by jboullion | Jun 23, 2008 | Uncategorized
From an editorial in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:
Wisconsin Power & Light Co. took a significant step recently when it promised to offset the greenhouse gas emissions from a new coal plant it is proposing to build in southwestern Wisconsin. Company officials understand the importance of balancing energy sources to provide customers with reliable and affordable energy while reducing emissions that contribute to climate change.
The problem is that while Wisconsin needs power, it also needs to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, not just offset increases in emissions. So while WP&L officials deserve credit for proposing their mitigation plan, they still need to make a more compelling case than they have so far for building a coal plant in Cassville.
State regulators need to carefully examine that case before they make their decision by the end of the year. And unless WP&L officials make a convincing case for the kind of coal plant they have proposed, the state shouldn’t give its OK.
In a recent meeting with the Journal Sentinel Editorial Board, company officials said demand was growing at a rate of 2% to 3% per year. To meet that demand, the utility says it needs to build a 300-megawatt $1.1 billion base load plant that would generate enough power to supply 150,000 homes.
Based on those numbers, WP&L, a subsidiary of Alliant Energy Corp., makes a reasonable case. Neither conservation nor renewable sources now available are likely to fill that demand.
But an analysis by state environmental and energy regulators predicts demand to grow by 1.65%. That analysis also concluded that although Alliant “needs to procure more energy resources to keep rates affordable,” this particular coal plant proposal was “not the least-cost option.” The environmental group Clean Wisconsin and the ratepayer group Citizens’ Utility Board oppose the plant and have urged the utility to spend more on energy efficiency and renewables. . . .
by jboullion | Jun 18, 2008 | Uncategorized
From a statement on behalf of RENEW Wisconsin submitted by Michael Vickerman to the Governor’s Global Warming Task Force:
These comments, submitted on behalf of RENEW Wisconsin, address the strawman proposal developed by the co-chairs of Governor Doyle’s Global Warming Task Force. I represented RENEW in the Electric Generation and Supply Workgroup and took part in the drafting and preparing of several specific proposals that were submitted to the full Task Force. Among them were proposals to establish (1) uniform permitting standards for wind projects, (2) fixed-rate production-cost-based tariffs to stimulate customer-sited renewable energy systems; and (3) post-2015 renewable energy requirements on utilities. The comments address various proposed changes to the existing renewable energy standard (RES). . . .
by jboullion | Jun 17, 2008 | Uncategorized
From an article by Larry Sandler in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:
Town of Yorkville – Cutting fares and restoring slashed service could be key strategies for rescuing the financially troubled Milwaukee County Transit System, a nationally known transit consultant told the Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Transit Authority on Monday. . . .
Rubin agreed with reports from the Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission and the Public Policy Forum that praised the Milwaukee County bus system’s cost-effective management, but that found major ridership losses resulted from fare increases and service cuts since 2000. He also agreed with those reports’ warnings of a 35% service cut by 2010 without new state or local funding — a cut that would wipe out all Freeway Flyers and most night, weekend and suburban service.
But Rubin said ridership could double in five years if county officials restore the service that has been cut and lower the fares. Phasing in that approach, with service restorations first and fare cuts later, would cater to “a huge unmet demand” for transit service that is growing as gas prices rise, he said.
Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker has spoken favorably about lowering fares but proposed several fare increases and no fare cuts. That’s because restoring service and lowering fares would require additional revenue, and state and local officials have been deeply divided about new funding for buses.
by jboullion | Jun 17, 2008 | Uncategorized
2011
Spring 2011
Siting Rule Suspension Rocks Wind Industry
Community Biogas Project Fires Up
Insty Prints: Mpower ChaMpion
Manitoba Hydro: A Washout?
Verona Firm Begins Work on “Epic” PV
2010
Summer 2010
Council Backs Compromise on Siting Standards
Community Wind on Move in Cashton
Seventh Generation Pioneers Wind
Making Sense of the Gulf Disaster
Turbines Power Cascade Wastewater
Calendar
Spring 2010
Case Builds for the Clean Energy Jobs Act Bills
Tour Spotlights Homegrown Renewables
Energizing Fort Atkinson Schools
Clearing Up Lakes with Clean Energy
Of Molehills and Renewable Energy
Calendar
2009
Fall 2009
+ Doyle Signs Wind Siting Reform Bill into Law
+ Solar Outlook Set to Dim in 2010
+ PSC Approves Coal to Wood Conversion
+ Producer Profile: Rick Adamski
+ Educating Schools on Solar Air Heating
+ RENEW Slams Anti-Wind Article
+ Calendar
Summer 2009
+ It’s Time to Bring Renewable Energy Home
+ In Memoriam: Bob Gilbertson
+ Board Member Brings Green Home
+ Renewables Profile: Jenny Heinzen
+ Manure Digesters Good Fit
+ Solar Innovator: Craig Tarr
+ Calendar
Spring 2009
+ Legislature to Tackle Wind Permitting
+ The Importance of Doing the Math
+ Stimulus Package 101
+ Policy Drives Solar Hot Water Market
+ PSC Investigates Renewable Tariffs
+ Open Letter from RENEW President
+ Calendar
2008
Winter 2008/2009
+ Rest in Peace: Cassville Generation Plant
+ Mississippi River Bird and Bat Study
+ Osceola School Heats Pools with Solar
+ Bob Ramlow: Solar Pioneer
+ Focus on Energy Issues Biogas Profiles
+ Focus on Energy Earns National Honor
+ State Plugs into Renewable Energy
+ Calendar
Summer/fall 2008
+ Peak Oil Spices Meeting with Cong. Baldwin
+ Countdown to Solar Tour
+ Solar H2O on Madison Fire Stations
+ Global Warming Task Force Report
+ Wisconsin’s Newest Wind Projects
+ PHEV+Wind=Clean Air
+ Small Wind Conference Wrap-up
Spring 2008
+ RENEW Battles Local Opposition to Wind
+ Starting a Renewable Energy Business
+ Renewable Profiles: Wes Slaymaker
+ Solar Hot Water from the Garden
+ Reviving a Classic Wind Machine
Winter 2008
+ Solar Water Heating’s Day of Superlatives
+ Calumet Voters Strongly Favor Wind
+ Renewable Profiles: Steve & Nancy Sandstrom
+ Wind a No Go in Trempealeau
+ Windpower Projects Near Completion
2007
Summer 2007
+ Random Thoughts from This Year’s Renewable Energy Fair
+ RENEW Objects to Town Ordinance
+ A Federal Energy Policy?
+ Renewable Profiles: Jeff Knutson
+ State Must End Wind Roadblocks
+ RENEW Lunch and Meeting, Sept. 15
+ RENEW Argues for Uniform Tariffs
+ Walter: MGE Gets High Marks
+ WPPI Adds PV at HQ
Spring 2007
+ Wind Farm Construction Explodes While Manufacturing Lags
+ “But what’s the payback?”
+ Renewable Profiles: Jeff Riggert
+ Can Ethanol Kick Fossil Fuels?
+ Coal Rush Negatives Wind’s Promise
+ Energy co-dependents: Russia, America, and Energy Security
2006
Winter 2006
+ RENEW, Clean Wisconsin Defend Wind Power Project
+ We Energies Cops National Honors
+ Don Wichert: RENEW Founder and Tireless Advocate
+ How I Fell in Love with My Solar Dryer
+ PSC Approves WE Wind Project
+ Doyle Sets Plans to Expand Renewables
Fall 2006
+ 2nd U.S. Solar Testing Lab Opens in State
+ Payback Analysis: Impediment to Sustainability
+ Andy Bangert: Solar Installer & Master Electrician
+ MGE, WPPI Tap into Top of Iowa Wind Projects
+ Wind Energy Projects Slowly Advance
+ Neenah Paper Buys Reams of Renewable Electricity
Summer 2006
+ Misplaced Security Concerns Still Wind Projects
+ Doyle Embraces Energy Independence
+ Profiles in Leadership: Niels Wolter
+ Wisconsin Tops in Cow Power
Spring 2006
+ State’s energy house back in order
+ WE bulllish on wind energy
+ Producer profile: Amy Taivalkoski
+ Ethanol mandate runs out of gas
+ WE updates renewable program
+ State renewable grants available
2005
Winter 2005
+ Time is ripe for renewable tariff reform
+ Church engergized by renewables
+ Producer profile: John Katers
+ RENEW lauds Forward’s payment plan
+ China pins hopes on hydro
+ New federal tax credits for solar
+ RENEW backs ethanol bill
by jboullion | Jun 16, 2008 | Uncategorized
From an editorial in The Capital Times (Madison):
The impossible happened this week — the U.S. Senate and House voted overwhelmingly to fully fund Amtrak for the next five years. There’s even some matching money to help states set up or expand rail service.
It’s amazing what four-buck-a-gallon gas will do.
Amtrak’s funding package even got the votes of some of its biggest critics, like Florida Republican Rep. John Mica, who admitted for the first time that Americans need some transportation choices.
“Nothing could be more fitting to bring before Congress today, on a day when gasoline has reached $4.05 a gallon across the United States on average,” he announced on the floor.
The two houses need to patch over some minor differences in the bills they passed, but Amtrak backers are confident that won’t be any trouble.
The biggest trouble, though, may still come from the White House. President Bush, who has attempted to dismantle the national rail system throughout his presidency, has pledged to veto the bill. Fortunately, both the House and Senate passed the funding by veto-proof margins. Unless Republicans switch because they don’t want to “embarrass” their president, Bush’s veto will be moot.
Frankly, the president should be embarrassed. His stand on public transportation has marginalized him on the issue. He continues to insist that Amtrak should be dismantled and pieces of it turned over to private companies to run short-line routes. That might work in highly urbanized areas, but without government subsidies the vast expanse of America would be left with no rail service of any kind.
But Bush has been far from alone. There has long been a mind-set against subsidizing rail transportation. Politicians from both sides of the aisle have never had trouble subsidizing the building of more and bigger highways and underwriting the cost of airports and sleek terminals, but when it came to rail, they sang a different tune.
Had we adequately funded Amtrak so that it could have improved trackage in congested areas and run more than one train a day between big cities like Chicago and Minneapolis, for example, the country would today have a reasonable alternative to $4gas and gridlocked and unreliable airports. We might even have had rail service to Madison. . . .
