Conventional Energy Sources Consumed by vermont
Source: Vermont Public Service Department
Nuclear Energy in vermont
Vermont currently draws most of its energy from conventional sources. A large portion of this energy comes from Vermont's own nuclear power plant. 70% of the energy produced in Vermont comes from nuclear power. While Vermont Yankee (VY) accounts for 12 percent of Vermont's electricity consumption as of 2010, it produces enough power to account for 80% of Vermont's energy budget. Established in 1973, VY is a 620 megawatt boiling water reactor cooled by river waters in the winter, and cooling towers in the summer. While Vermont Yankee has had a long and productive life, the reign of Vermont Yankee is almost over. The plant will be shutting its doors and going offline in the fourth quarter of 2014. This raises many questions of what power sources will take its place. Will new renewables be integrated into the system? Will Hydro Quebec provide Vermont with more energy? Will natural gas consumption increase? It is expected that more power will be generated from the New England grid which relies heavily on natural gas. If this is the case, Vermont's natural gas consumption will increase greatly.
A boiling water reactor works by boiling water using a radioactive reactor core. This process creates steam that powers a turbine where the energy is transformed into electricity. The steam is then cooled by water from either cooling towers or rivers, causing the steam to become liquid water once again. At this point, the water is cycled through the reactor one again.
A boiling water reactor works by boiling water using a radioactive reactor core. This process creates steam that powers a turbine where the energy is transformed into electricity. The steam is then cooled by water from either cooling towers or rivers, causing the steam to become liquid water once again. At this point, the water is cycled through the reactor one again.
Sources Cited:
U.S. Energy Information Administration, eia.gov
Vermont Yankee, Entegry, entegry.com/VY
Dr. Robert Hargraves' presentation to Hanover NH Rotary Club, March 24th 2010
Reactor Diagram taken from: euronuclear.org
By: Paul Lamarche
U.S. Energy Information Administration, eia.gov
Vermont Yankee, Entegry, entegry.com/VY
Dr. Robert Hargraves' presentation to Hanover NH Rotary Club, March 24th 2010
Reactor Diagram taken from: euronuclear.org
By: Paul Lamarche
A conversation with Neil Sheehan from Vermont Yankee.
Q. Vermont Yankee has had a long and successful life; do you believe it would be better to revamp the facility instead of shutting it down? Would it be worth the investment?
A. The decision to permanently cease operations of the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant rests with the owner, Entergy. The company determined that due to a number of factors, including the current low cost of natural gas, it would make sense to shut down the plant later this year. The NRC will now work with Entergy to ensure that the decommissioning of the facility proceeds safely and in accordance with NRC requirements.
Q. Will energy in Vermont become more expensive with the closing of Vermont Yankee?
A. That is a question that would be better posed to the grid operator, which in this case is ISO New England. The grid operator is responsible for ensuring there will be adequate electricity reserves through long-range planning. It works with the owners of energy production companies in the region to guarantee adequate supplies.
Q. With the closing of Vermont Yankee on the horizon, there must be an energy source that takes its place. Where do you believe this will come from?
A. The NRC would not have an opinion or stance as to what type of energy replaces Vermont Yankee. The NRC’s mandate is to provide oversight of operating nuclear power plants and ensure there are being run safely. We will also focus on the safe decommissioning of any permanently shutdown reactors.
Q. Vermont Yankee employs a large number of Vermonters; do you think the jobs lost by the closing of Vermont Yankee will be replaced by the expanding energy sources that take its place?
A. It would be speculative to say how the jobs that are being lost to Vermont Yankee’s permanent closure might be replaced. We can say that nuclear power plants employ hundreds of highly skilled professionals. A much smaller workforce will be needed for the decommissioning of the plant.
Q. Do you believe the gap left by Vermont Yankee can be filled or partially filled by renewable sources such as solar of hydroelectric power?
A. This is a question better answered by ISO New England, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) or state energy planners.
Q. Vermont has a goal to obtain 95% of its energy from renewable sources by the year 2050. Do you think this is feasible?
A. We are not qualified to answer this question.
Q. What do you see as the future of nuclear energy in the U.S.? Will its impact be reduced with more facilities such as Vermont Yankee being closed or will it continue to be a large source of our countries energy supply?
A. Nuclear power currently produces about 20 percent of the energy used in the United States. It is hard to predict exactly what the mix of energy production will be in the future. Many national energy experts have said the nation will continue to need an all-of-the-above strategy when it comes to energy supplies. That is, we should have a diverse assortment of power sources, including nuclear, to meet the country’s needs.
Interview by Paul Lamarche
Q. Vermont Yankee has had a long and successful life; do you believe it would be better to revamp the facility instead of shutting it down? Would it be worth the investment?
A. The decision to permanently cease operations of the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant rests with the owner, Entergy. The company determined that due to a number of factors, including the current low cost of natural gas, it would make sense to shut down the plant later this year. The NRC will now work with Entergy to ensure that the decommissioning of the facility proceeds safely and in accordance with NRC requirements.
Q. Will energy in Vermont become more expensive with the closing of Vermont Yankee?
A. That is a question that would be better posed to the grid operator, which in this case is ISO New England. The grid operator is responsible for ensuring there will be adequate electricity reserves through long-range planning. It works with the owners of energy production companies in the region to guarantee adequate supplies.
Q. With the closing of Vermont Yankee on the horizon, there must be an energy source that takes its place. Where do you believe this will come from?
A. The NRC would not have an opinion or stance as to what type of energy replaces Vermont Yankee. The NRC’s mandate is to provide oversight of operating nuclear power plants and ensure there are being run safely. We will also focus on the safe decommissioning of any permanently shutdown reactors.
Q. Vermont Yankee employs a large number of Vermonters; do you think the jobs lost by the closing of Vermont Yankee will be replaced by the expanding energy sources that take its place?
A. It would be speculative to say how the jobs that are being lost to Vermont Yankee’s permanent closure might be replaced. We can say that nuclear power plants employ hundreds of highly skilled professionals. A much smaller workforce will be needed for the decommissioning of the plant.
Q. Do you believe the gap left by Vermont Yankee can be filled or partially filled by renewable sources such as solar of hydroelectric power?
A. This is a question better answered by ISO New England, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) or state energy planners.
Q. Vermont has a goal to obtain 95% of its energy from renewable sources by the year 2050. Do you think this is feasible?
A. We are not qualified to answer this question.
Q. What do you see as the future of nuclear energy in the U.S.? Will its impact be reduced with more facilities such as Vermont Yankee being closed or will it continue to be a large source of our countries energy supply?
A. Nuclear power currently produces about 20 percent of the energy used in the United States. It is hard to predict exactly what the mix of energy production will be in the future. Many national energy experts have said the nation will continue to need an all-of-the-above strategy when it comes to energy supplies. That is, we should have a diverse assortment of power sources, including nuclear, to meet the country’s needs.
Interview by Paul Lamarche
Oil in vermont
Vermont currently consumes 36.9 trillion BTU's (British thermal units) of motor gasoline and 27.9 trillion BTU's of distillate fuel oils (diesel and other petroleum fuels). Transportation currently accounts for 33.8% of Vermont's total energy consumption. The process of obtaining oil for transportation and other uses such as building heating is long and expensive. First, crude oil must be extracted from deep underground. There are many different methods to extract oil from the ground, depending on the location of the oil. Oil wells can be drilled or facilities can be build to extract oil from oil sands. Both methods require energy for extraction. Once the oil is extracted, it must be refined for use, as crude oil is essential useless. The refining process is a complex, involving super heating the crude oil to various temperatures based on the desired fuel type. This requires a lot of energy to complete. Once refined, the oil must be transported to the desired location. This also requires plenty of energy. Every gallon of fuel that you pump into your car or use in your home has gone through this long, expensive, and energy draining process.
Sources Cited:
Vermont Energy Profile, Energy information administration, eia.gov
By: Paul Lamarche
Sources Cited:
Vermont Energy Profile, Energy information administration, eia.gov
By: Paul Lamarche
natural gas
Perhaps the most controversial source of energy is natural gas. The reason for the controversy is the most widely used method of natural gas extraction. This method is called hydraulic fracturing or fracking. This method of obtaining natural gas is detrimental to the environment due to the chemicals used during the drilling process. Water and chemicals are shot down the well to help widen existing cracks in the rock. This fracking water filled with chemicals is then stored in tanks or pits after it is used in the well. This creates a large amount of waste water that must be properly disposed of. Unfortunately, not all of the fracking water can be contained and contaminates the surrounding environment. The detrimental effects of this process make it non-sustainable.
Paul Lamarche
Paul Lamarche
The method of hydraulic fracturing is used to extract "unconventional" natural gas. This is gas that is trapped within bedrock. This type of gas is difficult to extract and leads to many environmental problems noted above. However, there is also conventional gas. Conventional natural gas is much easier to extract. This gas is usually trapped in permeable material underneath impermeable rock. Since the material the gas is found in is permeable, the gas is much easier to extract. While the natural gas found beneath the earths surface is not a renewable source, there are renewable methods of obtaining the same methane gas. This process can be done by the use of an anaerobic digester.
Sources:
Natural Gas, Natiuonal Geographic, http://education.nationalgeographic.com/education/encyclopedia/natural-gas/?ar_a=1
American Gas administration, aga.org
image: evwind.es
By: Paul Lamarche
Sources:
Natural Gas, Natiuonal Geographic, http://education.nationalgeographic.com/education/encyclopedia/natural-gas/?ar_a=1
American Gas administration, aga.org
image: evwind.es
By: Paul Lamarche
Banner Photo courtesy of:
[Untitled photo of smoke stacks]. Retrieved April16, 2014, from: http://captainkimo.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Smoke-Stack-from-Sugar-Factory-in-Belle-Glade-Florida.jpg
[Untitled photo of smoke stacks]. Retrieved April16, 2014, from: http://captainkimo.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Smoke-Stack-from-Sugar-Factory-in-Belle-Glade-Florida.jpg