Author Archives Laura Arnold

Henry County Commissioners end 2018 in midst of more windy debate

Posted by Laura Arnold  /   December 25, 2018  /   Posted in Uncategorized  /   No Comments

Commissioners end 2018 in midst of more windy debate

By DARREL RADFORD - dradford@thecouriertimes.com

Commissioners seemed to ask “What’s the problem?” People in the spacious former Henry Circuit Courtroom seemed to say “What’s the hurry?”

The final commissioners meeting of 2018 was a microcosm of a tumultuous 2018 dominated by debate over wind turbines. During a meeting filled with sarcastic remarks toward commissioners, paparazzi-like treatment for two Big Blue River/Calpine officials as they left the meeting early and unanimous passage of five wind turbine-related measures, the old year roared its way out the door like a wind-blown lion.

Commissioners said they were acting in the county’s best interests by passing the five measures that included establishing a transportation plan regarding roads and drains; creating a decommission plan from 5 to 8 years; approving indemnification and escrow agreements and stipulating annual training be provided to emergency responders should a wind turbine project ever be built.

“In reality, we’re just setting regulations before Big Blue River/Calpine determines where to apply for a permit,” Commissioner Kim Cronk said.

Susie Eichhorn drew applause for her comments at the end of the meeting, questioning why such action was even necessary when so many in the county have said they don’t want the turbines here in the first place.

“Those agreements could have been tabled and considered later,” Eichhorn said. “I’m sure that you three have served the county very well on most issues with the county. This single issue is the one issue that may affect most every person living in the county, and I think you know in your heart of hearts that there are a lot of people who do not want this. A lot.”

“We’ve had over 1,000 signatures on a petition, we’ve attended hearings, we have had town resolutions passed by 13 towns in the county saying they do not want turbines,” Eichhorn continued. “We now have 11 towns who have signed an ordinance saying they do not want these near their towns, and yet you’re very open to immediately signing these agreements before the end of the year.”

Eichhorn then spoke to each commissioner directly.

“Butch, I’m sure you really have been a good civil servant, but I don’t think you’re representing the people by signing these agreements,” she said.

“Kim, I think you’re sabotaging your very own community where you live,” she said to Cronk. “And Mr. Yanos, I imagine that your term will end in 2020. I fully expect to see a wind lease signed by you after that point.”

“You won’t see one,” Yanos replied.

“I hope that is the case,” she said.

Commissioners and attorney Joel Harvey emphasized the issues passed were simply establishing procedures and a groundwork if a wind company wants to proceed.

Patron Dan Richey asked for clarification, stating “Did I hear they do not go into affect until a commission-approved use is approved?”

“With the exception of the escrow agreement, that is correct,” Attorney Joel Harvey said, referring to a stipulation a wind company must put up $75,000 in escrow funds before proceeding, money the county can use for engineering expenses and inspections.

“Since these are moot until the time a CAU is approved,” Richey continued, “this in no way should influence the planning commission on their decisions concerning a CAU and it should not be used as evidence that we already have agreements in place and influence the decision of the planning commission – is that correct? Because Calpine will mention they are approved and I’m sure other members of the planning commission will mention that they’ve been approved. But they are not effective until the CAU’s approved on its own merit?”

Harvey said someone could come in and say these agreements have been passed, but conversely, “these things don’t become effective until the CAU is approved, so they don’t mean anything.”

“There will be a public hearing on the CAU application if and when it is submitted, so you will have an opportunity to speak,” Harvey said.

To date, no such CAU application for a wind farm project has been submitted.

“In reality, we’re just setting regulations before they determine whether to apply for a permit,” Cronk said.

Harvey’s explanations not withstanding, many questions linger about plans Calpine/Big Blue River Wind Farms have for between 80 and 100 turbines in northwestern Henry County.

“Has Calpine sold the power? Would have been a good question to ask,” Eichhorn said.

Martin Tobey summed up the final Commissioners meeting when he made reference to the fact that Calpine officials left the meeting immediately after Commissioner action on the wind-related issues.

“A good example of ethics happened tonight,” he said, claiming that those who really cared about the county would have stayed for the entire meeting.

Milwaukee considers legislation to require solar on all new residential units

Posted by Laura Arnold  /   December 20, 2018  /   Posted in solar, Uncategorized  /   No Comments

Milwaukee eyes its own rooftop solar mandate with a California clone

Proposal extending rooftop solar to apartments rejected by Nevada utility regulators

Posted by Laura Arnold  /   November 30, 2018  /   Posted in solar, Uncategorized  /   No Comments

Public Utilities Commission of Nevada

Proposal extending rooftop solar to apartments rejected by utility regulators

by Riley Snyder, The Nevada Independent, November 29th, 2018

Renewable energy advocates and lawmakers of both parties have for the past year touted the returning rooftop solar industry after slashed favorable reimbursement rates resulted in a year-long hiatus for solar businesses.

But even as the number of rooftop solar installations continues to grow, not all Nevadans have equal access — rooftop solar and other forms of distributed generation remains largely out of reach for the nearly half a million state residents who live in apartments and other non-single family residences throughout the state.

An attempt to expand rooftop solar systems to apartment dwellers was blocked Wednesday by the state’s Public Utilities Commission (PUC), which declined to take up a request for an advisory opinion that could open the door to allowing apartment dwellers and others who live in concentrated housing to participate in net metering programs.

The three-member commission rejected an application for an advisory opinion filed by Ovation MM, a property management company run by Alan Molasky that owns 38 separate apartment communities in Southern Nevada with more than 9,220 units. In a statement, Molasky said his apartment complexes already meet energy efficiency standards and have some solar panels on parking structures at several of the properties to power light fixtures, and that filing the application “just feels right.”

“I am disappointed that the PUC has denied our petition, but I do understand the reasoning,” he said in an email. “They are concerned that they have the statutory authority under Nevada law. Fortunately, this can be fixed. I know that many of our incoming legislators and our Governor-elect are very pro-clean energy, so I am hopeful we find a way to enable us with the authority to move forward soon.”

The company’s proposal called for creation of a so-called “Tenant Solar” initiative, which would in theory allow apartment owners — either directly or through a third-party — to install a distributed energy system (solar panels) on an apartment complex. The created electricity would be used and consumed by apartment residents.

But energy regulators and the state’s primary utility, NV Energy, recommended against adopting any advisory opinion or rulemaking without a clear directive from state lawmakers, as a similar concept was vetoed by Gov. Brian Sandoval in 2017. PUC staff warned that proceeding with the application would constitute “impermissible ad hoc rulemaking” in violation of state law.

Curt Ledford, the attorney representing the property management company in the docket, said in an interview that the commission’s decision was “not unexpected” and that the company would consider participating in other ways, such as a change in law or the opening of an investigatory docket.

“We knew the legal arguments were going to be challenging to overcome,” he said.

The company’s application, filed in October, acknowledged the lack of administrative rules that would guide such solar installations, and asked that the commission “acknowledge that the Legislature has opened up solar opportunities to a new group of Nevada’s residents.”

Although state law doesn’t expressly allow for community solar and other forms of distributed generation for multifamily housing units (such as apartment complexes), Ledford in the application pointed to a provision in a 2017 bill that created a “Renewable Energy Bill of Rights” for Nevada residents, including the right to “generate, consume and export renewable energy.”

In the application, Ledford added that the 2017 language was “clear and unambiguous,” and that residents of apartments or other non-single family homes should have the same ability to access distributed generation. He said the 2017 law “supersedes or impliedly repealed” a 2009 state law excluding the operators of apartments or other multifamily-living residences from operating rooftop solar systems, and that the rights granted under the 2017 bill would be “meaningless” without a way to access rooftop solar.

But PUC staff disagreed, saying no conflict existed between the two laws and any further “public policy goals” in relation to rooftop solar or net metering would first require legislative action. As a workaround, it suggested connecting individual rooftop solar panels to an individual apartment’s meter, or for the apartment unit itself to become a net metering customer (as opposed to an apartment complex selling power to its tenants).

Ledford — who said the structure of the “Tenant Solar” idea was kept purposefully vague to give regulators as much leeway as possible —  said it was “telling” that no other apartment owners were using the system described by the PUC as an alternative.

“There’s no reason to employ inefficient uses of technology just because the law doesn’t allow you to,” he said. “It’s better just to change the law.”

The proposal was also opposed by NV Energy, which cited legislative history showing references to community solar gardens were amended out of an initial version of the legislation, and the fact that the community solar concept was vetoed by Sandoval in 2017.

“Petitioner is attempting to circumnavigate the legislative process by asking the Commission to effectuate public policy that the Nevada Legislature has to date declined to enact,” an attorney for the utility wrote in a briefing.

Two pro-solar advocacy groups, Vote Solar and the Solar Energies Industry Association, submitted comments in support of the proposal.

In his veto message on the 2017 community solar bill, Sandoval expressed several concerns with the concept including worries that growth of the “gardens” would avoid the costs and regulations faced by other utilities, possibly compete with large-scale solar photovoltaic plants by giving them an “unfair” competitive advantage and not enough requirements that the gardens generate electricity for low-income residents or small businesses.

At the time, Sandoval also expressed concerns about how the measure would mesh with the proposed Energy Choice Initiative — now a moot point after voters overwhelmingly rejected the retail electric market ballot question on the 2018 ballot.

Democratic state Sen. Mo Denis, who sponsored the community solar bill in 2017, said in a brief interview that he was planning to bring the legislation back in 2019 and was working with the industry and NV Energy on potential changes, including limits on how much electricity each individual “garden” could generate and an aggregate limit on overall generation.

Disclosure: NV Energy has donated $150,000.00 to The Nevada Independent.
You can see a full list of donors on our donor page.

What a gas! Dominion, Smithfield team to turn methane from hog waste into fuel for homes and businesses

Posted by Laura Arnold  /   November 28, 2018  /   Posted in biomass  /   No Comments
Smithfield

This 2014 file photo depicts a pig statue on Main Street in Smithfield. 

What a gas! Dominion, Smithfield team to turn methane from hog waste into fuel for homes and businesses

Dominion Energy has a new source of fuel for its natural gas business.

Hog manure.

The Richmond-based energy giant announced a $250 million joint venture with Smithfield Foods on Tuesday to capture methane from hog waste on farms in Virginia and two other states for use as natural gas by homes and businesses.

“It puts that part of the pig to productive use,” quipped Diane Leopold, executive vice president and CEO of gas infrastructure at Dominion.

Dominion — the target of criticism for its proposed Atlantic Coast Pipeline — contends the renewable natural gas venture will reduce emissions of a primary source of greenhouse gases linked to climate change. Ultimately, the company estimates the new source of gas could displace up to 4 percent of the natural gas it extracts from the earth by hydraulic fracturing and transports by pipelines that are themselves sources of methane emissions.

“We recognize the need to reduce greenhouse gases,” Dominion Chairman and CEO Tom Farrell said at a public announcement at the Science Museum of Virginia in Richmond.

The new venture, Align Renewable Natural Gas, would begin with four projects, including one at a cluster of two dozen hog farms that supply Smithfield Foods in the Waverly area of Sussex County. The other projects include major Smithfield hog farming operations in North Carolina and Utah, where Dominion operates a natural gas transmission system.

Smithfield has experimented with the technology at a pilot project in North Carolina and hog farms in Missouri, but CEO Kenneth M. Sullivan said, “No one is doing this on the size and scale we’ve just announced.”

The system will require participating farmers to cap their hog manure lagoons in return for long-term contracts for the energy they produce. The waste will undergo a bacterial process called anaerobic digestion that produces a biogas consisting of methane and carbon dioxide — both greenhouse gases — that will be piped under low pressure to a central processing facility for clusters of hog farms.

The processing facility then reduces the moisture in the gas so it can be safely transported by pipeline to natural gas customers for home heating and other uses.

“It’s basically pure methane,” Farrell said.

Initially, Dominion plans to deliver the renewable natural gas to local distribution systems — in Waverly, that’s mostly Columbia Gas of Virginia, with some customers served by Virginia Natural Gas.

Farrell said that as the volume of converted biogas increases, it would be carried by larger pipelines, such as the Atlantic Coast Pipeline, a 600-mile, $7 billion project that would cross through Virginia and North Carolina near the hog farms that supply Smithfield.

By carrying gas produced by fracking in shale fields in West Virginia and transported by pipelines that leak methane, the pipeline represents the climate change threat the new renewable natural gas venture is trying to reduce, pipeline opponents say.

“This news shows both that Dominion acknowledges that methane is a harmful greenhouse gas that needs to be reduced; and that it’s possible to get gas from sources besides destructive fracking, pipelines, and compressor stations,” said Anne Havemann, senior counsel at the Chesapeake Climate Action Network.

Farrell described the converted natural gas as “carbon negative,” meaning that it would produce far less methane than the carbon dioxide that would be released when burned by gas customers. Methane is roughly 25 times more harmful to the atmosphere than carbon dioxide, although both are linked to global warming that scientists say causes climate change.

The companies said their new venture will help Virginia and North Carolina meet targets for reducing greenhouse gases under new initiatives announced by Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam and North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper.

Northam announced a plan in September for reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases, including the methane released by natural gas pipelines, compressor stations and other infrastructure, as well as landfills.

Farrell and Leopold briefed Northam and Virginia environmental regulators on the pending announcement in a meeting last week.

The meeting attracted the attention of pipeline opponents who have criticized the governor for removing two members of the State Air Pollution Control Board before a scheduled vote next month on a state air permit for a natural gas compressor station for the pipeline in Buckingham County.

Northam did not attend the announcement on Tuesday, but Secretary of Agriculture and Forestry Bettina Ring said in a news release, “This partnership with two leading Virginia companies shows the power of Virginia’s largest industry — agriculture — to promote cleaner energy, sustainable family farms, and a brighter future for rural communities here in the commonwealth and nationwide.”

The initiative demonstrates a continuing cultural shift for both companies in embracing environmental protection for industries that inevitably cause pollution.

Smithfield, the largest pig and pork producer in the world, threatened almost 30 years ago to move its operations out of Virginia because of the state’s new limits on phosphorus discharged in the Pagan River by the company’s meat processing operations in Smithfield. A federal judge fined the company $12.6 million in 1997 for thousands of water quality violations.

Shuanghui Group, a Chinese conglomerate now known as WH Group, purchased the company five years ago. Last year, the company formed Smithfield Renewables, which established a goal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 25 percent by 2025.

Sullivan called the initiative “a true win-win” by providing long-term revenue streams for farmers, while better protecting hog waste lagoons from hurricanes and other sources of flooding.

Dominion, as owner of Virginia’s largest electric utility and energy facilities across the country, said it already has reduced its carbon pollution by more than 40 percent in the last 10 years. It estimates that the renewable natural gas project will prevent 10 billion cubic feet of methane from entering the atmosphere, the equivalent of removing 120,000 vehicles from the road.

“With this transformational partnership, we are combining the environmental benefits of renewables with the reliability of natural gas to meet the around-the-clock clean energy needs of consumers and businesses,” Farrell said in a statement.

mmartz@timesdispatch.com

(804) 649-6964

 

DC lawmakers vote for 100 percent clean power by 2032; Thrive Indianapolis 100% by 2050

Posted by Laura Arnold  /   November 28, 2018  /   Posted in Uncategorized  /   No Comments

District of Columbia logo

DC lawmakers vote for 100 percent clean power by 2032

Copyright 2013 IndianaDG