by jboullion | Mar 11, 2009 | Uncategorized
From an article by Kevin Murphy in the La Crosse Tribune:
MADISON — Xcel Energy customers could choose to have more of the electricity they use come from renewable sources if the Wisconsin Public Service Commission approves a request Xcel submitted Friday.
The Voluntary Renewable Energy Source program would allow Xcel to charge $1.15 per 100 kilowatts for power produced by wind, solar or biomass sources but not from hydro, said David Donovan, Xcel’s manager of regulatory policy.
For typical residential customers using 750 kilowatts of power a month, the “green pricing” premium would add $8.62 to their existing $81.57 bill.
Xcel is the last utility in the state to offer an optional green energy plan for customers, Donovan said, but the company generates 14 percent of its power from renewable sources and has added 1,200 megawatts of wind power in recent years.
“Now there is a demand for it. Not just from residential customers, but commercial and industrial customers are interested in renewables beyond our base rate,” he said.
by jboullion | Mar 11, 2009 | Uncategorized
From an article by Kevin Murphy in the La Crosse Tribune:
MADISON — Xcel Energy customers could choose to have more of the electricity they use come from renewable sources if the Wisconsin Public Service Commission approves a request Xcel submitted Friday.
The Voluntary Renewable Energy Source program would allow Xcel to charge $1.15 per 100 kilowatts for power produced by wind, solar or biomass sources but not from hydro, said David Donovan, Xcel’s manager of regulatory policy.
For typical residential customers using 750 kilowatts of power a month, the “green pricing” premium would add $8.62 to their existing $81.57 bill.
Xcel is the last utility in the state to offer an optional green energy plan for customers, Donovan said, but the company generates 14 percent of its power from renewable sources and has added 1,200 megawatts of wind power in recent years.
“Now there is a demand for it. Not just from residential customers, but commercial and industrial customers are interested in renewables beyond our base rate,” he said.
by jboullion | Mar 11, 2009 | Uncategorized
From an article by Larry Sandler in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:
A $25 million cash infusion from the federal stimulus package will delay – but not avert – a financial crisis at the Milwaukee County Transit System, county officials and outside experts agree.
Wisconsin’s biggest bus system is in line to receive nearly one-third of the $81.6 million that the stimulus legislation will send to the state for transit. And County Executive Scott Walker, who has opposed other stimulus funding, says he will accept the bus money.
Milwaukee County’s share of the dollars will go toward buying new buses and other equipment for the transit system. Walker said that will meet his criteria for accepting stimulus funds, because the county won’t have to match part of the federal money with local tax dollars and won’t be required to fund ongoing operations that weren’t already planned.
Last year, the Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission and the Public Policy Forum warned that the transit system would be forced to slash service by 35% as early as 2010 unless it won new state or local funding.
The funding crisis stems largely from the way county officials used federal aid to avoid pumping more property tax dollars into the bus system. For years, Congress gave the county money to buy new buses, but the county legally spent the cash on major maintenance to keep old buses running longer. Those federal dollars are running out just as the transit system needs to start replacing about one-third of its aging fleet.
With the stimulus money, the county can buy some but not all of the 155 buses it needs, said planning commission Executive Director Ken Yunker.
That postpones the transit system’s day of reckoning, but doesn’t eliminate the need for a long-term solution, Public Policy Forum President Rob Henken said.
“Realistically, we’re probably talking about buying at least a year,” Walker said.
by jboullion | Mar 10, 2009 | Uncategorized
From an article by D.J. Slater in the Wausau Daily Herald:
A new city ordinance has allowed people to drive electric vehicles in Wausau for nearly two months, but you’d be hard-pressed to find one on the streets.
Two city residents who jointly own one of the cars haven’t taken it out since the ordinance took effect. And fewer than 100 of the vehicles are registered statewide.
Jim Sweo and Tracy Riehle bought their neighborhood electric vehicle in the summer of 2007, when gasoline prices soared past $3 a gallon. Since then, gas has dropped to about $2 a gallon, and the two owners have been using their gasoline-powered cars.
Riehle said the weather, not the gas-price drop, has encouraged her to keep using her regular vehicle. The NEV can get through snow, but not as effectively as a regular car. After the snow melts, Riehle plans to start using the electric vehicle for in-town errands, such as dropping her children off at school and picking up groceries.
“With my business, I’ve been really busy,” said Riehle, who owns Snow Services, a snow-removal company. “I really didn’t get a chance to use it. Now, with it getting warmer out, I’ll start using it again.”
Riehle was driving the vehicle the past two summers until she found out it was illegal to do so on city streets. The City Council passed an ordinance Jan. 13 allowing electric vehicles on most city streets with speed limits 35 mph or lower.
Electric cars run on several 12-volt batteries that are recharged through a standard household 110-volt outlet. The cars take between six to eight hours to charge and can travel between 30 to 35 miles on a full charge.
In 2007, the electric vehicle saved Riehle about $1,500 in fuel costs, she said. While she uses electricity to charge the car, she said she hasn’t noticed a significant increase in her monthly electric bill.
The NEV doesn’t require the normal maintenance needed for other cars, such as oil changes. Riehle’s car comfortably seats four people and has plastic windows wrapped around the vehicle, providing a 360-degree view of the street when driving.
by jboullion | Mar 10, 2009 | Uncategorized
From an article by Jo Anne Killeen in the Onalaska Holmen Courier-Life:
The “buy local” argument that surfaced recently before the Holmen Village Board is an economic development issue and Holmen’s Economic Development Committee is putting together a proposal to present to the board that would change bid acceptance policies.
The issue was raised at last month’s board meeting when the board voted 5-2 to accept an out of town bid versus a more local bid. The “local” bid for a new squad car, which came from Sparta, was only $65 higher than the lowest bidder from Hartford. Trustee Nancy Proctor, along with Trustee Tony Szak were the two votes arguing to buy local.
The board also recently gave a bid to a West Salem company when a Holmen bidder was $46 higher.
“We ought to stay local with the economy the way it is,” Proctor said.
State law requires municipalities who put something out to bid to accept the lowest bid without preferences when there are no other local ordinances allowing them to do otherwise.
Trustee Ryan Olson, who chairs the economic development committee, said he sided with the majority on the squad car vote because of Village President John Chapman’s argument that the integrity of the bidding process was at stake.
Olson also said the decision might have been good government, but not good business. The committee members all agreed local procurement is an economic sustainability issue and discussed alternatives.
At the EDC meeting March 3, Olson said the village could do one of two things. It could develop, adopt and implement an ordinance and then wait to be challenged on it or it could approach state legislators to further define what “preference” means in state procurement laws.
by jboullion | Mar 10, 2009 | Uncategorized
From an interview with Clay Sterling by Michael Burke published in The Journal Times (Racine):
Q. What is an off-grid home, and how did you achieve that?
A. There’s no physical connection between the home’s electrical system and the utility. You have an on-site power generation system, so you are your own utility. In my case, the sources are both solar and wind electric.
You store that energy in a battery pack for immediate or later use. Generally, those are sized for about three days of no power input — and generally, in three days you’ll have some power input.
But there are times, like in November, December and March, when you’re not generating enough. So you have to back up the whole system with a gasoline generator.
Q. Are we talking about do-it-yourself or professionally installed solar projects?
A. Professionally installed. We train homeowners and DIY people, but now 60-70 percent of people who go through program are in the trades. The systems are also being manufactured in ways that speed up installation for electrical and plumbing shops that want to offer this work.
Q. Where can one install a useful solar system?
A. For solar electricity, you need no shading from at least 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. every day of the year, and the sun’s position changes. Sometimes a roof is a suitable place. Sometimes a backyard, on a pole or on the ground.
Solar hot water, on the other hand, is very forgiving. You can have a little shade throughout the day with little or no impact.
Q. What are the investment costs and payback times for solar electric?
A. Before you install anything, you have to address energy efficiency. A homeowner could reduce electrical loads by 30-50 percent with energy-efficient measures. For every dollar you spend on energy efficiency, you reduce system cost by $3-$5.
A 4-5 kilowatt photovoltaic system for an average home would cost about $40,000 today, complete. After doing energy-efficiency measures, it would cost about $28,000.
Using $40,000, Focus on Energy would give a 25 percent rebate. A federal tax credit would knock off another 30 percent, for a final cost of about $21,000.
You’re still looking at a long time to pay off this system. But you can assume that each year the cost of energy will rise and value of dollar will decline.
The $28,000 system would end up costing you $14,700.
Q. What about solar hot water costs?
A. About $7,000-10,000 for a system. After the rebate and tax credit, you might spend $4,725. It would connect to a traditional hot water heater but reduce the amount of energy needed to heat water. It would supply 50-75 percent of an average home’s water-heating needs, averaged over a whole year.
