Missouri to vote on Nov. alternative energy issue

[frawin]

Pam, this appears to be a good direction, are you and the Missourians you know for it.

Missouri to vote on Nov. alternative energy issue

Monday October 13, 4:43 pm ET

Missouri proposition would require 3 utilities to meet alternative energy targets

ST. LOUIS (AP) -- More than half the states in the U.S. require utilities to get a percentage of their electricity from renewable sources like wind and solar by certain target dates.

Energy experts say 15 of them have gotten on board only in the last four years. On Nov. 4, Missourians can vote on which energy sources should power their homes and businesses.


Proposition C -- dubbed the Missouri Clean Energy Initiative -- would require the state's three investor-owned electric utilities to get 15 percent of their electricity from renewable sources by 2021.

Missouri is among the states most dependent on coal for its power source. Initiative supporters say the state gets 80 percent of its electricity from coal-fired power plants.

Tony Wyche, spokesman for Missourians for Cleaner Cheaper Energy, said Proposition C is "supported by a bipartisan coalition of business, labor, environmental interests, utilities, elected officials, and everyday Missourians, who are coming out in support of producing more clean energy in Missouri and making Missouri more energy independent."

The measure has no organized opposition.

Of the three utilities, AmerenUE and Empire District Electric Co. are neutral on the initiative, while Great Plains Energy Inc. subsidiary Kansas City Power & Light supports it. The industry's trade group, Missouri Energy Development Association, also is neutral.

If the measure passes, Missouri would become the latest of more than two dozen states that require utilities to maintain a certain percentage of renewables in their energy portfolios.

Last year, the Missouri Legislature passed a voluntary renewable energy standard, but it's meaningless without incentives or penalties, supporters of the ballot initiative say.

Proposition C would amend Missouri law to require investor-owned electric utilities to generate or purchase electricity from such renewable sources as solar, wind, methane, hydropower, along with wood, crops and other forms of biomass -- but not nuclear -- at graduated target levels: 2 percent by 2011, 5 percent by 2014, 10 percent by 2018 and 15 percent by 2021. At least 2 percent must be solar sources.

Utilities may generate the power or purchase it from another source in or outside of Missouri. Use of in-state sources would be rewarded. Utilities that don't comply would be fined.

Under the measure, any rate increase could not exceed 1 percent. Consumers would realize another benefit: rebates for new or expanded solar electric systems.

Warren Wood, who heads the trade group Missouri Energy Development Association said all three of Missouri's investor-owned electric utilities support and plan for the use of alternative energy sources.

"Energy conservation and renewables both have prominent places in all of the electric utilities' plans," he said. "But energy efficiency and renewables are not dispatchable 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Something must be available to keep the lights on."

The trade group is neutral on Proposition C because its members hold varying opinions.

Wood said Empire District Electric in Joplin already is close to generating 15 percent of its electricity through renewables, mostly wind power.

Kansas City Power & Light, which fully supports Proposition C, said it began aggressively trying to increase the use of renewable energy when its own customers demanded it five years ago. KCPL principally is looking at wind energy, and already meets the 2 percent target. It's also looking to partner with local businesses to develop solar and biofuels, and to burn coal with pelletized paper or switchgrass.

"We're not generally in favor of mandates, but the 1 percent price cap protects consumers from a radical price increase and it protects utilities," KCPL spokesman Chuck Caisley said. "If we cannot meet that, it gives us an out."

KCPL also is in proximity to some of the region's most productive wind energy areas: northwest Missouri and Kansas.

AmerenUE, based in St. Louis, doesn't have the same geographic advantage.

The company does not support the initiative, but is not actively opposing it. The company says the costs of complying with the measure are not known. It is particularly concerned with costs of the solar energy requirement.

Lori Bird, senior energy analyst with the National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Golden, Colo., said 27 states plus the District of Columbia have renewable energy requirements while six others have nonbinding policies. Colorado and Washington adopted their policies by a voter ballot initiative. The rest were by legislatures.

States also have modified their policies to significantly increase their targets.

Bird said states cite such factors as climate change, local economic development and the need to diversify supply and relieve the strain on natural gas as reasons to require utilities to use alternative energy.

"Wind farms are often in rural parts of the state where revenue, tax benefits and jobs are needed," Bird said.

They also provide extra revenue for farmers and ranchers but don't interrupt operations.

The Missouri Secretary of State's office initially determined that backers of the alternative energy initiative had failed to get the required number of signatures.

But Missourians for Cleaner Cheaper Energy successfully challenged the finding in a lawsuit, showing that local election authorities wrongly discarded valid signatures.

[pam]

Yeah Frank I'm all for cleaner renewable energy.  I think the future is individual solar and wind systems, each home having their own, but that's just me and my pipedream.

[frawin]

The individual home systems maybe a reality someday. I have read some on them and the problem seems to be maintaining a level load of electricity. When there is no wind at all or the winds are erratic, the power surges would damage appliances. There is some talk of home storage  systems to combat that but they are somewhere in the future and no doubt costly. I am for anything that we can do to reduce our almost total dependence on Foreign energy sources. We are at the mercy of our enemies and it is just a matter of time before they pull the energy weapon on us.

[pam]

The ability and knowledge is there we just have to tap it and use it and prioritze.