The ballot initiative that established a renewable portfolio standard (RPS) in Missouri in 2008 is likely to see a big change if the governor of the state approves a measure taken by the state Senate to remove geographic considerations of Proposition C.
The state Senate voted to remove the provision in Proposition C that would require investor-owned utilities (IOUs) in the state to purchase the renewable energy from within Missouri or nearby states. The bill is awaiting the signature of Gov. Jay Nixon, D-Mo.
If the bill is signed, IOUs will be able to purchase renewable energy from anywhere in the U.S. in order to fulfill the RPS requirement. This could impede wind development in Missouri.
In November 2008, Missouri residents voted to enact Proposition C, which established a 15% by 2021 RPS in the state. One of the goals of the ballot measure, which passed with 66% of the vote, was to develop renewable energy projects in the state and, as a result, create jobs.
The state could lose 9,000 clean energy jobs and billions of dollars in economic development if the governor signs the resolution, according to Renew Missouri, a group that promotes renewable and energy efficiency in the state.
‘We, like every state with an RPS, wanted to jump-start renewable energy development here at home,’ says Erin Noble, co-director of Renew Missouri.
In June 2010, the Missouri Public Service Commission (PSC) adopted rules that would implement Proposition C. These rules apply to AmerenUE, Kansas City Power & Light, KCPL-Greater Missouri Operations Co. and Empire District Electric Co.
‘These rules take significant steps toward reducing our reliance on out-state fuels for the production of electricity,’ said PSC Chairman Robert M. Clayton III in a press release issued by the PSC in 2010. ‘Missouri voters made it clear that they expect Missouri utilities to acquire clean and locally produced energy for their customers. These rules will support the creation of Missouri jobs and Missouri electricity.’
However, the geographic sourcing provisions included in the PSC's rules were suspended by the secretary of state after the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules (JCAR) voted to remove the provision that required renewable energy to come from Missouri.
‘We found the rules that [the PSC] developed to be favorable and consistent with what voters passed in November of 2008,’ says Noble. ‘Unfortunately, less than a month later, JCAR removed the sold-to-Missouri provision within those rules.’
In January, the PSC withdrew the geographic sourcing section that would implement Proposition C, saying that the Missouri General Assembly would address the issue through the legislative process.
Noble says excluding the geographic sourcing provision would have detrimental effects on renewable energy production in Missouri.
‘I think what we'll find is that this causes a lot of market uncertainty,’ she says, adding that wind developers that were considering building projects in the state might go elsewhere.
Paul Sadler, executive director of the Wind Coalition, says the removal of the geographic sourcing provision of the RPS rule is the result of a procedural battle between JCAR and the PSC.
He agrees that the adoption of the rules as they stand would not be beneficial for development.
‘I think the general consensus is that the current rule has an extremely limiting effect on the development of renewable energy inside Missouri,’ he says.
But Sadler is hopeful new that legislation will restore the geographic sourcing provision in some format.
‘We're in the process of providing a format for legislature to be drafted that will repair the issue,’ he says, adding that two state senators with whom he has communicated have said they will consider the proposal, but it is unclear when this will happen.
