Photo from LinkedIn.
Brandon Stromack, previously director of business development at UNIRAC, is now director of business development at Inovateus Solar, a large-scale solar EPC and distributor of solar products. Inovateus claims to have built and supplied over 230 megawatts of solar around the globe.
Congratulations, Brandon!
Ohio's biggest businesses aren't just making their voices heard in FirstEnergy Corp.'s request to shift the risk of running its Ohio coal and nuclear power plants to ratepayers.
FirstEnergy's (NYSE:FE) proposal before the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio has gathered national media attention in recent weeks centered around a common narrative: The coal-reliant utilities of the past are struggling with a changing, unregulated power market.
AEP has sought guaranteed rates for some of its older plants, including one near Conesville, Ohio.
AEP has sought guaranteed rates for some of its older plants, including one near… more
PHOTO COURTESY AEP
FirstEnergy and Columbus-based AEP both are seeking long-term power purchase agreements with their affiliate companies that they say would make sure the plants wouldn't retire prematurely. The plants aren't competitive in Ohio's unregulated marketplace.
Like with FirstEnergy's proposal, companies that use a lot of power generally oppose the AEP plan too. The Ohio Manufacturers Association and Industrial Energy Users –Ohio, both made up of large manufacturers with big electric bills, are urging the commission against the request.
Ohio Energy Group, whose members in AEP's service territory include AK Steel Holding Corp. (NYSE:AKS), Ford Motor Co. (NYSE: F), Timken Steel Corp. (NYSE:TMST) and Worthington Industries Inc. (NYSE:WOR), does not call for an outright rejection but proposes several ways for the commission to lessen the potential burden on ratepayers.
Kroger Co. (NYSE:KR) and Wal-Mart Stores Inc. (NYSE:WMT) oppose AEP's proposal as well. Wal-Mart's expert called AEP's proposal "simply not appropriate," mirroring the company's concerns from the FirstEnergy case.
Recent Ohio power plant purchaser Dynegy Inc., (NYSE:DYN) a critic of the PPAs, filed testimony urging the commission to reject the plan. So did Dublin-based IGS Energy Inc.
Notably, other opposition is coming from the group responsible for "promoting a robust, competitive and nondiscriminatory electric power market" in the regional grid that includes AEP and FirstEnergy territories. PJM Interconnection is the 13-state grid operator for states in the Midwest and Northeast, including Ohio. Its goal is to ensure reliability – and keeping plants open and reliable is one of the main reasons utilities give for their proposals.
"AEP has not demonstrated and cannot demonstrate why customers should bear these costs and take these risks, if a well-informed generation owner is not willing to do so," testified Joseph Bowring, who has led PJM's independent market monitoring activities since 1999.
Ned Hill, the former Cleveland State University dean now at Ohio State University, testified on behalf of the Ohio Manufacturers' Association Energy Group. He sums up one of the main issues – risk displacement – of the intervenors' arguments found in pages upon pages of testimony.
"It would shift the financial risk of operating generation plants onto AEP-Ohio’s ratepayers, placing the risk of market failure squarely on AEP-Ohio’s distribution consumers," Hill said in testimony.
AEP Ohio President Pablo Vegas says the proposal will help stabilize energy costs for ratepayers, and act as a hedge against up-and-down prices.
The PUCO is expected to issue its ruling on FirstEnergy's ongoing case near the start of 2016. It might not be at this position had the PUCO not said a smaller, similar AEP request was legal by the PUCO. The commission in February said such power purchase agreements are legal– a key open question up until that point – but ruled that AEP's request was not beneficial for customers.
AEP is set to begin its own evidentiary hearing Sept. 28. Friday was the deadline for intervenors to submit their take on the case.
A ruling made earlier this summer by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) could clear away the road block that has been hindering a solar project proposed by a rural Iowa school district, according to a lawyer familiar with the situation.
At issue is a plan by the Rudd-Rockford-Marble Rock Community School District in Rockford, Iowa to install a solar array and sell the excess power back to the local city utility.
And since the proposed 750-kilowatt system likely would be able to produce twice the electricity the district uses, and about half the energy the city provides to its 850 customers, it seems possible that it could displace a sizable chunk of the power that the city buys from its wholesale provider, the Municipal Energy Agency of Nebraska (MEAN).
However, an agreement known as an "all-requirements contract" between the utility and its wholesale power supplier is standing in the way.
Josh Mandelbaum, a staff attorney in Des Moines with the Environmental Law & Policy Center, said that a case from Colorado involving a rural electric cooperative and its wholesale power supplier is quite similar to the one now brewing in Rockford. In the Colorado case, the FERC ruled that when an all-requirements contract conflicts with the federal Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act (PURPA), PURPA wins.
What that would mean in Rockford is that the city utility would have to buy most of the power produced by the solar array being planned by the local school district.Would it also mean that the city utility could, in turn, drastically reduce its purchase from MEAN?
Not according to Chris Dibbern, general counsel for NMPP Energy, of which MEAN is a part.
"We're saying that the MEAN contract still requires us to collect from that community a fixed cost, and that (the FERC ruling) would not impair our contract," she said.
Although she agrees that the commission ruling gives precedence to the requirements of PURPA over an all-requirements contract between utilities, Dibbern said that the decision "trumps it at avoided cost – not at a net metered cost."
She also questioned the legality of the school district putting up an array with a capacity that so clearly exceeds its power needs.
"PURPA itself encourages right-sizing," Dibbern said, adding that the federal law never intended to protect excessive generation by utility customers, followed by net metering for the excess power.
"It was always avoided cost, and you send it back to the utility. We've been willing to do that since we've known about the project."
It's not entirely clear yet just what the June FERC ruling means, Dibbern said, since another utility has asked FERC to clarify it. Once the lingering questions are answered, she said, "We will follow the federal law."
The conflict grew out of the school district's escalating electric bills. The bill for July, when the school was mostly empty, was $19,000, according to superintendent Keith Turner. The rate increased by 12 percent that month, bringing it to about 16 cents per kilowatt hour in the summer, Turner said.
Over the course of a year, Turner said, the district pays about $400 per student for electricity, about $50 to $70 more than many schools pay.
"If we could use that money to pay teachers to do things in the classroom, we'd rather do that," Turner said.
School officials calculated that a 750-kilowatt solar array would enable the district not only to provide much of its own power, but to sell the excess and earn a profit. >>>According to Turner, the district could sell the power to the city utility at a lower price than the utility pays to MEAN, while – assuming a higher net-metering rate – earning about $100,000 per year to go toward school operations.
Then the utility's all-requirements contract with its power supplier came to light.
The Rockford city utility, like hundreds of other municipal utilities and rural electric cooperatives throughout the Midwest, was required to sign a contract stating that it would buy all, or nearly all, of its power from the wholesale supplier.
The contracts, which ensure enough long-term revenue for the wholesale supplier to pay for major capital investments, effectively prohibit utilities from investing in or purchasing renewable energy, at least not without the explicit permission of the wholesale power supplier. They also typically are in effect for many years, generally for at least 25 and sometimes for as many as 50 years.
Utilities that are bound by them find it nearly impossible to develop their own renewable energy.
"I think a lot of munis and [co-ops] enter into these all-requirements contracts and, quite honestly, the larger supplier takes advantage of the fact that the small muni or [co-op] doesn't negotiate these contracts very often,” said Mandelbaum. “Then (the utilities) start hearing, 'You can't do anything for the next 25 or 30 years because you have this contract.'
“That is not necessarily true. These munis and RECs have options and ways they can work on these issues.”
The wholesale supplier has offered to buy all of the school district's power for 2 cents per kilowatt hour - an offer the district has declined - and has encouraged the district to try reducing its bill by focusing on making efficiency upgrades.
The city utility's supervisor, Cory Murray, said he was willing to buy the power at the rate proposed by the district – provided the arrangement complied with the city's long-term all-requirements contract with MEAN.
According to Mandelbaum, however, the contract is superceded by the federal PURPA law, which requires the Rockford utility to buy renewable power.
Bob Poehling, the executive director and chief operating officer of MEAN and the other entities that make up the Nebraska Municipal Power Pool, said that if the Rockford utility chose to purchase any power from the school district, it still would be held accountable for payments required under its all-requirements contract with MEAN. The net result of that, he said, would be a roughly $400 surcharge for each of the utility's customers.
Although the city utility basically has declined to get involved in discussions, encouraging MEAN to speak on its behalf, Poehling said, “This is not a discussion between [MEAN] and the school district, but between the school district and the city utility. We stepped in because the city utility didn't have the resources to address this issue. I don't think district and city have had much dialogue."
Given the FERC ruling in June, Mandelbaum said only one real question remains: what price the utility must pay for the district's excess power. State law says it must reflect the “avoided cost.” Poehling has proposed that 2 cents per kilowatt hour is the right price. Mandelbam said that Iowa law “actually has specifics that the avoided-cost rate is not MEAN's avoided cost rate, it's what the Rockford utility is paying to MEAN.”
Poehling said that, along with a fixed monthly fee of $17,155, MEAN charges the Rockford utility about 3.8 cents per kilowatt hour – almost twice what MEAN offered to pay the district.
“It seems like the folks at the utility don't want to follow the law,” Mandelbaum said. Asked whether the Center intends to intervene in this matter, he said, the Center has been “evaluating the situation.”
A next move “is up to the school district,” he said. “There clearly would be an option to file a complaint with the (Iowa) utilities board. There are negotiated options, and probably a range of legal options.”
But according to Mandelbaum, the legal requirements are clear: federal law requires the city utility to purchase all excess power produced by the school district, and Iowa law requires the utility to pay to the school district a rate comparable to what it pays to MEAN.
“If MEAN wanted to resolve the situation,” Mandelbaum added, “the situation could be resolved tomorrow.”
GUEST COLUMN
By Debbie Dooley
As a lifelong conservative who believes in free-market principles, I believe that the giant electric monopolies deserve competition and consumers deserve choice. We need to set aside our old way of thinking and invest in the new, innovative technology of low-cost, clean energy and diversify our nation’s energy portfolio.
To that end, I co-founded the Green Tea Coalition in 2013 , along with activists from the Sierra Club and other environmental groups and we began to advocate for solar energy in Georgia. Green Tea Coalition unites activists from the left and right to advocate for sound energy policy that provides choice for the consumer and adds more cost effective, clean energy into our nation’s energy mix. Conservatives and progressives don’t agree on climate change or the importance of fossil fuel, but we do agree we want a clean environment and energy freedom for future generations of Americans.
Because of the innovative thinking of Georgia’s Public Service Commission, led by Bubba McDonald, Georgia ranked No. 1 in the nation this past quarter in creating 2,800 clean-energy jobs and is one of the fastest-growing states taking advantage of solar energy. Due to an effort led by state Rep. Michael Dudgeon and with assistance from state Rep. Don Parsons, the Georgia Legislature just passed a third-party solar leasing bill with unanimous support from both parties and Georgia Power.
Georgia is showing the nation that the left and right can set aside political differences and work together to provide a clean energy choice for consumers that satisfies the free market principles of the right and the clean energy demands of the left. With the passage of the solar leasing bill, you can expect the solar industry to add even more good-paying jobs. Georgia Power recently announced it’s getting into the rooftop solar business and will be offering solar leasing plans to their customers.
There is still work to be done in Georgia to advance solar choice for Georgians. Next on the horizon is to remove the hurdles that some electric co-ops have in place to discourage solar use. These hurdles include unjustified fees and charges and long interconnection delays. We strongly believe the free market should be given a chance to work without hurdles and unfair competition.
In 2014, I founded Conservatives for Energy Freedom to provide a much-needed national conservative voice that advocates for energy choice and to convince conservatives to join the free market energy revolution. Presently, I am active in 10 states.
One of my biggest projects is a free-market solar project in Florida. There, conservative groups, environmental groups, the Florida Retail Federation and the Florida Restaurant and Hospitality Group have united in a desire to advance third-party sales and leasing of solar. We formed Floridians for Solar Choice in January and have a free market solar choice ballot amendment which we hope will be on the general election ballot in 2016. Our amendment would remove barriers and allow Floridians to have the right to lease solar panels and purchase solar power from third parties. If voters approve it, Floridians would have the right to harvest Florida’s biggest natural resource, the sunlight, and sell excess solar power generated to their neighbors for a profit.
Recent polling conducted by a Republican polling firm, North Star Opinion Research, showed that 82 percent of Florida voters support our ballot amendment. Even more surprising is the fact that 65 percent of tea party-leaning voters supported it. This truly shows solar is no longer just for “tree huggers” and proves that conservatives are embracing solar as an option for free-market choice.
Debbie Dooley is president of Conservatives for Energy Freedom.
Rooftop power generation is more affordable than ever before.
by Michael Puente
In the 1985 blockbuster movie “Back to the Future,” Doc Brown famously told Marty McFly near the end of the film and looking 25 years into the future, “Where we’re going, we don’t need roads!”
If the movie was released today, Doc Brown may have said, “Where we’re going, we don’t need to buy electricity for our homes!”
That’s because in the year 2040, it’s predicted that more than half of the world’s power-generating capacity will come from sources that emit no carbon dioxide, primarily solar energy.
That’s according to a report released in June from Bloomberg New Energy Finance, an energy analysis group.
It’s expected residential homes and businesses will make a good percentage of solar power users–and generators. In Indiana, there are about 600 customers of solar power who both buy and sell the energy they use.
Solarize Northwest Indiana hopes to increase those numbers this year.
“What we see with solar energy, it’s just helping Northern Indiana move toward energy independence,” says Carl Lisek, president of the Crown Point-based South Shore Clean Cities Inc. “We all want clean water. We all want clean air. And we’re all looking at ways at just being sustainable, and this is just another opportunity for residents and businesses to take advantage of that.”
Solarize NWI is actually being spearheaded by the Northwestern Indiana Regional Planning Commission (NIRPC).
Under the program, Northwest Indiana homeowners and businesses can sign up to install rooftop solar power that is touted as being “more affordable” than ever before.
In fact, the cost to install the equipment will significantly decrease depending on the number of homes and businesses that sign up by the end of July. There is also a 30 percent federal tax credit on installation costs.
“Solarize has been all over the country. It’s like a Groupon for solar. A lot of people say they would like to go solar but it’s too expensive. We have a group discount. The more people we sign up, the lower our vendor will reduce the prices. So, we’re trying to bring the cost down,” says Kathy Luther, director of environmental programs, for NIRPC.
Funding to support the Solarize campaign is provided by the U.S Department Of Energy SunShot Initiative Rooftop Solar Challenge.
TO THE FUTURE A growing number of Hoosier homes and“The goal of SunShot is to reduce the cost of solar energy and our project is focusing heavily on soft costs: regulator burden, red tape, lack of knowledge, those kinds of things that make it difficult to get the ball rolling. It’s kind of overwhelming for people,” Luther says. “Solarize is designed to get passed all those obstacles.”
Luther says there are typically two ways a resident can save money on their electrical costs with the use of a solar system.
One is called “net metering.” That’s where the electricity generated from solar panels is sent to an inverter, which sends the electricity to your home. When your home is not using the electricity, the energy produced is sent instead into the power grid.
“Your electrical meter is running backwards. Once it starts using electricity again, it runs forward,” Luther says. “Basically, it’s a credit back and forth. An average homeowner may save $600 to $800 a year. The utility never actually pays you cash, but at the end of the year, they may zero you out. You may be in the hole or you could end up ahead. They start your meter roll after a year.”
Another way to save money is through a system called “feed-in tariff.” This involves the utility purchasing the electricity directly from the customer. Luther says the customer will still pay their utility bill, but they will also receive a check for the amount of solar energy they produce.
FITS RIGHT IN Advances in solar panel technology make it possible to generate power in all kinds of places, including on top of building awnings and overhangs.Currently, NIPSCO will enter into a 15-year contract with the customer. Right now, customers are making about 5 cents per kilowatt hour, even with a smaller solar energy system.
“You can get a guaranteed income that way. It’s literally a payment for all the solar your home can generate,” Luther says.
The firm selected to conduct the installation is Midwest Wind and Solar LLC based in Griffith. Founded eight years ago, the firm has experience with electrical, automation and project planning for solar thermal and wind systems for both residential and commercial.
Company president Kevin Moore says the Midwest is behind such states as California and New Mexico when it comes to using solar energy.
But there’s a reason for that. “It all comes down to economics. The Midwest has relatively low electric cost. Typically, we pay about 12 cents per kilowatt hour. Out West, they are paying 17 cents to 20 cents per kilowatt hour. You can see why people out west would adopt solar much sooner than us in the Midwest,” says Moore.
With the cost of materials and installation dropping every year, solar energy is seen as more affordable nowadays. “The cost of solar has gone down so much, the economics really makes sense today,” Moore says.
Moore understands that it will take communities and residents to get accustomed to purchasing solar energy products. “It’s not like a refrigerator, washer or dryer. We know what those are and how they work. It really takes education on the part of the consumer to understand how it works, what it does and the cost involved.”
One of the biggest myths about solar is that there’s not enough sunlight in Northwest Indiana to make it a viable option. “That’s furthest from the truth,” Moore says. “Germany is the number one user of renewable energy in the world. They get about an hour less of sunshine than we do. It still works even when we have a cloudy day.”
Moore says each home has its own unique system. Some panels are installed on a rooftop, or even on land.
“Every home is really customized by us. It’s based on the amount of energy usage,” Moore says. “We asked to look at their last electric bill. We can determine if you put on 10 solar panels, it may cut your electric bill by 50 percent. Or, if you put on 20 solar panels, it may get rid of their electric bill 100 percent.”
Moore says it’s important to note that not every home is suitable for a solar panel system. An in-home consultation will determine that.
NIRPC’s Kathy Luther says part of her job is to make people feel comfortable with the whole idea of solar energy. “Some people think it’s kind of out there but in reality solar energy has been around for more than 30 years. Some think it’s too new, it’s unreliable, or may lower my property value,” Luther says. “There are studies that show that solar systems increase your property value.”
Luther adds that Midwest Wind and Solar will not just try to sell you the biggest system. A typical system can range from $12,000 to $15,000. Some systems can pay for themselves in eight years.
“There is also a 30 percent federal tax credit on your installation. That is expiring in 2016. So, right there, that is a big chunk,” Luther says. “With our system, you’ll just sign up, Midwest Wind and Solar, and they’ll come out and there’s no obligation. Midwest Wind and Solar can also look on Google to see if your house is even suitable for a solar system.”
Luther stresses that the assessment in finding out if a system is right for you is free and there is no obligation to purchase.
Midwest Wind and Solar will conduct an on-site solar assessment at your home, walk you through a proposed system design, provide you with a detailed financial proposal, and answer any questions you may have.
Right now, the cities of Valparaiso, Hobart, Gary and Dyer have signed up to be a part of the program. “We’ve had quite a bit of interest in Hobart and Gary,” Luther says. “Those are the people who have signed up to be pioneers.”
Overall, Luther says, the campaign by NIRPC is to make purchasing a solar system as easy as possible.
“It just makes it easier. You don’t have to find an installer. You don’t need to find quotes. We’ve done all that,” Luther says. “You just have to decide if this is what you want to do and if solar makes sense for your house.”
For Lisek, he says educating the public is the key in making the program a success. “There’s been a lot of confusion on the types of equipment can be used; where this equipment can be mounted; ordinances for communities and businesses,” Lisek says. “We’re hoping to ready our communities and businesses so that they are solar-ready.”
A surprising aspect has been the involvement of local school districts, he says.
“We’ve seen a lot of enthusiasm with many of our communities. The biggest contributor that we’ve seen has been our schools. Many school administrators are looking at ways of getting off the grid. Their campuses are becoming more sustainable,” Lisek says. “In the coming year, we’ll have numerous examples of organizations, businesses, schools and communities that have begun the process of moving toward solar.”
Moving toward solar, Lisek says, will have a trickle-down effect into other areas. “We believe that we all can be green. We can help with the brain-drain; we can create some new jobs with the different trades,” Lisek says. “We’ve seen some solar-panel manufactures coming into our area, which is a great opportunity. I think we’re just at the cusp of some wonderful things happening in our area.”
For more information visit SolarizeNWI.com or go to www.nirpc.org/environment/
Midwest Wind and Solar LLC President Kevin Moore is a member of IndianaDG.