note: This wordpress blog will no longer be used by the chapter and will be taken down in the near future. Thank you all for your support.

The following are some of the components of LB 436 that represent positive policy steps: First, it creates a statewide net metering policy; second, there is one to one credit for energy generated up to the amount used; third, there is protection against additional utility charges and unnecessary performance standards, and fourth, there is a prohibition against additional liability insurance. I understand there will be an interim study on net metering and we will to continue to support efforts to advance best practices including increasing the individual system capacity limit from the 25 kw limit and providing kilowatt carryover for excess energy generation with the goal of establishing 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 also debated by the Legislature. We opposed the bill in committee and at every stage of debate. In the earlier stages of the legislative process there wasn’t much opposition to the bill. On the Select File, the second stage of debate by the Legislature,  we worked with the Nebraska Farmers Union, Nebraska Environmental Action Coalition and a number of concerned citizens to mount a last ditch effort to attack the bill. As a result of our efforts we were able to get the bill amended back to the original three “strikes” as opposed to the five strikes proposed by the Committee Amendments. Although we weren’t able to stop the bill, it is substantially less onerous than the original bill. Hopefully we will be able to get our coalition of opposition engaged earlier the next time we have to deal with legislation like this, which will improve the odds of stopping it.

Regarding LB 134, at the present time there is an agreement to put a hold on the bill pending the passage of a resolution by the NRD that it would not use eminent domain authority for recreational trails during the next year. In the meantime, there would be an interim study on the process of locating recreational trails. I am optimistic that this agreement will be solidified and carried out over the next year. I appreciate the conversations that I have had with Senator Pankonin, Senator Haar, Senator Gloor and others about this issue and hope this will lead to a process for developing a positive long-term policy for trail development.    

–Ken Winston 

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

“ENERGY: A TIME FOR ACTION”
Sunday, April 19th
1:00 p.m. – 5:00 p.m.
12th and R Streets and UNL City Campus

Be a part of Lincoln’s largest Earth Day Festival, a free community event on Sunday April 19th 2009!  

Earth Day is Coming!  It is Saturday, April 18th. noon to 8pm at Elmwood Park, Omaha (near the UNO Campus). 
The Earth Day Omaha Coalition is seeking volunteers. 

President Obama’s 2010 Budget includes:

Healthcare reform that extends unemployment healthcare benefits during an economically turbulent time. Expansion of Pell Grants to reduce amount of debt students acquire while pursuing post-secondary education. Permanent tax cuts for the middle class. Investments in the clean energy and developing a carbon cap-and-trade system that expedites the formation of the clean energy economy and curbs climate change. Creates jobs by investing in infrastructure for bridges, waterways, mass transit, and aviation system.

Please call: 1-888-436-8427 to connect to the congressional switchboard and ask to speak with your elected representative: Senator Johanns and Senator Nelson, Congressman Fortenberry (District 1) Congressman Terry (District 2) Congressman Smith (District 3) All three of your representatives will vote on this bill, make sure they each hear from you! Thanks for your support with Nebraska Chapter Sierra Club.

–Brittany Crawford

The other committee priority bill named by the Natural Resources Committee was LB 561, introduced by Senator Lathrop, which provides an exemption from eminent domain authority by the power districts for renewable generation facilities. Eminent domain is the authority that allows governmental units to take property for public purposes and this provision has been cited as a reason why developers have been reluctant to develop wind projects in Nebraska. We were originally neutral on the bill because of concerns that it might have a negative impact on Community Based Energy Development (CBED) projects, which we have consistently supported because they keep more money in the communities in which they are used. However, Senator Lathrop was one of the senators who was instrumental in the passage of the original CBED legislation and assured me that he supports efforts to provide incentives for the use of CBED as a mechanism for renewable energy development. Therefore we changed our position to support LB 561.

The fact that both priority bills for the Natural Resources Committee deal with promoting renewable energy development is very significant. In past years we have seen most legislation supporting renewable energy killed in committee. Senator Langemeier, the Natural Resources Committee chairman is working with Senator Haar and others on an interim study on wind and transmission siting. We are also working on obtaining stimulus funds appropriated for energy efficiency and renewable energy efforts.

We are at the point in the session where bills that do not have priority status are unlikely to be considered unless they are non-controversial. Therefore we are pleased that two bills that we opposed, LB 438, which would prohibit granting an instream flow right on streams such as the Niobrara and parts of the Platte, and LB 666, which would change the membership and authority of the Niobrara Council, both remain in committee and neither has been made a priority bill. Since both bills are controversial, it appears unlikely that either will be considered by the entire Legislature this session.

On the other hand there are a couple of bills that we oppose that have received priority status. LB 134, introduced by Senator Pankonin, would make it very difficult for Natural Resource Districts (NRDs) to obtain land for recreational trails, by eliminating their authority to use eminent domain for this purpose. We are working with a broad coalition to oppose this bill including runners, cyclists and other trail users. We are also opposed to LB 646, which attempts to provide inducements for counties to adopt “livestock friendly” status. Senator Schilz has made it his priority bill and although amendments have been proposed that are less objectionable than the original bill, we continue to oppose it. Our position is that livestock operations should become more friendly to the environment and their neighbors rather than trying to create inducements for people to take them. At the present time, LB 646 remains bottled up in committee.

–Ken Winston

Visit www.lincolnearthday.org for more information. And please spread the word!

Another bill that promotes renewable energy, LB 561, introduced by Senator Lathrop, was named the other committee priority bill by the Natural Resources Committee and also advanced by the committee. LB 561 provides an exemption from eminent domain authority by the power districts for renewable generation facilities. Eminent domain is the authority that allows governmental units to take property for public purposes and it has been cited as a reason why developers have been reluctant to develop wind projects in Nebraska. We were originally neutral on the bill because of concerns that it might have a negative impact on Community Based Energy Development (CBED) projects, which we have consistently supported because they keep more money in the communities in which they are used. However, Senator Lathrop pointed out that he was one of the senators who was instrumental in the passage of the original CBED legislation and assured me that he would continue to support efforts to provide incentives for the use of CBED as a mechanism for renewable energy development. Therefore we changed our position to support LB 561.

The fact that both priority bills for the Natural Resources Committee deal with promoting renewable energy development is very significant. In past years we have seen most legislation supporting renewable energy killed in committee. The Natural Resources Committee is also planning to introduce an interim study on wind and transmission siting. We are at the point in the session where bills that have priority status are likely to be discussed, and if there is sufficient support, are likely to pass. Bills that do not have priority status, unless they are completely non-controversial are unlikely to be considered at this point in the session.

On the other hand there are a couple of bills that we oppose that have received priority status. LB 134, introduced by Senator Pankonin, would make it very difficult for Natural Resource Districts (NRDs) to obtain land for recreational trails, by eliminating their authority to use eminent domain for this purpose. We are working with a broad coalition to oppose this bill including the NRDs, and are soliciting opposition from runners, cyclists and other trail users. We are also opposed to LB 646, which attempts to provide inducements for counties to adopt “livestock friendly” status. Senator Schilz has made it his priority bill and although amendments have been proposed that are less objectionable than the original bill, we continue to oppose it. Our position is that livestock operations should become more environmentally friendly and neighbor friendly rather than trying to create inducements for people to take them.

Two other bills that we opposed, LB 438, which would prohibit granting an instream flow right in a fully appropriated stream, such as the Niobrara and parts of the Platte, and LB 666, which would change the membership and authority of the Niobrara Council, both remain in committee and neither has been made a priority bill. Given their controversial nature, it means it is less likely that either bill will be considered this session.

– Ken Winston