by jboullion | Nov 30, 2009 | Uncategorized
From an editorial in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:
The state Public Service Commission [PSC] appears to have taken a reasonable approach to We Energies’ request for an increase in rates for electricity customers, granting some but not all of what the utility was asking. While any increase hurts consumers during a time of recession, the reality is that We Energies needs to cover costs related to building power plants, transmission lines costs and employee pensions.
Wisconsin needs reasonable power costs to attract and retain businesses, but it also needs reliable power. The PSC is striving to make sure the state has both.
But commissioners delayed making a decision on one aspect of the rate request. That delay could hurt Wisconsin consumers and the environment. Commissioners should reconsider, and grant the request without any delay.
At stake is a settlement We Energies reached in 2008 with environmental groups involving cooling methods for its new coal plants in Oak Creek. The settlement was a victory for all sides, allowing the utility and its partners to complete the plants in a timely manner, providing help for Lake Michigan in the form of funds for restoration initiatives and expanding renewable energy in Wisconsin.
The $105 million settlement will be paid for mostly by electric customers, but that price tag will be far less than it could have been under a protracted legal battle over the plant’s cooling system. The utilities involved and the environmental groups who fought the plant worked hard to reach a compromise that serves everyone.
But that compromise could be put in jeopardy if the PSC rejects the portion of the rate hike request designed to cover the cost of the settlement. The environmental groups could decide that their work was wasted if there is a significant delay in getting the restoration money for Lake Michigan. And re-opening the lawsuit could mean more costs to ratepayers if the groups prevail.
by jboullion | Nov 25, 2009 | Uncategorized
From a news release issued by Wisconsin Environment:
Madison, WI – Far from a solution to global warming, nuclear power will actually set America back in the race to reduce pollution, according to a new report by Wisconsin Environment. Leading environmental organizations, consumer groups and energy experts gathered today to release the report and call on state and federal leaders to focus on energy efficiency and renewable energy instead of nuclear power as the solution to global warming. . . .
Wisconsin Environment’s new report, Generating Failure: How Building Nuclear Power Plants Would Set America Back in the Race Against Global Warming, analyzes the role, under a best-case scenario, that nuclear power could play in reducing global warming pollution. Some key findings of the report include:
• To avoid the most catastrophic impacts of global warming, America must cut power plant emissions roughly in half over the next 10 years.
• Nuclear power is too slow to contribute to this effort. No new reactors are now under construction in the United States. Building a single reactor could take 10 years or longer. As a result, it is quite possible that nuclear power could deliver no progress in the critical next decade, despite spending billions on reactor construction.
• Even if the nuclear industry somehow managed to build 100 new nuclear reactors by 2030, nuclear power could reduce total U.S. emissions of global warming pollution over the next 20 years by only 12 percent — far too little, too late.
• In contrast, energy efficiency and renewable energy can immediately reduce global warming pollution. Energy efficiency programs are already cutting electricity consumption by 1-2 percent annually in leading states, and the U.S. wind industry is already building the equivalent of three nuclear reactors per year in wind farms. America has vast potential to do more.
• Building 100 new reactors would require an up-front investment on the order of $600 billion dollars – money which could cut at least twice as much carbon pollution by 2030 if invested in clean energy. Taking into account the ongoing costs of running the nuclear plants, clean energy could deliver 5 times more pollution-cutting progress per dollar.
• Nuclear power is not necessary to provide clean, carbon-free electricity for the long haul. The need for base-load power is exaggerated and small-scale clean energy solutions can actually enhance the reliability of the electric grid.
To address global warming, state and federal policy makers should focus on improving energy efficiency and generating electricity from clean sources that never run out – such as wind, solar, biomass and geothermal power, according to Wisconsin Environment and the coalition groups that attended today’s event.
by jboullion | Nov 25, 2009 | Uncategorized
From an article by Brian E. Clark on WisBusiness:
In an oral decision Tuesday, the state Public Service Commission approved an average rate hike of roughly $60 million, or 6.4 percent, for Alliant Energy. It will go into effect Jan. 1.
Officials said the ruling will mean average residential customers will see a monthly jump in their electric bills of about $6.10. The PSC also raised the company’s natural gas rates by about $5.5 million, amounting to a monthly increase of approximately $1.50 for gas distribution service.
“Today’s action struck a balance between a utility that needs more revenue to continue to provide reliable service, and a customer base that is working its way through hard economic times,” PSC Chairman Eric Callisto said. “At the end of the day, we cannot allow a regulated utility to fall off the cliff. Today’s decision kept the current recession in mind while keeping the lights on and keeping the utility moving forward.”
The Madison-based company had initially requested an increase of more than $100 million, or 10 percent. The PSC staff, in an audit, recommended a $73 million boost, or about 7.8 percent on average.
Part of the rate increase will cover declining sales for the utility. Since 2008, it has lost several major industrial customers, including the huge General Motors plant in Janesville. Another part of the rate increase will pay for the utility’s investment in the Bent Tree wind farm in Minnesota.
Charlie Higley, executive director of the Citizens Utility Board, said he was he was “glad the PSC was able to approve a more reasonable rate increase than that sought by the utility.
“That said, the PSC could have done more to lower rates, especially given the bad economy faced by consumers.”
by jboullion | Nov 25, 2009 | Uncategorized
From RENEW Wisconsin’s brief filed with the Public Service Commission in support of the Glacier Hills Wind Park:
The design of the proposed Project is in the public interest first and foremost because it will be powered by wind rather than fossil fuels. Wind energy is a locally available, self-replenishing, emission-free electricity source. Fossil fuels, on the other hand, must be imported, are available in limited quantities, and emit pollutants. Moreover, using wind energy furthers the State’s policy goal that all new installed capacity for electric generation be based on renewable energy resources to the extent cost-effective and technically feasible. Wis. Stat. § 1.12(3)(b).
In his direct testimony, RENEW Wisconsin witness Michael Vickerman outlined a number of other public policy objectives that would be advanced by the construction of Glacier Hills. These include:
1. Helping Wisconsin Electric Power Company (“WEPCO”) meet its renewable energy requirements under Wis. Stat. § 196.378(2)(a)(2)d;
2. Securing adequate supplies of energy from sustainable sources;
3. Protecting ratepayers from rising fossil fuel prices;
4. Reducing air and water emissions from generation sources;
5. Preserving working farms and pasture land;
6. Generating additional revenues for host towns and counties;
7. Reducing the flow of capital out of Wisconsin for energy purchases; and
8. Investing Wisconsin capital in a wealth-producing energy generating facility within its borders.
by jboullion | Nov 25, 2009 | Uncategorized
From an article by Brian Reisinger in the Wausau Daily Herald:
Planned layoffs and furloughs at Wisconsin Public Service Corp. could impact the Wausau area, though it’s unclear how at this point.
The utility’s holding company, Integrys of Green Bay, plans an undetermined number of layoffs throughout the Midwest. In addition, about 600 administrators will take an unpaid week off in 2010, WPS spokesman Kerry Spees said.
The Wausau area has about 350 WPS workers, out of 5,100 total Integrys employees throughout the Midwest, said Jim Rosenberg, a community and governmental affairs representative for the utility. That makes local layoffs likely, said Rosenberg, who also serves on the Wausau City Council and Marathon County Board.
“The short answer is probably, but we don’t know that yet,” until the company weighs its options, he said.
Rosenberg said WPS will offer voluntary severance and that the number of people who accept it could affect the number of layoffs.
Spees said commercial demand for power is down nearly 9 percent compared with last year, and Rosenberg pointed to the recession as a contributing factor.
by jboullion | Nov 24, 2009 | Uncategorized
From a fact sheet issued by the Homegrown Renewable Energy Campaign:
An innovative way to encourage more smaller-scale renewable energy systems by paying premiums to customers for wind, solar, biogas or biomass electric generation.
How are they different from standard utility buyback rates?
Unlike standard buyback rates, Renewable Energy Buyback Rates provide a fixed purchase price for the electricity produced over a period of 10 to 20 years. They are set at levels sufficient to fully recover installation costs along with a modest profit. Because the purchase price is guaranteed over a long period, Renewable Energy Buyback Rates make it easy for customers to obtain financing for their generation projects.
Why don’t utilities pursue these small-scale renewable projects themselves?
In general, the smaller the generating facility, the less likely it is owned by a utility. Utilities tend to favor bulk generation facilities that employ economies of scale to produce electricity at a lower cost. Renewable power plants owned by
utilities—such as large wind projects—are sized to serve their entire territory, not just a particular distribution area. For that reason utilities have shown little appetite for owning and operating distributed generation facilities powered with
solar, biogas, wind, and hydro.
If utilities won’t invest in small-scale renewable projects, how will they get built?
Clearly, the capital needed to build smaller-scale renewable projects has to come from independent sources—either customers or third parties. There is no shortage of investor interest in these systems, and sufficient capital is available. What’s needed to finance these projects is a predictable, long-term purchasing arrangement that assures full capital recovery if the project performs according to expectations. That’s where Renewable Energy Payments come into play.
