Compiled by Staff

HEDGE FUND MANAGER BLOCKS TRANSMISSION LINE

Xcel Energy says it might have to reduce the amount of solar power it buys in Colorado over the next few years because a hedge fund manager does not want a transmission line built over land he owns. The power companies are seeking to build a 140-mile, $180 million transmission line in south-central Colorado to upgrade service and transmit solar power generated in the San Luis Valley, which is regarded as a solar energy hot spot.

However, Xcel spokesman Mark Stutz, said the debate over the power line has clouded the utility’s plans to buy solar power from companies that want to develop plants in the valley. The developers say they are unable to obtain financing because of uncertainty over the transmission line. As a result, Xcel Energy said it wants to amend its 2007 plan that committed the utility to adding 700 MW of wind and solar energy and up to 600 MW of concentrated solar power.

“Because of the uncertainty of the transmission line,” Stutz said, “we can’t guarantee we will be able to move the power out.”

The utility, along with project partner Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, requested cancellation of a hearing Thursday before regulators on the proposed power line, but was denied, and the hearing was to take place, although with changes to the format outlined by the state administrative law judge who ruled on it going forward.

GARFIELD COUNTY CONSIDERING ENERGY IMPROVEMENTS DISTRICT

GLENWOOD SPRINGS — Garfield County is pondering the first step to be able to offer loans to property owners to make energy improvements to their homes or businesses. But one county commissioner believes the decision to form a countywide clean energy finance district should be left up to voters, not the county commissioners.

“I have a philosophical problem with county government being in the loan and finance business … that’s not government’s job,” County Commission Chairman John Martin said at a  work session with Garfield New Energy Communities Initiative (GNECI) representatives to discuss forming the district.

City and town councils of each of Garfield County’s six municipalities have signed letters of support for the county to form the district, and to put a question on the November ballot asking county voters to allow bonds to be issued using state and federal grant money to fund the program.

“I’d much rather see a vote of the people to create the district, and to decide on a bonding mechanism,” Martin said.

Tuesday’s discussion came as neighboring counties are moving forward with their own plans to offer loans to property owners to make energy improvements, such as solar installations and energy efficiency upgrades.

Eagle County commissioners on Tuesday authorized initial funding for the voter-approved Energy Smart Program, part of a three-county energy improvement district — including Pitkin and Gunnison counties — that was approved by voters last fall. The program provides fixed-interest loans to property owners for qualified energy improvements. The loans are paid back over a period of time as an add-on to the borrower’s property tax bill.

Eagle County voters authorized up to $10 million in bonds to fund the loan program, while Pitkin County agreed to $7 million and Gunnison County’s program is for $3 million. Gov. Bill Ritter was in Aspen Wednesday to sign SB 100, allowing even more flexibility to create cross-boundary energy improvement districts.

SNOWMASS VILLAGE MULLS SOLAR FARM

Snowmass Village is considering a proposal for a community solar farm on town-owned land, which would be the largest in the valley if it’s approved and built.
 
Clean Energy Collective of nearby Carbondale is proposing to put 1,600 solar panels on a nearly 1.5-acre site behind the Mountain View employee housing complex. The panels would generate about 400 kilowatts, enough to power 73 average U.S. homes, Paul Spencer of CEC told the Snowmass Village Town Council at its meeting earlier this week. That’s two-and-a-half times as much power as the largest solar array in the valley, which is at Colorado Rocky Mountain School in Carbondale, Spencer said.
 
A community-owned solar project is beneficial for a place like Snowmass in a lot of ways, he added. It’s not practical for many households in the Village to have their own solar panels because so many of them are on north-facing lots shaded by trees.
 
It takes an estimated 13-15 years to get a return on investment in the community array, as opposed to 25 years on an individual project.
 
And the cost of doing an individual solar project is prohibitive for most people, Spencer said, adding it cost between $10,000 to $15,000 to put a system on home. With a community-based project, start-up costs are lower, and people can buy fractional shares for as little as $500 for one solar panel.
 
CEC proposes building the solar facility, and doing all the back-end legal and permitting work, as well as maintaining and operating it. The company wants a no-cost 40-year lease agreement with the town, with renewal options. Ownership would rest with the town and anyone buying into the solar farm. The power would go into Holy Cross Energy’s grid and be redistributed to its local customers, most prominently the Mountain View housing residents.
 
Snowmass council members liked the concept and agreed to look into it further, although they did not agree with Spencer’s proposed timeframe of starting construction by August.
 

OPTIONS FOR ENERGY AUDITS INCREASE AS ENERGY PROGRAM NEARS

 With a little more than a month to go until Pitkin County residents can begin applying for the Energy Smart Loan Program, the biggest policy question still unanswered is whether participants will be required to obtain an energy audit before participating in the program.
 
No matter what Pitkin County eventually decides on that question, residents who are customers of Aspen’s water utility — which serves everyone from the Northstar Preserve to Red Mountain to the Airport Business Center — can already obtain a free energy audit, so long as they implement some of the suggested improvements.
 
The city will fund $125 of the cost of an energy audit up front, as long as it is provided by an auditor certified by the Building Performance Institute. The city will kick in an extra $225 (most energy audits cost about $350) if the homeowner spends that much implementing the audits’ suggestions. The rebate-reward program is paid for by funds from the city’s water efficiency fund, said utilities efficiency manager Jeff Rice.
 
The city in February expanded the audit rebate program from just residents who get their electricity from the city of Aspen to everyone inside the city’s urban growth boundary. The city electric utility serves most people in the downtown core and West End, while Holy Cross Energy provides electricity to the surrounding areas.
 
Rice said he fielded 14 requests for an energy audit rebate in March. The money for the rebates, from the water efficiency fund, ultimately comes from ratepayers’ bills. The city sets aside $150,000 each year for efficiency projects, Rice said.
 
The Energy Smart Loan Program, which voters approved in November, allows Pitkin County to acquire as much as $7 million in financing to assist residents with energy efficiency and renewable energy upgrades. The county will pay the up-front cost for approved projects, while participating homeowners will pay back the county through a special assessment on their property tax bill. The loans can range from $3,000 to $50,000.
 
The county will start taking applications for the loans in early to mid June.