Author Archives Laura Arnold

Bill introduced in Ohio Senate would extend freeze on renewable-energy standards

Posted by Laura Arnold  /   April 26, 2016  /   Posted in solar, Uncategorized, wind  /   No Comments

Bill introduced in Ohio Senate would extend freeze on renewable-energy standards

wyandot-solar-farm-osu-extensionjpg-ca1ab2c4fe947f2d_large.jpg

Peter Krouse, cleveland.comBy Peter Krouse, cleveland.com
Email the author | Follow on Twitter
on April 26, 2016 at 8:34 AM, updated April 26, 2016 at 10:11 AM

Ohio Sen. Bill Seitz, a Republican from Cincinnati, introduced a bill on Monday that would extend a freeze on the state's renewable energy standards for another three years.

After lifting the freeze in 2019, Senate Bill 320 would phase in renewable energy goals in three-year increments through 2028. Utilities would be required to obtain 5.5 percent of their energy from renewable sources in 2022, 8.5 percent in 2025 and 11.5 percent in 2028. Starting in 2029, the goal would be 12.5 percent.

If the freeze is allowed to expire, utilities would be required to meet th 12.5 percent goal by 2027.

Seitz said in a telephone interview Monday evening that he expects debate over  Senate Bill 320 to be contentious and that believes the bill will probably pass along partisan lines.

Seitz said an extension of the freeze is necessary because of uncertainty over proposed federal regulations in President Obama's Clean Power Plan, which has been stayed by the U.S. Supreme Court.

He said he wants to make sure mandates in the federal plan are in sync with those of the state.

If it wasn't for the Clean Power Plan, Seitz said, he would not want to see the state's renewable-energy standards frozen any longer.

The renewable-energy standards were first put in place in 2008 during the administration of Democratic Gov. Ted Strickland. They required investor-owned utilities in the state to procure 25 percent of their electricity from alternative energy sources by 2025 with half of that amount coming from renewable sources such as wind and solar power.

The Republican-controlled legislature, however, with the approval of Gov. John Kasich, froze the standards for two years beginning in 2014. They will revert back into place at the end of this year unless the legislature takes action.

Expect opponents of the bill to argue that it would further harm efforts to develop wind and solar power in Ohio and the jobs that go along with the industry.

Harnessing wind and solar power in Ohio

Harnessing wind and solar power in Ohio

Harnessing the wind and sun: Ohio can do better

Seitz floated a draft of Senate Bill 320 prior its being introduced, and 19 companies associated with a group called Ohio Advanced Energy Economy urged the senator to allow the standards to be restored, according to an Associated Press article.

"The legislature has a clear choice. It can create a business-friendly environment to attract investment in advanced energy or Ohio can keep the door shut on billions of dollars of benefits," said Ted Ford, CEO of Ohio Advanced Energy Economy, according to the AP

In freezing the standards in 2014, the legislature also created the Energy Mandates Study Committee, headed by two Ohio Republicans, State Rep. Kristina Roegner and State Sen. Troy Balderson. The committee recommended extending the freeze indefinitely, but Kasich said he would not go for that.

NIPSCO Settlement with Indiana Wind Farms Wins OK from FERC

Posted by Laura Arnold  /   April 26, 2016  /   Posted in Northern Indiana Public Service Company (NIPSCO), Uncategorized  /   No Comments

NIPSCO Settlement with Indiana Wind Farms Wins OK

By Amanda Durish Cook

FERC approved an uncontested partial settlement between Northern Indiana Public Service Co. and the owners of seven Indiana wind farms that contend the utility overcharged them for transmission upgrades.

NIPSCO - FERC - Indiana wind farms - Meadow Lake Wind Farm (Meadow Lake Wind Farm)
Meadow Lake Wind Farm Source: Meadow Lake Wind Farm

The April 21 order (EL14-66-003) resolves issues related to NIPSCO’s 138-kV transmission upgrade funded by the Meadow Lake and Fowler Ridge wind farms. Under the settlement, the utility will pay $400,000 to Meadow Lake and $450,000 to Fowler Ridge to withdraw their complaint.

E.ON Climate & Renewables North America filed the original complaint against NIPSCO in 2014, objecting to the multiplier rate used in two transmission upgrade agreements with its Pioneer Trail and Settlers Trail wind. FERC later that year ruled that the multiplier was unreasonable and instructed the two companies to enter into settlement proceedings to determine a new rate (EL14-66).

Meadow Lake and Fowler Ridge filed a similar action after the ruling, arguing that NIPSCO charged their facilities and seven other wind farms $35.8 million to cover 35 years of operating costs on top of the $50.4 million to build transmission. (See NIPSCO Blows Back at Wind Farm Complaints.)

FERC’s acceptance of the partial settlement also closes out Meadow Lake and Fowler Ridge’s request for rehearing in E.ON’s complaint (EL14-66-002).

Institutional Investors Are Walking Away From Ohio Utility Companies That Insist on Coal

Posted by Laura Arnold  /   April 25, 2016  /   Posted in Uncategorized  /   No Comments
High detailed vector map - Ohio

Institute for Energy Economics & Financial Analysis

Accelerating the transition to a diverse, sustainable and profitable energy economy
April 22, 2016 

Institutional Investors Are Walking Away From Ohio Utility Companies That Insist on Coal

Hundreds of Millions of Dollars in Divestment From One Fund Alone

Utilities in Ohio and West Virginia clinging stubbornly to coal-fired power plants for electricity generation are finding the strategy backfiring in a way they might not have anticipated.

Some of the world’s biggest investors are saying no thank you to enterprises so deeply—and dangerously—attached to coal. They include Norway’s Government Pension Fund Global, or GPFG, which last week announced its first round of divestiture from such holdings. Among the companies on Norway’s divestment list are three utilities operating in Ohio: FirstEnergy, American Electric Power, and AES, the parent company of Dayton Power and Light. Each of them has received or is seeking ratepayer bailouts to keep aging and increasingly costly coal-fired power plants alive, a strategy seen as badly out of step with the times.

The pension fund’s skepticism has now officially cost these utilities hundreds of million of dollars in financial backing. GPFG divested $115 million from stocks and bonds in FirstEnergy, $172 million from stocks and bonds in AEP and its subsidiary Appalachian Power Company, and $46 million from stock in AES.

Big as those numbers are, the full impact of GPFG’s action is even bigger. It is one of the most influential investors in the world, and other institutional investors are following its lead, including German insurance giant Allianz, French insurance company Axa, and huge public pension funds in California and New York.

Collectively, managers at these funds are divesting broadly from coal—GPFG’s model precludes holdings that use coal-fired power to generate 30 percent or more of their electricity and companies that derive 30 percent or more of their income from coal mining.

Managers of these funds, which control hundreds of billions of dollars of wealth, will simply no longer bet on an industry in structural decline.

While Norway’s precedent-setting move is based in part on environmental and moral principals, it is also informed by the reality that coal is the poorest-performing investment sector in the world.  Investors are up against a blunt, hard financial reality that is reflected by some of the largest investment fund in the world having lost confidence in coal.

FIRSTENERGY, AEP, AND DAYTON POWER AND LIGHT HAVE ALL FILED DOCUMENTS WITH THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION SHOWING THAT THEY ARE LOSING MONEY BY RUNNING COAL-FIRED PLANTS THAT CAN’T COMPETE WITH LOWER-COST POWER FROM NATURAL GAS AND RENEWABLES.

Their path for survival involves persuading the PUCO that customers should bail them out and pay extra for power from those plants. Our utility experts here at IEEFA estimate that the FirstEnergy bailout alone will cost Ohioans an extra $4 billion above market prices in the next eight years. The Ohio Consumers’  Counsel has come to a similar conclusion.

The PUCO approved FirstEnergy’s and AEP’s proposals last month, but customers and competitors are currently challenging them at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and will likely also go to the Ohio Supreme Court. Dayton Power and Light is asking the PUCO to approve their proposal by the end of this year.

Both FirstEnergy and AEP have also gone to great lengths in West Virginia to keep their uneconomic coal-fired plants in operation by shifting them from deregulated subsidiaries into the regulated rate base.

This strategy ignores a fact that managers at funds like GPFG grasp: that coal-fired electricity cannot compete and that no profits can be gleaned where none exist.

GPFG’s divestments allow it to reinvest in companies if they change their strategic direction to lessen their reliance on coal-fired power.  GPFG’s simple premise is that diversification of supply of energy for electricity is the most prudent financial and environmentally course to take.

Insistence by Ohio utilities to keep their coal-fired plants running by depending on ratepayer bailouts not only prove s to be a costly burden to customers, but costs the companies too in their inability to  attract and keep institutional investors.

Sandy Buchanan is IEEFA’s executive director.

INSTITUTE FOR ENERGY ECONOMICS AND FINANCIAL ANALYSIS (IEEFA)

Logansport (IN) hires Oregon-based utilities consultant to review wholesale power proposals

Posted by Laura Arnold  /   April 24, 2016  /   Posted in Uncategorized  /   No Comments

City hires utilities consultant

Firm will review wholesale power proposals, help develop master plan

Logansport officials have hired an Oregon-based consultant to examine wholesale power proposals and help plan the future of local utilities.

The Logansport Board of Public Works and Safety approved an agreement with McCullough Research, out of Portland, Oregon, on Wednesday.

Logansport Mayor Dave Kitchell said after the April 20 meeting the firm will work on retainer for the city for $10,000 a year to provide a variety of utilities-related consulting services.

Kitchell and Logansport Deputy Mayor Mercedes Brugh serve on the board of public works and safety.

Brugh said in a statement she expects McCullough Research's analysis to exceed the approach taken by the Logansport Utility Service Board.

"The utility service board hired a law firm to review the wholesale power proposals," she wrote. "I heartily approve this hiring of a rate analyst to compare the proposals, McCullough is an expert on power in the Midwest."

News of McCullough Research's involvement came as a surprise to LMU officials, who hired Indianapolis-based law firm Lewis & Kappes to evaluate the wholesale power proposals.

"I have received no communication asking my opinion nor informing me of the project," LMU Superintendent Paul Hartman said of McCullough Research. "...Lewis & Kappes' scope of work allows them to review the wholesale power proposals from all aspects, including law, engineering, financial, and to hire experts as they see fit."

Logansport Utility Service Board President Dan Slusser said he remains confident in LMU's approach to the proposals, but isn't against McCullough Research's involvement.

"I don't think our board would have any problem with including everybody, including whatever consulting firm is hired, to review whatever Lewis & Kappes' recommendation is," Slusser said.

Duke Energy, Indiana Municipal Power Agency, KenEnergy, Morgan Stanley, NextEra and Southern Company submitted wholesale power proposals earlier this year.

LMU's wholesale power contract with Duke Energy Indiana expires at the end of 2018.

Hartman, Kitchell, Slusser and Logansport City Council President Teresa Popejoy had a conference call with Lewis & Kappes earlier this month. Hartman said at Wednesday night's utility service board meeting that the firm indicated more than one of the proposals meets the community's needs.

McCullough Research will also oversee the creation of a request for proposals for a generating plant, recommend what payments in lieu of taxes LMU should allocate to the city, provide input on rate structures, oversee a request for proposals for a county-wide Wi-Fi system billed through LMU and other services, according to the agreement.

"It's like a comprehensive plan for the utilities," Kitchell said.

McCullough Research worked for the city and LMU in the late 1990s, Kitchell also said. He praised Robert F. McCullough Jr., the firm's managing partner, for his "national perspective" on utilities.

In other news, the utility service board also:

• Heard from Hartman, who said electric rates will go down 0.002018 cents per kilowatt-hour through June now that LMU's power plant has closed. He also said 22 of the roughly 30 generating plant employees accepted LMU's severance offer, resulting in a total of about $1.1 million.

• Unanimously passed a resolution making certain records confidential and excepting them from disclosure.

Reach Mitchell Kirk at mitchell.kirk@pharostribune.com or 574-732-5130


 

More Coverage

Mayor replaces utility board member

LMU sets timeline for power decision

Court decision won't affect local power plant

LMU withdraws 2 plant employee firings

Council reverses utility board decision

LMU, city strive to seek power solution together

Electricity providers address city residents


Logansport utility receives 6 power proposals

Relations weaken between LMU, city

Relations between Logansport utilities and city officials are being tested as they prepare to choose among wholesale power proposals from six firms.

Duke Energy, the Indiana Municipal Power Agency, KenEnergy, Morgan Stanley, NextEra and Southern Company made pitches to provide Logansport Municipal Utilities with its electric needs, according to LMU Superintendent Paul Hartman.

LMU is contracted to receive its electricity from Duke Energy through 2018.

Lewis & Kappes, a law firm LMU hired, is currently vetting the proposals and will be finished with its findings by the middle of May.

In the meantime, utilities and city officials are facing several issues, Logansport Utility Service Board member Jay King said at the board's monthly meeting Tuesday.

He went on to express his disapproval of Jim Brugh, LMU's attorney appointed by Logansport Mayor Dave Kitchell.

"I think it's fair to note that while Jim Brugh sits behind us as an arm of the city's legal office, he's certainly not our attorney and he's made that very clear," King said. "He doesn't answer to us, he doesn't take direction from us, he has no interest in working with Paul [Hartman] in any particular way other than as the direction of the mayor."

The utility service board should get legal advice and legal representation from its attorney, King continued, neither of which he feels Brugh provides.

"I have a lot of respect for Jim and I think he's a good attorney but he has a specific agenda that he has been pushing for the last four years at least and any advice that we receive from his is tainted in that sense," King said.

King went on to call Brugh's comments to Duke Energy representatives at an event in Logansport in January "a gratuitous attack."

At the event, Brugh accused Duke Energy of having "secret conversations" with Hartman.

Brugh has also called for the public release of LMU's contract with the firm, which King said "invites a lawsuit" Tuesday.

"So just so we're all clear, we're all on the same page, we can't trust the advice we get from him and he doesn't represent us when he speaks in public," King said.

Brugh pointed out during King's comments that under "Robert's Rules of Order," which guides the conduction of meetings, "personal statements are out of order."

Brugh reiterated that sentiment in an interview after the meeting.

"People in public positions should keep their personal opinions to themselves," he said. "I'm trained and skilled in law and when a board member does not like my opinion, that opinion from a lay person doesn't mean anything."

He went on to call himself "an employee of the [city's] law department."

"I love this city," Brugh said. "I have the interests of the citizens, of all the consumers."

Kitchell defended Brugh in an interview, calling him a far better legal asset to LMU than the out-of-town lawyers it hired throughout the previous administration.

"It only generated bills, it didn't generate any power," Kitchell said of the hiring of those firms.

King addressed Kitchell in his comments at the meeting as well, accusing him of micromanaging LMU decisions.

Kitchell took issue with that in the interview too.

"I haven't asked for the authority to micromanage contracts like my predecessor," Kitchell said, referring to how the utility service board allowed former Mayor Ted Franklin to negotiate three power plant proposals throughout his term, none of which reached fruition.

King referred to Kitchell's role in reversing the firing of two LMU generating plant employees in February.

"Now I understand it's the charitable thing to do... but the truth of the matter is the two employees in question were hired until the plant closed and they knew it the first day they came to work," King said.

LMU closed its generating plant in January because it couldn't adhere to the latest federal emissions regulations.

Kitchell contested King on that as well.

"The utilities made it clear nobody was going to lose their job until April," he said in the interview.

King also expressed his disagreement with Kitchell's replacement of former utility service board member Mark Hildebrandt.

Kitchell appointed Mike Meagher in Hildebrandt's place last month to boost the board's representation of those who live in LMU's service area outside of Logansport.

While Logansport City Council voted down an ordinance regarding the removal of utility service board members without cause earlier this year, case law in Indiana has set a precedent that permits it.

"I think the board made it clear that our position was board members should only be removed for cause and the city council made it clear that that was their position as well," King said.

Reach Mitchell Kirk at mitchell.kirk@pharostribune.com or 574-732-5130

Indiana Supreme Ct. rules 4-1 in favor of House but says General Assembly subject to APRA

Posted by Laura Arnold  /   April 19, 2016  /   Posted in 2015 Indiana General Assembly, Uncategorized  /   No Comments

 

 Energy and Policy Institute

 

CAC logo

IN 4-1 RULING INDIANA SUPREME COURT RULES IN FAVOR OF

HOUSE; BUT SAYS GENERAL ASSEMBLY SUBJECT TO APRA

 

INDIANAPOLIS – The Indiana Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s order of dismissal in the case of Citizens Action Coalition, et al. v. Indiana House Rep., et al. (Case Number: 49S00-1510-PL-00607). The Indiana Supreme Court concluded that the Indiana Access to Public Records Act (APRA) does apply to the Indiana General Assembly. However, the court has allowed the General Assembly to avoid disclosing the emails to the public based on a word product exemption.

We completely agree with the Indiana Supreme Court's conclusion that the General Assembly is subject to the Access to Public Records Act, and that the trial court erred in holding otherwise --and that is a victory for the citizens of Indiana. However, Justice Rucker is exactly correct that the majority, in holding that APRA’s “work product” exception applies to all emails sent to or received by state legislators, has deprived us (and for that matter any other citizens who might be interested in reviewing legislative communications) of any opportunity to make arguments that the work product exception is inapplicable to any and all legislative communications. As Justice Rucker aptly put it: “The majority’s ruling is not only premature, but it unfortunately weighs in on a significant separation of powers issue without an adequate record.”

The Supreme Court unfortunately has effectively slammed shut the door of transparency that the passage of APRA several decades ago had opened. It is indeed a sad day for those who advocate for open and transparent government in Indiana, and for all citizens who believe that government is the servant of the people rather than vice versa. It is now up to the General Assembly to remedy this blow against transparency by making clear it will honor the promise of open government contained in APRA’s preamble despite the license the Court has just given it to keep the public in the dark about its communications with lobbyists. Until it does, it is open to fair criticism that its passage of APRA was little more than a fraud perpetrated on the people of Indiana.

Background:

 Citizens Action Coalition (CAC), Common Cause Indiana, and the Energy and Policy Institute (EPI) originally filed a suit in April 2015 in Marion County Circuit/Superior Court against the Indiana House Republican Caucus and State Rep. Eric Koch (R-Bedford) for violating the Indiana Access to Public Records Act (APRA). The groups are asking the Court to declare that Rep. Koch and the Caucus are subject to APRA, which the legislators have denied, and to order disclosure of correspondence between Rep. Koch and utility companies regarding solar energy issues.

Shorty after its initial hearing, Marion County Superior Judge James Osborn dismissed the case claiming he had no jurisdiction over House of Representative’s affairs due to separation of powers, issuing a seven-line ruling relying on a 1993 Indiana Supreme Court case that said courts could not interfere with the operation of the state legislature.


Want to know more? Here is the link to the Indiana Supreme Court Ruling in Citizens Action Coalition, et al. v. Indiana House Rep., et al. (Case Number: 49S00-1510-PL-00607)

http://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/pdf/04191601shd.pdf


 

Copyright 2013 IndianaDG