Laserfiche WebLink
These meetings would provide an opportunity to gauge interest, collect site specific feedback and identify <br />local barriers/concerns and opportunities. Providing stakeholders information on specific sites helps to <br />"make it real" and could create opportunities. <br />Pursue state-wide policy and incentive programs to encourage solar development on CLP sites. <br />State policy and incentive programs have proven very valuable in Minnesota, other states and at the <br />federal level in encouraging renewable energy development. In Minnesota, our practice of upgrading the <br />environmental controls at closed landfills with GOBS has resulted in proactive management of these <br />legacy waste management sites. It has also created a barrier to solar development for about half of the <br />sites. Increased capital and construction costs associated with solar installations on closed landfills is also <br />a significant barrier. Based on previous experience in Minnesota with the community -based solar program <br />and elsewhere in other states there are many policy and incentive programs to consider. Here are a few <br />ideas: <br />• Virtual net metering. Virtual net metering or a similar policy for grid -tied projects could assist in <br />overcoming financial barriers related to developing solar on landfills. Virtual net metering is a <br />mechanism allowing energy customers to credit kilowatt-hours from one meter to another. Many <br />CLP sites are large enough to support solar systems that can produce many MW of electricity. <br />Most of those sites, however, do not have need for the power onsite. These sites will be <br />connected to the grid and can provide power to nearby communities or to other grid connected <br />users. With a virtual net metering policy, the landfill owners could be compensated for the power <br />they produce. In Massachusetts, a similar net metering policy allowed those who owned the solar <br />systems to receive 100 percent net metering credits for their solar generation up to six MW. For <br />example, credits could be transferred to a customer of the same distribution utility as long as they <br />are within the same service territory and MISO (Midwest Independent System Operator - the <br />regional electricity grid operator) load zone. The value of each kilowatt-hour could be valued <br />more as a net -metered credit under this policy than if the kWh was sold to the utility grid at the <br />clearing price. <br />In Minnesota, there is one policy that most closely approximates net metering, the community <br />solar garden (CSG) program. These projects, however, are limited to one MW, and at this <br />threshold are not cost effective for a developer. Projects with one MW cap would not make use of <br />many potential acres of available land. A solution could be to include a "brownfield adder" to the <br />CSG rules allowing for development of projects greater than one MW. <br />CLP solar development incentives. The state could earmark incentives for solar development on <br />CLP sites. If Minnesota determines that brownfield projects are a public good and worth <br />encouraging, the Legislature could set up incentives to offset the additional costs associated with <br />solar development on CLP sites and other brownfield sites. A rule of thumb for developing solar <br />on brownfields to cover the cost of ballasted systems and permitting is approximately 15 percent <br />more than a greenfield site. A state incentive that bridged that additional cost could assist in <br />making solar development at brownfield sites feasible for solar developers. <br />24 <br />