PSC should approve the settlement with We Energies

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.

Sec. Chu announces $620 million for smart grid demonstration and energy storage projects

From a news release issued by the U.S. Department of Energy:

COLUMBUS, OHIO – At an event in Columbus, Ohio this afternoon [November 24], Secretary Chu announced that the Department of Energy is awarding $620 million for projects around the country to demonstrate advanced Smart Grid technologies and integrated systems that will help build a smarter, more efficient, more resilient electrical grid. These 32 demonstration projects, which include large-scale energy storage, smart meters, distribution and transmission system monitoring devices, and a range of other smart technologies, will act as models for deploying integrated Smart Grid systems on a broader scale. This funding from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act will be leveraged with $1 billion in funds from the private sector to support more than $1.6 billion in total Smart Grid projects nationally.

An Associated Press article posted on WKBT-TV (La Crosse):

Federal energy officials have handed Wisconsin $10 million to improve electrical grids.

The money is part of $620 million in stimulus money that will support 32 grid improvement projects across the country. Projects include large-scale energy storage, monitoring devices and other technological upgrades that will serve as models for the rest of the nation.

U.S. Department of Energy officials say Wisconsin's share of the stimulus money will go toward a $21 million effort by Waukesha Electric Systems to develop a smaller, more efficient utility substation transformer.

RENEW brief supports Glacier Hills Wind Park

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. (Tr. D7.3-7.4.)

Report: Nuclear power will set back race against climate change

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.

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

We Energies coal plant hits milestone, generates power

From a Tom Content post on JSOnline:

We Energies’ newest coal-fired plant is generating power, after “significant progress” in construction over the past three months, the company’s chairman said Thursday.

The coal plant consists of two coal-fired boilers next to an older coal plant on Lake Michigan in Oak Creek. The first new boiler began burning coal earlier this month and has been running at 25% of maximum power in recent days, said Gale Klappa, We Energies chairman and chief executive.

Bechtel Power Corp., the contractor on the project, also has made progress on building the second boiler, which is now 74% complete, Klappa said.

The $2.3 billion project is the most expensive construction project in state history, as it’s roughly double the combined cost of building Miller Park and rebuilding the Marquette Interchange.

Solar thermal expo and conference,December 3-4

From the Midwest Renewable Energy Association:

SOLAR THERMAL '09 is a national conference and expo for the solar thermal professional. The Midwest Renewable Energy Association invites you to the only professional level conference devoted to solar heating and cooling.

Installers, manufacturers, site assessors, dealers, distributors, state agency representatives, and policy makers will not want to miss this one-of-a-kind conference.

TOPICS INCLUDE:
•Solar hot water, solar hot air, and solar space heating sessions
•Manufacturer and dealer updates
•Best practices on residential and commercial applications
•New control and balance of system options
•Structural considerations
•State policy and incentive updates

Register here.

Video showing -- Mountain top removal coal mining, Nov. 11 & 12

Wisconsin buys coal mined by blasting the tops off of Appalachian mountains & dumping the debris in the valleys!

Coal Country
November 11, 2009
Noon
Room 328 NW, State Capitol

Coal Country
November 12, 2009
7:00 p.m.
Goodman Community Center
149 Waubesa, Madison

The State of Wisconsin buys coal to be burned in state facilities from Massey Coal and Alpha Coal, two companies using the latest form of strip mining called mountaintop removal, or MTR. Coal companies blast the tops off mountains, and run the debris into valleys and streams. Then they mine the exposed seams of coal and transport it to processing plants. Coal is mined more cheaply than ever, and America needs coal. But the air and water are filled with chemicals, and an ancient mountain range is disappearing forever.

COAL COUNTRY is a dramatic look at modern coal mining. We get to know working miners along with activists who are battling coal companies in Appalachia. We hear from miners and coal company officials, who are concerned about jobs and the economy and believe they are acting responsibly in bringing power to the American people. Both sides in this conflict claim that history is on their side. Families have lived in the region for generations, and most have ancestors who worked in the mines. Everyone shares a deep love for the land, but MTR (Mountain Top Removal mining which has leveled over 500 Appalachian mountains) is tearing them apart.

More information -- Ed Blume, 608.819.0748, eblume@renewwisconsin.org

Sponsored by Sierra Club; RENEW Wisconsin; Madison Peak Oil Group; Wisconsin Network for Peace & Justice's "carbon free, nuclear free" campaign.

Integrys Energy Group plans cuts despite profit

From an article by Richard Ryman in the Green Bay Press Gazette:

Integrys Energy Group reported a $51.1 million profit in the third quarter, but warned Thursday that challenging times are ahead.

Company leaders said they will furlough all nonunion employees for one week in 2010 and also are planning job cuts, some at least related to the downsizing of the Integrys Energy Services subsidiary.

"The continued impact of the economy is really causing us to take even more aggressive actions to maintain our costs and make sure we take some of those costs permanently out of the system," Charles Schrock, president and CEO, said Thursday during a conference call with analysts.

The Chicago-based utility holding company is continuing a general hiring freeze in place for more than a year, is restricting travel, reducing the use of outside contractors and changing a retirement benefit plan for most new employees.

Alliant begins test burns of biomass at Cassville plant

A news release from Alliant Energy:

MADISON, WI – November 5, 2009 – Wisconsin Power and Light Company (WPL), an Alliant Energy company, has begun testing the usage of biomass at its Nelson Dewey Generating Station. The move comes after the company received a Research and Testing Exemption from the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) to test burn various biomass fuels at the site.

The WDNR approval allows for the co-firing to be done for a 12-month period within the facility’stwo cyclone coal boilers. Throughout the test burn process, WPL will examine a number of factors including environmental impacts, supply chain capabilities, material delivery and handling costs, and the blending and combustion of biomass based materials within the current plant configuration. No permanent structures or modifications will be made to the existing facility’s equipment to accommodate the test burns.

“We continually work to explore the technologies and costs associated with reducing our carbon footprint and this is another step in that process,” explains Barbara Swan, President – WPL.

“Conducting these test burns at Nelson Dewey will help us understand the capabilities we have within our current system.”

Biomass-based fuels approved for test burning within the current fuel blends include wood chips, agricultural based pellets, as well as native grasses. Other biofuel opportunities may present themselves during the testing, thus WPL would seek to update the test program, upon approval of the WDNR, to include any additions.

Solar Powering Your Community: A Guide for Local Governments

From Solar American Cities in the U.S. Department of Energy:

The U.S. Department of Energy developed this comprehensive resource to assist local governments and stakeholders in building sustainable local solar markets. The guide introduces a range of policy and program options that have been successfully field tested in cities around the country. The guide describes each policy or program, followed by more information on:

•Benefits: Identifies benefits from implementing the policy or program.
•Implementation Tips and Options: Outlines various tips and options for designing and implementing the policy or program.
•Examples: Highlights experiences from communities that have successfully implemented the policy or program.
•Additional References and Resources: Lists additional reports, references, and tools that offer more information on the topic, where applicable.

Summit Blue Launches New Website Highlighting Energy Consulting Services

From a news release issued by Summit Blue Consulting, LLC:

BOULDER, Colo., Nov. 2 /PRNewswire/ -- Summit Blue Consulting, LLC recently launched a newly redesigned website at www.summitblue.com. Summit Blue collaborated with Vermillion, a design firm to develop a new website that features expanded content and better represents the firm's technical capabilities and growing energy consulting services. The redesign incorporates a new look, new navigational tools, and additional information about Summit Blue's staff qualifications and energy industry contributions.

"Our online visitors can now easily search our site for information on each of our practice areas," says Kevin Cooney, CEO of Summit Blue. "The new design was created to allow clients and others interested in clean energy research and analysis to locate refereed papers, reports and presentations and more easily contact Summit Blue staff who conducted specific research."

The website now offers case studies to reflect the firm's expertise and project experience in the key practice areas of demand-side management (DSM) program evaluation; DSM program design and implementation; DSM resource potential assessment; Smart Grid, demand response, and pricing; renewables; and integrated resource planning and analysis.

The site provides the technical background and expertise of staff in areas including economics, engineering, energy policy, market research, and complex systems modeling. It also provides contact information for staff at all locations, including the recently expanded offices in Walnut Creek, California, Madison, Wisconsin, and Vancouver, Washington. The redesign includes an expanded news and events section and access to hundreds of industry relevant publications authored by Summit Blue staff.

Summit Blue was founded in 2000 and is a leading provider of utility and energy consulting services drawing on a broad and diverse range of skills from its offices in Colorado, California, Wisconsin, Washington, Illinois and Vermont. With extensive experience in energy efficiency, demand response and renewable energy systems, our core mission remains the same: to provide best-in-class consulting services to the utility and energy industry while engaging our staff in challenging and interesting work.

3 state utilities win $21.5 million in smart grid grants

From a blog post by Tom Content on JSOnline:

The Obama administration's high-profile $3.4 billion funding rollout for the "smart grid" includes $21.5 million for Wisconsin, the administration said Tuesday.

Three Wisconsin utilities will share $21.5 million in funding from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

Pewaukee-based American Transmission Co. received the most funding, totaling more than $12.7 million, for two different projects. The company's projects consist of a fiber-optic communications network for high-speed communications across the ATC transmission system in Wisconsin and Michigan's Upper Peninsula.

Madison Gas & Electric Co. won $5.5 million to install a network of 1,750 smart meters as well as a network of 12 public charging stations and 25 in-home vehicle charging management systems for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles and electric vehicles.

Also in Madison, Wisconsin Power & Light Co. was awarded $3.2 million for a program that would expand on the automated meters that it is installing across Wisconsin. DOE said WP&L will implement a "power factor management system to minimize overload on distribution lines, transformers and feeder segments," in a project that would reduce wasted electricity on its distribution system, or local network of small power lines.