Town’s Solar Growing Pains

Landfill photo by Diane Lederman, Republican staff.

Former Amherst Landfill Solar Project Raises Concerns
Republican Newspaper/Masslive.com
By Diane Lederman

Commentary

As most people know, Amherst, Massachusetts is a fairly unique town in many ways. Known as a very progressive town, with no lack of engaged, opinionated residents, Amherst is one of those rare towns that actually votes its own, non-binding, opinions on state and national issues, such as war and health care. It is also a community that takes to heart green and sustainable sensibilities.

The idea to use otherwise unusable land for an array of photovoltaics is not new, but it is enlightened. I have often looked at old landfills, such as the large one that can be seen driving south on Interstate 91 toward Hartford, and thought to myself, solar panels could be installed there and produce a lot of power for the city.

Having said that, the number one priority at all times is the safety of the residents of the community. The residents who have expressed concerns are right to do so. If the landfill cap were to be disturbed or damaged, any benefit to the environment made by the use of solar would be completely dwarfed by the harm done by contamination leaking out from the site.

It is wise to take an optimistic, but thorough and measured approach here and I think the town has got it right. They are investigating the impact and will alter their plan accordingly.

It would be fantastic to see other cities and towns move in this ‘outside the box thinking’ direction. Even in these difficult budgetary times, a slow and steady move toward more green and sustainable practices by our governments would benefit us all in the long run.

- Jason Burkins

Myth: Solar is drastically more expensive than grid power

A recent United States government report found that the price of solar power for homeowners is coming real close to being on par with power from the electrical grid. After years of slow progress, solar technology is advancing rapidly and the cost of generating power from photovoltaics will likely drop from $.021 per kilowatt hour in 2010 to $.010 per kilowatt hour in 2015. The current average cost of electricity from the grid is $.010 per kilowatt hour. The report also predicts that by the year 2030, solar power will likely drop to under 6 cents per kilowatt hour. By then the gap between grid powered and solar powered homes will have closed considerably.

Green Guide to the Massachusetts Governor’s Race

As I did prior to the Special United States Senate election in Massachusetts in January, I have put together a green election guide to the candidates for Massachusetts Governor, based on statements they have made on the issues of energy and the environment. The four candidates running are incumbent Democrat Governor Deval Patrick, Republican Charles Baker, Democrat turned-independent State Treasurer Tim Cahill and Green-Rainbow Party candidate Jill Stein. I have a personal preference in this race but I will not be endorsing any of the candidates in this space. I wanted to provide a source of information on where the candidates stand on issues surrounding Green and Sustainable principles. The information I used for this guide is from the candidates’ websites, news articles and campaign literature. Each candidate’s website is hyperlinked and you can be directed to the sites by clicking on each candidate’s name. As we all know, there is a lot at stake in this election, here in Massachusetts, and nationally, so whomever you choose to vote for, please don’t forget to vote on Tuesday, November 2!

Charles Baker, Republican For Governor

Charlie Baker “believes we have a responsibility to protect and preserve our natural resources for future generations” and believes Massachusetts “can and must be a leader in promoting strong environmental policies.”

Baker, who says he is concerned about the effects of climate change, would take a deliberate, measured approach to investing in renewable energy sources. His would be a two-pronged approach, that first focuses on getting the state’s fiscal health in order and then investing in new green technology jobs and working to reduce energy costs.

“I believe that renewable energy is an important investment in our future. Massachusetts is uniquely poised to take advantage of alternative energy sources, which have the potential to save taxpayers and businesses money on their electric bills and will reduce our dependence on foreign oil. Cutting energy costs is another way to make Massachusetts more affordable for families and businesses.”, Baker states on his website.  Baker points out that the cost of electricity in Massachusetts is double the national average. Because of the higher cost to ratepayers and businesses, Baker cautions against moving too quickly toward more costly alternatives, but sees a measured strategy where wise investments in wind, biomass, and solar power alternatives will steadily slow the reliance on fossil fuels. “The price of these energy sources can not make Massachusetts’ already uncompetitive energy picture even worse.”, Baker states.

Baker also says he is committed to strong public support for aggressive energy efficiency advocacy and Green technology. He does oppose the wind farm project off of Nantucket known as Cape Wind that has the support of incumbent Governor Patrick.

Summing up his message on the topic, Baker states, “We need a balanced approach to energy policy that includes a reliable, cost-effective portfolio of conventional and renewable energy sources. We must do whatever we can to reduce our dependence on foreign oil, and to reduce our reliance on non-renewable energy sources.”

Timothy Cahill, Independent For Governor State Treasurer Tim Cahill believes that the “green” sector of the economy could help Massachusetts move past these tough economic times, but he cautions that too much government activism in support of costly alternative solutions should lead the citizens to ask the question, “how much will it cost?” Cahill believes that market driven growth of renewable energy and government support for a diverse portfolio of alternative options is the way to go. Cahill criticizes the 2008 “Green Communities Act” filed by Governor Patrick because he believes Massachusetts taxpayers are already overburdened enough and that the Green Communities Act has tacked on hidden increases in consumers’ utility bills. He points out the significant added cost of renewable energy and claims that currently energy companies are allowed to hide the extra cost on utility bills. Cahill, referring to that extra cost to consumers, as a “Green Tax”, believes that it will cost consumers in the several millions of dollars over the next few years and continue to skyrocket in the years to come. Calling it Governor Patrick’s, “pet project”, Cahill labels the Cape Wind project a perfect example of an “irresponsible approach” to renewable energy investment. Cahill points to the estimated $2 billion to construct the project and the cost to transmit the power from the wind farm to the consumers and concludes that it will likely cost consumers close to $5 billion over what they would pay without Cape Wind.  ”The contract between National Grid and Cape Wind ultimately leaves the ratepayers footing the bill for a project that simply can’t compete with conventional energy.”, Cahill states.  He also said, “We must strive to seek common sense solutions to answer questions involving renewable energy diversification. The focus must be placed on maximizing return on investment rather than pursuing pet projects. Each taxpayer investment must be undertaken with a keen eye on total cost and total return. We should not tolerate wastefulness.” Cahill says he supports an approach that focuses on natural gas and nuclear power as alternatives to fossil fuels and says he supports the relicensing of the Pilgrim Nuclear plant in Plymouth. He accuses the Patrick Administration of dragging its feet on renewing the license while pursuing costly alternatives to nuclear power. Cahill states, “Economic and geopolitical realities suggest that nuclear energy and natural gas must be integrated into our renewable energy portfolio. We must strive to seek out solutions that provide the state with both clean and cheap energy. We cannot afford to settle for one without the other.” Deval Patrick, Incumbent Democrat Governor Governor Patrick has used his focus on energy policy and the environment as a highlight of his campaign and a way to distinguish himself from his opponents.  He points to several accomplishments, including the successful passage of the Cape Wind project. Patrick is the only candidate to support Cape Wind, which might not have won passage without the support and assistance of the governor. “We ought to drive toward a new industry in Massachusetts to become a global center around alternative and renewable energy. The technologies and the products and services, I believe if we get that right, the whole world will be our customer. We have all the capability here in terms of the concentration of brain power and venture capital and that whole innovative tradition and it is one of the reasons why I do support the wind farm in Nantucket sound.”, Patrick has said. Patrick points to exponential increases in the usage of solar and wind power in Massachusetts and his Administration’s advocacy on behalf of those alternative energy sources as an accomplishment of his first term and vows to continue to foster a friendly environment for the growth of those sources. ”Solar power is a key component of our clean energy future.” The project is, “an innovative new model to bring renewable energy–and the jobs that come with it–across the state at the lowest cost possible.” Patrick’s website states that Massachusetts has become the national leader in clean energy policy and touts the nation’s strongest laws to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The Governor also claims that his energy efficiency programs will invest $2 billion over three years, and provide $6.5 billion in savings for consumers. Governor Patrick also points out his commitment to preserving the Commonwealth’s open space. In 2008, he signed an environmental bond bill that allocated over $100 million per year for the next decade toward state forests and created the largest land conservation program in the history of Massachusetts, protecting 75,000 acres of open space. Jill Stein, Green/Rainbow for Governor Dr. Jill Stein says she favors solar, wind and hydropower energy and some forms of geothermal and ocean energy as alternatives to fossil fuels. She supports wind based energy solutions in theory but says she opposes the Cape Wind project off of Nantucket Sound because of the size and cost of the project. On her website, Dr. Stein focuses a great deal on her opposition to existing and proposed bio-mass power plants, stating, “logging wood for electricity is neither clean, nor green,” and further states, “Biomass energy is not carbon neutral, contrary to the claims stemming from faulty accounting. And claims of its climate benefits have not considered the extremely short time period in which we must reduce atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations to avert climate catastrophe. The period is too short to permit forest regrowth to restore neutrality after a forest is burned.” Dr. Stein has been campaigning on a platform that includes a call to foster an attitude that promotes the economy and the environment by creating green jobs. “A jobs bonanza is there for the taking in new jobs in weatherization, conservation, energy efficiency, renewable energy, sustainable local food production, and recycling  - among other areas. And as we reduce energy costs to families and businesses, a multiplier effect takes hold,  because our dollars start circulating within the local economy rather than being sent abroad to import oil.”, Stein said. In a campaign brochure, Stein charges the Patrick Administration with promoting sham solutions for climate action and states that the Patrick climate bill, “has no firm targets or teeth.” and criticizes Patrick for initiating harmful biomass, clean coal, incineration, and sprawl projects in his first term as governor.

East Longmeadow Considers Going Solar To Power Town Buildings.

All across America numerous municipalities are turning to photovoltaic solar panels to generate the power used in government buildings. Cities and towns large and small are turning to ever-renewable sunlight to save the environment, but also to save the taxpayers money and reduce the drain on municipal resources. Some cities and towns with extensive panel arrays are already selling power back to the electric companies. As the price of solar panels becomes more reasonable and the option to rent them becomes more prevalent, this is fast becoming a very viable option for governments and homeowners alike. Here is an example of a local community taking a serious look at making use of solar energy. I commend the town of East Longmeadow and its Green Committee for its being out front on this “out of the box” way of approaching the way municipal government operates.  This article from The Reminder weekly newspaper highlights the work of the town of East Longmeadow’s Green Committee:

Green Committee one step closer to bringing solar energy into town

Jan. 25, 2010

By Courtney Llewellyn
Reminder Assistant Editor

EAST LONGMEADOW — The Green Committee is growing ever closer to achieving one of its main goals — bringing solar energy into the town of East Longmeadow.

At its Jan. 12 meeting, the Green Committee met with Mike Silvestrini, CEO of Greenskies Renewable Energy, for a presentation on the company’s solar energy model.

“Solar energy makes sense,” Silvestrini said. “It doesn’t require a steady flow of grant money.”

Greenskies has developed a concept that combines long term financial services, project design and management, utility inflation forecasting and construction contracting that would benefit municipalities such as East Longmeadow. The company builds, owns, maintains and insures the parcels that house their photovoltaic panels and the town’s municipal buildings will reap the benefits.

Five acres of photovoltaic panels can result in up to one megawatt of power, and Silvestrini recommended Greenskies install at least 10 acres of panels to fully power all the town-owned buildings.

“You can get utility rates lower than I’ve ever seen anywhere else without the headaches of doing this yourself,” Silvestrini said. “[Allowing us to install the panels] could save you millions [of dollars]. There’s no downside for municipalities.”

The Green Committee, however, wants the town to own the panels and their output.

“A municipality could buy the panels after five years,” Silvestrini explained. “A power purchase agreement usually lasts 20 years … There is a buy out option or you could continue to purchase the energy at a significantly lower rate.”

Town Accountant Tom Caliento, a member of the Green Committee, said the town would prefer to own the facilities. Silvestrini said he and his company are “not opposed to that.”

“It’s just savings until you want to buy it,” Silvestrini added.

“We’ve actively been looking into solar energy since the inception of the Green Committee,” Committee Chair Jim Driscoll toldReminder Publications. “The models we’re looking at would mean no cash outlay for the town but we would still reap the benefits of that green energy.”

While Greenskies offers a concept the Green Committee is interested in, Driscoll said they will look at a few more companies before bringing a definitive plan before the Board of Selectmen.

“We’re looking to have something about this on the warrant for the Annual Town Meeting,” Driscoll said.

For more information on Greenskies, visit www.greenskies-energy.com .

The Solar Mortgage!

The largest obstacle to solar power for the average homeowner has always been the prohibitive cost of installation. According to journalist Christopher Mims in an article he wrote for Scientific American (December, 2009), entitled, “The No-Money Down Solar Plan”, installing a rooftop array of photovoltaic panels is the equivalent of prepaying your electricity bill for seven to ten years.

But thanks to the innovative financing devised by a few small start up energy companies in the northwest, there is an additional outlet for homeowners who want to reduce their carbon footprint and save on their electric bills. Why spend up to $25,000 on installing the panels, when you can lease them for very little and pay for electricity as you go?

According to Boston Globe staff writer Beth Daley, here’s how it all works: A one-time, upfront fee of about $1,000 is charged, and there is an 18-year locked-in rate for energy the panels generate. That rate will be comparable to, or less than, what utilities charge, according to the companies involved. If the homeowner uses more energy than the panels produce, they then pay the utility its rate for the electricity.

This works very much like the cable company. We rent the receiver and the wiring and pay a rate for the service.

Or as Mims puts it, it works much like a home mortgage.  Companies, banks and organizations pay for the solar panels as an investment, the homeowner buys the electricity produced by their own rooftop at a rate usually less than they would pay from the grid, investors get a safe investment and homeowners get to save money on their electricity bills. All while reducing their carbon footprint and utilizing a renewable power source.

According to a Boston Globe article in May, a company called SunRun Inc., which has done similar business in California and Arizona, is the first company to enter the Massachusetts solar lease market for homes. It owns the solar panels and partners with local solar installers – in Massachusetts, Alteris Renewables and groSolar.