Michigan Wind Mandate Study: Jobs, Income, Energy Sales Blow South

[XLFD]

A new study from Utah State University found that, as of 2013, Michigan’s renewable energy mandate, enacted in 2008, has cost families and businesses here a bundle: $15.1 billion overall, or $3,830 per family, compared to what we would have experienced without the mandate.  Because of the mandate, 29,366 jobs have been lost and a nearly 14 percent decrease in industrial electricity sales.

The study fuels the debate against having such energy mandates imposed, especially here in Mason County, where a 57 wind turbine 'farm' has been constructed by Consumer's Energy in 2013.  The problems have only blew in since then, with lawsuits concerning health effects, depreciation taxation, and noise levels coming from private citizens and the County being the only noticeable difference-- other than the sight of those 57 500-foot high turbines that greets all our visitors coming from the south.  

The U.S. has no federal mandate for “renewable” power production. Instead, a majority of states,
including Michigan, have created their own state laws called Renewable Portfolio Standards
(RPS).  In Michigan these are called Renewable Energy Standards (RES), and they're primarily based on artificially making a market for green energy.  The study indicates such steps are detrimental on many economic fronts.  How did we get there?

On October 6th, 2008, Governor Jennifer Granholm signed SB 213 into law, formally titled the Clean, Renewable, and Efficient Energy Act, or Public Act 295 for short, that law is responsible for helping the state transition to a clean energy economy by requiring all investor owned utilities, municipal utilities, electric cooperatives, and alternative electric suppliers to generate at least 10 percent of their electricity from renewable sources.  A November 2012 state proposal to make that RES up to 25% by 2025 was killed at the ballot box by over 60% of the voters.  This year, an active debate is on between legislators with those who want to double the mandate battling those who want to repeal it. 

The RENEWABLE PORTFOLIO STANDARDS:  Michigan study uses several mathematic models and formulas, and may be hard to understand without a solid background, but the study concludes:

"The results from these analyses paint a clear picture about the effects of RPS. Our empirical
analysis finds a drop in industrial electricity sales by almost 14 percent, real personal income by
almost four percent, non-farm employment by nearly three percent and an increase of 10 percent
in the unemployment rate, which for Michigan equals a loss of 29,366 jobs.

Our analysis of the legal rules surrounding Michigan’s RES describes the barriers that make it difficult for utilities to comply and for bureaucracies to enforce it, finding that Michigan’s multipliers and cost caps hinder compliance by creating inefficiency and potentially erecting political barriers to satisfying the mandates.

Any state currently deliberating on implementing a new RPS, or strengthening an existing one, should heed these results as a warning of their harmful effects. Finally, states should refrain from following the fad of enacting such costly regulations, in spite of the policy’s political palpability or expediency."

Other Utah State University studies for Ohio, Colorado, North Carolina and Kansas wind mandates and FAQs regarding the studies can be found here. 

[Willy]

Thanks for posting this information X. I hope the idiot County Commisioners who were in power and who voted for these monsters to be shoved up our as_ses, read this. Of course the money they probably received under the table will go a long way to easing their consciences. Most everyone with any common sense realized what a scam this wind energy is but those who have the influence are the ones who got the last laugh on us along with billions of tax dollars. 

[XLFD]

Like any market, the State's energy market can be greatly harmed by the introduction of 'inorganic' influences to the marketplace.  Anybody conducting a realistic cost-benefit analysis on introducing the 10% mandate we already have would have reached most of the conclusions found in this study.  But then, and when the people had the opportunity to put the mandate at 25% by 2025 in 2012, the horrendous side effects are largely withheld from the public and even the legislators.  Fortunately, 62% of the public were wise enough to vote against the proposal.

There will come a time when renewable energy will have its day in the marketplace without needing to be propped up.  Propping it up now is only inefficient and works against improving the technology as it makes the industry more non-competitive with fossil fuels.

[shinblind]

In the end mandated renewable energy will only make Michigan's manufacturing and agricultural exports less competitive which will lead to more lost jobs and stagnant wages.