PEOPLE AGAINST THE TVA EXPANSION

Following is the text of a document presented to STEVE PITT and others at TVA regarding energy conservation, waste, and the use of eminent domain.

May 26, 2006

“Maximizing Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy is the domestic epicenter in the War on Terror and it is imperative that we maximize the partnerships between the public and private sectors in new and creative ways with a sense of seriousness, national purpose and the urgency the situation merits."

On the same day in April, 2006 that residents of Eagleville and Rockvale were being given notice that TVA would be taking all or portions of their land for the RUTHERFORD-WILLIAMSON power expansion project, Alexander Karsner - Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy - was delivering these words at the annual Power-Gen Renewable Energy and Fuels Conference in Las Vegas.

Since the energy crisis of the late 1970’s, energy conservation has been taken seriously throughout much of our nation.  More efficient HVAC and industrial systems have been made available, interior lighting technology has advanced and illumination standards reduced, and effective energy codes have been adapted by many states and municipalities. 

At the forefront of the effort to reduce energy demand are our largest utility providers.  Their employees have the expertise and skills to guide their utility, commercial, and industrial customers toward the most appropriate conservation path.  The calculations they generate allow municipalities to adapt and enforce appropriate and viable energy codes, as well as develop sustainable managed growth plans.

All across our country, utility providers large and small alike have stepped up to the plate with well-developed incentive programs.  Municipalities often penalize businesses that engage in deliberate or negligent waste.  Pretty much all utilities that have truly embraced the benefits of reducing energy demand and developed effective programs have seen respectable rates of success.

Not TVA.

A March 2002 GAO report on TVA’s plans to reduce emissions cites the effectiveness of their demand-side management programs as largely ineffective.  While TVA will point to  a ‘lack of interest’ among their target clients as the primary reason, the harsh reality is that the failure of such programs – such as ‘ENERGY-RIGHT’ - to produce any moderate and consistent power demand reductions is due simply to a lack of commitment.  While other utilities, such as FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT, GEORGIA POWER, and PUGET SOUND ENERGY can claim a 20 to 25 percent participation rate in their various demand-side management programs (as of 2002), TVA can claim a whopping 2%.  Any demand-side program that is not properly funded with REAL incentives – not just low-interest loans – as well as ‘penalties’ for non-compliance, such as higher baseline rates – would be doomed to failure. 

TVA’s GREEN POWER SWITCH program addresses the GENERATION of electricity using alternative/environmentally friendly practices, such as Wind.  However, the GREEN POWER SWITCH program does NOTHING to address the power usage glut that currently grips our metropolitan areas.

SHARED RESPONSIBILITIES

Of course, TVA is not solely to blame.  At the top of the list, is the Tennessee Legislature who – in spite of growing pressure from all sides – failed in 2003 to pass even a moderate and mandatory energy reduction code.  Instead of adapting an energy code at least as stringent as ASHREA 90.1/1989 edition, they simply adapted language that all municipalities were to use the same, weak energy code already on the books based on 92MEC – with 2002 updates – on a VOLUNTARY basis.  Few municipalities in the state have ‘volunteered’, although some progress is made by adapting the INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE and the INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE for construction standards, which both include language dictating minimum standards for building envelope, HVAC, and Lighting systems.

With the help of larger utilities, many smaller utilities will offer incentives of their own to reach an even broader customer base.  NES has had several programs in effect, with mixed results – largely for the same reasons cited above.  Here is what the two primary local utilities being affected by this expansion have to offer:

New construction should be REQUIRED to meet a viable energy code standard – rather than gaining incentives through a voluntary program.  Voluntary incentives should be offered for EXISTING structures and EXISTING homeowners.  Furthermore, the ‘incentives’ should have some teeth – like rebates for purchasing energy-star rated equipment, installing insulation – and so forth.  After 5 years of the program, homes and businesses that do not meet the established standards will face a higher energy rate than those that do.  Financial incentives should be continued, however can be reduced somewhat, being replaced with penalties.  Federal financial aid – through TVA – can be made available to low-income families.

WASTE NOT WANT NOT

A related issue in any discussion on energy conservation is WASTE.  TVA says their primary concern is the ‘peak energy demand’ period – typically between 7:00 AM and 6:00 PM.  If one were to drive through Murfreesboro, Smyrna, La Vergne, and even Franklin and Brentwood – one would see countless parking lot, street, high-mast, and security lights blaring in broad daylight.  (See WASTE on the POWEROUTRAGE.ORG website).  No matter how many HPS fixtures are left on, it is doubtful that they will supplement any appreciable foot-candles on the ground to that which the Sun is providing.  For that matter, even cloudy days would still render their contribution ineffective.  Exterior lighting is for NIGHT use, and should be limited to such.  Burning lights during the day – whether by choice (as some car dealerships like to do), or negligence (failing to fix failed or badly calibrated photocells) is just pure waste.  Is THIS why so many people in rural areas such as EAGLEVILLE and COLLEGE GROVE are being forced to give up land and easements – to support continued WASTE?

Somebody must pay.  If the businesses that will not renovate their systems, maintain control equipment, or adapt basic energy management practices are allowed to continue unchecked, the cost of their waste is passed on to utilities, taxpayers, and ultimately – people who will lose their homes to make way for more infrastructure, and their neighbors who will lose property value just for being nearby.

WHY PICK ON TVA?

 TVA is essentially the ‘supreme authority’ in this region when it comes to electrical energy generation, distribution, and consumption.  The thing that makes TVA the target of such harsh criticism and generates so much community fear is the very thing that can be used to everyone’s advantage when it comes to energy management issues: Lack of public accountability.  TVA has the ability to bypass layers upon layers of bureaucracy and simply enact incentives and enforce penalties.  

The power that TVA uses to tell farmers and homeowners, “We want your land.  Bye-bye.  See-ya.  Write when you find work.  So long.”  Is the very power they could use to tell their utility and municipal clients “You want more power?  Tell ya what.  Until you cut peak power demand by 25% over the next 5 years, don’t come crying for more power.  Furthermore, if you do not effectively cut peak power demand by 5% percent every year, and show that 25 percent of your customers have effectively met or exceeded energy codes or standards, you get to pay a higher rate.”   Some would say that this could affect growth in the area.  PRECISELY!!!!!   The smaller utilities would not want to be accused of stifling growth, nor would they want to incur a higher rate for power – therefore, they would have no choice but to comply. 

Is this fair?  What is more fair – allowing commercial and industrial energy consumers to continue wasteful practices, ignore energy savings, and shrug off voluntary incentives – therefore passing the costs of such activities on to taxpayers and landowners in other communities – or demanding that they meet moderate energy savings standards, thereby reducing the demands on existing electrical infrastructures and eliminating the need to demolish peoples homes, farms, and livelihoods in order to meet their greedy requirements?

TVA also has the ability to fund incentive programs.  If even ½ of the budgeted dollars for the RUTHERFORD-WILLIAMSON expansion project were diverted to real incentive and enforcement programs targeting the affected areas, the need for such a large substation would most likely diminish or disappear. 

WHAT CAN BE DONE?

The first thing that TVA should do is hire an independent energy consultant to evaluate the real potential savings based on specific actions and programs.  In 2003, the HARPETH WATERSHED ASSOCIATION hired – at their own expense – an energy consultant from Massachusetts to perform a basic evaluation in the FRANKLIN/BRENTWOOD areas.  His conclusions showed that with moderate effort, an overall peak energy savings of 22% could be realized after 5 years of initiating such a program.  Such numbers are respectable, achievable, and are certainly worth further investigation prior to sending the bulldozers in and people packing.

As for what incentive and penalty programs would be most effective – TVA should simply open the Big Business Handbook to page one and read the first sentence – KNOW YOUR COMPETITION.  It would take little to no effort to examine the programs being undertaken by such utilities as Pacific Gas & Electric and Connecticut Light & Power, and determine which programs would be most effective and productive if given all the necessary resources, including marketing.  Such programs might include:

These are just a few of the more obvious and high-profile programs that TVA could fund.  Compliance with these programs could be rewarded after the first 5 years with a reduced rate, especially homes that install ‘ENERGY-STAR’ rated equipment. 

EMINENT DOMAIN AND COMMUNITY RESPONSIBILITY

While TVA will claim that eminent domain has only been used less than 5% of the time, one has to ask how many times the THREAT of eminent domain has been used.  Most people, when forced into a choice of ‘sell willingly’ or ‘we will just take it’ will begrudgingly choose to sell.  I would be curious to see real statistics showing how many people would NOT have sold had the eminent domain axe not been hanging over their heads.

TVA says that while they accept public comment on such expansions, their plans are NOT up to public vote – or else they would not be able to install infrastructure anywhere.  Conversely TVA must recognize the overwhelming wishes of a given community, or else we risk the threat of every piece of property being taken on a whim to support the TVA infrastructure without true public oversight or accountability.

With the awesome power of eminent domain comes an even greater responsibility.  Not only is TVA in the role of managing our natural resources, but must also accept stewardship for respecting property rights and community aesthetics.  Demanding that residents abandon their homes and farms, lose substantial property value, and live with the fear of health risks to serve the power needs of any growing community should be considered a ‘last resort option’.  Upgrading existing infrastructure should be the first priority.  To not even consider ‘demand-side reduction’ in the overall equation for any of the alternatives considered in this expansion is careless at best, and a total disregard for the communities being served – and the people who live and work there – at worst. 

THE REAL SOLUTION

Before TVA comes into rural communities such as Eagleville, Rockvale, College Grove, and Bethesda demanding land resources, taking people’s property through eminent domain, forcing families out of their homes and family farms, shutting down small businesses, exposing schoolchildren to potentially harmful EMF’s, and forever destroying older growth forests and rivers, they should be able to prove conclusively that all other options – including conservation – have been fully explored and implemented.  WE DO NOT BELIEVE THIS TEST HAS BEEN MET.  TVA can either rise to the challenges voiced by men such as Alexander Karsner and organizations such as the GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE and the U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, or they can simply ignore the reality of the situation yet again, and continue with their plan to destroy these communities and the lives of their residents in pursuit of the ‘same-old same ole’ supply-side solutions that have made them one of the most feared, outdated, totalitarian-minded public utilities in the nation.