So far, 21 states are considering Feed-In Tariff legislation: Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Hawaii, Indiana, Iowa, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Virginia, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin.
Arkansas
A
bill, HB 1851, commonly known as ‘REFIT Arkansas’, was introduced in
March in the House of Representatives by Rep. Kathy Webb. It came
before the House Insurance and Commerce Committee, where it was
defeated by a vote of 8 to 6. Supporters of the bill felt that it lost
because there was a great deal of ‘misinformation’ spread about it by
the utilities who opposed it. The Governor, the Arkansas Public Service
Commission, and the Arkansas Economic Development Commission all
strongly supported the bill. Another bill will be introduced in the
next session of the legislature in 2011. Proponents feel certain that
with more education of the Committee and House members, the bill will
pass. Read more: www.refitarkansas.org (Bill Ball, Arkansas RE
Association, bill@stellarsun.com, 501 993 0032)
California
Speaking
extemporaneously at the conclusion of the German-American Chamber of
Commerce's Solar Symposium on July 14, 2008 in San Francisco, John
Garamendi, California's Lieutenant Governor, said it "seems to me we
want to use what works . . . and feed-in tariffs clearly do." He also
added that "we need to come to a decision quickly" so the state can
move forward. Read more about the Symposium.
The following is taken verbatim from Wilson Rickerson et al's 2008 report:
California has played a leading role in developing FITs in the US.
California Assembly Bill (AB) 1969 of 2006 established a FIT for
systems with a capacity of 1.5 MW and below, capped at 250 MW total
statewide. Generators can choose 10-, 15-, or 20-year contracts, and
can opt to sell either 100% of their power, or offset their retail load
and sell only their excess electricity. Unlike in the German law,
California's tariff rates are based on time-of-delivery, rather than
the generation cost of individual technologies. This means that all
technologies are offered the same price, but that this price varies
depending on whether the electricity is generated during peak or
off-peak times. In Southern California Edison territory, peak payments
can be up to $0.31/kWh in the summer (Rickerson et al., 2008). The
original program was limited to facilities sited at wastewater and
water treatment facilities, but the California Public Utilities
Commission (CPUC) extended the program to all customer-types, and
expanded the cap to 478.4 MW in 2007. Subsequent bills have sought to
expand both the overall program cap and the individual project cap, and
a recent bill (AB 1807 of 2008) is seeking to increase the system
capacity limit to 20 MW, and shift to a more European-style structure
based on technology-specific payments.
"Los Angeles Mayor
Antonio Villaraigosa announced to much fanfare on
November 24 that the city's municipal utility would launch one of the
continent's largest solar power programs. [...] Among provisions of the
plan is a feed-in tariff for 150 MW of solar photovoltaics by 2016." (Gipe, 2008)
There
are several FIT bills in the state legislature including a bill from
Senator Fran Pavley that would establish a cost-based solar energy
feed-in pilot in several municipalities. None of the bills have moved
yet, and none offer a ‘full system of feed-in tariffs like those in
Germany’. In addition, the CA Public Utility Commission (PUC) is in the
midst of an exploration or proceeding to expand CA’s limited existing
FIT program. PUC staff recently recommended the FIT to systems 10 MW
and below and to 1,000 MW total statewide. (Paul Gipe, pgipe@igc.org,
416 597 2748 ex. 229, http://wind-works.org )
Colorado
In September 2009, "The Application of Feed-in Tariffs and Other Incentives to Promote
Renewable Energy in Colorado," was prepared by the staff of the
Colorado Public Utility Commission for its use in analyzing the pros and cons of Feed-in
Tariffs for Colorado. Read the full report, and see the supplementary Excel spreadsheets.
Florida
In 2007,
Florida Governor Crist issued several Executive Orders to reduce
Florida’s greenhouse gas emissions, increase energy efficiency, and
remove market barriers for renewable energy technologies such as solar
and wind energy. He created a State Environmental Task Force to review
various policy options for achieving these goals. Team members will
create a Florida Climate Change Action Plan which will include strategy
and proposed legislation for consideration during the 2008 Legislative
Session and beyond (Executive Orders 2007 News Release).
The task force will report its final recommendations in October 2008.
Environmental Defense Fund is sponsoring a white paper on renewable
energy policies for Florida which will also include a study of feed-in
tariffs for the state (Rickerson, 2008) While it is likely that solar
legislation will be introduced in 2009, it is unclear whether the State
will pursue a Renewable Energy Certificate program or a Feed-In Tariff. Join the movement in Florida by becoming part of the Florida Alliance for Renewable Energy!
In
March 2008, the Florida Solar Energy Industries Association (FlaSEIA)
endorsed a legislative policy effort to adopt a Renewable Energy
Payment mechanism. The FlaSEIA Board of Directors unanimously concluded
that the most cost-effective legislative policy tool to deliver the
rapid deployment of solar energy, while ensuring a healthy and
sustainable industry in Florida, are energy feed-in payments (FlaSEIA Endorsement Letter PDF). Since FlaSEIA's decision to endorse Florida feed-in tariffs, several other organizations have followed suit: Maryland-DC-Virginia SEIA Endorsement Letter; SolarWorld California Endorsement Letter; Solar Power Partners Endorsement Letter; Environmental Defense Endorsement Letter.
In the second half of 2008 FARE
engaged the Public Service Commission in their recommendation process,
and in the past six months they have changed their position from
adamantly behind a tradable SREC policy to now engaging in a steadily
increasing dialogue about aFIT systems to address projects under a
certain size under a Standard Offer Contract umbrella.
In the
1st quarter of 2009, the Florida Alliance for Renewable Energy (FARE)
created an overwhelming buzz and understanding of a FIT policy where
none existed even 6 months prior. In February, FARE hosted a delegation
from the EPIA (European Photovoltaic Industry Association) in
conjunction with their "Effective Renewable Energy Policies"
conference. The EPIA delegation, whose members represent over 80% of
the worlds solar production, participated in a whirlwind tour of the
State's capitol, visiting with over 30 legislators in 2 days. Time and
again, the executive officers of the world's largest solar companies
stressed to lawmakers the direct correlation between the growth of
their companies and the implementation of a feed-in tariff in Germany
and other European countries. Read more.
Having
addressed what the future of Florida's renewable energy industry could
look like, FARE next focused on what today's industry was made of. FARE
held a lobby day in March, bringing hundreds of renewable energy
advocates and small businesses to flood the State's capitol with the
message that they too deserve a seat at the table when lawmakers
determine the shape of renewable energy legislation.
In
addition to their Lobby Day, FARE launched a Renewable Energy tour,
hosting 5 town hall meetings in 5 days all across the state, sharing
their message with hundreds of Floridians and recruiting more and more
dedicated advocates to their cause. Read more.
Also
in early March, FARE hosted Former CIA Director R. James Woolsey, who
testified in front of both the House and Senate Energy Committees and
held private meetings with Commissioner of Agriculture Charles Bronson,
Florida Governor Charlie Crist, and over a dozen individual
legislators. Mr. Woolsey testified to the importance of a secure and
reliable energy grid, and went on to say the distributed generation
that would result from a feed-in tariff policy would help create energy
security as well as energy independence for Florida. Read more.
News:
EDF to Florida PSC: Feed-in Tariffs Better than REC Trading
Florida Solar Coalition Calls for Feed-in Tariffs Over RECs at PSC
Florida Alliance for Renewable Energy Launches
FARE Files Florida PSC Comments Calling for Feed-in Tariffs
Gainesville, Florida Putting REPs into Place
Fueling Demands for Solar
An Idea Catches On
The Rooftop Revolution
Feed-In Tariffs vs Credits
Hawaii
In the 2006-2007 session Hawaii introduced three bills (House Bill 1748 and Senate Bills 1223 and 1609).
All three of the bills seek to establish a 20-year $0.70/kWh feed-in
tariff for solar photovoltaic systems up to 20 MW in size.
Hawaii
state legislature Erik Kvam of Zero Emissions Leasing who drafted the
bill says he arrived at the tariff by incorporating the federal tax
subsidy and solving a cash flow model for an internal rate of return of
15% after tax. He notes that not unsurprisingly this is similar to the
current German solar PV tariff. However, the difference is that the
feed in tariffs apply only to excess electricity from net-metering and
the tariff is capped at 5% of utility peak demand.
In January 2008, Legislature Representative Thielen introduced House Bill 3237 which was similar to those previously introduced, but with a different rate of $0.45/kWh for solar photovoltaic systems.
None of the bills were passed out of committee. They will have to be carried over to the 2009 session (Rickerson 2008). According to Kvam, "there's real interest here" on both sides of the aisle and "everyone wants to be seen as out in front on this."
The
Hawaii Electric Company will request approval from the state Public
Utilities Commission by July 2009 for a feed-in tariff system. Learn more.
Read some Hawaii Feed-In Tariff case studies.
Bills are in the state legislature, but the important action in Spring
2009 is n ongoing Public Utilities proceeding to implement the Hawaii
Clean Energy Agreement Initiative. Under the Agreement, the Governor,
Consumer Advocate, and the utilities agreed to implement a generation
cost-based feed-in tariff by July of this year. Read more.
Indiana
A bill has been introduced in the House and they have had a committee hearing, but no further action.
News:
Indianapolis Power & Light Proposes Modest Midwestern Feed-in Tariff Program
Indiana Legislator Introduces FIT Bill
Iowa
A bill, HF412, was introduced in the House that would have the Utilities Board and State Energy Board set FITs.
Illinois
In February 2008, Representative Karen May introduced the “Illinois Renewable Energy Sources Act” House Bill 5855, based on the Michigan model.
However, it was amended to remove the Feed-in Tariff. A net-metering provision was added to compensate photovoltaic generators for their excess generation at 200% of the retail rate (Sec. 16-F). Illinois had recently passed legislation to provide $1 billion in electricity rate relief in response to steep electricity price increases. In view of this, House Bill 5855 was met with significant opposition in the legislature as it was thought ratepayers would be too sensitive to legislation that may raise electricity prices (Rickerson 2008). The bill will not move back to the floor this session, but might be reintroduced in the next session as a net-metering bill enhanced to include a broader array of technologies (Rickerson 2008; House Bill 5855 Status).
Maine
The proposed
Maine feed-in tariff bill, called the Maine Renewable Energy Sources
Act, is currently being drafted with help from the MidCoast Green Collaborative, a non-profit organization, has called for feed-in tariffs as part of a broader renewable energy strategy (Kando 2008 PDF).
Legislative Representative Hannah Pingree, is working with the
Collaborative, and plans to sponsor the bill when it is complete in the
2009 session (The Coastal Journal 2008).
The
Collaborative worked with the Boston University (BU) Legislation
Clinics to develop legislative language for a Renewable Energy Payment.
The BU proposal would require a 20- year fixed price contract for
renewable generators with payment rates, determined by Maine Public
Utilities Commisssion, based on generation cost plus a reasonable
profit (Rickerson 2008).
The
public hearing on a feed-in tariff bill in the Maine legislature was
held before the Utilities and Energy Joint Committee on Tuesday, April
14. The meeting ran over 4 hours which is unusual. There was ample
support for the bill with more people prepared to testify in favor than
the committee had time to hear, about 14 of 23 who came to speak. There
was a clear majority of support in the room that was filled to
capacity. There were a few who spoke against the bill, most notably a
Central Maine Power lobbyist and a representative of big industry in
Maine. Rep. Herb Adams, is the sponsor of the bill. Read more at:
www.midcoastgreencollaborative.org (Paul Kando, Midcoast Green Collaborative, midcoastgreencollaborative@gmail.com)
Massachusetts
In 2007, Governor Deval Patrick announced a target of 250MW of solar electricity by 2017 (Rickerson 2008).
Although the state considered Renewable Energy Payments to meet the new
target, they opted to expand the rebate program for solar power for
their short-term goal of 27MW by 2011 instead. Upfront rebates were
considered cheaper for ratepayers in the short-term.
Michigan
In September 2007 Representative Kathleen Law introduced the “Michigan Renewable Energy Sources Act” House Bill 5218. The Michigan bill was inspired by Germany’s 2004 Renewable Energy Sources Act (see how Germany's Act has progressed) and Ontario's Standard Offer Program. Her bill is expected to be scheduled in September 2008.
The
bill enables generators to receive [technology-specific payments] for
wind, hydropower, biomass, landfill gas, geothermal, and solar
electricity for 20 years. A [stepped tariff design] (differing rates
paid within the technology type) is applied to wind where remuneration
is differentiated according to the quality of the plant site. Wind
systems payments start at $0.105/kWh for systems that produce an
average specific yield less than 700 KWh/m2 of swept area per year, and
progress downward to $0.08/kWh for systems that produce 1, 100 kWh/m
per year (HB 5218 Section 3-e). Small wind turbines (2000 sq.ft of wept are or less) receive a $0.25/kWh tariff.
The Bill has been referred to committee but is on hold as legislatures focus on an RPS bill for Michigan.
A legislative luncheon was held in early April organized by the World Future Council & Paul Gipe with Toby Couture from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) giving a presentation. The luncheon reinvigorated the hope of a positive legislative response to FITs in MI. (Paul Gipe, pgipe@igc.org, 416 597 2748 ex. 229)
News:
Feed-in Tariff Presentation to Michigan House Commerce Committee
Michigan PSC Weighs Pilot Feed-in Tariff
Minnesota
In February 2008, Representative David Bly introduced “Renewable Energy Feed-In Tariff Act” House Bill HF 3537. The bill is co-sponsored by Representative Bill Hilty, who chairs the Energy Finance and Policy Committee, where the bill was referred, and Assistant Majority Leader Aaron Peterson.
The bill contains the same rate structure as Michigan’s bill, except there are no rates for geothermal resources and small wind generators are defined as systems with 1000 square feet of swept area or less.
Unique to the Minnesota bill, generators must be majority owned by Minnesotans as defined in the state’s Community-Based Energy Development (C-BED) statute. If Minnesota transitions to a C-BED feed-in-tariff as the bill proposes, it could spread to other states such as Nebraska (Legislative Bill 629), South Dakota (Senate Bill 71 PDF), and Iowa (Senate File 255), which have passed or are considering C-BED legislation similar to Minnesota’s (Rickerson 2008).
This bill will not move to the floor during this session.
For the second year in a row, state legislators in Minnesota proposed a statewide feed-in tariff. The 2009 proposal differed sharply from the prior year's, narrowing technologies down to wind and solar PV, capping the program at 20 percent of the state's renewable energy standard (RES), and creating a rate equalization formula that would share the cost equitably across all state utilities.
Despite the changes, the bill fared no better in this session. The House Energy Finance and Policy Division held a hearing on the bill - HF 932 in April but took no action. Utilities lined up to oppose the bill, focusing on the price offered for solar PV and the price setting mechanism. Advocates included the North American Water Office, Windustry, Audubon Minnesota, and the Institute for Local Self-Reliance (ILSR). There was also a companion bill in the Minnesota Senate - SF 843 - but no action was taken. (John Farrell, Research Associate, ILSR, jfarrell@ilsr.org, 612 379 3815 ex. 210)
New Jersey
New
Jersey was an early adopter of a [Renewable Portfolio Standard] target
specifically for solar (2% by 2020) and it quickly became the second
largest solar power market in the country after California (Prometheu Institute PDF 2006).
Between 2002 and 2006, New Jersey achieved triple digit solar market
growth through a mix of upfront state rebates (link to a section
defining rebates) and solar Renewable Energy Certificates(link).
Although this model was highly successful, state officials were
concerned that rebate budgets would not be sufficient to reach the full
solar target (White Paper Series: NJ’s Solar Market 2006, Winka 2-7 PDF).
[An
RPS Transition Working Group] was established to consider various
principles and financing models outlined in a series of [White Papers]
to support the continued growth and expansion of New Jersey’s solar
market. The Summit Blue team assisted the New Jersey Board Of Public
Utilities in this market transition stakeholder process by preparing
two reports: a qualitative review of market transition options
(Review PDF) proposed by stakeholders and an analysis of estimated ratepayer impacts from the proposed models (Analysis PDF).
The
latter report found that the investor security created by feed-in
tariffs would lead to lower rate-payer impacts than any other model
including RECs and a Hybrid-tariff model (links defining).
Nevertheless, the Board opted for a pure solar REC market (Preliminary review of alternatives for transitioning the New Jersey solar market from rebates to market-based incentives).
New Mexico
A bill, HM87, was introduced in the House. It would require a committee to establish a FIT.
New York
To meet the New York’s Renewable Portfolio Standard obligation, the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA)
centrally procures long-term Renewable Energy Certificate contracts on
behalf of utilities. However, NYSERDA has been authorized to use a
wide-range of policy mechanisms to procure RECs, one of which was a
standard offer contract, which would be similar to a REC-only Renewable
Energy Payment.
A bill has been introduced in both the Assembly and Senate. The Senate sponsor is Antoine Thompson, from Buffalo. (His aide, Bill Nowak: 716-854-8705, or, 716 882 9237)
Oregon
Two of Oregon's
Wind Working Group meetings, one in the fall of 2004, and one in spring
2006, have included discussions of Feed-In Tariffs, modeled
after the European experience. In 2006, they concluded that renewable
energy payments could be effective for supporting distributed
generation and should be explored. However in 2007, the state passed a
Renewable Portfolio Standard that didn’t include any elements of a
renewable energy payment mechanism (Rickerson 2007 PDF).
Oregon
Governor Kulongoski announced his climate change plan for the 2009
legislative session. It included: "Expand Solar Pilot Projects: To
accelerate and expand the use of solar energy in Oregon, this
legislation will create a production incentive pilot program that will
pay for the electricity produced by a solar project, rather than for
the capital investments. Known also as a feed-in tariff, this type of
incentive program has led to the installation of more than 2,500
megawatts of solar electricity in Germany. The objective of Oregon’s
pilot program is to determine if production payments make it more
affordable for individuals and communities to invest in solar energy,
which could lead to the acceleration and installation of renewable
projects."
In fall 2008, Oregonians started looking for policies that were more
efficient and effective at promoting the generation of renewable energy
than existing tax incentive policies. Citizens contacted ARE for help.
ARE steering committee member Jennifer Gleason who works in Oregon with
the Environmental Law Alliance Worldwide (ELAW) helped Oregonians learn
about REPs. A loose coalition of Organizations and people have now
formed a group called Oregonians for Renewable Energy Payments (OREP).
At the end of the year, Oregon Governor Kulongoski proposed a pilot
production-based incentive program for solar energy. OREP began working
to ensure that the Governor’s pilot project would be strong.
Disappointed that the proposed bill was not a true REP, OREP asked
Jennifer to draft a strong bill for Oregon. OREP’s bill (HB 3038-1) has
been introduced in the house.
Several ARE steering committee members helped in the drafting of the
bill and ARE member Bianca Barth spent a week in Oregon educating
people about the success of Germany’s program.
The House Sustainability & Economic Development Committee is
currently considering three bills that have some form of a REP in
them. Each of these bills is stronger than it would have been without
the involvement of ARE. (Jennifer Gleason, Staff Attorney, Environmental Law Alliance Worldwide (ELAW), jen@elaw.org, 541 687-8454 ext. 15)
Rhode Island
In 2008, Representative Ray Sullivan introduced the “Rhode Island Renewable Energy Sources Act” House Bill H7616.
Unlike
Michigan, Illinois, and Minnesota, the Rhode Island Bill does not use a
sliding scale (stepped tariff design) for wind systems. Rather systems
below 20MW can receive a $0.115 payment and 20-50MW are eligible for a
$0.105 payment. Further its solar PV payments are far lower than any of
the other bills. Resources without prescribed rates are guaranteed a
payment 1.15 times greater than the avoided cost.
This bill is still being negotiated.
Virginia
Virginia’s Governor’s Climate Change Commission recommended a feasibility study for FITs.
Vermont
The following is taken verbatim from Wilson Rickerson et al's 2008 report:
In 2005, Vermont passed legislation creating the Sustainably Priced
Energy Enterprise Development (SPEED) program as part of its renewable
portfolio goal legislation. Under the SPEED statute, the legislature
directed the Vermont Public Service Board (PSB) to establish long-term
contracts for facilities one megawatt or less in size. The legislation
did not set specific contract rates or length, but the Board was
directed to establish contracts "at a specified margin below the hourly
spot market price." On March 19th, 2008 Senate Bill 209 (Lyons) amended
the SPEED statute such that projects of one MW or less are allowed to
sell power under 15 year long-term contracts at levels that are
"adequate to promote" renewable resources, rather than linked to the
spot market price. The PSB was also directed to establish standard
long-term contracts for generators over one MW, which utilities are
encouraged to enter into. The state goal is that 20% of retail
electricity sales will come from SPEED resources by 2017, but the
legislation contains clauses that would suspend SPEED contracts if it
is determined that sufficient market growth has occurred by 2012.
On Earth Day the Vermont House of Representatives passed House Bill 446, the Vermont Energy Act of 2009. The bill includes changes to Vermont's Sustainably Priced Energy Enterprise Development Program (SPEED) that would implement a pilot feed-in tariff policy . Learn more: H 446 Bill As Passed by House, and H 446 Bill Status.
The proposed standard contract program is modest even by North American standards. There is a severe restriction on the extent of the program. Nevertheless, this is the first bill proposing a system of feed-in tariffs that has both been reported out of committee and passed one chamber of a bi-cameral legislature in the United States.
Here are several key elements of H. 446 as passed by the House.
- Program cap of 50 MW
- Project size cap of 2.2 MW
- Contract term: 20 years
- Wind energy tariffs
<15 kW: $0.20/kWh
>15 kW: $0.14/kWh
- Landfill and biogas tariff of $0.12/kWh
- Solar tariff of $0.30/kWh
- Future tariffs based on cost of generation plus profit less applicable tax credits and Other Incentives
- Profit set at rate of return of Vermont electric utilities
- Open a regulatory examination of the tariffs by September 15, 2009 and new rates set in January, 2010
The bill was assigned to the Senate Committee on Natural Resources and Energy April 28, 2009 and passed the committee April 29. The bill now moves to the Senate Finance Committee.
Washington State
In May 2005, the Washington State Senate Bill 5101
passed in the Assembly creating a Renewable Energy Payment law for
small solar, wind, and biogas projects. Homes and businesses with solar
PV and wind power systems would earn a credit of 15 cents per kWh of
electricity generated by their renewable energy systems up to $2000
annually, fixed over a 10 year period beginning July 1, 2005. The bill
combines economic multipliers to increase the system owner's payment
rate if the project's components are manufactured in Washington. This
can raise the 15 cent per kWh credit up to as much as 54 cents per kWh (Renewable Energy World 2005).
The
weakness of this REP is that the price is too low and the contract term
(10 years) is too short to make a viable business case for a 3.5
kW-size system. Further, money for the REP is not collected directly
from ratepayers a key difference to a model REP (link to part of the
website that would describe this) (Gipe 2008).
At least four ‘misguided’ feed-in tariff bills were introduced in the House and Senate and moved forward in committees. The last day for any bill to move is April 24th. Supporters are waiting to see what happens.
For more information on developments in Washington State, contact Mike Nelson, Northwest Solar Center, 206 396 8446.
Wisconsin
RENEW Wisconsin, a network of clean energy businesses, educators, utility managers, farmers, builders, and other concerned citizens, filed testimony with the Wisconsin Public Service Commission on September 18, 2006 calling for implementation of Renewable Energy Payments (also known as Advanced Renewable Tariffs) in the state by January 1, 2008. (Gipe, 2006).
This was the first formal action by a non-governmental organization in the US to urge the adoption of Renewable Energy Payments to successfully spur rapid development of renewable energy.
Governor James Doyle of Wisconsin created the Governor’s Task Force on Global Warming (TFGW) in April 2007. The Task Force is finalizing its policy recommendations and a Feed-In Tariff is currently under consideration (REP Proposal PDF) They recommend it for renewable generators 15MW of smaller. The Wisconsin Public Service Commission would set the long-term fixed payment rate in 2009 based on generation cost plus profit.
The FIT would be a component of an “enhanced Renewable Portfolio Standard.” A utility company can apply generation purchased under the Feed-in Tariff policy toward its RPS obligations. Renewable certificates generated under the policy would be granted to the utility company engaging in the power purchase agreement (FIT Proposal PDF). This is a clear example of how the best features of different FIT, REC and RPS can be brought out in a well designed integrated policy mix (link to section of website that speaks to this).
WE Energies (PDF of their RE policies) and Madison and Electric (their RE policies) are examples of utilities (link to whats in it for utilities part of the website) that have small renewable energy payment programs (Gipe 2008).
In January, the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin opened a docket to investigate what they are calling, ‘Advanced Renewable Tariffs’ (ARTs). In opening the document, the Commission listed a series of questions seeking comments on every facet of ARTs. Comments from RENEW Wisconsin and Clean Wisconsin were filed on Feb. 17. The groups are awaiting a determination from the Commission about next steps in this proceeding. Comments filed by RENEW Wisconsin and Clean Wisconsin can be accessed at the URL below: http://renewwisconsinblog.org/2009/02/18/renew-clean-wi-submits-comments-to-support-higher-buy-back-rates-for-small-renewable-installations/
To review all documents submitted in response to the Commission's investigation, go to the url below and type in 05 EI 148 in the docket box: http://psc.wi.gov/apps/erf_search/content/result.asp (Michael Vickerman, Ex. Dir., RENEW Wisconsin, mvickerman@renewwisconsin.org, 608 255 4044, www.renewwisconsin.org)
News:
RENEW Wisconsin Argues for Generic Feed-in Tariff Case
