Published Sunday, July 11, 1999 in The Sunday Rutland Herald and The Sunday Times Argus

Gas Pipeline Project A Huge Mistake

By ANNETTE SMITH

In his June 27 commentary, Lewis Milford claims we need natural gas power plants to produce a cleaner, more adequate power supply. But building natural gas generators in Vermont will not make our air cleaner and won't necessarily replace any existing plants. We are not going to need the additional electrical power. We need restructuring instead.

Milford, a respected environmentalist and attorney, professes a disinterested position as he addresses the issues surrounding the project. He called me on June 1 to gather information about the project and to assess my opposition. As we ended our conversation, he said, I will probably have to disagree with you on the power plants, suggesting he had already decided he was in favor of them.

I must respectfully disagree with some of his useful information

The Pipeline's Route

Referring to the pipeline, Milford says the planning process really has not begun. That comes as news to those of us who have been summoned to private meetings by New York State Electric & Gas employees who want access to our land to try and find a route. They show a cozy video about how wonderful, cheap and clean natural gas is, while we wonder why they are showing it to us since nobody in our town is going to get natural gas. They show us slides of the construction of a 16-inch natural gas pipeline, and bring a sample piece of 16-inch pipe.But the pipeline they propose to build is 24 inch. We are alarmed by the photos they show of the 75 foot to 125 foot swath they intend to clearcut and the 6 foot by 6 foot trench they will have to blast and dig for 65 miles from Bennington to Rutland. We are asked to sign survey permissions by NYSEG and State of Vermont agencies. We are told they plan to lay a conduit to hold fiber optic cable which they will put out for bid, making money from our land on which we will pay all the taxes. More than half the route runs through remote private property where nobody will get natural gas. For those of us who are affected, it is clear that a significant planning process is in effect.

Dirty Power Plants

Milford explains that Vermont electric use makes coal or oil plants run in other places, specifically the New England region.

Tom Macaulay says building these natural gas power plants in Vermont will cause dirtier power plants in the Midwest to shut down (although sometimes he says New York). Milford says that he probably has never agreed with Macaulay on anything, but it would be helpful if they would clearly state which, if any, existing power plants will shut down as a result of these Vermont plants. I have not found any mechanism that will cause a coal, oil, or nuclear power plant to shut down when a natural gas plant comes on line.

No Regional Energy Policy

Perhaps Milford's business is to try to establish such a mechanism, and that is to be applauded. But it must be clearly understood that the reason we are dealing with this project at all is because of deregulation of the construction of power plants which has left a total void in national and regional energy policy. As of 1997, there were 15 coal-fired plants in New England, mostly in Massachusetts, and 25 oil- and gas-fired plants, mostly in Connecticut. There are no coal, oil, or gas plants in Vermont. Milford's implication is that we are not consuming our fair share of pollution since our air is the 2nd cleanest in the nation. If we are to make a realistic impact on air quality, we should be working to convert the dirty power plants that exist in the states that already have natural gas. This would be a real strategy to reduce regional emissions.

More Air Pollution

Milford says that natural gas generators are cleaner than oil or coal, and that they emit extremely small amounts of nitrogen oxide. Data that I have received from Vermont's Department of Public Service shows nitrogen oxide levels from natural gas power plants to be equal to oil power plants. If these power plants are built in Vermont, we are looking at a substantial increase in toxic and greenhouse gas emissions and a decline in our air quality because we do not have any coal or oil plants to replace. The Vt. DPS document Fueling Vermont's Future says that natural gas power plants will cause emission impacts to worsen considerably. While there is no guarantee that a kid in Roxbury will see a reduction in toxic emissions as a result of these Vermont power plants, the children in Rutland and Bennington will breathe dirtier air if these plants are built.

Too Many Plants

Milford says that we need to build two or three times the number of plants now on the drawing boards. Currently on the drawing boards are 58 power plants for New England (and 10 more for New York) that would produce more than 30,000 megawatts of power. The region has a peak load of 20,000 megawatts. Vermont's peak load is 1,100 megawatts. Vt. DPS Commissioner Richard Sedano says there is a need for about 4000 to 8000 megawatts of new power in the region to replace older plants that are scheduled to go off line. My research clearly shows that if even a fraction of these proposed plants are built, we will have plenty of power in the grid. There are more than enough natural gas generators on the drawing boards to replace all the power from all the dirty plants in the region.

Not Enough Room

All of these 58 proposed plants are fighting for space at the New England Power Pool, and they all hope to be producing electricity by Nov. 2001, when those New England states that have deregulated will be able to buy power in a competitive marketplace. There are bottlenecks in the system and they must do Interconnect Studies to assure there is room for their power on the grid. New York law requires that those studies be completed at the time of filing with the Department of Public Service for their Certificate of Public Good. DPS officials tell me the proponents of this project have not even begun their studies. VELCO will be doing the studies and they gave an estimate in May to Vermont Energy Park Holdings, who have not yet signed a contract. These plants currently occupy spots 51 and 52 on the list of 58, which means there are 50 power plants ahead of these Vermont plants working to secure their space. Think of this as a risky and expensive game of musical chairs: the first plants built will be the winners, hence the incredible pressure to get these plants in Vermont on line ASAP.

No Sustainable Energy

Milford says that gas will be an important bridge to a more sustainable energy future. The proponents admit that the last priority of this project is getting natural gas to Vermonters; residential natural gas is 7 to 10 years away. Within 7 years, new technologies may make these huge, ugly, polluting power plants obsolete. The opportunity for Vermont to focus on wind, solar, hydro, and fuel cell technologies is very real and exciting. If natural gas is part of that future, it should be accomplished by respecting our environment, our citizens, and our property. The Rutland plant would be one of the largest in the country and the cost of this project is larger than the Vermont General Fund. This is the largest industrial development project ever seen in Vermont and totally out of scale to the size of this state. It will degrade the image of Vermont and damage the natural beauty of our state. This project is not a bridge, it is an obstacle to a sustainable energy future

Private Meetings vs. Public Discussion

The public discussion that Milford advocates should have begun long before the lives of the citizens of the region were disrupted. The only discussions I am aware of were essentially private meetings in Montpelier, Rutland, and Bennington. He suggests it is not too late. How can anyone have faith and confidence in an organization that has not been forthcoming from the outset? I am supportive of public discussion. If you have seen and heard the proponents, you know the frustration of not getting straight answers to even the most basic questions. I have lost count of the number of times I have heard Tom Macaulay say, I don't have those with me tonight, when asked about water usage by the power plants. If he doesn't even know the essential facts about the project, how can we be expected to have any kind of meaningful, trusting public dialogue with this company?

Information vs. Misinformation

We must all work to get our facts straight and to level with Vermonters. I have worked very hard researching and compiling material on this project, talked to anybody who will speak with me, and attended more than eight hours of presentations by the gas companies. The subject matter to be covered is very large and there are issues that I haven't even begun to research. The proponents have been asked in public what, if any, part of my information is incorrect. To date, they have never identified what they call my misinformation.

This is All About Money

I didn't start out opposing natural gas or the pipeline. I thought the information being presented by the sponsors of the power plants was scientifically inaccurate and I started looking into the details. The more I learn about the specifics of this project and witness the aggressive, out-of-state, multi-billion dollar companies behind it who will profit at our expense, the more I realize that this is all about money and not at all about the people of Vermont or our energy future.

A Natural Gas Project for Vermont

Vermonters for a Clean Environment supports a 6-inch to 8-inch natural gas pipeline in the highway right-of-way that would help fuel Vermont's energy future. Fuel cell technology is widely anticipated to revolutionize the way electricity is delivered. In a few short years, fuel cells will generate electricity by a chemical reaction rather than by burning, using any fuel that contains hydrogen. Individual homes might be the first to benefit from fuel cells, but the technology will allow entire communities to generate their own electricity.

The communities in this region, where there are clusters of houses and businesses not far from the highway corridor, would be a perfect place to develop this independent type of electricity generation. While this type of natural gas project would not generate huge profits for its investors, it would meet the needs of Vermonters, provide the infrastructure for electricity restructuring, offer a choice of fuels, make our air cleaner, and set a standard for other states to follow.

Annette Smith is spokesperson for Vermonters for a Clean Environment, based in East Arlington.