INDIANAPOLIS - A consumer-rights group, the Citizens Action Coalition, is asking in a letter to the state Attorney General to investigate whether over 50 communities buying electricity from the Indiana Municipal Power Agency are getting the low-cost electricity promised by IMPA's investment in the Prairie State Energy Campus in southern Illinois.

According to Lindsay Shipps, a community organizer with the CAC, the state is being addressed because IMPA has a 12 percent stake in the plant.

"We're asking the Attorney General to investigate any potential misrepresentation that occurred in pitching communities this plant and investing in a contract to purchase power from IMPA with this plant until 2042," she explained.

Peabody Energy, the developer of Prairie State, has disclosed that the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission is investigating issues related to the development of the plant.

The CAC is also urging leaders in IMPA communities to determine if they're paying more for electricity than the price on the wholesale market.

Shipps stated that earlier this year, citing high costs, the Missouri town of Marceline announced it wanted out of its contract with Prairie State.

"Other communities, other states are noticing that this is increasing their costs," Shipps said. "Why aren't we doing the same?"

According to Tom Sanzillo, director of finance for the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis, they have documents showing that the promised Prairie State price for electricity in 2007, when the plant was being developed, was $43 to $45 a megawatt hour. Sanzillo declared that last year's actual costs from two states were higher than what had been pitched.

"The Ohio numbers that we have - and there we get billings, right? - from the community, that was at $57.25 a megawatt hour," he specified. "And, then in Missouri, it was $59.24 a megawatt hour; that's about 35 percent above what they had promised them."

Not all communities with contracts with Prairie State are dissatisfied. The Danville, Virginia, utilities director is quoted as saying their contract can still pay off and be a good investment, if the economy turns around and energy costs are driven up.

More information is at IEEFA.org.




get more stories like this via email

Wisconsin's clean-energy portfolio is growing. Communities seeing the transition happen at their doorstep might get benefits, but sometimes have questions about the scope of these projects. A new grant could help deliver the facts.

The University of Wisconsin-Madison Extension has received a $1 million federal grant to educate towns and cities about large-scale solar, wind and similar development in their areas. Under state law, projects of at least 100 megawatts don't need local approval.

Sherrie Gruder, the extension's sustainable design specialist and energy strategist, said the outreach strikes a balance between boosting the clean-energy transition and factoring in local feedback from community interests.

"Looking at endangered species in the area - will they be protected - to what happens to the water in the wells when the land isn't being farmed for that time?" she said.

Gruder said they'll also use the listening sessions to help dispel misinformation about renewable energy. Also, residents can learn about the economic benefits that trickle down to their government, creating discussions about how to spend that revenue. This type of engagement comes as hundreds of locally adopted restrictions for wind and solar development surface around the United States.

Gruder said another important form of guidance is tips on lease agreements between landowners and project developers. She noted that they want these individuals to be able to ask the right questions.

"Not all farmers are going to spend $300 to $500 an hour to talk with an attorney," she added, "but we could help educate them on that type of thing."

A coalition of Wisconsin organizations will assist with the outreach. According to the extension, the Badger State currently has 33 large-scale solar developments in place or under development in 21 counties.


get more stories like this via email

With less than a month left in the New York Legislature's session, environmentalists are pushing for the HEAT Act's passage.

Last-minute stalling from the Assembly kept it from being in the 2025 budget. The bill phases out gas line extension allowances and gives the Public Service Commission authority to align utility companies with the state's climate laws.

Lisa Marshall, advocacy and organizing director for New Yorkers for Clean Power, said lawmakers have no time to play politics with the state's climate future "in a time where we've had the hottest year on record, record-breaking floods, our train system flooded out, air that children can't go outside and play and breathe for weeks on end. And, they can't see it's necessary to crack down and get to work and start to move the climate plan forward, then that's on them."

Passing the bill has faced misinformation campaigns from fossil-fuel companies and some skepticism from lawmakers about relying entirely on electricity. They have argued it's not useful if the power goes out, but infrastructure would prevent many fossil-fuel energy sources from working correctly with the power out, too. Gov. Kathy Hochul has said she'll sign the bill if the Legislature passes it.

Reports show New York won't reach its 2030 climate goals because of clean-energy projects falling through and climate legislation failing to pass.

Michael Hernandez, New York policy director for Rewiring America, noted that the Public Service Commission and utilities are required by law to build out gas pipes, keeping New Yorkers stuck on fossil fuels. He said the HEAT Act changes that.

"This is the way forward," he said. "This provides the pathway where we can start to consider what are the other ways that we can innovate and improve our energy infrastructure."

The HEAT Act could cut utility bills nearly in half for one in four energy-burdened New Yorkers. Some shortcomings for New York's climate goals include three offshore wind projects recently being canceled because of "material modifications."

Minnesota is coming off another windy month of April. Those strong wind gusts may have translated into some extra cash for counties with wind turbines dotting the landscape.

Minnesota has a wind and solar energy production tax, which allows jurisdictions where these systems are located to collect revenue based on the energy that's generated.

Nobles County brought in nearly $2 million in 2023, the third highest in the state.

County Commissioner Gene Metz said over time, this extra financial stream has helped cover maintenance costs.

"We did a ten year bond basically to upgrade our buildings," said Metz. "You know, we had roofs that needed work - outside, windows, that type of thing. And we upgraded a lot of our heating and technology controlling those systems."

He said it's helpful since smaller counties have a harder time attracting larger industries to help spur economic growth.

While it's become a solid income source, Metz said turbines taken out of operation for repairs, or less windy seasons can make the numbers vary in certain years.

Minnesota supporters also are eyeing bipartisan legislation to speed up the permitting process for these energy projects, in hopes it will open up much-needed space on the power grid.

Metz, also a member of the Rural Minnesota Energy Board, said he feels addressing that issue will lead to more wind farms.

He added that having additional dollars trickle down takes pressure off local taxpayers because county budgets won't be so one-dimensional.

"We depend so much on agriculture," said Metz. "In our county, 75% of the tax levy comes from agriculture, and if that has a bad year or bad period, it's just nice to have another source of income. "

While some counties have embraced renewables, local governments elsewhere have put up more resistance as proposed projects come on board.

Metz said some of that is driven by misinformation.

He advises planning officials and constituents - worried about seeing wind farms harming aesthetics on the rural landscape - to compare them with other industries that take up more space and have deeper effects on the quality of life.




get more stories like this via email