Vermont has set a voluntary goal to have 90% RE of all primary energy by 2050, not just electrical energy, which is only 35% of all primary energy, as described in the Comprehensive Energy Plan, CEP, of 2016.


Vermont’s goal of attaining 90% of its energy from renewables by 2050 would require capital investments of at least $33.3 billion during the 2017-2050 period, or about $1 billion per year, according to Vermont Energy Action Network’s 2015 annual report. That is not counting interest and finance charges and replacements and refurbishments due to wear and tear. See Page 6 of annual report.


During the 2016-2050 period, there would be population and gross state product growth. The above $33 billion likely would not be sufficient. That burden is far in excess of what the anemic, near zero, real-growth Vermont economy could afford. 


Implementing the Plan: Implementing the CEP would require utility purchases of electricity to increase from 6,135,922 MWh in 2014, to about 9,066,279 MWh in 2050, a 48% increase, per GMP estimates; EAN estimates are over 10 million MWh.


The capital cost of Vermont’s energy transformation would involve:


- 90% of the electricity supply to be from RE sources

- 90% of other primary energy to be from RE sources.

- EVs (car, SUV, minivan, 1/4-ton truck) replacing almost all light-duty IC vehicles, plus tens of thousands of chargers.

- Cold climate heat pumps replacing existing systems for space heating/cooling and domestic hot water for almost all buildings.

- Upgrading the energy efficiency of almost all buildings.


Doing away with fossil fuels would imply highways would be built/repaired with renewable energy. Asphalt for road and driveway surfacing, made from tar from refineries, would no longer be available.


Vermont’s Projected Electric Load: Green Mountain Power (GMP), which sells about 77% of all electricity in Vermont, has prepared an Integrated Source Plan (ISP), which shows its load projection by 2050. See URLs from GMP site.

According to the Utility Facts report, prepared by the Department of Public Service (DPS), the utility data are as shown in the table. It is shocking more recent GMP and DPS data are not readily available to the public in user-friendly format.








GMP sales



Other utilities sales



Total sales



Total utility purchases



T & D loss




NOTE: According to the ISP, pages 2.11, 2.13












GMP purchases





GMP sales





GMP T&D loss





- GMP did not explain the basis for its T&D loss being about 50% less than DPS percentages.

- GMP projected an increase of 1,849,238 MWh due to electric vehicles and heat pumps, for a total of 6,981,035 MWh in 2050, of which 90%, or 6,282,932 MWh, would be from RE sources and 10%, or 698,104 MWh, from fossil fuels.

- Total utility purchases (GMP + other utilities) would be 9,066,279 MWh, of which 90%, or 8,159,651 MWh, would be from RE sources, including T&D losses, in 2050.


The below tables summarize the above values:


- The bold values were taken from DPS and GMP reports and the other values were extrapolated.

- Actual T&D losses for 2010 and 2011 were extrapolated for subsequent years.

- The GMP percentage, about 77% of total utility purchases in 2010 and 2011, was assumed to remain the same.



GMP sales

Other sales

Total sales

Total load

T&D Loss

Loss %








2010, DPS







2011, DPS







2014, ISP, EIA*







2035, ISP







2050, ISP








Projected Load


Other Utilities






2050, per ISP*





Incremental; EVs & HPs

EVs and HPs





2050, per ISP




RE 90%




FF 10%




NOTE: The graph on page 3 - 29 of the ISP shows purchases under PPAs of about 2.65 million MWh/y, undefined purchases of about 2.48 million MWh/y, and a total projected GMP load of about 5,131,797 MWh/y in 2050*.


*The graph shows about 5.0 million MWh for 2035, but the ISP shows 5,131,797 MWh for 2050, which is a small increase for 15 years.


NOTE: The GMP graph should have started at 2009, instead of 2015, to better illustrate the changes due to VY, H-Q and Seabrook. For a more informative graph, see page E-7 of Utility Facts report.

NOTE: Vermont utilities purchase energy from:


1) Suppliers with whom they have power purchase agreements, PPAs

2) Directly on the spot market at wholesale prices; those wholesale prices have averaged about 5 c/kWh for the past 5 years.

Utilities make periodic payments to their suppliers, per PPAs.


NOTE: The NE grid electricity mix is about 50% gas, 25% nuclear, and 25% other. Every ratepayer consumes the NE mix.

Electricity Mix Based on Power Purchase Agreements: There are non-technical people talking about the “Vermont electricity mix” or the “New Hampshire electricity mix”. That mix exists only on paper, because it is based on power purchase agreements, PPAs, between utilities and owners of electricity generators. A utility may claim it is 100% renewable. This means the utility has PPAs with owners of renewable generators, i.e. wind, solar, biomass, hydro, etc. That mix has nothing to do with physical reality.


Electricity Mix Based on Physical Reality: Once electricity is fed into the NE electric grid by any generator, it travels:


- On un-insulated wires, as electromagnetic waves, EM, at somewhat less than the speed of light, i.e. from northern Maine to southern Florida, about 1800 miles in 0.01 of a second, per College Physics 101.

- On insulated wires, the speed decreases to as low as 2/3 the speed of light, depending on the application.


If those speeds were not that high, the NE electric grid would not work, and modern electronics would not work.


The electrons vibrate at 60 cycles per second, 60 Hz, and travel at less than 0.1 inch/second; the reason it takes so long to charge a battery.


It is unfortunate most high school teachers told students the electrons were traveling.

Teachers likely never told them about EM waves, or did not know it themselves.


This article explains in detail what happens when electricity is fed to the grid.


NOTE: If you live off the grid, have your own PV system, batteries, and generator for shortages and emergencies, then you can say I use my own electricity mix. If you are connected to the GMP grid, which is connected to the NE grid, and draw from any socket, then you draw the NE mix.

Vermont Utilities “Making Room” For Renewable Energy: The below table shows Vermont utilities decreased their purchases of low-cost, near-CO2-free, steady electricity by 2,256,205 MWh/y due to:


- The Vermont Yankee supply being replaced by a lesser Seabrook supply

- The H-Q supply being reduced under a new, but lesser PPA starting in 2017


The total decrease is 37% of 2011 utility purchases, per pages E-6, 7, and 8 of Utility Facts. See below table.


Utility Purchases


All utilities in 2011


VY in 2011




Nuclear decrease


H-Q in 2011


H-Q in 2017*


Hydro decrease


Total decrease



* GMP’s portion is about 1,000,000 MWh


Filling the “Room” with RE Sources: The GMP ISP aims to transition away from a few large PPAs towards smaller, more diverse, distributed energy sources; an "all of the above" approach favored by RE proponents. In practice, that means the 2,256,205 MWh/y would be replaced with mostly in-state and out-of-state, wind and solar energy, as it becomes available, during the 2016 - 2050 period.


In the meantime, GMP, et al., plan to buy energy at NE wholesale prices, and under small, shorter-term PPAs from diverse, distributed sources to fill any energy shortages. The replacement wind and solar energy would be:


- Non-dispatchable, and

- Variable, intermittent, i.e., low-quality, grid disturbing, with

- Solar providing zero synchronous rotational inertia to help stabilize the grid, and 

- Wind providing asynchronous, variable, rotational inertia, which could adversely affect grid stability, and all that at

- High-cost, 2 - 5 times NE wholesale prices, which have averaged about 5 c/kWh for the past 5 years, due to the NE grid having energy from low-cost nuclear (about 25%) and low-cost natural gas (about 50%).


The above tables show, projected utility purchases would be about 9,066,279 MWh/y by 2050. The projected energy difference of 9.07 million MWh, projected load in 2050, less 2.90 million MWh, existing PPAs, page E-7 of Utility Facts = 6.17 million MWh/y by 2050.


- Filling the “room” with 90% RE, mostly wind and solar energy, would significantly increase electric rates, and also would increase the cost of operating EVs and heat pumps.

- However, most of that cost increase could be avoided by having a much greater supply of low-cost, hydro energy from H-Q.


However, GMP Refusing Additional Hydro Energy from Hydro-Quebec: GMP could lower costs for Vermonters, but refuses to do so. According to Donald Jessome, CEO and president of TDI New England, 200 MW of the recently approved, 1000 MW, HVDC line, owned by Blackstone, is reserved for Vermont. “Vermont has the option to purchase up to 200 megawatts, but Jessome said he doesn’t expect the state to take advantage of that option.”


Apparently, Green Mountain Power prefers to buy much higher-cost wind and solar energy from a variety of local suppliers. The 200 MW could provide about 1.3 million MWh/y, replacing most of what Vermont lost when Vermont Yankee was shut down in 2014.

But Vermont utilities have shown little interest in the 200 MW, because of the CEP politically inspired penchant for much higher cost wind and solar electricity, so-called “local, small-scale, distributed generation”. In fact, as shown above, Vermont utilities have steadily reduced future HQ electricity supplies, as PPAs expired.

From GMP’s viewpoint, it is understandable not to go with the 200 MW, because it does very little for GMP’s asset base, on which GMP earns about 9+%/y. Instead, GMP prefers to own/lease to ratepayers heat pumps (made in Japan), solar systems (PV panels made in China with dirty coal plants) and Tesla Powerwall 2.0 batteries (made in Nevada), because that adds to GMP’s asset base on which it earns 9+%/y, and helps GMP collect federal and state ITC cash grants, federal and state tax savings due to 5-y write-offs, and other subsidies, to minimize paying federal and state taxes (no wonder Vermont’s government is not collecting enough taxes year after year), and increase its net profit. Buying electricity from other producers, such as H-Q, does none of that. It has to do about the bottom line and nothing with saving the world. That is just window dressing

Vermont Example of Electricity Storage With Powerwall 2.0s: If 250,000 households in Vermont had Powerwall 2.0s, they could provide about 4.74 hours of electricity to the Vermont grid, assuming:


1) No losses

2) All Powerwalls would be fully charged

3) All Powerwalls would be fully discharged.


Covering a 6-day wind lull in winter (solar would be minimal as well) would require 144/4.74 x 250,000 = 7.6 million Powerwall units at a capital cost of $60.8 billion. The Powerwalls have a useful life of about 10  - 12 years and likely would be returned to Tesla for “processing”. The cost /kWh of that approach would be expensive.


After the 6-day wind lull, it would need to be windy for some days to provide electric service and recharge the Powerwalls, which would need to be ready for the next wind lull; all that time solar would be minimal.


NOTE: H-Q hydro, unwisely being rejected by GMP, et al., and Vermont Yankee nuclear, unwisely hounded to close down, would have provided near-CO2-free, low-cost, steady, electricity, 24/7/365, for all of Vermont, rain or shine.





Capital cost

250,000 x $8000

$2 billion

Vermont consumption

6,100,000 MWh/y/8766 h/y

696 MWh/h


250,000 x 13.2 kWh

3300 MWh.



4.74 hours

Hydro-Quebec A Much Better Alternative Than Standard Offer: Hydro-Quebec has about 5600 MW of spare hydro plant capacity, and has under construction and in planning stages an additional 5000 MW of hydro plant capacity. Here a list of the benefits of hydro energy:


- Clean (no particulates, no SOX, no NOx)

- Low-cost (5 - 7 c/kWh, plus 1 c/kWh for transmission), much less than wind and solar

- Very low CO2/kWh emissions, much lower than wind and solar

- Steady, 24/7/365 energy, i.e., NOT variable and NOT intermittent, unlike wind and solar, which are weather dependent, variable cloudiness dependent, night and day dependent, and season dependent

- NO federal and state subsidies and investment tax credits

- NO capital outlays by Vermont’s government

- NO enriching of multi-millionaires and their lucrative, risk-free, tax shelters

- NO additional environmental impact in Vermont

- Private entities would own the transmission lines from Quebec to New England

- RECs would not be sold to out-of-state entities so they would be wearing the green halo, instead of Vermonters.

- Much less social discord than controversial wind on pristine ridgelines and solar in fertile meadows


Here are some URLs about increased hydro energy from Hydro Quebec.



Views: 193


You need to be a member of Citizens' Task Force on Wind Power - Maine to add comments!

Join Citizens' Task Force on Wind Power - Maine


Maine as Third World Country:

CMP Transmission Rate Skyrockets 19.6% Due to Wind Power


Click here to read how the Maine ratepayer has been sold down the river by the Angus King cabal.

Maine Center For Public Interest Reporting – Three Part Series: A CRITICAL LOOK AT MAINE’S WIND ACT


(excerpts) From Part 1 – On Maine’s Wind Law “Once the committee passed the wind energy bill on to the full House and Senate, lawmakers there didn’t even debate it. They passed it unanimously and with no discussion. House Majority Leader Hannah Pingree, a Democrat from North Haven, says legislators probably didn’t know how many turbines would be constructed in Maine if the law’s goals were met." . – Maine Center for Public Interest Reporting, August 2010 Part 2 – On Wind and Oil Yet using wind energy doesn’t lower dependence on imported foreign oil. That’s because the majority of imported oil in Maine is used for heating and transportation. And switching our dependence from foreign oil to Maine-produced electricity isn’t likely to happen very soon, says Bartlett. “Right now, people can’t switch to electric cars and heating – if they did, we’d be in trouble.” So was one of the fundamental premises of the task force false, or at least misleading?" Part 3 – On Wind-Required New Transmission Lines Finally, the building of enormous, high-voltage transmission lines that the regional electricity system operator says are required to move substantial amounts of wind power to markets south of Maine was never even discussed by the task force – an omission that Mills said will come to haunt the state.“If you try to put 2,500 or 3,000 megawatts in northern or eastern Maine – oh, my god, try to build the transmission!” said Mills. “It’s not just the towers, it’s the lines – that’s when I begin to think that the goal is a little farfetched.”

Not yet a member?

Sign up today and lend your voice and presence to the steadily rising tide that will soon sweep the scourge of useless and wretched turbines from our beloved Maine countryside. For many of us, our little pieces of paradise have been hard won. Did the carpetbaggers think they could simply steal them from us?

We have the facts on our side. We have the truth on our side. All we need now is YOU.

“First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”

 -- Mahatma Gandhi

"It's not whether you get knocked down: it's whether you get up."
Vince Lombardi 

Task Force membership is free. Please sign up today!

Hannah Pingree on the Maine expedited wind law

Hannah Pingree - Director of Maine's Office of Innovation and the Future

"Once the committee passed the wind energy bill on to the full House and Senate, lawmakers there didn’t even debate it. They passed it unanimously and with no discussion. House Majority Leader Hannah Pingree, a Democrat from North Haven, says legislators probably didn’t know how many turbines would be constructed in Maine."

© 2024   Created by Webmaster.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service