There is something appealing about Wisconsin taking control of its own energy future. We are an independent-minded state. We believe in self-reliance, local accountability, and keeping decisions close to the people who live with their consequences. These are good instincts. But independence is not the same as isolation, and when it comes to electricity, the difference can be extraordinarily expensive.

Consider what would happen if Wisconsin’s five investor-owned electric utilities and American Transmission Company (ATC) left the Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO). The idea might be presented as a way to escape regional bureaucracy, regain control over transmission planning, or reduce costs. Yet before celebrating such a departure, Wisconsin residents should ask: How much is the bill?

The answer is not simple, but the potential costs are substantial.

Leaving Does Not Mean Walking Away from the Bill

MISO is the regional organization that coordinates wholesale electricity markets and transmission operations across much of the Midwest. Its members benefit from access to a broad electricity market, shared reliability resources, and coordinated transmission planning.

They also share financial obligations.

Over the years, MISO has approved major transmission investments intended to strengthen reliability, reduce congestion, and connect electricity generation across state lines. These investments include Multi-Value Projects (MVPs), whose costs are allocated across participating areas under established rules.

Those financial commitments do not necessarily disappear when a transmission owner withdraws.

Under MISO’s federally approved tariff, withdrawing transmission owners can remain responsible for some outstanding obligations. The exact costs would depend on the projects involved, applicable agreements, and regulatory determinations.

This matters for Wisconsin because ATC owns and operates much of our state’s high-voltage transmission infrastructure. If ATC withdrew alongside Wisconsin’s investor-owned utilities, the financial consequences would extend well beyond ordinary administrative expenses.

For preliminary analysis, policymakers might examine scenarios involving $250 million, $750 million, or $1.5 billion in withdrawal-related obligations. These figures are illustrative stress tests, not actual estimates of what Wisconsin would owe.

The distinction matters. We should not invent an exit penalty simply to make a political argument. We should insist on calculating the actual costs before anyone proposes putting Wisconsinites on the hook.

Who Ultimately Pays?

Utility costs tend to find their way into household and business electricity bills. With this in mind, suppose Wisconsin were to pay $750 million in withdrawal-related obligations. Divided evenly among approximately 2.8 million electric utility customers, that represents roughly $268 per customer.

This is just an illustration, not a prediction of actual bill increases. Real costs would depend on regulatory decisions, financing, customer classes, and the entities legally responsible.

Still, the math shows how significant the financial risk could be. And these costs don’t include the build-out of new services to replace the ones MISO currently provides for our state.

Ultimately, we would pay to leave one system and then pay again to participate in or build another. That alone is not necessarily an argument against every possible withdrawal from MISO. But it is a powerful enough reason to demand evidence that shows how a replacement would actually cost less.

The More Expensive Problem May Come After We Leave

MISO’s greatest economic contribution is not eliminating the cost of operating the electric grid. It is that regional cooperation lets utilities manage those costs across a larger system.

Wisconsin utilities can purchase electricity from generators throughout the region rather than relying exclusively on resources within our borders. Operating reserves can be shared. Transmission investments can be coordinated. Electricity can move more easily to where it is most needed.

These arrangements create economic efficiencies that would be difficult to reproduce on our own.

In its 2025 Value Proposition, MISO estimated that its operations generated approximately $7.6 billion in annual net benefits across its regional footprint. That is MISO’s own systemwide estimate, not a calculation of Wisconsin’s individual savings.

Leaving MISO would not automatically mean losing every regional economic benefit. Another market structure might preserve some or many of them. But Wisconsin would have to demonstrate that its alternative could deliver.

We Cannot Escape the Geography of Electricity

Our transmission lines connect with neighboring states. Our power plants operate within a larger interconnected system. Our industries depend on reliable electricity during periods when weather, demand, or equipment failures can strain available resources.

Regional cooperation becomes particularly valuable as Wisconsin expands renewable energy.

Wind and solar generation vary with weather and time of day. Being a part of a larger market allows electricity production from different locations and technologies to complement one another. Transmission connections help balance these resources.

Wisconsin also faces growing electricity demand from manufacturing, data centers, and other economic development.

Meeting those needs will require careful investment in generation, storage, and transmission. Leaving MISO would make it more difficult for Wisconsin to meet its energy needs.

The Price of Going It Alone

Wisconsin should pursue greater energy security. We should produce more affordable electricity within our borders, expand renewable generation, strengthen our transmission infrastructure, and reduce unnecessary dependence on imported fossil fuels.

But energy independence does not require abandoning regional cooperation.

In fact, a strong regional electricity market can make Wisconsin’s own investments more valuable, our system more resilient, and our energy economy more competitive.

Leaving MISO could expose Wisconsin to substantial outstanding financial obligations, additional transition expenses, and the possibility of higher long-term electricity costs. The precise amounts remain undetermined, which is exactly why an independent analysis must precede any serious proposal.

The common good demands something more practical: an electricity system that serves Wisconsin families, protects businesses, supports economic growth, and delivers reliable power at a reasonable cost.

Until someone can demonstrate that leaving would save money without compromising reliability, walking away would be a gamble Wisconsin has little reason to take.

And as with so many decisions about our energy future, the people who would ultimately bear the consequences are the people least able to afford another unnecessary expense.

In response to the United States Department of Agriculture’s decision to cut solar out of the Rural Energy for America Program (REAP). On behalf of our members, RENEW has joined a lawsuit against the Trump Administration for the harmful actions it has taken. We are one of several plaintiffs, represented by Environmental Law & Policy Center (ELPC) with Earthjustice as co-counsel.

This is the first of several efforts by RENEW to represent the legal interests of our members as we expand the ways in which we are fighting against policies that restrict Americans from accessing or owning renewable energy.

The lawsuit, filed today, challenges the USDA’s new eligibility rules that block solar projects from REAP. Created in 2002, this program has received funding for more than two decades with a goal of helping farmers and rural small businesses save money through investments in energy efficiency and achieve self-reliance through renewable energy, with solar being one of the best options to accomplish this goal. 

The USDA’s updated criteria effectively cut solar from a bipartisan program built by Congress. As a result, cash-strapped rural communities have been denied access to affordable, reliable, and environmentally beneficial solar power during a period when energy prices have reached historic highs.

Making matters worse, the USDA has also decided to apply this new policy retroactively, affecting applications submitted under the USDA’s old rules. REAP applications can take months to prepare, and many applicants have already spent tens of thousands of dollars on equipment, engineering, and other costs that did and still should qualify for reimbursement. This abrupt, retroactive policy change leaves many holding expenses they likely cannot afford.

The lawsuit we’ve joined asks the court to:

1. Invalidate USDA’s new anti-solar eligibility criteria.
2. Order USDA to process REAP applications under the rules that were in place when USDA received them.

As finances get tighter and margins thinner, we cannot pull the rug out from the people who grow our food. REAP is supposed to help farmers keep their energy costs low. It is our hope that we can reverse this decision by the Trump Administration to protect farmers and rural business owners from the direct financial harm this rule change will cause.

This Action Alert might seem similar to one we sent earlier this month. We are, in fact, working to make it easier to pair batteries with residential solar across multiple utility territories!

Batteries are a great option for energy resiliency as they provide power during grid service outages. As they become more cost-effective, more people are hoping to pair them with solar. Unfortunately, utilities have been throwing hurdles in the way, preventing customers from storing and using the energy they create with their own rooftop solar array.

In WPS’ current rate case before the PSC, RENEW has addressed this issue head-on and is asking the PSC to step in and regulate utility interconnection practices.

When installing a solar array, utilities often factor in the size of a rooftop solar array when they determine the cost to connect the system to the electrical grid. WPS adds the capacity of batteries intended to store energy at home (non-exporting) to the solar capacity in order to increase these costs and also make it so customers can’t benefit from net metering.

This utility practice has effectively blocked all non-exporting batteries from being installed in WPS’ service territory. To solve this, we need the PSC to officially tell WPS to stop this unreasonable practice and allow customers to install batteries that they can pair with their rooftop solar arrays.

Join us in telling the PSC to regulate WPS and require the utility to allow customers to pair batteries with their own rooftop solar. The deadline to file public comments with the PSC is October 5th.

Sample comment:

WPS is blocking customers from adding batteries to their solar systems, but the PSC can remove this unreasonable hurdle and enable customers to invest in their own energy resilience. Certified, non-exporting batteries help customers store their own solar power for when the grid goes down.

Yet WPS has made it impossible for customers to add these batteries by increasing interconnection costs and pushing solar customers out of net metering. I urge the PSC to do the right thing and allow customers to add batteries to their rooftop solar!

As batteries have become more cost-effective, they have also become more in demand, in part, for the energy resiliency they provide during grid service outages. But as more homeowners and businesses attempt to add batteries to their solar systems, utilities have been throwing hurdles in the way, preventing customers from storing and using the energy they create with their own rooftop solar array.

In WE Energies’ current rate case before the PSC, RENEW has addressed this issue head-on and is asking the PSC to step in and regulate utility interconnection practices. 

When installing a solar array, utilities often factor in the size of a rooftop solar array when they determine the cost to connect the system to the electrical grid. WE Energies adds the capacity of batteries intended to store energy at home (non-exporting) to the solar capacity in order to increase these costs and also make it so customers can’t benefit from net metering.

This utility practice has effectively blocked all non-exporting batteries from being installed in WE Energies’ service territory. To solve this, we need the PSC to officially tell WE Energies to stop this unreasonable practice and allow customers to install batteries that they can pair with their rooftop solar arrays.

Join us in telling the PSC to regulate WE Energies and require the utility to allow customers to pair batteries with their own rooftop solar. The deadline to file public comments with the PSC is September 18.

*The deadline has passed for this comment period

Update: The comment period for the draft EIS has closed

A draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) created by the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and Public Service Commission of Wisconsin (PSC) staff regarding the Columbia Wind energy project is out for public comment. The EIS analyzes the social, cultural, and environmental impacts that could result from the Columbia Wind Project. The EIS should include the positive benefits the project would bring. However, the current draft EIS stops short of actually estimating Columbia Wind’s positive environmental benefits, such as the public health benefits of emission reductions.

RENEW Wisconsin is submitting comments asking the PSC to make sure that both estimates of avoided emissions and climate change impacts are included in the final version of the EIS. The positive impacts of reduced air pollution from projects like Columbia Wind are necessary for helping the general public understand why clean energy projects like Columbia Wind are so important. Join us in telling the PSC that reduced climate impacts and greenhouse gas emissions are necessary for a complete EIS.

Personalized comments are more effective, please take the time to make your message to the PSC unique. Comments on the EIS are due on August 28 and are for regulatory staff, but EIS comments are not officially part of the Commission record. There will be an opportunity to submit official comments in support of Columbia Wind this fall.

Sample Comment:

The Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), prepared by the DNR and PSC for Columbia Wind, needs to include information about the emissions that will be avoided thanks to this project. By reducing the amount of emissions we put into the air, we reduce health issues caused by fossil fuels and avoid causing greater damage to our climate. The EIS is not complete without these necessary details.

A Nonpartisan Comparison of Gubernatorial Candidates’ Energy Policies

Wisconsin is entering an important period of energy investment and transition.

Electricity demand is expected to grow as manufacturers expand, transportation becomes increasingly electrified, and data centers seek access to large amounts of power. At the same time, utilities must replace aging infrastructure, maintain dependable service, control costs, and decide which generation and grid resources should serve Wisconsin for decades.

The next governor will influence these decisions through appointments to the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin (PSC), state budgets, administrative policy, economic-development agreements, and cooperation with the Legislature.

This voter-education guide summarizes and compares the gubernatorial candidates’ publicly stated positions on renewable energy and related electricity policy. It does not endorse, oppose, rank, rate, or assign grades to any candidate.

Candidates are presented alphabetically and evaluated through the same policy framework.

The Evaluation Framework

The comparison examines four characteristics of a modern Wisconsin energy system.

Clean

Renewable

Reliable

Independent

Cross-Cutting Policy Questions

Several issues affect all four areas and are therefore discussed throughout the comparison.

Affordability

Energy affordability includes more than the initial cost of constructing a power plant.

Coal and natural-gas facilities require ongoing fuel purchases, transportation, maintenance, and exposure to commodity price fluctuations. Wind and solar require significant upfront investment but do not incur continuing fuel expenses. Renewable integration may also require transmission, storage, grid controls, and other reliability resources.

A complete comparison must examine the cost of the entire electricity portfolio rather than the construction cost of one resource in isolation.

Land Use

Every large energy system has a physical footprint.

Wind and solar projects require land, roads, substations, and transmission. Conventional energy also requires generating stations, pipelines, rail infrastructure, fuel storage, transmission, and waste-management facilities. Nuclear power requires plant sites, cooling infrastructure, security areas, transmission, and long-term fuel and waste management.

The relevant questions include how much land is needed, whether compatible uses can continue, whether the use is temporary or permanent, how the community benefits, and what restoration or decommissioning requirements apply.

Public Service Commission Governance

The governor appoints members of the PSC, subject to Senate confirmation. Commissioners make consequential decisions concerning utility rates, power plants, transmission, customer programs, and long-term utility investments.

The candidates therefore differ not only on particular technologies but also on how Wisconsin’s regulatory system should make energy decisions.

Candidate Policy Summaries (Listed Alphabetically)

Joel Brennan

David Crowley

Francesca Hong

Andy Manske

Kelda Roys

Tom Tiffany

Areas of Agreement

Despite significant differences, several themes appear across multiple platforms.

Most candidates acknowledge that electricity affordability has become a serious public concern. Several support preventing data centers from transferring their costs to existing customers. Most recognize that Wisconsin will need additional electricity and infrastructure, although they disagree sharply over the technologies, ownership structures, regulations, and timelines involved.

There is also broad recognition that appointments to the PSC will influence Wisconsin’s energy future. The disagreement concerns what commissioners should prioritize and how those priorities should be measured.

Major Policy Differences

The clearest distinction is the role assigned to renewable energy.

Hong and Roys propose explicit long-term clean-energy objectives, with Hong also establishing a near-term renewable standard. Brennan emphasizes a planning process through which renewable resources would be compared with other options. Crowley emphasizes efficiency and clean-energy access but has published fewer generation-specific details.

Manske and Tiffany place much greater emphasis on nuclear or existing firm generation. Manske proposes a nuclear-led expansion of electricity supply, while Tiffany emphasizes retaining existing generating plants, limiting large wind and solar development, and pursuing advanced nuclear technology.

The candidates also differ over data centers. Their positions range from a temporary moratorium or possible prohibition to conditional approval, separate tariffs, self-generation, demand response, publicly owned clean infrastructure, and general protections against cost shifting.

Conclusion

Wisconsin’s gubernatorial candidates offer substantially different approaches to energy policy.

Some emphasize binding renewable-energy standards. Others focus on integrated planning, consumer protection, efficiency, nuclear development, or the preservation of existing firm generation. Their data-center proposals also differ in important ways, particularly regarding cost responsibility, clean-energy requirements, land use, and public ownership.

No energy technology is free of costs, risks, or physical impacts. Sound policy requires careful consideration of affordability, reliability, environmental consequences, land use, implementation timelines, and Wisconsin’s continuing dependence on fuels purchased outside the state.

The purpose of this guide is not to tell readers which candidate to support. It is to identify the policy choices before Wisconsin and provide a consistent foundation for further public discussion.

*Methodology and Nonpartisanship Statement

This publication is intended solely for nonpartisan public education.

It summarizes publicly available candidate positions using the same subjects and general analytical framework for every candidate included. Candidate names are presented alphabetically. The publication does not endorse, oppose, rank, rate, grade, or recommend any candidate or political party.

The analysis distinguishes among documented policy proposals, general statements of support, and areas where detailed public positions were not identified. Inclusion or omission of a particular proposal reflects the publicly available materials reviewed and should not be interpreted as support for or opposition to any candidate.

Readers are encouraged to review each candidate’s complete platforms and reach their own conclusions.

On Thursday, July 30, the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin (PSC) approved Dawn Break Solar. This Waushara County project comes in at 180 Megawatts (MW) and is paired with an equally large battery energy storage system (BESS). Many renewable energy advocates joined us in supporting this project, thanks to all of you who helped us support this project as it sought approval from the PSC.

In our comments that advocated for this project, we highlighted both the benefits of the clean energy it will produce, along with the many economic benefits.

When construction is completed, Dawn Break Solar is expected to create many temporary construction jobs, as well as several long-term local jobs for operations and maintenance. Landowners will also benefit from consistent lease payments during the 35-year lifespan of the project.

Over the course of its life, the project will contribute more than $31.5 million in utility-aid payments. Local governments will receive $900,000 annually, with $510,000 for Waushara County and $390,000 for the Towns of Oasis, Plainfield, Deerfield, and Hancock.

Along with the many direct economic benefits, Dawn Break Solar will reduce emissions from energy production by about 600 million pounds of CO2 in the first year of operations. In terms of greenhouse gas emissions, this is the equivalent of taking more than 59,100 vehicles off the road for a full year.

The more we reduce our emissions, the more benefits we will see, specifically better health outcomes. In this case, Wisconsin can expect more than $1.3 million in economic benefits associated with public health improvements in Dawn Break Solar’s first year of operations alone.

Dawn Break Solar is just one piece of the clean energy puzzle. We hope you’ll all continue to join us in supporting invaluable projects like this as we continue to build our clean energy future.

Over the past week, millions of people across the Midwest and East Coast have stepped outside to hazy skies, smelled smoke in the air, and checked their weather apps—not for rain, but for the Air Quality Index (AQI).

For many communities, the AQI has climbed from “Unhealthy for Sensitive Groups” to “Unhealthy” and even “hazardous” categories because of wildfire smoke drifting south from Canada.

The culprit is PM2.5—fine particulate matter measuring 2.5 micrometers or smaller. These particles are so small that they can travel deep into your lungs and even enter your bloodstream. They’re associated with increased asthma attacks, heart disease, strokes, respiratory illness, and other serious health concerns.

We often talk about building an economy and a clean energy future we can afford, focusing on the cost of producing energy and the size of people’s energy bills. In this case, the discussion shifts to what we can’t afford. We can’t afford to keep making the choices that have turned these smoky summer days into a new normal.

Those decisions have not only brought us to this moment, but have been producing the same type of pollution driving today’s air quality alerts. PM2.5 is also one of the primary pollutants produced when coal is burned to generate electricity. Coal-fired power plants also emit sulfur dioxide (SO₂) and nitrogen oxides (NOₓ), which can react in the atmosphere to create even more fine particulate pollution.

To be clear, not every wildfire is directly caused by climate change, but our choice to rely on fuel sources like coal and natural gas makes it more common. What’s worse is that our continued reliance on coal plants continues to regularly expose nearby residents to fine particulate pollution that can harm our health. The same kind of air pollution that much of the country is being exposed to right now. 

Every time smoke fills our skies, we change our behavior. We keep our children indoors, cancel outdoor events, run air purifiers, and hope the wind shifts. Unfortunately, those who live near coal plants don’t have the benefit of waiting for the winds to change.

It reminds us of something we often take for granted: Clean air matters.

That is why RENEW Wisconsin works every day to expand renewable energy across our state.

Every new solar array, every wind project, every battery installation, every clean energy policy we advance is about more than electricity. It’s about protecting the air we breathe, strengthening our economy, creating jobs in Wisconsin, and building an energy system that doesn’t rely on harmful combustion to keep the lights on.

This work doesn’t happen by accident.

It happens because people like you believe Wisconsin deserves a cleaner, healthier, and more resilient energy future.

If you’ve ever wondered whether your support makes a difference, it does.

Your donation helps RENEW Wisconsin:

• Advocate for clean energy policies at the Capitol and before state agencies.
• Support the responsible development of wind, solar, and energy storage.
• Expand access to renewable energy for schools, nonprofits, and communities.
• Educate the public with trusted, fact-based information.
• Build a healthier energy future for every Wisconsin family.

The next time you look outside and see a hazy sky, remember that while we can’t stop every wildfire, we can choose how we generate the electricity that powers our lives and build the future we want to see.

If you believe, like us, that we can’t afford to continue to rely on the energy sources that got us into this mess, I invite you to support RENEW Wisconsin today.

Together, we can build a state where clean air isn’t something we hope for—it’s something we protect.

Donate today and help power Wisconsin’s clean energy future.

Ismaeel Chartier
Executive Director, RENEW Wisconsin

Public comments are open now through June 11 for Dawn Break Solar, a 180 Megawatt (MW) solar project paired with a 180 MW battery energy storage system. If approved, the solar project will be located in Waushara County and is planned for completion in 2029. Projects like this have a wide range of local and statewide benefits. Show your support for this project and tell the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin (PSC) why you support the approval of a vital solar project in Wisconsin!

You can use some of the listed benefits below to help you craft your message.

Dawn Break Solar isn’t just about the clean energy it will produce. The 180 MW facility in Waushara County has many benefits:

Economic Growth: Dawn Break Solar is expected to create construction jobs, as well as several long-term local jobs for operations and maintenance. Landowners will also benefit from consistent lease payments during the 35-year lifespan of the project.

Community Benefits: Once in service, Dawn Break Solar will contribute more than $31.5 million in utility-aid payments. Local governments will receive $900,000 annually, with $510,000 for Waushara County and $390,000 for the Towns of Oasis, Plainfield, Deerfield, and Hancock.

Emissions Reductions: Dawn Break Solar will reduce emissions from energy production by about 600 million pounds of CO2 in the first year of operations. In terms of greenhouse gas emissions, this is the equivalent of taking more than 59,100 vehicles off the road for a full year. Additionally, non-GHG emissions reductions will result in health, economic, and environmental benefits. Wisconsin can expect more than $1.3 million in economic benefits associated with public health improvements in Dawn Break Solar’s first year of operations alone.

Submit your comments today and tell the PSC you support the approval of Dawn Break Solar. Feel free to use some of the bullet points above to craft your own unique message.

On Thursday, May 7, the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin (PSC) approved Alliant Energy’s contract with Meta regarding their data center in Beaver Dam, but not before criticizing their lack of transparency and significantly modifying the contract. Modifications included safeguards requiring the utility to cover transmission costs and to address the potential for underpayments from the data center.

The PSC was clear today in its decision regarding Alliant Energy’s contract with Meta—Wisconsin utilities must be more transparent about their relationships with data centers and ensure that not a single cent of the costs of powering data centers is passed on to Wisconsin families and small businesses.

“I want it to be clear that whether you’re a large load customer coming in to Wisconsin for the first time or a regulated entity familiar with our process, transparency, and by that I mean actual and real transparency, is a foundational expectation and a necessity,” Commissioner Summer Strand said. “Frankly, transparency is quite often mutually beneficial, and I don’t think it needs to be this difficult, so I was a little disappointed, and initially, it was like pulling teeth here to increase the transparency.”

We are encouraged by the PSC signaling that they want utilities not only to place greater emphasis on transparency, but also to have a Very Large Customer tariff that is the same for each data center in their territory. This makes it easier to ensure that each data center pays the same and that all of them pay their own way in Wisconsin.

Though we would have preferred a rejection of this contract today, there was a clear win. As it should be, the PSC is ensuring it is easy for us to verify that data centers are paying for their own energy and infrastructure.

We also encouraged the PSC to be proactive in urging data centers to invest in clean energy technology, especially emerging or cutting-edge technologies. These new neighbors have the resources to spur growth in the world of renewables, and if they intend to be responsible neighbors, they will help us expand our renewable energy footprint rather than stall our progress in combating climate change.

We’ve seen this history play out before.

Just as momentum for clean energy gains ground—projects rising, costs falling—a new decree arrives from above. The return of top-down, centralized energy policy isn’t just a debate; it’s an attempt to rule by rollback. It’s the old guard trying to reclaim power by stalling investment and clouding the future with uncertainty.

But here’s the thing about progress: it doesn’t belong to any single person. It belongs to the people building it on the ground, right here in Wisconsin.

The Decree vs. The Reality

When leadership tries to reign over the energy transition, we, the people, pay the price:

• Infrastructure is halted by royal red tape.
• Investment is chased away to more stable lands.
• Communities lose their independence to volatile, old-world costs.

We aren’t waiting for a coronation or a change of heart in a distant capital. At RENEW Wisconsin, we believe in a self-governing energy future. We move forward because the climate doesn’t care who sits in the Oval Office.

A Revolutionary Act for Your Individual Retirement Account (IRA)

You don’t have to be a spectator in this power struggle. If you are 70½ or older, you have a unique tool to help fund resistance to progress-killing policies: the Qualified Charitable Distribution (QCD).

Think of it as a way that you can defund an agenda you don’t support and put those funds directly into the hands of those building the future.

With a QCD, you can:

• Move IRA funds to RENEW Wisconsin to protect local projects.
• Avoid increasing your taxable income.
• Satisfy your Required Minimum Distribution (RMD) on your own terms.
• Ensure your legacy builds local power, not political theater.

Let’s Democratize Energy

You’ve spent a lifetime building your own estate. You know that true stability isn’t granted by a leader—it’s built through hard work and foresight.

The window to act is open, but the gates can be slammed shut by the next administration. Don’t let your hard-earned resources be eroded by shifting political winds. Use a QCD to reinforce the progress we’ve made.

Wisconsin doesn’t answer to kings. We answer to the future we build.

Last Friday, April 24, the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin (PSC) unanimously approved an electricity rate plan for data centers and other “Very Large Customers” (VLC) in We Energies’ service territory. This decision will protect Wisconsinites from shouldering the financial burden of the energy and infrastructure costs associated with data centers.

RENEW Wisconsin submitted comments in support of this decision to protect Wisconsin ratepayers. We also asked the PSC to include considerations such as energy efficiency and renewable energy in their decision-making process. Meaning these corporations with massive financial means should, at the very least, be investing in building and operational efficiency, while also signing contracts with utility-scale solar projects.

We also highlighted the importance of these large corporations sticking to their own sustainability goals and how, through their vast access to capital, they could incorporate emerging or cutting-edge renewable energy resources to mitigate their contributions to climate change.

As our Policy Director, Andrew Kell, said in his comments to the PSC, “Data centers have adequate resources to become key innovators and provide the ‘technology push’ and ‘demand pull’ required for these programs, technologies, and infrastructure to scale up and flourish.”

While we don’t have guarantees that data centers will lead the charge on innovation as it relates to renewables, we do at least have a strong indication that the PSC will continue to protect ratepayers in future proceedings related to data centers.

“The decisions we’re making here today will not be limited to this docket,” said PSC Commissioner Kristy Nieto. “They will shape future proceedings, future investments, and the trajectory of the utility system itself.”

The PSC also determined that the energy demand threshold for a VLC to qualify for this rate structure should be reduced from 500 megawatts (MW) to 100 MW, the level at which new energy generation projects typically require PSC approval. The PSC also made it mandatory for eligible VLCs to subscribe.

VLCs will also need to fund and subscribe to portions of multiple new power generation projects, or entire projects, as they will be the driver of much of the state’s new energy demand.

We are still waiting for the final written order for this decision, but we are glad that PSC’s preliminary decisions align with what many public comments submitted stated, which is that data centers must pay the full costs of the energy and infrastructure they require.

As data center development progresses, RENEW aims to collaborate with data centers and strongly encourage them to drive and fully pay for cutting-edge clean energy resources. If data centers do in fact strive to incorporate into communities, they should help to ensure that we can create a sustainable, zero-carbon future.

Our shared home and all of its inhabitants deserve protection. It’s been said many times before, but it deserves repeating—we only have the one Earth.

For the last 35 years, supporters like you have helped us lead the charge as we fight to create a future powered by renewable energy. In that time, we’ve made a lot of progress and continue to expand our efforts to end our reliance on fossil fuels and combat climate change.

In 2025 our efforts to support renewables resulted in:

• 5.6 million megawatt hours of renewable energy generated
• 9 billion pounds of carbon emissions avoided
• 560,000 homes powered by renewable energy

We also helped 25 nonprofit organizations go solar through our Solar for Good grant program. This year, we’re looking to do even more to bring the benefits of renewable energy to every corner of Wisconsin.

In 2026 we have already:

• Supported two utility-scale solar projects
• Supported one utility-scale wind project
• Highlighted the value of clean energy jobs
• Advocated for data center legislation that protects Wisconsinites
• And Hosted our Annual Summit!

We’ve also seen three new utility-scale renewable projects get approved by the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin! Each of these wins brings us one step closer to our goal of creating a healthy climate and an economy we can afford. And there’s so much more we hope to achieve. It is, after all, still spring. By winter, we hope our list of achievements has gotten much longer. Together, we can make it happen!

There is an old story from the Mediterranean about an elderly man planting an olive tree. A passerby asks why he would plant something that takes decades to bear fruit. The man replies: “Because my children will need the olives.”

Transmission lines are much the same.

Across southwest Wisconsin, communities are hearing about the MariBell Transmission Project, a proposed high-voltage transmission line that would connect Marion, Minnesota, to Bell Center, Wisconsin. The project is part of an effort to strengthen the electric grid across the Upper Midwest.

When people first hear about a transmission project, the natural questions are: Why do we need it? And is it safe?

We can answer both.

Transmission Is Planned Generations Ahead

Transmission lines are not built for today’s electricity needs. They are planned decades ahead for our children’s future.

Much of the infrastructure we rely on today was planned decades ago. Engineers studied population growth and future electricity demand long before many of the businesses and technologies we rely on today even existed.

Regional grid operators like MISO (Midcontinent Independent System Operator) are responsible for conducting these long-range studies. From that work comes the Long Range Transmission Plan, which identifies major grid upgrades needed to maintain reliability across the region. The MariBell project is part of that effort.

Once a project appears on a planning map, it often takes 10 to 15 years before construction begins. Environmental studies, landowner discussions, engineering design, and regulatory approvals are all requirements for this long-term investment.

In other words, transmission is built for the future long before it arrives.

The Backbone of a Reliable Economy

Electricity demand across the Midwest is growing again.

Manufacturing is expanding. We’re electrifying our homes and transportation. At the same time, older power plants are retiring, and new energy sources are coming online across the region.

Transmission connects it all, allowing electricity to travel long distances, balancing supply and demand across states, and ensuring reliability during extreme weather or periods of high demand. It also allows new power generation, from solar to nuclear, to connect to the grid and reach the communities that need it.

Addressing the EMF Question

Another common concern raised during transmission discussions is electromagnetic fields, or EMF.

EMFs are produced whenever electricity flows through a wire, not just transmission lines. Household wiring, appliances, power tools, and TVs also create EMFs.

Because this issue has raised questions for decades, it has been studied extensively. Research conducted by the National Institutes of Health, the World Health Organization, and the National Cancer Institute has examined EMF exposure for more than 40 years.

The consistent scientific finding is that EMF from power lines has not been shown to cause adverse health effects from the levels of exposure typically experienced by the public.

Transmission lines are also designed to naturally reduce exposure. The height of structures and the distance they are placed from homes are both meant to take advantage of the fact that EMF levels drop rapidly the farther you move away from a line. In many cases, household appliances can expose people to stronger EMF levels at a very close range.

That doesn’t mean concerns should be dismissed. But decades of research provide strong reassurance that transmission infrastructure operates safely within established guidelines.

Thinking Like the Man With the Olive Tree

The conversation around the MariBell project is in its early stages. Maps show both proposed and optional corridors, and the final route will be determined through regulatory review and public input.

Those conversations matter. Communities deserve transparency, and landowners deserve to be heard.

The grid we rely on today exists because previous generations believed in planning for the future. They built the infrastructure that powers today’s homes, hospitals, farms, and businesses.

They planted the olive trees.

Now it’s our turn.

Transmission projects like MariBell are not just about meeting today’s electricity needs. They are about ensuring that our children inherit an infrastructure strong enough to support their future.

If we want them to enjoy the harvest, we have to start planting now.

Earlier this week, the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin (PSC) approved Akron Solar! This 200 Megawatt (MW) solar project will be located in Adams and Wood Counties and is planned for completion in the latter half of 2029. Projects like this have a wide range of local and statewide benefits. Thanks to everyone who helped make this project happen, especially those who submitted comments to the PSC and told them why Wisconsin needs more solar power!

Even though we’re only three months into 2026, we are excited about the amount of progress we have already made. That said, there’s plenty more for us to accomplish this year. We hope you’re just as excited as we are to keep the momentum up and help us create a future where everyone benefits from the renewable energy revolution!

Akron Solar’s benefits extend well beyond the clean energy it will produce. If you’re not familiar with the project, below are some additional reasons why we support this project:

• Economic Growth: According to a report by Strategic Economic Research, Akron Solar will create more than 450 jobs during construction, as well as more than 14 good-paying, long-term positions in Adams and Wood Counties.
• Community Benefits: Once in service, Akron Solar will contribute more than $1,000,000 in utility-aid payments each year. Over $566,000 of this will go to the counties, while the remaining $433,33 will go to the towns of Rome and Saratoga. During its 25-year life, the project will contribute a total of at least $25million in utility-aid payments.
• Emissions Reductions: Akron Solar will reduce energy production emissions by 650 million pounds of CO2 in the first year of operations. In terms of greenhouse gas emissions, this is the equivalent of taking more than 64,000 vehicles off the road for a full year. These emissions reductions will result in health, economic, and environmental benefits. Wisconsin can expect more than $1.4 million in economic benefits associated with public health improvements in Akron Solar’s first year of operations alone.

Public comments are open now through March 9 for Fox Solar, a 100 Megawatt (MW) solar project paired with a 50 MW battery energy storage system. If approved, the solar project will be located in Oconto County and is planned for completion in 2028. Projects like this have a wide range of local and statewide benefits. Show your support for this project and tell the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin (PSC) why you support the approval of a vital solar project in Wisconsin!

You can use some of the listed benefits below to help you craft your message.

Fox Solar isn’t just about the clean energy it will produce. The 100 MW facility in Oconto County has many benefits:

Economic Growth: According to witness testimony provided by David Loomis of Strategic Economic Research, Fox Solar will create 300 temporary jobs during construction, as well as more than 20 good-paying, long-term jobs across Wisconsin due to economic stimulus related to the project.

Community Benefits: Once in service, Fox Solar will contribute more than $500,000 in utility-aid payments each year. $283,333 of this will go to Oconto County, while the remaining $216,667 will go to the Town of Morgan. During its 25-year life, the project will contribute more than $12 million in utility-aid payments.

Emissions Reductions: Fox Solar will reduce energy production emissions by 304 million pounds of CO2 in the first year of operations. In terms of greenhouse gas emissions, this is the equivalent of taking more than 29,993 vehicles off the road for a full year. Additionally, non-GHG emissions reductions will result in health, economic, and environmental benefits. Wisconsin can expect more than $690,000 in economic benefits associated with public health improvements in Fox Solar’s first year of operations alone.

Submit your comments today and tell the PSC you support the approval of Fox Solar. Feel free to use some of the bullet points above to craft your own unique message.

Wisconsin Power and Light (Alliant Energy) plans to expand its Bent Tree Wind Farm with the Bent Tree North Wind Farm project. Though located in Minnesota, the project will provide power for Alliant Energy customers here in Wisconsin. RENEW Wisconsin is advocating for approval of this project both in Minnesota and here in Wisconsin, as Alliant Energy requires approval from both the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission and the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin.

In its first full year of electricity production, Bent Tree North Wind Farm will produce about 550,000 Megawatt-hours (MWh) of electricity. This is enough to power 55,000 Wisconsin households and reduce emissions produced from energy production by more than 865 million pounds of Carbon Dioxide (CO2) each year. This amount of CO2 would be like taking more than 85,500 vehicles off the road.

Along with CO2 emissions, there are a slew of pollutants that this project will keep out of the air we breathe. As a result, Wisconsin can expect over $1.8 million in economic benefits associated with public health improvements in the first year of Bent Tree North Wind’s operations.

Similar to Wisconsin, Minnesota communities that host utility-scale energy projects benefit from these projects. Bent Tree North will add 150 Megawatts (MW) to the already existing Bent Tree Wind Farm, a 201 MW project. In Minnesota, wind projects are subject to a Wind Energy Production Tax. At about $19,000 per turbine, Bent Tree North will add nearly $650,000 in revenue to be split among Steele, Waseca, and Freeborn Counties. Additional financial benefit will go to the landowners who are leasing their land to make this project possible.

The construction of the project is expected to create 100 to 150 full-time jobs until the project is operational. Additionally, construction workers will contribute to local spending for housing, fuel, meals, and supplies, and construction materials such as concrete and gravel are often sourced locally or regionally.

Though we don’t typically extend our advocacy beyond the borders of our state, this is a great opportunity for both Wisconsin and Minnesota, even if we can’t see eye-to-eye on where Paul Bunyan’s Axe really belongs. Rivalries aside, we look forward to seeing this project approved and will provide an update when we know more!

Public comments are open now through February 23 for Muddy Creek Solar, a 322 Megawatt (MW) solar project paired with a 300 MW battery energy storage system. If approved, the solar project will be located in Dunn County and is planned for completion in 2029. Projects like this have a wide range of local and statewide benefits. Show your support for this project and tell the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin (PSC) why you support the approval of a vital solar project in Wisconsin!

You can use some of the listed benefits below to help you craft your message.

(update: public comments for this project have now closed. We will share an update when the PSC announces their decision)

Muddy Creek Solar isn’t just about the clean energy it will produce. The 322 MW facility in Dunn County has many benefits:

• Economic Growth: According to witness testimony provided by David Loomis of Strategic Economic Research, Muddy Creek Solar will create more than 800 temporary jobs during construction, as well as more than 52 good-paying, long-term jobs across Wisconsin due to economic stimulus related to the project.
• Community Benefits: Once in service, Muddy Creek Solar will contribute more than $1,605,000 in utility-aid payments each year. $909,500 of this will go to Dunn County, while the remaining $695,000 will go to the Town of Spring Brook. During its 25-year life, the project will contribute a total of over $40 million in utility-aid payments.
• Emissions Reductions: Muddy Creek Solar will reduce energy production emissions by 954 million pounds of CO2 in the first year of operations. In terms of greenhouse gas emissions, this is the equivalent of taking more than 94,000 vehicles off the road for a full year. Additionally, non-GHG emissions reductions will result in health, economic, and environmental benefits. Wisconsin can expect more than $2 million in economic benefits associated with public health improvements in Muddy Creek Solar’s first year of operations alone.

Submit your comments today and tell the PSC you support the approval of Muddy Creek Solar. Feel free to use some of the bullet points above to craft your own unique message.

On Wednesday, January 21, 2026, the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin (PSC) approved the Emerald Bluffs Solar Project, a 225 Megawatt (MW) solar project in Juneau County. This project is planned for completion in the latter half of 2027. Projects like this have a wide range of local and statewide benefits. Thanks to the support from the public, we were able to get this project across the finish line!

Emerald Bluffs is another exciting step in the right direction as we work to expand renewable energy across the state. Wisconsin has now reached a point where we have 2089 MW of solar in operation, nearly 4,000 MW approved and in the development phase, and more than 1,000 MW of solar seeking approval from the PSC. Altogether, we’re hopeful that we’ll have nearly 7,500 MW of solar online across Wisconsin in the near future. Together, we can keep this momentum going.

Emerald Bluffs Solar Project’s Benefits Go Beyond Renewable Energy:

Economic Growth: Emerald Bluffs will create nearly 1,000 jobs during construction, as well as more than 20 good-paying, long-term operations and maintenance positions.

Community Benefits: Once in service, Emerald Bluffs will contribute more than $1,125,000 in utility-aid payments each year. Over $637,000 of this will go to Juneau County, while the remaining $487,500 will go to the towns of Lemonweir and Seven Mile Creek. During its 35-year life, the project will contribute a total of $39.375 million in utility-aid payments.

Emissions Reductions: Emerald Bluffs will reduce energy production emissions by 746 million pounds of CO2 in the first year of operations. In terms of greenhouse gas emissions, this is the equivalent of taking more than 73,500 vehicles off the road for a full year. These emissions reductions will result in health, economic, and environmental benefits.