Guest blog: Stating the case for renewable energy in Vermont

Kathryn Blume, a friend who is active in Vermont energy and climate circles, posted the following on Facebook today.  I like it, and asked for permission to repost here:

There's been a peck of absurd hoo-ha and some childish fol-de-rol here in Charlotte [a town near Burlington, Vt.] over concerns about renewable energy projects sullying some obscure form of virginity possessed by our fair and delicate town.

In response, I posted this on FPF [Front Porch Forum], and have received messages of kudos, gratitude, and approval--some by folks feeling a little too shy to stick their neck out for the cause. On behalf of all you concerned-but-retiring peeps out there, I am happy to re-post:

"While I appreciate everyone's concern for the politics, economics, and logistics of siting "industrial" energy-generation projects in Charlotte, I think it's important to keep in mind the fact that climate change is accelerating rapidly, and addressing it requires that we get off fossil fuels as quickly as possible.

"We demand abundant energy--exactly when we want it--to power every aspect of our lives. While one might be uncomfortable with the look of a field full of solar panels, or a wind turbine on a ridge top, they hardly rival the massive impacts of true industrial energy generation: entire mountains and forests destroyed due to mountaintop removal coal mining and tar sands extraction, earthquakes and poisoned groundwater due to fracking, massive offshore oil spills collapsing entire marine ecosystems, pristine rivers polluted by leaking pipelines, communities endangered by exploding oil trains...the list goes on.

"The big difference is that we don't live in Alberta or the Gulf Coast or Appalachia or Nigeria or Lac-Mégantic or San Martín Texmelucan de Labastida or Arkansas or Oklahoma or Montana or Michigan - so we don't have to experience the consequences of all that firsthand. We just get to benefit from the results.

"Of course, it's important that energy generated in Vermont stay in Vermont and benefit Vermonters. And yes, the politics and policies can be complex, and we do need to engage them consciously and deliberately. But ultimately, if we're going to power our lives, then the least we can do is take responsibility for it."

So there.

Pricing carbon in Vermont

The following letter to the editor (from yours truly) appeared in the Valley News on Friday, 13 February:

Charge for Carbon Pollution

To the editor:

As California's massive drought rolls on and Boston is buried in record snowfalls, it's apparent that something is going wrong with our planet's climate.

If you're like me and many others concerned about global warming and the unplanned experiment we are currently carrying out on the climate of the only livable planet we know of, you should be aware of a coming campaign to put a price on carbon pollution in Vermont. This campaign, under the name Energy Independent Vermont, will seek to reduce Vermont's carbon pollution, benefit the state's economy and create jobs, and do so in a way that is fair to low-income Vermonters. You can find out more about it at energyindependentvt.org.

Please join me and many other Vermonters in this effort to make carbon polluters pay while at the same time helping homeowners save energy and money. It's that simple.

Climate tweets for 12 June 2014

Anger rises as India swelters under record heat wave: @Reuters 
http://in.reuters.com/article/2014/06/12/uk-india-heatwave-idINKBN0EN0T420140612

As World Cup Begins, Deadly Floods Threaten Host City: @climateprogress
http://thkpr.gs/1v3McDh
[Brazil, flooding]

Maine Confronts Shellfish Threats As Oceans Turn More Acid: @MPBNnews: http://www.mpbn.net/Home/tabid/36/ctl/ViewItem/mid/5347/ItemId/34177/Default.aspx
[acidification]

U. of Vermont climate change study projects snow, followed by rain: @vtdigger 
http://vtdigger.org/2014/06/11/uvm-climate-change-study-projects-snow-followed-rain/
[science]

22 Devastating Effects Of Climate Change, Including Tiny Horses: @BusInsiderAU 
http://www.businessinsider.com.au/effects-of-climate-change-2014-6
[science]

Coal Co. CEO Threatens to Sue @EPA for ‘Lying’ About Climate Change: http://thkpr.gs/1uTsrye 
[Robert Murray, Murray Energy, denial]

California Drought Outlook: ‘Disastrous Consequences’ If 2015 Is Dry: @KQED
http://blogs.kqed.org/science/2014/06/11/drought-outlook-disasterous-consequences-if-2015-is-dry/
[water, food, farming, agriculture]

Early Summer Heat Broils Northern Hemisphere: @WUnderground 
http://www.wunderground.com/blog/weatherhistorian/comment.html?entrynum=280 … 
[heat waves]

RT EcoWatch @EcoWatch:
Sierra Club Ad Campaign Targets Legislators Who Let Wind PTC Blow Away @BeyondCoal @maryannehitt 
http://ow.ly/xWboq
[wind energy, wind power, renewable energy]

RT Heidi Cullen @HeidiCullen:
Climate change has kicked up Brazil's temps since it last hosted the World Cup in 1950: 
http://bit.ly/1oOweuF http://pic.twitter.com/cFGblLNVYo
[science]

Misinformation in Vermont's wind power debate

Vermont's State Senate is currently debating a bill, S. 30, that would impose a set of new restrictions on the siting of renewable energy facilities in the state.  I'm opposing this bill, which would throw another roadblock in the path of efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.  If you would like more information on this debate, a good basic resources is the Vermont Public Interest Research Group's Support Wind page.

This specific post responds to a post on the Norwich, Vermont, town listserve by Ms. Clare Holland, of Sharon, Vt., who is a supporter of S. 30.  I've responded briefly on the listserve, but said I'd add some comments here for those who want more detail.

A few errors and omissions from Ms. Holland's posting:

- Ms. Holland makes much of the fact that only 4% of Vermont's carbon dioxide emissions are from electricity generation. In fact, consumption of electrical power in Vermont accounts for much more than that, because all marginal consumption is provided by fossil plants elsewhere in the region. Vermont uses/consumes 5.6 billion kilowatt-hours of electricity a year, which at the marginal New England emissions rate of 0.943 pounds per kilowatt-hour equals 2.64 million tons of CO2 attributable to electricity consumption in Vermont. Adding that to the 6.3 million tons of CO2 actually emitted in Vermont means electricity consumption accounts for 30% of Vermont’s CO2 emissions, not 4%.  The cost of operating a wind farm is very low, so whenever the wind is blowing, the electricity it generates displaces electricity from the most expensive (usually oldest and most polluting) power plant on the New England ISO utility system.

- New renewable energy power plants in Vermont are already subject to the same aesthetic and other standards as are contained in Act 250.  The key difference is that under Section 248, the Act-250-like permitting regulation that governs power plants and infrastructure, there is no local veto.  Why?  Because a balance must be struck between finding a way to produce the energy we all need and the rights of people to object to projects "in their back yard."  Section 248 represents that balance, negotiated over a number of years through the legislative process.  Now the State Senate, after a few weeks of discussion which have been notable for the circulation of wild misinformation about wind, proposes to toss that process out the window.

- With respect to bird fatalities at wind farms, the answer is simple: wind farms are not a threat to birds in general.  A recent study estimates that U.S. cats kill 2.4 billion birds a year, while a summary of studies from more than 100 wind farms results in a finding that less than 200,000 die as a result of colliding with wind turbines.  In short, cats kill more birds in one hour than all U.S. wind farms do in a year.

Additional resources:

Article from Green Mountain Daily that explains just how thorough Vermont's existing siting process is
Opinion article on S. 30 from Johanna Miller, energy program director at Vermont Natural Resources Council

Early ending: Maple sugar and global warming

Latest letter to the editor. Local papers offer an excellent opportunity for climate activism and education. The Valley News, for example, will basically print any letter of 350 words or less, and asks only that writers refrain from writing more than once every two weeks.  Pretty hard to beat.  The only defect is that they don't have a web version.


Letter to the Editor - Valley News (Lebanon, N.H.) - March 20, 2012 (Links added)


To the Editor:

Your article "Sap Flow Ends Early: Sugaring Ending When It Typically Would Be Taking Off" (Mar. 19) is one more indication that climate change is upon us, and the weather and world ahead will not be what they used to be.  Strangely, the article did not mention climate, nor did another ("Spring Comes to the Fore: Weather Creates Early Golf Start") the same day, but it's getting more and more difficult to ignore what is going on.

What does the future hold for maple sugaring?  Likely nothing good--to date, producers have managed to stay more or less even with the warming weather by using new technology, but climate change is like rust in that it never sleeps.  A good source for readers who would like to know more is a five-minute YouTube video titled "No Maple Syrup by 2100?"  It tells the fascinating story of Martha Carlson, a New Hampshire sugar producer who decided to become a tree researcher and PhD student at the age of 61 after she saw the quality of the syrup from her trees declining.   The video quotes the U.S. Forest Service as the source for the simple statement, "Most of the sugar maple is likely to be gone by 2100 due to climate change."  It adds that climate change threatens the $3 million maple sugar industry and the $292 million foliage tourism industry.

Anyone concerned about climate change and the prospect it offers--weather disruption, threats to plant and animal species, and more--should consider joining Citizens' Climate Lobby, a group that is seeking to persuade Congress to pass a gradually escalating carbon tax, with the proceeds distributed to all Americans as a dividend.  That may not happen this year or next, but climate change is not going away.

Thomas O. Gray


[In related news, see The End of Maple? for a first-person account of this year's sugaring "season."]