My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
6.1. ERMUSR 05-10-2011
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
Boards and Commissions
>
Utilities Commission
>
Packets
>
2003-2013
>
2011
>
05-10-2011
>
6.1. ERMUSR 05-10-2011
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/29/2012 2:52:35 PM
Creation date
5/10/2011 11:55:39 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
ERMUSR
date
5/10/2011
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Vol. 14, No. 9 April 15, 2011 <br />While the budget has been the overriding focus on the Legislature for most of the year, <br />energy bills were also in the spotlight this week. <br />The Minnesota Senate voted Thursday to lift restrictions on new coal-fired power <br />plants. The 42-18 vote would strike a portion of the Next Generation Energy Act of 2007 that <br />imposes conditions on new coal plants or on importing electricity from such plants outside the <br />state. <br />Proponents of the bill, SF 86, including chief author Sen. Julie Rosen (R-Fairmont), said <br />carbon-dioxide emission limits on coal-fired power plants have become obstacles to economic <br />growth. <br />Whether DFL-Governor Mark Dayton will sign bills approved by the Republican-led <br />Legislature, of course, remains a source of some speculation. <br />They were busy days Tuesday, April 12 and Wednesday, April 13 in the House <br />Environment, Eneray and Natural Resources Policy and Finance Committee, as it heard a <br />number ofenergy-related bills, including: HF1193 a bill making changes to the Conservation <br />Improvement Program (CIP). The bill was drafted by the Minnesota Rural Electric Association. <br />MMUA is neutral on the bill, MMUA's Bob Jagusch said in his testimony. MMUA would <br />like to see some changes made in the program, but has been pursuing these changes <br />administratively, through the state Office of Energy Security (OES). MMUA favors discussing <br />changes to the law over the interim, and coming back with a consensus bill next session. <br />One sticking point for MMUA is that the MREA-sponsored bill does not account for <br />energy savings over the lifetime of a measure. That leaves intact the current practice of only <br />counting savings from any particular measure for only one year. <br />Bill Grant, director of the OES, said he was vvillirtg to work with bill drafters to try and <br />make the language acceptable to the administration. He also said more fully accounting for <br />utility-side savings could be handled administratively (a process MMUA has been working on) <br />and his office is coming out with guidance on this issue. Grant said he believed the OES has <br />flexibility to handle some of these issues now. <br />No vote was taken on this bill, or any of the others heard. Instead, the bills are being <br />considered for inclusion into an omnibus energy bill. Other bills heard this week in the <br />Committee included: <br />HF1212 (Anderson) Melrose Public Utilities Commission membership increased from <br />three to five members (this bill was amended to allow up to seven commissioners). <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.