by jboullion | May 4, 2011 | Uncategorized
From an article by Tom Content in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:
Domtar Corp. agreed to boost its financial stake in a proposed biomass power plant, as We Energies and the paper company revised the terms of their deal Tuesday to satisfy regulators’ concerns.
The three-member state Public Service Commission last week raised objections about the cost of the $255 million biomass power plant that We Energies is seeking to build at the Domtar paper mill in Rothschild, just south of Wausau. The plant would burn wood chips and other forms of biomass to produce electricity for the energy grid and steam for the adjacent paper mill.
The PSC, however, said the plant’s price tag was too expensive and was structured in such a way that too much of the cost would be borne by customers of the Milwaukee-based utility. Commissioners directed Domtar and We Energies to revise their proposal.
The filing by the companies Tuesday will be reviewed by the plant’s critics, including the Wisconsin Citizens’ Utility Board. The groups raising concerns about the project have until Thursday to respond to the revised financing plan.
Domtar on Tuesday said it would boost its contribution by $22 million, to $47 million, a move that increases the price of the steam Domtar would buy for the paper mill and reduce the cost for We Energies customers.
Both companies stressed the economic development opportunity from the project, linked to construction and paper mill jobs.
by jboullion | May 4, 2011 | Uncategorized
From an article by Patrick Marley and Don Walker in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:
It also eliminates state funding for bike paths
Madison — The Legislature’s budget committee voted Tuesday to repeal the state’s regional transit authorities, including one responsible for a proposed commuter rail line from Milwaukee to Kenosha.
The Legislature gave four areas the ability to create RTAs in 2009, when Democrats were in charge. Republicans now run the Legislature, and on a 12-4 party-line vote the Joint Finance Committee voted to reverse course and eliminate the RTAs. The measure will go to the Legislature as part of the state budget once the committee finishes its work in the coming months.
After the 2009 law passed, local officials created the Southeastern RTA and the Dane County RTA, but the Chippewa Valley RTA and Chequamegon Bay RTA have not been formed.
The Southeastern RTA, or SERTA, is responsible for the proposed KRM Commuter Link rail line. It has the authority to impose an $18 per vehicle fee on rental cars but has not done so.
SERTA had $1.27 million in its coffers as of August. If it were disbanded, the money would be split equally by Milwaukee, Racine and Kenosha counties unless the counties agree otherwise.
The committee also voted to go along with Republican Gov. Scott Walker’s plan to eliminate a $100 million bonding program for capital transit projects in southeastern Wisconsin and to eliminate all state funding – $5 million over two years – for bike and pedestrian paths.
by jboullion | May 3, 2011 | Uncategorized
From an Associated Press article in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:
More Wisconsin residents are looking for help with their heating and electricity bills.
The state Division of Energy Services reports that the number of low-income people seeking financial assistance is up 6% this year compared with last year.
The agency administers the federal Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program. Spokeswoman Susan Brown said 9,000 households have sought basic assistance with their utility bills this year, and another 3,000 households sought crisis assistance.
Brown tells Wisconsin Public Radio the numbers could be up this year because of the struggling economy, but also because more people might be aware of the program.
by jboullion | May 3, 2011 | Uncategorized
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
by jboullion | May 2, 2011 | Uncategorized
A news release from Clean Wisconsin:
Letters signed by nearly 100 businesses delivered to Capitol
MADISON – Letters signed by nearly 100 businesses as well as faith, low-income and environmental advocates were delivered to members of the Joint Committee on Finance today, asking them not to eliminatethe funding approved last year for Focus on Energy, a statewide program that helps homeowners and businesses reduce energy use.
“Focus on Energy is a successful program that creates thousands of family-supporting jobs and cuts energy bills,” said Keith Reopelle, senior policy director at Clean Wisconsin. “Cutting this funding would increase
electricity bills as homeowners and businesses would lose the opportunity to reduce their energy bills by a combined $2 billion.”
Joint Finance Committee co-chair Robin Vos has stated his intention to eliminate the funding approved last year several times. That move is likely to happen as early as tomorrow through the committee’s consideration of the state budget, despite the fact that Focus on Energy funding is unrelated to the state budget.
“We urge you to protect the PSC’s investment increase for the program and allow our businesses to grow, add new jobs, and strengthen the local economy,” reads a letter addressed to members of the Joint Finance Committee. “With a proven track record of delivering cost-effective energy savings and driving local business, Focus on Energy should be allowed to grow.”
To date, Focus on Energy has created 24,000 jobs and saved homeowners $2.50 for every $1.00 invested in the program, according to an independent evaluation. When the PSC issued its approval for the increased funding in November of last year, it referenced an energy efficiency-potential study that showed 7,000 to 9,000 new jobs would be created with a similar increase of Focus on Energy funding.
“The Focus on Energy program contributes significant resources to help businesses and residents save energy, create jobs and stay competitive in the marketplace,” said Randy Johnson, president of US Lamp, Inc. “Reducing or eliminating Focus on Energy funding would take away our state’s competitive energy advantage and position us in the bottom, not the top, of states to consider for residence or locating a business. I would urge legislators to keep the Focus on Energy funding in place for the vitality of
Wisconsin.”
Newly appointed Public Service Commission Chairman Phil Montgomery issued a statement two weeks ago, on Earth Day (April 22), lauding the program and pointing out that it saved Wisconsin ratepayers $380 million on their energy bills in 2010 alone.
by jboullion | May 2, 2011 | Uncategorized
From an article by Regan Carstensen in the Red Wing Republican Eagle:
Goodhue County’s wind power ordinance should not be applied to a project proposed by Goodhue Wind, a judge said Friday in her recommendation to the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission.
Administrative Law Judge Kathleen Sheehy said that she found good cause not to apply many provisions of the county ordinance, passed last October, to Goodhue Wind’s 78 megawatt, 52-turbine project.
“It was really a comprehensive review, and she was very professional and even-handed in the way she developed it,” said Joe Jennings, director of communications for Goodhue Wind.
The review detailed 179 findings, in which Sheehy addressed many things people who were opposed to the project had been concerned about.
Some concerns involved noise from the turbines, as well as the possibilities of stray voltage, ice throws and shadow flicker.
Sheehy found that all of the wind turbine sites proposed by Goodhue Wind would be located far enough from dwellings to meet the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency noise standards. Another finding showed that there is no evidence that any wind farm operation has ever caused stray voltage problems.
