In Michigan’s Upper Peninsula, a legislative debate is unfolding over whether certain gas-fueled generators should be classified as clean energy. This debate is significant given Michigan’s recent energy laws aimed at transitioning to a “clean energy system” by 2040, with limited exceptions.
The discussion is centered around reciprocating internal combustion engine (RICE) generators. State Representative David Prestin, a Republican from Cedar River, advocates for these generators to be considered exceptions to the clean energy mandate. According to Prestin, these power plants were built to reduce carbon emissions by moving away from coal, following previous clean energy strategies. He argues that without legislative amendments, these facilities will become obsolete.
Prestin emphasized the financial implications, stating, “Those RICE generators are effectively going to be boat anchors. They’re not going to be able to be used. And, instead, we’re going to have to reach out and purchase renewable energy credits to make up for that. And the utility is going to start an aggressive build on renewable, which is also going to hit the ratepayers.”
The legislation Prestin sponsors seeks to include RICE generators in renewable energy credits, despite their reliance on natural gas. Current Michigan law requires that renewable sources constitute at least 60% of electric providers’ portfolios by 2035.
Environmental organizations have raised concerns about the proposed bill, suggesting it could weaken the 2023 clean energy laws. The Michigan Environmental Justice Coalition, in their written testimony to the House Energy Committee, described the legislation as supporting a “corporate political agenda.” They stated, “By prolonging our reliance on fossil fuels instead of investing in an energy-independent future for the UP, these bills ensure that those same companies can keep inflating their bottom line at the expense of the UP’s working families.”
Both proponents and opponents of the bill express a common interest in reducing dependence on energy imports from Wisconsin. Bill supporters caution that Wisconsin’s renewable energy developments might lead to increased costs for Michigan consumers.
Prestin also highlighted the need for more time to develop alternatives to natural gas, such as small modular nuclear reactors. He remarked, “Utilities operate in decades, not years. And the plan, as laid out, it runs in years, not decades. And we’re just not able to respond and comply quickly enough without it.”
Conversely, Jane Fitkin, a resident of the Upper Peninsula and director of Citizens for a Clean and Safe Lake Superior, believes the legislation is premature. She argues that U.P. utility providers should invest in renewable energy now, as technology becomes more affordable. During an interview, she stated, “If we are developing new energy infrastructure now, which we desire energy independence in the Upper Peninsula, we want to be able to produce our own energy, we need to be investing in renewables because it’s just what makes sense.” Fitkin also suggested alternative ways to keep the gas generators operational without altering the state’s clean energy laws.
—
Read More Michigan News
