DES MOINES, Iowa - Rural electric cooperatives serve more than 40 million people, including 650,000 in Iowa, and a new report says many co-ops could save their customers money by retiring existing coal plants in favor of renewable-energy sources.

The report was authored by the Center for Rural Affairs, We Own It and Clean Up the River Environment (CURE). Erik Hatlestad, program director for CURE, said U.S. wind capacity is expected to grow by 6% in 2019 and solar capacity by 14% - big increases aimed at reducing greenhouse-gas emissions that accelerate climate change.

"We've seen a big shift across the country towards prioritizing clean energy," he said, "largely because of the massive decline in price."

The report said rural Americans typically pay more for utilities than do urban dwellers. For years, electric cooperatives have argued the costs of transitioning to clean energy have been too high for them to move forward, acknowledging long-term contracts with coal suppliers and significant debt.

While Hatlestad said a transition away from coal to cleaner energy won't be cheap, research shows it will cost more to continue operating coal plants.

"But it's going to require tremendous amount of the public will," he said, "and a shift in priorities to options that are statistically proven to be more affordable and to offer more opportunities for local communities."

Study co-author Liz Veazey, network director of We Own It, an Omaha-based nonprofit representing co-op customers, said rural cooperatives derive 67% to 75% of their energy from fossil fuels. She said co-op members aren't just customers - they're owners, and can make their voices heard if they want a shift to cleaner energy.

"Sadly, most of the more than 40 million member owners of electric co-ops in the United States don't know that they're member owners," she said, "so there's a huge opportunity for co-ops to help engage their member owners."

Iowa is home to 45 rural electric cooperatives, more than 130 municipal utilities and two investor-owned utility providers.

The report is online at cfra.org.

A recently signed law expands New York City's solar property tax abatement. This four year tax abatement allows for the construction of solar generating systems with residential and commercial buildings in the city. Building owners would end up saving more than $62,000 per year. The new legislation expands the abatement from 20% to 30% starting in 2024.

Noah Ginsburg, executive director of the New York Solar Energy Industries Association, said this can help make up any lost progress in the city's goal to reach 1-gigawatt of solar by 2030.

"The city has made some good progress toward that goal, but I don't think they were on track to achieve that goal necessarily," Ginsburg said. "This expanded incentive we think puts us more on track to hit that goal. Our forecast is that this will help close that gap by about 95 megawatts, give or take."

While this bill has its own benefits, it can boost other climate legislation in the city. A bill has recently been proposed by City Councilmember Sandy Nurse to get 100 megawatts of solar on city-owned buildings by 2025. By 2030, the bill expands that target to 150 megawatts into private buildings.

Despite the benefits it poses, the abatement was only extended to 2034, at which point legislation will have to extend it again. Ginsburg said that is due to keeping the city's funding in line with federal programs, and added there are plans to introduce a bill to strengthen the state's residential solar tax credit.

"So, anywhere in New York State, today, if you install solar panels on your home, you're entitled to a tax credit of up to 25% of the cost of the system," he explained. "That incentive is capped at $5,000 per household, and that cap hasn't increased since 2006."

Ginsburg noted this proposed legislation would be an inflation adjustment to the incentive cap, and hopes to see the bill before the State Legislature in next year's session.


get more stories like this via email

New research from the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis found making hydrogen from natural gas, so-called "blue hydrogen," is not much better than burning fossil fuels, and will waste billions in federal government spending.

David Schlissel, director of resource planning analysis at the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis and the study's co-author, said people should be paying attention to the issue because the federal government is banking on blue hydrogen technology he argued could worsen climate change instead of mitigating its effects.

"The government is planning to spend maybe upwards of $70 billion on subsidies related to hydrogen," Schlissel pointed out. "There are a lot of uncertainties with the technology, and with factors like how much natural gas, which is used in the production of blue hydrogen, how much is going to leak into the atmosphere."

In addition, the report found government agencies may be significantly understating the environmental impact of methane, the primary component of natural gas. Fossil fuel companies have said blue hydrogen produced from methane or coal can be manufactured cleanly and can be part of the solution to the climate crisis.

Schlissel contended U.S. Department of Energy models are also based on an extremely optimistic set of assumptions about future carbon-capture technology. Models currently estimate 95% or more of the carbon dioxide produced at blue hydrogen facilities will be captured.

"There is no facility in the world that captures anywhere near that much carbon dioxide," Schlissel countered. "And the testing that's gone on to date is relatively small scale."

According to the report, carbon dioxide emissions involved in fully compressing, storing and transporting the hydrogen to the site where it will be used is more than three times as much as the Department of Energy's clean hydrogen standard.

A proposal to allow utility-scale solar operations for Washington Township in Delaware County is meeting with some setbacks and one nonpartisan group thinks it is time for more discussion.

Almost 200,000 Indiana homes are powered by solar energy, but the Delaware County Commission issued a moratorium on solar development last year. It created a study committee for further review and then, the unexpected death of a commissioner delayed creation of a new ordinance.

Linda Hanson, spokesperson for the League of Women Voters of Muncie-Delaware County, said the community needs to use the city's resources economically and responsibly.

"We believe that natural resources should be managed as interrelated parts of life-supporting ecosystems," Hanson explained. "We need to conserve and protect those resources for future availability."

The League backs ending the moratorium and passing an ordinance to approve solar installations in the Muncie area, based on a responsible review of each proposal on its individual merits. Another hearing is scheduled for Oct. 2.

Landowners in towns from Gaston to Matthews are voicing concerns about their property values potentially dropping if more solar farms are built. Some are also upset they were notified about a 2021 ordinance for another solar project, Meadow Forge, after it had been approved.

Hanson thinks the commissioners are leaning toward lifting the moratorium and allowing more solar development, with sufficient review.

"You try and look at how this can work responsibly, and that seems to be where we're getting pushback," Hanson observed. "When we track it, it seems to be coming from people who have investments in coal and petroleum."

Indiana is already home to the Mammoth Solar farm in Starke and Pulaski counties. The 13,000 acre facility is the country's largest. Built in 2021, the farm is expected to bring $1.5 billion in investment into the state over the next five years.


get more stories like this via email