Cashton Greens Community Wind Project Plows New Ground

Immediate release: July 18, 2012

More information:
Michael Vickerman Director, Program and Policy
608.255.4044, ext. 2, mvickerman@renewwisconsin.org

Two-turbine project sets a number of firsts for Wisconsin

A vision of Wisconsin’s renewable energy future came to life with the dedication today of the two-turbine Cashton Greens Wind Farm, Wisconsin‘s first community wind development. This five megawatt project rises alongside Organic Valley Cooperative’s distribution center in this village 40 miles southeast of La Crosse.

Owned by La Farge-based Organic Valley Cooperative and Gunderson Lutheran Health System, La Crosse, Cashton Greens will generate enough electricity to offset the energy use for Organic Valley’s corporate headquarters and distribution center, as well as 5% of Gundersen Lutheran’s energy needs.

“This ground-breaking community wind project represents a number of firsts for Wisconsin,” said Michael Vickerman, director of programs and policies for RENEW Wisconsin, a renewable energy advocacy organization.

“Cashton Greens is both Wisconsin’s largest customer-owned renewable energy installation and the largest ever to receive a grant from Focus on Energy, the state’s energy efficiency and renewable energy program,” Vickerman said. It is also the first wind project permitted following the enactment of Wisconsin’s three-year-old wind siting law (2009 Act 40).The Village of Cashton approved the project in June 2010.

“RENEW and all of our members salute the team of Organic Valley, Gundersen Lutheran, and the village of Cashton for their audacious commitment to energy independence,” said Vickerman. “They are plowing ground that will result in new renewable energy systems supporting Wisconsin’s economic vitality while protecting its environmental health.”

“This project clearly shows that Wisconsin energy customers are eager to move forward to reduce their use of fossil fuels. Rather than wait for their utilities to act, many of them are now taking the initiative and installing systems to supply their own businesses and residences with clean renewable energy produced,” he said.

Organic Valley is America’s largest cooperative of organic farmers and one of the nation’s leading organic brands. Gundersen Health System provides health services to its patients at is hospital and clinics throughout west Wisconsin, southeast Minnesota, and northeast Iowa.

-END-

RENEW Wisconsin is an independent, nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization that leads and represents businesses, organizations, and individuals who seek more clean renewable energy in Wisconsin. More information on RENEW’s Web site at www.renewwisconsin.org.

Coal Critic Coming to Madison to Speak on Effective Renewable Energy Advocacy, January 13, 2012

For immediate release
December 7, 2011

More information
Michael Vickerman
608.255.4044
mvickerman@renewwisconsin.org

Leslie Glustrom, research director of Colorado-based Clean Energy Action, and an unwavering critic of utility reliance on coal for electricity generation, will be the featured speaker at RENEW Wisconsin’s Energy Policy Summit.

The Summit will be held on Friday, January 13, 2012, at the University of Wisconsin-Extension’s Pyle Center located on the UW-Madison campus. Summit attendees will spend the day discussing and selecting renewable energy strategies that make sense in the current political environment in Wisconsin. More information on the Summit can be found on the RENEW Wisconsin website at http://www.renewwisconsin.org.

As research director, Glustrom authored in 2009 an extensively referenced report on U.S. coal supplies titled, “Coal—Cheap and Abundant—Or Is It? Why Americans Should Stop Assuming that the US has a 200-Year Supply of Coal,” available for free at http://www.cleanenergyaction.org.

Since 2009, Glustrom has traveled to numerous states helping them to understand the likely constraints on their coal supplies.

Glustrom’s on-going research illuminates a future in which coal prices will likely continue to escalate, driven by a combination of less accessible coal supplies, increasing demand from Asian countries, and rising diesel fuel costs for hauling coal to distant markets like Wisconsin.

Clean Energy Action is spearheading a campaign to shut down Colorado’s coal-fired power plants and replace them with locally generated renewable electricity.

“Leslie’s experiences with Clean Energy Action can help Wisconsin renewable energy advocates formulate effective strategies for 2012 and beyond,” said Michael Vickerman, executive director of RENEW Wisconsin, a statewide sustainable energy advocacy organization headquartered in Madison.

“Even though Colorado is a coal-producing state, it has adopted some of the most aggressive policies in the country for advancing renewable energy,” said Vickerman. “Colorado’s commitment to clean energy is driving its economy at a time when its coal output is diminishing. For example, Vestas, the world’s largest manufacturer of wind turbines with four plants employing 1,700 people in Colorado, supplied 90 turbines this year to Wisconsin’s largest wind project, the Glacier Hills Wind Park in Columbia County.”

“Leslie will inspire us to reverse the retreat from renewables and retake the initiative going forward,” Vickerman said.

In Boulder, Glustrom was part of the team that led the successful 2010 and 2011 ballot initiatives allowing Boulder to move ahead with plans to municipalize and break away from the long term commitment to coal plants made by their incumbent utility, Xcel Energy.

-- END --

Montfort wind farm marks 10th anniversary

News release
Renew Wisconsin
September 27,2011

More information:
Michael Vickerman
Executive Director
608.255.4044
mvickerman@renewwisconsin.org

The Montfort Wind Energy Center, a popular attraction in western Iowa County along U.S. Highway 18, turned 10 years old this summer. The 30-megawatt (MW) project, which for many years was Wisconsin’s largest commercial wind energy installation, began generating electricity in 2001, and thus far has produced over 500,000 megawatt-hours of electricity. In a typical year, Montfort’s output serves more than 5,000 households.

 The project’s 20 turbines are divided into two arrays. The main array, consisting of 17 turbines, runs along the southern side of U.S. 18 between Cobb and Montfort. The output from those 17 turbines is sold to Milwaukee-based We Energies. The other three turbines, located to the south of the main array, produce electricity under contract to Alliant Energy’s Wisconsin Power & Light subsidiary, whose service territory covers Iowa County.

 Originally developed by Enron Wind, the Montfort project was purchased in 2001 by NextEra Energy Resources, a Juno Beach, Florida-based company. Residents of Cobb and Montfort have been strongly supportive of this project. “Montfort has a gas station called Windmill Mobil,” said Carol Anderson, a project landowner. “Most commonly, I hear people ask ‘When we’re going to get more’?” Just east of the Windmill Mobil, an informational kiosk on the project stands prominently in front of the Tower Junction restaurant, located directly across the highway from Montfort’s westernmost turbines.

Carol Anderson holds a map of Wisconsin to show a group the topography with the best wind resource for projects similar to the Montfort Wind Farm.

 “People are also surprised at how quiet the turbines are,” Anderson said. “Some family members still live in our homestead only 2,000 feet from the turbines, and they don’t have any problems with noise or anything else.

 This project has brought economic development to Iowa County,” Anderson said. “Conservation is a big value in this area. All of us appreciate the conservation aspects of the clean energy.” Montfort is not the first Wisconsin wind project to complete 10 years of continuous operation. Others include the Rosiere and Lincoln projects in Kewaunee County, totaling 31 turbines, and the two-turbine Byron project south of Fond du Lac along U.S. Highway 41.

 “Wind generation is proving to be a reliable source of clean energy over the long haul,” said Michael Vickerman, executive director of RENEW Wisconsin, a statewide organization promoting Wisconsin’s renewable energy marketplace. “Furthermore, unlike coal-fired generators, wind projects will never need expensive retrofits to comply with federal clean air regulations because they don’t produce particulates, sulfur compounds or greenhouse gases.”

 “Wisconsin utilities are now in the process of spending more than a billion dollars to clean up their older coal-fired power stations,” Vickerman said. “This is a considerable expense that utility ratepayers will fully absorb. By contrast, Montfort’s owner will never have to spend a dime on pollution control technology over its entire operating life.”

 “When you add the cost of retrofitting older coal-fired units to the cost of supplying these generators with fuel transported from Wyoming, windpower is hands down the better economic choice,” Vickerman said.

 In addition to Montfort, NextEra Energy Resources also owns and operates the 36-turbine, 54 MW Butler Ridge project near Iron Ridge in Dodge County. That project started commercial operations in 2009.

National Study Vindicates Wisconsin’s Clean Energy Policies

Immediate release
July 18, 2011

More information
Michael Vickerman
Executive Director
608.255.4044
mvickerman@renewwisconsin.org

National Study Vindicates Wisconsin’s Clean Energy Policies

Nearly a decade of forward-looking strategies propelled investments in Wisconsin’s clean jobs economy above other Midwest states, according to an economic study issued by The Brookings Institution, a nonpartisan public policy organization in Washington, D.C.

Reviewing data gathered between 2003 and 2010, the Brookings analysis pegged the number of clean economy jobs in the state at 76,858, a net increase of nearly 4,000. Measured as a percentage, Wisconsin’s clean economy accounted for 2.7% of all jobs in the state, compared with 2.5% for Iowa, 2.1% for Minnesota, 1.9 % for both Indiana and Michigan, and 1.8% for Illinois. Overall, Wisconsin ranked 8th among all states and the District of Columbia in the relative size of its clean economy.

The report categorizes clean economy jobs as those in energy efficiency and renewable energy; sustainable forestry products; recycling and reuse; waste management and treatment; organic food and farming; energy efficient appliance and building manufacturing; and more.

“Clearly, Wisconsin’s commitment to clean energy has paid dividends, attracting new businesses and creating high-paying jobs that could have easily gone elsewhere,” said Michael Vickerman, executive director of RENEW Wisconsin, a statewide organization advocating for public policies and private initiatives that advance renewable energy.

These policies and initiatives include the establishment of Focus on Energy, the region’s first ratepayer-funded energy efficiency and renewable energy program, attractive buyback rates offered by utilities for renewable energy, and innovative incentives to encourage customer installation of renewables.

In addition, Wisconsin’s adoption of a 10% renewable energy standard back in 2006 spurred new utility-scale installations built by skilled tradesmen employed by local contractors. During the study period, the number of wind-related jobs in Wisconsin doubled from less than 450 to 900.

As documented in the Brookings report, the wages for these clean economy jobs run higher than the statewide average ($37,931 vs. $35,906).

“Unfortunately, Wisconsin’s clean economy is in danger of losing a good deal of its steam as a result of policy rollbacks and funding cutbacks in the renewable energy arena,” Vickerman said. “The short-sighted attacks we’ve seen in 2011 could throw the state’s clean economy into reverse next year.”

So far this year, the Legislature has reduced funding for Focus on Energy, suspended the statewide rule regulating the permitting of wind turbines, and weakened the state’s renewable energy standard by allowing utilities to count Canadian hydropower toward their requirements.

“On top of that, We Energies, the state’s largest utility, announced that it will discontinue what had been an effective renewable energy initiative,” Vickerman said. “Among other accomplishments, it was instrumental in enabling Helios USA to build a solar-electric manufacturing facility in Milwaukee’s Menomonee River Valley.” The plant now employs 50 workers.

END

RENEW Wisconsin is an independent, nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization that acts as a catalyst to advance a sustainable energy future through public policy and private sector initiatives. More information on RENEW’s Web site at www.renewwisconsin.org.

Wisconsin’s Widening War on Renewable Energy

Dramatic Slowdown in Market Activity Anticipated
By Michael Vickerman
July 11, 2011

What started out as an opening salvo from the Walker Administration to shackle large-scale wind projects has in six months turned into a systematic campaign to dismantle the state policies that support renewable energy development. Joining the executive and legislative branches in pursuing policy rollbacks and/or funding cutbacks against renewables are various utilities and, surprisingly, Focus on Energy, Wisconsin’s ratepayer-funded energy efficiency and renewable programs.

Since January 1st, Wisconsin has seen a series of assaults against utility-scale projects and smaller renewable systems serving both residences and businesses. These include the following actions:

• The Legislature suspended PSC 128, the statewide rule developed by the Public Service Commission last year in response to a law passed by the Legislature in 2009 ordering the agency to establish uniform standards for permitting wind energy systems. Since the March 1 suspension vote, wind development in Wisconsin has slowed to a standstill.
• The Legislature adopted SB 81, a bill that RENEW Wisconsin describes as the “Outsource Renewable Energy to Canada Act.” SB 81 allows Wisconsin utilities to meet their renewable energy requirements beginning in 2015 with electricity generated from large hydropower plants in other states and Canada. By allowing Wisconsin utilities to become even more dependent on energy imports than they are today, SB 81 turns Wisconsin’s Renewable Energy Standard on its head. Importing large-scale hydropower exports the very dollars that could have been used to harness Wisconsin’s renewable energy resources. 
• We Energies, the state’s largest electric utility, abruptly decided in May to walk away from an agreement with RENEW to dedicate $60 million over a 10-year period in support of renewable energy development in its territory. The decision came in the sixth year of this program. We Energies plans to reallocate the unspent dollars (totaling about $27 million) to general operations. 
• Green Bay-based Wisconsin Public Service (WPS) instituted in April a new net energy policy designed to discourage new customer-sited renewable energy systems. Until recently WPS had been paying its customers the full retail rate for electricity that flows back on the wires, which is now about 12 cents/kWh. But under the new rate, WPS only pays three cents/kWh for electricity exported to the grid. Moreover, the utility calculates the net each month, which penalizes customers whose loads vary significantly depending on seasonal factors. Right now, the new policy only covers systems installed after March 2011, but WPS has said that it plans to apply that rate to older systems effective January 2013.
• In its deliberations on the biennial state budget passed in June, the Legislature appended a rider to tie Focus on Energy’s annual budget to a percentage (1.2% of gross utility revenues). This action will mean a cut of $20 million in the program’s 2012 budget relative to this year’s allocation of $120 million. The Focus on Energy program provides grants and cash-back awards supporting customer investments in solar electric, solar thermal systems, small wind, biogas and biomass energy systems. 
• Last, but certainly not least, as of July 1, Focus on Energy stopped accepting applications for business program incentives to help customers install renewable energy systems. These incentives, which average about $7 million per year, had been available since 2002 to businesses, farms, schools, local governments and other nonprofit customers. It is not clear when these incentives will be resumed and in what quantity. 

This one-two punch of policy rollbacks and funding cutbacks has cast a pall over the state’s renewable energy marketplace. At this year’s Energy Fair in Custer, Wisconsin, the prevailing mood of contractors and exhibitors was one of bewilderment tinged with anger. It is dawning on these companies that their state, which once took pride in its efforts to nurture a thriving renewable energy market, is becoming an inhospitable place to do business. The transformation is occurring with stunning speed; no business is likely to be spared from this abrupt reversal of fortune, which will hit home soon and continue for several months, if not years.

At this moment, however, the Wisconsin renewable energy landscape is humming with installation activity. New wind turbines are soaring above cornfields in Columbia County, where construction crews and operating engineers from Appleton-based Boldt Construction and Brownsville-based Michels Wind Energy assemble what will become Wisconsin’s largest wind generation facility. The towers for the Glacier Hills wind energy project are being fabricated at Tower Tech in Manitowoc. Solar hot water systems now crown the rooftops of new apartment and university buildings, while solar PV panels mounted on 14-foot-tall poles rise above a farm field in Dane County to power Epic Systems’ ground source heat pump system. A cranberry company in Monroe County is about to become the second of its kind to rely on a pair of small wind turbines for its electrical needs. Meanwhile, all across Wisconsin one can find contractors building this year’s crop of bioenergy systems that convert the effluent from dairy farms, cheese producers and wastewater treatment plants into a baseload source of electricity.

Indeed, this wave of projects, fueled principally by funding commitments made in previous years and the early part of this year, should keep contractors and installers busy through the end of 2011. Though an observer unfamiliar with this year’s travails might be deceived by this show of vitality, both installers and advocates know that this activity can’t be sustained for long without a fresh supply of oxygen in the form of policy and funding initiatives. But until state government recognizes the folly of its war against renewable energy and changes course on energy policy, the rollbacks of 2011 will suck much of the oxygen out of next year’s renewable energy marketplace, setting it up for significant contraction in the years that follow.

How Wisconsin benefits from shrinking its renewable energy business community and becoming even more dependent on finite supplies of fossil energy imported from afar is a question worth posing to our political leaders. In our view, that approach is guaranteed to turn Wisconsin into an economic backwater. Is this what they hope to achieve? Probably not. But the toll on the state goes beyond the jobs that weren’t created, the investments from overseas that went to other states, and the tax revenues that failed to materialize as projected.

An even bigger casualty of these rollbacks is Wisconsin’s ability to project itself as a center of consistency and stability, a place where policy changes affecting businesses occur gradually and over time. Not long ago, Wisconsin political leaders were capable of working on complex legislative matters in a low-key and bipartisan manner. An example of that is the Energy Efficiency and Renewables Law (2005 Act 141) signed into law in March 2006, which increased Wisconsin’s Renewable Energy Standard to 10% by 2015 and protected Focus on Energy from future budget raids. That law created what seemed at the time to be a durable framework for enabling renewable energy resources to play an expanded role in the state’s energy future.

However, it is now painfully evident that the political consensus that created the five-year-old law has evaporated. The resulting vacuum has emboldened incoming legislators to fix their crosshairs on the policy mechanisms supporting investment in renewable energy. With the active assistance of politically powerful interests like the Wisconsin Industrial Energy Group, these legislators are now attacking Wisconsin’s pro-renewable energy policies in a manner resembling a wave of Formosan termites going through a house.

What has happened to Wisconsin’s energy policy here is a microcosm of the radically polarized political dynamic that has, unfortunately, become “the new normal” in this state. In this environment, confrontation is celebrated and compromise is shunned. Politics in Wisconsin has become a roller-coaster ride that is heavy on the sharp turns and violent dives, and light on the straightaways and gentle grades. And, with the Senate recall elections this summer and the virtual certainty of a gubernatorial recall election in the offing, this dynamic is not going away any time soon.

Needless to say, this volatility makes long-range financial commitments to upgrading the state’s energy infrastructure a challenge if not an impossibility. The suspension of the state’s wind siting rule, for example, upended a deliberate and multiyear effort to build predictability and certainty into the permitting process. With the rule in abeyance, what wind developers now face amounts to a random walk through a minefield. Small wonder that many of the developers who were active here three years ago have migrated to less explosive pastures. Indeed, high-profile rollbacks like these give the state an unwelcome reputation as being famously difficult to do business in.

Amazingly enough, despite the onslaught from political leaders and certain utilities, public support for renewable energy has held strong, according to a St. Norbert College poll conducted between April 11 and April 18 for Wisconsin Public Radio. More than three-quarters of the respondents favored additional investments in windpower, even if such expenditures would increase monthly electric bills. The rankings for each resource surveyed were: wind (77%), hydropower (60%), biomass (54%), natural gas (39%), nuclear (27%), and coal (19%). The results suggest that the hostility that the Walker Administration and the Legislature have shown to the renewable energy business community is completely out of step with the public.

Along with many other organizations and individuals, RENEW Wisconsin helped build public awareness on the value of renewable energy for jobs and energy self-sufficiency. Now in its 20th year, RENEW Wisconsin finds itself vigorously defending the many policies and practices that made Wisconsin a regional leader in the use of its native renewable energy resources. Though the future is fraught with challenges and uncertainties, about one thing we can be certain: the assaults and policy swings that come our way will not change either the citizen consensus or RENEW Wisconsin’s commitment to a future based on clean, local and sustainable energy.

Testimony in Opposition to Counting Canadian Hydro Toward RPS

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

Second Wind Developer Forsakes Wisconsin for Greener Pastures

For immediate release:
March 30, 2011
More information
Michael Vickerman
Executive Director
608.255.4044
mvickerman@renewwisconsin.org

Second Wind Developer Forsakes Wisconsin for Greener Pastures

Citing Wisconsin’s inhospitable regulatory climate, Midwest Wind Energy, LLC (MWE), a Chicago-based developer of wind generation installations, became the second developer in two weeks to suspend all wind energy development activity in Wisconsin. Another Chicago-based wind developer, Invenergy, LLC, announced last week that it had canceled a 100-turbine wind project in southern Brown County.

Both announcements come on the heels of a March 1 vote by a legislative panel to suspend a Public Service Commission (PSC) rule establishing standards for local government review of windpower projects. That body, the Joint Committee for the Review of Administrative Rules, voted yesterday to introduce legislation to repeal the wind siting rule (PSC 128) and direct the Commission to promulgate a new rule.

In 2006 MWE proposed erecting a 98 megawatt (MW) prospect in southern Calumet County, north of We Energies’ Blue Sky Green Field installation. Called Stony Brook, MWE’s proposed development was stymied in 2007 and 2008 by a combination of moratoria and arbitrary ordinance changes imposed at the county and township level. In an interesting twist, the Wisconsin Court of Appeals in 2009 invalidated Calumet County’s wind ordinance, after determining that local governments lack the authority to restrict wind energy systems beyond what is allowed in state statutes.

“One wonders if our political leadership appreciates the economic damage being done to Wisconsin when it decided to pull the welcome mat out from under the wind industry,” said Michael Vickerman, executive director of RENEW Wisconsin. ‘The industry’s exodus to greener pastures will cause manufacturing and construction jobs to migrate to states that are friendlier to wind energy. It will be a challenge for Wisconsin businesses that participate in the wind energy supply chain to avoid being caught up in the collateral damage caused by the prevailing climate of inhospitality,” Vickerman said.

MWE’s 98 MW Stony Brook facility represents about a $230 million investment in a locally available source of renewable energy that would generate more than 130 construction jobs, support 10 permanent high-tech jobs, yield an annual flow of nearly $400,000 to host local governments and more than $500,000 to host landowners, as well as create manufacturing and consulting opportunities for a host of Wisconsin businesses.

An early entrant to the Wisconsin wind development scene, MWE secured permits for two mid-sized windpower facilities now operating: Cedar Ridge, a 41-turbine, 68 MW project in Fond du Lac County; and Butler Ridge, as 36-turbine 54 MW facility in Dodge County. Cedar Ridge is owned by Alliant Energy and Butler Ridge is now owned by NextEra Energy Resources.

-- END --

RENEW Wisconsin is an independent, nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization that acts as a catalyst to advance a sustainable energy future through public policy and private sector initiatives. More information on RENEW’s Web site at www.renewwisconsin.org.

Hostile Regulatory Climate Sinks Brown County Wind Project

More information
Michael Vickerman
Executive Director
608.255.4044
mvickerman@renewwisconsin.org

Hostile Regulatory Climate Sinks Brown County Wind Project

Less than a month after a 10-member legislative committee prevented a statewide wind permitting rule from taking effect, Invenergy, LLC, a Chicago-based wind developer that owns and operates the 86-turbine Forward Energy Center installation south of Fond du Lac, has ended efforts to install 100 turbines in southern Brown County.

In a March 21 letter to the Public Service Commission (PSC), Invenergy singled out the recent suspension of the agency’s wind siting rule as a significant factor in its decision to cancel the Ledge Wind Energy Center. “The absence of regulatory stability has made it imprudent for Invenergy to proceed with investments in a project which unknown regulations might make infeasible to construct,” the letter states. Invenergy’s application to build the 150-megawatt Ledge Wind project was filed in October 2009.

“The regulatory environment for permitting wind energy systems in Wisconsin is deteriorating rapidly,” said Michael Vickerman, executive director of RENEW Wisconsin. “The rollback started with Governor Walker’s proposal to impose onerous and unworkable setback requirements on wind turbines, and continues with the Legislature’s assault on the PSC’s wind siting rule.”

“By all appearances, it seems that Governor Walker and the Legislature intend to close the door on wind development in Wisconsin once We Energies completes its Glacier Hills project later this year,” Vickerman said.

The PSC rule, which was scheduled to take effect March 1st, would have fulfilled the Legislature’s intent to create uniform siting regulations to replace what had become a restrictive and hodgepodge of local requirements. On that very day, the Joint Committee for Review of Administrative Rules suspended the rule on a 5-2 vote that tracked along party line votes (Republicans in favor; Democrats against).

Had the 150 MW Ledge Wind Energy Center gone forward, it would have generated $600,000 annually in municipal revenues to Brown County and four host townships, and more than $600,000 annually to host landowners and their neighbors. On average, installing one turbine requires 1,325 hours of craft labor, and a 100-turbine wind project will support a payroll of over $10 million, according to figures provided by Boldt Construction.

“Invenergy’s cancellation of its Ledge Wind project should not come as a surprise,” Vickerman said. “It should be expected with a political leadership that treats windpower as a pariah energy source. Until the day the Governor and the Legislature put aside their ideological blinders and recognize the benefits that come with developing a clean, locally available and inexhaustible energy source, Wisconsin will remain a very unappetizing place to pursue utility- scale wind projects.”

“Wisconsin can ill-afford to export windpower-related jobs and local payments to other states,” Vickerman said.

-- END --

RENEW Wisconsin is an independent, nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization that acts as a catalyst to advance a sustainable energy future through public policy and private sector initiatives. More information on RENEW’s Web site at http://www.renewwisconsin.org.

Suspension of wind siting rule endangers state’s economic future

For immediate release:
March 1, 2011

More information
Michael Vickerman
Executive Director
608.255.4044
mvickerman@renewwisconsin.org

(Madison) - The wind industry in Wisconsin suffered a serious setback when a joint legislative panel voted to suspend the wind siting rule promulgated by the Public Service Commission (PSC) in December, according to RENEW Wisconsin, a statewide renewable energy advocacy group.

The five-to-two vote tracked along party lines, with all five votes to suspend coming from Republican members of the Joint Committee for Review of Administrative Rules (JCRAR).

Many companies involved in windpower supported the PSC’s rule as a workable compromise that would have created a stable and predictable permitting environment for all wind energy systems regulated by local governments. The rule, which was scheduled to take effect today, would have fulfilled the Legislature’s intent to create uniform siting regulations to replace what had become a restrictive hodgepodge of local requirements.

“The committee gave the state of Wisconsin a black eye that, in the view of the wind industry, will linger well into the future,” Vickerman said.

“The suspension rolls the wind permitting environment back to the dark days when wind project developers routinely faced arbitrary and ever-shifting local regulations – the kind of chaos that will hasten their departure from Wisconsin to more business-friendly states.”

“As of today, Wisconsin utilities have placed more megawatts of wind capacity in neighboring states than in Wisconsin. As indicated in the following table, importing wind generation from other states deprives Wisconsin of a valuable source of employment, income for rural residents, and property tax relief,” said Vickerman.

The figures compiled by RENEW show that the 219 utility-owned wind turbines that will be operational by January 1, 2012, will yield nearly $2.7 million per year in potential property tax relief for towns and counties hosting wind projects. All told, these projects will be responsible for nearly 300,000 construction-related job-hours.

“We have a hard time foreseeing in-state utility-scale wind development going forward without statewide siting standards.”
“It’s a shame to see the end of bipartisanship that led to the passage of the rule requirement in 2009. What we are seeing here is a breakdown of governance that will rob the state of one of its brightest economic hopes for the future,” Vickerman said.


Click on table to enlarge.

RENEW Wisconsin is an independent, nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization that acts as a catalyst to advance a sustainable energy future through public policy and private sector initiatives. More information on RENEW’s Web site at www.renewwisconsin.org.

Landowners and municipalities to reap millions from wind farm operations for 2010

For immediate release
January 10, 2011

More information
RENEW Wisconsin
Michael Vickerman
608.255.4044
mvickerman@renewwisconsin.org

Landowners and Municipalities to Reap Millions from Wind Farm Operations for 2010

Owners of Wisconsin’s four largest wind energy projects will pay out approximately $2.8 million in rent to landowners hosting turbines and payments in lieu of taxes to local governments for 2010, according to figures compiled by RENEW Wisconsin, a statewide renewable energy advocacy organization.

Wind energy developers negotiate lease agreements with landowners to host turbines on their property. Payments can be as high as $7,000 per turbine per year. Estimated rental payments to all Fond du Lac and Dodge county landowners will total slightly more than $1.2 million in 2010.

Towns and counties do not collect property taxes from wind turbines but instead receive payments based on the generating capacity of each turbine, allocated under a formula adopted by the Legislature in 2003. Payments to those local governments will reach almost $1.6 million for 2010.

“These revenues help support farm families and rural Wisconsin communities.” said Michael Vickerman, executive director of RENEW Wisconsin. “It’s a much better deal for the state than sending dollars to Wyoming and West Virginia for the coal imported to Wisconsin to generate electricity.”

Gary Haltaufderheide, an employee of Madison-based Land Services Company, which negotiates land leases for large projects, like pipelines and wind turbines, says, “Farmers are smart business people and they’re very satisfied with the payments. One farmer saw the lease as a way to cover tuition payments for a child entering college.”

Four wind projects – Forward, Blue Sky Green Field, Cedar Ridge, and Butler Ridge – account for the payments to host landowners and local governments. Together these projects comprise nearly 90 percent of Wisconsin’s wind generation fleet.

When calculated over a 20-year contract period, total revenues should exceed $60 million, taking inflation into account.

Shirley Wind, the state’s newest wind power installation, will contributed another $80,000 a year, divided equally between Brown County, Town of Glenmore, local landowners, and neighbors within one-third of a mile of a turbine. The eight-turbine, 20-megawatt project began producing electricity in 2010.

Click tables to enlarge.

PSC approves final wind siting rule; improves clean energy outlook

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
December 9, 2010

MORE INFORMATION
RENEW Wisconsin
Michael Vickerman
608.255.4044
mvickerman@renewwisconsin.org

Final Wind Siting Rule Improves Clean Energy Outlook

With the changes made at the Public Service Commission’s (PSC) open meeting today, wind developers in Wisconsin can look forward to a set of workable statewide permitting standards that will facilitate the development of well-designed wind projects.

At the meeting, the Commission adjusted the requirements on two issues of critical importance to the wind industry: set back distances and compensation to neighboring residents.

“Today’s decisions culminate a four-year effort to set Wisconsin’s permitting house in order,” said Michael Vickerman, executive director of RENEW Wisconsin, a statewide renewable energy advocacy organization.

“The final rules strike a reasonable balance between protecting public health and safety and advancing wind energy generation, a proven pathway for creating well-paying jobs and increasing revenues to local governments,” Vickerman said.

Initially, the rule did not specify a definite setback distance between turbines and residences and community buildings neighboring the host property.

“By setting a maximum setback distance of 1,250 feet, the rule would not impose economic burdens on wind developers seeking to install newer and larger wind turbines now available in the market, such as the 2.5 megawatt turbines being erected at the Shirley Wind Farm in Brown County,” according to Vickerman.

Regarding compensation to non-participating residences, the commission decided to uncouple the annual compensation level instead of linking the size of the payments to the payment received by the host landowner. The commission’s move resolved the most problematic feature that had been in the rule.

“We thank the Commissioners for their hard work and their willingness to work through a number of very complicated and thorny issues that do not lend themselves to easy resolution,” Vickerman added.

The rules promulgated by the PSC are a product of landmark legislation adopted in 2009 to establish statewide siting standards for wind energy siting. Legislative committees will have 10 days to review the rules after formally receiving them. If they take no action, the rules take effect on January 1, 2011.

Shirley Wind: An Auspicious Debut for Emerging Energies

Commentary
by Michael Vickerman, RENEW Wisconsin
November 10, 2010

Earlier this week, I had the privilege of attending a celebration of Shirley Wind, Wisconsin’s newest commercial wind installation. Located in the Brown County township of Glenmore, a mere 15 miles southeast of Lambeau Field, the project consists of eight Nordex N100 turbines rated at 2.5 megawatts (MW) apiece. All eight turbines are fully erected and will be turned on individually as part of the commissioning process. Commercial operation should begin in a few weeks.

There are many features of this project that stand out. The most obvious one is the turbines themselves, which are the tallest in Wisconsin and are among the tallest in North America. The nacelle is perched on a 100-meter tower (330 feet). Attached to the rotor are three blades extending 50 meters (165 feet). For comparison purposes, the tower is more than 60 feet taller than the next largest turbine in Wisconsin, the Vestas V82, and the blades are about 30 feet longer. According to Michels Wind, the general contractor for Shirley Wind, the spread foundations supporting these turbines are the largest in North America.

Between their height and blade length, Shirley Wind’s eight turbines will be the most productive wind generators in the state. The power conversion zone of a Nordex N100 is one-third larger than those of the Vestas and GE turbines located in Fond du Lac and Dodge counties. The turbine’s productivity is enhanced by the favorable wind resource that flows over the relatively flat terrain in southeast Brown County. All told, Shirley Wind’s turbines should produce about 64 million kilowatt-hours of electricity each year, which will exceed the annual output from the 20 turbines at the 30 MW Montfort installation in Iowa County, now in its 10th year of operation.

Another praiseworthy feature of Shirley Wind is the degree of local participation in the manufacturing and construction of the project. The towers were fabricated in Manitowoc by Tower Tech Systems. Manitowoc Crane supplied the giant crane that assembled the turbines. Brownsville-based Michels Wind Energy, which was also the general contractor for the 86-turbine Forward Energy Center surrounding its headquarters, organized and oversaw all facets of project construction. Numerous Wisconsin-based subcontractors, consulting engineers and natural resource professionals also made significant contributions to Shirley Wind. And Emerging Energies, the enterprising developer that started prospecting in this area in 2004 and drove the project forward across the finish line six years, is a Wisconsin corporation whose principals have deep roots in the Badger State.

It is no accident that the Shirley Wind project sets a new standard for Wisconsin content and participation. From its inception, Emerging Energies sought to maximize the benefits of windpower development to two important constituencies: Wisconsin businesses and the local community. As it turned out, its decision to partner with Tower Tech was a money-saving proposition, due to the very short distances needed to haul 80-ton tower sections from Manitowoc to the project site 25 miles away.

To build support among local officials, Emerging Energies agreed to set aside a portion of their receipts for compensating local governments and project neighbors, even though such payments are not required on power plants under 50 MW. The developer devised an innovative arrangement that allocates one-third of this revenue pool to the Town of Glenmore, one-third to Brown County, and one-third to project neighbors living within a certain distance of a wind turbine. This commitment to equitable distribution of revenues was no doubt instrumental in helping Emerging Energies secure a conditional use permit from the township in March 2007. This was no mean feat for a seasoned wind developer, let alone a relative newcomer to the industry.

With permit in hand, Emerging Energies set out to find an entity with an appetite for renewable energy. Initially, the developer approached Wisconsin utilities, which are required under 2005 Act 141 to increase the renewable energy content of the electricity they sell. However, by the time Emerging Energies started knocking on their doors, the utilities were already moving forward with their own acquisition plans, which emphasized owning and operating renewable generation sources over purchasing renewable electricity from third parties.

However, the same state law created another entity that needed to acquire renewable energy, namely, the State of Wisconsin. Under Act 141, which was signed into law in March of 2006, the State is obligated to source, by 2011, 20% of the electricity it consumes, or 184 million kilowatt-hours per year, from renewable resources. For state government officials, the purchasing requirement presented an opportunity to back an in-state wind project that could showcase Wisconsin’s prowess in manufacturing and construction as well as bolster the local economy. As a modest-sized project that had assembled a highly capable project development team, Shirley Wind shaped up to be an ideal fit for the State’s aspirations.

Because only utilities can legally sell electricity at retail, the State of Wisconsin and Emerging Energies needed to engage Wisconsin Public Service Corporation, the local utility, in a purchasing agreement that could allow the project to move forward. This was accomplished under a novel arrangement that allows Wisconsin Public Service to purchase both electricity and renewable energy credits from Shirley Wind under a 20-year contract and resell the credits to the State of Wisconsin.

With this three-way arrangement in place, Emerging Energies then sold a 90% stake in Shirley Wind in late 2009 to an outside investor, Central Hudson Enterprise Corporation, a Poughkeepsie, N.Y.-based company. The other 10% of the project remains with Emerging Energies. Having consummated that investment, Shirley Wind cleared the last remaining preconstruction hurdle. Project construction commenced in April.

When fully operational, Shirley Wind will produce enough electricity to equal the annual consumption of approximately 8,000 households without discharging so much as an ounce of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. At the same time, the project as well as generate thousands of dollars each year in supplemental income to host landowners and their neighbors. At every step of this six-year endeavor, Emerging Energies pursued its vision of locally beneficial renewable energy development in a patient and transparent manner, which eventually bore fruit when the State of Wisconsin decided to apply the power of the public purse to seal the deal for Shirley Wind. Shirley Wind represents an auspicious debut for Emerging Energies. Hopefully, there will be more projects coming through that particular pipeline.

Michael Vickerman is executive director of RENEW Wisconsin, a sustainable energy advocacy organization. RENEW Wisconsin hosts and updates the on-line Wisconsin Wind Information Center (http://www.wiwindinfo.net) and facilitates the Wisconsin Wind Working Group. These commentaries also posted on RENEW’s blog: http://renewwisconsinblog.org.

A Cruel Month for Clean Energy

A commentary
by Michael Vickerman, RENEW Wisconsin
May 4, 2010

Renewable energy businesses and activists entered the month of April with high hopes of seeing the State Legislature pass the Clean Energy Jobs Act (CEJA), a comprehensive bill designed to propel Wisconsin toward energy independence, along the way creating thousands of new jobs and strengthening the sustainable energy marketplace. This comprehensive bill would have raised the renewable energy content of electricity sold in Wisconsin, while stepping up ratepayer support for smaller-scale renewable energy installations throughout the state.

Unfortunately, on April 22, the State Senate adjourned for the year without taking action on the Clean Energy Jobs Act bill, effectively killing the measure and leaving hundreds of businesses and individuals who campaigned for the bill empty-handed.

If life imitates poetry, then the line that opens T.S. Eliot’s “The Waste Land—“April is the cruelest month”—aptly encapsulates the evolution of a campaign that overcame many obstacles in the final weeks only to be undermined by the unwillingness of Senate leaders to schedule a vote on the bill. The sense of anticipation that began the month was swept away by a combination of personal feuds, extreme partisanship, and increasingly polarized public attitudes toward climate change. That the bill’s demise coincided with the 40th anniversary of Earth Day was seen by supporters as an especially cruel twist of fate.

It certainly didn’t help matters that the some of the state’s most politically entrenched constituencies banded together to fight CEJA at every stage of the process. Among the hard-core opponents were Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce, the Paper Council and the Farm Bureau. Their vociferous opposition scuttled bipartisanship, eliminating the possibility that a Republican legislator would vote for the bill.

Working hand-in-glove with vitriolic right-wing radio talk show hosts, the opposition supplied their grassroots faithful with a smorgasbord of exaggerated claims, hyperbole, outright fantasy, and pseudoscience. Though the analysis purporting to document the opposition’s assertions set a new low in academic rigor, it succeeded in its aim, which was to plant the seeds of fear among certain legislators about the ultimate cost of this legislation before the bill was even introduced.

Working just as vigorously for the Clean Energy Jobs Act, a broad spectrum of interests answered the requests for help. Whether they were one-person solar installation businesses or Fortune 500 corporations like Milwaukee-based Johnson Controls, CEJA supporters wrote letters, made phone calls, and corralled their legislators at the Capitol on several days during March and April.

In dozens of face-to-face meetings with their representatives, CEJA supporters made the case for this bill by bringing out their own experiences as business owners, farmers, educators, builders, and skilled tradesmen. They presented a local and highly personal angle to the clean energy policy debate that many legislators had not appreciated before. Their passion and energy were instrumental in giving this bill a fighting chance for passage at the end of the session. Unfortunately, the campaign could not overcome the pique of the Senate Democrats.

One legislator who kept pushing this ambitious bill up the legislative hill until the very last day was Assembly representative Spencer Black, who was one of the four principal authors of the measure. CEJA supporters are indebted to Rep. Black for his vigorous leadership and his determined efforts to round up support among his compatriots for passing this bill.

Two rays of sunlight did manage to pierce through the heavy clouds at the close of April, prompted by the dedication of the two largest wind turbines owned by Wisconsin schools. In each case, the school erected a 100-kilowatt Northwind turbine manufactured by Vermont-based Northern Power Systems. One serves Wausau East High School while the other feeds power to the Madison Area Technical College’s Fort Atkinson branch. The turbines will offset a significant fraction of the electricity consumed at each school.

Located well within the city limits of Wausau and Fort Atkinson, these 155-foot-tall wind generators eloquently testify to the breadth and depth of public support for renewable energy across Wisconsin. Next January, the Legislature will witness the return of clean energy supporters with similar legislation for strengthening Wisconsin’s renewable energy marketplace. In the meantime, we will be working hard to achieve a very different outcome.

END

Michael Vickerman is the executive director of RENEW Wisconsin, a sustainable energy advocacy organization headquartered in Madison. For more information on Wisconsin renewable energy policy, visit RENEW’s web site at: www.renewwisconsin.org.

We Energies Wins Praise for Support of Clean Energy Jobs Act

A news release issued by RENEW Wisconsin:

IMMEDIATE RELEASE
April 21, 2010

MORE INFORMATION
Michael Vickerman
RENEW Wisconsin
608.255.4044
mvickerman@renewwisconsin.org

We Energies Wins Praise for Support of Clean Energy Jobs Act

A leading renewable energy advocacy group praised Milwaukee-based We Energies for its support of the Clean Energy Jobs Act legislation (Assembly Bill 649).

On Tuesday (April 20), We Energies distributed a memo explaining its support to all members of the state Assembly.

We Energies’ memo followed a similar memo last week from Clean, Responsible Energy for Wisconsin’s Economy (CREWE), a coalition of businesses and utilities supporting the legislation. Other utility members of CREWE are Alliant Energy, Madison Gas & Electric, WPPI Energy, Xcel Energy, and American Transmission Company.

“We Energies deserves praise for stepping out and speaking up on its own,” said Michael Vickerman,” executive director of RENEW Wisconsin.

“We Energies expressed its positive vision for a renewable energy future and the jobs that come with it,” added Vickerman.

The memo from Joel Haubrich, We Energies, said:

We Energies urges support for AB 649.

Throughout the process we have supported moving from our current 10% by 2015 renewable mandate to the 25% by 2025 renewable mandate. It will be a massive effort to meet the requirements in the legislation but we will . . . work to achieve the goal when it becomes law.

Recently, we asked the authors for specific changes to the legislation. On Monday, April 19, we believe we resolved our concerns and now can support the bill.

The changes we believe the authors have agreed to include: 1) incorporating language on “utility rate of return,” 2) removing the ambiguity as to who can perform energy conservation work, 3) allowing efficiency to count from 2016 to 2020 and 4) changing nuclear findings to previously agreed upon language.

We Energies urges support for these amendments and urges support for AB 649. (Emphasis in the original.)

END

RENEW Wisconsin (HUwww.renewwisconsin.orgUH) is an independent, nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization that acts as a catalyst to advance a sustainable energy future through public policy and private sector initiatives.

Legislators Fire Blanks at Clean Energy Jobs Act

A commentary by Michael Vickerman, executive director of RENEW Wisconsin:

Immediate release
April 15, 2010

More information
Michael Vickerman
RENEW Wisconsin
608.255.4044
mvickerman@renewwisconsin.org

Statement of Michael Vickerman
Executive Director – RENEW Wisconsin

Legislators Fire Blanks at Clean Energy Jobs Act

In an April 13 statement, Reps. Mike Huebsch (R-West Salem), Phil Montgomery (R-Green Bay), and Scott Gunderson (R-Waterford) contend that the substitute amendment for the Clean Energy Jobs Act, released earlier this week, will drive up electric rates across Wisconsin. As ammunition for their argument, the representatives point to recent requests in Iowa to raise electric rates, which they attribute to the state’s renewable energy policy.

The argument advanced by these three lawmakers is truly absurd, given the facts of the situation. In the first place, Iowa’s Alternative Energy Production (AEP) law, which dates from 1983, requires the state’s two largest electric utilities to add a mere 105 megawatts (MW) of generating capacity between them. By 1997, both utilities had achieved full compliance with that law. That mandate has not been increased or modified since that time.

Fast forward to April 2010. Windpower capacity alone in Iowa now totals 3,670 MW, and the Hawkeye State is now the second largest producer of wind-generated electricity in the nation behind Texas. According to the Iowa Policy Project, windpower accounted for 14% of the state’s electric output in 2009. Additional information on windpower development in Iowa can be accessed here.

The vast majority of Iowa’s windpower capacity was built for reasons other than complying with the state’s renewable energy policy. Iowa utilities invested in windpower because it is the lowest cost generation option available to them. Here’s what MidAmerican Energy Company, Iowa’s largest investor-owned utility, says about its windpower assets.

MidAmerican began building wind turbines in 2004 and has made the investment without raising customers’ electric rates. The price of electricity per kilowatt-hour … for MidAmerican customers is lower today than it was in 1995, and the company has committed to not seek an electric rate increase to become effective until 2014, which is nearly 20 years without a rate increase.

Given MidAmerican’s experience with windpower, it is clear that the allegation from Reps. Huebsch, Montgomery and Gunderson was spun without any apparent connection to reality. The proper place to file a claim this ludicrous is in a manure digester, where it can be broken down into usable energy.

It’s worth pointing out that a significant percentage of Iowa’s wind capacity serves Wisconsin utilities, among them Madison Gas & Electric (MGE), which owns the 30 MW Top of Iowa 3 installation and purchases additional supplies of wind-generated electricity from independently owned facilities there. These facilities were constructed after 2006, the year Wisconsin’s current renewable energy standard was enacted. Yet MGE’s residential ratepayers have seen annual rate increases of only 1.5% in the last four years. Compared with other expenses, such as college tuition, health insurance premiums, and vehicle registration fees, electricity cost increases have barely been noticeable.

Windpower’s rapid growth in the Upper Midwest has also contributed to the reduction of fossil fuel consumption, resulting in lower natural gas prices. That benefit is passed through directly to Wisconsin energy users in the form of lower heating bills. Indeed, over the last 12 months, overall energy costs declined measurably for most Wisconsin households and businesses, thanks to the prolonged slump in natural gas prices.

There is no surer way to control energy bills than to reduce the state’s reliance on imported fossil fuels through increased conservation and substituting renewable resources wherever practical. The choice before the Legislature is clear cut and momentous. Either it can embrace a 15-year commitment to invigorate the state’s economy through sustained investment in clean energy or it can decide to coast along on current energy policies until they lapse several years from now and lose their force and effect.

We at RENEW believe the Clean Energy Jobs Act will propel the clean energy marketplace into an economic powerhouse that will generate jobs and help Wisconsin businesses remain competitive. We strongly support the passage of the Clean Energy Jobs Act bill as amended.

--END--

RENEW Wisconsin is an independent, nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization that acts as a catalyst to advance a sustainable energy future through public policy and private sector initiatives. More information on RENEW’s Web site at www.renewwisconsin.org.

RENEW Wisconsin Backs Amended Clean Energy Jobs Act

IMMEDIATE RELEASE
April 15, 2010

MORE INFORMATION
Michael Vickerman
RENEW Wisconsin
608.255.4044
mvickerman@renewwisconsin.org

RENEW Backs Amended Clean Energy Jobs Act
The board of directors of RENEW Wisconsin approved, without dissent, the following resolution in support of the amended version of the Clean Energy Jobs Act, according to Michael Vickerman, RENEW’s executive director:

RENEW Wisconsin strongly supports passage of the Clean Energy Jobs Act. While RENEW recognizes that future legislative improve- ments will be needed, it is incumbent upon the State to extend and expand Wisconsin’s commitment to a clean energy infrastructure with associated clean energy job creation.

END
RENEW Wisconsin (www.renewwisconsin.org) is an independent, nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization that acts as a catalyst to advance a sustainable energy future through public policy and private sector initiatives.

Costs of coal plants keep going up

For Immediate Release
April 7, 2010

For More Information Contact
Michael Vickerman
608.255.4044
mvickerman@renewwisconsin.org

Costs of coal plants keep going up
In recent weeks, some groups have suggested that we maintain our current energy portfolio, continuing to rely heavily on coal-fired generation for a substantial amount of our electricity. These groups claim that gradually moving toward more reliance on local, in-state sources of energy will increase electricity costs. These claims have been thoroughly discredited by two economic studies concluding that electricity bills will decrease with the Clean Energy Jobs Act.

Further, these groups refuse to acknowledge the substantial, ongoing costs associated with coal plants. Since 1999, Wisconsin utilities have spent over $2 billion of customer money keeping old, inefficient coal plants running. For comparison purposes, this sum is nearly triple the utilities’ investment in windpower facilities during the same period. Customers have seen the real and substantial impact of these coal plant costs through rising electricity rates over the past several years. These costs are in addition to the more than $700 million (exclusive of transportation costs) we send out of state each year to pay for the coal to fuel these aging plants. Reliance on dirty, antiquated coal plants leaves Wisconsin in a vulnerable position, unable to predict or control energy costs.

Unlike coal, clean resources like biogas, wind and solar will produce energy throughout their productive lives without requiring costly pollution abatement measures. Going forward, the more renewable energy we add to Wisconsin’s energy resource mix, the less exposed we will be to these downstream liabilities. The avoidance of these regulatory risks is another compelling reason for passing the Clean Energy Jobs Act legislation in this session.

Coal Plant Retrofit Costs (1999-2009)
(in Millions of Dollars)

Revitalizing Wisconsin with Homegrown Renewable Energy

From a PowerPoint presentation (posted as a PDF) by Michael Vickerman, RENEW Executive Director:

+ Where We Are Today
+ Renewable Energy Standard
+ Renewable Buyback Rates/Incentives
+ Outlook for Clean Energy Jobs Act bill

Testimony in support of Clean Energy Jobs Act bill

Summary of Michael Vickerman’s (RENEW Wisconsin)
testimony before the
Assembly Special Committee on Clean Energy
February 2, 2010

RENEW Wisconsin strongly supports the provisions in SB450/AB649 to expand the state’s Renewable Energy Standard to 25% by 2025, which includes a 10% in-state renewable energy set-aside. RENEW has evaluated the availability of specific resources to reach that standard and has concluded that meeting such a target is technically feasible. If adopted, the in-state set-aside will become the most powerful engine for job development and capital investment over the next 15 years.

We expect such a requirement to be achieved through a combination of utility-scale power plants and smaller-scale generating units dispersed throughout Wisconsin. With respect to distributed renewable generation, we note the following:

1. The vast majority of the distributed renewable generating units installed in Wisconsin serve schools, dairy farms and other small businesses, churches and local governments.

2. Utilities are not in the business of installing these systems themselves.

3. In many cases the renewable energy installation went forward because there was a special buyback rate available to accelerate the recovery of the original investment made by the customer. Last week, I gave the example of the Dane County community anaerobic digester project that, once operational, will treat manure taken from several nearby dairy farms in the Waunakee area and produce two megawatts of electricity with it. The electricity will be purchased by Alliant Energy through a voluntary biogas tariff worth 9.3 cents/kWh. Unfortunately, Alliant’s biogas program is fully subscribed and is no longer available to other dairy farmers, food processing companies and wastewater treatment facilities served by Alliant.

4. Companies that install solar, wind and biogas energy systems are quintessentially small businesses, many of them family-owned. Renewable energy contractors and affiliated service providers constitute one of the few market sectors where young adults who have acquired the necessary skills to do the job well can find meaningful work at decent pay.

5. By its very nature, distributed renewable energy delivers nearly 100% of its economic punch to the local economy.

In stark contrast to other states, Wisconsin has a well developed market structure for supporting small-scale renewables. Through the ratepayer-funded Focus on Energy program, there is in Wisconsin a human infrastructure that trains and educates thousands of young people to work in the renewable energy arena. Indeed, Wisconsin is a leader in this area. Our expectation is that these workers will apply their skills in the state, fabricating and installing renewable energy equipment in a thoroughly professional manner.

But if we don’t take equal care to create and sustain demand for their skills and services, these workers are apt to leave the state for greener pastures, and Wisconsin’s investment in their education will have gone unpaid. This is why the issue of Advanced Renewable Tariffs is so important to RENEW members.

One final point: Last week several utility representatives recommended that the Legislature strip out the Advanced Renewables Tariff section. RENEW urges you not to heed their advice. While we would support a reworking of this section, including a program cap to limit rate impacts, we cannot support abandoning this initiative altogether and cannot further support a bill that is silent on policies to advance the distributed energy marketplace. That is a bottom-line priority with us.


Submitted by:
Michael Vickerman
Executive Director
RENEW Wisconsin
February 2, 2010

Hearing on Clean Energy Jobs Act bill trivialized Advanced Renewable Tariffs

January 28, 2010

Senator Jeff Plale
Room 313 South, State Capitol
Madison, WI 53708

Senator Mark Miller
Room 317 East, State Capitol
Madison, WI 53708

Dear Senators Miller and Plale:

Thank you for holding a hearing yesterday of the Select Committee on Clean Energy on SB 450 (the Clean Energy Jobs Act bill). You heard a great deal of substantive commentary about much of the bill, particularly the sections dealing with energy efficiency and the expanded Renewable Energy Standard.

Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for the discussion on the proposal to institute Advanced Renewable Tariffs in Wisconsin. Early in the hearing, a speaker framed the issue as “asking a little old lady in Cudahy to subsidize an expensive system in Mequon.” From that point, the discussion devolved into a kind of semi-orchestrated gang-tackling on this issue that continued unabated until I was called upon to speak, some seven hours and forty five minutes after the hearing began. While RENEW members who work for or with solar, wind and biogas energy installation companies were present during the hearing and had registered to speak, none were called prior to myself. All but two (Full Spectrum Solar and Ed Ritger) had to leave before the hearing ended.

Now, I don’t believe the first speaker, a labor leader, had intended to belittle the companies that install customer-sited renewable energy systems or dismiss their contribution to Wisconsin’s economy and environment. Nevertheless, the “little old lady from Cudahy” theme took a life of its own, and as a result, the very important issues of how to support these systems through utility rates and whether these rates should be mandated had become thoroughly trivialized by the end.

Allow me to repeat some of the points I made at yesterday’s hearing:

1. The vast majority of the distributed renewable generating units installed in Wisconsin serve schools, dairy farms and other small businesses, churches and local governments.

2. Utilities are not in the business of installing these systems themselves.

3. In many cases the renewable energy installation went forward because there was a special buyback rate available to accelerate the recovery of the original investment made by the customer. Yesterday, I gave the example of the Dane County community anaerobic digester project that, once operational, will treat manure taken from several nearby dairy farms in the Waunakee area and produce two megawatts of electricity with it. The electricity will be purchased by Alliant Energy through a voluntary biogas tariff worth 9.3 cents/kWh. Unfortunately, Alliant’s biogas program is fully subscribed and is no longer available to other dairy farmers, food processing companies and wastewater treatment facilities served by Alliant.

4. Companies that install solar, wind and biogas energy systems are quintessentially small businesses, many of them family-owned. Renewable energy contractors and affiliated service providers constitute one of the few market sectors where young adults who have acquired the necessary skills to do the job well can find meaningful work at decent pay.

5. By its very nature, distributed renewable energy delivers nearly 100% of its economic punch to the local economy.

In stark contrast to other states, Wisconsin has a well developed market structure for supporting small-scale renewables. Through the ratepayer-funded Focus on Energy program, there is in Wisconsin a human infrastructure that trains and educates thousands of young people to work in the renewable energy arena. Indeed, Wisconsin is a leader in this area. Our expectation is that these workers will apply their skills in the state, fabricating and installing renewable energy equipment in a thoroughly professional manner.

But if we don’t take equal care to create and sustain demand for their skills and services, these workers are apt to leave the state for greener pastures, and Wisconsin’s investment in their education will have gone unpaid. This is why the issue of Advanced Renewable Tariffs is so important to RENEW members.

The question of how to sustain and broaden the distributed generation marketplace is a serious matter that deserves careful consideration by the Legislature. As I mentioned yesterday, RENEW Wisconsin has a wealth of experience and expertise in designing forward-looking renewable energy policies, examples being the Act 141 renewable energy standard and We Energies’ voluntary renewable energy program, the most ambitious and innovative of its kind in the state.

We at RENEW would greatly appreciate the opportunity to meet with you and suggest some alternative approaches in the Advanced Renewable tariffs section that we believe would end the impasse between utilities and clean energy advocates and put the distributed energy sector on a sustainable growth trajectory. We would like very much the opportunity to discuss our alternative approach and provide any assistance you require in forging an acceptable compromise with the utilities.

One final point: yesterday you heard several utilities recommend that the Legislature strip out the Advanced Renewables Tariff section. RENEW urges you not to heed their advice. While we would support a reworking of this section, we cannot support abandoning this initiative altogether and cannot further support a bill that is silent on policies to advance the distributed energy marketplace. That is a bottom-line priority with us.


Sincerely,


Michael Vickerman
Executive Director