410 likes | 545 Views
Vermont’s Energy Future Utility Presentation Regional Workshops and Deliberative Polling ™ January 25, 2008. Dr. Jonathan Raab, Raab Associates, Ltd. Dr. Robert Luskin, University of Texas at Austin. What is the Process?.
E N D
Vermont’s Energy Future Utility Presentation Regional Workshops and Deliberative Polling™ January 25, 2008 Dr. Jonathan Raab, Raab Associates, Ltd. Dr. Robert Luskin, University of Texas at Austin
What is the Process? • Advisory and Resource panels of diverse interests helped prepare background documents & questions • Five regional workshops hosted to gather public input in October from over 650 Vermonters • A deliberative polling event of 140+ randomly selected Vermonters in November • On-line effort to disseminate information and allow for additional input
Steve Blair, IBM Steve Costello, Central Vermont Power Robert Griffin, Green Mountain Power David Lamont, Dept. Public Service James Matteau, Windham Regional Commission James Moore, VT Public Interest Research Group Patricia Richards, VT Public Power Supply Authority Rich Sedano, Regulatory Assistance Project The Projects’ Advisors
Patrick Haller, VT Energy Efficiency, Inc. John Irving, Burlington Electric (biomass) Kerrick Johnson, VELCO (transmission) David McElwee, Entergy (nuclear) Andrew Perchlik, Renewable Energy VT Sylvie Racine, Hydro-Quèbec Eileen Simolardes, Vermont Gas John Zimmerman, VT Environmental Research Assoc. (wind) The Project’s Resource Panel
Regional Workshop Agenda 5:00 Registration and light dinner 6:00 Welcome (Commissioner David O’Brien, VT DPS), Overview (Jonathan Raab, Raab Associates), and Demographic Polling (Patrick Field, CBI) 6:20 Presentation: Vermont’s Current Electricity System, Upcoming Challenges, and Future Options (Dave Lamont, VT Department of Public Service) 6:40 Facilitated Discussions: Most Significant Challenges and Promising Options for Vermont, and Additional Questions for Panel 7:35 Break 7:50 Panel Responds to Questions 8:45 Polling on Most Significant Challenges and Best Options for Vermont (Patrick Field, Moderator) 9:30 Open Mike for Participants to Make Brief Additional Comments 10:00 Adjourn (when comments done)
Vermont’s Energy FutureRegional Workshop Attendance • * Panel, Observers, Facilitators (non-voting)
Deliberative Polling Process • Draw random sample • Interview and invite to event • Two-day event, alternating between small group discussions (led by trained moderators) and plenary Q & A’s with policy experts and policy makers • Re-administer same questionnaire
Comparison Analysis • Five Regional Workshops in October, and Deliberative Polling weekend in November • Compare demographics and substantive responses, where same or very similar questions asked • Minor adjustments to some scales to allow “apples-to-apples” comparisons • All data represent “means” unless otherwise indicated
Demographic Comparisons * Independent, Progressive, other, none 1
Response Comparisons 1 = strongly agree 5 = strongly disagree 3
Response Comparisons 1 = strongly support 5 = strongly oppose 5
How Concerned Are You About Each of the Following? 0 = not at all concerned 10 = extremely concerned 7
How Much Of a Threat to Vermont's Scenic Beauty is Each of the Following? 0 = no threat at all 10 = extremely serious threat 8
How Important is Each of the Following Goals in Meeting Vermont's Future Energy Needs? 0 = not at all important 10 = critically important 9
How Important is Each of the Following Goals in Meeting Vermont's Future Energy Needs (continued)? 0 = not at all important 10 = critically important 10
REGIONAL WORKSHOPSWhich resource options do you think should be the highest or lowest priorities to meet Vermont’s future electricity needs considering all factors (cost, environmental attributes, reliability, etc.)? mean n = 507
Vermont should meet as much of its electricity needs as possible by increasing how efficiently consumers use electricity Vermont should meet its electricity needs entirely by generating or buying more electricity n = 510
Over the next ten years, would you like to see Vermont increase, decrease, or keep about the same funding for its energy efficiency program? n = 535
Over the next ten years, would you like to see Vermont increase, decrease, or keep about the same the percentage of electricity it uses that comes from renewable resources? n = 535
Vermont should require that a minimum percentage of the electricity sold to Vermonters come from renewable sources. Do you: n = 522
Vermont should continue to purchase electricity from Hydro Québec. Do you: n = 544
Hydro Québec (predominantly hydro) provides base load plower, meaning power is usually available 24/7. If you learned that discontinuing power from H.Q. would require another base load source of power, and that only natural gas, coal, out of state nuclear power, or oil were available to replace this power, would you choose to:* n = 468 *This question was added after the St. Johnsbury workshop by the VT DPS
Hydro Québec can sell Vermont power from any mix of their resources we choose (hydro, wind, fossil fuels). Would you be willing to pay extra to get power exclusively from their wind resources?* n = 544 *This question was added after the St. Johnsbury workshop by the VT DPS
Vermont should continue to purchase electricity from the Vermont Yankee nuclear- power plant. Do you: n = 546
Vermont Yankee provides base load power, meaning power is usually available 24/7. If you learned that discontinuing power from V.Y. would require another base load source of power, and that only natural gas, coal, out-of-state nuclear power, or oil were available to replace this power, would you:* n = 386 * This question was added after the St. Johnsbury workshop by the VT DPS
REGIONAL WORKSHOPSHow valuable to you were each of the following elements of the workshop on a scale of 1 (not valuable) to 5 (very high value)? mean n = 516
Continuing to Buy Electricity from … 1 = disagree strongly, 3 = neither agree nor disagree, 5 = agree strongly