Comments - Lisa Linowes: Wind Energy Without the PTC (Master Resource) - Citizens' Task Force on Wind Power - Maine2024-03-28T10:08:09Zhttps://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/comment/feed?attachedTo=4401701%3ABlogPost%3A38848&xn_auth=noThank you Lisa for your …tag:www.windtaskforce.org,2012-05-11:4401701:Comment:387892012-05-11T15:21:33.085ZMonique Aniel Thurstonhttps://www.windtaskforce.org/profile/moniqueaniel
<p>Thank you Lisa for your review of the history , current situation and future of the PTC and of the role and interconnection of the RPS mandates as a basis for the future of wind power cost .</p>
<p>This was certainly a " coup of genius "of an industry knowing well that it needed to be accepted ,if not imposed , because neither competitive , necessary, reliable nor palatable .</p>
<p>This sad state of affairs was started in Maine by Angus King who …</p>
<p>Thank you Lisa for your review of the history , current situation and future of the PTC and of the role and interconnection of the RPS mandates as a basis for the future of wind power cost .</p>
<p>This was certainly a " coup of genius "of an industry knowing well that it needed to be accepted ,if not imposed , because neither competitive , necessary, reliable nor palatable .</p>
<p>This sad state of affairs was started in Maine by Angus King who signed one the first state RPS Act in 1997 ( see below ).</p>
<p>Followed after that the REGGIE mandates and finally the Expedited Wind Law ( LD 2283) which removed all scenic obstacles for wind turbines and sacrificing more than a quarter of the State of Maine to the turbines altar .</p>
<p>The profound deceit of that law is based on its premises :</p>
<p>. reducing carbon emission ( purely assumptive and whose mission to verify its accuracy and to monitor quantitatively its progress was delegated to the legislature who failed to do so since 2008) </p>
<p>. the preservation of the Scenic Quality of Maine ( a perverse statement of ironical and deceptive quality since scenic was no longer a consideration in the permitting of wind power except for some very specific sites)</p>
<p>. the concept of tangible benefits ( unpredictable because of the complex relationsip between town valuations and state revenue sharing).</p>
<p>In Maine, the path to expensive wind generation was carved in two steps : First Renewables mandates , then a law ( LD 2283 ) pursuing actively the elimination of 40 years of protection of Maine Natural beauty by all regulatory agencies. </p>
<p>It is important however to remember that Governor Lepage tried both to decrease the growth of the RPS mandates during last year's legislative session and this year tried to lift the 100 MW ceiling for renewable generators with a bill called :" LD 1863 An Act to Lower the Price of Electricity for Maine Consumers":</p>
<p>This bill would have removed the 100 megawatt cap for qualifying renewable generation, specifically hydro power. Wind generation can already qualify if greater than 100 MW. This re-enforced the policy that long term contracts for electricity must place reducing electric prices as a top priority.</p>
<p>In our testimony we mentioned that Maine's renewable generation is largely owned by out of state, or foreign entities, so there is little basis for protecting their interests at the expense of higher costs for ratepayers for potentially more expensive in-state generation. ( An argument used by EUT committee Chair Stacy Fitts , who was the architect behind any attempt to correct LD 2283 for the past two years ) </p>
<p>We also expressed our concerns that with potential failure of Production Tax Credits ( this testimony was given in April when the fourth attempt to extend the PTC had failed ) to be extended by the federal government, there is a heightened risk that RPS mandates will force suppliers to "cover the PTC cost" with higher rates since wind developers are essentially going to have to make up for $22 per MW of lost income. Allowing HQ to fulfill RPS requirements will moderate that risk.</p>
<p>The Governor's RPS bill was killed in the Energy , Utility and Technology Committee in 2011 and , LD 1863, was rejected ( after being amended ) during the last week of the Maine legislative session in April .( 2012 )</p>
<p> From your analysis Lisa , it seems that Maine will be suffering from a increase in the cost of wind energy if the PTC is not extended .</p>
<p>But the legislators could not say that they have not been warned !!!!</p>
<p>With only a fraction of the 2700 MW of wind recommended by LD 2283 in place and thus potentially thousand of new MW constructed without the PTC , it is urgent for the new Maine legislature to address the problem of the real cost of wind .</p>
<p>We have urged the Legislature to review ,amend or rescind LD 2283 for two years now .</p>
<p>We have asked three moratoriums in the past three years to two different governors.</p>
<p>We have addressed the noise and scenic issues .</p>
<p>Thank you Lisa for pointing us to the stark reality of the economics of wind power without subsidies .</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Monique</p>
<p>Please read below from PUC website in 1997 :</p>
<p> </p>
<p><u><i>Maine</i></u> <font color="#000080"><b>Legislature Adopts Portfolio Standard</b></font>On May 29, 1997, Governor Angus S. King signed into law a bill to restructure the state's electric power industry. As of March 1, 2000, the state's investor-owned utilities will no longer own power plants. These utilities will continue to be regulated as transmission and distribution providers, and retail customers will be able to choose their electricity provider in a competitive market. Recovery of stranded costs has been referred to the PUC for adjudicatory proceedings by July 1, 1999.</p>
<p>The law establishes a renewable portfolio standard as a component of power provider licensing, which requires each competitive electricity provider to include no less than 30% of its supply from renewable resources, including hydro. The law also requires the PUC to establish information disclosure standards for competitive electricity providers so that consumers can make informed market choices and to establish a program allowing retail customers to make voluntary contributions to fund renewables-related research and development (R&D). <font color="#000080"><b>PUC Contact:</b></font> <font color="#000080"><b><i>Faith Huntington, (207) 287-1373</i></b></font></p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p><font color="#000080"><b><i> </i></b></font></p>
<p><font color="#000080"><b><i> </i></b></font></p>
<p> </p>