New data: Clean energy in Michigan comes in cheaper than coal; utility says it will only cost one-third of original projections

Everyone knows renewable energy is way more expensive than the ‘cheap’ coal touted by those slick industry advertisements Right?

Two words: Bull. Puckey. And a pair of stunning new developments in Michigan make that analysis abundantly clear.

First, a refresher: You’ll remember that the Michigan Legislature passed the state’s first renewable energy standard in 2008. It requires utilities to generate 10 percent of their electricity from renewable sources by 2015. The utilities also are required to administer energy efficiency programs to help customers reduce their use.

You’ll also recall that the anti-tax and anti-government zealots – along with the fossil fuel lobby – opposed the measures vehemently. Their mouthpieces at places like the Detroit News editorial page complained loudly that the programs were outrageously expensive socialist plots by “the Greens” that would bankrupt the state’s ratepayers.

Now, more than two years in, we have actual data on the cost of these clean energy programs. And two documents released in February show how it’s working out:

#1: The Michigan Public Service Commission (PSC), in this analysis (PDF) released last month, reports that the cost of renewable energy in Michigan is 25 percent less expensive than electricity from a new coal fired power plant. It further reports that the cost of saving energy through the new efficiency programs is one-tenth of the cost of providing it with a new coal plant. These renewable energy costs are based on actual contract prices, not guesswork. Bottom line: Cheaper. Than. Coal.

#2: Consumers Energy Co., in a rate filing in late February, reports that meeting the renewable energy law’s requirements will cost one-third of its original projection. Instead of $1.5 billion, it will cost ratepayers $500 million to meet the 10 percent standards. Bills will be adjusted. Adjusted downward. Honestly, when was the last time a contractor started a job, and then told the customer “Geez, we didn’t think it would be so easy. We’re cutting your bill by two thirds.”?

Again: Cheaper. Than. Coal. And that’s even before we begin talking about the reduced health care and pollution costs that accompany clean energy. That’s not something you’re likely to read in a Detroit News editorial anytime soon.

###

Why doe-eyed liberals aren't responsible for that extra-looking renewable energy surcharge

My DTE Energy electric bill has a separately delineated $3 charge for “renewable energy plan surcharge.”

But, tellingly, there is no similar line item for coal purchases, coal plant operation, or capital costs of coal plants. Nor is there any breakout for nuclear power. None of this, despite the fact that coal and nuclear account for 85 percent of electricity generated in Michigan.

So why is there a separate line item explaining $3 worth of my bill, but no clues as to what the remaining $65.51 goes to?

When Michigan passed its renewable energy standard in 2008 (requiring utilities to provide 10 percent from clean energy sources by 2015), the utilities and their friends in the legislature wanted to make it perfectly clear  that the $3 increase was the fault of those idyllic tree huggers and their insistence on building windmills and solar panels and such. Renewable energy advocates lost their bid to simply fold the rate increase into the rest of the bill.

The renewable line item perpetuates the myth that power from nonpolluting sources is somehow an expensive, boutique hobby horse of weepy, doe-eyed, seitan eaters from Ann Arbor.

And it’s bull. When our rates go up because the price of coal rises, that increase is tucked right into the bill without any separate explanation.

In Michigan, we’ve made progress to a more sensible future. We’ve got a modest amount of renewable energy on the way, and have scuttled a number of ill-advised coal plants. But the Old Guard is not retreating without mining the bridges behind them. And the renewable energy surcharge is one of those land mines.

When it comes time to improve Michigan’s anemic renewable energy standard, it will be more difficult because of the visibility of the $3 surcharge. The response from ratepayers may well be just what the mine layers intended in 2008: “WTF? We’re already paying $3 extra on our bill!”

Kaboom!
###

U.S. military's renewable energy goal puts Congress, Michigan to shame

Don’t believe the liberal peacenick wackos when they cry about our dependence on fossil fuel being a national security problem? Then maybe you’ll believe the military: http://www.pewclimatesecurity.org/

This study released today by the Pew Project on National Security, Energy and Climate details how the Department of Defense has set a goal of producing or procuring 25 percent of its electric energy needs from renewable sources by 2025. They also plan a U.S. Navy "green" carrier strike group to run completely on alternative fuels by 2016.

Think how sheepish some terrorist will be explaining how his cell was wiped out by some pansy carrier strike force that didn’t even run on Mideast oil!

It makes you wonder, if the military, which accounts for 80 percent of the U.S. government’s energy consumption can set a 25 by 2025 renewable energy goal, why the hell can’t the U.S. Congress? And why can't Michigan strive for something better than 10 percent by 2015?

###