Solar? WI Regulators Punt
February 26th, 2019
Carol A. Overland: Big solar projects need guidance, but regulators punt
Bill Berry’s recent op/ed column said it clearly — the Public Service Commission and solar industry need guidance for siting solar projects. Wisconsin has none. There’s specific wind-siting guidance, but none for solar.
How would “guidance” happen? Typically, that’s “rulemaking,” which can occur by legislative mandate, on the commission’s initiative, or by citizen petition.
Without “guidance,” projects are sited willy-nilly, without regard for setbacks from properties and homes, impacts on agriculture and “exclusive agriculture” land, community purpose and character. When a project moves into an established community, it’s a set-up for a “nuisance” that interferes with another’s use of their property, interferes with their lives.
Jewell Jinkins Intervenors, landowners who are intervening in the Badger Hollow solar project dockets, filed a petition for rulemaking for solar rules and environmental update, and were joined by landowners in Jefferson County. In filing this petition, we were hoping to head off largely irreversible siting problems. Once it’s built, if problems occur, then what?
However, the PSC declared that “rulemaking is not necessary at this time.” Isn’t any other time too late? The commission chose to abdicate its power and claims a legislative mandate is needed for rulemaking. The commission said an update of environmental rules wasn’t necessary, although “solar” doesn’t require any environmental review. A solar project with a lifespan of 30-50 years, with a PSC staff-admitted “dramatic” impact of industrial infrastructure covering prime ag land, doesn’t require environmental review! The commission claims there’s “flexibility in order to ensure that large-scale solar projects get an appropriate level of environmental review.” That didn’t occur for Badger Hollow.
Work within the system? Sure, we’re trying, but with as dysfunctional and absent a regulatory system as this, well — how’s that working for us?
Carol A. Overland, attorney for Jewell Jinkins Intervenors, of Iowa County, WI
Red Wing, Minnesota
More snow — stay home for a while…
February 24th, 2019
Another (yawn) peak demand for Xcel
February 22nd, 2019
And yet another year where Xcel, errrrrr, NSP, had a lackluster peak demand. That’s a good thing, verification that we can get along with a lot less coal and nuclear. And it’s also good as proof that of those Certificates of Need, based on their bogus “modeling” predicting 2.49% annual increase, we could jettison how many of those projects? How much infrastructure was built that clearly wasn’t needed, at least by their justifications? Billions, right? How much will ratepayers be refunded given all these unnecessary projects based on bogus projections?
Here are the details:
And looking at it another way:
Here’s the primary doc — Xcel’s 2018 10-K, just search for “peak demand” and there it is:
So now can we get all that unneeded transmission yanked up and hauled to the salvage yard?
Does this solar make my house look fat?!?!
February 21st, 2019
Does this solar make my house look fat?!?! Soon… coming to a new white roof on West! It looks reasonable that we can cover our annual useage, average is 465 kWhr/mo., and if we can keep Alan’s air conditioner out of the window, and figure out a heater for the mudroom during polar vortices (?)(got a panel heater, should work), it’s even lower, so NO PROBLEM! Won’t be able to get out of the $8/mo to Xcel for the privilege of getting a low bill from them, drat!
We’ve got the new roof on, so we’re ready to rock! Just have to nail down the details!
THIS is how solar should be, on every rooftop. It’s SO easy, it’s at load, DOH! Just do it!
And then there’s this: Build a Simple Solar Air Heater.
I want one on the south side of every building in Red Wing. How hard would that be?
Freeborn Co. couldn’t get a 2nd on wind development agreement!
February 19th, 2019
GOOD! Another incremental win for Association of Freeborn County Landowners. That’s an interesting development!
County board opts not to vote on wind farm, will have further talks in March
After last Friday’s PUC meeting where Freeborn Wind’s siting permit was put on hold as they consider amendments:
Yesterday at PUC – Freeborn Wind TABLED!
… and today, at Freeborn County, when Motion was made to vote on the Freeborn Wind Development Agreement, and others, there was no 2nd! Silence!!
Here’s the latest drafts of the agreements that I’ve been able to scrounge up:
Freeborn Development Agreement final January 2019
Freeborn Road Use Agreement final January 2019
Freeborn Public Drainage System Agreement final January 2019
How bad is this agreement? Check this, on p. 8:
6.1. Amendments to Development Agreement. This Development Agreement may be amended by mutual agreement of the Parties only if the amendment is in writing and signed by an authorized representative of each Party. County authorized representative will be County Board Chair or County Administrator. Developer authorized representatives will be as designated by Article 9.4 of Development Agreement.
Ummmmm, no. Guess again… Amendments must go to entire County Board. And there are additional changes you’ll need to make, Freeborn Wind!
Stay tuned. Next meeting is mid-March.