Missouri Nuclear and Fair Energy Rates

Learn the Issues, Get the Facts

HB 1316: The $115 Million Ameren Bailout

Ameren is asking Missouri businesses and residents to bail them out for costs they have already incurred and plan to incur in the future which do nothing to produce energy or provide any service to consumers now or in the future.

• Ameren has already spent at least $25 million towards pursuing an early site permit.  Ameren willingly spent its own money and as with any other business, Ameren ought to be spending its own money on this speculative venture, rather than seeking a bailout through HB 1316.
• HB 1316 does not guarantee customers will be paid back their money in the case that a new electric plant is never built.
• HB 1316 will cost Missouri businesses and residents $45 million plus interest and Ameren earnings for 20 years totaling an increase of $115 million.
• HB 1316 will produce ZERO watts of electricity. This legislation will not result in a new electric power plant.
• HB 1316 will create ZERO jobs. This legislation has nothing to do with building a new electric power plant that would actually create jobs.

A Plan with Consumer Protections: Senate Bill 406

• Ameren says it needs this legislation to maintain the option of seeking an Early Site Permit toward building a second nuclear power plant. At the same time the bill protects Missouri employers, businesses and residential ratepayers if Ameren proceeds as it has indicated it would.
• The bill also protects business and residential ratepayers if Ameren is wrong and holds Ameren accountable.
• The bill represents a compromise that gives Ameren everything it says is needed to obtain an Early Site Permit and that protects businesses and residential consumers who are being asked to pay for the Early Site Permit.
• This bill allows Ameren to recover from ratepayers financing costs on $40 Million of expenditures to obtain an Early Site Permit.
• Consumer protections include the same three requests that were made by consumer groups this past November:
  • A hard cap on expenses to ensure Ameren doesn’t charge consumers for cost overruns.
    • This is important to avoid the mistakes and huge overruns that have historically plagued the building of nuclear plants.
    • Consumers must be protected from cost overruns at all stages of the process.
  • A rebate to ensure consumers are refunded their money if energy is never produced or the Early Site Permit is never obtained.
    • Ameren has already spent $25 million dollars towards obtaining an Early Site Permit. A rebate is necessary to keep Ameren from shifting the gamble and all of the risk on getting the permit to consumers.
  • Assessment funding for the Office of Public Counsel
    • This takes the Governor’s proposal and makes sure legislative intent for funding the OPC is established and better secures the funding beyond FY 2012, which is the only year the Governor’s proposal ensures.
    • Consumers need an adequately funded independent OPC to ensure consumers are protected through the entire process of building the nuclear plant.

“Ameren Demands $263 Million Rate Hike”

With an unemployment rate of nearly 10%, Missouri families and employers are struggling. Rather than tightening their belts like Missouri’s working families, Ameren is asking the Missouri Public Service Commission (PSC), the regulatory body responsible for policing the monopoly, to allow another Ameren rate hike which will:

• Raise electricity rates on Missouri’s working families and employers by $263 million.
• Drive up the cost of doing business in Missouri Ameren’s rate hike plan comes at a time of crisis for Missouri’s economy. Missourians are losing their jobs. Missouri businesses are being forced to downsize in order to stay afloat.  Missouri’s employers and small businesses are already struggling to prevent layoffs of even more workers.
• Drive up the cost of living for already struggling Missouri families Ameren’s $263 million rate hike demand before the PSC comes at a time when Missouri’s employers and small businesses are hurting and at a time when Missouri families are hurting even more. In this fragile economy, thousands of families live on the brink of financial disaster.

Ameren has been awarded over $577 million in rate increases, a 26% hike, at the expense of Missouri ratepayers in less than two years.  It’s time to ask Ameren to do the same, just like Missouri’s working families.

“The Nuclear Option”

It seems like common sense: the market should make decisions on whether a second power plant is financially viable, not the whims of politicians.  In the midst of a recession and with unemployment at record levels, now is not the time to ask taxpayers and ratepayers to pay more money for energy investment. But that hasn’t stopped the big utilities from trying to push their financial gamble on us.  Senate Bill 50 was crafted by the utility companies to create an exception in long-standing state law.  It would allow large Missouri utilities to charge YOU for the costs associated with Early Site Permit (ESP), the first step in construction of a nuclear power plant.

The Situation

• The fact that Ameren is seeking money from ratepayers and cannot get private backing means that there is substantial financial risk in building a second nuclear power plant.

• Missouri’s other nuclear power plant was built without a rate-hike in advance of the plant.

• Ameren made over $600 million last year and is still seeking to raise rates on consumers.

• Ameren has already raised energy rates several times in the past few years, and is now looking to raise them again.

• Other states have allowed energy companies to pass on development costs to ratepayers, and consumers in those states have seen their electric bills skyrocket.

• The development of a new power plant is financially risky, which is why Ameren wants to raise energy rates to cover the costs, instead of using their own money.

• Ameren is seeking to transfer the financial cost of energy development to their consumers in order to appease their shareholders.

The Solution

Any proposal that were to meet General Assembly approval must have strong consumer protections. FERAF encourages you to express your support for consumers by insisting on pro-consumer provisions including:

• Robust Office of Public Counsel (OPC). Over the years funding for consumer protection has been greatly reduced impairing the ability of OPC and PSC to conduct adequate reviews of rate case filings. Legislation must include funding OPC that allows them to conduct thorough audits of rate cases filed with the Public Service Commission.

• Responsible Cap. Should the Legislature consider the utility’s proposed legislation allowing them to recover costs of construction while in progress, they must include a reasonable and fair cap on rate increases to keep energy costs from spiraling out of control. To ensure consumers money is well spent, each step of the construction process should be monitored and controlled.
• Rebate. If ratepayers pay tens of millions of dollars in rate increases and a plant is never built or the permit is sold at a profit, Missouri ratepayers deserve to be refunded in full. We believe these consumer protections to be essential for the health of Missouri’s energy future, and therefore, Missouri economy.

TAKE ACTION TODAY.

The “Bad Debt Surcharge” is Unfair to Consumers

Big gas companies have pushed the Missouri legislature to create a surcharge so they could raise our bills without going before the Public Service Commission, which currently sets utility rates in Missouri. This new surcharge would have allowed them to charge you immediately when other people don’t pay their utility bills. If this new practice had become law, what motivation would the gas companies have to track down customers skipping out on their bills when they could just stick you with their debt?

• Two bills before the legislature in 2010 (SB 705 and HB 1610) would have allowed increases on natural gas bills to pay the utility for the bad debts of its non-paying natural gas customers, overriding the current consumer protection against such single-issue ratemaking.
• This legislation would have allowed energy rates to increase, even at times when Laclede Gas Company or Missouri Gas Energy’s overall cost of doing business was not going up!
• Bad debts are already included in rates. When a utility needs to adjust rates, including for bad debt, it may initiate a rate case. The Bad Debt Surcharge would allow accelerated increases without the protections of a full rate case audit.
• This Bad Debt Surcharge would have increased the volatility of natural gas bills, due to the correlation between wholesale gas rates and uncollectible accounts.
• The Bad Debt Surcharge would have been a hidden surcharge.  By cleverly attempting to redefine certain bad debts as “gas costs”, it would have been disguised in the Purchased Gas Adjustment (PGA), instead of being identified separately on gas bills.
• The legal purpose of the PGA is solely for recovering the wholesale cost of natural gas—not to compensate the utility for bad debt.  In 2009, the Missouri PSC ruled unanimously that bad debt is not a “gas cost” [Case No. GT-2009-0026].
• This legislation would have decreased the utility’s incentive to effectively manage its bad debt accounts and increased the incentive to write off accounts early and pass those costs through the PGA.  However, writing off accounts as “uncollectible” does not stop the utility from continuing to attempt collection from the customer who owes the debt.
• The Bad Debt Surcharge also reduces the utilities’ risk, and therefore increases their profits. These companies are already compensated for this risk through the return on equity (ROE) component of rates.  Laclede and MGE are already permitted double-digit ROEs.  In other states, it has been estimated that such surcharges would enhance earnings by 0.75% to 0.95%.

Single Issue Ratemaking

Single issue ratemaking is an unfair utility proposal whereby Missouri’s public utilities are allowed to increase electric rates on Missouri consumers through rate increase surcharges outside of the normal ratemaking process. As fuel charges have increased on Ameren as on all other consumers, for instance, Ameren has raised electrical rates via fuel surcharge increases. Often, Ameren has imposed these fuel surcharges even when their revenues are increase from other means such as off system sales. The result is that, while all Missourians struggle at times with increased fuel charges, only Ameren is able to pass those increased costs on to hard working families. FERAF opposes single-issue ratemaking for exactly these reasons.

Ameren Demands 18% Rate Increase

Missouri’s families and employers are struggling with a state unemployment rate of nearly 10%. In the face of this struggle, rather than tighten their belts like Missouri’s working families, Ameren  demanded that the Missouri Public Service Commission (PSC), the regulatory body responsible for policing the Ameren monopoly, allow another Ameren rate hike.  Thanks to the efforts of concerned Missourians and FERAF the rate hike was cut nearly in half.

• Raise electricity rates on Missouri’s working families and employers by 18%.
• Resulted in an immediate rate hike on Missouri’s electricity users. If Ameren has their way, Missouri’s families and employers would have had their electricity rates raised immediately, during one of the most difficult economic downturns we’ve seen in decades.
• Ameren’s original request would have allowed them to raise rates more frequently.Despite the fact that they enjoy a monopoly, Ameren isn’t content with its profits. Buried in the fine print of of its 18% rate hike request was a plan to allow it to raise rates on struggling Missouri families more often through rate increase surcharges on customers’ electric bills. If Ameren had their way, Missourians would need to be prepared for more frequent rate increases!
• Cause Missouri job losses. Missourians are losing their jobs. Missouri businesses are being forced to downsize in order to stay afloat. Hiking rates on Missouri’s employers and small businesses when they’re already struggling will force many to lay off even more workers.
• Push already struggling Missouri families into poverty. Rate increases will hurt Missouri’s employers and small businesses but it will hurt Missouri families even more. In this fragile economy, thousands of families live on the brink of financial disaster. Electric rate increases will cause the number of Missouri families living in poverty to increase.

go Here to TAKE ACTION TODAY

Thank you for stopping by St Louis Renewable Energy. Feel free to comment in the section below or contact Scotty for any Home Improvement Projects or Energy Reducing Needs and Scotty, Scotts Contracting will respond ASAP. Company Web Address: http://www.stlouisrenewableenergy.com

Re:Missouri Flunks! -- Save EPA & Coal Ash Rule -- Landfill Update

Subject: Missouri Flunks! -- Save EPA and Coal Ash Rule -- Landfill Update
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2011 19:05:26 +0000

	Some news and information from  Labadie Environmental Organization August 25, 2011 ____________________________________________________ When Will County Commission Decide Landfill Zoning Issue?     Tick.  Tock.  No "save the date" for this event.  Check the Commission agenda every Friday afternoon here  and attend the Tuesday 10 am Commission meetings at the Government Center in Union.  The decision meeting will likely happen in the next several weeks and with very little notice.   An action alert will be sent as soon as we know. But there is still time to put the Commissioners on notice that landfills DO NOT belong in a floodplain or a floodway or a seismic impact zone… EVER.   Strong rules at the local level that actually protect affected residents are more important than ever now that we know these 3 things: 1.       State coal ash regulations that truly protect the public are a myth 2.       No national coal ash standards currently exist,  and 3.       Congress is actively trying to prevent future enactment of national coal ash standards.  The landfill issue represents the intersection of local, state and federal policies and how they should work together to benefit the public but often end up failing to do that.  Here's what we've learned. Myth Busted!  Missouri flunks the test when it comes to managing coal ash.   According to a recent state-by-state analysis, Missouri falls in the top 12 of the worst states for coal ash management.  # 6 to be exact.  That's an alarming statistic that must be emphasized to the Franklin County Commission as they wrestle with zoning changes that would allow coal ash landfills.  This report debunks the myth that state regulatory agencies are strong and actually protect the public from the dangers of toxic coal ash.   Read the report here (Missouri details are on pg 15 of the report) and then take action.  Here are 3 easy ways to share your concerns with the Commissioners. Ø  Send an email to commission@franklinmo.net Ø  Send a letter to Franklin County Commission, 400 E. Locust, Union, Mo. 63084 or Ø  Call 636-583-6358 Trusting state regulations on coal ash management will protect our drinking water creates a false sense of security.  The truth is, State regulations are lacking and/or unenforced.  But surely the EPA will come to the rescue.  Won't they?  Not if the House of Representatives get their way. Coal Ash Rule and EPA Under Attack!    House Reps are on a roll – rolling back our environmental protections.   Here is a partial hit list:  ü  suspending vehicle car mileage goals ü  suspending rules on mountaintop removal mining ü  disallowing almost any activity related to greenhouse gas regulation ü  stopping stricter mercury emissions standards ü  and preventing the EPA from regulating coal ash as a hazardous waste… EVER ! The Clean Water Act and the Clean Air Act are under attack … that means you, your kids, your grandkids and your future grandkids are under attack.  There are many fronts in this battle but here's how to fight back on coal ash: v  Let your member of Congress know you want federal protection from toxic coal ash.  Tell them to oppose H.R. 2273 aka "The McKinley Bill".   This bill is a gift to polluters.  Find out more here. v  Coal Ash Talking Points.  Get the lowdown here on how Congress is trying to use budget riders to the Appropriations Bill to kill coal ash protections … another gift to polluters.  For details on a different House bill (HR 2018*) that has incredibly passed the House and would dismantle 40 years of environmental progress if the Senate passes it this Fall, read this article from Health News Digest.   *The Clean Water Cooperative Federalism Act of 2011 will amend the Clean Water Act of 1970 and give authority over clean water regulation back to the States.  Think about that… considering Missouri is at the very end of one of the largest watersheds in the country!  WE ALL LIVE DOWNSTREAM and Missouri is downstream from many, many states.  Tell your Senator to reject HR 2018 and save the Clean Water Act.   Tell Senator McCaskill to protect the public and "unsign" the White House coal ash letter she endorsed that would prevent managing coal ash as the hazardous waste it is.  Contact your Senator here. Powerful Words and Images:    A concerned citizen recently wrote a thoughtful and moving open letter to Senator Claire McCaskill about the Ameren coal ash landfill issue.  It was prominently displayed in the August 17th edition of the Missourian.  See it here and read what one person had to say.  Get inspired to add your voice wherever you can.   www.leomo.info

---

---

Labadie Environmental Organization, Inc. PO Box 112 Labadie, Missouri 63055 US

--

*Scott's Contracting*

Green Me UP-Scotty
scottscontracting@gmail.com
http://stlouisrenewableenergy.blogspot.com
http://scottscontracting.wordpress.com
Twitter                      Facebook

Nega Watts- Energy Efficiency News

birth of the negawatt – a tradable resource now gaining prominence in the industry energy efficiency resource portfolio standards with targets to reduce electricity demand over time standards will take a 6% bite out of retail electricity sales nationwide by 2020			Estimating the imact of US energy efficiency programmes
	May 5, 2011	Risk . net
	Increased interest in energy efficiency and demand response programmes in the US power markets has led to the birth of the negawatt – a tradable resource now gaining prominence in the industry. But estimating the impact of these programmes is not easy, as Elisa Wood discovers Many US states are now mandating deep cuts in power use through energy efficiency programmes. However, for suppliers and utilities, working out the impact these programmes will have on their business models is proving extremely difficult. Twenty-six US states, which account for 65% of the country’s electricity demand, now have energy efficiency resource portfolio standards with targets to reduce electricity demand over time. If achieved, the standards will take a 6% bite out of retail electricity sales nationwide by 2020, according to the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy (ACEEE). Because these, and other efficiency and demand reduction programmes, effectively increase supply, they have given birth to a new virtual resource – the negawatt – energy saved via energy efficiency measures. The negawatt is fast becoming a recognised tradable resource that can be used to bid in some of the US regional wholesale power markets head to head against power resources. The first to accept such bids was ISO New England in its forward capacity market. These negawatts have contributed to significant flattening of demand for capacity in New England. Negawatts have not, however, created power markets that are any less complicated when it comes to navigating risk and reward, according to Daniel Allegretti, vice-president for energy policy with Maryland-based Constellation Energy, which operates in both wholesale and retail electric markets. In fact, they have added yet another wrinkle. “As we’re seeing more demand response coming in flattening things out, we are also seeing more intermittent supply [such as wind and solar] come in. So I don’t think the markets are becoming less volatile from a trading perspective,” he says. “To understand it, to predict and see where to take a position, is becoming increasingly challenging,” he adds. “I wouldn’t say there is a magical algorithm.” Indeed, it is ultimately the “grey matter” that must determine a supplier’s market position by taking in the many data points that influence demand, such as weather, rule changes, energy imports, regional transmission organisation information and new utility programmes, he says. All these variables make trying to calculate the impact of energy efficiency and demand response extremely tricky. “The prevailing conventional wisdom is that energy efficiency will put downward pressure on demand and prices. I don’t think anyone argues with that. The $64,000 question is, of what magnitude,” says Martin Kushler, senior fellow at the ACEEE. Overall demand appears set to rise despite energy efficiency programmes, due to a growing use of air conditioners and electronic devices. However, the rise is forecast at just 1% per year, according to the US Energy Information Administration (EIA). Retail electricity rates also appear to be levelling and may even fall, according to the EIA’s Short-Term Energy Outlook, published in March 2011. Household electricity prices showed no growth from 2009 and 2010, hovering around an average 11.58 cents/kWh, not an unexpected event during a period of slow economic activity and low natural gas prices. The same forecast shows electricity prices rising by 1% in 2011 and 0.5% in 2012. But over the long term, prices may actually fall. An early release of EIA’s Annual Energy Outlook 2011 projects that real average delivered electricity prices will drop to as low as 8.9 cents/kWh in 2016. _______________ Scotty writes: I'll believe a decrease in Electricity Rates when It happens.  From all I read about Ameren UE's agenda- they will not be lowering the Electricity Rates for St Louis anytime soon.

Join Me to Protest Ameren UE's Nuclear Reactor Agenda

Protest

Ameren Shareholders Meeting

 

Thursday, April 21 · 7:30am - 9:30am

 

Powell Symphony Hall, 718 N Grand Blvd, Saint Louis, MO

Ameren Missouri is holding their annual Meeting of Shareholders to vote on several issues pertaining to their governing laws.

 

The anti-CWIP law states that investor-owned utilities, like Ameren, are not allowed to collect money from ratepayers for costs associated with new power plants until they are producing electricity. 

 

This law saved Ameren ratepayers $400 million after the completion of the 1st nuclear reactor in Callaway County. Ameren wants to repeal part of this law. Know the talking points and make a difference.

 

----------

Find Additional Information on Ameren UE and Nuclear Energy

Ameren UE's Greed Missouri Nuclear Agenda

Latest News on Missouri Nuclear Reactor Agenda

Nuclear siting bill awaits committee action (AUDIO))

by Bob Priddy on March 31, 2011 cross-posted via: Missourinet

 

Four bills focused on how to pay to pick a site for a second commercial nuclear power plant are stuck in a Senate Committee.  Senator Jason Crowell, the sponsor of one of the bills, chairs the committee that held a seven-hour public hearing about three weeks ago. The committee has not considered whether to recommend full senate debate.
For him, the big issue is who will pay for the site selection.  He thinks the utility company and its stockholders should bear that cost.

The sponsor of one of the proposals, Jefferson City Senator Mike Kehoe, thinks most senators are comfortable with having consumers pay for the site selection—but be repaid if no site is picked or no plant goes into operation.

Crowell worries that having consumers pay for the site selection is the first step toward repealing the construction work in progress law that says consumers won't be billed for construction costs until the plant is running.  Kehoe says he favors whichever approach is the most economical way to build the plant.

Kehoe comments 7:38 mp3                   crowell comments 4:03 mp3

Find Additional News on Missouri's Nuclear Agenda Here

--
Scott's Contracting
scottscontracting@gmail.com
http://stlouisrenewableenergy.blogspot.com
http://scottscontracting.wordpress.com

Ameren UEs Greed-Missouri-Nuclear Reactor-

Here is some of the latest news on Energy (Electricity) Issues affecting the St Louis Area, Ameren UEs Nuclear Reactor Agenda is just plain GREEDY and will cost us the rate payers now and in the future.

• Amerens goal is to charge the people of the St Louis Area, the ratepayers, millions of dollars up front for an unnecessary, risky, and expensive Nuclear Power Reactor Plant rather than investing in the cheapest energy resource available, energy efficiency
  

• US Department of Energy Statistics on Energy Efficiency-Saves 10% Energy Costs, 20-30% Heating/AC Costs. 
  

• The proposed legislation would chip away at a 1976 ballot initiative supported 2-to-1 by Missouri voters. This law protects Missourians from investor-owned utilities charging ratepayers up-front for the construction of a power plant until it is producing electricity.

• Missouri General Assembly is considering legislation that would allow Ameren Missouri to charge ratepayers $40 million for a permit for a second nuclear reactor in mid-Missouri.
  

• The proposed legislation-SB 321 and SB 406- would chip away at a 1976 ballot initiative supported 2-to-1 by Missouri voters. This law protects Missourians from investor-owned utilities charging ratepayers up-front for the construction of a power plant until it is producing electricity.

• To understand the many other reasons why SB 321 and SB 406 are bad public policy, read Senator Joan Bray's guest column in the Joplin Globe last month.                                                                                                                                                                                        
• Ameren admits it cannot find investors to fund the Nuclear Plant because it is too risky and expensive.

• Scotts Contracting/Facebook Page Latest Estimated Costs for Nuclear Reactor is $10 Billion. we'll have to pay an additional $4 Billion Dollars                                             

• Therefore, Ameren must pass SB 321 or SB 406 which shifts the financial risk of investment of a new nuclear plant from shareholders to ratepayers.  But while shareholders dodge the risk, they still receive a financial windfall if/when the reactor comes online and Ameren then sells the excess electricity out of state for a premium.                                                                                                                                                                           

•  Ameren can easily meet Missouri's energy needs through energy efficiency instead of raising your electric rates to pay for a $6 billion nuclear reactor.  (Per Nuclear Reactor in Florida 6 Billion in Projected Costs ends up with total costs of 22 Billion over Budget)  In the St. Louis Post Dispatch on February 25, Steve Kidwell, Ameren Missouri Vice President of Regulatory Affairs, said:  

1.  
   "If we went after the potential that we've seen in our own study,  we wouldn't have to build another power plant for 20 years, and we could retire Meramec, and we'd be OK.  But we'd lose  $30 million a year. And we just can't do that. It's that simple."

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Join the Movement and Contact the Missouri Legislative Department Here

-Find Your Representatives-Republican or Democrat,
and Let Your Voice BE HEARD!     
Active Participation is Suggested Tell My Politician

--
Scott's Contracting
scottscontracting@gmail.com
http://stlouisrenewableenergy.blogspot.com
http://scottscontracting.wordpress.com

Renewable Energy Rebates-Ameren UE-Federal Tax Incentive

Ameren UE Renewable Energy Rebate Program

Recently I was asked:

• "Why does Ameren UE buy back the electricity created by Renewable Energy System on my House?" 

When I directed the question to Ms L.Cosgrove who handles the Local Ameren UE Renewable Energy Department.  She replied:

•    "AmerenUE provides the MO Solar Rebate in response to Missourian’s passing Proposition C back in November, 2008[ii],[iii]"

In a nutshell it seems to me that Ameren UE will either have to build Renewable Energy Producing Systems or Purchase the Electricity that is made from Residents and Businesses to comply with the Law. 

Which means that Ameren has a Stake in any Renewable Energy Sytem that produces Electricity and is Interconnected utilizing Net Metering to our / their Electircal Grid here in the St Louis Area. 

Good News for all those who would like additional Monetary Incentives for Installing RE (Renewable Energy) Sytems.

The Ameren Rebate and the Federal Tax Incentive can add up to as much as 2/3 of the cost of the RE System. 

---

[i] Lisa M. Cosgrove | Renewables Specialist  | 1901 Chouteau Avenue, MC 611 | St. Louis, MO 63103

314-554-2649 | fax 314-206-1387 | lcosgrove@ameren.com   

[ii] See http://www.sos.mo.gov/elections/2008petitions/2008-031.asp for more details.

[iii] 2008 Initiative Petitions
Approved for Circulation in Missouri

Amendment to Chapter 393 of the Revised Statutes of Missouri, Relating to Renewable Energy, version 4, 2008-031

THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT

Be it enacted by the people of the state of Missouri:

Chapter 393, RSMo, is amended by repealing sections 393.1020, 393.1025, 393.1030, and 393.1035, and substituting therefor three new sections to be known as sections 393.1020, 393.1025 and 393.1030, to read as follows:

393.1020. Sections 393.1025 to 393.1030 shall be known as the Renewable Energy Standard.

393.1025. As used in sections 393.1020 to 393.1030, the following terms mean:

 1. "Commission", the public service commission;

 2. "Department", the department of natural resources;

 3. “Electric utility”, any electrical corporation as defined by section 386.020;

 4. "Renewable energy resources", electric energy produced from wind, solar thermal sources, photovoltaic cells and panels, dedicated crops grown for energy production, cellulosic agricultural residues, plant residues, methane from landfills or from wastewater treatment, clean and untreated wood such as pallets, hydropower (not including pumped storage) that does not require a new diversion or impoundment of water and that has a nameplate rating of 10 megawatts or less, fuel cells using hydrogen produced by one of the above-named renewable energy sources, and other sources of energy not including nuclear that become available after the effective date of this section and are certified as renewable by rule by the department; and

 5. "Renewable energy credit" or “REC”, a tradable certificate of proof that one megawatt-hour of electricity has been generated from renewable energy sources.

393.1030.1. The commission shall, in consultation with the department, prescribe by rule a portfolio requirement for all electric utilities to generate or purchase electricity generated from renewable energy resources. Such portfolio requirement shall provide that electricity from renewable energy resources shall constitute the following portions of each electric utility’s sales:

(a) No less than two percent for calendar years 2011 through 2013;

(b) No less than five percent for calendar years 2014 through 2017;

(c) No less than ten percent for calendar years 2018 through 2020; and

(d) No less than fifteen percent in each calendar year beginning in 2021. 

At least two percent of each portfolio requirement shall be derived from solar energy. The portfolio requirements shall apply to all power sold to Missouri consumers whether such power is self-generated or purchased from another source in or outside of this state. A utility may comply with the standard in whole or in part by purchasing RECs. Each kilowatt-hour of eligible energy generated in Missouri shall count as 1.25 kilowatt-hours for purposes of compliance.

2. The commission, in consultation with the department and within one year of the effective date of sections 393.1020 to 393.1030, shall select a program for tracking and verifying the trading of renewable energy credits. An unused credit may exist for up to three years from the date of its creation. A credit may be used only once to comply with this act and may not also be used to satisfy any similar non-federal requirement. An electric utility may not use a credit derived from a green pricing program. Certificates from net-metered sources shall initially be owned by the customer-generator.  The... continues on web site 

St Louis Ameren UE Renewable Energy Info

Ameren UE Solar Renewable Energy Rebate Application and Rate Information. If needed information for Solar Panels, Inverters, Total Wattage, etc. email Scotty

• Ameren UE Solar Power Rebate Info/ Application Form
• Ameren UE Rates
• Ameren UE Rates(2)

AmerenUE's renewable energy initiatives

Leading the way to a secure energy future
Renewable energy is electric energy produced from sources that replenish themselves naturally, never run out, and are cleaner for the environment. These resources include:
	Wind
	Sunlight (solar energy)
	Landfill and agricultural waste (biomass)
	Water (some low-impact and run-of-river hydroelectric facilities)
As a responsible steward of the environment, Ameren is committed to exploring all of these renewable energy options. In fact, the company already has a number of renewable initiatives under way—see Facts about AmerenUE’s Commitment to Develop Renewable Energy Resources brochure. Other renewable initiatives include:
		Pure Power
		UE responded to the desires of its customers by offering a voluntary renewable energy program—Pure Power—this program empowers UE electric customers to support wind farms and other renewable energy facilities in the Midwest as well as contribute to regional development. See how the Pure Power program works at www.ameren.com/PurePower.
		Participation in this program does not constitute the purchase of energy. Renewable energy credits which represent the environmental attributes associated with past renewable energy generation are retired on behalf of program participants. All renewable energy credits purchased under this program are Green-e certified by the independent Center for Resource Solutions.
		Utility Scale Wind-Powered Electric Generation
		Working with wind developers who seek partners to develop utility scale wind-powered electric generation (20 MW and larger) for our portfolio. See the latest news regarding our portfolio.
		Methane to Megawatts Project
		An agreement between AmerenUE and Fred Weber, Inc. includes plans to install combustion turbines capable of generating about 15 megawatts (MW) of electricity by burning methane gas at Fred Weber’s solid waste landfill in Maryland Heights, Missouri. See the latest news on the Methane to Megawatts project.
		Solar Home
		UE funded a project at the University of Missouri-Rolla to develop a solar home for entry in the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Solar Home Competition.
		Missouri Schools Going Solar
		Supported Missouri Schools Going Solar, a program in conjunction with the Missouri Department of Natural Resources that provided solar panels to schools.
		-	AmerenUE-Funded ‘Missouri Schools Going Solar’ Program Unveils First Solar Array Panel
		-	Missouri Schools Going Solar
		Renewable Generating Opportunities
		UE continues to pursue renewable generating opportunities, such as wind, solar, landfill gas, agricultural methane, hydro and other alternative energy sources to generate electricity. See details in our 20-year Integrated Resource Plan.
		Clean Energy Message
		UE has taken its clean energy message to school children (K-6th grade) at more than 350 Missouri schools, through the National Theatre for Children’s live production of “Boomerang Jack and the Unseen Green Machine.” More about the National Theatre for Children.
		Net Metering
		UE offers net metering. For net metering tariff details and required application (Sheet 13 includes the necessary documents for filing), see our Rates section.
		Missouri's Proposition C
		UE will comply with Missouri’s Proposition C, which passed on the Nov. 2008 ballot. The Public Service Commission in conjunction with the Department of Natural Resources began rulemaking for Proposition C in 2009; however, final rules have not been published to date. Primary effective date is January 1, 2011. For details on Proposition C, see the Missouri Secretary of State site. View the Missouri Solar Rebate Tariff information or access the Missouri Solar Rebate Application.
		Hybrid Bucket Truck
		We are one of the first utilities in the nation to place in service a hybrid bucket truck that uses both diesel fuel and electricity. See the Fact Sheet.
For more information about renewable energy at UE, contact our Renewables group at 314.554.2649 or lcosgrove@ameren.com.