Reality Check

Politics by Emerson Lynn 

ISO-New England is an “independent system operator” established by the federal government in 1997 to oversee and to assume responsibility for the reliability of the electricity demands in Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island and Vermont.

On Monday, the organization essentially said the reliability of New England’s electric grid would be put at risk if Vermont Yankee were not part of the region’s baseload power providers.

The issue came up because ISO-New England earlier this month conducted its fourth “Forward Capacity Market” auction, which is its effort to secure a commitment from the region’s energy providers as to what level of power they will be able to provide in future years. This particular auction was for 2013-2014 and it procured 37,501 megawatts for a market that needs an estimated 32,127 megawatts of capacity.

By law, all generators are obligated to participate in the auction and if one wants to opt out it needs to notify the ISO before or during the auction. Entergy, the owners of Vermont Yankee took that option and notified the group during the auction that it wanted out. Vermont Yankee officials did not elaborate as to why, but according to the rules a company faces financial penalties if it fails to meet its commitment. Vermont Yankee obviously has no assurance it will be allowed to operate beyond 2012, which is when its license expires. If it does not have that assurance, then why would it be part of an auction process for 2013-2014?

That aside, the more important news is ISO-New England’s determination as to how important Vermont Yankee is to New England’s electricity needs. The plant is one of New England’s top ten power producers. Without it, the group Monday provided the following comment:

“Studies for future system needs in Vermont and New Hampshire have been ongoing for more than a year and are being updated to reflect the possibility of a Vermont Yankee shutdown in order to identify impacts on the regional power system. The studies completed so far have shown that with or without Vermont Yankee, the system in Vermont has reliability issues that must be addressed; without Vermont Yankee in service, those issues are more severe and could affect neighboring areas. The potential reliability issues could include thermal overloads on high-voltage transmission lines and voltage instability, either of which could damage equipment, compromise grid stability, or cause uncontrolled outages.”

This observation comes from ISO-New England. They don’t have a dog in Vermont’s political fight as to whether the plant is relicensed or not. It’s an independent group whose sole responsibility is to make sure the power grid for our five-state area is reliable and as competitively priced as possible. The group’s warning is clear: Without Vermont Yankee there is the very real concern of impending power outages and the system’s overall stability. ISO officials say it’s more than the fact Vermont Yankee is a large producer of electricity, its physical location on the grid contributes disproportionately to the system’s stability and voltage needs. If it does close, part of the system’s stability goes with it.

That’s not a feel good situation for Vermont, or its businesses. If Vermont Yankee is closed down the state is immediately in a position where it will need to spend many millions more to upgrade its transmission system, which is a long-term project, or, in the words of Monday’s ISO report, immediate needs could include “interim solutions such as emergency generation brought into Vermont temporarily, more expensive generation from outside Vermont, and demand-side resources.”

These are not cheap options. Keep in mind that Vermont routinely needs about 700 megawatts of power, and its peak needs top 1,000 megawatts of power. Vermont Yankee and Hydro-Quebec produce more than two-thirds of our needs. Vermont Yankee alone supplies about 35 percent of our energy requirements and 28 percent of our peak load needs.

If Vermont Yankee is shut down, the state has no ability to make up the difference. And as important as renewable energy sources are, it’s generally assumed that in the near term renewables cannot contribute more than about 60 megawatts of the state’s energy needs – and that’s being generous.

Where do we get that missing power? From the grid. And it will be dirtier and costlier than what we have with Vermont Yankee. According to the folks whose job it is to speak directly to the reliability of future power requirements, we’ve got a problem if Vermont Yankee is out of the mix. And understandably, the other states in the region can’t be too happy about it. They are already beginning to talk about how the cost should not be borne by them, but by Vermont. If we cause the problem [deny the company its license] then Vermont should share more of the burden in making sure the energy source is replaced.

For Vermonters, this is an important reality flash. Shutting down Vermont Yankee has been dismissed as no big deal, that the energy can be easily and cheaply replaced and that the job losses can be countered by new jobs in renewables. That’s been the mantra preached by Peter Shumlin the architect of the primary effort to shut Vermont Yankee down.

He’s wrong and his direction would cost Vermont substantially. That’s not a political conclusion, that’s the conclusion of the folks whose job it is to keep the power running at affordable rates.

Emerson Lynn is editor & publisher of the St. Albans Messenger where this essay first appeared.

Comments

[Cheshire Cat]

"Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake."
- Napoleon Bonaparte 1769-1821)

This could be the demise of the Progs. Stupidity on this grand a scale has to make a huge mess and leave a large fingerprint.

[Gary Richardson]

About three years ago Vermont State Senator Peter Shumlin shut down the Legislature for about the first three weeks of the new session to learn about global warming. Speakers and experts were trotted in. His pet news media believers thought this was wonderful. They dutifully reported that the results of this global warming disaster could be averted by shutting down America. Then it turns out that their global warming research is bogus, with the United Nations, of all organizations, having driven the final nail into the coffin of phony global warning just yesterday.
Now his same sort of approach to save us all from nuclear power is to shut down Vermont Yankee. However, we now learn that their "studies" are running up against the reality of the results of shutting down Vermont Yankee as detailed by the ISO-New England, an organization that is actually knowledgeable in the subject of power requirements of New England and the loss of Vermont Yankee nuclear power. The high cost of shutting down VY will very possibly have to be paid by the Vermont taxpayers. And he's running for Governor. Wow. Save your money, folks. You'll need the cash to keep the lights burning. (Thank you, Mr. Lynn. You've done us a great service by your writing.)

[Bill]

Cheaply? Forcing the electric utilities to pay well north of .20 kWh for politically generated renewable power? And what are they going to then turn around and charge us for that power?

If Shumlin is elected and Vermont Yankee shut down, expect your power bill to at least double within three years.

[Jim Howrigan]

When my car starts to fall apart and repairs are too costly to be economical, I don't replace it with a bicycle or even 10 bicycles, I buy a new, more efficient, more reliable car.

Vermont should temporarily re-license Vermont Yankee while we seek out some entity willing to build one, or even two, new nuclear plants on the site.

Property values already reflect the presence of Vermont Yankee and the locals have had 40 years to move out if they don't like its presence. Plus, added bonus, nuclear power keeps the price of firewood lower per cord down in the Upper Valley than up here near Burlington Electric.

A new nuclear plant- not windmills for still frigid Februarys and photovoltaics for dark cloudy Novembers- is what Vermont needs.