy Credits, that, beginning in 2012, can be banked to help the utility meet its 2015 target under Wisconsin’s Renewable Energy Standard. That supply cushion could become very valuable to We Energies if an extended interruption occurs with a major supply source of renewable electricity. Also, the preponderance of solar PV systems in We Energies territory was a contributing factor enabling We Energies to weather July’s heat waves without setting a new record for system-wide peak demand.

Q. Did RENEW have any advance knowledge of We Energies’ unilateral decision to prematurely terminate its Renewable Energy Program?
A. At WEREC’s May 11, 2011 meeting, We Energies representatives disclosed to the collaborative the company’s internal decision to unilaterally and prematurely terminate the program. There had been no discussion of such an outcome between We Energies and any of the other collaborative members prior to the meeting. We Energies’ representatives assured us that the decision was final and irrevocable. Indeed, by the time We Energies got around to dropping this particular bombshell on WEREC participants, program termination was already a fait accompli. One day later, an announcement on the termination appeared on We Energies’ web site.

Q. Has We Energies provided any information to the Commission explaining its unilateral decision to prematurely terminate its program?
A. No, it has not. We Energies has yet to offer an explanation for its decision in this proceeding. In fact, We Energies is not explicitly asking for permission to discontinue funding for this initiative at this time. Instead, the program’s suspension is merely assumed within its proposed suspension of certain regulatory amortizations for 2012. This suspension for the test year would appear to set the stage for termination of the program pursuant to Wis. Admin. Code ch. PSC 137.

Q. Why should the Commission reject We Energies’ decision to prematurely and unilaterally terminate its Renewable Energy Development program?
A. There are several persuasive reasons for not sanctioning We Energies’ decision to unilaterally and prematurely terminate its Renewable Energy Development program. One, this proceeding, to date, is devoid of any justification by We Energies for this abrupt change of course. Two, the Commission has in three previous rate cases approved the $6 million per year earmarked for supporting renewable energy development activities. Nothing has happened between the most recent approval of funds for this initiative and today that warrant a lesser amount of funding for this initiative, let alone its outright termination. [***BEGIN CONFIDENTIAL***][***END CONFIDENTIAL***] In other words, there is a trust issue here that should not be summarily dismissed.

Five, the Commission staff audit in this proceeding revealed excess revenue for the test year of more than $85.8 million under the proposal submitted by WEPCO compared with adjustments proposed by Commission staff. “In other words, these proposed adjustments indicate that applicants are proposing to defer $85.8 million more than is necessary to achieve no change in base rates.” Accordingly, there is no valid basis for We Energies to contend that it must terminate or suspend its renewable energy program with a relatively small annual budget of $6 million. We Energies could cover program costs 14 times over with its revenue surplus. Six, this initiative is an important source of renewable energy development and innovation throughout We Energies’ service territory, providing support for customer-sited renewable energy installations, conferences, workshops, research and development activities, demonstration projects, and advanced renewable buyback rates. Although the accomplishments of this program over the past five years are a good start, there is still much to be achieved. Termination of this program would be a severe blow to area contractors, businesses, and manufacturers that invested in new production capacity and expanded their workforce in direct response to the favorable climate for renewable energy that We Energies had created in its service territory. Allowing We Energies to abruptly terminate its renewable energy initiative without cause would send a strong signal to these businesses and other prospective market actors that they should focus their renewable energy development work in out-of-state markets, where policy commitments are durable enough to survive the whims of utility managers.

Q. Does this complete your direct testimony?
A. Yes it does.

RENEW Debuts Wisconsin Renewable Energy Map

For immediate release

More information
Joe Friesen, Communications Assistant
608.819.0748
jfriesen@renewwisconsin.org

RENEW Debuts Wisconsin Renewable Energy Map

Volunteer Joe Friesen started a “simple” task to organize basic information on Wisconsin’s wind farms. This task grew over time to become a database and map that documents the location of nearly every renewable energy generating system in the state. Highlighting over 1,300 installations that total more than 700 megawatts of renewable electricity, RENEW Wisconsin’s database has become the most comprehensive on-line compilation of in-state renewable energy systems.

Installations depicted on this on-line tool range from small customer-owned solar electric systems to the 162 MW Glacier Hills wind farm in Columbia County, the largest renewable energy installation in Wisconsin. The database also includes a county by county breakdown.

“The real power of this database is the ability to visually represent the data across Wisconsin,” said Friesen. “Being able to see the distribution of renewable energy systems from Racine to Ashland shows that these are proven technologies that play a critical role in Wisconsin’s energy mix.”

When Glacier Hills comes online this December, the combined output from Wisconsin’s commercial-scale wind farms will produce the equivalent energy needed to power 175,000 residences.

At 1,200 installations, more than 90% of RENEW’s database is comprised of solar electric systems placed on homes, churches, businesses and schools.

“The steady growth of small-scale renewables here is attributable to the state’s previous commitment to build a vibrant renewable energy marketplace,” Friesen said. “Unfortunately, the policies adopted years ago to accomplish that objective are now under attack from the Legislature and certain utilities. This is certain to result in a dramatic slowdown of renewable energy installation activity.”

“Legislators needn’t look any further than their own districts to see examples of renewable energy systems creating local jobs and contributing to Wisconsin’s energy security” Friesen said.

Individuals interested in helping should send details about their renewable energy installations to Joe Friesen. Pertinent details include: system capacity, name of installer, year of installation, and zip code of installation.

Joe Friesen’s volunteer work with RENEW is made possible through a program called Mennonite Voluntary Service. MVS is a nationwide program which seeks to match dedicated volunteers with deserving nonprofit organizations at a fraction of the cost of a normal full-time employee.

--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.

National Study Vindicates Wisconsin’s Clean Energy Policies

Immediate release
July 18, 2011

More information
Michael Vickerman
Executive Director
608.255.4044
mvickerman@renewwisconsin.org

National Study Vindicates Wisconsin’s Clean Energy Policies

Nearly a decade of forward-looking strategies propelled investments in Wisconsin’s clean jobs economy above other Midwest states, according to an economic study issued by The Brookings Institution, a nonpartisan public policy organization in Washington, D.C.

Reviewing data gathered between 2003 and 2010, the Brookings analysis pegged the number of clean economy jobs in the state at 76,858, a net increase of nearly 4,000. Measured as a percentage, Wisconsin’s clean economy accounted for 2.7% of all jobs in the state, compared with 2.5% for Iowa, 2.1% for Minnesota, 1.9 % for both Indiana and Michigan, and 1.8% for Illinois. Overall, Wisconsin ranked 8th among all states and the District of Columbia in the relative size of its clean economy.

The report categorizes clean economy jobs as those in energy efficiency and renewable energy; sustainable forestry products; recycling and reuse; waste management and treatment; organic food and farming; energy efficient appliance and building manufacturing; and more.

“Clearly, Wisconsin’s commitment to clean energy has paid dividends, attracting new businesses and creating high-paying jobs that could have easily gone elsewhere,” said Michael Vickerman, executive director of RENEW Wisconsin, a statewide organization advocating for public policies and private initiatives that advance renewable energy.

These policies and initiatives include the establishment of Focus on Energy, the region’s first ratepayer-funded energy efficiency and renewable energy program, attractive buyback rates offered by utilities for renewable energy, and innovative incentives to encourage customer installation of renewables.

In addition, Wisconsin’s adoption of a 10% renewable energy standard back in 2006 spurred new utility-scale installations built by skilled tradesmen employed by local contractors. During the study period, the number of wind-related jobs in Wisconsin doubled from less than 450 to 900.

As documented in the Brookings report, the wages for these clean economy jobs run higher than the statewide average ($37,931 vs. $35,906).

“Unfortunately, Wisconsin’s clean economy is in danger of losing a good deal of its steam as a result of policy rollbacks and funding cutbacks in the renewable energy arena,” Vickerman said. “The short-sighted attacks we’ve seen in 2011 could throw the state’s clean economy into reverse next year.”

So far this year, the Legislature has reduced funding for Focus on Energy, suspended the statewide rule regulating the permitting of wind turbines, and weakened the state’s renewable energy standard by allowing utilities to count Canadian hydropower toward their requirements.

“On top of that, We Energies, the state’s largest utility, announced that it will discontinue what had been an effective renewable energy initiative,” Vickerman said. “Among other accomplishments, it was instrumental in enabling Helios USA to build a solar-electric manufacturing facility in Milwaukee’s Menomonee River Valley.” The plant now employs 50 workers.

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.

Wisconsin’s Widening War on Renewable Energy

Dramatic Slowdown in Market Activity Anticipated
By Michael Vickerman
July 11, 2011

What started out as an opening salvo from the Walker Administration to shackle large-scale wind projects has in six months turned into a systematic campaign to dismantle the state policies that support renewable energy development. Joining the executive and legislative branches in pursuing policy rollbacks and/or funding cutbacks against renewables are various utilities and, surprisingly, Focus on Energy, Wisconsin’s ratepayer-funded energy efficiency and renewable programs.

Since January 1st, Wisconsin has seen a series of assaults against utility-scale projects and smaller renewable systems serving both residences and businesses. These include the following actions:

• The Legislature suspended PSC 128, the statewide rule developed by the Public Service Commission last year in response to a law passed by the Legislature in 2009 ordering the agency to establish uniform standards for permitting wind energy systems. Since the March 1 suspension vote, wind development in Wisconsin has slowed to a standstill.
• The Legislature adopted SB 81, a bill that RENEW Wisconsin describes as the “Outsource Renewable Energy to Canada Act.” SB 81 allows Wisconsin utilities to meet their renewable energy requirements beginning in 2015 with electricity generated from large hydropower plants in other states and Canada. By allowing Wisconsin utilities to become even more dependent on energy imports than they are today, SB 81 turns Wisconsin’s Renewable Energy Standard on its head. Importing large-scale hydropower exports the very dollars that could have been used to harness Wisconsin’s renewable energy resources. 
• We Energies, the state’s largest electric utility, abruptly decided in May to walk away from an agreement with RENEW to dedicate $60 million over a 10-year period in support of renewable energy development in its territory. The decision came in the sixth year of this program. We Energies plans to reallocate the unspent dollars (totaling about $27 million) to general operations. 
• Green Bay-based Wisconsin Public Service (WPS) instituted in April a new net energy policy designed to discourage new customer-sited renewable energy systems. Until recently WPS had been paying its customers the full retail rate for electricity that flows back on the wires, which is now about 12 cents/kWh. But under the new rate, WPS only pays three cents/kWh for electricity exported to the grid. Moreover, the utility calculates the net each month, which penalizes customers whose loads vary significantly depending on seasonal factors. Right now, the new policy only covers systems installed after March 2011, but WPS has said that it plans to apply that rate to older systems effective January 2013.
• In its deliberations on the biennial state budget passed in June, the Legislature appended a rider to tie Focus on Energy’s annual budget to a percentage (1.2% of gross utility revenues). This action will mean a cut of $20 million in the program’s 2012 budget relative to this year’s allocation of $120 million. The Focus on Energy program provides grants and cash-back awards supporting customer investments in solar electric, solar thermal systems, small wind, biogas and biomass energy systems. 
• Last, but certainly not least, as of July 1, Focus on Energy stopped accepting applications for business program incentives to help customers install renewable energy systems. These incentives, which average about $7 million per year, had been available since 2002 to businesses, farms, schools, local governments and other nonprofit customers. It is not clear when these incentives will be resumed and in what quantity. 

This one-two punch of policy rollbacks and funding cutbacks has cast a pall over the state’s renewable energy marketplace. At this year’s Energy Fair in Custer, Wisconsin, the prevailing mood of contractors and exhibitors was one of bewilderment tinged with anger. It is dawning on these companies that their state, which once took pride in its efforts to nurture a thriving renewable energy market, is becoming an inhospitable place to do business. The transformation is occurring with stunning speed; no business is likely to be spared from this abrupt reversal of fortune, which will hit home soon and continue for several months, if not years.

At this moment, however, the Wisconsin renewable energy landscape is humming with installation activity. New wind turbines are soaring above cornfields in Columbia County, where construction crews and operating engineers from Appleton-based Boldt Construction and Brownsville-based Michels Wind Energy assemble what will become Wisconsin’s largest wind generation facility. The towers for the Glacier Hills wind energy project are being fabricated at Tower Tech in Manitowoc. Solar hot water systems now crown the rooftops of new apartment and university buildings, while solar PV panels mounted on 14-foot-tall poles rise above a farm field in Dane County to power Epic Systems’ ground source heat pump system. A cranberry company in Monroe County is about to become the second of its kind to rely on a pair of small wind turbines for its electrical needs. Meanwhile, all across Wisconsin one can find contractors building this year’s crop of bioenergy systems that convert the effluent from dairy farms, cheese producers and wastewater treatment plants into a baseload source of electricity.

Indeed, this wave of projects, fueled principally by funding commitments made in previous years and the early part of this year, should keep contractors and installers busy through the end of 2011. Though an observer unfamiliar with this year’s travails might be deceived by this show of vitality, both installers and advocates know that this activity can’t be sustained for long without a fresh supply of oxygen in the form of policy and funding initiatives. But until state government recognizes the folly of its war against renewable energy and changes course on energy policy, the rollbacks of 2011 will suck much of the oxygen out of next year’s renewable energy marketplace, setting it up for significant contraction in the years that follow.

How Wisconsin benefits from shrinking its renewable energy business community and becoming even more dependent on finite supplies of fossil energy imported from afar is a question worth posing to our political leaders. In our view, that approach is guaranteed to turn Wisconsin into an economic backwater. Is this what they hope to achieve? Probably not. But the toll on the state goes beyond the jobs that weren’t created, the investments from overseas that went to other states, and the tax revenues that failed to materialize as projected.

An even bigger casualty of these rollbacks is Wisconsin’s ability to project itself as a center of consistency and stability, a place where policy changes affecting businesses occur gradually and over time. Not long ago, Wisconsin political leaders were capable of working on complex legislative matters in a low-key and bipartisan manner. An example of that is the Energy Efficiency and Renewables Law (2005 Act 141) signed into law in March 2006, which increased Wisconsin’s Renewable Energy Standard to 10% by 2015 and protected Focus on Energy from future budget raids. That law created what seemed at the time to be a durable framework for enabling renewable energy resources to play an expanded role in the state’s energy future.

However, it is now painfully evident that the political consensus that created the five-year-old law has evaporated. The resulting vacuum has emboldened incoming legislators to fix their crosshairs on the policy mechanisms supporting investment in renewable energy. With the active assistance of politically powerful interests like the Wisconsin Industrial Energy Group, these legislators are now attacking Wisconsin’s pro-renewable energy policies in a manner resembling a wave of Formosan termites going through a house.

What has happened to Wisconsin’s energy policy here is a microcosm of the radically polarized political dynamic that has, unfortunately, become “the new normal” in this state. In this environment, confrontation is celebrated and compromise is shunned. Politics in Wisconsin has become a roller-coaster ride that is heavy on the sharp turns and violent dives, and light on the straightaways and gentle grades. And, with the Senate recall elections this summer and the virtual certainty of a gubernatorial recall election in the offing, this dynamic is not going away any time soon.

Needless to say, this volatility makes long-range financial commitments to upgrading the state’s energy infrastructure a challenge if not an impossibility. The suspension of the state’s wind siting rule, for example, upended a deliberate and multiyear effort to build predictability and certainty into the permitting process. With the rule in abeyance, what wind developers now face amounts to a random walk through a minefield. Small wonder that many of the developers who were active here three years ago have migrated to less explosive pastures. Indeed, high-profile rollbacks like these give the state an unwelcome reputation as being famously difficult to do business in.

Amazingly enough, despite the onslaught from political leaders and certain utilities, public support for renewable energy has held strong, according to a St. Norbert College poll conducted between April 11 and April 18 for Wisconsin Public Radio. More than three-quarters of the respondents favored additional investments in windpower, even if such expenditures would increase monthly electric bills. The rankings for each resource surveyed were: wind (77%), hydropower (60%), biomass (54%), natural gas (39%), nuclear (27%), and coal (19%). The results suggest that the hostility that the Walker Administration and the Legislature have shown to the renewable energy business community is completely out of step with the public.

Along with many other organizations and individuals, RENEW Wisconsin helped build public awareness on the value of renewable energy for jobs and energy self-sufficiency. Now in its 20th year, RENEW Wisconsin finds itself vigorously defending the many policies and practices that made Wisconsin a regional leader in the use of its native renewable energy resources. Though the future is fraught with challenges and uncertainties, about one thing we can be certain: the assaults and policy swings that come our way will not change either the citizen consensus or RENEW Wisconsin’s commitment to a future based on clean, local and sustainable energy.

Funding Hiatus Darkens Outlook for In-State Renewables

Immediate release
July 5, 2011

More information
Michael Vickerman
Executive Director
608.255.4044
mvickerman@renewwisconsin.org

Funding Hiatus Darkens Outlook for In-State Renewables

For the first time in its 11-year history, Focus on Energy is no longer accepting applications from Wisconsin businesses and nonprofit entities seeking to install renewable energy systems. This new policy took effect July 1.

According to Focus on Energy officials, this suspension of financial incentives is necessary to balance demand for renewable energy systems with available funds. In 2009, Focus on Energy allocated approximately $10 million to support customer-sited renewable energy systems. More than half of that allocation went to businesses, farmers, local governments, schools, and nonprofit organizations throughout the state.

“We recognize that Focus on Energy officials have a responsibility to ensure that outflows don’t exceed revenues. However, this suspension could not have occurred at a worse time for Wisconsin’s renewable energy contractors,” said Michael Vickerman, executive director of RENEW Wisconsin.

“Unfortunately, this move coincides with Milwaukee-based We Energies’ decision to walk away from an agreement with RENEW Wisconsin to commit $60 million over a 10-year period to develop renewable energy within its territory,” Vickerman said. ‘We Energies disclosed its unilateral action in May, barely more than halfway into honoring its commitment.”

“Given the adverse environment for renewable energy right now in Wisconsin, we hope that the interruption amounts to nothing more than a brief timeout,” said Vickerman.

“Unless funding is restored quickly, 2012 will turn out to be a very lean year for contractors and installers,” Vickerman warned.

As of this moment, the renewable energy marketplace is bristling with new installations. Installations to be completed this summer with incentives from Focus on Energy include:
• Two small wind turbines serving a Monroe County cranberry grower;
• A solar hot water system serving a new apartment building next to the Hilldale shopping complex in Madison;
• Side-by-side solar hot water and electric installations atop a new classroom building at the UW-Oshkosh;
• An engine generator fed with biogas derived from the City of Appleton’s wastewater treatment plant.

However, without a fresh supply of Focus-funded projects, Wisconsin’s renewable energy development pipeline will slow to a trickle, forcing contractors and installers to either seek work in other states or lay off employees.

Wisconsin has more than 2,500 customer-sited renewable energy installations, the vast majority of which received either financial incentives or facilitation services from Focus on Energy. In total, these installations have a generating capacity of about 20 megawatts.

END

State’s Hostility Toward Renewables Escalates; “Leaders” Lag Citizenry on Wind Support

Two articles from Catching Wind, a newsletter published by RENEW Wisconsin with funding from a grant from the U.S. Department of Energy:

State’s Hostility Toward Renewables Escalates
At the urging of Wisconsin utilities, several lawmakers have introduced a bill to allow a renewable energy credit (REC) to be banked indefinitely. If adopted, this measure (AB146) would constitute the most devastating legislative assault yet on the state’s renewable energy marketplace, which is already reeling from the suspension of the statewide wind siting rule this March and the loosening of renewable energy definitions to allow Wisconsin utilities to count electricity generated from large Canadian hydro projects toward their renewable energy requirements.

“Leaders” Lag Citizenry on Wind Support
Public support for wind energy development has held strong against the attacks launched by Governor Walker and the Legislature’s new Republican majority, according to a poll conducted between April 11 and April 18 by the St. Norbert College Survey Center for Wisconsin Public Radio.

Asked whether Wisconsin should "increase, decrease or continue with the same amount" of energy supply from various sources, 77% favored increasing wind power, the highest of any option (60% favored increasing hydropower, 54% biomass, 39% natural gas, 27% nuclear, and 19% coal).

We Energies Terminates Its Renewable Energy Program

For immediate release
May 13, 2011
More information
RENEW Wisconsin
Michael Vickerman
608.255.4044
mvickerman@renewwisconsin.org

We Energies Terminates Its Renewable Energy Program
Utility Pulls Plug on $6 Million a Year Commitment

As reported on its Web site, Milwaukee-based We Energies will discontinue an innovative and effective renewable energy development program that supported scores of renewable energy systems throughout its service territory. [The announcement can be accessed at http://www.we-energies.com/re.]

“It’s a sad day when the state’s largest utility decides to walk away from its commitment to a clean energy future,” said Michael Vickerman, executive director of RENEW Wisconsin, a statewide organization advocating for public policies and private initiatives that advance renewable energy.

As indicated in various filings with the Public Service Commission, We Energies had committed to spend $6 million a year over 10 years to increase its renewable energy supplies and make renewable energy more affordable to its customers through grants and incentives. We Energies’ commitment came in the wake of a settlement with RENEW over the utility’s plans to build two coal-fired power stations in southeast Wisconsin.

Of the $60 million committed, the utility has spent approximately $30 million since 2006. This program will be zeroed out in We Energies’ next rate filing, which will cover 2012 and 2013.

This program supported numerous customer-sited renewable energy installations [see list below], conferences and workshops, research and development activities, and innovative buyback rates.

“Perhaps not coincidently, the decision to terminate this program comes just months after We Energies placed its second coal-fired plant in service. The $6 million a year was a small price to pay for the all of the renewable energy advances that occurred while the utility built two coal plants,” said Vickerman.

“Now that the coal plant is up and running, it appears that the program has outlived its usefulness to We Energies,” Vickerman said.
Six million dollars equates to about .025 percent of We Energies’ annual expenditures.

“This cancellation comes as a blow to area contractors and businesses that were relying on the program to create jobs and clean energy,” said Vickerman. “The achievements leveraged far outweigh the program’s negligible cost.”

“Between utility program cutbacks and state government rollbacks, Wisconsin’s policy framework for supporting renewable energy will be largely dismantled by the end of the year.”

--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.

Customer-owned renewable energy success stories and live data

A growing number of customers have their own renewable energy facilities. The links below go to summaries of the projects and/or real-time production data from the solar photovoltaic, solar hot water and wind renewable energy generation systems.

Solar electric photovoltaic
Ascension Lutheran Church
Cedar Community
City of Brookfield Safety Building
Concordia University Wisconsin
Cooper Elementary School
Cross Lutheran Church
Crown of Life Lutheran Church
Energy Producing Home #1
Evangelical and Reformed United Church of Christ - Waukesha
Fairview Charter School
Family Enrichment Center of Ozaukee County
First Congregational Church - Port Washington
First Unitarian Society of Milwaukee
Fox River Christian Church
Fox Valley Lutheran High School
Gateway Technical College Horizon Center Solar Tracker
GE Healthcare
GE Research Park
Good Shepherd Evangelical Lutheran Church and School
Growing Power - Milwaukee
HOPE Christian School
Johnson Foundation
Kettle Moraine Lutheran High School
La Casa de Esperanza
Lake Country School
Lake Park Lutheran Church
Lawrence University
Madison Area Technical College - Fort Atkinson Campus
Madison College - Fort Atkinson
Menomonee Falls North Middle School
Milwaukee Area Tech College - Oak Creek
Milwaukee Central Library
Milwaukee County Zoo
Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District
Milwaukee Recycling Education Facility
MSOE:Fat Spaniel Tech MSOE Monitor
Navarino Nature Center
North Shore Presbyterian Church
Our Savior Lutheran Church
Outpost Natural Foods
Pragmatic Construction Home 1 - PV
Purdy Elementary School - Fort Atkinson
Racine City Hall Annex
Racine Eco-Justice Center
Racine St. Catherine's High School
Schlitz Audubon Nature Center
St. Matthew’s Evangelical Lutheran Church
Shoreland Lutheran High School
Shorewood School District
Still Point Zen Center
The Order of Julian of Norwich
Town of Greenville
Town of Menasha
Unitarian Universalist Church West
United Community Center
University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
University of Wisconsin - Parkside
Urban Ecology Center
Village of Marshall Wastewater Treatment Facility
Village of Wind Point
Walden III Middle and Senior High School
Waukesha County Technical College
Wauwatosa Fire Department
Whitewater Innovation Center
Wisconsin Lutheran College
Wisconsin State Fair Park

Solar water heating
Fort Atkinson High School Solar Thermal
Fort Atkinson Middle School Solar Thermal
Milwaukee Habitat for Humanity SHW 1
Milwaukee Habitat for Humanity SHW 2
We Energies HQ: Fat Spaniel Tech Wired Solar

Solar electric photovoltaic and wind
Discovery World
Lakeshore Technical College
Mequon Nature Preserve
Milwaukee Area Tech College - Mequon

Wind
Boys & Girls Club of Greater Milwaukee – Camp Whitcomb Mason
Village of Cascade Wastewater Treatment Plant

List from We Energies' Web site -- http://www.we-energies.com/residential/energyeff/active_installdata.htm

Testimony in Opposition to Counting Canadian Hydro Toward RPS

Statement of RENEW Wisconsin in Opposition to SB 81

Senate Judiciary, Utilities, Commerce and Government Operations Committee

May 3, 2011

Good morning, my name is Michael Vickerman. I am here to represent RENEW Wisconsin, a nonprofit advocacy and education organization based in Madison. Incorporated in 1991, RENEW acts as a catalyst to advance a sustainable energy future through public policy and private sector initiatives. We have over 300 total members, and more than 60 businesses around the state, including Biogas Direct (Prairie du Sac), Bubbling Springs Solar (Menomonie), Crave Brothers Farm (Waterloo), Convergence Energy (Lake Geneva), Emerging Energies (Hubertus), Energy Concepts (Hudson), Full Circle Farm (Seymour), Full Spectrum Solar (Madison), GHD, Inc. (Chilton), H&H Solar (Madison), Kettle View Renewable Energy (Random Lake), Michels Wind Energy (Brownsville), North American Hydro (Neshkoro), Northwind Renewable Energy LLC (Stevens Point), Pieper Power (Milwaukee), Organic Valley (LaFarge), Quantum Dairy (Weyauwega), Renewegy (Oshkosh), and Seventh Generation Energy Systems (Madison).

More on North American Hydro later.

On behalf of our members and the many businesses and individuals who support the continued expansion of Wisconsin’s renewable energy marketplace, RENEW Wisconsin is here to express opposition to AB 114/SB 81, and urges the Legislature not to pass this bill. If passed as is, AB 114/SB 81 would allow electric utilities to use generation from hydro facilities larger than 60 megawatts to satisfy their renewable energy requirements under 2005 Act 141. Manitoba Hydro could easily become Wisconsin’s largest supplier of statutorily sanctioned renewable energy in the next decade.

Because no increase to the state’s Renewable Energy Standard is contemplated in this bill, the outwash of kilowatt-hours from Manitoba in the next decade will crowd out opportunities for utility-scale renewable energy development opportunities in Wisconsin. The window was already closing for in-state renewable energy sources before this bill was introduced. According to Platt’s Electric Daily, Wisconsin Power & Light and WPPI Energy have already accumulated enough renewable electrons and credits to meet their 2015 targets. The same is true of Madison Gas & Electric. The Platt’s article also quotes a Wisconsin Public Service Corporation official stating that the utility can meet its 2015 renewable energy requirements with what it has acquired to date until 2020. AB 114/SB 81 would enable those utilities to enter into contracts with Manitoba Hydro to supply them with post-2015 renewable energy, thereby sparing these utilities from ever having to invest another nickel in a Wisconsin renewable energy project again.

Leaving aside We Energies’ proposed biomass plant in Rothschild, which may or may not go forward, We Energies’ Glacier Hills wind project in Columbia County is the only utility-scale renewable energy project under construction right now in Wisconsin. It will be completed this December. None of the other utilities have any plans to build a renewable energy generating facility in Wisconsin in the next five years. Should this legislation pass, we could go 15 to 20 years before seeing another large renewable energy project built in this state, if ever.

True, there are quite a few wind prospects under development in Wisconsin, all of them pursued by independent companies. But as of late, Wisconsin utilities have shown no interest in entering into a contract with them. And if AB 114/SB 81 is adopted without an increase in the state’s Renewable Energy Standard, Wisconsin utilities will have no reason to buy wind projects or their output, because the utilities can get whatever they need from Manitoba Hydro.

For the record, RENEW supported the Clean Energy Jobs Act introduced last year and the compromise on large-scale hydro in that legislation. That bill would have increased the utilities’ renewable energy requirements along with classifying large hydro as an eligible renewable energy resource. In it there was room for both in-state renewable energy development and electricity purchases from Manitoba Hydro. However, as a stand-alone measure, AB 114/SB 81 would make room for Manitoba Hydro at the expense of local renewable energy businesses. If passed, this bill would effectively turn Wisconsin into a renewable energy backwater for the next 20 years.

In the absence of legislation to increase the state’s renewable energy standard, AB 114/SB 81 is best described as the “Outsource Renewable Energy to Canada Act.”

About North American Hydro, this company owns 25 hydro generating units in Wisconsin and employs about 70 people. Both the company and its employees pay taxes in Wisconsin and spend the income they earn in their respective communities. That won’t happen when renewable energy production is outsourced to Canada.

Let me close by asking a few rhetorical questions.

• How does the elimination of in-state renewable energy development revitalize the state economy and create new jobs?
• How does importing vast quantities of hydropower from another jurisdiction promote energy self-sufficiency and resilience in this state?
• How does purchasing vast quantities of hydropower from another country improve the country’s balance of payments?
• Where will our children and young people go to find renewable energy employment opportunities if we decide that foreign hydro should become Wisconsin’s default energy resource option.

Respectfully submitted,
Michael Vickerman,
Executive Director

Rising Diesel Prices Fuel Higher Electric Rates

For immediate release
April 15, 2011

More information
RENEW Wisconsin
Michael Vickerman
608.255.4044
mvickerman@renewwisconsin.org

We Energies Customers Will Pay the Higher Cost of Hauling Coal

We Energies’ electricity customers can look forward to coughing up an additional $25 million in 2011 due to the Public Service Commission’s approval yesterday [April14] of a rate increase to cover the escalating cost of transporting coal to Wisconsin power plants.

Milwaukee-based We Energies, Wisconsin’s largest electric utility, imports coal from such distant locations as Wyoming and Pennsylvania to generate electricity. Transportation now accounts for two-thirds of the delivered cost of coal to Wisconsin.

Diesel fuel costs have jumped to approximately $4.00 a gallon this year, propelled by political unrest in the Middle East, declining petroleum output from Mexico, a weakening dollar, and other factors. We Energies’ request predated the ongoing civil war in Libya.

“While we cannot control any of those price drivers, we can more effectively cushion their effects by diversifying our energy generation mix with locally produced wind, solar, small hydro, and biogas electricity,” said Michael Vickerman, executive director of RENEW Wisconsin, a statewide organization advocating for public policies and private initiatives that advance renewable energy.

“The coal mines aren’t getting any closer to Wisconsin. Therefore we have to be serious about reducing our dependence on fossil fuels that are tied to the global oil supply picture. Now is not the time to skimp on investments in conservation and renewable energy that will help stabilize the utility bills of businesses and residents,” Vickerman said.

“Do we have the will to pursue energy policies that take us off of the fossil fuel price escalator? Doing nothing will bake these rate increases into our future without any corresponding boost to Wisconsin’s job market and sustainable energy economy.”

--END--