|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
By Guy Page
Eagle-eyed New England energy observer Meredith Angwin of Wilder pointed out an inconvenient fact on X this Monday: when it’s cold (like this week) and people are home more than usual (like this week), ‘green’ New England burns oil and coal to make electricity.
“We are having our first real cold snap,” the author of Shorting the Grid said five days ago. “It will get below zero F tonight. And at 4:15 p.m. our grid was already dependent on oil.”
Indeed. According to another Dec. 23 (11;55 AM) ISO-New England energy resource snapshot posted early this week by Angwin, about one one in eight (12%) of all kilowatts were generated by burning oil.
Here’s why. Around 4 PM, many people are home, cooking, washing, viewing TV and computers – in other words, consuming more power than at, say, 4 AM. At these ‘peak’ times on cold days, New England starts to run low on electricity-making natural gas.
The problem isn’t lack of supply. Billions of square ft. of natural gas wait to be ‘wheeled’ through existing pipelines from the nearby Marcellus shale natural gas fields in New York and Pennsylvania.
The problem is transportation. Climate-minded New England energy legislators and regulators, prompted by climate change advocacy organizations, have stalled efforts to build more pipeline capacity.
Natural gas is a dual-purpose fuel. Across New England it’s the #1 electricity fuel and the #2 heating fuel (after heating oil and kerosene).
Thanks to Vermont’s large, hard-working, decentralized network of heating oil fuel dealers, and the renewable-preferring state government’s opposition to extending natural gas lines, heating fuels like oil, propane and kerosene provide about 59% of the Green Mountain State’s heat. Gas is just 18%, most of it in northwestern Vermont.
However, the more populous southern New England states are far more reliant on natural gas to stay warm. When the mercury falls in Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Connecticut, there’s not enough natural gas to go around.
As the temps plummet, southern New Englanders turn up the heat and turn on their appliances (they’re inside, remember?). If natural gas was their only option, energy operators and regulators face a Sophie’s Choice: keep ‘em warm, or keep on the electricity?
Of course, choosing between freezing and darkness is unacceptable. So the operators (maybe) ask homeowners to conserve, and then prioritize natural gas supplies to keep people warm. ISO-New England, the regional electricity grid, picks up the electricity slack by burning other fuels. Fuels like coal and oil.
There was a time, just over a decade ago, that New England could rely on four nuclear power plants to provide 24/7/365 low cost, zero-carbon electricity. But when the powerful renewable industry and friendly lawmakers and regulators prevented new utility contracts with Vermont Yankee and Pilgrim (Plymouth, MA), those plants were quite intentionally thrown on the mercy of the natural-gas glutted open market.
Those closures left only Seabrook in New Hampshire and Millstones 1&2 in Connecticut. Efforts to build high-transmission lines from Canada, and offshore wind, have not born fruit. Coal-burning plants too have been shut down. But still the grid carries enough ‘emergency’ oil and coal-burning generation to keep the lights on – barring a perfect storm of a severe Polar Vortex and unforeseen fuel transportation and electricity transmission problems.
In bullet-point form, here’s an overview of New England’s cold-weather energy challenges, and possible solutions.
1. Pipeline Constraints and Energy Access
- Pipeline Development Opposition: The lack of sufficient natural gas pipeline infrastructure in New England has created bottlenecks, even though the region is geographically close to abundant gas resources in the Marcellus Shale. Resistance to building pipelines often stems from environmental concerns, land use conflicts, and local opposition.
- Import Reliance: Due to pipeline constraints, New England sometimes imports liquefied natural gas (LNG) from overseas, which is typically more expensive than domestic pipeline-delivered gas.
2. Fuel Prioritization During Winter
- Residential Heating Priority: Natural gas providers prioritize home heating, which means power plants often struggle to secure enough gas during peak winter demand. This “dual-fuel” system means that many power plants switch to burning oil when natural gas isn’t available.
- Environmental and Economic Costs: Using oil for power generation is less efficient and emits more carbon dioxide than natural gas. It’s also subject to price volatility and potential supply challenges.
3. Coal and Nuclear Plant Closures
- Like other regions, New England is witnessing the retirement of coal and nuclear plants, which historically provided stable, baseload power. This increases reliance on natural gas and intermittent renewable energy sources.
- The loss of nuclear, in particular, removes a significant low-carbon energy source, complicating efforts to decarbonize the grid.
Possible Solutions:
- Energy Infrastructure Investments:
- Advocate for carefully planned pipeline expansions to increase access to Marcellus gas, with environmental safeguards to address concerns.
- Explore regional LNG storage and delivery options for peak demand periods.
- Diversification of Energy Sources:
- Accelerate investments in renewable energy, like wind and solar, alongside grid-scale battery storage to ensure reliability.
- Consider keeping remaining nuclear plants operational where feasible or investing in next-generation nuclear technology.
- Demand-Side Management:
- Encourage energy efficiency measures and demand response programs to reduce peak heating and electricity demand in winter.
Follow Meredith Angwin on her Substack column, “The Electric Grandma.”
The author served with Angwin on the ISO-New England Community Liason Group.
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Energy
Hey….here’s the plan
https://rumble.com/v6337tw-if-you-can-control-energy-you-can-control-human-beings.-a-flawless-one-minu.html
Best way to avoid the gov’t control and the associated taxation on heating fuel…cut your own wood or pay a willing wood dealer cash under the table…Burning wood really burns taxation and control-freak democrats.
Vermonters still love their wood… given the richness of our cellulose legacy here, that only makes common sense.
Shall we mention the efficacy of ‘radiant heat’ vs. blown air heat?
SMH Especially important for older Vermonters whose thermometers don’t work as well (metabolism)… I know health is directy tied to the ability to get and stay warm from the inside out, not the inside in (definition of radiant).
This link is worth its weight in gold. Take a minute and watch it.
Obviously, Massachusetts policymakers intend to strike natural gas from the energy mix to comply with ill-conceived greenhouse reduction goals, but with 52% of Mass. households heating with NG and the ISO-NE wholesale energy market dominated by natural gas plant output, the answer isn’t to constrict this resource or to replace it with intermittent wind and solar.
Compounding the issue is the policies and incentives driving the switch to electric heat pumps and EVs.
The states of Maine and Vermont will suffer the most with winter blackouts as below zero temperatures are common.
There is some merit for Maine and Vermont, both with shared generation and transmission lines with Canada, to end participation in the ISO-NE network and join with Canada to form a new RTO.
Maine weather is more like Canadian weather. Canadian electricity rates hover around 14 cents per kilowatt hour, is as green as New England’s electricity and besides. heavyweight Massachusetts pretty much controls ISO-NE.
The weird thing about Massachusetts’ high natural gas heating load (52%) is how little gas gets to Maine natural gas-fired electrical generation plants during the winter months, which are the State’s peak load months.
A collision course to an outright energy battle is about to explode between the Northern and Southern New England States with unsustainable policies driving it.
Great stuff Guy Page! The elephant in the room is the notion that renewables can somehow be the energy source for the future, now incorporated by statute into Vermont law. If policymakers don’t concentrate on the recommendations you make Vermont and New England will descend into a cul-de-sac of energy scarcity and economic poverty. The U-turn cannot come soon enough.
Repealing the Global Warming Solutions Act, the Clean Heat Standard, and the 100% Renewable by 2030 laws (the Big 3) should be a priority for the incoming legislature. The tectonic shift in representation that voters deemed necessary in the last election cannot be considered anything but a mandate for the changes you recommend.
Yes, trash the whole package. Totally pie in the sky and economically unsustainable.
My firm researched, purchased, and installed the most efficient, oil burner- steam boiler system commercially available. A “technician” employed by our fuel oil supplier made the final adjustments.
Results printed by a combustion analyzer were far less than specified by the system vendor. CO level was way beyond allowable limits. Another, local, “technician” claiming boiler experience was contracted. Combustion efficiency was little better. This time with 740 deg F. stack temperature!
Out of desperation I contracted with the burner manufacturer, Carlin, In New Haven, CT. At significant cost, the manufacturer sent their director of training. Within a couple hours the boiler was operating at greater efficiency than advertised with minimal emissions.
The training director lamented Vermont has the least training requirement for burner technicians of all the northeast states. That many are freelancing with no formal training in combustion engineering. That if Vermont demanded manufacturer certification of burner technicians, home owners on average would enjoy 10%-20% less usage with far less emissions.
I contacted area legislators making the case for this common sense legislation over taxing fuel oil to discourage consumption. Evidently their low IQs failed to comprehend such win-win logic.
A couple of tid-bits you may find interesting. Green Mountain power Has a large very old turbine in Berlin. when it’s up and running at 100% it consumes 7500 gallons of Kerosene an hour. If I remember correctly they have 5 other diesel plants for peak power. When the thermometer drops below zero for 3 consecutive days large industrial consumer of natural gas are required to switch to oil until the supply In Canada can catch up. Some of those large customers include UVM the UVM medical center and the Whey plant in Georgia. I’m sure there are others but those I remember delivering the evil oil too before I retired
Why not just look at what is going on with the EU after the Nord Stream pipeline was sabatoged. Forcing the EU to buy natural gas and coal from the USA – adding time, additional resources, and costs to shipping fuel across the ocean, then trucking it to it’s destination. (Green Energy does not power tankers, by sea or road, filled with coal or natural gas – in case the greentards can’t figure out how the world actually receives it’s vital supplies) Now Germany is in a vicious recession after being the powerhouse economic engine (and preferred lender) for the EU.
The globalists push the lies, cause the supply chain disruptions, force shortages, force the prices higher, and guess what? They all have the stock options in their portfolios making big bank off others misery. Racketeering has never been so profitable in the modern era as it is now for the despots and their global cartels.
Here is a wonderful video all those in Montpelier and our education should watch
https://twitter.com/i/status/1872855650394619946
BLACKMAIL, BRIBERY, EMBEZZLEMENT, AND EXTORTION ARE A DIRTY BUSINESS.
We had an Attorney General that made it his goal to go after Vermont Yankee. So we now only have crime and drugs to light up our homes.