Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Renewable Energy Credits topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Monona sustainability committee leans toward buying renewable energy credits while weighing rooftop options
Summary
After a presentation from a Renew Wisconsin expert, the Monona Sustainability Committee agreed to research renewable energy credit (REC) purchase options (utility, local co-op, market) and prepare a council recommendation that could include a provisional $17,000/year budget request.
The Monona Sustainability Committee on June 4 moved to pursue research into purchasing renewable energy credits (RECs) as a near-term step toward meeting the city’s clean-energy goals, while continuing to plan rooftop solar in future roof replacements.
At a meeting presentation, Michael Vickermanerman of Renew Wisconsin described RECs as a way for municipalities to certify that their electricity use is offset by renewable generation. "This is a premium service," Michael said, adding that REC purchases "are increasing"—they do not reduce the municipal electric bill—because the purchase separates attributes from the underlying electricity.
Committee members asked whether buying RECs would simply reassign credits that would otherwise go to other customers. Michael told the group the Public Service Commission reviews utility programs to protect non-participating customers and that some facilities (for example, already-allocated projects) may be off-limits for new REC offers. "If they don't get enough interest from other customers, they're not going to build the project," he said, noting permitting and subscription timelines could delay when credits are actually available.
Members reviewed rough cost figures aired in the presentation: an illustrative full-rooftop municipal installation ranged from about $1.5 million to $2.25 million if roof space existed, whereas Michael estimated a five-year REC purchase could total roughly $100,000 (he characterized RECs as a premium service). One committee member proposed an illustrative budget ask of $17,000 per year for five years as a starting point for council consideration; the figure is tentative and intended to be compared with other options.
The committee tasked staff to compare three procurement paths: MGE’s program, Legacy Solar Co-op’s offering, and open-market REC purchases, and to report back by email in about two weeks. Henry (staff) was asked to reach out to Legacy and to prepare a short comparison for the committee. Teresa said she and Henry would work with the city administrator and mayor to draft a council recommendation or resolution once the committee has pricing and options.
Why it matters: RECs can let a municipality claim renewable offsets immediately while on-site generation is planned or installed. The committee emphasized that RECs should not be a substitute for building local, visible solar where feasible; several members urged designing new roof replacements to be “solar ready” so the city can install panels when budgets and conditions allow.
Next steps: Staff will research and email a comparison of REC options (utility program, local co-op, market) within two weeks; Henry and Teresa will work with the city administrator and mayor to draft a council item for consideration in the upcoming budget cycle.
