Rolling Blackouts for New England? Angwin Op-Ed

Mystic Power Station

Rolling blackouts

Rolling blackouts are probably coming to New England sooner than expected.

When there’s not enough supply of electricity to meet demand, an electric grid operator cuts power to one section of the grid to keep the rest of the grid from failing.  After a while, the operator restores the power to the blacked-out area and moves the blackout on to another section. The New England grid operator (ISO-NE) recently completed a major study of various scenarios for the near-term future (2024-2025) of the grid, including the possibilities of rolling blackouts.

In New England, blackouts are expected to occur during the coldest weather, because that is when the grid is most stressed. Rolling blackouts add painful uncertainty – and danger – to everyday life.  You aren’t likely to know when a blackout will happen, because most grid operators have a policy that announcing a blackout would attract crime to the area.

Exelon announces plan to close Mystic Station

In early April, Exelon said that it would close two large natural-gas fired units at Mystic Station, Massachusetts. In its report about possibilities for the winter of 2024-25, ISO-NE had included the loss of these two plants as one of its scenarios. The ISO-NE report concluded that Mystic’s possible closure would lead to 20 to 50 hours of load shedding (rolling blackouts) and hundreds of hours of grid operation under emergency protocols.

When Exelon made its closure announcement, ISO-NE realized that the danger of rolling blackouts was suddenly more immediate than 2024.  ISO-NE now hopes to grant “out of market cost recovery” (that is, subsidies) to persuade Exelon to keep the Mystic plants operating. If ISO-NE gets FERC permission for the subsidies, some of the threat of blackouts will retreat a few years into the future.

Winter scenarios and natural gas

The foremost challenge to grid reliability is the inability of power plants to get fuel in winter.  So ISO-NE  modeled various scenarios, such as winter-long outages at key energy facilities, and difficulty or ease of delivering Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) to existing plants.

Ominously, 19 of the 23 of the ISO-NE scenarios led to rolling blackouts. The worst scenarios, with the longest blackouts, included a long outage at a nuclear plant or a long-lasting failure of a gas pipeline compressor.

A major cause of these grid problems is that the New England grid is heavily dependent on natural gas. Power plants using natural gas supply about 50% of New England’s electricity on a year-round basis. Pipelines give priority to delivering gas for home heating over delivering gas to power plants. In the winter, some power plants cannot get enough gas to operate. Other fuels have to take up the slack. But coal and nuclear generators are retiring, and with them goes needed capacity. In general, the competing-for-natural-gas problem will get steadily worse over time.

All the ISO-NE scenarios assumed that no new oil, coal, or nuclear plants are built, some existing plants will close, and no new pipelines are constructed. Their scenarios included renewable buildouts, transmission line construction, increased delivery of LNG, plant outages and compressor outages.

Natural gas and LNG

The one “no-problem” scenario (no load shedding, no emergency procedures) is one where everything goes right. It assumed no major pipeline or power plant outages. It included a large renewable buildout plus greatly increased LNG delivery, despite difficult winter weather. This no-problem scenario also assumes a minimum number of retirements of coal, oil and nuclear plants.

This positive scenario is dependent on increased LNG deliveries from abroad. Thanks to the Jones Act, New England cannot obtain domestic LNG. There are no LNG carriers flying an American flag, and the Jones Act prevents foreign carriers from delivering American goods to American ports.

We can plan to import more electricity, but ISO-NE  notes that such imports are also problematic.  Canada has extreme winter weather (and curtails electricity exports) at the same time that New England has extreme weather and a stressed grid.

New England needs a diverse grid

To avoid blackouts, we need to diversify our energy supply beyond renewables and natural gas to have a grid that can reliably deliver power in all sorts of weather.  When we close nuclear and coal plants and don’t build gas pipelines, we increase our weather-vulnerable dependency on imported LNG.

We need to keep existing nuclear, hydro, coal and oil plants available to meet peak demands, even if it takes subsidies.  Coal is a problem fuel, but running a coal plant for a comparatively short time in bad weather is a better choice than rolling blackouts.

This can’t happen overnight. It has to be planned for. If we don’t diversify our electricity supply, we will have to get used to enduring rolling blackouts.
-----
Meredith Angwin is a retired physical chemist and a member of the ISO-NE consumer advisory group. She headed the Ethan Allen Institute’s Energy Education Project and her latest book is Campaigning for Clean Air.

______

This op-ed has now appeared in several websites and news outlets. Links below to the post in other publications, some of which have comment streams.
This post at Ethan Allen Institute, The Caledonian Record, Vermont Business Magazine, VTDigger, True North Reports,  The Commons, New England Diary   Providence Journal, Rhode Island and New England May Get Hit with Rolling Blackouts in the Future, including an interview with me, appeared in GoLocalProv.com

Special note: My op-ed has now appeared in my local paper, the Valley News, on the front page of the Sunday "Perspectives" section.  It is always a thrill to see my work in my local paper!

Vermont Renewable Mandate (video)

The "90% renewables" solution

Vermont has an energy policy that requires that 90% of Vermont's energy come from renewables by 2050. This policy includes all of Vermont's energy, including heating and transportation.  Such a change can most generously be described as "unlikely."  I have at least two blog posts on this subject:  What 90% renewables would look like in Vermont,  and Vermont's renewable plan is wishful thinking   These posts are from 2013.

The renewable policy might become a law

So far, this renewable policy is not law, but it might become law.  The legislature is in session, and, as Mark Twain said: "No man's life, liberty or property are safe while the legislature is in session."  Bills are being introduced to make this policy into an actual law.

The Ethan Allen Institute recently made a video on the folly of 90% renewables for Vermont.  I appear briefly in the video.  I hope you enjoy it.

Smaller Faster Lighter Denser Cheaper: Book Review

Smaller Faster Lighter Denser Cheaper
How Innovation Keeps Proving the Catastrophists Wrong
by Robert Bryce
Public Affairs, 2014 (400 pgs.)

 Robert Bryce is optimistic about our energy future, and indeed, the future of humanity. His books and op-eds are carefully researched and clearly written. Bryce does not claim that every problem will have a technological fix, but our frequently-successful search for such fixes have led to a world in which more people are living longer and healthier lives.  For example, in 1970, the average life span in the least-developed countries was 43 years. In 2011, the average for those same countries was 59 years.  Almost everywhere in the world, literacy is up, mortality  and maternal mortality is down, and lives are longer and better.
       
 In this book, Bryce shows that this happy result is a direct consequence of our human quest to achieve more results while using less resources.  In other words, we seek to do our work in ways that are “Smaller Faster Lighter Denser Cheaper.”  His book covers some of the same ground as his earlier book, Power Hungry.  In this book, he expands the scope to fields beyond energy.

Some of the areas that he describes are familiar to all of us: the fact that computers are smaller is no surprise to anyone.  But other aspects of “smaller faster” were new to me.  For example, in poor countries, cell phones can encourage commerce. In Africa and Afghanistan, most people do not have bank accounts. The ability to buy goods by cell-phone has increased commerce and partially disabled corruption.  (The account is held by the cell phone company, and there are kiosks for people to deposit or withdraw cash.) In one case, Afghan policemen, paid through their cell phones, thought they had gotten a major raise.  Actually, the policemen were merely getting their full pay, without their superiors skimming about 30% of their cash payments before the policemen ever saw the money.

In expected ways, and in surprising ways, the world of making things smaller, faster, lighter, denser and cheaper has led to unprecedented prosperity and health.  For the energy to power this world, Bryce recommends the N2N plan described in Power Hungry:  Use natural gas (N) while building advanced nuclear (N).  I would amend this slightly to be sure to Keep Existing Nuclear while building advanced nuclear, but his basics are correct.

Some parts of the book are painful to read.  The title of one section is pretty direct: “Biofuels are a crime against humanity.” Government and academic reports question both  the practicality and the morals of biofuel production. Using land for biofuels increases the cost of food, increases the volatility of food prices, decreases the ability of poor nations to import food, and indeed, decreases our ability to feed the poor and hungry.

With many examples, Bryce shows that moving to low-density “renewable” energy would be a step backwards for human health and happiness. His analysis of McKibben’s “Energy Starvation” plan is well-referenced and scathing.

I hate to say that anything is “required reading” for everyone, but I strongly recommend that people in Vermont read this book.  Why Vermont?  Well, right now, Vermont has an official state energy plan that claims we will reduce statewide energy use by more than  1/3 by 2050.  Further, the state of Vermont “plans” to have 90% of the remaining energy come from renewable sources by 2050.  The energy plan admits that renewable sources are not as dense as  conventional sources, and that the ridges planned for wind turbines are important wildlife and watershed resources.   The Vermont plan is the opposite of N2N.  The Vermont plan is not about making things smaller, faster, lighter, cheaper.

Will Vermonters allow this plan continue to be our state plan, in which everything is justified on the basis of “low greenhouse gases”? Are we going to use the “Energy Starvation” plan proposed by those who hate nuclear energy (which also produces no greenhouse gases) and who also don’t seem to care very much about wildlife habitat?  Or will we take some reasonable version of N2N, choosing dense, relatively low-emissions energy sources.

Will Vermont continue to move to Smaller, Faster, Lighter, Denser, Cheaper, as humanity has always aimed to do?  Or will we go backwards? It’s up to us, right here in Vermont, to choose a happy and prosperous future.  Let’s not mess it up.

- Review by Meredith Angwin

----

This review appeared in the February newsletter of the Ethan Allen Institute.

While you are looking at the newsletter, let me also recommend Willem Post's article Abandoning Low Cost Hydro for Costly Renewables.   Vermont is buying less power from Hydro Quebec, perhaps in the hope of building yet more instate renewables.

Updated: Overreach at the Attorney General's Office: Guest Post by Deborah Bucknam

I need to update this post with a link:

As described in the blog for Vermonters for a Clean Environment, the complaint about Annette Smith originated with David Blittersdorf, a wind developer in Vermont. 
https://vermontersforacleanenvironment.wordpress.com/2016/01/31/i-represent-david-blittersdorf/

Overreach at the Attorney General’s office 
By Deborah T. Bucknam, Esq.

Vermont’s Attorney General has filed a complaint against Annette Smith, the activist who helps Vermonters opposed to Industrial Wind, navigate the administrative jungle that best describes the Public Service Board proceedings. I have represented folks opposed to Industrial Wind at the Public Service Board, and the hearings are overrun by lawyers—most of whom favor the government’s and the developer’s positions on Industrial Wind. Neighbors opposed to an Industrial Wind project face a phalanx of government and industry lawyers in a proceeding that is costly, time consuming and often confusing. In other words, the fix is in.

Now the Attorney General is siding with Vermont’s large law firms and big lobbyists to deprive opponents of Industrial Wind the advice of a person who knows the intricacies of the proceedings and can help those who cannot afford the high priced lawyers the developers can. And make no mistake: even though this is a preposterous charge, and will likely be thrown out, its purpose will be fulfilled: to chill anyone’s free speech rights who dares to question the powerful in Montpelier.

“Practicing law without a license” is a hoary concept left over from the medieval guilds where skilled tradesmen (including lawyers) sought to keep out competition. It was revived in the early 20th century when the newly organized Bar attempted to persuade legislatures to define the practice of law and regulate it—to the Bar’s advantage. Legislators were wary of such a regulatory scheme, so the effort waned until the Great Depression, when lawyers’ incomes plummeted, and the organized Bar launched a new effort to keep out those who were in competition for their services. This time the Bar sought the help of the Judiciary, which took up the cause. That is where it stands today: the unauthorized practice of law is regulated in large part by the Judiciary. Over the years, lawyers targeted different groups: realtors, bankers, and investment advisors, with varying success. The reason for this effort was supposedly to protect consumers from service providers who did not adhere to the strict professional conduct rules of the Bar. However, with the advent of strong consumer protection statutes and competition among providers, this “protection” is mostly a red herring.

The concept of unauthorized practice of law is so vague as to call into question its constitutionality. The practice of law is, according to the Vermont Supreme Court, "the rendering of services for another involving the use of legal knowledge or skill on his behalf -- where legal advice is required and is availed of or rendered in connection with such services.” Under that standard, hundreds of public servants in Vermont provide “legal advice”—providing information about relevant statutes, procedures and regulations---to the public and to Vermont attorneys smart enough to get the information directly from those in the know at state agencies. Yet these public servants will not –and certainly should not--be prosecuted. Only Ms. Smith, who provides similar information to those who cannot pay for those high priced lawyers is prosecuted by the Attorney General. This is precisely the constitutional issue: a rule violates the Due Process clause of the constitution because it is too vague to put the public on adequate notice as to when a violation occurs, and it opens the door for selective prosecution—exactly what has happened here. The Attorney General’s action appears to be an effort to silence opposition to Industrial Wind, and to help the large Burlington law firms and their clients to keep from having to deal with pesky Vermonters who oppose their clients’ projects.

Vermonters are being strangled by government overreach. The Attorney General’s action is a disgraceful example. If you don’t agree with the powerful and well-connected in this state, then just shut up, or you may be the target of the Government and its unlimited resources.

---

About the Author

Deborah Bucknam, Esq. has practiced law for 37 years, and has a private practice in St. Johnsbury, Vermont

-----

About the post

In the last two weeks, opponents of industrial wind have rallied in Vermont, and the Vermont administration is beginning to "investigate" them.   Below is a brief summary and history.

A bill against industrial wind

Two Vermont legislators introduced a bill to ban industrial wind on our ridge lines.  They held a press conference in Montpelier on January 21: the press conference was attended by many supporters.  The supporters wore green vests and cheered for banning industrial wind.  

The Ethan Allen Institute (my Energy Education Project is part of the Institute) made made a three-minute video of the highlights of the press conference.  Ethan Allen Institute posted a blog post with the video, and Rod Adams posted about the conference at his blog: Vermonters Say They Want Industrial Wind to Go the Way of the Billboard. Both posts have lively comment streams.  I have also posted the video at the bottom of this post.

The Administration strikes back

 The press conference and the Ethan Allen Institute post took place on January 21, 2016. Perhaps purely by chance, on January 22, the Vermont Attorney General opened an investigation into whether Annette Smith, the highest-profile anti-wind advocate in Vermont, is "practicing law without a license."  This was reported in a VtDigger article by Mike Polhamus on January 23: AG's office investigating complaints against Annette Smith, anti-wind advocate.  As Polhamus points out: this is a charge with penalties left entirely to the court's discretion.  He also quotes Ms. Smith: "I believe this has the potential to shut down my organization of 16 years. It clearly falls under the definition of harassment.”

There are (at this writing) 147 comments on the Digger post. The vast majority are in support of Annette Smith. An early comment was written by Peter Galbraith, a former Senator in Vermont (and a Democrat). A short quote: "Annette Smith is a person of integrity who has helped the weaker party in what would otherwise be a very uneven contest. This investigation will have a chilling effect on all citizen advocates."

This post:

I wanted to write something really powerful about this issue: about the environment, about freedom of speech, about government harassment of dissenting views, about crony capitalism.  Then, to my great relief, I received this press release from Deborah Bucknam in my email inbox.  I have never met Ms. Bucknam, but she said it all, much better than I could.  Thank you, Ms. Bucknam. 

 Video by Ethan Allen Institute

400K Pageviews at Yes Vermont Yankee Blog

A Successful Blog

Yesterday afternoon, I took this screen shot of the page-views on Yes Vermont Yankee blog.  It's from the blogger "Stats" page. Clearly the time-line is not right, because the blog began in January 2010. Still, I think the page-count is accurate.  For example, the big blip shown in "April 2009" is certainly the giant readership of the 25th Carnival of Nuclear Energy blogs in October 2010.  That post was featured in Instapundit and other venues.

I'm proud of the record of this blog. The blog has followed the story of Vermont Yankee and put that story in perspective. The issues in Vermont are a reflection (exaggeration?) of the type of opposition faced by nuclear plants world-wide.  In my opinion, knowing the specifics of a single example illuminates the "big picture" of nuclear.

Angwin and Shaffer as Visible Supporters of Vermont Yankee

This blog has also served as a voice for the pro-nuclear side of the debate about Vermont Yankee.  Howard Shaffer and I have been voices for Vermont Yankee. We have been rewarded by frequent media interviews, plus opportunities to write op-eds and participate in debates. (But the opponents won't debate us any more. More accurately, opponents tried to back out of our most recent debates, and no new debates are currently scheduled...)

The presence of this blog also means that reporter bias becomes visible.  A biased, rushed or lazy reporter can interview a well-known opponent. He or she can follow this by getting a "no comment" from the plant.  That's the end-of-story for that reporter! However, the more enterprising reporters know that Howard and I are available. We are knowledgeable, we are credible, and we are always good for a sound-bite.  We don't expect to get interviewed every time, but we do get interviewed.

A Voice For Many Supporters

Howard and I are not the only voices in this blog.  I am pleased that this blog has hosted guest posts from plant supporters within and outside of Vermont: Willem Post, Charles Kelly, Guy Page, Dr. Robert Hargraves, Cheryl Twarog, Cavan Stone, and many more. This blog has been a place for pro-nuclear voices to be heard.

I am especially proud of the many examples of pro-Vermont Yankee statements submitted to the Public Service Board in November 2012: many of these are guest posts on the blog.  For a listing of Public Service Board posts on this blog, I recommend Vermont Yankee's Greatest Hits at the Public Service Board Meeting, posted at ANS Nuclear Cafe.  

But better yet: get the book!  George Angwin and I put together Voices for Vermont Yankee, a compendium of pictures and testimony from plant supporters at the Public Service Board meeting.

You can buy Voices for Vermont Yankee as a Kindle for $2.99
You can buy Voices for Vermont Yankee as a paperback for $4.51
You can buy Voices for Vermont Yankee on the Nook for  $2.99

Just in time for Christmas!  (Though it's late for Hanukkah, it could be a New Year's present maybe?)

The ebook versions are less expensive than a ginger latte, or whatever the local coffee shops are serving nowadays. The paperback version is something you can hold, and it has a pretty full-color cover.  Yes, you can afford one of these books!  You will find reading the book to be heartening and inspiring.

Supporting the Work

Buying the book also supports the pro-nuclear activism of the Energy Education Project: a portion of book profits is donated to the Project. We do everything on the super-cheap, but we still have expenses.  There's mileage, some Internet fees, travel for ourselves and for guest speakers. We have summer interns when we can.  Every now and again, if we can, we pay ourselves something (not much, alas, not much).  Your contribution helps a lot!

Or you can donate to the Energy Education Project directly.  There's a Donate button at the top right of this page.  Please click it and make a donation of any amount.  If you want to be a full-fledged member of the Energy Education Project, please donate $30 ($40 for a family membership) . It is perfectly okay to donate more ;-) I think $50 is a nice number, don't you?

Any amount is helpful, it really is. When you make is a direct donation to our cause, it is fully tax-deductible.  The Energy Education Project is part of the Ethan Allen Institute, a 501c(3) nonprofit, educational organization.

Here's a link to more information about donation and membership.


Thank you for reading this blog. Please support it if you can.

Vermont Governor Salmon Supports Vermont Yankee

Governor Salmon Speaks in Favor of Vermont Yankee 

On June 19, the Ethan Allen Institute celebrated its 20 year anniversary with a dinner "roasting" its founder, John McClaughry.  I am director of the Energy Education Project, which is part of the Institute. Two former governors spoke at the dinner: Jim Douglas and Tom Salmon.

Tom Salmon was Governor of Vermont from 1973 to 1976.  He is a Democrat. During his term, financial crises in Vermont caused his fiscal viewpoints to become more conservative.  More recently, Salmon testified in favor of Vermont Yankee's continued operation at the Public Service Board hearings in November 2012.

Last month, Salmon again supported Vermont Yankee, this time at the anniversary dinner. I embed the video of Governor Salmon's remarks at the dinner.

I encourage you to move the slider to the 8:30 minute mark, where Salmon talks about the policy areas in which he now agrees with John McClaughry.  He starts with a spirited defense of Vermont Yankee: the state's "assault on Vermont Yankee" makes no sense, and turning our back on baseload power will not help people in Vermont.  Governor Salmon is inspiring.




More information:

For more videos from the dinner, visit the Ethan Allen Institute website page on videos and highlights from the dinner.

Here is Vermont Digger's report on the dinner.

I feel a little guilty about not including more information about Governor Douglas or John McClaughry at the dinner. So I decided to include their pictures, at least! The video-highlights link includes their remarks.

Governor Jim Douglas

John McClaughry

The 90% Solution: What 90% Renewables Would Look Like in Vermont

What going to 90% renewable energy would do to Vermont’s landscape

In 2011, the Vermont Department of Public Service published a Comprehensive Energy Plan (CEP) for Vermont’s future. The CEP states that Vermont will get 90% of all its energy, including the energy we use to drive our cars and heat our homes, from renewables by 2050.  There’s another section titled “25 by 25”, meaning that Vermont should get 25% of its energy from renewables by 2025.  There are no concrete directions or roadmaps for accomplishing either of these goals.

In a hearing before the newly formed Energy Siting Board, one woman stated that the CEP was a collection of slogans, not a plan.  She was correct. Nevertheless, it does represent the goals Montpelier has made for our state, they are acting on it, and we have to take it seriously. I am attempting to see how we could possibly meet these goals, and to answer the question what does moving to 90% renewable energy – or trying to – really mean? In particular, what impact would it have on our natural environment and signature Vermont landscape?

Here’s the reality: If we are going to build enough renewables to generate 90% of our energy needs, we will have to devote much of our state land resources to the cause of energy production.

Renault ZE  electric car

Consider that to “get away from fossil fuels” we will have to convert to mostly electric vehicles and electric heat-pump heated homes. How much more electricity will we need?  Right now, Vermont uses 6000 GWh of electricity per year.  For the “renewable” future, my preliminary estimate is that we we will need at least three times this much, or 18,000 GWh. In an op-ed in the Valley News, Charles McKenna, a Sierra Club member and retired engineer, estimated Vermont would require 15,000 GWh. (He was making the case for building renewables quickly.) In short we’re looking at a lot more electricity generation. What are the renewable options for obtaining this power?

Let’s take wind turbines. Most people are immediately struck by how big the things are. A 3 MW wind turbine has blades that sweep the entire area of a football field.  The Vestas at Kingdom Community Wind (Lowell Mountain) have blades that sweep 112 meters  (367 feet). Why so big?  Because wind is not energy-dense.  Think about it: a windy day can blow some trash around, but the wind usually can’t lift even a tiny dog and blow it around.  If you want to make electricity with wind — enough electricity to make it worth the trouble to put in a transmission line — you have to capture a lot of wind. So, you build turbines that sweep more than the area of a football field.

Solar and Wind at Lempster NH

To make 18,000 GWh of electricity, my rough estimate (I’ll have more detailed numbers ready for publication later this spring) is that Vermont would need to build 140 wind farms with the approximate output of Lowell Mountain’s 21-turbine facility. According to the National Renewable Energy Laboratory web site and other comparisons, 21 turbines of this size would usually cover 5 miles of ridgeline.  These 140 wind farms would use 2,240 industrial turbines over 700 miles of ridgeline. Lowell claims to use only 3 miles of ridge line: in this case, ”only” 420 miles of ridgeline would be required for the turbines. However, not all ridges have wind as good as Lowell, so more turbines would probably be needed. Keep in mind, the entire state of Vermont is 158 miles long and 90 miles across at its widest.

If we do move to a 90% renewable energy portfolio, much of Vermont’s high country would need to be sacrificed to meet the CEP’s goals. Still, that wouldn’t cover the electricity we would need, because sometimes the wind doesn’t blow.

Logs at Springfield NH
biomass plant

What about solar? A 2.2 MW solar facility was recently installed in White River Junction. An area of 15 acres was cleared for this facility. Do to our northern locations and frequent cloud cover, this can be expected to generate only 2,755 MWh or 2.8 GWh per year. Making 18,000 GWh per year with solar would require 6,700 such facilities or 100,000 acres of solar installations. They would cover an area approximately one-fourth the size of the Green Mountain Forest. And, of course, they would not provide any power when the sun isn’t shining.

Biomass? It is difficult to calculate the wood required by biomass plants. Using information from the McNeil and Ryegate biomass plants gives different results from calculations based on wood heat content and power plant efficiencies. Basically, making 18,000 GWh with wood biomass will require between 8 and 14 million cords per year. In contrast, the current wood harvest from Vermont is about 1 million cords per year.

At the Springfield plant

How much forestland does, say, 12 million cords represent?  Estimates of a sustainable wood harvest vary from 0.5 to 2 cords per year per acre. Assuming one cord per acre, we would need 12 million acres to be devoted to wood for the biomass power plants. The total area of the state of Vermont is 5.9 million acres, of which 4.6 million is forested.

Any (or any combination) of the above mentioned options necessary to meet a 90% renewable policy would have a tremendous impact on the look and feel of Vermont for generations to come. Tourism plays a very important role in the economy of this state, and a pristine and rural landscape is an important part of the Vermont brand. We really have to decide if “90%” is worth its tremendous cost to our environment. (And to our pocketbooks. Electricity made from renewables costs two to ten times as much as standard “grid” electricity. We can expect Vermont’s electricity prices to double or triple, if the CEP is actually put into effect.)

People who are against large-scale renewable energy development are often ridiculed as NIMBYs.  However, they may simply be aware that achieving renewable-energy goals will have huge effects on Vermont’s landscape and ecosystem, and they don’t want that to happen.  In other words, people opposed to renewable developments are often true environmentalists. It is time to reject the impossible goals of the CEP, and implement only the renewables that are reasonable and cost-effective for the citizens of our state.

-------

This is a preliminary version of the Vermont Land Use report that George and I are writing for the Ethan Allen Institute.  This post first appeared on the Ethan Allen Institute site.

The Big Green Energy Mountain: A Song

The Big Green Energy Mountain

In the year that oil had reached its peak a New Age lad came biking
He rode right in with a progressive grin and a hubris that was striking
"I'm heading for a land that's far away from the greenhouse gas cloud mountin’;
and if you’re all wise, you’ll subsidize the Big Green Energy Mountain."

On the Big Green Energy Mountain, the sun shines day and night.
The solar cells that run the wells provide abundant heat and light.
And you can site them miles away ‘cause the power lines have no loss.
The windmills all drive, spinning nine to five,
the birds are all happy just to be alive,
On the Big Green Energy Mountain

On the Big Green Energy Mountain, the cars burn alcohol.
And to make these stocks of ethanol takes no farm land at all.
The trucks all run on water and surplus cooking oil.
Their engines respond to biodiesel spawned
from the algae that’s grown in a big koi pond,
On the Big Green Energy Mountain

On the Big Green Energy Mountain, the cordwood has no soot;
the forests can be clear cut miles around without a tree uproot.
The dams don’t block the canyons and the fish can swim right through.
The geothermal brings many shallow hot springs
the stoves use methane that the compost pile brings
On the Big Green Energy Mountain

Well I’ve been all around that verdant hill and now I must say frankly
For energy safe and clean and true, I’ll take Vermont Yankee
I’m tired of being taxed by political hacks
For boondoggle schemes that belie all facts
On the Big Green Energy Mountain

----------

 Dana Krueger (with apologies to Harry McClintock http://www.stlyrics.com/lyrics/obrotherwhereartthou/inthebigrockcandymountains.htm

Land Use For Renewables

The Comprehensive Energy Plan for Vermont (CEP) says that Vermont will use 90% renewables by 2050.  My husband and I are doing a report on the land-use implications of this 90% renewable path for Vermont.  An early report on land-use is at the Ethan Allen Institute site right now. The 90 Percent Solution. You can expect a longer report later in the year.

Back to the Song

My friend Dana Krueger wrote this song, and I decided to run it on the day of the NRC meeting.  Plant opponents may be better at intimidation, but we have better songs!

The original Big Rock Candy Mountain song is below, just for fun.

The Vermont Energy Land Use Report

The Energy Education Project of the Ethan Allen Institute (I am the director of the Energy project)  has a new initiative: the  Vermont Energy Land Use Report.  We announced  the report in the Ethan Allen Institute February newsletter, and I copy that announcement below. Later, there will be press releases and so forth.

To donate to preparing this report, click the Donate button on this blog or the Support Freedom button on the Ethan Allen Institute website.  Please donate to help build a solid report which will be of interest to everyone in Vermont.

Energy Education Project Keeps Close Watch on Energy Issues

In the last few months, the Energy Education Project has focused in two main areas:

• Educating people about the value of the Vermont Yankee power plant, and encouraging them to testify in favor of the plant at the Public Service Board hearings
• Writing op-eds and letters to the editor about the economics of renewable energy and the problems with over-investing in these technologies.

Both these areas are the source of fierce debate within Vermont. Here's the gist:

Vermont Yankee:

The Public Service Board must rule on a Certificate of Public Good for Vermont Yankee.  The PSB evaluated this subject between 2008 and 2010, but then the Senate voted in 2010 to forbid the Board from releasing its findings.  The Federal Court decision in 2012 told the state that it could not make decisions about nuclear plants based on nuclear safety.  Nuclear safety evaluations are the purview of the Federal government.

At that point, the Public Service Board decided its docket about Vermont Yankee was  contaminated with inappropriate material. It opened a new docket, and held two public hearings about the Certificate of Public Good.  In general, anti-nuclear groups completely mob these hearings, often with many people from Massachusetts.  The Energy Education Project encouraged supporters of clean efficient energy to come to the PSB hearings.  Other groups (such as Associated Industries of Vermont and the main Vermont Yankee union) did the same. Therefore, the meetings had a high proportion (in one case, a majority) of plant supporters.

Plant supporters line up
to make statements at hearing

Since the supporters were not outnumbered, more of them chose to speak.  We made an effort to have the Public Service Board hear both sides of the Vermont Yankee story, including the supporter side. That effort was successful.  There were only two public hearings on this docket. Plant supporters were there.

Renewable Energy:

In 2011, newly-elected Governor Shumlin was "shocked" to discover that the state's energy plan assumed that Vermont Yankee would keep operating.  His appointees at the Department of Public Service put together an ambitious energy plan: the state will use 90% renewable energy for everything (including home heating and transportation) by 2050.

Wind resource map of Vermont

This plan is similar to Germany's Energiewende plan, which is currently running into deep trouble. Too many intermittent sources are destabilizing the German grid. Neighboring countries, such as Poland, are tired of having their power plants be "backup" to Germany's intermittent power surges from wind turbines. These countries are setting switches to be able to isolate German power, when necessary. In other words, the European grid is becoming somewhat fragmented. Also, the electricity costs are forcing some manufacturers to leave Germany.  However, the German plan is being partially bailed out by new power plants burning brown coal.

The new Comprehensive Energy Plan for Vermont has striking similarities to the German plan.  The Energy Education Project has written several op-eds about this issue.

We will write a white paper in the near future about the land use consequences of the current Vermont Energy plan. Renewables are not only intermittent, they are diffuse energy sources, and require a lot of land to make a relatively small amount of power. Land use has only been addressed in a fragmentary way in the media, and we will rectify that.

--------------------

The Energy Education Project

I am director of the Energy Education Project of the Ethan Allen Institute.  The Ethan Allen Institute was founded in 1991 and is Vermont's independent, nonpartisan, free-market-oriented public policy think tank.  The Institute was kind enough to take my interest in Energy Education seriously, and form a Project under the general heading of the Institute. We founded the Energy Education Project of the Ethan Allen Institute in September, 2010.  Here's my blog post about the Energy Education Project launch.

The Ethan Allen Institute just revitalized its website, to a great, modern site.  I encourage you to visit ethanallen.org.  The new site is attractive and very easy to navigate!  Most of the topics are far removed from energy, but I expect energy will be higher on the agenda in the near future.  You can donate to the Ethan Allen Institute by clicking the "support freedom" button on the web page.

Contribute to the Energy Education Project

Please Contribute to the Energy Education Project

Ethan Allen

There are many worthy causes competing for your generosity, but Vermonters’ ability to support any and all of those causes depends on Vermont’s continued prosperity. Unfortunately, our prosperity is being sabotaged by misguided energy policies such as unrealistic energy "plans," ever-increasing subsidies for renewable energy projects, and state-sponsored efforts to shut down the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant.

The Energy Education Project of the Ethan Allen Institute needs your support this year with a $30 membership in our program. To donate by PayPal, you can click on the Donate button at the upper right corner of the blog, or  click the Donate Button on this page of the Energy Education Project website.

The Energy Education Project

The Energy Education Project works to educate people about the real, science-driven energy choices we have, and cut through the hyped rhetoric about how Vermont can be instantly "green" at almost no cost.

Meredith Angwin is a physical chemist with twenty years of utility experience,  and Howard Shaffer is a registered professional engineer in Vermont and New Hampshire, with over thirty years of utility experience. We are the two people who staff the project. 

We have written op-eds, blog posts, brochures and other material to spread accurate information. We have made videos for YouTube and blogs.  We have talked to Rotary and Kiwanis clubs all over the state.  We have been on radio regularly, including WDEV, WCAX, WNTK, WAMC, NHPR and WHMP.  

We have debated anti-nuclear activists at high schools, panels, and colleges in Vermont, including the University of Vermont.  We have commented on the Vermont Energy Plan in print, at hearings,  and on the radio. 

We have a web presence with a Save Vermont Yankee Facebook Page, a twitter feed,  this blog and an Energy Education Project website.  We also contribute guest blogs to ANS Nuclear Cafe.

At the grassroots level, we staged rallies in Vernon to show that Vermont Yankee has supporters (yes, they do!), and helped pro-Yankee activists get positive press coverage with a few well-chosen media events. 

Awards and Plans

For our energy education work, Meredith Angwin and Howard Shaffer received a major award in 2012:  the prestigious President's Citation of the American Nuclear Society. This award acknowledges that our Vermont battles have national significance.

The Energy Education Project of the Ethan Allen Institute has been the most active and effective group educating people about important Vermont energy issues. For a prosperous Vermont tomorrow, for prosperous Vermonters who can support other worthy causes tomorrow, please support the Energy Education Project today! 

Contributions

Please, help us keep this good and important work going. Basic yearly membership in the Energy Education Project is just $30. A contribution of $200 will support the mileage and minor expenses for Meredith Angwin or Howard Shaffer for one month. $500 will fund copying, renting rooms for meetings, pizza parties for supporters, small ads about meetings, and so forth, for two months.

The Ethan Allen Institute is a 501(c)3 charitable/educational corporation, and your donation is fully tax deductible.

To donate, you can either send a check to the Energy Education Project/EAI at

EAI

PO Box 543, 

Montpelier VT 05601 

(please note "energy" on the memo field to direct the funds to the Energy project instead of the entire Institute, if that is what you want to do.)

or click the Donate button on this page  to donate by PayPal.

Farm and Forest in Vermont: Bruce Shields Guest Post

Bruce Shields, President of the Ethan Allen Institute
Tree farmer in Vermont

I am Bruce Shields, President of Ethan Allen Institute, a Vermont organization promoting free markets and individual decision making.  I have been active in agriculture and forestry in Vermont since 1977.

Agriculture and forestry at about 20% of Vermont’s economy provide a stable and widely distributed base of employment.  Thousands more derive their living indirectly -- paper mills, Cabot Cheese, Ethan Allen Furniture and hundreds of self employed truckers, mechanics, and financial service workers.

These people look to State government to provide a stable and predictable economic framework in which they may operate.  Energy is key to the success of farming and forestry.  No other sector of Vermont has more rapidly and profoundly modernized its production process, and electrical energy is their indispensable base.   One modern farmer with several hundred horsepower of electrical motors on his farm creates more value than 50 farmers like my grandfather did.  An electric sawmill with 5 or 6 hands can put up as much lumber in a day as 30 or more hands could 50 years ago.

Both farming and forestry are dominated by small family businesses who have little influence over their selling price.  The market provides our income: we can only control our expenses.  Electricity is one of the largest expenses for the typical farm.   In 2009, Vermont Gross Farm Income was $589,827,000.  The National Agricultural Statistical Service [NASS] shows that electricity cost our farms $17,423,000 -- 2.95% of GFI.  After all expenses are deducted, Net Farm Income for 2009 was $97,099,000.   Electricity cost equals 17.95% of NFI.  Both the low net operating margin, and the high cost of electricity are consistent with prior years.  But the trend is adverse: in 2003, electricity was 2.72% of GFI, and just 11.87% of NFI.   That upward trend in electrical costs is a negative for business viability.

Vermont Yankee has anchored the power costs of all New England.  Steady and predictable generation smooths price volatility across the region, helping to cap spikes and fill in voids.    Other power sources may move in concert with dominant economic indicators and thus impact farmers and sawmills concurrently with other stressors like high oil costs, or a drought.  For Vermont’s economic health we need to maintain as many counter-cyclical mechanisms as possible.

An operational Vermont Yankee will also inject about $100 million per year into the Vermont economy, and pay millions in statewide education taxes which already fall heavily on farm and forest land. If Vermont Yankee remains open, some of that $100 million in economic benefit will find its way to the wood products makers and farmers. But if it closes, a share of those millions in lost taxes would be inevitably transferred to them, as well. I see no upside to closing Vermont Yankee for farmers and wood products manufacturers.

----------

This is the first in a series of posts which share statements made in favor of Vermont Yankee at the Public Service Board hearing on November 7, 2012.   I will have pictures from the meeting for most of the posts.

Shields is President of the Ethan Allen Institute, and my Energy Education Project is part of the Institute.   Quoting from his biography on the Ethan Allen site:

Bruce, a family tree farmer, has been active in farm and forestry work for many years. He has served as state treasurer of the Vermont Farm Bureau since 1994 and as vice president and president of the Lamoille County Farm Bureau for 13 years. He has been active for many years in leadership positions in the Vermont Timber Truckers and Producers Association, the Vermont Sugar Makers Association, the Vermont Forestry Foundation, and the Vermont Forest Products Association. (Bruce is on the board of directors of the Vermont Forest Products Association.)

More Nuclear Supporters than Opponents at Public Service Board Hearing

The scene at the meeting
Note the green stickers and buttons of VY supporters

Public Service Board members at head table
David Coen, Commissioner John Volz, John Burke
Court Reporter at left

For continued operation, Vermont Yankee requires a Certificate of Public Good from the Vermont Public Service Board (PSB).  The only in-person public meeting for this docket was held last night at the Vernon Elementary School across the street from Vermont Yankee.

I hoped that supporters would come to this hearing.  Sometimes plant opponents practice the politics of intimidation.  I hoped this meeting would be civil.

State Representative Mike Hebert
of Vernon and Guilford

The meeting was civil. The meeting was informative. I think one reason for the civility was that plant supporters outnumbered opponents. I have noticed that the higher the percentage of supporters, the less shouting and intimidation takes place.  Also, I give much credit to the PSB members. They ran a tight, controlled meeting. They timed the talks and did not let people go over their time.

The Brattleboro Reformer article by Bob Audette started: Supporters of the continued operation of Vermont Yankee outnumbered opponents by a margin of three-to-one. Audette quoted several plant supporters in the article: I encourage you to read it.

Plant supporters spoke of local economics and the economics of electricity prices.  They spoke of environmental impacts and family life.  They spoke of reasonable and unreasonable fears.  Over the next few days, I hope to have several of their presentations as guest posts on this blog.

               

Former Governor Thomas P Salman
speaking in favor of Vermont Yankee

Former State Representative Patty O'Donnell
Now Chairwoman of the Vernon Selectboard

Bruce Shields, President of the Ethan Allen Institute
The Energy Education Project is part of the Institute

Thank you to Stephanie Thomson of VTEP for the pictures.

Gwyneth Cravens In Burlington

Gwyneth Cravens gave two talks in Burlington on January 20. The evening talk was recorded by CCTV of Burlington.

Concerned about the devastating impacts on public health and the environment caused by fossil-fuel combustion, environmental writer Gwyneth Cravens concludes that nuclear is the only large-scale, practical, environmentally friendly, nonpolluting energy source available. Her book Power to Save the World: The Truth About Nuclear Energy documents her findings which are shared in this first 2011 Sheraton Economic Series presentation.

Energy Education Project Hosts Gwyneth Cravens in Vermont Thursday

The Energy Education Project: Gwyneth Cravens Visit to Vermont This Thursday

On Thursday, January 20, the Ethan Allen Institute Energy Education Project will host Gwyneth Cravens, author of Power to Save the World. She will appear in Vermont, and Vermont needs to hear her reasoned message about nuclear power at this crucial time. Her thoughtful approach and clarity of expression is an important antidote to the overblown energy rhetoric of recent months.

Cravens will appear at several events on Thursday, two of which are free and open to the public. Ethan Allen Institute Energy Education Project is proud to have arranged this visit.

The first event is a State House Round table. At 12:15 p.m., Cravens will speak at the Montpelier Statehouse. We will provide a complimentary copy of her book, Power to Save the World, to Vermont legislators. The Round Table event is open to the public, and we hope to see many non-legislators (as well as legislators) in attendance. The announcement for this event is at the right, including the coupon which legislators have received.

At 7 p.m., Cravens will speak in Burlington, at the Ethan Allen Institute Sheraton Economics series at the Sheraton Burlington Emerald Ballroom. This Economics Series talk is free and open to the public. At this event, her book will be available for sale and book-signing. The announcement for this event is at the top of this blog post.

Cravens will also appear at a few smaller venues, such as the Gund Institute for Ecological Economics at University of Vermont. Due to space restrictions, these talks are not open to the public.

As usual, double-click the graphics to enlarge them.

If you want to know more about Cravens approach, you can follow the links below to hear Cravens on a recent Vermont talk radio show: the Mark Johnson Show.

Mark Johnson Show Part 1

Mark Johnson Show Part 2

I have also appeared on several radio shows to discuss her upcoming visit.

Cravens' talks in Burlington and Montpelier will give you an opportunity to ask questions of a knowledgeable pro-nuclear speaker. Your questions are probably the same questions Cravens considered when she started out. She was very skeptical of nuclear energy. She changed her mind through years of study, travel, and interviews with scientists. Cravens combines knowledge with clarity in a very approachable way. This is an excellent opportunity to learn why nuclear power is indeed, Power to Save the World.

I hope that many of you will be able to attend.

NOTE: Most of this blog post is a copy of an email I sent to Energy Education Project supporters. Just for fun, I include a picture of myself at a radio show yesterday morning.

The Energy Education Project

The fellow on the left is Ethan Allen, a famous figure in Vermont. He led the Green Mountain Boys during the Revolutionary War. Actually, he started by fighting against New York State for Vermont's independence before the war. When the Revolution began, he switched from fighting New York to fighting the British. He captured a major British fort almost immediately.

Good move, Ethan.

The Ethan Allen Institute Energy Education Project

The graphic above is the logo of the Ethan Allen Institute, which is hosting the Energy Education Project, a not-for-profit group which will inform Vermont citizens of their energy choices....without hot air.

The idea for the Energy Education Project started this summer. In July, NRC Chairman Jaczko came to Brattleboro and met with seven "citizens groups" opposed to Vermont Yankee. I felt we needed at least one citizen's group to tell the truth about energy. I was very happy when the Ethan Allen Institute agreed to host the Project.

A little about the Ethan Allen Institute and its leadership. The Ethan Allen Institute, founded in 1991, is Vermont's independent, nonpartisan, free-market-oriented public policy think tank. John McClaughry, acting head of the Ethan Allen Institute, is a former member of the Vermont legislature. He holds a M.S. degree in Nuclear Engineering, and spent some of his career at GE

ANS (American Nuclear Society) Announces Project

ANS Nuclear Cafe blog announced the Energy Education Project today. ANS is hosting View From Vermont as a regular feature; here's a link to Howard Shaffer's View From Vermont post of about two weeks ago. Thank you, ANS, for showcasing the Energy Education Project today!

How to Join the Energy Education Project

Yearly dues for the Energy Education Project are $30, but donations in any amount are very welcome. Since the Ethan Allen Institute is a 501(c) 3 Corporation, dues and donations are tax deductible. The membership page includes a PayPal button, as well as an address.

If you don't want to join the Energy Education Project at this time, consider joining our email list by sending an email through the project website.

Our First Meeting, Thursday, September 30

On Thursday, September 30, the Energy Education Project will present Energy Choices for Vermont: 6:30 to 8:30 p.m., Montshire Museum of Science, 1 Montshire Road, Norwich.

At this first meeting, the president of the Ethan Allen Institute, John McClaughry, will introduce the project. After his introduction, Meredith Angwin will describe the role of ISO-NE in grid reliability, and Dr. Robert Hargraves will present a history of the Vermont Yankee power plant.

I hope you can come to the meeting, but not everyone lives close enough to attend. However, everyone can consider joining the project. If you have any questions, please email me at mjangwin at gmail.

We plan to make a difference to the energy debate in Vermont.

------

VTEP

I don't want my friends at the Vermont Energy Partnership (VTEP) to call me up and say: "Hey Meredith. What do you mean there's no group now? What are we, chopped liver?" VTEP does a great job, but they have a different organizational and membership structure, slightly different goals, and different activities than the ones we have planned. Of course, we plan to cooperate with VTEP.

A Quote from the Press Release:

Ethan Allen Institute announced the Energy Education Project in a press release on Friday.

The Ethan Allen Institute today announced a new Energy Education Project , designed to educate Vermonters about their energy choices without the usual “hot air.”

The Project will address current issues, such as relicensing Vermont Yankee and the federal legal challenge to Vermont’s method of paying for renewables (Feed In Tariffs). In a broader scope, the Project will provide education about the economics and environmental impacts of conventional and renewable energy generation, including new technology now on the horizon....

The Project plans educational outreach programs including community meetings, energy debates, and social media.

John McClaughry, acting president of the Ethan Allen Institute, says: “Ethan Allen Institute is pleased to host this project. The subject is timely, and the scope of the project fits with the Institute’s mission of building a stronger and more economically prosperous Vermont.

-----

Ethan Allen Graphic courtesy of the Ethan Allen Institute

Graphic of VY 4 VT courtesy of Entergy Vermont Yankee. (It is a lawn sign.)