This article was originally published by the Michigan Advance.

More than a year after 5 Lakes Energy released a report detailing more than $7.8 billion in federal investments available to fuel Michigan’s transition to clean energy, the consulting firm is taking stock of the state’s energy economy following the passage of multiple laws based on Gov. Gretchen Whitmer’s climate plan. 

In November, the Democratic-led Michigan Legislature voted through a host of policies including goals for transitioning the state to 100% clean energy by 2040 and increasing the state’s energy waster reduction standards and efforts intended to streamline the permitting process by allowing the Michigan Public Service Commission (MPSC) to approve large scale renewable energy projects provided they meet state requirements.

“The future of our energy sector — and a significant part of our economy — lies in clean energy. This report highlights how investments in clean energy fuels robust job growth across the U.S. energy sector, with Michigan playing a key role,” state Sen. Sue Shink (D-Northfield Twp.) said in a statement. 

“Our historic Clean Energy Future legislation has positioned Michigan as a national leader in the fight against climate change, reducing household utility cost and safeguarding our air, water and public health, while creating good-paying jobs for people. This report proves that prioritizing clean energy isn’t just good for the environment — it’s also a powerful boost for our economy and American workers,” said Shink, who was a lead sponsor of one of the bills in the clean energy package. 

By examining the interactions between the Inflation Reduction Act and Michigan’s suite of clean energy legislation, the report estimates Michigan families will save an average of $297 a year on their energy bill by 2030 and $713 a year by 2040 compared to if these policies were not enacted, saving Michiganders more than was predicted in the previous report. 

Additionally, Michigan will bring in $15.6 billion in investments from the Inflation Reduction Act by 2030 and $30.7 billion by 2040. The state will also shrink its greenhouse gas emissions by at least 65% over the next six years, down 88% by 2040.

Michigan is also projected to save $7.3 billion by 2030 in avoided public health costs — such as deaths, hospitalizations and lost school and work days — with savings across the state totaling $27.8 billion by 2040. 

The report also broke down the economic impact of these policies on a more local level, breaking the state into 10 regions and examining the projected growth of jobs and the gross domestic product of those regions. 

Alongside breaking down the economic impacts by region, the report also polled and interviewed 20 members of the Michigan Energy Innovation Business Council, a trade organization focused on supporting innovative energy technology. 

In the survey, 75% of companies indicated they were hiring or understaffed, with 90% indicating they would need to hire or they would be understaffed in the next three years. 

To further support Michigan’s clean energy, the report shares policy recommendations including additional state policies advancing the growth of clean energy and decarbonizing the state’s building and transportation sectors in line with Whitmer’s MI Healthy Climate Plan, continued investment into clean energy projects and monitoring and evaluation to ensure energy goals are met. 

The report also advises lawmakers to enact a new policy on conducting cumulative impact assessments to determine the effects of retiring existing energy assets and building new projects, to ensure communities of color and low income communities and communities with a history of disinvestment can reap the benefits of clean energy. 

Additionally, it recommends taking steps to reduce the amount households spend on their energy bills by ensuring that cost reductions for energy utilities translate into savings for customers.  

In its final recommendation the report calls on the state to develop workforce training programs in support of the clean energy sector, placing a focus on ensuring opportunities for those transitioning away from traditional energy industries like those based in fossil fuels.

Clean energy laws and funding fuel Michigan jobs and economic growth, new study says is an article from Energy News Network, a nonprofit news service covering the clean energy transition. If you would like to support us please make a donation.

Detroit’s City Council again postponed a vote on a fund connected with the proposed solar plan this week. The plan involves building 200 acres of solar fields in six neighborhoods to offset the energy used by municipal buildings.

Councilmembers continue to voice disagreements over the first phase of the plan, which would create 104 acres of solar in the Gratiot-Findlay, State Fair and Van Dyke-Lynch neighborhoods. 

Councilmember Angela Whitfield-Calloway has argued that utility-scale solar is wrong for the city and questioned why Detroit hasn’t explored placing solar on municipal buildings or developing arrays outside the city.

However, Councilmembers Fred Durhal III and Coleman A. Young II have said the plan could revitalize neighborhoods and save residents money. Detroit Mayor Mike Duggan has pitched the program as a way to meet city climate goals while reducing blight and illegal dumping in vacant lots.

Homeowners in the footprint of the proposed solar fields would receive twice the fair market value of their homes or $90,000, whichever is higher, while renters will get 18 months of rent to relocate. Homeowners within community benefits areas surrounding the projects will receive $15,000 to $25,000 each for energy efficiency upgrades.

In the five neighborhoods being considered for the second phase of the solar plan, 28 of the 31 homeowners have already signed letters of intent to sell their homes, according to Duggan. 

He has proposed using a $4.4 million equity fund derived from the Utility Conversion Fund, which is legally required to be used for energy conservation, to purchase these homes.

City council has twice delayed a vote on the fund so far, with Whitfield Calloway emerging as a strong critic. She said during the July 2 council meeting that the arrays would do little to address blight and crime. 

“Solar panels will disrupt and destroy entire neighborhoods. There will be no future affordable housing being built anywhere around a solar farm,” Whitfield Calloway said.

Young responded to Whitfield Calloway, saying the plan would help lower taxes for Detroiters who would otherwise be paying the utility bills for city buildings.

“I, for one, believe the taxes are too damn high,” he said.

One resident who lives near the proposed 40-acre State Fair solar project in Whitfield Calloway’s district spoke out against the plan on Tuesday, calling attention to the infill housing developed by the nonprofit Emmanuel Community House in the area.

“That area could be used again for single-family housing and bringing people back to the city of Detroit,” she said. “I’ve been there since 1980 and want to bring it back.”

Meanwhile, the city council is considering asking for an outside legal opinion on the solar plan. Council President Mary Sheffield has said she has questions about the city’s use of eminent domain and whether it can exempt itself from its own zoning ordinance.

Detroit Corporation Council Conrad Mallet and the council’s Legislative Policy Division have said that the solar sites are exempt because they’re being put to public use.   

Councilmembers question placing arrays in neighborhoods, criticize DTE Energy

As city council weighed the equity fund, its Public Health and Safety Standing Committee has been considering a resolution to approve the acquisition of land for the solar plan and the contracts for Lightstar Renewables and DTE Energy, the businesses chosen to develop the solar fields.

Developer representatives and city departments made lengthy presentations touting the potential for solar to improve health outcomes by reducing emissions from fossil fuel power plants and increasing energy reliability as the grid is upgraded to enable solar.

During Monday’s meeting, Whitfield Calloway questioned why Detroit hasn’t explored placing arrays on city buildings or developing solar fields outside the city limits as places like Chicago, Cincinnati and Philadelphia have done.

“Why not put the solar panels on the structures that we’re trying to drive power to?” she asked. “Why do we have to put them in neighborhoods?”

“We really feel that it was the right thing to do to invest in our land here and make sure that residents are able to benefit from it,” Trisha Stein, Detroit’s chief strategy officer, said earlier in the meeting. She said neighborhood groups had drawn up the areas that would host the solar fields and surrounding community benefits areas.

DTE Energy also came in for criticism on Monday, with councilmember James Tate saying he was met with “eyerolls” and “sighs” when he told the Detroit Green Task Force that DTE Energy would be developing some of these projects.

“You have a terrible reputation,” he said, calling out the utility’s opposition to community solar, which allows residents to subscribe to offsite solar arrays and receive bill credits for the energy produced.

The committee will continue deliberating on these contracts next week.

Detroit’s city council is divided over plans for utility-scale solar arrays in neighborhoods is an article from Energy News Network, a nonprofit news service covering the clean energy transition. If you would like to support us please make a donation.

The Midwest’s regional transmission grid operator this week announced another multi-billion dollar phase of transmission line projects as part of a four-part push to improve reliability and reduce curtailments.

The Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO) unveiled plans Monday for what’s known as its “Tranche 2” portfolio, which includes plans for several 765 kilovolt transmission “highways” spanning sections of Minnesota, Iowa, Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, North Dakota and Missouri.

Many of the new lines would connect to projects being built as part of the $10.4 billion Tranche 1 portfolio, which MISO approved last year. Tranche 2 is projected to cost even more, at between $17 billion and $23 billion. A third batch of projects will focus on the grid operator’s southern territory, and the fourth will address north-south connections.

In its presentation to stakeholders, MISO officials said the investment will help manage challenges in three regions. In MISO West, which includes Minnesota, Iowa, North Dakota, Wisconsin and Michigan’s Upper Peninsula, 20% of its facilities are overloaded and annual curtailments exceed 15%.

In its Central region, composed of parts of Illinois, Indiana, and Missouri, facilities are 10% overloaded, and there’s a need for transmission to move power from west to east.

MISO’s East Region, defined as Michigan’s lower peninsula, suffers annual curtailment of over 15% and 10% of facilities are overloaded. MISO said in a presentation that transmission would help mitigate “import and export power swings between day and night.”

Beth Soholt, executive director of the nonprofit Clean Grid Alliance, said the Tranche 2 plan is  “bold” and “the direction we need to go.” The question is: does it go far enough?

The regional grid is expected to see significant growth from industries, electrification, data centers and other sources, Soholt said. 

“If load growth ramps up faster than the grid can handle, then we’re behind the eight ball again,” she said. “Now is the time to ask: Have we right-sized this portfolio?”

Mike Schowalter, senior manager of wholesale electric grid transition for Fresh Energy, said he was surprised by the lack of a High Voltage Direct Current (HVDC) line.

“If we’re looking at the long-term, we’re going to need the attributes that HVDC brings,” Schowalter said.

The Energy News Network is an independent journalism program of Fresh Energy.

A 765 kV transmission line needs taller towers and a much wider corridor than HVDC or other alternatives, Schowalter said. 

“I’m a little concerned about some of the siting issues that the different states will have to deal with,” he said, noting that the map shows a 765 kV Minnesota River crossing.

Utilities have told Schowalter that the plan misses future pockets of generation that may need additional transmission. He said the reason may be because the draft report centers on reliability, not interconnection constraints.

The plan also does not venture much into North Dakota, which has plenty of wind generation, Schowalter said. The draft plan “will help with some congestion, but will it help enough?” he said. “Probably not. In terms of relative to what we need, we need a lot more than this.”

Some utilities also think deploying HVDC lines would better solve grid instability issues, especially between wind-rich Southwest Minnesota and the more populated regions to the east, Soholt said. HVDC transmits electricity more efficiently than alternate current lines, which have higher rates of power loss. 

Utilities have often had to curtail wind power from southwest Minnesota because of transmission capacity issues. Clean energy advocates and others will be closely listening to the business case MISO will make later for the choice of the transmission locations and the size of the lines, she said.

Soholt said comments are being taken now on the plan and some stakeholders will offer modifications and alternatives. Some clean energy developers and members of the Clean Grid Alliance plan to suggest alternatives. Some organizations are expected to argue that MISO does not need this much transmission and others will tender a different vision, she said.

So far, MISO has released only a rough map of where the lines would run, without much detail. A stakeholder process will refine precisely where the lines will operate, Soholt said. 

Stakeholder input and alternatives to the Tranche 2 plan will be accepted through April 5. MISO will make a final decision later this year.

Fresh Energy staff, board members and funders do not have access to or oversight of the Energy News Network’s editorial process. More about our relationship with Fresh Energy can be found in our code of ethics.

The Midwest’s grid operator is planning a massive new transmission buildout. Will it be enough? is an article from Energy News Network, a nonprofit news service covering the clean energy transition. If you would like to support us please make a donation.

This article originally appeared on Planet Detroit.

Advocates across Michigan celebrated last week as Gov. Gretchen Whitmer signed into law a package of energy bills targeting 100% clean power by 2040, positioning Michigan as a national climate leader.

But environmental justice advocates say the legislation, dubbed the “Clean Energy Future” package by supporters, had a major omission by making no provision for community solar, which allows residents to subscribe to third-party-owned solar arrays in exchange for energy bill credits. 

The Michigan Environmental Justice Coalition (MEJC) is pushing for the passage of Senate Bills 152 and 153 and House Bills 4464 and 4465, introduced in the spring, which would enable community solar in Michigan. 

But so far, none of the bills have come up for a vote, although the House Committee on Energy, Communications and Technology heard testimony on the House bills in November.  

“It’s no secret that we are not very happy with the Clean Energy Future package,” Roshan Krishnan, policy associate at MEJC, told Planet Detroit. Krishnan said enabling community solar would accelerate solar buildout in the state and reduce demand for carbon capture and biofuels — polluting technologies included in the bill package — which MEJC opposes.

Backers say community solar, more accessible to lower-income customers and those living in multifamily housing, is crucial to building equity into the energy transition. They tout other benefits like improved energy reliability and lower bills for renters and others who can’t install rooftop solar. 

But they say Michigan utilities are wielding their influence and political spending in Lansing to block legislation enabling community solar owned by third parties, even though the concept enjoys bipartisan support. 

Michigan’s two largest investor-owned utilities, DTE Energy and Consumers Energy, have long fought laws enabling community solar. They argue such laws are unnecessary and would add costs for other customers. And they’ve spent millions in the last two years to influence lawmakers as such laws were being considered.

According to the U.S. Department of Energy, 22 states and the District of Columbia have policies in place that enable community solar. Most projects are concentrated in four states: Minnesota, New York, Massachusetts and Florida.

Ed Rivet, executive director of the nonprofit Michigan Conservative Energy Forum, told Planet Detroit he believes the public’s increasing embrace of renewable energy could give groups like his leverage to pressure lawmakers to bring community solar to Michigan.

“Part of our work … is to say to legislators, ‘Look, people want to do this in your district. Republicans and Democrats alike want to do this. Go ahead and ask folks in your district and see what you find’,” Rivet said.

Can community solar boosters overcome utility resistance?

Rivet said utilities’ influence in Lansing is the major hurdle to passing community solar legislation.  

“If there’s resistance to the legislation being adopted, it’s coming from a singular vantage point, that being the utilities,” he said.

DTE and Consumers are unequivocal in their opposition to community solar. DTE spokesperson Peter Ternes told Planet Detroit the proposed community solar legislation is “unnecessary” and would “allow developers to cherry-pick customers and force the utility’s remaining customers to subsidize the program – challenging affordability for our customers.”

Consumers spokesperson Brian Wheeler also called the legislation “unnecessary,” warning that it would allow “unregulated, out-of-state solar developers” to have “unfiltered access to the grid while pushing for a premium price for their own solar projects at the expense of low-income customers.”

Ternes and Wheeler each endorsed their respective companies’ utility-owned programs, DTE’s MIGreenPower and Consumers’ Solar Gardens, where residents voluntarily charge extra bills to support utility-owned solar developments.

Rivet criticized these programs, noting they are designed so customers pay more for clean energy without receiving a financial benefit for investing in a power source that is cleaner and often cheaper than others.

There’s little doubt utilities are spending resources to influence legislators. Utility watchdog group Energy and Policy Institute revealed that political action committees (PACs) tied to DTE and Consumers gave nearly $500,000 to campaign accounts for Whitmer, state legislators and state party funds in 2023 while renewable energy legislation was being considered, with 80% of legislators taking money from these PACs.

The analysis showed that key Democratic lawmakers received far more than other party members this year. For example, House Speaker Joe Tate (D-Detroit) took $30,000 from utilities, and Senate Majority Leader Winnie Brinks (D-Grand Rapids) received $15,500. 

In 2022, DTE-affiliated dark money groups gave $2 million to Democratic groups.

Community solar’s economic and equity potential

A 2021 study from Michigan State University found that enabling community solar would create thousands of jobs over the next 25 years and bring $1.5 billion in economic benefits. 

And advocates say it would better position the state to compete for grants through the $7 billion federal Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund for projects that reduce or avoid planet-warming emissions, emphasizing low-income and disadvantaged communities. 

But they say the greatest potential benefits lie in creating opportunities for low-income residents to lower their energy bills and access more reliable power. Residential customers in Michigan pay the highest rates in the Midwest, and DTE and Consumers are some of the worst utilities in the nation for the duration of blackouts. On Dec. 1, the Michigan Public Service Commission approved a $368 million rate increase for DTE that would add $6.51 to the average customer’s monthly bill. 

HB 4464 would require 30% of each community solar project to go to low-income households or service organizations. 

In comments to the Michigan House Energy, Communications, and Technology Committee in November, Dr. Elizabeth Del Buono, president of Michigan Clinicians for Climate Action, said community solar would also be a win for public health.

Del Buono said community solar will make the grid more reliable during power outages when paired with battery storage, “thereby protecting the health of vulnerable patients dependent on electricity to breathe and be mobile.”

An uncertain future

According to John Richter, senior policy analyst at the nonprofit Great Lakes Renewable Energy Association, additional legislation would be in order if community solar did pass. 

That would include raising the state’s “solar cap,” which sets the percentage of peak yearly load that a utility must buy from distributed energy producers. 

The Clean Energy Future package raised this number from 1% to 10%, but State Sen. Jeff Irwin (D-Ann Arbor) introduced Senate Bill 362 this year to remove the cap. Irwin’s bill would also restore “net metering,” where rooftop solar customers are credited for energy put back on the grid at the same retail rate they pay for electricity. 

Following intense utility lobbying, net metering was replaced by an “inflow-outflow” tariff in 2018, which deducts transmission costs from credits. That change increased the time to recoup up-front costs for the average rooftop solar producer from roughly nine years to 13 years.

Richter said that if these credits aren’t increased, “it would basically be pointless” to try to make community solar projects work economically for residents and developers.

But with Democrats losing their majority in the Michigan House in 2024, community solar may be one of the few energy priorities that could move forward, according to Rivet. 

“Because it does have bipartisan support, it at least has a chance of being the next round of dialogue on energy policy,” he said.

Krishnan is less optimistic.

“Nothing is going to move unless the leadership actually steps up to the plate and does it,” he said. “And they’ve shown absolutely no inclination that they are willing to do so, which I think is frankly reflective of their extreme lack of commitment to environmental justice.”

Republicans and Democrats want community solar. Why won’t Michigan legislators enable it? is an article from Energy News Network, a nonprofit news service covering the clean energy transition. If you would like to support us please make a donation.

This article originally appeared on Planet Detroit.

After Mayor Mike Duggan announced nine finalists in his campaign to recruit Detroit neighborhoods to host solar panel arrays at a Wednesday press conference, community members and activists are divided over whether the plan will help or unfairly burden their communities.

“I thought it was time the city of Detroit stepped up and took action on climate change,” Duggan said. “Too much of the climate change discussion in this country, as far as I’m concerned, is empty performance.”

Under the program, owner-occupied households in selected communities would be eligible to receive $10,000 to $25,000 in energy-efficient upgrades, such as new windows, roofs, energy-efficient appliances, or battery back-up for power outages. 

Detroit would own the land for the solar arrays and contract with private solar developers to build and operate them. Details for how the city would be credited for the power are not yet determined, Duggan said.

Of the nine, he said six will be selected to assemble 250 acres of vacant and underutilized land to offset the electricity used to power city operations. Duggan said the project will cost the city about $8 million a year, or roughly what Detroit now pays DTE Energy to power the city’s 127 public buildings, plus $1-2 million per year more to provide community benefits. He said he plans to bring a funding proposal to city council by spring.

The finalist neighborhoods include Gratiot/Findlay, Greenfield Park/I-75 McNichols, Grixdale, Houston Whittier/Hayes, I-96/Plymouth (O’Shea), Mount Olivet, State Fair, Trinity Pickford and Van Dyke/Lynch.

Duggan emphasized that the city would place solar arrays only in areas “where we are wanted,” noting that the city would buy out residents in owner-occupied homes with a minimum offer of $90,000 and would pay moving costs and 18 months’ rent for tenants. He previously said the city sought “stretches where they don’t have more than one or two occupied homes.” 

But several proposals contain a number of residences, especially rentals. 

For example, the footprint of the 21-acre Mt Olivet project contains 16 renter-occupied and seven owner-occupied homes.  Duggan said the fenced-in solar panel arrays would contribute to neighborhood stability and prevent illegal dumping in vacant and abandoned areas of the city. 

But Duggan spokesperson John Roach said the city could also use eminent domain to assemble land for the arrays, and the mayor said the city may condemn vacant properties owned by speculators. The finalist neighborhoods have until Jan. 31 to provide documentation that residents in owner-occupied homes are willing to move. 

Measha Parker has lived in Gratiot-Findlay for 18 years. She’s president of her block and said she hoped the fenced-in panels on 24 acres would help fight illegal dumping and drive out illegal drugs in the area. 

She’d also like to see the former Wilkins Elementary School building, which has sat vacant for years, demolished as part of the plan. But she is concerned about vandalism and hopes the solar arrays will have surveillance cameras. 

“It’ll bring safety over there,” she said. “Once they put the solar panels up…. It’ll help with the blight and help the whole area survive.”

But several residents and sustainability advocates Planet Detroit talked to question the emphasis on large solar arrays that won’t provide energy directly to residents. Others voiced concern that the projects could attract even more blight.

Birch Kemp, a lifelong Detroiter and president of the nonprofit tree-planting organization Arboretum Detroit, said he supports installing solar panels on top of buildings but worries that fenced-in solar fields will only add to blight problems and hurt property values. 

Kemp said city officials approached him and others living in and around the Poletown East area about a possible array around Perrien Park, a former Detroit Public Schools site, but neighborhood organizations unanimously rejected it.

“It’s not going to increase anybody’s property value. It’s not going to make it look more beautiful. And it’s not going to increase your access to green space,” he said. “It’s going to be like a little prison for solar panels.”

A recent study found solar installations in California, Connecticut, New Jersey, Minnesota, and Massachusetts reduced property values by 1.5% within half a mile, and outcomes varied by state.

Kemp added that the solar fields would tie up land the city could use for open space and green infrastructure to sequester stormwater and prevent basement flooding. He also worries that trees would need to be cut down to reduce shade on the panels.

Experts consider tree cover important for reducing heat and managing stormwater. And while solar power is considered critical for dealing with the climate crisis, solar fields can create a localized increase in temperature. 

This may pose a special problem in Detroit, where the heat island effect, or the capacity of impervious surfaces to absorb and re-emit heat, already increases temperatures by 8 degrees or more.

Jon Kent, a Riverbend resident and co-founder of Sanctuary Farms, also supports solar, but said communities hosting the arrays should benefit more than what he sees in the current proposal.

“They’re doing this within neighborhoods that are really poor and really disengaged,” he said, adding that these areas would be getting a one-time pay-out while the city would continue to benefit.

Kent said he’d like to see the city take more time with the process, doing additional community outreach and building in a more extensive community benefits process that could include allowing communities to renegotiate the terms for hosting arrays in the future.

The expedited time frame may be driven by pressure to secure federal support through the Inflation Reduction Act before this program ends in 2033. A city of Detroit spokesperson confirmed that the city is seeking federal credits to offset municipal operations’ energy use under the IRA. However, they added that the short timeline is because “the mayor feels the climate crisis is an urgent matter.”

Roach defended the current plan, saying the city worked with 15 renewable energy groups to develop the proposal and that eight groups, including Walker-Miller Energy Services, EcoWorks and the GreenDoor Initiative, have been working with neighborhoods to help them develop community benefit requests.

“This is a remarkable partnership between renewable energy advocates and neighborhood groups to design better neighborhoods that will help fight climate change,” he said. 

Roach also pushed back on the idea that solar could hurt property values. “Those who best know the property values in a neighborhood are those who actually live there, which is why they will be the ones choosing the sites,” he said.

Jackson Koeppel, a Highland Park-based energy democracy practitioner and former executive director of the nonprofit Soulardarity, questioned the strategy of jumping immediately to large-scale solar arrays before embracing more targeted strategies.

“This approach to just build out as much solar on vacant land as possible to meet that need isn’t the right order of operations,” he said. Koeppel argues that on-site and rooftop solar and battery storage is the most cost-effective approach for city operations because it would generate “behind the meter” power that would allow the city to avoid the full cost of energy it would otherwise have to purchase. 

Instead, the mayor’s proposal would have a third-party solar developer generate the power and likely sell it to DTE, which could then credit the city on its bills. The city’s request for information from solar developers did include inquiries about behind-the-meter projects at municipal facilities.

North Rosedale resident Amanda Paige said the city could incorporate solar energy into the urban landscape in other ways, like installing rooftop solar panels in neighborhoods or putting panels on top of structures like parking garages and bus shelters.

She worries especially about those living in some of Detroit’s most disinvested neighborhoods who may be underwater on their mortgages and struggling to build generational wealth.

“They’re not attractive,” Paige said of solar panels. “It’s not going to do anything for your long-term property values if you’re across the street from a big solar farm.”

As Detroit solar plan advances, community activists are wary is an article from Energy News Network, a nonprofit news service covering the clean energy transition. If you would like to support us please make a donation.