6. IMPACTS FROM INFRASTRUCTURE AND OPERATIONS

 


 >

6.1 ENERGY USE AND ENERGY EFFICIENCY

Each employee works in an open work area that fosters transparency and communication throughout the organization. This has reduced energy consumption by use of natural lighting and smaller work spaces. In 1995, Green Mountain Power consumed 1,400,225 kwh to operate its company headquarters. This compares with 921,400 kwh for 2007. This represents a decrease of over 34% over an 12-year span and is a result of streamlining company operations and our decision to move our corporate headquarters into an existing company service center.

In some of our buildings, we have a daylight control system where lights within the building dim as more daylight enters the building. Employees are also able to control how much lighting is allowed in the building by the use of skylights and high-efficiency T-8 lamps and ballasts. T-8 electronics allow for the dimming of fluorescent lighting, anywhere from 5-10%, throughout the building based on employee needs and outside light conditions. This feature conserves energy and provides a level of comfort for employees that prefer conventional lighting.

In 2006, we installed additional occupancy sensors to minimize lighting use when areas are not being used. We added high-efficiency air-conditioning units to the Colchester computer room for additional cooling capacity. We also replaced two older, inefficient rooftop heaters with five small energy efficient heaters in Colchester garage spaces. The smaller heaters are more efficient and more appropriate technology for the workspace.

Figure 6-1 compares our overall energy use from 2000 to 2007. The variations are largely due to changes in use of some of the buildings, such as consolidating operations and then later adding tenants to the same meter. The decrease since 2004 is a direct result of energy efficiency initiatives in our building operations.

Figure 6-1: Electricity Use 2000-2007

EN3, EN4

Energy use can be broken down by location, as follows:

Table 6-1: KWH Use by Location

Please note that the totals for Bellow Falls, Montpelier, and Wells River include energy consumed by additional tenants in the buildings. We have determined that it is not economically advantageous to segregate our electricity usage from other tenants.

6.2 WATER USE

Table 6-2 lists the gallons of water used for each Green Mountain Power location in 2007. EN8

Table 6-2: Water Use by Location

Through looking at historical water usage data, we realized that our Colchester office usage, which houses most of our employees, has been incorrectly metered for several years. This was rectified in early 2007 with the local water department.

Currently, the Wells River and Wilmington offices use a well for their water supply, and do not have meters to track their water usage. The Vergennes office is connected with the generation facility, and there is no separate meter or bill. Next year, we intend to purchase water meters for these locations to connect to the water intake.

In Colchester, our building is heated and cooled using a closed-loop system. Instead of using new water, it uses a radiator to cool and a highly efficient boiler to heat. We also installed automatic shut-offs on low flow fixtures in the rest rooms of each office to conserve water.

In 2006, the water-cooled diesel generators at the Essex facility were removed from service. The new diesel engines utilize air-cooled regulator systems and eliminate the need and risk associated with an open-loop river water cooling system.

Figure 6-2: Green Mountain Power Total Water Use (2004-2007)

Due to inaccurate metering, Colchester service center water usage has been significantly underreported for several years. This chart reflects estimated water usage for the Colchester facility. The increase in water usage is primarily explained by an increase at our Montpelier facility. We are researching the source of this increase.

There were no known water sources or related ecosystems/habitats that were affected by discharges of water or runoff in 2007. Also, there were no significant discharges to water. Additionally, Green Mountain Power does not withdraw any ground or surface water for industrial purposes. Green Mountain Power does not have many stormwater impacts. The only facility where stormwater is an issue is at our Colchester location. We performed some improvements to our stormwater collection system in Colchester in 2004, and evaluated the improvements in 2005. As a result of these evaluations, we performed some upgrades to this system in 2006.

6.3 IMPACTS FROM TRANSPORTATION

Green Mountain Power has recognized the impact of vehicle use on the environment and has taken the following steps to minimize impact while not sacrificing our reputation for excellent customer service. EN29

6.3.1 Fuel Efficiency

Green Mountain Power improved its average vehicle fuel efficiency (measured in gallons per 100 miles traveled) by 10% from 2005 to 2006 and has similar aggressive fuel-efficiency goal of 7% improvement for 2007. We continue to replace older, less efficient trucks with newer vehicles. We also have an ongoing hybrid purchasing program. Green Mountain Power currently owns nine hybrid vehicles (Toyota Prius and Ford Escape) which comprise 8% of Green Mountain Power's fleet of vehicles. Each hybrid vehicle has an improvement of greater than 15 miles per gallon over the vehicle it is replacing. In addition, carpooling is encouraged, and hybrids are used by management to travel within our service territory. We continue to explore additional ways to improve our mileage and reduce transportation emissions, such as our early 2007 project to fill vehicle tires with nitrogen to improve fuel efficiency and extend tire life.

We recently instituted a non-idling policy that strongly discourages field employees from idling vehicles. Occasionally, idling will occur during winter months for safety reasons and is often a required part of our operations since the buckets use the truck engine to power their work. Figure 6-3 shows total fuel used for transportation, but also includes information on fuel used in miscellaneous sources. Figures 6-4 and 6-5 show trends in miles traveled and fuel efficiency for our gasoline and diesel fleets. Data are based on 106 vehicles from all seven districts (Colchester, Vergennes, Montpelier, Wells River, White River Junction, Bellows Falls and Wilmington). EN4

Figure 6-3: Transportation and Miscellaneous Fuel Use

Figure 6-4: Vehicle Fleet Efficiency

Figure 6-5: Vehicle Fleet Travel

There are a couple of important changes in reporting fuel use that have occurred:

  • In mid-2005, we implemented the use of fuel cards, which more accurately track mileage and fuel use for each vehicle. We also replaced some diesel vehicles with gasoline vehicles — which accounts for changes viewed in miles traveled and miles per gallon for each fuel type.
  • We found an error in the fuel use data and mileage calculations presented in previous reports. Previous reports included only fuel dispensed at our two largest service locations, while mileage was reported for the entire company. This resulted in an under-estimate of fuel use and an over- estimate of efficiency of about 20%. The information in this year's report, including Table 6-3 and Figure 6-5, has been corrected to include fuel dispensed at all locations.

6.3.2 Emissions Reductions

Since 2005, we have required that a 20% biodiesel mix (B20) be used in our larger vehicles in the summer and a 5% biodiesel mix (B5) be used in the winter. All vehicles that fuel up at our Colchester and Montpelier facilities run on biodiesel. EN7

While biodiesel does not improve mileage, it does drastically reduce emissions. We currently use biodiesel to fuel vehicles at our two largest facilities, which are fueling stations for 31 diesel vehicles and represent over 70% of our diesel fuel use. We plan to install an additional fueling station at another service facility in 2008, which will allow us to use biodiesel for another four vehicles.

6.3.3 Vehicle Performance and Service Life

We follow a regular preventive maintenance schedule for all equipment. We purchase high quality oil and filters to extend service intervals, which minimizes resource use while maximizing vehicle performance.

6.3.4 Airline Travel

In 2007, approximately 4,020 gallons of jet fuel was consumed for employee flights. As shown in Figure 6-3, above, on a per gallon basis, airline travel accounts for only a small percentage of the total fuel consumed for transportation. EN4

6.4 RAW MATERIAL USAGE

Green Mountain Power maintains approximately 50,000 items in its existing inventory. Items are organized by approximately 50 stock categories (i.e., transformers, reclosers, etc.). The following data represents usage of items from 2005-2007 that represent the highest volume, weight, and potential environmental impact: Green Mountain Power's main distributor (60-70% of supplies) is located locally, in White River Junction. We have not yet measured the transportation impacts associated with our purchase of raw materials.

Table 6-4: Raw Material Usage 2005-2007

EN1

6.4.1 Use of Recycled Materials

Currently 77% of the office supplies purchased from OfficeMax contain recycled content. Green Mountain Power intended to have products that contain 100% recycled content by August 1, 2007. We would have met the goal except that we experienced problems with the 100% recycled content in our copiers and began using 50% recycled content.

6.4.2 Street Light Initiative

Green Mountain Power recently began an initiative to improve the street lights that it owns and rents to municipalities in Vermont. Many of the street lights are older and contain mercury vapor. We are slowly switching out the older lights and replacing them with more energy-efficient, environmentally-friendly lights. The new lights also help reduce light pollution.

6.4.3 Fuel Use

Table 6-5 shows the amount of fuel and energy used for heating in each of our locations in 2007.

Table 6-5: Fuel Use for Building Heat by Location

EN1

We rent our space in Wells River and have no way to capture the portion of fuel that we use.

6.5 PURCHASING POLICY

While Green Mountain Power does not have a formal Sustainable Purchasing Policy, there are aspects to its existing purchasing policy that encourage purchase of sustainable goods and goods/services from companies with strong environmental records. The following is an excerpt from Green Mountain Power's purchasing policy:

"Preference should be given to…suppliers who are proven to be environmental friendly in their daily work practices and attributes, maximize Post Consumer Recycled content, minimize toxicity and packaging, or have any other environmentally preferable attributes, without sacrificing price, quality, and delivery requirements."

Our purchasing policy also specifies that priority should be given to "suppliers located near the company operation." EC6

6.6 IMPACTS FROM WASTES AND RELEASES

6.6.1 Solid Waste and Chemical Waste

Table 6-6 describes some of the chemicals used and wastes generated by Green Mountain Power, the waste destinations, and on-going waste minimization efforts. This data represents the total for all GMP locations. EN22

Table 6-6: Waste Data for 2004-2007

EN24

Figure 6-6: Hazardous Waste Generation (2004-2007)

EN22

6.6.2 Recycling

Table 6-7 describes the various recycling methods for materials that were recycled from Green Mountain Power in 2007.

Table 6-7: Recycling Methods

6.6.3 Berlin Landfarm

In 2006, Green Mountain Power diverted approximately 38.69 tons of petroleum-contaminated soil and debris from the conventional hazardous waste stream for treatment at the Berlin Landfarm. This treatment program uses bio-remediation to treat soils that are less than 5% total petroleum hydrocarbons by weight. The process includes amending the soil with organic material (cow manure), tilling and natural aeration. The soil is treated until it tests clean. Green Mountain Power finds this method of using natural treatment technologies for this type of waste preferable to landfilling. EN2, EN22

6.6.4 2007 Releases

In 2007 we had 26 reported spills ranging in volume from a few ounces to 300 gallons. Seven of the spills resulted from failed hydraulic lines on line and bucket trucks. We have investigated this issue and due to the nature of our work we can not change the types of hoses we use on our trucks. Our booms must remain non-conductive and therefore we can not use steel enforced hoses. GMP is evaluating changing our hydraulic fluid to a vegetable-based oil that will minimize environmental impact for future spills.

One spill that occurred resulted in approximately 300 gallons of mineral oil released to the ground surface at our Colchester Service Center. This spill occurred when a plowing contractor hit a transformer in storage while removing snow. The release was not identified for several days. As a result of this spill approximately 500 cubic yards of oil-contaminated soil was transferred to our Berlin Landfarm for treatment.

All of the spills from 2007 have been cleaned up and are considered closed. EN23

Table 6-8: Spills 2007

EN23

6.6.5 Pine Street Barge Canal

Green Mountain Power was among those named by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in 1982 as responsible for the contamination of the Pine Street Barge Canal in Burlington, VT. In 1998, EPA directed responsible parties to pay $4.3 million for site remediation activities that involved containing canal contamination with an underwater cap, restoration of wetlands areas at the site, and a long-term maintenance and monitoring program.

A 2006 update on the site is as follows:

"The first five year review of the remedial action was completed in October 2006. The remedy is currently protective of human health and the environment except for ongoing release of coal tar in a limited area of the subaqueous cap in the canal. The remedy will not be protective in the future without a mechanism in place to monitor to determine compliance with institutional controls that have been established to restrict land and groundwater use at the site. Two issues that must be evaluated in order to determine protectiveness in the future are: 1) the vapor intrusion to indoor air pathway and the potential to impact current or future indoor receptors; and 2) the ability of the existing compliance monitoring program to adequately monitor performance standards for contaminant migration given new site conditions. The precise mechanism(s) for these ongoing releases is the subject of additional field investigations which are expected to be completed by mid-winter 2007. Environmental controls, such as absorbent booms, keep the contamination from entering Lake Champlain." - excerpt from epa.gov website.