IURC Offers New Opportunities for Renewable Energy; Hoosiers to benefit from significant regulatory changes

Posted by Laura Arnold  /   July 21, 2011  /   Posted in Feed-in Tariffs (FiT), IPL Rate REP, Northern Indiana Public Service Company (NIPSCO), Voluntary Clean Energy Portfolio Standard Program  /   No Comments

IURC News Release

Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission

101 W. Washington St.

Suite 1500 E.

Indianapolis, IN 46204

For Immediate Release

July 20, 2011

Contact Information:

Danielle McGrath

Office: (317) 232-2297

E-mail: dmcgrath@urc.in.gov

INDIANAPOLIS – The Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission (IURC) recently created new opportunities for Hoosiers wishing to generate their own power by dramatically expanding Indiana’s net metering rule.

After seeking public input around the state on the existing net metering rule, the IURC initiated a formal rulemaking and drafted a new rule that makes it easier for consumers to take advantage of the service offering. This initiative stemmed from proposed legislation during the 2010 legislative session.

Net metering is a service offering that allows participants to supplement their electric usage and mitigate a portion of their cost by installing renewable energy facilities, such as wind turbines or solar panels. If the amount the customer received from the utility is less than the amount delivered to the utility, the customer receives a credit on the next bill for the difference. The net metering rule applies to all jurisdictional investor-owned electric utilities.

“By holding public meetings, the IURC heard concerns about the existing rule,” said Commissioner Carolene Mays, the presiding officer over the rulemaking. “It was clear the rule could be improved so that more Hoosiers could participate and take advantage of its benefits.”

Significant changes stemming from the rulemaking include:

1)      A 9900 percent increase in the maximum size of an eligible facility from 10 kilowatts to 1 megawatt;

2)      Expanded eligibility to all customer classes (industrial, commercial, and residential) from just K-12 schools and residential customers; and

3)      A 900 percent increase in the aggregate sales level under each utility’s net metering tariff from 0.1 percent to 1 percent of annual kilowatt hour sales.

“The new net metering rule will stimulate growth within the renewable industry and make it a more attractive option for those who wish to use renewable energy in their own backyards,” said Commissioner Mays.

The Commission traveled to Indianapolis, Ellettsville, and South Bend in early 2010 and initiated the formal rulemaking process last fall. The effective date of the rule was July 13, 2011. To view the revised rule, please refer to 170 IAC 4‐4.2, which can be found by clicking here.

Other renewable energy initiatives before the IURC include feed-in tariffs and a Voluntary Clean Energy Portfolio Standard Program (P.L. 150-2011), which was passed during the last legislative session.

Feed-in tariffs allow larger producers to be compensated for the electricity they produce, an amount that varies based on the type of renewable energy. Indianapolis Power and Light (IPL) was the first utility to launch a pilot program, under Cause No. 43960. IPL has since filed another petition to revise the terms of the program. Northern Indiana Public Service Company’s feed-in tariff pilot program was recently approved on July 13, 2011, under Cause No. 43922. It is the second utility to file a petition with the IURC.

The IURC initiated a formal rulemaking for Indiana’s Voluntary Clean Energy Portfolio Standard Program. The program is designed so that a participating utility is to reach a clean energy target of 10 percent of the total electricity supplied to Indiana retail electric customers in the 2010 base year by December 31, 2025. Interim targets are to be met and maintained by January 1, 2013 through 2018 of an average of at least 4 percent and January 1, 2019 through 2024 of an average of at least of 7 percent. The IURC will accept initial written comments until August 15, 2011.

###

The Commission is a fact-finding body that hears evidence in cases filed before it and makes decisions based on the evidence presented in those cases. An advocate of neither the public nor the utilities, the IURC is required by state statute to make decisions that balance the interests of all parties to ensure the utilities provide adequate and reliable service at reasonable prices.

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

Danielle McGrath

Manager of External Communications

Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission

101 West Washington Street, Suite 1500 East

Indianapolis, IN  46204

Tel:        317-232-2297

E-mail:  dmcgrath@urc.in.gov

AEP Shelves Ambitious Plan to Limit Carbon

Posted by Laura Arnold  /   July 18, 2011  /   Posted in Uncategorized  /   No Comments
Dear Readers:
It is not clear to me yet what the impact of this action will have on Indiana. American Electric Power (AEP) is the parent company for Indiana Michigan Power (I&M). What is clear is that the future of renewable energy and distributed generation is linked to the success or failure of technologies such as carbon capture from existing power plants. FYI, clean coal technology would qualify under Indiana's new Voluntary Clean Energy Portfolio Standard program created by Seante Enrolled Act (S.E.A.) 251.
What do you think this means?
Laura Ann Arnold
July 13, 2011

By and

WASHINGTON — A major American utility is shelving the nation’s most prominent effort to capture carbon dioxide from an existing coal-burning power plant, dealing a severe blow to efforts to rein in emissions responsible for global warming.

American Electric Power has decided to table plans to build a full-scale carbon-capture plant at Mountaineer, a 31-year-old coal-fired plant in West Virginia, where the company has successfully captured and buried carbon dioxide in a small pilot program for two years.

The technology had been heralded as the quickest solution to help the coal industry weather tougher federal limits on greenhouse gas emissions. But Congressional inaction on climate change diminished the incentives that had spurred A.E.P. to take the leap.

Company officials, who plan an announcement on Thursday, said they were dropping the larger, $668 million project because they did not believe state regulators would let the company recover its costs by charging customers, thus leaving it no compelling regulatory or business reason to continue the program.

The federal Department of Energy had pledged to cover half the cost, but A.E.P. said it was unwilling to spend the remainder in a political climate that had changed strikingly since it began the project.

“We are placing the project on hold until economic and policy conditions create a viable path forward,” said Michael G. Morris, chairman of American Electric Power, based in Columbus, Ohio, one of the largest operators of coal-fired generating plants in the United States. He said his company and other coal-burning utilities were caught in a quandary: they need to develop carbon-capture technology to meet any future greenhouse-gas emissions rules, but they cannot afford the projects without federal standards that will require them to act and will persuade the states to allow reimbursement.

The decision could set back for years efforts to learn how best to capture carbon emissions that result from burning fossil fuels and then inject them deep under-ground to keep them from accumulating in the atmosphere and heating the planet. The procedure, formally known as carbon capture and sequestration or C.C.S., offers the best current technology for taming greenhouse-gas emissions from traditional fuels burned at existing plants.

The abandonment of the A.E.P. plant comes in response to a string of reversals for federal climate change policy. President Obama spent his first year in office pushing a goal of an 80 percent reduction in climate-altering emissions by 2050, a target that could be met only with widespread adoption of carbon-capture and storage at coal plants around the country. The administration’s stimulus package provided billions of dollars to speed development of the technology; the climate change bill passed by the House in 2009 would have provided tens of billions of dollars in additional incentives for what industry calls “clean coal.”

But all such efforts collapsed last year with the Republican takeover of the House and the continuing softness in the economy, which killed any appetite for far-reaching environmental measures.

A senior Obama administration official said that the A.E.P. decision was a direct result of the political stalemate.

“This is what happens when you don’t get a climate bill,” the official said, insisting on anonymity to discuss a corporate decision that had not yet been publicly announced.

At the Energy Department, Charles McConnell, the acting assistant secretary of energy for fossil energy, said no carbon legislation was near and unless there was a place to sell the carbon dioxide, utilities would have great difficulties in justifying the expense. “You could have the debate all day long about whether people are enlightened about whether carbon dioxide should be sequestered,” he said. But, he added, “it’s not a situation that is going to promote investment.”

His department has pledged more than $3 billion to other industrial plants to encourage the capture of carbon dioxide for sale to oil drillers, who use it to more easily get crude out of wells.

The West Virginia project was one of the most advanced and successful in the world. “While the coal industry’s commitment and ability to develop this technology on a large scale was always uncertain, the continued pollution from old-style, coal-fired power plants will certainly be damaging to the environment without the installation of carbon capture and other pollution control updates,” said Representative Edward J. Markey, Democrat of Massachusetts, co-author of the House climate bill. “A.E.P., the American coal industry and the Republicans who blocked help for this technology have done our economy and energy workers a disservice by likely ceding the development of carbon-capture technology to countries like China.”

A.E.P., which serves five million customers in 11 states, operated a pilot-scale capture plant at its Mountaineer generating station in New Haven, W.Va., on the Ohio River, from 2009 until May of this year. But the company plans to announce on Thursday that it will complete early engineering studies and then will suspend the project indefinitely.

Public service commissions of both West Virginia and Virginia turned down the company’s request for full reimbursement for the pilot plant. West Virginia said earlier this year that the cost should have been shared among all the states where A.E.P. does business; Virginia hinted last July that it should have been paid for by all utilities around the United States, since a successful project would benefit all of them.

Five years ago, when global warming ranked higher on the national political agenda, the consensus was that this decade would be one of research and demonstration in new technologies. A comprehensive 2007 study by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology concluded that global coal use was inevitable and that the ensuing few years should be used to quickly find ways to burn the cheap, abundant fuel cleanly. But with the demise of the Mountaineer project, the United States, the largest historic emitter of global warming gases, now appears to have made little progress solving the problem.

Robert H. Socolow, an engineering professor at Princeton and the co-director of the Carbon Mitigation Initiative there, said he was encouraged that some chemical factories and other industries were working on carbon capture without government incentives.

Mr. Socolow, the co-author of an influential 2004 paper that identified carbon capture as one of the critical technologies needed to slow global warming, said that there was a trap ahead. “Lull yourself into believing that there is no climate problem, or that there is lots of time to fix it, and the policy driver dissolves,” he said in an e-mail. He added that for companies like A.E.P., “business wants to be ahead of the curve, but not a lap ahead.”

 

New PACE Bill to be Introduced in US Congress to Fix FHFA Problems; Will Fix Help Us to Get Indiana PACE Program?

Posted by Laura Arnold  /   July 14, 2011  /   Posted in Uncategorized  /   No Comments

Dear Readers:

Here is a message we just received from Adam Browning with Vote Solar. Although IDEA doesn't always agree with everything that Vote Solar does, e.g. their less than enthusiastic support for feed-in tariffs, we do support these efforts to get PACE programs around the country back on track.

Here in Indiana, efforts to enact a PACE-like program in Indiana were derailed during the 2011 session of the Indiana General Assembly. Neither SB 260 introduced by Sen. Jim Merritt (R-Indianapolis) nor HB 1457 introduced by Rep. Tim Neese (R-Elkhart) --both proposing to create clean energy finance districts--passed during the 2011 session.

Perhaps introduction of this legislation will re-energize the discussion about an Indiana PACE program.

Laura Ann Arnold

Friends-

We are writing with good news.  Remember PACE, the innovative energy financing program that ran into a roadblock because of objections by the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA)? Well, next week legislation will be introduced in Congress to fix the situation.

TAKE ACTION.

The "PACE Assessment Protection Act of 2011," to be introduced imminently by Congresspersons Nan Hayworth, Daniel Lungren and Mike Thompson (bi-partisan!), addresses potential concerns by establishing strict underwriting criteria and lender protections.  It guarantees that PACE assessments will only be allowed for credit-worthy participants, and that improvements must be revenue positive.  Details here.

In return, FHFA and other federal agencies simply have to back off, and let the 27 states that have passed enabling legislation for PACE programs get to work reducing energy use, saving homeowners money, and creating jobs.  Seems like a fair deal.

We know that the program works: jurisdictions with PACE programs report higher construction and green job activity (Links here, here (pdf), and here)

And of the 2,565 homes with PACE assessments currently in place around the country, we know of only 2 defaults.  That's 1/30th of the national average default rate--which is to be expected, as PACE lowers the cost of living, and puts homeowner in a better financial position.  The irony is that PACE saves FHFA money, too.

This bill doesn't cost money, doesn't impose any government mandates, or touch non-participants' taxes.

The bill does restore states rights, does leverage private capital, and puts America to work saving homeowners money.

What's not to like?  Let's pass this sucker: stop reading this email, and get on the horn to ask your representative to be a co-sponsor.

TAKE ACTION NOW.

While this is helpful for solar, it will do a lot for energy efficiency too, and energy efficiency is no joke.

Onwards-
Adam + Team
The Vote Solar Initiative
300 Brannan Street, Suite 609
San Francisco, CA 94107
www.votesolar.org
http://twitter.com/votesolar

IURC schedules meeting to kick-off rulemaking to implement Indiana Voluntary Clean Energy Portfolio Standard program created by P.L. 150-2011 or SEA 251

Posted by Laura Arnold  /   June 30, 2011  /   Posted in Uncategorized, Voluntary Clean Energy Portfolio Standard Program  /   No Comments

Indiana Distributed Energy Advocates (IDEA) is planning to participate in the rulemaking process intended to implement a new law enacted by the 2011 Indiana General Assembly. IDEA will be forming a Task Force and will work with other groups and organizations with similar interests in renewable energy and distributed generation. State legislators have given the Commission a great deal of latitude in tying up the loose ends and to make sense out of this voluntary approach to encourage Indiana electric utilities to invest in renewable energy resources in the State of Indiana.

Please let me me know if you are interesting in participating and helping with this activity.

The following information was posted on the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission's website on June 28th.

Notice is hereby given that the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission (IURC)  will hold public meetings on the agency's Rulemaking to Establish Indiana's Voluntary Clean

Energy Portfolio Standard Program, IURC RuleMaking #11-05. This rulemaking is in response to P.L. 150-2011 or Senate Enrolled Act (SEA) 251. SECTION 16 of SEA 251

which establishes the Voluntary Clean Energy Portfolio Standard Program, codified at Indiana Code 8-1-37. IC 8-1-37-10 states that the:

"Commission shall adopt rules under IC 4-22-2 to establish the Indiana voluntary clean energy portfolio standard program"

The public meetings will be held at the offices of the Commission located in the IURC Conference Center, Suite 220, National City Center, Judicial Courtroom 222, 101

W. Washington Street, Indianapolis, Indiana on the following dates:

July 8, 2011 at 10:00 a.m. local time (Agenda attached)

October 7,2011 at 10:00 a.m. local time

If an accommodation is required to allow an individual with a disability to participate in this meeting, please contact Danielle McGrath, Manager, External

Communications at (317) 232-2297 at least 48 hours before the meeting.

The meeting notice and agenda can be found at: http://www.in.gov/iurc/files/Public_Notice_6-28.pdf

The next steps after this initial meeting are as follows:

  • Written Comments - Aug. 15,2011.

  •  Strawman Draft Proposed Rule Circulated - Sept. 15, 2011

  •  Next Meeting - Oct. 7, 2011, at 10:00 a.m.

Candidates, show your greener sides; Ask your local candidates for Mayor and City Council about renewable energy

Posted by Laura Arnold  /   June 30, 2011  /   Posted in Uncategorized  /   No Comments

Dear readers: Although this morning's Indianapolis Star editorial talks about the environmental and energy policies of incumbent Republican Mayor Greg Ballard and his Democratic challenger Melina Kennedy, it should serve as a reminder for everyone in Indiana to engage your local candidates for Mayor and City Council to ask them what their views and more importantly their action plan is for renewable energy and distributed generation. Municipal elections in Indiana will take place in November this year.

As the readers of this blog know, renewable energy and distributed generation policies are more than just good for the environment. It's good for economic development and jobs creation as well as national security. Many municipalities still own and operate their own electric utilities. Although many if not most of these municipal electric utilities don't own and operate their own electrical generating plants anymore, it is still fair game to ask municipal candidates what their views are on renewable energy.

Please share with us and our readers your discussions with municipal officials. If your local newspaper writes about energy issues in their coverage of your local upcoming municipal elections this fall, please send us a link and we will share it here on this blog.

You also might want to learn about an organization called, Climate Communities. Climate Communities hosts weekly webinars on best practices and other key energy issues of importance to local governments. There is no charge to attend these weekly webinars. The next free webinar is TODAY ast 2:00 pm EDT.

Upcoming Climate Communities Webinars:
June 30: HUD's Sustainable Communities Regional Planning Grants
July 7: Establishing an Effective Energy Efficiency Revolving Loan Fund
July 14: Utilizing Qualified Energy Conservation Bonds for Residential Retrofits
July 21: Enabling Feed-in Tariffs in Your Community
July 28: Utilizing Performance Contracting to Reduce Energy Consumption and Save Money

Laura Ann Arnold

Indianapolis Star: Candidates, show your greener sides

Original article: http://www.indystar.com/article/20110630/OPINION08/106300357/Candidates-show-your-greener-sides?odyssey=mod|newswell|text|Opinion|p

Jun 30, 2011  

When it comes to environmental health as an election issue, Mayor Greg Ballard has an advantage over challenger Melina Kennedy.

He can truly say he's done more than his predecessor and her former boss, Bart Peterson.

When it comes to improving the physical condition and energy efficiency of one of America's least-green cities, however, he has far more to do than he has to brag about. Unfortunately, she isn't throwing down the gauntlet.

In three major categories of environmental policy where Indy lags behind other major cities, both candidates are distinguished mainly by timidity.

Kennedy does stand out in her call for a comprehensive anti-smoking ordinance, a position Ballard held as a candidate but abandoned as mayor. Many Indiana municipalities, big cities in other states and the majority of state legislatures have enacted such bans in response to overwhelming scientific evidence that they save lives and cut health-care costs on a massive scale. Indiana and Indianapolis legislators sit and squabble.

In two other pressing areas, curbside recycling and funding for mass transit, neither Ballard nor Kennedy will get past the fear of modest tax increases and declare "Yes, it's time." The cost-benefit question has been answered by experience in comparable cities, where mandatory recycling is a fact of life and small local taxes have leveraged federal dollars and financed public transportation systems that dwarf IndyGo. Ballard and Kennedy need to bring that message to the community, rather than fall back on a presumed lack of information or receptivity.

In general, both candidates pledge that making Indy greener will guide mayoral policy in the coming four years. Ballard can assert that he's laid a foundation.

He established the city's Office of Sustainability, oversaw a dramatic increase in bicycle trails and biking awareness, and is retrofitting 61 city buildings for greater efficiency. These and other initiatives have pleased activists for clean air and healthier lifestyles, though they don't see them as nearly enough to boost Indy's low national ranking.

Kennedy says she'd press harder than Ballard has for environmentally conscious techniques and materials to be used by developers. Incentives are given now, but she says a broader vision is needed.

Broad, and bold. The mayoral debate could use more of both on various issues, not the least being the environment. Who knows? Throwing caution to these dirty winds might not be bad strategy.

Copyright 2013 IndianaDG