Thursday at the Montshire: Energy Education Project Kick-Off

This evening is the first meeting of the Energy Education Project. The meeting will be held at the Montshire Museum of Science in Norwich at 6:30 p.m. The Energy Education Project is hosted by the Ethan Allen Institute, and the acting president of the Institute, John McClaughry, will introduce the two speakers.

Both speakers aim at putting some of the recent controversies about Vermont energy in an informative perspective.

• I am going to speak about ISO-NE (Independent Systems Operator for the New England grid). To make good energy choices, people need to know where their electricity comes from, and how it is dispatched and priced.

• Bob Hargraves will inform people about the history of the Vermont Yankee plant.

You can read short biographies of us at the Coalition for Energy Solutions website.

I have been pretty busy preparing for this talk, but you can expect some good blog posts after the meeting. I also plan to post links to the talks at the Energy Education Project web site.

The formal mission statement of the Energy Education Project is:

The Energy Education Project helps people in Vermont understand their energy options in terms of cost, reliability, environmental impact and government support.

The informal mission statement is: Energy Information for Vermont...without the hot air!

And yes, there's a tip of the hat to David MacKay's book on Sustainable Energy in the informal statement.

Hope some of you can come this evening!

And if you can't come, please go to the Energy Education Project website, click on the PayPal button and join. We're trying to get a rational message out there, while many irrational things are being said by well-funded opponent organizations. Membership is the Energy Education Project is $30 per year, and tax-deductible. Join now! If you can't join, please consider donating a smaller amount. Thank you!

Here's a link to my post about the project that was in the ANS blog. It gathered some nice comments.

See ya later! Maybe tonight!

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.)

Economics and Vermont Yankee

In an earlier set of posts, I analyzed several economic reports about the impact of shutting down Vermont Yankee. I posted the most straight-forward reports as Economic Report Well Constructed. These reports reviewed the situation if Vermont Yankee continues to operate past 2012 with the situation in which it shuts down. With VY continuing to operate, reports show $60 to $80 million dollars a year more disposable income in Vermont, and around $7 million a year in state taxes.

This also translates into jobs lost or jobs gained. The graph of job creation and loss (above) comes from the Legislative Consensus Report, released in March of this year. The comparison between shutting down Vermont Yankee and keeping it open is straightforward, and agrees with results from several other economic studies. The job consequences are shown in the chart above.

Aside: As I discussed in another post, Economic Reports: De-Constructed, the assumptions for job creation for the Green scenarios are a bit murky, so we are sticking to the simple cases. End Aside.

If you double click on the chart, you can compare the black line (Vermont Yankee keeps running, no other change) with the red line (Vermont Yankee shuts down, no other change). You will see that shutting down Yankee leads to a job loss of around 1000 to 1500 jobs in the state. This loss goes on for years. It's ugly.

Rumors and Experience

Recently, however, I have been thinking that these estimates of job loss in the state are far too low.

Rumors about IBM

The rumor is that IBM might shut down its wafer fab plant in Essex Junction and move out of state if electricity rates rise. According to Wikipedia about Essex Junction, IBM has been in town since 1957. According to everyone, including Wikipedia, IBM is the largest employer in the state. Various websites list the facility as having around 6000 employees.

The latest word-on-the-street that I have heard is that some people in Essex Junction are selling their houses and looking for jobs out of state. They believe that the IBM plant will close if Yankee shuts down and electricity rates rise.

Is there any basis for these rumors? Who knows? I do know, however, IBM is very concerned with electricity rates. For example, when Vermont added an electricity surtax to fund Efficiency Vermont, IBM and other large electricity users insisted on a way to partially opt-out of the surtax. So Vermont started the Energy Savings Account program, allowing eligible Vermont business customers to self-administer energy efficiency through the use of an Energy Savings Account (ESA).

Experience with Other Manufacturing

In my day job, I write for various Vermont businesses, and one of my customers has been the Vermont Manufacturing Extension Center (VMEC). VMEC's primary mission is "To Improve Manufacturing in Vermont and strengthen the global competitiveness of the state's smaller manufacturers." VMEC is a public-private partnership, partially under the auspices of the National Institute of Standards (NIST). Among other things, NIST is the home of the Balridge National Quality Program and the prestigious Malcolm Balridge Quality Awards.

On VMEC's web page, Impacts and Successes, the right hand column contains links to many success stories. (I wrote some of these.) I hope you will look at these stories. Think about which of these manufacturing operations probably use a lot of electricity.

A partial list of the businesses of these VMEC clients includes:

• High-tech eye protection for the military.
• Thin saw blades.
• Electric lawnmowers.
• Close tolerance parts for the aerospace industry.
• Fiberglass composites.
• The IBM fab plant (again).

Do you think these companies have significant electric bills? I think so.

Would a rise in electricity prices cause all these companies to fold? No. I'm not into the worst-case doomsday scenarios. (I leave that to the plant opponents.) Would it make them less competitive, less likely to hire, more likely to cut someone's hours? Would some of them perhaps fold?

I think so. Look at the companies, and draw your own conclusions.

The Tip of the Iceberg

In between rumors about IBM, and the list of VMEC clients, I believe the economic costs of a rise in electricity rates will be much worse than the legislative report indicates. Much worse. I hate to use hackneyed phrases, but possible job losses around Vernon are "just the tip of the iceberg" for the effects on Vermont prosperity.

It's a big cold iceberg, and we don't need it. If we don't relicense Vermont Yankee, we'll be inviting that iceberg to dinner.

Silicon wafer image from Wikipedia

Iceberg from Wikipedia

Energy Use and Feminism in My Family

My aunt Blanche Stein Vision is 88 years old. She lives in a retirement building (apartments with lunches and some housekeeping provided) in Arizona. Though the daughter of very poor immigrants, she managed to graduate Phi Beta Kappa from University of Chicago. She went to law school at Columbia University. This was practically unheard-of for a woman in those days.

Later, she worked as a lawyer for the FTC: Federal Trade Commission. If you visit a model home, it may have some labels. For example, the fancy tile in the kitchen may have a sign next to it: This tile choice is an upgrade to the base price of the house. That's Blanche's work. She led the FTC project on mislabeling and truth in advertising in model homes.

She usually reads my blog, but doesn't always comment on it. Two days ago, though, she did comment.

Liked your VY blog today. When I was a real little kid we had a coal heater in the in the kitchen and was not allowed to go near it because if we touched it we could get burned, we had a coal stove for cooking, and we had an ice box that needed to have a large chunk of ice replaced in it every few days to keep the food cold. Who knew any better--but as the finances of our family improved we could move into an apartment that had all the "modern" facilities-- steam heat, a gas stove and a real refrigerator with the electrical mechanism on the top. And my mother was able to go to work. Give me convenience any time! And bless whoever invented the washing machine!

I asked her if I could use this post in my blog. She answered:

Sure, do anything you want with it -- I delight now in the "luxury" of air conditioning, heat, hot water, ice and a cooking surface all that can be summoned with the press of a button!

With much love,

Blanche

To me, this story is a blending of the third-world energy use and modern energy use, and how energy use affects the life of women. And it all happened in my own family.

19th Blog Carnival of Nuclear Energy

The 19th Blog Carnival of Nuclear Energy is up at Next Big Future. Stories include: Hyperion is building at 25MW Fast Reactor at Savannah River. When the Sierra Club and the Cato Institute agree on why we don't need more capacity, Rod Adams gets suspicious about motives, as in "Hey, doesn't that mean continuing to use the old fossil plants?" Nuclear Green discusses the Molten Salt Reactor. And more, even more! Always something new at the Carnival.

Coal stove from Wikimedia

Prosperity and Energy and Convenience Revisited. Warning: Feminist Angle

Prosperity

I wrote a post about how access to energy improves lives in in the third world-- It's the Energy. Why I Love Nuclear. Karen Street, of A Musing Environment blog, read that post. She suggested that I should probably say that I did not mean to encourage rich people to be wasteful of energy. In her opinion, while energy is essential for people in the third world, many people in developed countries use it wastefully.

I thought about her comments and realized that energy makes life better, even if you already use a fair amount of energy. In my answering blog post, Prosperity for Rich Folks, I said that something that looks like "waste" to one person can be very important to the life of another person. The example I used was big refrigerators. I honestly can't imagine how I would have worked and raised two kids without an American-size refrigerator, though many would consider it wasteful.

In response to my post, Karen posted an excellent argument for conservation and moderation in Are we richer if we make perceived convenience the priority?

Karen defined the problem clearly, and I planned to answer her post. Yet...time went by, as it so often does. I didn't get around to writing an answer. However, this morning, Rod Adams posted about efficiency versus abundant energy, and that made me think about the subject again.

Can Nuclear Do It?

The crux of the matter is whether nuclear can provide enough energy for rich people to live a life we consider convenient. If nuclear can provide abundant energy, then everything is fine. If not, I am burning the world's limited supply of fossil fuels for my lifestyle. Karen points out that there is no peer-reviewed study that shows nuclear can provide this level of power for everyone.

I think nuclear can provide large amounts of inexpensive power to everyone in the world. I cannot prove this. Perhaps others can. One could argue that I should live a life of deep energy frugality until it is proven.

By the way, about deep energy frugality. Karen absolutely walks the talk. She has not owned a car since 1991. I have the greatest admiration for her. Karen not only lives a careful life, but she is a clear thinker. As she pointed out, the crux of the matter is whether inexpensive, low-emission power is abundantly available. Or not.

What is Convenience, Anyway?

Back to my fridge. I can't prove that nuclear can provide enough energy, but I do want to talk a little about word choice. I don't like the words Karen used in her essay title: Are we richer if we make perceived convenience the priority?

In my opinion, "convenience" and "perceived convenience" are pejorative terms for people's choices. I chose certain material things (a big fridge, say) because then I could live the life I wanted to live: a scientist AND a wife and mother. My desire to be a scientist and a mommy may have been inappropriate according to some people's ideas. Perhaps it it took too much energy (my own car! a big fridge!) But it was, indeed, what I wanted to do with my life. This is beyond mere "convenience."

So, it boils down to this. If energy is abundant, then my choices were all right. If not, I would have had to choose. I could work, or I could have kids. I believe it is truly as stark as that. Being a working mom is tough enough, using every possible support you can get. If I had to hang the laundry in the morning and take it in if it looked like rain, if I had to shop every day for my family, it would have been impossible to combine motherhood and career.

Aside: I read an early interview with Dr. Chu right after he became Energy Secretary. He talked about biking to work every day at Berkeley. Someone asked him if his wife also biked. He answered something like: "No. She doesn't bike. She needs a car to carry the kids and groceries." My feminist antenna went on full alert. I thought: "Ah, he stays on his bike, riding along on the moral high ground, while she does the schlepping. So admirable! Or maybe, not so admirable?" Yeah. I'm cynical. End Aside.

The Bottom Line

In poor countries, women are liberated from lives of poverty and endless childbearing by access to energy. In rich countries, women are liberated to have both children and careers by having abundant energy. Nuclear power can provide that energy. That's how I see it. I don't have the statistics to back this up, but that's how I see it.

To some extent, a blog is a set of opinions. This is my opinion on women and energy.

The image is a painting by Albert Anker: "Excess" From Wikimedia.

Monday Blue Ribbon: Howard Shaffer and Public Outreach

Howard Shaffer: Knowledge, Outreach, and Perseverance

Howard Shaffer has been an advocate for Vermont Yankee for years. He debates anti-nuclear activists, testifies at hearings, writes for the press, and is a member of the American Nuclear Society Public Information Committee.

The problem with writing about Howard Shaffer is that he is my mentor in nuclear outreach. It's not easy to write about someone whom I admire so greatly. But I'll try.

How I Met Howard Shaffer

I was writing a novel. Specifically, I was writing a mystery, Nuclear Gentleman. Most of the action takes place in a power plant, and my nuclear plant experience was out-of-date. Also, in my working life, I had been a researcher. I visited nuclear plants to solve problems. For my book, I needed information on daily life in a nuclear plant.

I had just moved to Vermont, so I scoured the local newspaper for pro-nuclear letters to the editor. There was a letter from Howard, and it included information on the town in which he lives. He was in the phone book, and I called him up to ask him about life in a nuclear plant. It was the beginning of a wonderful friendship.

I soon learned that Howard had been a start-up engineer on Vermont Yankee, Chin Shan in Taiwan, and a pumped storage plant. He was also an engineer for for Dresden, Seabrook, Watts Bar 1, and a member of the GE SBWR project. Howard is a licensed professional engineer in Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts and Illinois. He was a Congressional Science Fellow in 2001. He was a submarine officer. His engineering degrees are from Duke University and M I T.

In other words, he can answer almost any question about BWRs with significant authority and practical experience.

What he spends his time on now, though, is outreach.

Outreach

Howard attends meetings, testifies in writing and orally at hearings and debates against anti-nuclear activists (when they are willing to debate). He writes letters to the editor. His article, The Downside of Nuclear Power, By An Advocate, was published in the Vermont Journal of Environmental Law. ( This Vermont Law School publication is not known for pro-nuclear views!) Despite its title, Howard's article is pro-nuclear.

He also answers comments in local papers, being a strong voice for nuclear when not that many voices are available. Here he is, today, answering a letter from old-line anti-nuclear activist, Gary Sachs, in the Rutland Herald. Or countering a comment from another nuclear activist who commented on a Rutland Herald article. Today, Howard summarizes both the geography and the politics of Vermont in a View From Vermont blog post in ANS Nuclear Cafe.

Teaching Me About Outreach

I don't know how to say this without sounding a bit sappy. Howard constantly teaches me about outreach. He manages to be unwavering in his support of the plant, and a gentleman to plant opponents. Both at the same time. Howard brings handouts to meetings: some that he writes, some he obtains from NEI. He is a firm presence at these meetings, both in what he says and what he does. He talks gently to people on both sides of the fence. He respects people, even when he disagrees strongly with their opinions.

I constantly learn from Howard.

Photograph of Howard Shaffer used by permission.

The Politics in Vermont

In between the High Holy Days and a reconciliation hymn for September 11, my mind has been elsewhere. It's been somewhere spiritual. Somewhere positive.

Time to bring my thoughts back in balance. No more harmony-with-the-universe stuff.

Time for politics in Vermont.

Governor of Vermont

The Democratic primary was a five way race, with Shumlin ahead of Racine by about 200 votes. The recount finished two days ago. Shumlin also won the recount, again by 200 votes.

Shumlin will run again the Republican Brian Dubie for governor this November. A few things to note:

• Shumlin won by 200 votes out of 75,000 cast.
• Dubie has released his financial statement, and Shumlin seems reluctant to release his own.
• Shumlin spent about $230,000 of his own money on his primary campaign. In Vermont, that's a lot of money. Dubie's warchest, including money from the Republican Governors Association, was about one million dollars shortly before the primary.

For those who tuned in late: Shumlin is eager to shut down Vermont Yankee and Dubie wants to keep it. This excellent Vermont Digger article about Dubie and Shumlin describes the issues around revealing financial statements. The article also describes a new soft-money not-for-profit which is active against Vermont Yankee. And against Brian Dubie.

Soft Money

Green Mountain Future is the new not-for-profit, apparently designed expressly to funnel soft money into the campaign against Vermont Yankee and against Brian Dubie. Political campaign contributions must be revealed. Campaign contributions are supposed to be visible to the public. However, contributions for not-for-profits do not have to be revealed. Green Mountain Future can take any amount of money, from anywhere, and not say very much about who gave that money. This is a great advantage in a political campaign. Of course, such organizations are not supposed to participate in political campaigns.

In this case, a Green Mountain Future anti-Vermont Yankee TV ad is now running on many stations in Vermont. The final words of the ad are "Tell Brian Dubie No." Yet somehow, this is not political. As Terri Hallenbeck of the Burlington Free Press says in a blog post: In the world of fine lines, a nonprofit can weigh in on policy but not come out and tell you who to vote for.

Interesting. If you don't say "vote for Joe," you CAN say "Tell Jim No." You are still an educational-charitable not-for-profit. You didn't actually tell anyone who to vote for, right? Just who to vote against...

And In Conclusion (I hope not)

The Brattleboro Reformer just ran an interesting article called Want a high-paying job? Move to Massachusetts. Thank you to Vermont Tiger blog for leading me to this article.

Lotus Blossom graphic from Wikimedia