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.

The Real Meaning of Kewaunee’s Demise

Immediate release
November 8, 20112

More information
Michael Vickerman
608.225.4044, ext. 2
mvickerman@renewwisconsin.org

The Real Meaning of Kewaunee’s Demise
November 6, 2012
A commentary by Michael Vickerman, Director, Policy and Programs:

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, which is that the low-price energy future 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, especially after the last employee leaving Kewaunee turns out the lights?
END
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

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 

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.

Natural Gas: Wrestling With Reality

August 10, 2012
A commentary by Michael Vickerman, RENEW Wisconsin, Director, Policy and Programs:

After skidding below $2.00/MMBtu this winter, wholesale natural gas prices are now creeping toward the $3.00 mark. This upward movement is the result of below-normal volumes of natural gas going into storage for the winter heating season. The latest report, released August 16th, marks the 16th straight week where injection volumes lagged significantly behind the five-year average.

Notwithstanding this mild rebound, everyone in the energy industry, including the traders themselves, knows that $3.00/MMBtu is well below the cost of producing natural gas, and cannot deliver a return that can support future drilling efforts. This is particularly true with shale gas, the so-called “game-changer” that industry flacks contended would topple King Coal’s reign over the electricity sector.

High-profile shale gas producers like Chesapeake Energy are now running out of ways of concealing their financial distress. Consider the following developments that occurred over the last fortnight.

• Chesapeake Energy announced plans to reduce domestic gas production in 2013 by 8%; 
• BHP Billiton wrote down $2.84 billion on the value of Fayetteville shale gas assets it had acquired in 2011; and 
• The most recent count of rigs drilling for natural gas in the United States is 495, down 70% from the record-setting levels seen in September 2008.

“Write down” is a fairly bloodless way to describe the loss of $3 billion; “carnage” is better at conveying the pain that now grips the natural gas sector. This begs the question: why are wholesale natural gas prices still under the $3.00/MMBtu level?

I believe that there are two reasons for this phenomenon. The first is that energy traders, like virtually everyone else in this country, are truly convinced that the United States is awash in shale gas, thanks to a brilliant industry-led public relations campaign. Lower prices help reinforce the popular belief that cheap gas will be with us for another century. Unfortunately, federal energy agencies and universities have also bought into this view of the supply picture big-time, leaving little room for skeptics and agnostics to influence public perceptions.

This overarching belief has been unintentionally reinforced by local and regional controversies over the practice of hydraulic fracturing solid rock to obtain the shale gas trapped inside. Virtually unheard of four years ago, “fracking” has vaulted into the public consciousness, and in doing so, sustains the society-wide belief that natural gas can be accessed almost anywhere in the United States.

Ironically, the myth of abundance that E&P companies so carefully cultivated--and bankrolled--is now clearly working against their short-term interests.

The other factor that keeps prices so low is the traders’ fear of large demand swings. For example, the phantom winter of 2011-2012, which cut demand for heating fuel by more than 25%, creating a colossal oversupply that sent wholesale prices crashing. The supply pendulum is now swinging the other way, and more than half of the bulge has melted away. Assuming a continuation of smaller-than normal injections, natural gas inventories should be in line with the five-year average by mid-December.

Traders attribute the ongoing reduction in inventories to a hotter than normal summer, prompting utilities to switch on more gas generators to meet system peaks. But weather isn’t the only thing that influences the storage picture; output does as well. But as long as traders and speculators subscribe to the myth of nearly limitless supply, they will discount the possibility that declining output is also responsible for lagging storage volumes.

The paradigm shift ushered in by the fracking phenomenon won’t go away easily. But in the not-very-distant future, the reality of reduced drilling activity and capital spending, along with rapid decline rates in shale gas plays, will bite deeply into natural gas supplies and cause yet another overturning of expectations in this sector. For electric utilities as well as end-users, the results will not be pretty.

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

Cashton Greens Community Wind Project Plows New Ground

Immediate release: July 18, 2012

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

Two-turbine project sets a number of firsts for Wisconsin

A vision of Wisconsin’s renewable energy future came to life with the dedication today of the two-turbine Cashton Greens Wind Farm, Wisconsin‘s first community wind development. This five megawatt project rises alongside Organic Valley Cooperative’s distribution center in this village 40 miles southeast of La Crosse.

Owned by La Farge-based Organic Valley Cooperative and Gunderson Lutheran Health System, La Crosse, Cashton Greens will generate enough electricity to offset the energy use for Organic Valley’s corporate headquarters and distribution center, as well as 5% of Gundersen Lutheran’s energy needs.

“This ground-breaking community wind project represents a number of firsts for Wisconsin,” said Michael Vickerman, director of programs and policies for RENEW Wisconsin, a renewable energy advocacy organization.

“Cashton Greens is both Wisconsin’s largest customer-owned renewable energy installation and the largest ever to receive a grant from Focus on Energy, the state’s energy efficiency and renewable energy program,” Vickerman said. It is also the first wind project permitted following the enactment of Wisconsin’s three-year-old wind siting law (2009 Act 40).The Village of Cashton approved the project in June 2010.

“RENEW and all of our members salute the team of Organic Valley, Gundersen Lutheran, and the village of Cashton for their audacious commitment to energy independence,” said Vickerman. “They are plowing ground that will result in new renewable energy systems supporting Wisconsin’s economic vitality while protecting its environmental health.”

“This project clearly shows that Wisconsin energy customers are eager to move forward to reduce their use of fossil fuels. Rather than wait for their utilities to act, many of them are now taking the initiative and installing systems to supply their own businesses and residences with clean renewable energy produced,” he said.

Organic Valley is America’s largest cooperative of organic farmers and one of the nation’s leading organic brands. Gundersen Health System provides health services to its patients at is hospital and clinics throughout west Wisconsin, southeast Minnesota, and northeast Iowa.

-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.

Focus on Energy Resumes Offer of Renewable Energy Incentives

Immediate release
July 5, 2012

More information
Don Wichert
Interim Executive Director
608.2554044
dwichert@renewwisconsin.org

Focus on Energy Resumes Offer of Renewable Energy Incentives
Financial incentives to support customer-sited renewable energy systems are once again available from Focus on Energy, the ratepayer-funded energy efficiency and renewable energy program in Wisconsin. About $2 million will be available for solar, wind, biomass, and biogas energy systems between now and December 31, 2012.

The resumption of renewable energy incentives marks the end of a suspension on applications for funding support that lasted six months for residential customers and an entire year for business customers.

“We are pleased that the funding uncertainties with Focus on Energy are behind us and that the renewable energy program is back up and running,” said Don Wichert,

Interim Executive Director of RENEW Wisconsin (RENEW), a nonprofit renewable energy advocacy organization.

“With the resumption of incentives, there is no need for customers to ‘wait and see’ what the future holds.”

In January, RENEW Wisconsin delivered a letter, signed by over 150 businesses, schools, and local officials, to the Public Service Commission asking the agency “to exercise its oversight authority over Focus on Energy and restore funding, without delay, for renewables at a level consistent with previous years’ allocations.” In early March, RENEW organized a similar write-in campaign to the PSC with over 200 comments submitted.

“I am hopeful that the reinstatement of incentives signals a closer working relationship between renewable energy businesses and Focus on Energy administrators,” Wichert said.

-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.

Catching Wind updates Wisconsin wind news

Catching Wind, a newsletter from RENEW Wisconsin, includes the following updates on wind in Wisconsin:

Siting rule survives challenge, takes effect
Capping a bitter four-year struggle, the Legislature cleared the path for wind energy development to resume in Wisconsin under clear and consistent rules.

By adjourning without passage of bills restricting wind development, the Legislature allowed a statewide permitting rule developed by the Public Service Commission (PSC) to take effect.

Community wind sweeps into western Wisconsin
Two privately owned utility-scale wind turbines are set to rise this spring near Organic Valley Cooperative’s distribution center in Cashton, home of Wisconsin’s first Community Wind project. Called Cashton Greens, the wind project is a joint venture of LaFarge-based Organic Valley and La Crosse-based Gundersen Lutheran Health System.

St. Croix County Wind Project seeks PSC approval
In a first for the Badger State, western Wisconsin, specifically, St. Croix County will provide the backdrop for a high-profile permitting battle over a utility-scale wind energy project. The 41-turbine project would be located in the towns of Forest and Cylon, about 30 miles northeast of Hudson.

RENEW Cheers End of Wind Siting Impasse

Immediate release
March 16, 2012

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

RENEW Cheers End of Wind Siting Impasse Improved Regulatory Climate Will Attract New Projects

Capping a bitter four-year struggle, the Legislature cleared the path for wind energy development to resume in Wisconsin under clear and consistent rules.

By adjourning without passage of bills restricting wind development, the Legislature allowed a statewide permitting rule developed by the Public Service Commission (PSC) to take effect. That rule, which the PSC issued in late 2010 after extensive deliberation and public comment, was suspended by a legislative oversight committee on March 1, 2011.

“During the PSC rule suspension, wind development slowed to a virtual standstill, resulting in the loss of millions of dollars in construction and manufacturing opportunities, as well as a significant revenue hit to landowners and local governments,” said Michael Vickerman, Program and Policy Director of RENEW Wisconsin, a statewide organization advocating for more clean renewable energy.

For 2012, wind energy companies in each of the states surrounding Wisconsin are constructing hundreds of megawatts of new generating capacity, compared with a projected addition of five megawatts here, enough to power only 1,000 houses, according to Vickerman.

“We hope this outcome will end the wind industry’s exodus to greener pastures. As with any other economic sector, the wind industry will flourish in a welcoming environment where the rules of the road are clear and consistently applied. We believe that the long-delayed rule will provide the certainty needed by investors, contractors, local governments, and landowners.”

END

News releases

2012
11.12.12 State's Renewable Standard Delivers Positive Results
09.27.12 RENEW Raps We Energies' Radical Proposal to Restrict Net Metering
09.11.12 Utilities Get C on Renewable Energy Report Card
07.17.12 Cashton Greens Community Wind Project Plows New Ground
07.11.12 RENEW Announces New Members of Board of Directors
07.05.12 Focus on Energy Resumes Offer of Renewable Energy Incentives
05.23.12 RENEW Rips WPS's Net Metering Proposal
04.17.12 PSC Issues Flawed Decision on Renewable Energy
03.16.12 RENEW Cheers End of Wind Siting Impasse

2011
10.13.11 RENEW Puts Solar Hot Water on the Wisconsin Map
09.27.11 Montfort Wind Farm Marks 10th Anniversary
08.08.11 Statement of Michael Vickerman on Alliant's Iowa Wind Energy Project
07.20.11 RENEW Debuts Wisconsin Renewable Energy Map
07.18.11 National Study Vindicates Wisconsin's Clean Energy Policies
07.05.11 Funding Hiatus Darkens Outlook for In-State Renewables
05.13.11 We Energies Terminates Its Renewable Energy Program
04.15.11 Rising Diesel Prices Fuel Higher Electric Rates
03.30.11 Second Wind Developer Foresakes Wisconsin for Greener Pastures
03.27.11 Hostile Regulatory Climate Sinks Brown County Wind Project.
03.01.11 Suspension of Wind Siting Rule endangers state’s economic future
01.18.11 Walker's wind siting proposal strips local control
01.10.11 Landowners and municipalities to reap millions from wind farm operations for 2010

2010
12.09.10 PSC Approves Final Wind Siting Rule; Improve Clean Energy Outlook
12.01.10 Wisconsin Cannot Afford to Ignore Rising Cost of Coal
09.16.10 MGE Rate Filing Rewards Fossil Fuel Use, Penalizes Renewable Energy
07.07.10 Uniformity Cited as Key to Wind Siting Success
06.09.10 Village of Cascade Installs Two Wind Turbines at Wastewater Plant
06.04.10 DOE program recognizes Vickerman for wind advocacy
05.24.10 Canadian company’s first U.S. turbine spins plenty of power for cranberry farm
04.27.10 Renewable Energy Not Responsible for MGE Rate Increase
04.23.10 RENEW Wisconsin Calls for Veto of Waste-to-energy bill
04.21.10 We Energies Wins Praise for Support of Clean Energies Job Act
04.15.10 RENEW Wisconsin Backs Amended Clean Energy Jobs Act
01.29.10 Hearing on Clean Energy Jobs Act bill trivialized Advanced Renewable Tariffs
01.21.10 RENEW denounces WMC's "fact-free flip-flop" on energy bill
01.11.10 Wind project approval will recharge state's economy

2009
12.22.09 Think tank flunks renewable energy analysis
12.15.09 Report: Wind turbines cause no human harm
10.30.09 PSC Approval of Bay Front Project Advances Wood Over Coal
10.23.09 Solar Outlook Set to Dim in 2010
09.15.09 State Senate strongly backs new rules for wind projects
08.27.09 PSC opens door for more in-state renewable installations
07.09.09 Statement on PSC approval of Alliant's Bent Tree project
05.08.09 State snares federal dollars for renewable energy work
01.22.09 Manitowoc County Says “No Can Do” to Windpower Project

2008
12.03.08 RENEW, Farmers Union, and partners launch Homegrown Renewable Energy Campaign
11.17.08 RENEW, Clean Wisconsin endorse Manitowoc wind project
11.11.08 RENEW's reaction to PSC rejection of Cassville coal plant
01.16.08 Calumet County morass blocks wind projects again

2007
12.18.07 Trempealeau sharply limits wind service

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 --

Facts on wind installations trump myths

Michael Vickerman's letter-to-the-editor of the Racine Journal Times:

Dear Editor:

In his November 3rd letter opposing S.C. Johnson’s proposed wind development in Mt. Pleasant, Tom Joy rattles off a number of myths about wind turbines that populate the Internet. However, the facts on the ground paint a very different picture of wind generation than what Mr. Joy represents.

First, there is no medically credible study out there that concludes or suggests that wind generation is a threat to human health. According to Dr. Jevon McFadden, a public health professional serving on Wisconsin’s Wind Siting Council, “Evidence does not support the conclusion that wind turbines cause or are associated with adverse health outcomes.”

If the experience elsewhere in Wisconsin is any guide, the proposed wind turbines will have no discernible effect on neighboring property values. But don’t just take RENEW’s word for it. Ask any and all assessors in townships that host large wind turbines, and to a person they will confirm that finding. Moreover, in Kewaunee County, home to the oldest commercial wind projects in Wisconsin, new homes are going up within sight of the 31 turbines operating there.

S.C. Johnson’s proposed project has been carefully designed to meet the strict performance standards specified in Wisconsin’s wind siting rule. We have little doubt that this project, once placed in service, will very quickly become a source of pride for the surrounding community.

Sincerely,

Michael Vickerman
Executive Director
RENEW Wisconsin

RENEW puts solar hot water on the Wisconsin map

Immediate release
October 13, 2011

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

From the North Woods to the Illinois border, from Lake Michigan to the Mississippi River, growing numbers of Wisconsin factories, businesses, schools, hospitals, fire stations, apartment buildings and breweries have installed systems that heat their water with the power of the sun.

A newly launched online map on RENEW Wisconsin’s web site displays the locations of more than 60 nonresidential solar hot water systems installed in the state. Each flagged system is accompanied by a box containing information on the owner, installation contractor, system size and date of installation. Many of these systems are linked to their installers’ web sites, accompanied by photos.

The solar hot water map joins the family of on-line renewable energy maps developed by RENEW Wisconsin in the past year. Some maps are resource-specific; others break out renewable energy systems by county.

“These maps verify the enormously positive effect that Wisconsin’s clean energy initiatives like Focus on Energy have had in creating such a vibrant economic sector,” said RENEW executive director Michael Vickerman.

Created in 1999 and strengthened in 2006, Focus on Energy is a ratepayer-funded initiative that helps Wisconsin residents and businesses employ energy efficiency measures and install renewable energy systems.

“In the past five years, Focus on Energy incentives have been instrumental in putting solar hot water on the map in Wisconsin,” Vickerman said. “No other Midwestern state has come close to experiencing Wisconsin’s success in advancing this particular application of solar energy.”

The table below shows the five largest solar hot water installations operating in Wisconsin, two are located at University of Wisconsin campuses.

Owner: UW-Oshkosh
Installer: H&H Solar, Green Sky Energetics
County: Winnebago
Capacity: 6,800 square feet (total)
Year installed: 2010, 2011

Kalahari Resorts
Terrytown Plumbing/H&H Solar
Sauk
4,160
2007

Menomonie Indian Tribe
Energy Concepts
Menomonie
2,600
2010

UW-Stevens Point
Hooper Corp./ Pertzborn Plumbing
Portage
2,240 (total)
2011

Avis Rent-a-Car (multiple locations)
Mitchell’s Heating & Cooling
Outagamie
2,160 (total)
2007

Milwaukee-based Hot Water Products, one of the largest stocking distributors for solar thermal and domestic hot water systems in the Midwest, supplied and designed four of these systems and many others in Wisconsin over the last five years. In addition to training contractors in this field, Hot Water Products also assists them with system design and equipment sizing support.

This year, installation activity has been brisk, but most installation contractors are bracing for a sharp slowdown in 2012, due to a Focus on Energy decision on July 1st to suspend renewable energy grants and incentives to nonresidential customers. The announcement of the funding suspension came after the Legislature voted in June to lop $20 million from Focus on Energy’s 2012 budget.

“The longer Focus on Energy’s funding suspension goes on, the deeper the damage will be. Installers are holding their breath as they wait for Focus on Energy to restore renewable energy funding assistance.”

Installers and system owners wishing to add their installations to the map should contact Alex Brasch at brasch@renewwisconsin.org.