GROW A NEW CROP: Carbon offsets

Over half of the land resources in America belong to farmers and ranchers. Dawson Power believes they can be involved in the development of climate change solutions. While most of us have focused on renewable energy or improved energy efficiency as a way to reduce CO2, there are many other options that can affect our agriculture community.

To stay in business, farmers and ranchers need to make a profit…but they also want to be good stewards of their farmland. In our view, the local farmers/ranchers do a very good job at watching/upholding proper land use practices. But, if farmers are compensated for the environmental benefits they produce, such as cleaner water and (natural) carbon sequestration, they're more encouraged to get involved in climate change solutions.

SO…how can farmers/ranchers make money using carbon sequestration? The technology to do injected carbon sequestration has not even been developed but a natural version is an option. Farmers and ranchers can look at being paid for carbon reduction by looking into Chicago Climate Exchange’s offset program. CCX has many project options including methane, agricultural soil carbon, rangeland carbon soil management, and energy efficiency and fuel switching as means to pay farmers for carbon offsets.

CCX general rules/questions for carbon offsets can be found by clicking on this link. Specifics including Agricultural Potential (Question 3), How to Enroll (Question 8) and Current Market Value (Question 24) can be researched thoroughly at http://www.chicagoclimateexchange.com/. Don’t be discouraged by the complexity of a carbon offset program. The CCX is a viable organization and members can have their questions answered quickly by checking the website.

Gwen Kautz, Customer Service Manager

Talking WIND with Custer Power & NPPD

Instead of reading a blog today....listen! Public Power is your power!

Renewable energy is over 100 years old.

Electricity has been generated by hydro, wind, biomass, and other renewable resources in the United States for more than a century. Today, 11 percent of the power electric cooperatives and public power districts provide comes from renewables, compared to 9 percent for other types of utilities. However, in light of how our legislative body wants to push additional renewable options, there's much at stake.

Public Power Districts and electric cooperatives are asking elected officials to address climate change issues in an affordable and environmentally responsible fashion. We're ready to provide insight into how various policy proposals like Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS) and Renewable Electricity Standards (RES) will impact consumers, and we'll urge lawmakers to reach the right answers.

In unity with 42 million other rural utility consumers around the country, ask your U.S. representative and senators to work with your public power district or electric cooperative to keep electric bills affordable. Get involved in this effort by participating in the Our Energy, Our Future™ grassroots campaign at www.ourenergy.coop.

Source: www.cooperative.com – Straight Talk

I’ll take electricity please, with my tax.

Climate change legislation is now being considered in Washington D. C. which has far reaching affordability Implications for every tax payer and electric rate payer. It's called Cap & Trade. The concept is being pushed by the Obama Administration and is now being debated in the House of Representatives.

Each of you needs to know the potential effect this legislation will have on your pocket book. It has the potential to double or triple electric rates in the future.

Here is how it works. The government, probably EPA, monitors the emissions of all greenhouse gasses, to include co2. The legislation will set targets or caps to meet in the future. Example: as now proposed, greenhouse gas emissions need to be reduced to 1990 levels by 2020 for electric generators like NPPD. This means that current emissions of 10.6 million Tons of Co2 need to be reduced by about 40% over the next 12 years. The cap then falls each year so the utility must make new investments to be in compliance. Now this is no easy task as replacement generation will need to be found or built, transmission constructed, with an expected increase in rates to support this effort. In reality, realistic emissions caps can be met and greenhouse gasses reduced with higher electric costs but not excessive costs as I will next describe.

The next part is where electric industry big heartburn comes in. It's the trade part of the equation. As now proposed, the legislation requires that a 100% auction to be held for emissions allowances. This would mean that NPPD would have to go to the auction and purchase allowances for the full 10.6 million Tons of Co2, not just the part which exceeds the cap. In addition this auction would be the start of a new trading market and it would be managed by Wall Street. This allows commissions to be added to the cost and it allows speculators such as hedge funds to buy sell and trade allowances. Estimates from sources in the Obama administration indicate that revenues from such an auction could generate $640Billion to over a Trillion dollars. You guessed it; the rate payers will pay the bill as the cost for allowances will be passed along in higher electric rates.

So now that your electric company is a tax collector for the federal government, it would be nice to know how the money is proposed to being spent. A small portion will be used to fund research and development of alternate technologies for renewable generation and improved generation capabilities, and a portion will be used to help compensate the poorer people in the country cope with higher electric rates with a form of energy welfare. But the biggest share of the money is proposed to go to the federal treasury to be used for government programs unrelated to energy. This is nothing but a huge scheme to transfer wealth from each of us and send it to Wall Street and the government under the guise of Climate Change. The part that you need to know it, it doesn't have to be this way.

Green house gas emitters can meet reasonable caps without this type of auction. As a tax payer and rate payer, this proposed legislation should make you upset. I ask you to become active in the defeat of this cap and trade proposal. It's just bad public policy and will cause unnecessary hardship on every electric customer in the nation. Fair and balanced legislation needs to be crafted for our energy future, which meets the needs of a shift to non-carbon generation in the most affordable manner.

Robert Heinz, General Manager
Dawson Public Power District

Introducing: The Energy Welfare Department

What happens if our government makes a mistake about adopting certain elements of an energy policy that have a huge (negative) impact on consumers? Nothing. We will whine and complain – but the resiliency of the American people eventually surfaces and we adapt to the change. Soon, we are desensitized to the negativity of the situation and ready ourselves for the next change. I think it's safe to say that there is none in government positions who purposely set out to create havoc/hardships on their constituents. But, by the same token, why do they believe they are experts about energy and the environment?

Our government leaders have heard from hundreds of utilities; municipal systems, investor owned utilities, and rural electric systems alike….and all testimony pointed in the same direction – that a cap and trade system could be devastating to the electric industry and to the customers they serve. If the idea is to curb CO2 emissions, then a cap program might work. Utilities, as a whole, understand their role in reducing emissions that harm our environment. Still, the higher costs of new and upgraded generation, including transmission lines, will have to be passed on to the consumer…eventually. No company stays in business without passing operating costs on to the consumer.

It's the "trade" part of the program that has utilities screaming foul. Our governing body sees the "trade" portion as a way to raise money (from the American people) so there is some type of revenue stream other than our income, personal, sales and property tax system. They take the dollars from auctioning off the permits allocated by the federal government; those permits will be traded on Wall Street and then our government will use the funds to "give back" to the American people through other government programs. By the way, the Senate Finance Committee had a recent hearing about cap and trade….confirmation of what is written above: http://tinyurl.com/qr9ubp

When the government tells us they will be giving back the money collected through an energy tax, don't expect it to be direct cash to you. Instead, it will likely go to fund President Obama's proposed health care overhaul or our other economic problems.

Look for the creation of a new governmental agency called "The Energy Welfare Department." Roy Innis, National Chairman for the Congress of Racial Equality says that's where we are headed. Further, he says "Whatever the precise numbers may be in your state, there is no question but that higher energy prices discriminate against poor families and Americans of color." (Source: May 7, 2009; An Open Letter To Congress.) Higher energy costs drives up every American's direct costs and increases the price of every item we use in our homes.

Gwen Kautz, Customer Service Manager
Dawson Public Power District

Where is the cheapest kilowatt hour?

The cheapest kilowatt hour is the one NOT produced. Energy efficiency is the best "green" option available. The best thing about energy efficiency….everyone can participate with only a few changes in basic living habits.

Customers who purchase and install specific products, such as energy-efficient windows, insulation, doors, roofs, and heating and cooling equipment in existing homes can receive a tax credit for 30% of the cost, up to $1,500, for improvements "placed in service" starting January 1, 2009, through December 31, 2010. See EnergyStar.gov for a complete summary of energy efficiency tax credits available to consumers. A tax credit is generally more valuable than an equivalent tax deduction because a tax credit reduces tax dollar-for-dollar, while a deduction only removes a percentage of the tax that is owed.

Energy-efficient improvements not only make your home more comfortable, they can yield long-term financial rewards. Reduced utility bills more than make up for the higher price of energy-efficient appliances and improvements over their lifetimes.

Many appliances continue to draw a small amount of power when they are switched off. These "phantom" loads occur in most appliances that use electricity, such as VCRs, televisions, stereos, computers, and kitchen appliances. These phantom loads can be avoided by unplugging the appliance or using a power strip and using the switch on the power strip to cut all power to the appliance. Whenever you replace an appliance or electronic device, look for the Energy Star rating.

To start your pursuit of energy efficiency, please visit Dawson Power's website and go to the online energy audit page to see where you can save energy.

How We Use Energy in Our Homes
Heating accounts for the biggest chunk of a typical utility bill. Source: 2007 Buildings Energy Data Book, Table 4.2.1., 2005 energy cost data.

If you build it, they will come....but who will pay?

In April, Ron Asche, Nebraska Public Power District’s CEO, addressed the Loup Power District Board of Directors and said transmission planning is a real and challenging concern. He said he believes if national renewable goals are to be met; a national energy transmission plan will have to be designed and implemented. “Finally, how is this going to be financed, and who will be ultimately responsible for the debt incurred in the development of this system,” Asche asked. “Will Nebraska ratepayers be asked to guarantee the debt, or will capital be available to private developers? (Columbus Telegram; Columbus, NE, April 23, 2009)

Transmission proponents are focusing on wind, though, because (currently) environmentally friendly projects sit better with the public. Nobody would say, ‘We want to build a transmission line for coal.” It's much better to talk about it being for wind. Supporters of wind power said the need for transmission capacity is real. How do we deal with the growing LOCAL opposition to building transmission lines?

In early March, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) introduced a bill that would give the federal government authority to grant permits for new electric transmission lines, trumping states’ jurisdiction on the matter. The stimulus package allotted $11 billion dollars for transmission builds but regional grid operators say that at least $80 billion in new transmission infrastructure spending would be needed to get 20 percent of the eastern U.S.’s electricity from wind by 2024. (source: http://www.jcspstudy.org/)

Since electricity cannot be stored in large quantity, the transmission system must work 24 hours a day in tandem with the generation system to meet the needs of the growing demand for electricity. As with other components of utility infrastructure, siting and building transmission lines are very difficult.

Adding large transmission lines also requires state regulatory approval, which involves significant permitting, research and modeling data, environmental information, cost comparisons, analyses of various options, discussions of scenarios and criteria used in evaluation, and other information.

Everybody wants electricity, but nobody wants the transmission line in their back yard. Listen to NPRs “Building Power Lines Creates A Web Of Problems.”

Gwen Kautz, Customer Service Manager
Dawson Public Power District