Thursday, July 18, 2013

The Live and Local Podcast: Assessing the Energy Plan in Vermont:

Energy Safari group 
at Lempster Wind Farm
The Comprehensive Energy Plan and My Op-Ed

The Vermont Comprehensive Energy Plan, issued in 2011, asserted that Vermont would obtain 90% of all its energy from renewables by 2050.   I have been studying the land-use implications of that plan, and my husband and I are preparing a report for the Ethan Allen Institute. (I am the director of the Energy Education Project, which is part of that Institute.)

With our preliminary results, I wrote an op-ed: Vermont Renewable Plan is Wishful Thinking. This op-ed was printed in several newspapers in Vermont.  Most particularly, the op-ed was printed in The Commons, a weekly independent, nonprofit paper in Brattleboro.  I want to give a hat tip to Jeff Potter of The Commons, because he truly welcomes voices from both sides of this controversy.

Chris Lenois is host of the Live and Local radio program in Brattleboro (WKVT 1490 FM).  Lenois saw the op-ed in The Commons, and he invited me to speak on his show.  I was on Live and Local yesterday.

The Podcast

WKVT mounted a podcast of the discussion on their site: Meredith Angwin --VT Energy Policy.

Lenois asked me:
  • How I estimated Vermont's future energy use
  • Whether an ambitious renewables policy could encourage innovation in renewable energy
  • How I derived numbers such as "400 miles of ridge line for wind turbines"
  • The role of efficiency and conservation in Vermont's energy policy
To answer Lenois' questions, I needed to go into depth about land-use issues and my research methods.   I think you will find the podcast interesting.  

Thank you to Chris Lenois for inviting me and asking me serious questions.  I also thank him for his role in quickly mounting the podcast on the WKVT website.

2 comments:

Mary Gerdt said...

Thanks for clarifying with science and reason. Have a Great cooler cooler weekend.. hopefully! mary

trag said...

Thank you for your tireless efforts to bring rational discussion and information to the public.

The distortions that "policy wonks" and social scientists feel free to engage in are a danger to our health and livelihood. It is essential that someone develop a public voice which can mitigate the harm and with time, do some good.