Author Archives Laura Arnold

IndianaDG 2012 in review; Please support our activities in 2013 and share this with others to increase our impact

Posted by Laura Arnold  /   December 31, 2012  /   Posted in Uncategorized  /   No Comments

Dear IndianaDG Readers:

Happy New Year and thank you for subscribing or regularly visiting this blog to find content informing you about important issues and events impacting renewable energy and distributed generation development in Indiana.  IndianaDG provides valuable information including opportunities to shape public policy that you really can't find elsewhere. We can't continue this work though without your both your financial support and participation.

Those of you who have contacted me in the past to get more information know that I can and do provide a wealth of information and insight into the renewable energy and distributed generation market. I know the issues,  I know the players and I know how to help you to participate.

I sincerely hope that you will join and financially support the efforts of Indiana Distributed Energy Alliance in the coming year.

If you only read this blog then you are really only getting part of the story. Some information is only shared with members and financial supporters of IndianaDG.

JOIN TODAY > 2013 IndianaDG Membership Application

Thank you! Watch for changes and improvements in this blog next year and don't forget to send us information about what you are doing to report here.

Laura Ann Arnold

P.S. Please share this blog with others!

-------------------------------------------------

The WordPress.com stats helper monkeys prepared a 2012 annual report for this blog.

Here's an excerpt:

4,329 films were submitted to the 2012 Cannes Film Festival. This blog had 25,000 views in 2012. If each view were a film, this blog would power 6 Film Festivals

Click here to see the complete report.

Expiring Federal Wind Production Tax Credit (PTC) could impact NW Indiana businesses

Posted by Laura Arnold  /   December 29, 2012  /   Posted in Uncategorized  /   No Comments

Original article: Expiring tax credit could impact local business

 By Matt Fritz, Staff writer, 1-866-362-2167 Ext. 13887, mfritz@heraldargus.com
Published: Thursday, December 27, 2012 5:05 PM CST
La PORTE — Whether some Indiana and La Porte businesses continue to succeed in the coming years depends on the renewal of a particular tax credit for smart energy, said Donn Pendergrass, a representative for wind industry manufacturing workers at ATI Casting in La Porte.Pendergrass, along with other industry workers from Pennsylvania and Indiana, met with lawmakers in Washington, D.C. about the expiring Production Tax Credit (PTC) for wind energy.The PTC, a 2.2 cent-per-kilowatt tax credit for the production of electricity from utility scale wind turbines, has been allowed to expire in the past, with dire results to industries, Pendergrass noted.

He knows from experience. Back in 2006 he worked at the RMG foundry in Mishawaka, a business that at one point boasted 1,200 employees. He said the failure of the tax credit to renew on time, and for a long enough period of time, helped lead to the foundry's closure.

Now with it up for renewal again he is hoping for it to get at least three years. He fears if it passes that it might only get one."By the time you get your orders in and get those orders fulfilled you need more than one year," he said. "You need three to get up and running for orders, for designing new blades."Anytime there is a change in the design you have to make some modification," he continued. "And they take time. And my concern is in getting more or less a three to five year period to get it off and running."

He pointed out that ATI Casting Services in La Porte once employed 500 workers in a business that produced three castings per day. Now it makes no castings for wind turbines and employs less than 100.

He said the biggest round of layoffs for that company was 350 workers. If the credits are renewed in time, he said many of them could possibly get their jobs back.

The president of the 1191 Amalgamated Local Steel Workers union, Pendergrass said wind energy is a burgeoning business and the credits are needed to help it grow and expand. He said wind energy is profitable. And with its current business, he said Indiana could be in the forefront of the industry.

But one of the issues holding the bill back is the talk of the deficit and the fiscal cliff in capital hill

"They speak of adding to the deficit and the fiscal cliff and this and that," he said, "but working people are the ones that spend the money and put it back into the system so it can work."

He said he is hoping it passes after the first of the year.

‘Net-zero’ school pays off; Richardsville Elementary setting std with its electricity generation; Morton Solar installs KY school PV

Posted by Laura Arnold  /   December 28, 2012  /   Posted in Uncategorized  /   No Comments

Dear IndianaDG Readers:

Congratulations to Brad Morton with Morton Solar, LLC of Evansville for your contribution to this project.

From Morton Solar:

The Bowling Green Daily News featured this article on the front page of their newspaper on Sunday December 22nd. Morton Solar was the installer of the photovoltaic system that has "exceeded expectations" according to the article. "The district received a check for $37,227.31 this year."

Morton Solar is very proud to be part of this project!!!

This TVA program has been revised since this project but you can learn more about it at:

http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=KY01F&re=0&ee=0

Laura Ann Arnold

P.S. Brad Morton and Morton Solar, LLC are members of Indiana Distributed Energy Alliance and the Indiana Renewable Energy Association.

-----------------------------------------

Posted: Sunday, December 23, 2012 2:00 am | Updated: 9:20 pm, Sat Dec 22, 2012.

By CHUCK MASON The Daily News cmason@bgdailynews.com/783-3262 |1 comment

There’s no big smokestack. You also don’t see a bunch of workers scurrying around in hard hats. Rest assured though, Warren County Public Schools has a power plant.

The district received a check for $37,227.31 this year. The Tennessee Valley Authority paid the school district for electricity it generated. The school district doesn’t have a power plant, per se, like the utility company. But it does have an energy producer, the first “net-zero” school in the nation: Richardsville Elementary School.

The check is tangible evidence that net-zero pays for itself and then some.

“It has exceeded expectations. We’re seeing a savings of millions of dollars in energy costs,” state Rep. Jim DeCesare, R-Bowling Green, said of the net-zero schools concept developing across the nation.

In talking this past week with officials from the nation’s capital to the Pacific Northwest, they agree Richardsville Elementary is still the only major school building in the United States that is not only net-zero, but that also actually earns money from its electricity generation.

“That’s net-positive,” said Paul Hutton of Hutton Architecture Studio, a member of Cuningham Group Architecture Inc. in Denver.

Hutton has worked with “green schools” since 1982. Green schools have environmentally friendly features. Hutton said it is good that Warren County has been able to work with the TVA on energy generation, and that’s a benefit to local schools. In other parts of the country, a utility wouldn’t send an actual check to a school district for electricity generation by a school’s solar panels, he said.

The $12.1 million, 550-student, 77,466-square-foot Richardsville school generates as much clean energy with solar panels as it consumes in natural energy. The development of schools that generate more energy than they use is turning heads in the public school construction business, according to Kenny Stanfield, architect for Sherman, Carter, Barnhart of Louisville.

“That opens up some eyes,” Stanfield said. He has been a national leader in design of the net-zero schools. Stanfield holds up Richardsville to an energy conscious nation as the model of energy efficiency.

“It is the icon of the green schools movement,” Nathaniel Allen, schools advocacy lead for the Center for Green Schools at the U.S. Green Building Council in Washington, D.C., said of Richardsville Elementary.

There are an estimated 99,000 public schools and 34,000 private schools, and while there has been a growth in the number of environmentally friendly schools over the last several years, there is still work to do, Allen said.

The White House, the federal Environmental Protection Agency and the federal Department of Education have worked together in recent years on a program called Green Ribbon Schools to reward districts that take energy conservation seriously.

“The speed that this effort came together is incredible,” Allen said. “This is one issue where everyone agrees.”

While many school buildings are opening each fall, the net-zero variety remains a Kentucky phenomenon.

“We don’t have them yet,” John Weekes, an architect for IBI Group Architects of Portland, Ore., said about net-zero schools in the Pacific Northwest. “A lot of them are moving toward that area.”

Valley View Middle School in Snohmish, Wash., north of Seattle, opened this fall, Weekes said. The 140,000-square-foot middle school was $5 million under budget, but school officials decided not to exercise the alternate bid on solar panels to make it a net-zero school, the architect said.

Richardsville Elementary operates on an energy use of 18.2 kilo BTUs per square foot per year. BTUs are British Thermal Units, a standard measure of energy. The federal government standard to be termed a net-zero school is 25 kilo BTUs or less per square foot per year, Stanfield said. Both Bristow Elementary, at 19.7 kilo BTUs per square foot per year, and Jody Richards Elementary, at 25 kilo BTUs per square foot per year, are considered “net-zero ready,” at the cusp of where Richardsville is now.

Valley View Middle School in Washington has an energy rating of 24 kilo BTUs per square foot per year, Weekes said.

Net-zero schools are the “hot trend” in public building construction, Hutton said. “It’s one thing to say it, and another thing to verify it,” Hutton said.

The national average use of energy is 73 kilo BTUs per square foot per year, according to information provided in literature about Richardsville Elementary. Bristow and Jody Richards elementary schools don’t have solar panels installed yet, so they remain net-zero ready.

Stanfield said that when a school generates enough electricity to earn income, as Richardsville Elementary has for the Warren County district, it turns an old axiom in school finance on its head: Paying for the school utility bills is a given expense.

“School districts just accepted the fact that they were going to have to pay utility bills,” Stanfield said. “Other counties are noticing the energy savings in Warren County. Now we are able to show some real results, real numbers, that (net-zero) works.”

In the case of Richardsville Elementary, which continues to receive laudatory reviews in national publications such as Parade and Forbes magazines, the just over $37,000 payment from the TVA is placed in a separate account to eventually pay for replacement of the solar panels at Richardsville when they wear out, school district spokeswoman Joanie Hendricks said.

There are some public school buildings that are net-zero, but they aren’t complete schools, Stanfield said. Weekes is aware of some structures on public school campuses that are net-zero, such as gymnasiums.

Besides Warren County’s two net-zero ready schools, there is the 70,000-square-foot Flaherty Primary Center in Meade County, near Fort Knox; and, the 60,000-square-foot Ezra Sparrow Early Childhood Center in Anderson County that are net-zero ready, Stanfield said. Currently under design are schools in Spencer County and in the Bardstown Independent School District that are designed to be net-zero ready, Stanfield said.

“I don’t think you can open a trade magazine now without seeing net-zero,” he said.

Stanfield recently fielded calls from the Ministry of Education in New Zealand and the Wilson Center in Washington, D.C., about the Richardsville story. He said he figured after the Richardsville school opened, the inquiries about the concept would lessen. Instead, they have accelerated.

Allen said Richardsville “is a most amazing place,” not only because of its energy savings but also because the students know all about the school and its complicated heating and energy systems. Other schools across America are getting closer to the Richardsville standard, but they haven’t generated their own electricity for payment, Allen said. “And they (Warren County) were able to do that without spending extra money,” he said.

Another public school energy savings strategy pursued is the Energy Star rating found in T.C. Cherry and Parker-Bennett-Curry elementary schools in Bowling Green Independent Schools, according to Rickey Shive, district facilities manager.

Energy Star rating is also planned for the new Dishman-McGinnis Elementary School. Energy Star requires a year’s worth of data to qualify. It definitely makes a difference, Shive said.

For example, the old T.C. Cherry Elementary consumed twice as much energy as the new T.C. Cherry Elementary does.

Under Energy Star, a portfolio is put together that contains information on everything from the building materials used in the school’s construction to the lighting systems, Shive said.

“Energy use is the key factor,” Shive said.

A release from Kentucky Lt. Gov. Jerry Abramson noted that five schools in the Warren County district had been added to seven other schools statewide marking Energy Star designation. Abramson said the schools are among the top 5 percent in the nation for energy efficiency. Richardsville joins Warren East Middle, Oakland Elementary, Plano Elementary and Cumberland Trace on the list of Energy Star schools in Kentucky. There are now 160 schools on the list.

Weekes said people in the Pacific Northwest have been successful in building small net-zero projects in public buildings, but none is as large as Richardsville Elementary.

“This (Richardsville) is an important story in the educational environment with restrained resources. You can save enough money to buy a teacher,” Weekes said.

“The trend toward net-zero schools has been aided by the downturn of the economy,” Hutton said. Since 2008, with building materials costs lessening, builders sharpening their pencils to fine points to land desperately needed construction jobs and the world economy playing a role in the construction slowdown, the cost of outfitting a net-zero school is assumable, the architect said.

“If we experience an upsurge (in the economy), then there will be tough challenges toward making net-zero schools. When push comes to shove, what will those who are in control of educational budgets choose?” he asked.

One blueprint that has been developed are goals set by America’s architects through Architects International to make all new buildings net-zero by 2030.

“That’s just 17 years from now. We need to get busy,” Hutton said.

IndyStar: Duke Energy Indiana customers owe $2.5 billion-plus for Edwardsport plant

Posted by Laura Arnold  /   December 28, 2012  /   Posted in Edwardsport IGCC Plant, Office of Utility Consumer Counselor (OUCC), Uncategorized  /   No Comments

Dear IndianaDG Readers:

The story about the IURC order on Duke Energy Indiana's Edwardsport IGCC  plant was the front page banner story in this morning's Indianapolis Star print edition. At the end of the article is a summary of the timeline of events. This matter is not over since it is anticipated that parties such as Citizens Action Coalition of Indiana et al., that were intervenors that did not sign the proposed settlement agreement are expected to appeal the IURC decision.

For additional perspectives on this matter please also see:

Remember, you can read the IURC order in its entirety HERE> Order_in_Cause_No_43114_IGCC_4_S1(1)
Laura Ann Arnold
Duke Energy coal gasification power plant, Edwardsport, Ind.

Duke Energy coal gasification power plant, Edwardsport, Ind.

8:31 PM, Dec 27, 2012 Written by John Russell

Follow Indianapolis Star reporter John Russell on Twitter at @johnrussell99 or call him at (317) 444-6283.

Finally, after years of legal fighting, it’s official: Duke Energy Corp.and its 790,000 Indiana customers will split the $3.5 billion cost of the Edwardsport power plant — one of the largest, most expensive and most disputed construction projects in Indiana history.

But it’s not an even split, and how much each side will have to pay is likely to produce some grumbling.

The Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission ruled Thursday that Duke Energy must swallow about $900 million for the plant, which in 2010 became enveloped in an ethics cloud involving a revolving door between the regulatory commission’s staff and the utility’s ranks.

The commission ruled that Duke should have managed the project more prudently and that it failed to hold its contractors accountable in allowing costs to spiral from the original estimate of $1.985 billion.

“We do not find it reasonable for ratepayers to pay for the imprudent actions of Duke’s contractors,” the ruling said.

But the commission ruled that the 618-megawatt plant ias necessary to meet the future energy needs of Indiana. It said customers must pay the bulk of construction costs: $2.595 billion, plus millions of dollars in financing costs.

Duke said the ruling will result in customers’ bills climbing 14 percent to 16 percent. Of that, a 5 percent rise already has taken place. The remainder will occur in two steps: Customers will see a rate hike of 3 percent to 4 percent in January, and two other hikes totaling 6 percent to 7 percent by early 2014.

The company said construction of the huge plant, near Vincennes, is nearly complete. It expects to put the plant into commercial operation by the middle of next year. Already, it has produced its first electricity from gasified coal during start-up and testing. The plant uses a coal-gasification technology to turn coal into electricity.

The ruling “allows us to focus on bringing into service a plant that will help us meet increasingly strict federal environmental regulations while still using an abundant local resource, Indiana coal,” Duke Energy said in a statement.

The IURC said that if Duke recovers any additional funds through litigation, the surplus must be returned to customers. Duke has strongly hinted it would take its contractors to court for engineering and construction problems.

The commission also directed Duke to credit customers for certain incentive payments that were found to be unwarranted “given the delays that arose from the project cost overruns.”

And in a major victory for the utility, the commission found that Duke did not commit fraud, concealment or gross mismanagement with the project. Those charges were leveled by several customer and citizens groups and resulted in months of public hearings.

In large part, Thursday’s ruling reflects a new settlement that Duke reached with its largest customers and the Indiana Office of Utility Consumer Counselor in April. The agreement and ruling apparently end more than two years of uncertainty and bitter fighting among those organizations over who should pay for a string of huge cost overruns.

The deal replaces an earlier agreement, reached in 2010, that had called for customers to pay about $2.9 billion of the plant’s costs. That settlement fell apart after The Indianapolis Star revealed secret meetings and conversations between state regulators and Duke executives stretching back several years.

David Stippler, the state’s consumer counselor, said Thursday the ruling means that more than $835 million in construction cost overruns will be borne by Duke, not its customers.

“At the same time, all Hoosiers will benefit from the reliability and stability this project will add to the grid,” Stippler said in a statement.

The agreement did not satisfy everyone. Citizens Action Coalition of Indiana, which has long fought the plant as unnecessary, said customers could have to pay tens of millions of dollars in additional funds for ongoing financing of the plant, which could push their share of the cost to $2.65 billion.

“Customers should not have to pay for any cost overruns which are attributable to imprudence or mismanagement of the project,” said Kerwin Olson, the group’s executive director. His group said it would appeal the ruling to the Indiana Court of Appeals.

The plant came under severe criticism from the outset. Some critics said the technology was unproven and the additional generating capacity wasn’t needed.

Others weighed in after The Star exposed numerous emails and internal documents that showed utility executives had a chummy relationship with some state regulators.

Those revelations cost four high-ranking people their jobs, including David Lott Hardy, former chairman of the regulatory commission, who was fired by Gov. Mitch Daniels in late 2010. Others who lost their jobs were Duke’s No. 2 executive, the company’s former Indiana president and a Duke lawyer named Scott Storms.

The ethics scandal began, in large part, when Storms joined Duke in 2010 from the IURC, where he had been working as a chief administrative law judge. In that role, he oversaw the IURC’s regulation of the Edwardsport project while negotiating for a job with utility.

Duke said Thursday it looked forward to getting the controversy behind it and getting the plant in operation.

“Edwardsport will serve the electric energy needs of our Indiana customers for decades to come,” the company said.

TIMELINE OF EVENTS

2010
>> Aug. 31: Duke Energy offered a job to Scott Storms, general counsel for the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission.
>> Sept. 9: The Indiana Ethics Commission ruled that Storms could take the job without a one-year cooling-off period typically required for utility regulators.
>> Sept. 22: Consumer groups, including the Citizens Action Coalition, raised serious concerns about Storms’ hiring and the relationship between utilities and state regulators.
>> Sept. 24: Duke Energy said it would impose stricter limits on Storms’ work for Duke, saying it wouldn’t let him do any work for Duke with the IURC for a year or work internally for Duke on any regulatory cases involving Duke pending with the state.
>> Sept. 27: Storms began working for Duke.
>> Oct. 5: Gov. Mitch Daniels terminated and replaced David Lott Hardy as chairman of the IURC, citing the violation of an ethics policy. As a result, Duke announced it had put its Indiana president, Michael W. Reed, on paid leave as he played a role in hiring Storms away from the IURC. Reed formerly was an IURC executive director.
>> Dec. 9: Under pressure from large industrial customers, Duke agreed to renegotiate an agreement that had customers paying for much of the latest cost overruns at Duke’s coal-gasification plant in Edwardsport.

2011
>> May 12: An ethics panel ruled that Storms violated state law when he participated in cases involving Duke while talking to the utility about a job.
>> June 30: The state’s utility consumer agency withdrew support for a deal with Duke in which ratepayers would shoulder $530 million in extra construction costs for the Edwardsport plant.
>> July 14: The utility consumer agency and Duke’s industrial users called for regulators to force the utility to pay for $1 billion in cost overruns on the Edwardsport plant and not pass those costs on to consumers. The Citizens Action Coalition argued that consumers should pay nothing toward the cost of the plant.
>> Oct. 27: The IURC kicked off weeks of testimony about Duke’s handling of the Edwardsport project.
>> Dec. 9: A Marion County grand jury indicted Hardy on three counts of official misconduct.

2012
>> July 2: Duke Energy agrees to merge with Progress Energy. Hours after gaining regulators’ approval, Duke Energy’s board ousted Progress Energy CEO Bill Johnson, who was supposed to take over the combined company, in favor of Duke Energy CEO Jim Rogers. The deal created the nation’s largest electric company.
>> Nov. 29: Rogers agrees to retire at the end of 2013 as part of a settlement with North Carolina utilities regulators over the July 2 action.
>> Dec. 27: The Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission approves an agreement that would shift $900 million in cost overruns on the Edwardsport plant to Duke.

-- Source: Star archives

Copyright 2013 IndianaDG