Vermont Gas Systems says a recent study that claims its 41.2-mile Addison County pipeline would increase greenhouse gases is wrong.
VTGas submitted testimony Friday in response to an analysis from the Conservation Law Foundation and criticism from environmental advocates that the company’s application for a Certificate of Public Good contained incomplete greenhouse gas calculations. VTGas’ new study was submitted to the Public Service Board as part of its consideration to grant a permit for the $86.6 million expansion project.
“The CLF analysis contained errors and failed to take into account the emissions of greenhouse gases from the production, refinement and transportation of oil.”
The new VTGas testimony claims that the natural gas project would reduce carbon dioxide by 13,901 short tons initially if Addison County residents and businesses switched from oil.
“The CLF analysis contained errors and failed to take into account the emissions of greenhouse gases from the production, refinement and transportation of oil,” VTGas spokesman Steve Wark said. “Once these are accounted for, natural gas clearly is a cleaner fuel.”
The Conservation Law Foundation contracted the services of Elizabeth Stanton, a senior associate at Synapse Energy Economics Inc., to analyze VTGas’ initial calculations for emissions. She found that VTGas failed to account for methane emissions and the life-cycle leaking of natural gas. A life-cycle analysis includes all of the processes from extraction through distribution.
Stanton’s revised calculations found that the VTGas project would increase CO2 equivalent emissions by 8,100 short tons, not reduce them by 13,000 short tons, as VTGas initially proposed.
“Dr. Stanton provided an important analysis, far superior to what Vermont Gas had provided in their initial petition,” said Sandy Levine, senior attorney at the Conservation Law Foundation. “The life-cycle calculations for greenhouse gas emissions are based on EPA information and peer-reviewed studies.”
VTGas’ testimony points to flaws in Stanton’s calculations. VTGas contracted its analysis to Joel Bluestein, vice president at ICF International, which worked with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to develop federal methods for estimating emissions from natural gas.
Bluestein said of Stanton’s work: ”Her key assumption was poorly chosen and there is at least one material error in her calculation.”
The major concern Bluestein had with Stanton’s calculations was the density she used for methane. At a “normal temperature” of 20 degrees Celsius and a pressure of 1 atmosphere, he said, methane has a density of 42 pounds per cubic foot. Stanton used a density of 77.5 pounds per cubic foot, which led to an overestimate of greenhouse gas emissions, Bluestein said.
Bluestein also found that Stanton did not account for all emissions for oil, as she had for natural gas, and she did not account for all CO2 emissions, as she had for methane.
“Obviously, an analysis that only accounts for the upstream emissions of one fuel but not the other is not a valid comparison,” he said. “A life-cycle analysis must include all of the significant emissions for both fuels in order to be complete and valid.”
Bluestein did note that greenhouse gases were “almost twice as high” coming from Western Canada as they would be if the gas was sourced from the Northeastern U.S. VTGas sources gas from the TransCanada pipeline, which is a system of pipelines that stretches from Alberta to Quebec, where VTGas’ parent company, Gaz Métro, is headquartered.
Addison County Sen. Claire Ayer and other local legislators were in the process of drafting a letter to the Public Service Department on Friday. As they interpret title 30, sections 248 and 218 of the Vermont statutes, VTGas is required by law to provide a life-cycle analysis.
Ayer said she is glad VTGas has now submitted the study, but she said the Public Service Board must sift through competing agendas to get to the heart of the matter.
“We know that VTGas is biased toward its own needs, and we know that Conservation Law Foundation is probably biased, too,” she said. “Hopefully we’ll find a way to sort this out so it has some meaning to the people in the area, as well as to the Public Service Board because I think there may be exaggerations on both sides.”
