Editor’s note: This commentary is by Willem Post, a retired engineer, who now writes about energy issues, currently specializing in energy efficiency of buildings and building systems. He is a founding member of the Coalition for Energy Solutions.
Vermont is quickly headed towards greatly increased costs of the SPEED program for projects 2.2 MW or less. It is now abundantly clear the energy cost of the SPEED Program, for projects 2.2 MW or less, is grossly excessive, based on the information from Vermont Department of Public Service websites. Continuing the program on its present course, as if all is well, would be irresponsible.
Speed Program; 2.2 MW projects or less.
The program started generating energy in July 2010.
Year … Production … Cost … $/kWh …% VT Use
Units … kWh … $
2010 ….. 5,980,779 ….. 829,832.88 ….. 0.1387 ….. 0.11
2011 ….. 20,172,973 ….. 3,329,269.05 ….. 0.1644 ….. 0.36
2012 ….. 29,666,592 ….. 5,093,237.71 ….. 0.1716 ….. 0.53
2013 ….. 44,822,813 ….. 8,692,749.09 ….. 0.1919 …… 0.81
Vermont SPEED monthly production
The above “Cost” column shows the amount paid mostly to the risk-free tax shelters of in-state and out-of-state multi-millionaires, who own the larger PV solar systems.
Based on a New England annual average grid price of $0.054/kWh at which GMP, et al., could have bought the energy, the excess payments were:
2010 — $506,871
2011 — $2,226,120
2012 — $3,488,193
2013 — $6,183,290
These excess payments were rolled into the electric rates of already struggling households and businesses. These payments will increase to about $60 million by 2017, because the PV solar feed-in tariff, set by the PSB, is an excessively high 25.7 c/kWh (based on “avoided cost-based prices,” whatever that means), and because of Vermont’s unrealistic SPEED goals. See notes.
Other feed-in tariffs are:
PV Solar — 0.257
Hydro — 0.123
Landfill gas — 0.090
Farm methane — 0.141
Wind over 100 kW — 0.118
Wind 100 kW or less — 0.253
Biomass — 0.125
NOTE: Vermont’s SPEED goal: 20 percent of total statewide electric retail sales during year commencing Jan. 1, 2017, must be generated by SPEED resources that constitute NEW renewable energy, or 0.20 x 5,554,500,000 kWh/yr (assumed Vermont consumption in 2017) = 1,110,900,000 kWh/yr, with:
• SPEED projects greater than 2.2 MW (no cap) producing 777,630,000 kWh/yr (assumed at 70 percent), and
• SPEED projects 2.2 MW or less (capped at 127.5 MW) producing 333,270,000 kWh/yr (assumed at 30 percent).
Renewable Energy Programs in Vermont
NOTE: David Hallquist, CEO of Vermont Electric Cooperative, has testified to the Legislature the Vermont production cost of field-mounted PV solar systems is about 17 c/kWh for systems 1,000 kW and larger!
NOTE: The already-struggling households and businesses are:
• Trying to make ends meet/hold their own, most of them with declining or stagnant real household incomes since about 2000,
• In a near-zero-growth Vermont economy,
• With a cost of living index 20 percent greater than the U.S. cost of living,
• With a government and quasi-government sector growing at a greater rate than the increasingly-hollowed-out private sector, and
• With the fourth highest electric rates in the U.S., right after Hawaii, Alaska and Connecticut, partially due to having to subsidize and finance expensive, ineffective, inefficient, job destroying, wind energy and solar energy SPEED programs that produce variable, intermittent, i.e., junk, energy at 3-4 times New England grid prices. See URLs.
The below URL gives a summary of the German ENERGIEWENDE, that claims, whereas jobs are created in renewable energy sectors, about 2-3 times the jobs are destroyed in other sectors, for a net job loss, due to inefficient, expensive energy production.
A similar study was performed by the Vermont DPS but it was removed from its website, because it likely “did not fit” the established renewable energy mantras! Here is the old URL: http://publicservice.vermont.gov/planning/DPS%20White%20Paper%20Feed%20in%20Tariff.pdf
Increased energy efficiency of buildings and vehicles would be so much better and less costly, and would REDUCE, instead of INCREASE household and business energy expenses.
The Energy Collective: A More Realistic Cost of Wind Energy
The Energy Collective: High Renewable Energy Costs Damage the Vermont Economy
The Energy Collective: Reducing the Energy Use of Houses
The Energy Collective: Energy Efficiency First, Renewables Later
