Original Article: http://www.pal-item.com/article/20101108/NEWS01/11080320
Utility considers allowing customers with wind, solar power or generators to sell power back
By Pam Tharp • Correspondent • November 8, 2010
Richmond Power & Light customers who also generate their own power might soon be able to sell extra kilowatts to RP&L.
Customers with wind or solar power systems or generators could sell their excess power back to the electrical grid if RP&L adopts a net metering ordinance, RP&L general manager Steve Saum said. The RP&L board will review a proposed ordinance for net metering at its Nov. 15 meeting.
The amount of electricity a customer could sell to the grid is limited to 10 kilowatts at any one time. Customers with higher generation capacity would need an agreement with the Indiana Municipal Power Agency, Saum said.
RP&L charges its customers 7.5 to 8 cents per kilowatt hour. Customers with extra power to sell would be paid at half of that rate, about 4.5 cents, because the higher rate includes the utility's fixed costs for line maintenance and overhead, Saum said.
Saum's unsure how many customers are generating power using solar panels or wind turbines but said he's had some inquiries about selling power back to the grid.
"Green" energy systems that power the sustainable living house at Centerville's Cope Environmental Center have transferred 540 kilowatts to Whitewater Valley REMC since April 2009, said Cope executive director Stephanie Hays-Mussoni. A 1-kilowatt wind turbine and a 900-watt solar panel power the sustainable living house.
Cope staff gets numerous inquiries about wind and solar power for home use, Hays-Mussoni said. Few follow through because of the substantial capital investment required -- about $20,000 to $25,000 for the systems and extra insulation, she said.
"We aren't currently selling the power back, but it does go back to the grid," Hays-Mussoni said. "It's not a whole lot of power. The turbine and solar panel provide 60 percent of the energy used by the residents of the sustainable house throughout the year. The systems don't provide energy all the time because sometimes the sun doesn't shine and the wind doesn't blow."
A disconnect switch is required for any system that would send power back to RP&L or other utilities. The switch automatically disconnects the private system line from the utility during a power failure, Saum said. Without the switch, a lineman working on a power failure issue could be injured by electricity flowing back into the line from a home generation system. The disconnect switch also must be inspected by the city building inspector before power sales can begin, Saum said.
RP&L board member Larry Parker was concerned earlier this week about the safety of RP&L linemen if a power outage occurred.
"How will we know if the disconnect switch has been installed?" Parker asked. "I don't want one of our linemen being killed because of this."
Those who enroll in the net metering program would be required to sign a form verifying the disconnect switch was installed, Saum said. Linemen also are trained to be cautious during outages, he said.
"If the line is out and we see lights, they know there's a generator or something producing power in the home," Saum said.
Board member Jack Elstro questioned the wisdom of the program.
"Why do we want to do this? To me, it's foolish," Elstro said.
The Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission is encouraging utilities to allow customers who generate excess electrical power to sell it to the power grid, Saum said.
"The IURC is trying to push it pretty hard. They've had complaints from customers whose utility didn't have a net metering ordinance," Saum said. "It's not mandatory yet for utilities to do this. We're trying to be proactive and be ready to handle it."
For more information
A customer interested in selling electricity to Richmond Power & Light should contact the utility for additional information, RP&L manager Steve Saum said. The net metering agreement is a legal document that includes acceptance of liability, and the required disconnect switch must be inspected and approved by the city of Richmond's building inspector, Saum said.
Comment on this story at palitem@pal-item.com.
This article brought to you by the Indiana Renewable Energy Association.
Showing posts with label Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission. Show all posts
Saturday, November 13, 2010
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
IURC Denies Petition for Clarification in Generic DSM Investigation
For a little background on this story, please see this earlier blog post. http://blog.indianarenew.org/2009/12/jolted-into-efficiency-we-all-must-do.html.
The Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission (IURC) issued the following order in Cause No. 42693 on Demand Side Management. In denying the requested clarification it looks to me that the IURC basically told the affected utilities to just read the order. PERIOD. END OF STORY. Here is the order issued today in its entirety.
On July 28, 2004, the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission ("Commission") initiated an investigation to review Demand Side Management ("DSM") issues and programs in the State of Indiana. The Commission issued its Phase I Order in this proceeding on April 23, 2008. In its Phase I Order, the Commission outlined a series of issues to be addressed in Phase II of this proceeding. Pursuant to notice, duly published as required by law, an Evidentiary Hearing was held in Phase II of this proceeding on August 25, 2009, at 9:30 a.m. EDT, in Room 222, National City Center, 101 West Washington Street, Indianapolis, Indiana. Following the Evidentiary Hearing and the submission of proposed orders, the Commission issued a Phase II Order in this Proceeding on December 9, 2009.
On December 29, 2009, Anderson Municipal Light & Power ("Anderson"); City of Auburn, Indiana ("Auburn"); Duke Energy Indiana, Inc. ("Duke Energy Indiana"); Harrison County Rural Electric Membership Corporation; Hoosier Energy Rural Electric Cooperative, Inc.; Indiana Michigan Power Company; Indiana Municipal Power Agency; Indianapolis Power & Light Company; Jackson County Rural Electric Membership Corporation; Marshall County Rural Electric Membership Corporation; Mishawaka Utilities; Northern Indiana Public Service Company; Northeastern Rural Electric Membership Corporation; Richmond Power & Light; Southern Indiana Gas & Electric Company, d/b/a Vectren Energy Delivery of Indiana, Inc.; and Wabash Valley Power Association, Inc. (all of the foregoing referred to herein as the "Utility Group") filed a Petition for Reconsideration in the Nature of Clarification ("Motion for Clarification" or "Motion") of the Phase II Order.
In its Motion for Clarification, the Utility Group indicated that the Motion "identifies some, but not all, of the questions and issues arising from the Commission's Phase II Order." Notwithstanding this caveat, the Motion for Clarification specifically identifies certain issues that the Utility Group contends are in need of clarification and intersperses additional arguments with respect to additional issues.
With respect to specific issues identified in the Motion for Clarification, the Utility Group presents the following matters for consideration by the Commission: (1) whether the percentages by year of annual savings goals in the Phase II Order are intended to be annual savings or incremental annual savings targets; (2) whether core and non-core programs count toward the energy efficiency targets; (3) whether historical utility-sponsored DSM program savings count toward the saving targets; (4) whether the current economic downturn in electricity sales will be considered vis-a-vis achievement of the interim or overall goals; (5) how the load from customers that are allowed to opt out of programs will be addressed with respect to measuring savings; (6) how fluctuations in large customer load will impact goal achievement and whether issues regarding the harmonization of the target savings with other state policies such as economic development will be considered; (7) how state and federal codes/standards may be counted toward the achievement of the established goals and if utility advocacy with respect to participation in the establishment of increased codes and standards will be recognized in determining compliance with the energy savings goals; (8) whether, additional evidence related to any of these issues may be presented in the Implementation Subdocket; (9) whether the requirements contained in the Phase II Order will be adjusted to reflect decisions made
throughout the Implementation Subdocket.
The Commission has reviewed the Motion for Clarification and finds that the Phase II Order is clear on its face with respect to its specific conclusions as well as the specific limited issues to be considered by the Commission in the Implementation Subdocket. Therefore, the Motion for Clarification is hereby denied. In reaching this conclusion, the Commission notes that it conducted an Attorneys' Conference on January 26, 2010 in an effort to facilitate implementation of the Phase II Order and that Commission staff will continue to work with the parties in the Implementation Subdocket to ensure that the provisions of the Phase II Order are effectuated in a timely manner.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED BY THE INDIANA UTILITY REGULATORY COMMISSION that:
1. The Motion for Reconsideration in the Nature of Clarification filed in this matter on December 29, 2009, is hereby denied in its entirety by the Commission.
2. This Order shall be effective on and after the date of its approval.
HARDY, ATTERHOLT, GOLC AND ZIEGNER CONCUR; LANDIS ABSENT:
APPROVED: Feb. 3, 2010
The Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission (IURC) issued the following order in Cause No. 42693 on Demand Side Management. In denying the requested clarification it looks to me that the IURC basically told the affected utilities to just read the order. PERIOD. END OF STORY. Here is the order issued today in its entirety.
On July 28, 2004, the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission ("Commission") initiated an investigation to review Demand Side Management ("DSM") issues and programs in the State of Indiana. The Commission issued its Phase I Order in this proceeding on April 23, 2008. In its Phase I Order, the Commission outlined a series of issues to be addressed in Phase II of this proceeding. Pursuant to notice, duly published as required by law, an Evidentiary Hearing was held in Phase II of this proceeding on August 25, 2009, at 9:30 a.m. EDT, in Room 222, National City Center, 101 West Washington Street, Indianapolis, Indiana. Following the Evidentiary Hearing and the submission of proposed orders, the Commission issued a Phase II Order in this Proceeding on December 9, 2009.
On December 29, 2009, Anderson Municipal Light & Power ("Anderson"); City of Auburn, Indiana ("Auburn"); Duke Energy Indiana, Inc. ("Duke Energy Indiana"); Harrison County Rural Electric Membership Corporation; Hoosier Energy Rural Electric Cooperative, Inc.; Indiana Michigan Power Company; Indiana Municipal Power Agency; Indianapolis Power & Light Company; Jackson County Rural Electric Membership Corporation; Marshall County Rural Electric Membership Corporation; Mishawaka Utilities; Northern Indiana Public Service Company; Northeastern Rural Electric Membership Corporation; Richmond Power & Light; Southern Indiana Gas & Electric Company, d/b/a Vectren Energy Delivery of Indiana, Inc.; and Wabash Valley Power Association, Inc. (all of the foregoing referred to herein as the "Utility Group") filed a Petition for Reconsideration in the Nature of Clarification ("Motion for Clarification" or "Motion") of the Phase II Order.
In its Motion for Clarification, the Utility Group indicated that the Motion "identifies some, but not all, of the questions and issues arising from the Commission's Phase II Order." Notwithstanding this caveat, the Motion for Clarification specifically identifies certain issues that the Utility Group contends are in need of clarification and intersperses additional arguments with respect to additional issues.
With respect to specific issues identified in the Motion for Clarification, the Utility Group presents the following matters for consideration by the Commission: (1) whether the percentages by year of annual savings goals in the Phase II Order are intended to be annual savings or incremental annual savings targets; (2) whether core and non-core programs count toward the energy efficiency targets; (3) whether historical utility-sponsored DSM program savings count toward the saving targets; (4) whether the current economic downturn in electricity sales will be considered vis-a-vis achievement of the interim or overall goals; (5) how the load from customers that are allowed to opt out of programs will be addressed with respect to measuring savings; (6) how fluctuations in large customer load will impact goal achievement and whether issues regarding the harmonization of the target savings with other state policies such as economic development will be considered; (7) how state and federal codes/standards may be counted toward the achievement of the established goals and if utility advocacy with respect to participation in the establishment of increased codes and standards will be recognized in determining compliance with the energy savings goals; (8) whether, additional evidence related to any of these issues may be presented in the Implementation Subdocket; (9) whether the requirements contained in the Phase II Order will be adjusted to reflect decisions made
throughout the Implementation Subdocket.
The Commission has reviewed the Motion for Clarification and finds that the Phase II Order is clear on its face with respect to its specific conclusions as well as the specific limited issues to be considered by the Commission in the Implementation Subdocket. Therefore, the Motion for Clarification is hereby denied. In reaching this conclusion, the Commission notes that it conducted an Attorneys' Conference on January 26, 2010 in an effort to facilitate implementation of the Phase II Order and that Commission staff will continue to work with the parties in the Implementation Subdocket to ensure that the provisions of the Phase II Order are effectuated in a timely manner.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED BY THE INDIANA UTILITY REGULATORY COMMISSION that:
1. The Motion for Reconsideration in the Nature of Clarification filed in this matter on December 29, 2009, is hereby denied in its entirety by the Commission.
2. This Order shall be effective on and after the date of its approval.
HARDY, ATTERHOLT, GOLC AND ZIEGNER CONCUR; LANDIS ABSENT:
APPROVED: Feb. 3, 2010
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
IURC Approves Muny Electric Net Metering Tariffs
Today (01/13/10) during the weekly meeting of the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission (IURC), the Commission approved its Weekly Utility Articles that included approval for four (4) municipal electric utilities that requested to adopt net metering tariffs. The utilities are as follows:
Anderson Municpal Light and Power,
Lebanon Utilities,
Crawfordsville Electric Light and Power, and
Columbia City Municpal Electric Utility.
The 30-Day Utility Articles approved today can be found at http://www.in.gov/iurc/files/u011310s.pdf
These four municipal electric utilities needed IURC approval to create a net metering tariff since they have choosen to remain under IURC rate regulation rather than to opt out of IURC jurisdiction as many other municipal electric utilities have. See http://www.in.gov/iurc/2340.htm for a list of utilities that have opted out, etc.
Each of the four utilities proposed identical proposed net metering tariffs that reflect the current IURC rules for Investor Owned Utilities (IOU's) with one exception, they proposed that their net metering tariffs be available for all classes of customers not just residential and K-12 schools. Hence, the system size limit is 10 kW and is proposed to be .1% of their most recent summer peak load of the utility.
Eric Cotton, a partner in ECI Wind and Solar, VP of the Indiana Renewable Energy Association and Treasurer of the newly formed Indiana Distributed Energy Advocates (IDEA), commended the action taken today by the IURC.
"These four municipal electric utilities should be commended for their leadership in promoting renewable energy development in their service territories by proposing these net metering tariffs." said Cotton. "We look forward to working with these utilities and their customers to install renewable energy systems."
This article brought to you by the Indiana Renewable Energy Association and Indiana Distributed Energy Advocates.
Anderson Municpal Light and Power,
Lebanon Utilities,
Crawfordsville Electric Light and Power, and
Columbia City Municpal Electric Utility.
The 30-Day Utility Articles approved today can be found at http://www.in.gov/iurc/files/u011310s.pdf
These four municipal electric utilities needed IURC approval to create a net metering tariff since they have choosen to remain under IURC rate regulation rather than to opt out of IURC jurisdiction as many other municipal electric utilities have. See http://www.in.gov/iurc/2340.htm for a list of utilities that have opted out, etc.
Each of the four utilities proposed identical proposed net metering tariffs that reflect the current IURC rules for Investor Owned Utilities (IOU's) with one exception, they proposed that their net metering tariffs be available for all classes of customers not just residential and K-12 schools. Hence, the system size limit is 10 kW and is proposed to be .1% of their most recent summer peak load of the utility.
Eric Cotton, a partner in ECI Wind and Solar, VP of the Indiana Renewable Energy Association and Treasurer of the newly formed Indiana Distributed Energy Advocates (IDEA), commended the action taken today by the IURC.
"These four municipal electric utilities should be commended for their leadership in promoting renewable energy development in their service territories by proposing these net metering tariffs." said Cotton. "We look forward to working with these utilities and their customers to install renewable energy systems."
This article brought to you by the Indiana Renewable Energy Association and Indiana Distributed Energy Advocates.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
