- By Mike Sigler
- Opinions
Print 
I admit I was being a bit snarky, but I think we share a similar goal: we both want to transition to a better energy future as soon as possible.
This will be a complicated transition and won’t happen as fast as any of us would like. To move from our current centralized energy generating system, to one that is more dependent on distributed generation and variable renewable sources like the sun and the wind will require an intricate and complex web of finance, public policy, engineering and politics, not to mention conflicting state and federal regulatory policies and a rapidly changing technology.
We can and will get to that shared vision of a better energy future by being reasonable about the time it will take and how we balance environmental and economic goals.
I support heat-pumps and solar panels. Heat-pumps work like your refrigerator in reverse. I investigated putting a ground source system in my home. A local installer quoted $80,000. An air-source system, drawing heat from the air, would be less, $30,000, but the solar array to run it would be an additional $30,000. The costs are simply too great, but I’ll continue to shop around for a solution or a better price.
I see natural gas as a bridge or transition fuel. I won’t be able to use heat-pumps so my options now are oil or propane because natural gas in Lansing is under a moratorium. My situation is not everyone’s. Some will be able to justify heat pump systems, but should we relegate folks who can’t, to dirtier forms of energy in the quest for perfection. It’s been argued that if more of the new construction choses heat-pumps over natural gas, more gas will be available to business and industry. That only makes sense if there is widespread conversion of existing systems.
Using electricity for heat is only carbon neutral if that electricity is produced with green technology which has a carbon cost rarely figured into the equation. Right now, natural gas is the cleanest form of energy that’s widely available. It’s managed to cut the United States carbon footprint by three percent last year. Germany saw its carbon footprint go up that year. Cornell saw a massive cut in its carbon footprint when it shifted from coal to natural gas. The nation is converting to gas. Now the question becomes, will our county continue to be an economic engine in Upstate New York, escaping the declining standard of living in some of the surrounding area, or will it decide that only renewable energy is acceptable, even if it means a larger carbon footprint for the next 30 years as the shift is made?
The shale boom has caused a lot of intense emotions in the county and in our country. Regardless of your view, it’s happened, and continues to expand in the nation. As the drilling continues, the EPA and DEC continue to show some of the problems like methane leaks and concerns about contaminating aquifers diminish; the EPA has found that groundwater contamination is non-existent if done correctly. The benefits include lower prices for everyone, a U.S. foreign policy where Russia and OPEC don’t dictate energy prices, and fewer carbon emissions. This doesn’t mean we should drill everywhere in the nation. There are areas like the Fingerlakes where a ground spill could be devastating. Constant vigilance is required.
While I have solar panels on my own house, thousands of other homeowners have not made that choice or cannot afford them. Many more will find using heat-pumps out of their financial reach as well and industry needs denser fuels like natural gas to produce the energy they need for manufacturing. So where does that leave us? It leaves us importing our electricity from dirtier sources or at the very least from sources out of state, with people turning to propane or continuing to rely on oil or wood to heat their homes instead of turning to cleaner natural gas. I don’t want to sacrifice a lower carbon footprint today for what might happen in 20 years. Cornell shifted to natural gas and has saved thousands of tons of CO2 from entering the atmosphere. That doesn’t stop the University from continuing its quest for alternatives. I don’t believe we as a county will either and for right now, our residents need the lower prices, the jobs created, and the larger tax base that natural gas provides.
Mike Sigler
County Legislator, Lansing, NY
v13i21