Those Crazy Radicals In Burlington, Vermont, Are At It Again

By Frank Andorka, Senior Correspondent

It was the first city in the United States to become powered by 100% renewables. Now Burlington, Vermont, and its radical electrical utility are at it again – they have issued a request for proposals to become the first net-zero (NZE) city in the country.

If it succeeds, Burlington could blaze a new trail for cities across the country the way it did with it commitment to renewable energy. After all, until Burlington did it, you never heard anyone else talk about such aggressive and lofty goals, did you? You did not.

Now 72 other cities have joined the commitment, according to the Sierra Club’s “Ready for 100” list. So how exciting would it be to see the same commitment to net zero after Burlington proves you can do it?

[wds id=”3″]

First, though, the electric utility – the largest municipal utility in the United States with 21,000 customers – has to complete its RFP, which states:

Our concept of an NZE City encompasses sourcing as much renewable energy as we consume across the electric, thermal and ground transportation sectors (air travel is not included at this time), thereby displacing fossil fuel consumption.

The Burlington Electrical Department says it is already moving in the direction of becoming a net-zero city through its focus on energy efficiency and strategic electrification, while helping its citizens understand the goals and helping them get there. The RFP’s authors write:

The success of the NZE effort depends in part on BED continuing to serve as a trusted advisor and partner to customers interested in energy efficiency and technologies such as solar, storage, heat pump technology, electric vehicles, solar + battery storage, weatherization, deep energy retrofits, commercial envelope, and HVAC, and lighting and other offerings.

BED will review proposals using the following RFP Evaluation Criteria:

Has the necessary analytical and modeling capabilities to conduct energy/environmental/economic analyses to provide BED with multiple alternative pathway scenarios describing how to achieve NZE;
Has conducted relevant work in the past for municipal or state governments or utilities;
Demonstrates the ability to take complex data and information and provide it in a way that is useful, and transparent, for a variety of audiences including policymakers, regulators, BED staff, and the general public;
Outline of a project plan that meets BED’s targeted timeline for an interim report (ideally early 2019) and final report (by July 2019);
Demonstrates relevant experience presenting similar materials to policymakers, regulators, and the general public;
Has expertise in utility-led energy transformation work and new business models for utilities, or “utility 2.0”.
Understanding of electric utility business and financial structures, as well as general utility rate economics

Proposals must be made by Burlington Electrical Department approved vendors by August 31. The full RFP is attached below.

NZE Roadmap FINAL RFP 7.27.18

Gone With The Wind: Wind Farms Hasten The Closure Of An Iowan Nuclear Plant

By Frank Andorka, Senior Correspondent

Another one bites the dust: Another nuclear plant is going offline – this one five years earlier than planned – at least in part thanks to the power of four nearby wind plants, which will partially replace the generating power of the nuclear facility.

NextEra’s Energy has decided to close the 615 MW Duane Arnold Energy Center (DAEC) five years prior to its expected decommissioning in part because the energy conglomerate can sell power from its four wind plants more inexpensively and cleanly. The company supplies energy for Alliant Energy, which supplies electricity to customers in Iowa and Wisconsin.

[wds id=”3″]

The four wind farms will replace 340 MW of the generation capacity, and Alliant plans to build its own wind plants in Iowa to make up the rest.

What makes the decision most remarkable is that it comes against the backdrop of plans being hatched in Washington D.C. to interfere in the nuclear market and prop up uneconomic nuclear and coal plants using national taxpayer money to do it. Estimates on what the bailout will cost vary, but some experts have put the number as high as $34 billion. It’s worth asking the denizens at the Department of Energy why they feel it’s important to keep these plants open when the companies on the ground – like NextEra and Alliant – are obviously perfectly OK with closing the plant.

Heck, Alliant is even paying NextEra $110 million in September 2020 to ensure the plant closes five years before its power-purchase agreement (PPA) with the plant runs out. So what on Earth are the regulators and politicians in Washington thinking?

Stories like this one out of Iowa need to be heard at the highest levels of our government in the hopes that the harebrained bailout scheme can still be headed off. Senators and Congressmen need to be held accountable for trying to pick winners and losers in the electricity generation game. Otherwise, they’re just a bunch of hypocrites paying off their donors.

The Energy Show: California Requires Solar on all New Homes

The Energy Show: By Barry Cinnamon

California continues to lead the country when it comes to clean and inexpensive energy. Here is an example – In May the California Energy Commission passed a rule that goes into effect on January 1, 2020 that requires solar on all new homes. The rule applies to all new homes, apartments and condos under three stories tall. The rule also includes an option to include an energy storage system (which we believe will become a standard feature with all solar systems).

We have received a number of calls and emails from people both in favor of and against this new rule since it was passed. What we really like about this new rule is that new home buyers will definitely save money. We’ve done hundreds of installations on new homes and the monthly energy savings are always more than the monthly mortgage increase. Always.

According to data from the California Energy Commission, the cost of a new solar system would be an extra $40 per month on a typical mortgage. And that’s without the tax credit. The monthly savings on the homeowner’s electric bill would be $80 per month. So the net monthly savings is $40 per month, or almost $500 per year. So every new home that has solar on it is going to come out almost $500 cash flow positive every year. Based on our installation experiences, I think the CEC’s cost numbers are on the high side and savings number are low – so the benefits are even better. This New Solar Homes Mandate is good for home buyers, and will increase the awareness of solar on existing residential rooftops.

But there are some negatives about this new rule. Some people have a visceral reaction against mandates. They simply don’t want to be told what to do. Moreover, adding solar will slightly increase the cost of a new home. Nevertheless, our government mandates things like seat belts, clean air, new home warranties and energy efficiency. By mandating popular consumer safety and efficiency benefits, costs generally come down for everyone, to the overall benefit of society. For more about California’s New Solar Homes Mandate, Listen Up to this week’s Energy Show.

Mediocre Massachusetts Energy Bill Closes Out Legislative Session To The Disappointment Of Nearly Everyone

By Frank Andorka, Senior Correspondent

“In like a lion, out like a lamb.”

That’s how Massachusetts solar advocate Sean Garren characterized on Twitter the whimper of a clean-energy bill that made its way through the Massachusetts legislature on its final day. The Senate voted 36-0 to pass the legislation, while the House had one dissenting vote, 150-1.

Advocates offered intensely mixed reviews of the bill, although it was almost universally praised for eliminating the “fixed charge” Eversource had sought to impose on all new solar users. But net metering caps inexplicably remain in place and the renewable portfolio standard (RPS) increases are so tiny you need a microscope to see them.

[wds id=”3″]

Mary C. Serreze at MassLive.com quoted one renewable advocate as saying the bill was a “base hit” when it could have been a home run, endearing themselves to people everywhere who forgot baseball was still a game Americans played in the summer.

The biggest win for the solar industry was the elimination of the Eversource “fixed charge,” which the usurious utility’s attempt to fix in legislation the nonsensical, zombie lie of the “cost shift” that utilities across the country keep yammering on about. I will not take my usual break to explain what complete nonsense the “cost shift” argument is because honestly, I’m tired of typing about it, so search “zombie lie” in the search box up there in the upper right-hand corner of the page to see my explanation elsewhere. Go ahead…I’ll wait.

OK, are you back? Do you see why eliminating the charge was such a huge priority for clean energy advocates in the Bay State? Yes? Good. Let’s move on.

The biggest loss for the solar industry was the fact that net metering caps will remain in place, essentially freezing rooftop solar in place until the caps are raised. Advocates had hoped to either eliminate the cap or at least raise it 5%. That did not make it into the final bill. This disappointing state of affairs was best summed up in a release on the bill by a coalition of solar groups that had lobbied hard to get the caps removed:

But small commercial and business solar projects across the Commonwealth will remain stalled as the legislation leaves a needless barrier to customer adoption of solar, caps on Massachusetts’ most successful solar program, net metering, in place. With just hours left in the session, it appears the urgent action needed to get solar back to work for the Commonwealth will wait for another year.

In the half-victory category, the RPS will rise, by only incrementally over a period of more than 20 years, rising 1% each year until 2020, then 2% per year until 2030 and 1% every year thereafter. Those are tiny rises in a region where New Jersey and New York are leaping forward into the renewable energy future with great gusto, and even Vermont is moving apace. But an increase is an increase, and even under the anemic rise it still will reach 100% – eventually.

All in all, a disappointing end to a legislative session that saw a robust Senate bill whittled down to near nothing in the House of Representatives, which had its own four-headed bill amalgamation as the two houses entered into negotiations to reach agreement on this final bill. Garren had it exactly right: A legislative session in which clean-energy advocates had high hopes for significant progress on their agenda ended up with crumbs – important crumbs, some of them, but a far cry from what they’d hoped for.

As they have said for decades in Cleveland about the Browns, advocates are left shaking their fists and saying, “Wait until next year!”