Earlier this month, Wolverine Power Cooperative, of Cadillac, announced that it is working with John Deere Wind Energy to construct a 32-turbine wind farm in Huron County.

Construction of the Harvest Wind Farm project, principally owned by John Deere, is under way, with commercial operation scheduled for early 2008. The 52.8 megawatt project will be Michigan’s first utility-sized wind farm and, more importantly, is being built without a state or federal mandate.

The Michigan Legislature is currently considering at least six different bills that, if enacted, would mandate that all utilities include a certain percentage of renewable energy as part of their power supply. The details of each bill differ, but the concepts are the same: impose a government mandate in an effort to advance the use of renewable energy in Michigan. In theory, this appears to be a reasonable approach that will result in renewable energy becoming a greater percentage of our state’s power supply.

I am certain policy makers in California thought so, as well, when they took the same approach in 2002 and adopted a Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) requiring that 20 percent of the state’s electricity needs be met with renewable energy by 2010, with a long-term goal of 33 percent by 2020. However, a study released by the California Energy Commission this past January shows that California has achieved only minimal increases in renewable generation. Between 2005, the year in which the Renewable Portfolio Standard took effect, and 2007, the percentage of renewable energy in California’s generation mix has remained nearly constant rather than increasing by at least 1 percent per year as required under the statute. And this is in a state where the average residential rate is approximately 19 cents per kilowatt hour, almost double what it is in Michigan.

What would be the impact on electricity bills in Michigan if the state were to adopt a 10 percent RPS? No one knows—and that is one of the main concerns electric cooperative leaders have with adopting an RPS at this time. The Michigan House Energy Committee has held several hearings on this issue already. At several of the hearings, witnesses were asked what the increased cost would be to customers if the state adopted an RPS. Their responses have been consistent: “We don’t know.”

The Michigan Chamber of Commerce has attempted to quantify the cost of meeting a 10 percent RPS in a memo they circulated to legislators. Using data from the Michigan Public Service Commission’s 21st Century Energy Plan, the Michigan Chamber estimates that a 10 percent RPS would cost customers at least $6 billion, an average $2,000 per household over the 20-year life expectancy of the installations–and that’s over the cost of paying for the new baseload generating plants we still need to build. Even one-half the RPS cost would be a significant increase in electric costs to Michigan customers at a time when we are all faced with increasing gas prices, taxes, health insurance premiums, and a stagnant economy.

Part of the problem is that Michigan does not have a working wind farm to give real data on what can be done to meet an RPS. We have lots of theoretical studies, but no real-world Michigan data. We have a better suggestion for policy makers: Let’s get a utility-sized wind farm up and running. Then, by the end of its first year of operation, we will have real information from a working wind farm that can be analyzed to see what is a practical, cost-effective RPS for Michigan. Christine Todd Whitman, former head of the EPA and a past governor of New Jersey, recently spoke at a conference for electric cooperative leaders and said that addressing greenhouse gas issues and global warming will cost money. Policy makers have to be informed about the costs and make rational decisions, Whitman said. We can’t agree more. With the announcement by Wolverine Power and John Deere, we have an opportunity to fully understand what is feasible, as well as get a handle on the costs of pursuing an RPS. Let’s take the time necessary to do so.