This week saw important developments in renewable energy for the State of Nebraska. On Wednesday, the Natural Resources Committee announced the introduction of a study resolution on wind energy development. The impetus for this study, LR 83, came from LB 437, introduced by Senator Ken Haar, which called for the creation of a task force to study wind energy development. Unlike some years when a study might be viewed as an alternative to taking action, this study appears intended to develop the fundamentals for necessary policy changes to encourage wind development. The entire Natural Resources Committee chaired by Senator Chris Langemeier signed onto the study, along with Senators Mike Gloor, Bob Giese, Tom Hansen and Pete Pirsch. The fact that Senator Langemeier called a press conference to announce its introduction and Senator Haar prepared press packets are other indications of the importance the issue is being given.
The committee will convene a task force of experts on wind generation and transmission issues as well as an advisory group to review, advise and make recommendations to the committee. Issues to be examined include the roles of the utilities and private developers in wind generation and for export, the role of the Power Review Board, environmental impacts of developing wind energy, including transmission needs, and the financial benefits and risks to Nebraskans due to expansion of wind development. As Senator Haar put it, “We’re taking a step forward.” I believe this study resolution reflects a substantial step forward in the way renewable energy is viewed by policy-makers. I have received assurances that the Sierra Club will have a place in the advisory group.
On Thursday LB 436, Senator Haar’s net metering bill, was debated on General File, the first stage of debate by the entire Legislature. Net metering allows electric customers who generate electricity through renewable sources to receive credit for electricity they put on the grid. This provides an incentive for consumers to invest in small renewable generation systems. We have been working on net metering legislation for many years and had never gotten a bill that we could support out of committee before this. As amended by the Natural Resources Committee, LB 436 reflected a compromise which was acceptable to many organizations. With the Sierra Club, Farmers Union, the public power districts and several other organizations all supporting LB 436, it was advanced on a vote of 45 to 0.
Although LB 436 doesn’t have everything we want, it does have the following components that are important in a net metering bill, including one to one credit for energy generated up to the amount used, protection against additional utility charges and fees, protection against unnecessary safety or performance standards, and prohibition of additional liability insurance. On the other hand, there are several issues that we believe should be addressed, including individual capacity limits and the manner in which credits are provided. At the present time LB 436 has a 25 kw individual system capacity limit and provides for monetary credits rather than kilowatt carryover for excess energy generation. We would like to see the individual system capacity limit increased, and I spoke with several senators about introducing an amendment to increase the limit. We also believe the law should provide for kilowatt carryover credit for excess energy generation rather than monetary credit since that provides more benefit to most customer generators. Although we believe LB 436 represents an important step forward, we will continue to work for a net metering policy that provides the most benefits for small renewable energy generators.
In other news, LB 56, which would weaken the “bad actor” provisions that allow DEQ to revoke a permit for three serious violations of the Livestock Waste Management Act, was advanced from General File on Thursday. We continue to oppose the bill because we believe it is unnecessary, since there are only three operations that have single strikes against them. However, the Committee Amendments changed the standard for violation back to the negligence standard that DEQ is currently using, which is an improvement over the original bill.
We also continue to oppose LB 134, introduced by Senator Pankonin, which would make it difficult for Natural Resource Districts (NRDs) to obtain land for recreational trails, by eliminating their eminent domain authority for this purpose. I have had several friendly conversations with Senator Pankonin about working out a compromise that will support building trails, but we do not yet have an agreement on this issue. We are working with a broad coalition to oppose this bill including runners, cyclists and other trail advocates.
I have attached links to stories in the Lincoln Journal Star about the two energy issues I described at the beginning of the blog.
The Wind Energy Study Article
The Net Metering Study Article
–Ken Winston