Re: Feb. 1 editorial.
Colorado’s electric cooperatives are not out to “hobble” renewable energy development in Colorado. We are trying to develop these valuable resources in a more affordable way for our co-op member-owners.
The Denver Post argues that the Colorado legislature should oppose Senate Bills 44 and 46 on the grounds that they would “hobble” renewable energy development. These bills, however, present two very different approaches to renewable energy.
The Colorado Rural Electric Association does not support SB 44, which would lower the renewable energy standard (RES) for electric co-ops from 20 percent to 15 percent. While we opposed the doubling of the RES applicable to electric co-ops two years ago, we are not advocating a reduction of the “20 percent by 2020” requirement established in 2013’s SB 252.
Our bill, SB 46, does not reduce the RES or lessen the amount of renewable energy that will go onto the grid. The bill simply recognizes that for many electric co-ops, there is very little demand for “retail” customer-sited distributed generation, a requirement resulting from SB 252.
SB 46 eliminates the “retail distributed generation” requirement. That means electric co-ops must heavily subsidize “behind the meter” renewable energy resources, not the most efficient way to incorporate renewable energy. We are seeking a change to the law to allow projects that can be better integrated into electric co-op systems and save money for rural electricity consumers. At the very least, community solar gardens in co-op service territories should count as retail distributed generation as they do for the investor-owned utilities (this is another objective of SB 46).
Kent Singer is executive director of the Colorado Rural Electric Association.
To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit or check out our for how to submit by e-mail or mail.
