The future? That's what MA Rep. John Keenan wants. (Photo credit: Marilyn Humphries)

Protecting dirty old coal plants. Whacking solar and wind. Sounds like the opposite of the clean energy revolution that is underway in Massachusetts, right?  Or perhaps a belated April Fool?  But no, sadly, these deeply troubling initiatives have been introduced by Representative John Keenan, the new House co-chair of the MA Legislature’s Energy Committee, through amendments to the state budget currently under debate on Beacon Hill.  All on the eve of Earth Day, no less.

These amendments are alarming, and would undo much of the enormous progress that has been made over the past few years with respect to reducing Massachusetts’ reliance on dirty and costly fossil fuels, most of which are imported from faraway lands and offer Massachusetts no economic development benefits.  And the use of the budget process, rather than stand-alone legislation with public hearings, adds insult to injury.   We strongly encourage everyone who cares about clean air and a clean energy economy to ask your Massachusetts state legislators to oppose the Keenan Amendments (# 594, 623 and 640).  For more detail:

Keenan Amendment # 594 would prioritize existing (and even mothballed) coal and oil plants over transmission alternatives – in other words, it would severely discourage upgrades to improve efficiency or capacity of existing power lines or new transmission that would connect to cleaner resources.  This amendment seeks to protect the dirty, obsolete energy generating sources of the past while standing in the way of cleaner alternatives.  Who would benefit?  Dominion Energy, the owner of the Salem Harbor Station coal and oil plant in Chairman Keenan’s District, would benefit more than anyone.  The rest of us would have to continue to pay the price in terms of dirty air.

Keenan Amendment # 623: This amendment would require Massachusetts to prioritize renewable energy that is the cheapest when viewed over a very short three year time period.  As such, it would promote facilities that can be cheaper to build, like biomass, at the expense of solar and wind, which have higher up-front costs but are powered by fuels that are free (unlike biomass).  The amendment would turn on its head the thoughtful balance struck by the legislature less than three years ago when the Green Communities Act was passed, requiring renewables to be “cost-effective” and “reasonable” to qualify for benefits such as long-term contracts.  If this system were scrapped in favor of prioritizing the “cheapest” resource, we probably would wind up with only one type of renewable energy – most likely biomass, possibly hydropower too – rather than the diverse array of clean energy solutions that we need.

Keenan Amendment # 640: The aim of this amendment is to take the MA Renewable Energy Trust’s limit of $3 million per year to support hydropower and convert that limit to a floor, or minimum, for annual investment of MA ratepayers’ dollars in hydropower.  The amendment has a fundamental technical flaw — it tries to adjust the language of a statute that was repealed last year — but otherwise it would guarantee investment in hydropower even if there are far more deserving solar, wind or other renewable energy projects available.

We hope that cooler heads will prevail and these amendments all will be rejected.  Otherwise, coal lobbyists and their clients will be dancing all the way to the bank (ka-ching!) while we face a major setback for Massachusetts’ nation-leading clean energy programs and the enormous environmental, public health and economic development benefits they bring.

Last week was a busy week for the Land Use Regulation Commission (LURC).  First, intervention status was granted to CLF and several other organizations in the Highland Wind case, a 39 turbine project located in Somerset county.  In addition, the Commission was presented with a novel legal argument.   The issue revolves around what sort of scenic standard should be applied to “associated facilities” of a grid scale wind power development.  The various components that make up the physical characteristics of a wind development consist of two broad categories: 1) generating facilities (the turbines, towers and transmission lines) and 2) associated facilities (the roads, buildings, generator lead lines, substations, etc…).

Historically, the scenic impact of both sets of facilities were evaluated under the Wind Energy Act (WEA) that seeks to provide meaningful guidance on evaluating scenic impacts by providing a list of 6 criteria that the applicant must adhere to.  However, last week, Commissioners were asked to apply an exception provided for under the WEA statute.  The exception provides that if the Commission “determines that application of the [wind-power-specific standard] to the development may result in unreasonable adverse effects due to the scope, scale, location or other characteristics of the associated facilities” then the Commission can revert to the more general standard when assessing the effect of the associated facilities on the scenic character of the affected area.

One of the issues that the parties and the Commission will be struggling with going forward is how to comprehensively analyze scenic impacts.  Wind energy development, of necessity, includes associated facilities.  How exactly do you go about erecting the turbines without the roads to transport the turbines in the first place? Better yet, once there, how do you collect the power generated without lead lines and substations?  Should the various parts of a single, cohesive development be judged with two very different standards?

LURC was clearly in a difficult position when grappling with whether to apply the exception.  The language of WEA lacked guidance on what sort of fact based criteria should be considered in determining whether the exception applies.  In the end, in a decision of first impression, LURC opted to apply the exception so that associated facilities will be evaluated by a different scenic standard from generating facilities.    The decision was hailed by wind opponents but the ultimate result of the decision has to be determined.  What is needed, by either LURC or the legislature, is clear guidance and a meaningful standard on when the exception should apply so that all parties can move forward with a sense of consistency on what standard will be applied to a project.

Ipswich, Massachusetts received its first wind turbine this week!

Parts for the wind turbine, including three 132-foot-long blades were delivered to the Town Farm Road site on Wednesday March 30th.  The wind turbine is expected to be constructed and in operation by Memorial Day and it will supply power to the Ipswich High School/Middle School. Check out the enthusiasm displayed by kids as the blades passed by Ipswich Elementary School:

NSTAR Green 100 customers got a rude shock last week when a notice from the utility informed them, without any explanation, that their green power premiums would be going up by more than 300 percent in March. What’s up with that?

What’s up is that prices for natural gas, the dominant fuel used to create electricity in our region, are way down.  Meanwhile, the price of the clean, renewable wind power that NSTAR Green customers are buying to reduce our dependence on such polluting fossil fuels as gas and coal, is stable. So, because the NSTAR Green premiums are pegged to the price of power from those fossil fuels – i.e., the price of its “Basic Service ” – when the differential between its Basic Service and the cost of wind power increases, the premiums go up.

What NSTAR failed to explain to its Green customers is that, even with the  hike in premiums, customers will still pay the same or less  for their total energy bill (basic electric supply, transmission and distribution charges, plus the green premium) than they paid when the program first started. Other than the obvious environmental and public health benefits of consuming less fossil fuels, NSTAR Green customers also get the benefit of more stable and ultimately lower total energy prices over time. The drop in traditional electricity prices is temporary, and it is inevitable that they will soon rise again, given the finite nature of fossil fuels and the environmental, public health and national security costs of burning them. When the price of traditional electricity increases in the future, NSTAR Green premiums will go back down.

We wish that NSTAR had taken this opportunity to tell its customers who have chosen to buy clean power that their investment continues to be a sound one, one that will ultimately save them money by getting off of the fossil fuel roller coaster.

CLF is a founding member of Renewable Energy New England (RENEW), a collaborative between the renewable energy industry and the environmental community.  After ISO-NE (the operator of the New England electricity grid) gave a press briefing about a report on “wind integration” yesterday, RENEW issued the following statement, check it out:

Renewable Energy New England (RENEW) today issued the following statement about the New England Wind Integration Study (NEWIS) currently underway by the Independent System Operator of New England (ISO-NE).  The final NEWIS report from ISO-NE is not yet available, but is expected to be released later this week.

“RENEW is encouraged by the study results released thus far and looks forward to seeing the final report soon,” said Abigail Krich, president of Boreas Renewables and a consultant to RENEW.  ”The study demonstrates that a great deal of wind power can be reliably integrated into the New England power system.  New England is well-positioned to see extensive growth in wind energy in the coming years.

“The results thus far show that wind energy located in New England will significantly reduce regional carbon dioxide emissions, in support of the New England states’ strong renewable energy and greenhouse gas policies.  The findings show that if New England were to receive twenty percent of its electricity from wind power, its carbon dioxide emissions from power plants would decrease twenty five percent.

“As recommended in the report, ISO-NE has stated they will set up a centralized wind power forecasting system. The wind forecast will use atmospheric modeling to predict minutes and days ahead of time how much wind power will be produced within the region. This forecasting will allow the system operator to effectively manage the variability inherent in wind power in the same way it is currently able to manage the variability inherent in electricity usage.

“Today wind generates approximately half a percent of the electricity used in New England. The NEWIS studied a number of scenarios between 2.5 and 24% of New England’s electricity being provided by wind. Even at the lowest level studied, this represents more than four times the amount of wind currently operating in New England.

“New England is just starting down the road toward increasing its use of renewable power, but this study is providing a helpful roadmap as we look toward growing wind power in the region.”

Tonight on WBZ radio’s “Nightside with Dan Rea” starting at 9 pm CLF’s Sue Reid will debate Audra Parker, Executive Director of the anti-Cape Wind “Alliance for the Protection of Nantucket Sound.”  The show will run until at least 10 PM and could go longer.  Tune in to AM 1030 or listen live online and call in at 617-254-1030.

The show is likely to focus on the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities decision approving a long term contract between Cape Wind and National Grid but is sure to be full of discussion of Cape Wind generally.

Yesterday’s decision by the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities (DPU) to approve a 15-year contract for the sale of half of Cape Wind’s power to National Grid removed yet another major hurdle for the nation’s first offshore wind farm and confirmed what CLF and other project supporters have long known to be true: Cape Wind is a good deal for ratepayers.

In finding the contract “cost-effective” and “in the public interest,” the DPU overrode opponents’ most recent objections that the project supposedly is too expensive and will lead to huge profits for the developer.  In fact, the decision pointed out again – for those who chose to overlook the terms spelled out in black and white in the Cape Wind contract – that the developer will not reap windfall profits because the profits are capped and cost savings will flow back to the ratepayers.  And, the contract price is fixed and predictable over the entire 15-year term of the contract.

CLF is thrilled, if not entirely surprised, that the DPU found the project to be good for ratepayers.  As noted in the DPU’s decision, the estimated price impacts are very small and are significantly outweighed by the benefits. Customers will get some relief from the volatile fossil fuel price rollercoaster while Cape Wind takes a major bite out of global warming pollution and forces some of the most expensive and dirty fossil fuel-fired power plants to reduce their operation.  This is a major win for the environment and the emerging clean energy economy.

As an intervening party in the DPU proceeding, CLF took the lead working with the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), NRDC and Clean Power Now to introduce extensive expert testimony, cross-examine one of the opponents’ principal witnesses (an avowed climate skeptic), and draft detailed legal briefs to make the case for approval of the Cape Wind contract.

John Rogers, senior energy analyst at UCS said, “With this decision, Massachusetts has taken a real step forward on behalf of the commonwealth and the country as a whole. We know that offshore wind represents a real opportunity for economic development and environmental progress.  This move means we’re ready to say yes to that opportunity.”

Over the past decade, Cape Wind has withstood exhaustive environmental and permitting reviews, demonstrating over and over that its benefits will far exceed its impacts.  Since the contract was so thoroughly vetted, we are confident that today’s decision paves the way for a much more streamlined review and approval of a contract for the second half of Cape Wind’s power, renewable energy credits and other output. With federal, state and local approvals, a lease and a long-term contract, Cape Wind is looking more and more like a sure thing.

Patrick Administration offshore wind expert Greg Watson with an artist's rendering of the future wind blade/turbine port facility. (Photo credit: Sue Reid)

At an event Wednesday afternoon in New Bedford, Governor Patrick, Congressman Frank, Mayor Lang, Secretary Bowles, Senator Montigny, DOER Commissioner Phil Giudice and a host of other local, state and federal officials together announced that New Bedford’s South Terminal will be developed as a deepwater port to serve the Cape Wind project and other offshore wind projects to follow.

Congressman Frank at the podium. (Photo credit: Sue Reid)

It was a rare chance to celebrate the progress that has been made in bringing the nation’s first offshore wind project to fruition after so many years.  And it was striking to see longshoremen side-by-side with electrical workers, environmental advocates, renewable energy industry stakeholders, politicians and former politicians, such as former New Bedford Mayor John Bullard who long has championed the benefits of wind power — on land and offshore alike. The key message of the day was hammered home by speakers who highlighted the New Bedford wind port as a compelling example of the sort of convergence between economic and environmental objectives that we all seek.  Exactly.

Read more about CLF’s work on Cape Wind and other renewable energy initiatives at clf.org>>

Tomorrow, the Secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs, Ian Bowles, will announce new state support for electric vehicles and the infrastructure needed to support them.  This is great news for the environment and the economy.

Electric vehicles are a vital piece of the puzzle when it comes to reducing greenhouse gas emissions and other harmful pollutants from the transportation sector.  These benefits are multiplied when electric cars are powered by clean renewable energy such as wind and solar.  In fact, electric cars are especially compatible with wind power which is often at its height when electric cars are charging at night.  Although these benefits are dampened in parts of the country where coal-fired power provides the majority of electricity, electric cars are still an improvement over the status quo.   So purging the system of old coal-fired power plants will maximize the positive impacts of these vehicles.

In addition, electric vehicles, like the Nissan Leaf will need charging stations, batteries, and maintenance—all of which will create solid, new green collar jobs.  One of the fastest growing electric car battery manufacturers started right here in Massachusetts, and with programs like the one at UMass Lowell (which is hosting the summit) and other leading educational institutions in Massachusetts, this sector will continue to grow and provide revenues and jobs for years to come.  This announcement is yet another sign of Massachusetts’ commitment to fight climate change by embracing innovative solutions.  It follows on the heels of, and will support the agreement entered into between Massachusetts and Nissan earlier this year.

Electric vehicles are one of the significant types of technologies that would benefit from the adoption of a regional Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) that is being developed by eleven Northeast and Mid-Atlantic states and would create a robust market for transportation fuels that are cleaner than petroleum.  Of course, electric cars are only one piece of the puzzle.  Increasing public transit, supporting smart growth, and reducing vehicle miles traveled are also essential to cutting the climate change impacts from transporation which is currently the fastest growing sector for greenhouse gas emissions.

Check out the work that CLF is doing to promote a regional low carbon fuel standard and increased public transit, and take action to support transportation solutions for the entire region.