An emerging economic challenge for greater Minnesota involves developing renewable energy sources for local consumption.To lay the groundwork for the next generation, the West Central Rural Outreach Center (WCROC) has launched an extensive applied research program in renewable energy geared towards rural Minnesota users and producers. An extention of the University of Minnesota’s College of Food, Agriculture and Natural Resource Sciences, WCROC tests and develops biomass gasification, creates synthetic fertilizer (NH3) from wind turbines, as well as photovoltaic and solar-thermal systems. Continue Reading
Minnesota’s energy production and consumption is complex and heavily dependent on energy imports, as the first part in this series explained.Part two of a two-part series. Read part 1The Next Generation Energy Act of 2007 significantly changed the direction and tone of energy policy in Minnesota. One of the biggest changes it made focused on reducing carbon emissions, especially for power plants in Minnesota.The law places restrictions on fossil-fuel based plants built after 2007, both domestically and across state lines. These new standards are causing conflict, with North Dakota balking at new coal prices, and Minnesota’s new legislative majority attempting to repeal the carbon emissions restrictions altogether.The first part of the carbon conflict developed in late 2009, when North Dakota Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem decided that Minnesota’s Next Generation Energy Act harmed the interests of North Dakota, in what he claims could amount to an interference in interstate commerce.As the Star Tribune reports, part of the law calls for utility regulators in Minnesota to “include the cost of the carbon dioxide emissions into the cost of electricity from coal-fired power plants to price the power more accurately.”Stenehjem reportedly feels that this impinges on his state’s coal industry by increasing the price of Minnesota’s coal imports, and $500,000 has been set aside to fight the law.As we stated in the previous entry to this series, most of Minnesota’s coal comes from Wyoming and Montana, but we also import coal from North Dakota. Overall, Minnesota is spending half of $1 billion on coal, which is slightly more than the state used to spend.According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (USEIA), Minnesota spent $76.9 million on coal in 1970. Continue Reading
Minnesota is the twelfth largest state in the union geographically, with over 5.3 million residents spread out across its pastoral landscape. These citizens of the modern age require energy, which means that energy needs to be distributed across the state’s 87,000 square miles. As big as the state is, however, it doesn’t have any fossil fuel resources.Being in a fossil-fueled society, Minnesota imports its needed fuels from outside its borders, then generates the power domestically. Recent legislation and a growing concern for our effects on the environment are turning attention to more domestic, clean, and renewable energy in the North Star State. To better understand the direction of Minnesota’s energy policy, it is useful to examine where we are now.Minnesota’s coal plants provide the largest proportion of electricity for the state. Continue Reading
The topic of “waste-to-energy,” or the process of converting garbage into electricity or fuel, has been at the forefront of my green radar lately. Continue Reading
A combination of tax incentives, grants and plain old market demand is turning solar power into a good business investment and offering another opportunity to “buy local.” Although purchase and ins
Imagine pulling into a gas station and being offered a complimentary tune-up to improve your car’s fuel efficiency. You’d probably wonder: what’s the catch?So how about when your electric utility gives you a free compact fluorescent light bulb? Or your gas company offers to help pay for new windows or a more efficient furnace?Gas and electric utilities have unique relationships with their customers in that they actually spend money on programs to reduce demand for the products they sell.Why is this? Most states require utilities to invest in conservation programs as part of the regulation they accept for being able to operate as regional monopolies. In other words, they’re doing it because they have to.A growing list of states, however, are experimenting with a new approach. Continue Reading
A convenience store chain is installing free electric vehicle charging stations at stores in three Midwest states. But will the stations – essentially standard household outlets with a sign attached – really make a difference? The family-owned Kwik Trip chain is installing the stations at all its new stores, a total of 25 so far in Wisconsin, Minnesota and Iowa. But the outlets only provide 110 volts, which, charging for the few minutes it takes to grab coffee and use the bathroom, would barely get someone out of the parking lot and down the block. Charging for an hour at that voltage might allow a typical electric vehicle to run three to five miles. Continue Reading
An energy policy bill passed 82-49 by the House would enable an undeveloped Iron Range coal gasification plant to start out simply as a natural gas plant, with the potential to upgrade as a coal gasification plant in the future. However, it also could enjoy all the advantages it was granted when it was first proposed as an innovative energy project.Sponsored by Rep. Mike Beard (R-Shakopee) and Sen. Julie Rosen (R-Fairmont), HF1025/ SF1197*, as amended, now goes back to the Senate.Natural gas plant technology has been around since the 1920s, said Rep. Bill Hilty (DFL-Finlayson). He and several others didn’t feel it was right to keep the same perks in the bill as when it was proposed as a new “clean coal” plant, such as eminent domain.Rep. Andrew Falk (DFL-Murdock) unsuccessfully tried to amend the bill to delete provisions that would afford the company, Excelsior Energy, eminent domain and to bypass contested case hearings that it was granted when the project was considered an innovative energy project.“This is terrible public policy,” said Falk.Rep. Tom Anzelc (DFL-Balsam Township) said what was supposed to bring jobs to the Iron Range since 2001 has not materialized and has cost more than $41 million to ratepayers and taxpayers. “Please put an end to this project. From a fiduciary point of view, from a public policy point of view, please stop this madness,” Anzelc said.But Rep. David Dill (DFL-Crane Lake) said killing the project now while it still has a chance to produce jobs and a return on public investment would be like “flushing all this money down the drain.” He urged members to support allowing the project to go forward.Other provisions in the bill include:eliminating inverted block rates; removing a $5 million grant for 2012 for the Initiative for Renewable Energy and Environment at the University of Minnesota; and allows utilities to notify ratepayers via email for those with electronic billing. Continue Reading
The topic of “waste-to-energy,” or the process of converting garbage into electricity or fuel, has been at the forefront of my green radar lately. 
Two years ago when planners designed the new S
