Author Archives Laura Arnold

PUCO Net Metering Technical Workshop Agenda for 5/5/15 in Columbus, Ohio

Posted by Laura Arnold  /   May 01, 2015  /   Posted in Uncategorized  /   No Comments

 PUCO_logo

Public Utility Commission of Ohio (PUCO)

Net Metering Workshop Agenda

May 5, 2015, 10:00 a.m.

Hearing Room 11-B, 180 E. Broad St., Columbus, Ohio 43215

 

  1. Introduction by Attorney Examiner

 

  1. Staff Introduction

 

III.                Prepared Remarks (in order of sign-up), 10 min. each:

 

  1. FirstEnergy
  2. Ohio Advanced Energy Economy
  3. The Alliance for Solar Choice
  4. Pettisville Local School
  5. Environmental Law & Policy Center
  6. The Ohio Environmental Council
  7. Direct Energy
  8. Additional discussion and remarks by other stakeholders who wish to speak. Staff welcomes additional input by other stakeholders at the workshop.  Topics for discussion include, but are not limited to the following that have been identified in advance by stakeholders:
  • Cost recovery
  • Payments for over generation
  • Eligible technologies
  • Size limitations associated with customers’ electricity requirements
  • Importance of net metering to the emerging and growing advanced energy industries, such as solar, wind, co-generation and biomass
  • Rate paid to net metering customers
  • Proposed rule change from 100 to 120%, support the Commission’s decision to modify the percentage of production to less than 120% and still allow a generator to meet the requirements of the net metering rule
  • Ohio legal requirements regarding net metering
  • Existing evidence of costs and benefits of distributed generation
  • Mechanisms for providing net metering credit
  • No discriminatory monthly charges for net-metering customers, solar or otherwise
  • Reimbursement for net metering customers at standard service operating rate, which includes energy and capacity charges
  • Expansion of customer generator definition
  • Fair treatment of net metering users in an aggregated political subdivision
  • Virtual and aggregate net metering
  • 120% excess generating threshold
  • CHP as a qualified net metering technology, among others
  • Proper settlement for CRES who serve net metered customers
  • Requirement regarding the type of meter and data that is necessary for net metering, support a requirement that net metered customers have meters capable of doing hourly reads
  • Net metering rates—regardless of the rate used by utilities to net meter, CRES providers who serve net metered customers should have the ability to negotiate the rate for net metering directly with customers

 

 

Finalists Announced for 2015 Indianapolis Sustainability Awards; IPL Nominated for Feed-in Tariff (FIT) called Rate REP

Posted by Laura Arnold  /   May 01, 2015  /   Posted in Feed-in Tariffs (FiT), IPL Rate REP, Uncategorized  /   No Comments

News Release
For immediate release
APRIL 29, 2015
Media Contact:
Jennifer Hashem
(317) 650­-2994
jennifer.hashem@indy.gov

FINALISTS ANNOUNCED FOR 2015 INDIANAPOLIS SUSTAINABILITY AWARDS

INDIANAPOLIS - ​​ The Indianapolis Office of Sustainability announced today the finalists for the 2015 Indianapolis Sustainability Awards. Nine finalists were chosen from sustainability projects across Indianapolis and Marion County. Three finalists were selected for each of the Awards’ three categories: Economic, Environmental and Social. Three winners will be announced during the annual Indianapolis Sustainability Awards dinner on Thursday, June 18, 2015 at the JW Marriott in downtown Indianapolis.

The Awards finalists are as follows:
Economic
-Green Infra Reducing Combined Sewer Overflow - Citizens Energy Group
-Neurosciences Research Building – BSA LifeStructures
-Rate REP – Indianapolis Power and Light

​Environmental

-IND Solar Farm – Airport (IAA), Telamon Corp, Johnson Melloh Solutions, and IPL
-Indiana Pacers Bikeshare Program – Indianapolis Cultural Trail
-Inst. for Green and Sust. Science (IGGS) Summer Program 2014 - Marian University
​Social

-Growing Places Indy’s Farm Expansion and U-Pick – GPI, Chase Near Eastside Legacy Center
-The Common Ground at Eskinazi Health – Eskinazi Health
-Simon Skjodt International Orangutan Center – Browning Day Mullin Dierdorf, Indianapolis Zoo​​​​​
About the Office of Sustainability

The Indianapolis Office of Sustainability was created by Mayor Greg Ballard to drive SustainIndy. The Office provides a structure for implementation and policy recommendations for SustainIndy.

The main charges of the Office of Sustainability are to lead sustainability efforts within city government, coordinate and collaborate on community sustainability goals and establish public-private partnership opportunities to move forward aggressively on achieving the vision of a more sustainable Indianapolis.

 

-30-

 

Solar energy poll results called warning for Nevada legislators: Shows bi-partisan solar support

Posted by Laura Arnold  /   April 29, 2015  /   Posted in solar  /   No Comments

Updated 

MidwestEnergyNews: Xcel says it will limit size of Minnesota community solar

Posted by Laura Arnold  /   April 29, 2015  /   Posted in solar  /   No Comments

Xcel says it will limit size of Minnesota community solar

After talks with solar developers reached an impasse, Xcel Energy announced plans Tuesday to strictly limit the size of community solar projects in Minnesota.

In a letter to the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission, the state’s largest utility said it will prohibit developers from co-locating 1 megawatt (MW) gardens together at a site.

Within the next 31 days Xcel will scale all co-located solar garden proposals with aggregated capacity of greater than 1 MW down to just 1 MW.

Different developers can co-locate gardens at the same site but they must total 1 MW or less and any attempts at large-scale community projects will be rejected, Xcel said.

“What’s driving us is we’re seeing a small number of developers really aggregating a lot of one-megawatt projects together and creating what is a utility-scale solar sized project rather than something that is more suitable for a community-based program,” said Aakash Chandarana, regional vice president of rates and regulatory affairs.

Of the 560 MW of community solar applications, around 80 percent involved co-located projects, he said. Although state statute restricts solar gardens to 1 MW or less the PUC has indicated support for co-located gardens in the past.

Chandarana argues that the state statute does not support co-located projects that would result in utility-scale solar installations. The company is using the letter to inform the PUC of how it will implement the program with the 1 MW gardens, he said.

Even with the restriction, Xcel will still have at least 80 MW of community solar, making Minnesota’s program one of the largest in the country, he said.

Xcel is not prohibiting customers from going to several different solar developers to buy community solar power, added Chandarana.

Since the community solar law only allows a customer to buy 40 percent of the power from a solar garden the result may be larger customers having to work with more than one developer to fulfill their renewable energy needs.

Developers are disappointed with Xcel’s response and believed the matter of co-located 1 MW projects had been settled. Dustin Denison, board chair of Minnesota Solar Energy Industries Association (MnSEIA), said the filing shows Xcel’s “defiance of the PUC and defiance of state statute…this is their third or fourth attempt to stop a train that has left the station.”

Denison believes that by creating uncertainty in the program, development may cease next year over concerns that Congress might not extend an important solar investment tax credit that has helped grow the industry.

David Amster-Olszewski, CEO and founder of Sunshare, believes the PUC has said clearly in the past that the program should move forward and allow for co-located 1 MW gardens from a single developer.

He sees the “unilateral” move as “a pretty strong stance for the company” and believes many of the larger proposed co-located sites will never be built. Instead, he sees Xcel’s effort as a negotiating position that may lead a different cap on co-location.

“It’s like when they ask for a 10 percent rate increase and then they settle with a five percent rate increase,” he said.

In a prepared statement, Minnesota Community Solar’s cofounder Peter Teigland “applauded” Xcel’s commitment to solar energy while pointing to a PUC ruling last year allowing for co-located 1 MW gardens.

“Doing so takes advantage of shared infrastructure and drives down prices for consumers,” he said. “We are puzzled that Xcel would re-open this settled issue.”

The problem of co-located sites

Xcel argues utility-scale community solar is too costly. Xcel pays roughly twice as much for power generated by community solar gardens as compared with typical utility-scale projects, said Laura McCarten, regional vice president.

“Those costs are paid completely by our customers,” she said, and could potentially increase ratepayers’ bills by 1 or 1.5 percent.

John Farrell, one of the architects of the community solar law and a policy expert at the Institute for Local Self-Reliance, said Xcel may have a point.

“Is the compensation price right?” he asked. “The compensation level might not be right but their solution is a hammer blow to community solar.”

Xcel chose not to use the Value of Solar, which may have potentially offered a more fair price, he said.

“I don’t understand why they are not using the solution we have provided them,” he said. “But I don’t think they have a lot of statutory basis for this argument…it’s an argument over potential revenue loss.”

Farrell adds the conversation should be whether Xcel is overpaying to community solar developers. The solution should not be reducing the program by more than 80 percent, he said.

Xcel’s move comes after announcements by solar developers that large customers such as Ecolab, Inc. and Macalester College would be offsetting their entire energy consumption through solar gardens.

The utility promised to refund money spent by developers on additional costs incurred during the submission of applications that are no longer valid under the 1 MW mandate.

Under its plan, a developer’s first eligible project could advance and other submissions at the same site would be rejected.  All fees for additional co-located submissions would be refunded.

Developers have applauded Xcel’s record on solar energy in general. Chandarana pointed out the utility plans to add 2,400 MW of solar in the future, including 700 MW of distributed solar on rooftops and community gardens.

The Institute for Local Self-Reliance is a member of RE-AMP, which publishes Midwest Energy News.

State lawmakers attempt to conceal legislative records in SB 528 conference committee

Posted by Laura Arnold  /   April 28, 2015  /   Posted in 2015 Indiana General Assembly  /   No Comments

02_INorgday_111814.jpg

April 28, 2015 1:34 PM

Bill concealing legislative records from public scrapped

Niki Kelly, The Journal Gazette

INDIANAPOLIS - A last-second attempt to conceal legislative records from the public hit a wall Tuesday morning.

A conference committee hearing had been called for Senate Bill 528 - a bill about public records. Legislative leaders were considering adding language to officially exempt legislative calls and emails.

The move is related to a recent lawsuit filed against the Indiana House, and multiple opinions by the Indiana Public Access Counselor that the General Assembly must follow the state public records law.

But the Tuesday meeting was scrapped.

"Ultimately I thought it was inadvisable to put legislation together at the last second despite the appropriateness of it and the need for it," said Republican House Speaker Brian Bosma. "Probably best not to do it."

Citizens Action Coalition, Common Cause Indiana and the Energy and Policy Institute filed a lawsuit earlier this month in Marion County against the Indiana House Republican Caucus and State Rep. Eric Koch, R-Bedford, for violating the Indiana Access to Public Records Act.

According to a press release, the groups are asking the court to declare that Koch and the caucus are subject to the state open records law, which the GOP legislators have denied, and to order disclosure of correspondence between Rep. Koch and utility companies regarding solar energy issues.

Both the House and Senate have long held that they aren't subject to the public records law though there isn't a specific exemption in the law. Judges have been hesitant in the past to step into legislative affairs due to the separation of powers.

"As Indiana Public Access Counselor, I humbly and respectfully request the caucus reconsider its position on the blanket inapplicability of the Access to Public Records Act and treat public records requests in a manner consistent with the spirit of transparency and openness," the April PAC ruling said.

He said the caucus could define their own work product as an exception to the law.

"I implore the General Assembly to be judicious in deciding what to withhold and what to release," the ruling said. "It indeed requires a delicate balance, but the scales should favor transparency.

Effort to withhold state legislative records stalls

A last-minute push to protect state lawmakers from having to disclose public records, including their emails and other documents, has stalled, but is likely to resurface next year.

Senate and House lawmakers had scheduled a conference committee for Tuesday morning to consider a measure that would have specifically exempted their exchanges from public disclosure. But the meeting was cancelled at the last minute Tuesday morning.

House Speaker Brian Bosma, whose lawyers are fighting off a challenge from a Washington-based environmental group, said the protection is needed, but will probably have to wait.

"Ultimately I thought it was inadvisable for us to put legislation together at the last second, despite the appropriateness of it and the need for it," he said Tuesday.

Lawmakers are a little more than 24 hours from wrapping up work on their 2015 legislative session. The issue of access to public records arose earlier in the session when the Energy and Policy Institute sought emails between House Energy Chairman Eric Koch, R-Bedford, and Duke Energy regarding solar energy legislation.

Bosma's staff flatly refused the request, citing a 1993 court case that allegedly exempted all state lawmakers from the state's public records laws. But Indiana's public access counselor, who is appointed by the governor to interpret state open records laws, determined at the time that lawmakers, along with other public agencies, are still subject to the law.

"It is the opinion of the public access counselor the Indiana General Assembly is subject to the Access to Public Records Act," Public Access Counselor Luke Britt wrote in the conclusion of his March 6 opinion.

But because the opinion's are only advisory, and not enforceable, Bosma's staff replied that they would still not release the emails. Specifically, Bosma's chief counsel, Jill Carnell, argued that a pair of Indiana Supreme Court cases left the decision solely up to the General Assembly, as to whether disclose.

"For all of these reasons, the Indiana Access to Public Records (in the Indiana Code 5-14-3) does not apply to the Indiana General Assembly," Carnell wrote in a March 16 reply.

A month later, the Energy Policy Institute and a pair of local liberal watchdog groups -- Common Cause of Indiana and The Citizen Action Coalition -- filed suit against the Indiana House in Marion County Superior Court.

Copyright 2013 IndianaDG