Expert: Seek diverse energy sources
Toolbox
By DANIEL BARLOW Vermont Press Bureau - Published: February 14, 2009
MONTPELIER – Vermont has numerous options for electricity besides the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant, but those sources will be more expensive and could increase the state's carbon emissions, an energy consultant told lawmakers Friday.
William Steinhurst, a senior consultant with Synapse Energy Economics, told members of the House and Senate energy committees that Vermont does not need to develop in-state electricity sources to replace the Vernon nuclear facility.
Steinhurst, a consultant hired by the Vermont Legislature as it considers a request from Vermont Yankee's owner to extend its operating license beyond 2012, urged lawmakers to seek a diverse energy portfolio that does not rely heavily on a few sources.
"You don't want to be in the situation again where two-thirds of your energy sources suddenly turn into pumpkins at midnight," Steinhurst said, referring to the end of contracts with Vermont Yankee and Hydro-Quebec over the next eight years.
Steinhurst told lawmakers that there are benefits to having in-state generation – such as new jobs and a boost to the tax base – but that options outside of the state could include solar, wind, hydro and other renewable sources.
"You shouldn't pay much attention to claims that we would lose a lot without the generation in Vermont," he said.
Representatives from Vermont's top two energy utilities – Central Vermont Public Service and Green Mountain Power – had a similar message to lawmakers, but stressed that they are hopeful that new contracts with Vermont Yankee can be made.
Negotiations between the two utilities and Entergy Vermont Nuclear, the owner of the power plant, are top secret. Earlier this week, key lawmakers said they doubted the Legislature would vote on relicensing without knowing details of the contracts. Gov. James Douglas' administration has
exexpressed similar concerns.
William Deehan, the vice president of power planning and regulatory affairs for CVPS, said Friday that those negotiations are still ongoing.
"We've been working with them, but we have not yet reached an agreement," Deehan said. "We are hopeful."
Doug Smith, the manager of energy resource planning and rates for GMP, said even if the utilities sign new contracts with Entergy beyond 2012, they are planning on the plant providing a smaller piece of the state's energy pie than the approximately 33 percent the plant now supplies.
"If a new contract can be made and Vermont Yankee is relicensed, we intend to purchase less and then ramp down over time," Smith said.
Both GMP and CVPS have put out bids to the regional energy markets for additional power supplies and received enthusiastic responses.
"There are a lot of people out there looking for a home, looking for people to sell power to," Deehan said.
Deehan and Smith did warn that an energy future without Vermont Yankee will likely mean higher energy costs for consumers and a larger carbon footprint for Vermont. Using a PowerPoint presentation, the two men showed that Vermont has the lowest energy rates and carbon dioxide emissions among the New England states.
"We would probably see a dramatic jump in CO2 emissions without Vermont Yankee," Smith said.
Rob Williams, a spokesman for Entergy, said Friday that the company is continuing its negotiations with the utilities, but added that even if a deal is not struck to share its power with Vermont beyond 2012, the state would still benefit from a revenue-sharing agreement built into the purchase deal when the company bought the plant in 2002.
That agreement will be null and void if the facility is not relicensed to continue producing power beyond 2012.
"With Vermont Yankee in operation, it also means continued employment for about 500 employees and their wages, taxes and local purchases will remain a major driver of the economy in southern Vermont for the next 20 years," Williams said in an e-mail.
Contact Daniel Barlow at Daniel.Barlow@timesargus.com.
5