Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
MG&E presents shared-solar option; Monona committee asks for cost scenarios before buying renewable attributes
Loading...
Summary
MG&E representative Matthew Matanera outlined a shared-solar-for-business offer tied to Pinehill Solar (Cross Plains) and presented REC-based options that could help Monona meet municipal clean-energy targets; committee members requested clearer cost scenarios and a financial comparison with on-site solar before committing.
Matthew Matanera, a business-customer relations representative for MG&E, told the City of Monona Sustainability Committee on April 2 that MG&E is launching a Shared Solar for Business program and wants municipal partners to buy renewable attributes tied to new projects such as Pinehill Solar in Cross Plains.
Matanera said MG&E received regulatory approval to add about 50 megawatts of clean generation and is phasing new projects; Pinehill Solar is an initial 6-megawatt project with roughly 23,000 shares available, he said. He described how renewable energy credits (RECs) work — roughly one REC per 1,000 kilowatt-hours — and said MG&E would retire the RECs on behalf of participating customers through a Midwest tracking system and could help arrange third-party audits if the city required them. “This is where you help us build. You invest with us to build it, and then that green energy serves our entire community,” Matanera said.
Matanera identified two commercial pricing structures during the presentation: a per‑share price he gave as $28.44 and said each share produces about 500 kWh per year; one option described in the meeting included an upfront payment and an ongoing monthly line-item premium for the five‑year base term, and an alternative cited a larger one‑time upfront payment with no monthly premium. Committee members pressed for written cost scenarios after several participants noted the transcript numbers and examples in the live presentation were unclear and asked for a side‑by‑side comparison of REC purchase versus on‑site ownership costs.
Committee members also raised practical constraints: MG&E said it requires approximately 75% of a project’s shares to be allocated before construction can begin and that marketing for shares had been underway for about 90 days. Members warned that large institutional buyers (Matanera cited ongoing conversations with UW and other large local buyers) could purchase significant shares quickly, potentially limiting what is available for Monona.
The committee discussed why a REC-based purchase is mainly a stopgap: buying RECs would not reduce the city’s monthly electric consumption charges and instead would be a premium paid to secure renewable attributes. “You would be receiving the benefits of more green electrons on the distribution system,” Matanera said, but several members emphasized the program would increase near-term spending without lowering utility bills. Several members asked MG&E to prepare additional scenarios (for example, a 75% target or partial participation) that show upfront and ongoing costs, the committee’s percentage of Pinehill shares under different purchase levels, and a clear comparison with the estimated capital and maintenance costs of city-installed solar.
What happens next: the committee asked staff to request a cost‑benefit analysis and multiple financial scenarios from MG&E and to report budget implications to the council committees ahead of the city’s budget cycle. MG&E offered to provide a template letter of intent to secure shares and said it would return with refined scenarios if requested.
