fitting topic for independence day (u.s)
The proposed pipeline people/corporation are/is facing opposition
I save up the updates until there are a few.
Here is the latest, most recent appear first.
First, Buy this #Fracking album:
Natalie Merchant et al...
from VT Digger...Addison Independent
Regulator rethinking gas pipeline
Posted on June 25,
2015 |
By
MONTPELIER
— Opponents of Vermont Gas Systems natural gas pipeline said Tuesday that the
expensive project is no longer necessary because technological advances have
obviated the need for the product.
The
comments came as the Vermont Public Service Board on Monday and Tuesday held
technical hearings on whether to revoke the permit it granted to Vermont Gas for
a 41-mile natural gas pipeline from Colchester to Middlebury. The hearings were
called to reconsider the Phase 1 permits due to significant cost increases.
Witnesses
who testified against Vermont Gas said cold climate heat pumps are an efficient
alternative heating source, home heating oil prices are low, and NG Advantage
can send natural gas on tractor-trailer trucks to industrial customers who still
want the gas.
The
Public Service Board argued in October that an economic boost was one of the
main benefits of the pipeline.
Vermont
Gas put its top executives on the witness stand during the first day of hearing
Monday. On Tuesday public advocates brought in witnesses who criticized both the
pipeline extension project and the calculations that the company has used to
justify the efficacy of the pipeline.
The
price when the Public Service Board approved the project on Dec. 23, 2013, was
$86.6 million. The new cost estimate stands at $153.6 million to build the
transmission pipeline — not including distribution costs that the company said
Monday would be $5.8 million plus $1,600 per new customer.
Vermont
Gas started construction between Colchester and Middlebury last summer, just
months before the first price increase was announced. About six miles have been
completed in Chittenden County, according to the company’s April cost update
report, and $61.5 million of the budget has been spent.
From
here, the quasi-judicial Public Service Board can issue an order to keep the
project going, or make the company re-argue for its state permit, called a
certificate of public good. In October, the board went through an identical
series of hearings but ultimately decided the project was still a benefit to the
public. This week, they appeared to be more skeptical.
“I’m
pleased that we had the chance to present our case,” said Vermont Gas President
and CEO Don Rendall. “We’ll proceed in accordance with the board’s order when
the order comes out. We’re presenting the facts as they are and doing it in as
open, direct and transparent way as we can.
“I’m
confident that our estimate is reliable,” Rendall said. “I’m confident that it
was estimated as effectively as it could be.”
Bristol
attorney Jim Dumont, who represents AARP and Kristin Lyons, pressed the Public
Service Department on several points. The department’s job is to represent the
public interest in utility cases, and the department disagreed with Dumont’s
arguments that alternative energy sources are more cost-effective than natural
gas service.
Natural
gas distribution, Dumont argued, only has about a 25 percent cost advantage over
a cold-climate heat pump. He argued that industrial customers don’t need natural
gas through a pipe because they can get it trucked in by NG Advantage.
James
Volz, the chair of the Public Service Board, also pressed on compressed natural
gas — the type of gas service that is being trucked to a so-called gas island in
Middlebury for customers including Agri-Mark’s Cabot cheese plant.
Volz
said the board should consider the gas island and natural gas infrastructure as
a “sunk cost” that companies won’t get their money back from whether the
pipeline is built or not.
Asa
Hopkins, the director of energy and policy planning for the Public Service
Department, said the efficiency of cold-climate heat pumps depends a lot on how
people use them and various weather conditions, among other things.
Hopkins
said he did not change his methods to account for compressed natural gas because
it was an unjustified, much more sweeping change to the economic modeling than
changing fuel prices or costs.
Hopkins
was the sole witness representing the Public Service Department, and he
reiterated the department’s position that the project is still in the public
good. “There is no call for a re-opened proceeding,” he said.
Reached
by phone, Chris Recchia, commissioner of the Public Service Department, said
that the department used numbers from the U.S. Energy Information Administration
that are “the most credible numbers allowable.”
“All
modeling is a matter of what assumptions you use, and we think we’ve used some
very credible assumptions,” Recchia said. “[Hopkins] didn’t have a particular
objective to come to a particular conclusion.”
HEAVY-HITTING
ECONOMIST
David
Dismukes, an economist from Louisiana State University, was Tuesday’s major
witness. AARP flew him to Vermont to defended his economic modeling, which
projects up to $200 million in lost economic activity and 3,650 lost jobs across
Vermont over a 70-year period.
Dismukes’
low-ball numbers were about $100 million in lost economic activity and 1,500
lost jobs across Vermont in a 20-year period. He also told the board that
regulators need to address risk that utility companies put on ratepayers during
capital projects like pipelines.
“Their
shareholders are going to be the ones who make that money,” Dismukes said of
Vermont Gas’ profits. “The ratepayers are going to be the ones who pay for it. …
The key to this is who bears the risk in all this.”
Hopkins,
a physicist who serves as an energy planner for the Public Service Department,
analyzed parts of Dismukes’ analysis during his own testimony. Hopkins said
Dismukes had valuable insight but overestimated employment losses.
“His
analysis assumes some continuing job loss through time, as does ours, and I
think it is actually appropriate to recognize that ongoing effect,” Hopkins
said. “The main difference as I see it … is in the question of the overall scale
and whether the results meet with a common-sense test in terms of the size of
the impact.”
Dismukes
said the economy would lose job opportunities to a pipeline that delivers fuel
instead of delivery truck drivers.
“I
like to characterize them more as ‘employment opportunities’ as opposed to
‘jobs,’” Dismukes said. “If my business goes down for five years, there are
fewer employment opportunities for five years.”
Lawyers
for Vermont Gas, whose experts used different modeling that projects a net
benefit from the $153.6 million project, also questioned Dismukes. They said
Dismukes didn’t account for delivery drivers finding new jobs.
More links/articles:
New
Report: EPA's Clean Power Plan Will Not Cause a Significant Increase in
Natural Gas ...
PSB
takes another look at Vermont Gas pipeline project
The
analysis shows that additional natural gas pipeline expenditures under
the CPP would be modest: 3% to 7% more than currently planned
through ...
|
BurlingtonFreePress.com
|
The
board has the power to halt the pipeline construction. ... He said economic
benefit is not the right reason to approve a natural gas pipeline, but
he ...
compatriot notes:
"We also believe the natural gas pipeline project will help stimulate the economy in Vermont and enhance the state’s ability to attract new business and jobs to the area." PROVE IT! What has Cabot done with their fuel cost savings?
Robert Wellington: Agri-Mark supports gas pipeline
Vermont
Gas chief: Unsure of path forward on pipeline
From UK:
compatriot notes:
"We also believe the natural gas pipeline project will help stimulate the economy in Vermont and enhance the state’s ability to attract new business and jobs to the area." PROVE IT! What has Cabot done with their fuel cost savings?
Robert Wellington: Agri-Mark supports gas pipeline
Agri-Mark
Dairy Cooperative and its family farm members strongly support the extension of
the natural gas pipeline from Chittenden County to ...
My notes: Farmers dumping milk to sustain prices, Oh and Cabot isn't a Vermont company anymore.
Next, an article that caught the eye of us Vermont "Wackos" ? :)
You can't view comments.
I commented: see below...
Mary Gerdt
Good start on your pr campaign. No to fracking is how Monkton,Vermont voted. My fight is over land rights, Canadian owned utility monopoly in Vermont, a short sighted Vermont public service board And selectmen, limited service offered with maximum environmental risk, $150+ million price for 3000 hookups (other ratepayers pay-many elderly). Oh, the original proposal said IP in NY would pay $40 Million. No more. Call us names, tear apart our arguments against high Pressure nG Transmission lines when pipefitters on crack were Caught in northern Vermont. We value our beautiful pristine state. With nG prices rising, the urgency To build a pipeline (which is secretly headed to big cities like NYC) is clear. Hopefully It will never happen.
I commented: see below...
Mary Gerdt
Good start on your pr campaign. No to fracking is how Monkton,Vermont voted. My fight is over land rights, Canadian owned utility monopoly in Vermont, a short sighted Vermont public service board And selectmen, limited service offered with maximum environmental risk, $150+ million price for 3000 hookups (other ratepayers pay-many elderly). Oh, the original proposal said IP in NY would pay $40 Million. No more. Call us names, tear apart our arguments against high Pressure nG Transmission lines when pipefitters on crack were Caught in northern Vermont. We value our beautiful pristine state. With nG prices rising, the urgency To build a pipeline (which is secretly headed to big cities like NYC) is clear. Hopefully It will never happen.
BTW, I found the articles by searching for Vermont Wackos.
They were 1 and 2 on the google search.
From the Digger:
|
vtdigger.org
|
MONTPELIER
(AP) >> The head of Vermont Gas Systems says the company will wait
to see if the state Public Service Board reopens its review of
a ...
Don't get dizzy and pardon any duplicates as you peruse this collection:
Regulators
launch Vermont Gas pipeline hearing
Vt.
PSB holds gas pipeline hearings
Vermont
Gas proposed pipeline hearing draws large crowd
PSB
takes another look at Vermont Gas pipeline project
Share
“Vermont regulators take new look at gas...”
Protestors:
"We Don't Want Your Pipeline"
Vermont
regulators take new look at gas pipeline
I live in Vremont.
Youth
climate change delegates bicycling 10000 km from Vremont to UN Climate
Conference
MONTPELIER
– Many questions to Vermont Gas Systems executives from the Public
Service Board on Monday morning centered on one theme: Why ...
|
Vermont
Public Radio
|
The
43-mile pipeline would run from Chittenden County to Middlebury. ...
Rendall maintains natural gas is safe and cheaper than oil or
propane.
|
WPTZ
The Champlain Valley
|
The
Public Service Board hosted the first day of hearings for the Vermont Gas'
proposed $154 million natural gas pipeline on Monday, June
22.
|
vtdigger.org
|
Witnesses
for Vermont Gas Systems faced detailed questions on the first day of
hearings that will determine whether the state should reopen the ...
|
WPTZ
The Champlain Valley
|
MONTPELIER,
Vt. (AP) — The president of Vermont Gas Systems told ... cost forecast for a
pipeline expansion in western Vermont is accurate now, even ...
tremendous expense of the continued reliance on natural gas," said
Sandra ...
|
My
Champlain Valley FOX44 &
ABC22
|
Board
members weighed the benefits of the fracked gas pipeline. ... “Natural
gas is less expensive than heating oil and propane and our
customers ...
|
Vermont
Public Radio
|
MONTPELIER,
Vt. — The president of Vermont Gas Systems told skeptical state
regulators Monday that the current cost forecast for a pipeline ...
Full Coverage
PSB takes another look at Vermont Gas pipeline project
by Erin Mansfield
The first day of a two-day quasi-judicial hearing into the merits of a natural gas pipeline expansion focuses on the company’s economic modeling.
Continue reading...
Share
“Vermont Gas chief: Unsure of path forward...”
Vermont
regulators take new look at gas pipeline
PSB takes another look at Vermont Gas pipeline project
by Erin Mansfield
The first day of a two-day quasi-judicial hearing into the merits of a natural gas pipeline expansion focuses on the company’s economic modeling.
Continue reading...
|
Vermont
Public Radio
|
MONTPELIER,
Vt. (AP) — The head of Vermont Gas Systems says the company will wait to
see if the state Public Service Board reopens its review a ...
Vermont
Gas System's Looking Forward to the Expansion of Its Phase I Pipelines
- TopNews United States
Full Coverage
Vermont
Gas chief: Unsure of path forward on pipeline
VT
Gas now awaits pipeline decision
|
WRGB
|
WRGB
LIVE: Day two of Vermont Gas hearing in front of Public Service Board
LIVE: Day two of Vermont Gas hearing in front of Public Service Board
Watch
the second day of a Vermont Gas hearing in front of the Public Service
Board, including testimony from land owners and other opponents to
the ...
MONTPELIER,
Vt. (AP) -- The head of Vermont Gas Systems says the company will wait to
see if the state Public Service Board reopens its review a ...
|
Vermont
Public Radio
|
MONTPELIER
– On the second day of a Public Service Board hearing to determine the fate of
the proposed expansion of the Vermont Gas
pipeline ...
|
Vermont
Public Radio
|
“These
hearings show the tremendous expense of the continued reliance on natural
gas,” said Sandra Levine, a senior attorney with the
Conservation ...
PSB
takes another look at Vermont Gas pipeline project
Opponents
make case for alternatives to gas pipeline
|
vtdigger.org
|
MONTPELIER
>> Witnesses for Vermont Gas Systems faced detailed ... a natural
gas pipeline, but he looked into the numbers from Vermont Gas
and ...
Protested,Vermont
Gas Systems' proposed gas pipeline
MONTPELIER
— More than 100 people gathered to protest Vermont Gas Systems' proposed
gas pipeline at evidentiary hearings early this week.
|
||||||||
|
Give
Vermonters natural gas option
In
Vermont, natural gas is also regulated, and rates are set by the
Public Service Board. If that were true for oil and propane companies, they
might not ...
|
|
vtdigger.org
|
Opponents
of the Vermont Gas Systems natural gas pipeline said Tuesday that the
expensive project is no longer necessary because
technological ...
I live in Vremont.
|
CNN
|
Starting
in Vermont, they have been speaking with local people organizing against the
proposed Vermont Gas Systems' pipeline, understanding
their ...
No comments:
Post a Comment
Feel free to leave comments. Have a great day in the Universe!