Homegrown Renewable Energy Campaign touts renewable energy buyback rates

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.

The staggering cost of new nuclear power

From an article by Joseph Room on Center for American Progress:

A new study puts the generation costs for power from new nuclear plants at 25 to 30 cents per kilowatt-hour—triple current U.S. electricity rates!

This staggering price is far higher than the cost of a variety of carbon-free renewable power sources available today—and 10 times the cost of energy efficiency (see “Is 450 ppm possible? Part 5: Old coal’s out, can’t wait for new nukes, so what do we do NOW?”

The new study, “Business Risks and Costs of New Nuclear Power,” is one of the most detailed cost analyses publically available on the current generation of nuclear power plants being considered in this country. It is by a leading expert in power plant costs, Craig A. Severance. A practicing CPA, Severance is co-author of The Economics of Nuclear and Coal Power (Praeger 1976), and former assistant to the chairman and to commerce counsel, Iowa State Commerce Commission.

This important new analysis is being published by Climate Progress because it fills a critical gap in the current debate over nuclear power—transparency. Severance explains:

All assumptions, and methods of calculation are clearly stated. The piece is a deliberate effort to demystify the entire process, so that anyone reading it (including non-technical readers) can develop a clear understanding of how total generation costs per kWh come together.

As stunning as this new, detailed cost estimate is, it should not come as a total surprise. I detailed the escalating capital costs of nuclear power in my May 2008 report, “The Self-Limiting Future of Nuclear Power.” And in a story last week on nuclear power’s supposed comeback, Time magazine notes that nuclear plants’ capital costs are “out of control,” concluding:

Most efficiency improvements have been priced at 1¢ to 3¢ per kilowatt-hour, while new nuclear energy is on track to cost 15¢ to 20¢ per kilowatt-hour. And no nuclear plant has ever been completed on budget.

Time buried that in the penultimate paragraph of the story!

ZBB gets order for renewable energy project in Canada

From a story in Business Times:

Menomonee Falls-based ZBB Energy Corp. today announced that it has received an order for four standard, modular ZESS 50 energy storage systems from Powertech Labs, a subsidiary of BC Hydro, for the Bella Coola Hydrogen Assisted Renewable Power (HARP) project in Bella Coola, British Columbia.

The ZESS energy storage systems will be used as part of a demonstration project that uses multiple components (power generation, utilization, storage, and dispatch optimization) to provide electrical power to an isolated remote area grid with the goal of reducing reliance on diesel generation and the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in remote communities in British Columbia.

The project objective is to increase the utilization of BC Hydro’s Clayton Falls small hydro plant and reduce the reliance on diesel generators at its Ah Sin Heek generating facility. The ZESS units will be used to store excess power from Clayton Falls, to be later dispatched during periods when Clayton Falls is unable to supply sufficient power to the community.

Milwaukee a finalist for Spanish wind energy company

From a post by Tom Content on his blog at JSOnline:

Milwaukee and one other city are in the running for a Spanish wind energy supplier as it considers its first manufacturing plant in the United States.

The name of the firm and the name of the city competing against Milwaukee haven't been disclosed, but Tim Sheehy, president of the Metropolitan Milwaukee Association of Commerce, said the company was in the alternative energy business.

State and city economic development leaders were in Spain this week for meetings with the Spanish firm. Brian Manthey, a spokesman for We Energies, said the team that headed to Spain brought along a representative of the utility who has expertise about wind energy.

The company would be expected to create 100 to 200 jobs here, Sheehy said.

Milwaukee is a finalist for the investment, after earlier competing against more than a dozen cities that the firm was considering.

Representatives of the company have been to the city twice to evaluate potential suppliers and the availability of skilled manufacturing workers, he said.

Representatives of the state at the meeting this week were state Commerce Secretary Dick Leinenkugel, city development director Rocky Marcoux, and Pat O'Brien and Jim Paetsch from the Milwaukee 7 economic development group.

"It's fair to call this a significant investment," Sheehy said. "We've got a lot of manpower on the ground over there - not that we're not going to chase every possible job out there - but I think the manpower is appropriate to the potential in this deal."

Solar energy field remains strong in Wisconsin

From an article by Tom Content in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

Given our climate, Wisconsin would never be mistaken for the best solar state in the country.

But among non-Sun Belt states, the state is staking a claim in providing power from the sun.

Except for California and Texas, Wisconsin is the only state with two cities - Milwaukee and Madison - in the national Solar America Cities program.

A $19.6 million project for Roundy's Corp. in Oconomowoc would become the largest solar power project in the Midwest, if it gets $8.8 million in federal stimulus funding.

And the state has more certified solar installers per capita than nearly every state in the country, according to Tehri Parker, executive director of the Midwest Renewable Energy Association. Even with the recession, the number of solar installations is expanding - and so is training for solar-contracting jobs, Parker said.

On a recent weekend in Milwaukee, trainees from Wyoming, Virginia and Missouri were on a rooftop in Milwaukee's central city installing solar panels on a Habitat for Humanity home.

Habitat is partnering with We Energies and the Midwest Renewable Energy Association to provide much-needed training for solar technicians - a job that's expected to be in high demand given the growth trajectory that solar enjoys.

John Price, a firefighter with the Brookfield Fire Department, is looking to switch careers into a greener line of work.

He's getting trained in solar installation, working on installing solar panels at Habitat for Humanity homes in Milwaukee, and forming a Waukesha business, Access Solar, with his sons.

He was leading an installation at a Habitat house a few weeks back and learned his students hailed from across the country.

"It's people who've been laid off, or are people who are in their 40s who are changing careers or laid off and looking for something else," said Price, 50.

Small fraction
Solar represents a fraction of the energy supply puzzle. If the state's energy supply in 2007 were a 500-piece jigsaw puzzle, coal would account for more than 300 pieces, and renewable energy would account for about 20 pieces. All the solar power in the state wouldn't add up to a piece.

But the growth rate for solar has been something to behold, even as advocates concede the numbers are small in total.

"It's been a remarkable year," said Niels Wolter, who heads solar programs at the state Focus on Energy program. "We're projecting out 73% growth over last year. Before that it was growing at about 80% per year since 2002. So it's slowed down a little bit in the growth rate, but it's still a booming market. . . ."

Even with all these projects and announcements, some renewable energy advocates say the growth rate will slow considerably in 2010 because electric utilities no longer are offering extra incentives to give the solar market a boost.

We Energies had a generous solar buyback rate in place two years ago, and replaced it with a different program this year. That program is fully subscribed, and no more applications are being accepted.

Michael Vickerman, executive director of the advocacy group Renew Wisconsin, said the expiration of those incentives is unfortunate. He's urging the state to move aggressively to require utilities to offer generous buyback rates.

"We are clearly the leading state in the Midwest, but that momentum is in danger of dissipating," said Vickerman. "Because what really attracts customers and would-be system owners is the buyback rate."

And developers of large solar projects aren't coming to Wisconsin, said green-energy consultant Brett Hulsey, because Wisconsin hasn't followed states such as California and New Jersey in adopting tax credits to bring down the price of solar projects.

Utilities say that the incentives are being subsidized by other utility customers. Other incentives are still available, including a 30% federal tax credit and rebates from Focus on Energy, said We Energies spokesman Brian Manthey.

In addition, the prices for solar panels themselves have dropped by 15% in recent months, shortening the number of years it would take to pay back the investment in solar from about 23 years to about 20 years, depending on the project.

Demand Control: Your Action Plan to Savings

A course offering from the Energy Center of Wisconsin:

Discover how to manage your loads to minimize electric demand costs. This half-day workshop will examine the fundamentals of monitoring, analyzing and managing electrical demand in facilities to take advantage of electric rates including time-of-use with demand charges and peak pricing demand response programs. This training is designed to serve customers who have a time of use rate with demand charges. Commercial, institutional and industrial businesses will learn innovations in reducing costs and saving energy.

Renewable Energy Quarterly, Fall 2009, now online

RENEW Wisconsin's newsletter features these articles:

+ Doyle Signs Wind Siting Reform Bill into Law
+ Solar Outlook Set to Dim in 2010
+ PSC Approves Coal to Wood Conversion
+ Producer Profile: Rick Adamski
+ Educating Schools on Solar Air Heating
+ RENEW Slams Anti-Wind Article
+ Calendar