April's Tip: Best Ways to Save Power

Japan's ongoing nuclear crisis has focused attention on our country's dependence on nonrenewable, radioactive uranium for 20% of our electricity. This month's tip explores ways to cut the typical residential power bill in half, which would allow us to safely and quickly power down all of our nuclear plants without needing to build new power plants to replace them. I also discuss why former nuclear power advocates (such as me; I worked for Pacific Gas & Electric during law school) no longer support public subsidies for fission power, now that we have better technology for managing the grid.

In a nutshell, here's what each of us would need to do to cut our household power bill in half:

1. turn off lights when you leave a room
2. install motion sensors on outdoor lighting so it automatically turns and off as needed
3. remove unnecessary lights
4. install task lighting so you use energy to focus light just where it's needed
5. replace all incandescent light bulbs with CFLs or LEDs
6. replace wasteful refrigerators with Energy Star models
7. use a drying line or a drying rack instead of an electric or gas clothes dryer
8. if you must use a machine to dry your clothes, use high-efficiency washing machines with a high-speed spin cycle or use a spinner to wring most water out of clothes before drying
9. in homes with air conditioners and electric heaters, condition a smaller space or accept a wider range of indoor temperatures (a little hotter in summer and a little colder in winter)
10. in homes with electric water heating, do the following:
• wash clothes in cold water
• install low-flow showerheads
• install aerators on all sinks
11. in homes with well pumps, do the following:
• check for leaking toilets
• install low-flow showerheads
• use a rain barrel for exterior watering
12. replace wasteful desktop computers with laptops
13. replace wasteful televisions with Energy Star models
14. turn off and unplug electronic devices when not in use
15. cook with microwaves instead of electric ranges or ovens
16. use solar chargers for recharging personal electronic devices (cell phones, etc.)
17. use solar chargers for rechargeable batteries
18. replace wasteful night lights with efficient LEC or LED models

Let's start by imagining the impact if we were able to cut the typical residential power bill in half. Residential electricity use is 38% of our country's total (the commercial and industrial sectors are responsible for 37% and 25% of electricity consumption, respectively). Cutting residential power bills in half would save almost 20% of our total electricity demand, just about the amount of energy the nuclear power plants across America supply. In other words, cutting our residential power bills in half and improving efficiency in our commercial and industrial sector by just a few percentages would allow us to shut down all of our nuclear power reactors without needing to build new power plants to replace them.

Shedding 20% of our load and shutting down our nuclear power stations permanently would free up resources to invest in improving our transmission and control infrastructure. Engineers, managers, and lawyers currently required by our nuclear power industry could use their time more productively to make the transition to a fully sustainable power system. We would also stop producing nuclear waste in the commercial power sector, limiting the scope of that problem to the military, medical and other industrial sources of radioactive waste. Plus, we wouldn't need to open lands around the Grand Canyon to uranium mining, as is being proposed now.

The average household in the United States uses 920 kilowatt hours of electricity per month. Here in Maine, we use on average 500 kWh per month. In England, the average is 390 kWh per month. My family uses between 250 and 380 kWh per month, depending on the time of year and who's visiting.

If you are a typical family, your lighting and appliances account for the majority of your electricity consumption. In 2008, according to the Energy Information Administration, lighting and appliances accounted for about 60% of residential energy use. Air conditioning was just 16%, water heating was 9%, refrigerators were 8% and space heating was 6%.

Maine leads the nation in showing what happens when you shut down a nuclear power plant. Now that Maine Yankee is closed, we have higher electricity rates and lower household electricity consumption. We replaced nuclear power with efficiency and natural gas. Although it seems likely that we will be storing nuclear waste in Wiscasset for generations, we are no longer importing large amounts of radioactive materials through our communities and our risk of a nuclear catastrophe is much lower. (By the way, even though we no longer have a nuclear power plant in Maine, most Maine electricity rate payers are still paying each month for nuclear power plants in other states. CMP's standard offer is 19% nuclear, for example.)

My personal experience in our home shows that it is not difficult to cut household electricity consumption in half. We expect to be able to stay below 250 kWh per month on a consistent basis once we switch all of our household lighting to LED. (The recent improvement in light quality of LEDs now makes this a viable option for us.)

Given that we could shut down all of our nuclear powers plants just by taking relatively easy and common-sense steps to improve the energy efficiency in our own homes, why do energy experts say nuclear power is a necessity? Are nuclear power plants needed for the reliability of the grid? Do they help prevent climate change?

Since nuclear power has never been economically viable, the industry has developed through political connections. Experts who claim nuclear power is necessary do so for political reasons.

In terms of grid reliability, hydropower is the best reserve because it can be almost instantly turned on and turned off. Nuclear power, in contrast, provides significant challenges to grid operators because it is very difficult to adjust the output. Once a nuclear power plant is up and running, it is typically intended to run at nearly full power for months, producing roughly the same amount of power day and night, whether the power is needed or not. Grid operators must bring in or drop off other power generators to match the supply to the load to maintain a constant voltage for every power customer.

Nuclear power makes much less sense in today's world than it did in the 1970s. As communication and computing technology has improved, we are much better able to manage a diverse mix of power sources.Today, nuclear adds almost nothing in reliability to a grid that combines hydropower, coal, natural gas, biomass, and distributed sources such as solar and wind. Nuclear is a relatively inflexible power source that other power generators must accommodate. Maine's section of the grid, for example, dropped nuclear power and still maintains a high level of reliability.

In a few months, we could shed 20% of our total electricity load, begin decommisioning our nuclear reactors, and enjoy the same level of reliability in our electricity grid as we have now. Shedding loads can happen very quickly. In my house, for example, we were able to shed 25% of our load the day we moved in by replacing the refrigerator and installing CFLs. Similar efficiency opportunities are available to every homeowner in America. There really is no good reason Americans are wasting so much electricity and paying for nuclear power plants to supply it.

In terms of climate protection, the question is whether it would be better to shut down our coal power plants instead of our nuclear power plants. My personal feeling is that we would be in a better position to make the transition to a fully sustainable power grid if we shut down all the nuclear power plants first, and then tackled the coal power plants. The nuclear industry is a huge distraction from the research and engineering work that needs to be done to improve the way our grid operates so that we can power our homes, businesses and factories entirely by clean, renewable sources.

Looking to the future, we have plenty of other clean and sustainable power sources we can develop to supply all the electricity we need. Solar and hydropower could supply our needs many times over.

In the end, whether we continue to expose ourselves to the expense and risk of nuclear power is a political choice. The industry depends on tax payer support to operate now; it will require enormous new government subsidies to grow.

Each of us can do our part to make it possible to choose a nuclear-free future by bringing our household electricity consumption down to half the national average. I hope this article has given you some ideas you can try in your own home.