In his budget address, Gov. Scott Walker spoke of “a vision for a better tomorrow in Wisconsin.” While Walker may be pursuing his vision of a better Wisconsin, it is not clear whether that vision and the means by which he is pursuing it are compatible. Walker’s maxim throughout his campaign and his first months in office has been that Wisconsin is “Open for Business,” and yet, when it comes to clean energy and new green technologies, Walker’s policies have been hostile to the emerging industry.
Under former Gov. Jim Doyle, the Public Service Commission (PSC) adopted a set of rules regulating windmills. These administrative rules stipulated things such as where wind turbines could be placed in relation to others’ property or communications infrastructure, what type of notice had to be given before building a wind turbine, and so forth. The rules were supposed to go into force on Tuesday, March 2, but were instead suspended that day by the PSC along a partisan vote (5-2). While on the surface this might seem either good for wind energy or obscure enough to be irrelevant, it will actually have an important impact on wind energy in Wisconsin, and fits into a larger picture of Walker’s apparent designs on alternative energy.
The suspension of the current PSC rules allows the legislature to introduce new regulations for wind turbines. Walker’s proposal would mandate that wind turbines would have to be 1800 feet from the nearest property line, a limit that would effectively bar the construction of any new wind farms. Proponents of this rule argue it protects the value – both normative and financial – of property, while opponents argue it will severely damage the emerging wind energy sector and restrict people’s choice about what to do on their property. Opponents also argue that wind turbines can increase property values.
The recently suspended PSC rules were passed after months of debate and public input from businesses and private residents. They were, as all the best compromises are, partially satisfactory to both sides. The current PSC rules represented the culmination of careful consideration and collaboration between various interests. That Republicans pushed for their suspension so rapidly, without waiting to see their effects on the industry, property values or neighbors, was irresponsible.
Governmental oversight should be updated in response to feedback after implementation, not overhauled on the basis of ideology. Previously, those who knew the most about the subject had a clear voice in the process. With this suspension, and presumably with the passage of the new rules (just going off the past few weeks), the rules will be mandated by Walker and rubber-stamped by the Legislature, most of whom have little technical expertise in the area of wind power.
Besides threatening the wind power sector – which, ironically, is probably going to “escape to Illinois” – Walker’s agenda also seems to be targeting solar, bio-fuel, biomass and energy storage technologies. Wisconsin’s solar industry has the potential to be a huge asset to the state’s economy, since Wisconsin gets more sunlight than the current solar energy leader: Germany. Walker also nixed the biomass plant on campus. These emerging industries represent the energy of the future.
Gas prices are nearing $3.50 a gallon and fossil fuel supplies are being depleted across the globe. Even with responsible usage, fossil fuels are not a sustainable source of energy. We need to be investing in alternative energies now to effectively meet future demands on energy and environmental responsibility.
Included in Walker’s budget is a provision rescinding the mandate for cities and municipalities to provide recycling services. It also takes away all state funding for such programs. It does, however, maintain the illegality of not recycling on an individual level. Despite the removal of state funds, not all cities will eliminate recycling programs – in fact, recycling glass, plastic and aluminum actually draws revenue for local governments. However, decreased budgets will make it harder for cities to provide these services and may reduce the scope of recycling programs.
Although there is currently a $7 tax per landfill ton, eliminating the program won’t eliminate the tax – instead, that tax money will go to a new agency aimed at economic development. Maybe that agency will recommend offering incentives to emerging industries with large job growth potential. Maybe it will find a way to create hundreds of jobs, like the ones lost by Walker’s wind energy policies.
During his budget address, Walker invoked the memory of former Gov. Tommy Thompson. Thompson, however, actually passed several pro-alternative energy policies. Doyle continued that practice. Walker seems to be breaking with that tradition and threatening the emergence of this important and emerging market. Forcing or scaring forward-looking businesses out of the state is not the way to create 250,000 new jobs in the short term, much less create sustainable economic growth in the long term. But, then again, Walker did receive significant campaign contributions from coal, oil, gas, construction and realty interests. Whatever the reason behind them, these policies are not leading Wisconsin into a “better tomorrow”. If Walker really wants to be an effective leader, he needs to be willing to respond to the long term needs of the state.
Elise Swanson ([email protected]) is a sophomore majoring in political science and English.
