Daily Press News Editor
DENVER — Local officials and organizations are appealing to Senate leadership to pass a net metering bill.
|
Advertisement |
HB 1169 would require all rural electrical companies to provide the option of net metering — generating some of their own energy via wind turbines, solar panels, biomass (plant or animal waste, or methane produced as a byproduct of wastewater treatment) or geothermal and pumping it back onto the grid.
The measure enjoys the support of Montrose County Commissioner Bill Patterson and San Miguel County Commissioner Art Goodtimes, along with members of the Farmers Union, Western Colorado Congress and Environment Colorado, the latter of which sponsored Thursday’s teleconference.
“I feel it would be very good for this community,” Patterson said, adding that Montrose’s local rural electrical cooperative, Delta-Montrose Electrical Association, supports the measure.
Spradley and conference participant Mike Bowman praised DMEA for its progressive stance on renewable energy policies. “DMEA ‘got it’ a long time ago, God bless them,” Spradley said.
Though HB1169 passed the House March 22, it could face a fight in the Senate, where it was introduced in committee Thursday. Environment Colorado and bill supporters expressed fears that Sen. Jim Isgar, D-Hesperus, would bow to industry pressure and vote against the legislation.
Isgar said Friday he’d carried a net-metering bill in 2002, but was concerned the new measure would require rural electric associations to buy back power from commercial entities at retail rates.
“This (new bill) goes further. My concern is not so much with residential users being tied in, the concern is the larger commercial use,” he said. “Maybe that could be addressed in some way.”
The bill has been criticized by the Colorado Rural Electric Association, which according to its Web site, feared the measure would result in residential and agricultural consumers subsidizing better funded energy developers. The CREA also said current law already requires electric cooperatives to allow net metering under certain conditions.
Spradley acknowledged concerns Thursday, but said they were “misplaced.”
Extant statute is “permissive,” allowing companies to adopt net-metering policies for up to 25 kilowatt hours, she said.
HB 1169 allows consumers to generate up to 500 kwh hours. If they generate more energy for the grid than they use, their rural electric association is to remit the difference to them at a wholesale rate — but only for “overpayments” of up to 25 percent above actual use.
Additionally, under the bill, only 1 percent of a rural electric association’s total load can come from net metering. The remainder must be generated from standard sources, such as coal.
LaPlata County rancher Cecil Phelps said the bill afforded an opportunity to farmers, ranchers and entrepreneurs. “There may be some things that need to be looked at in the future, but I think we need to step forward and do something now.”
• Be respectful of others, the writer and the subjects in the story.
• Be relevant. Keep your comments on point.
• See the guidelines for TalkAbout. Perhaps your comment is best for that community forum, available from the home page, instead of commenting on a particular story.
Comment posters are responsible for the opinions they express and the accuracy of the information they provide. We urge comment writers to treat this as a public forum where manners matter. We encourage a collegial, non-insulting tone. All readers comments must be approved by our staff before posting to the Web site. Be aware, in accordance with the Communications Decency Act and provisions upheld in judicial appeal, that you are responsible for comments posted on this Web site. Montrose Press is not liable for messages from third parties.
DO NOT POST:
* Potentially libelous statements or damaging innuendo.
* Obscene, explicit, or racist language.
* Personal attacks, insults or threats.
* The use of another person's real name to disguise your identity.
* Comments unrelated to the story.
Opinions, advice and all other information expressed in montrosepress.com's reader comments represent the individual's own views and not necessarily those of the Montrose Press. Montrose Press does not endorse and is not responsible for statements, advice or opinions offered by anyone other than authorized Montrose Press spokespersons.
Thank you for your comments!