Legislature tables net-metering bills

“On Groundhog Day yesterday, Feb. 2, Montana citizens were asking why NorthWestern Energy is so afraid of the sun,” NPRC said in a press release. “The company seems determined to hold onto the past by looking back at its shadow and avoiding beneficial new technologies. It’s as if the groundhog simply won’t come out of its hole.”

The Northern Plains Resource Council is a grassroots conservation organization that organizes Montana citizens to protect water quality, family farms and ranches.

The Montana House Federal Relations, Energy, and Telecommunications (FRET) Committee voted Monday afternoon to table a bill, introduced by Rep. Art Wittich, R-Bozeman, that would have increased the cap on how large a net-metered renewable energy system can be, from 50 kilowatts to 350 kilowatts, after amendments that were approved 13-2.

The House FRET vote followed a Jan. 29 vote by the Senate Energy and Telecommunications Committee to table bills for aggregate net metering and neighborhood net-metered facilities.

“These bills would have also made net-metered renewable energy systems, such as solar and wind, more accessible and less costly to Montanans who wish to invest their own capital for a renewable energy system,” NPRC said.

While dozens of renewable energy installers, cities, organizations and other citizens spoke in favor of expanded net metering, opposing testimony came from NorthWestern Energy, Montana-Dakota Utilities and the Montana Electric Cooperatives Association.

“It is clear that the net metering debate has become NorthWestern Energy vs. the citizens of Montana, who are asking for increased competition and energy choice in the face of a regulated monopoly,” said Ed Gulick, a member of Northern Plains Resource Council. “We agree the grid and other services that the utility provides are important. However, NorthWestern Energy is guaranteed a hefty rate of return, with little to no risk, on the backs of ratepayers. The concerns they voiced about potential ‘cost-shifts’ are not only disingenuous, they’re also false.”

The issue is not with net metering, Gulick said. The problem lies with the rate structure and how NorthWestern Energy recoups its fixed costs, he said. As future studies in Montana will show, and as studies in other states have shown, net metering benefits all customers on the system, Gulick said. He said it was unfortunate that the legislature voted in the best interest of a for-profit corporation rather than Montana citizens.

“We are simply trying to bring our utility into the 21st century,” said Ben Reed, owner of renewable energy business Winpower West in Billings. “The pre-eminent utilities nationwide are embracing distributed generation and making a profit on it. It’s unfortunate that NorthWestern Energy chooses to wield its corporate power in order to hold on to the status quo rather than beginning to shift toward a more sustainable business model. If they don’t look to the future, Montana is going to be left behind.”

The Northern Plains Resource Council expressed its displeasure with how Montana House and Senate committees tabled votes on net-metering, which allows small power systems, such as solar and wind generators, to provide power to the grid.

“On Groundhog Day yesterday, Feb. 2, Montana citizens were asking why NorthWestern Energy is so afraid of the sun,” NPRC said in a press release. “The company seems determined to hold onto the past by looking back at its shadow and avoiding beneficial new technologies. It’s as if the groundhog simply won’t come out of its hole.”

The Northern Plains Resource Council is a grassroots conservation organization that organizes Montana citizens to protect water quality, family farms and ranches.

The Montana House Federal Relations, Energy, and Telecommunications (FRET) Committee voted Monday afternoon to table a bill, introduced by Rep. Art Wittich, R-Bozeman, that would have increased the cap on how large a net-metered renewable energy system can be, from 50 kilowatts to 350 kilowatts, after amendments that were approved 13-2.

The House FRET vote followed a Jan. 29 vote by the Senate Energy and Telecommunications Committee to table bills for aggregate net metering and neighborhood net-metered facilities.

“These bills would have also made net-metered renewable energy systems, such as solar and wind, more accessible and less costly to Montanans who wish to invest their own capital for a renewable energy system,” NPRC said.

While dozens of renewable energy installers, cities, organizations and other citizens spoke in favor of expanded net metering, opposing testimony came from NorthWestern Energy, Montana-Dakota Utilities and the Montana Electric Cooperatives Association.

“It is clear that the net metering debate has become NorthWestern Energy vs. the citizens of Montana, who are asking for increased competition and energy choice in the face of a regulated monopoly,” said Ed Gulick, a member of Northern Plains Resource Council. “We agree the grid and other services that the utility provides are important. However, NorthWestern Energy is guaranteed a hefty rate of return, with little to no risk, on the backs of ratepayers. The concerns they voiced about potential ‘cost-shifts’ are not only disingenuous, they’re also false.”

The issue is not with net metering, Gulick said. The problem lies with the rate structure and how NorthWestern Energy recoups its fixed costs, he said. As future studies in Montana will show, and as studies in other states have shown, net metering benefits all customers on the system, Gulick said. He said it was unfortunate that the legislature voted in the best interest of a for-profit corporation rather than Montana citizens.

“We are simply trying to bring our utility into the 21st century,” said Ben Reed, owner of renewable energy business Winpower West in Billings. “The pre-eminent utilities nationwide are embracing distributed generation and making a profit on it. It’s unfortunate that NorthWestern Energy chooses to wield its corporate power in order to hold on to the status quo rather than beginning to shift toward a more sustainable business model. If they don’t look to the future, Montana is going to be left behind.”