VERNON — Last month, the usual suspects lined up in protest of Vermont Yankee once again. U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders and other speakers appeared in Brattleboro and made their typical confident projections that all we need in order to solve our energy problems in Vermont is more zeal for energy efficiency.
While we can all agree that using energy more efficiently is a good thing, and worthy of government attention and funding, it is not the silver bullet to our energy challenges.
Energy-efficiency measures won't put an end to our need for electricity. It's like driving 55 m.p.h. on the Interstate: it might save you gas, but you're still going to need to eventually refill your tank, or recharge your hybrid or electric car.
It is one thing to tell a weekend group of enthusiasts what they want to hear. It is another to sit in the U.S. Senate and say with a straight face that the main solution to Vermont's energy needs is to just save more electricity.
The real-world problem with confident energy savings projections is that demand for electricity is always increasing. This is for the best of reasons: we are transitioning from high-carbon fossil-fuel combustion (most notably in transportation, but also in buildings) to hopefully low-carbon electricity.
According to the Vermont Comprehensive Energy Plan, even stringent efficiency measures will only slow the rate of increased demand.
So I ask the senator: where will the hundreds and hundreds of megawatts for much-needed new, carbon-free, non-intermittent power come from? And where will it be built and how much will it cost?
If he can provide a realistic, implementable plan, that would be leadership.
Until then, it's just pandering.
And by the way, my answer to the above question is operating safely and reliably 24/7, about eight miles down the road from this protest, in Vernon.
Yes, I'm talking about Vermont Yankee, where I work.