Electricity in NH - Did restructuring cause higher prices in New England?
With more snow coming and the faint hum of the oil burner in the background, it seems like a good time for a follow-up in my electricity restructuring series. Lately, there's been a growing concern that restructuring is not working and perhaps we should re-evaluate our current "simulated market competition" approach to electricity markets.
In Connecticut, some state officials want to return to the old regulated monopoly model. The justification is that electric rates in Connecticut are higher than nearly anywhere else in the country and they say that's proof that restructuring has failed. These officials point out that the lowest electricity prices are often found in states that still use the regulated monopoly model for electricity generation.
In light of these assertions, I'm reminded of a favorite phrase of economists, scientists, and statisticians - Correlation does not imply causation. In other words, when two things are related, you can't just assume that one caused the other. Just because New England has high electricity rates and has restructured their electricity markets doesn't mean that restructuring caused the high rates.
In fact, in Connecticut, and in New England, electricity rates have long been higher than average rates in the rest of the country. Generally, the states where electricity restructuring took hold were the states with the highest rates to begin with. That makes sense since we New Englanders have a pretty strong "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" sensibility. If electricity rates in New England weren't broken, my guess is we'd have left well-enough alone.
It turns out that the main explanation for higher electricity rates in New England is that for lots of reasons, we decided to generate our power with more expensive fuels like nuclear, natural gas, and oil and we don't use as much cheap coal as other regions. In the US overall, inexpensive coal is used to generate almost half of all electricity, while in New England, it's used to produce only 12%. Nuclear, gas, and oil together produce almost 70% of electricity in New England, but only 40% nationally. Our focus on fuels such as nuclear and natural gas keeps our air cleaner, and may be necessary due to our region's resources, but it comes with a cost.
Connecticut legislators also have another beef with restructuring. They argue that ISO-NE's marginal-price-based bulk power markets cause ratepayers to overpay for electricity. They say that paying all generators the price that "clears the market" and matches up supply with demand gouges consumers and sends excess profits to lower-cost energy producers. There may be something to this concern, but the challenge is to find a solution that can correct the problem without introducing even greater inefficiencies.
Under marginal pricing, the market price for everyone is set by the last unit of a good that's needed and supplied in the market. All suppliers (power generators) are able to sell their output at that last or marginal price. If the cost of supplying the last unit is roughly the same as the cost of supplying all other units, this isn't a big deal. However, if the marginal cost of production (the cost to make each additional unit of output) is sharply increasing, producers who have lower costs get excess profit because they get to sell their inexpensively produced output at the market price set by the last unit produced. In electricity generation, low-cost coal based producers can get a bonus because the marginal price of electricity is usually set by more expensive natural gas generators. Under a regulated monopoly model, utilities could only recover their actual cost of generating the power needed, plus a fixed profit.
Although these inefficiencies can be real, in a free market system, most prices are set using marginal pricing. Marginal pricing is how the market figures out the price of a gallon of gasoline, the price of a home, and the price of a new TV. Sure, there are other approaches, but in reality, once you decide that a market-based pricing scheme isn't good enough, you're on the hook to out-design the market and that's usually tough to do. Reverting to the regulated monopoly cost-plus approach has its own inefficiencies. The question boils down to which "synthetic" market structure can achieve the best result.
Generating capacity - do you come from a land of plenty?
One important step in assuring that the cost of electricity is reasonable is to assure that there's enough generating capacity. Under perfect, free-market competition, there would be hundreds of firms entering and exiting the power generating market and the supply of generating capacity would naturally meet up with the demand. Unfortunately that didn't happen with power generation in the early days of restructuring, and some regions experienced serious electricity shortages as demand grew faster than supply.
Since the market didn't naturally build the needed capacity, regulators tweaked things by creating a system of "capacity payments" to encourage power generators to build and maintain enough capacity to serve the market's needs. That sounds reasonable, but as with much of restructuring, getting the incentives right has been tough. In practice, capacity payments aren't just paid to owners that build new plants, they're also paid to existing power plant owners. Many economists believe this is inefficient and raises prices more than is needed to assure adaquate capacity.
While it's vital for restructuring that regulators get the market mechanisms and incentives right, the more I learn, the more I become convinced that a huge part of the equation is understanding how risk is allocated, and how we'd like it to be allocated. Exactly how should the risks of a new coal scrubber, wind plant, or nuclear power plant be allocated? Who should pay if things don't turn out as planned? Who should profit if things go better than planned?
Advocates of the regulated monopoly approach suggest that because regulated utilities have a lower cost of capital, they can offer a less expensive model for power generation. IMO, this view is incorrect. Unlike merchant power generators, utility power plant owners are basically risk pass-through entities. They have lower financing costs because the risk of their capital projects is passed on to ratepayers. Sure, there are some benefits from the certainty of a captive consumer base, but most of those benefits can also be enjoyed by merchant generators using power purchase agreements to pre-sell their output. In the end, there's really no free-lunch in terms of cost-of-capital. The power plants that regulated utilities build are every bit as risky as those that merchant generators build. It's just a question of how the risk is allocated and who pays if things go bad.
It seems that trying to figure out if one regulatory scheme is better than another without delving into the risk model is like trying to decide if bonds are better than stocks by looking only at last month's returns. Unless you've uncovered what the risks are and who's on the hook for them, the pricing at any instant could be a mirage.
So, did restructuring cause higher electricity prices in New England? Personally, I don't think so. There have certainly been challenges in getting the market structure right, and these could have increased costs some. Still, I don't see any obvious signs of market failure either. To me the key in all this is to get the incentives and the risk sharing right.
Developing a robust electricity generation and delivery system that can meet our needs today and in the future involves taking risks. The ultimate question is this: How much risk do we, as electricity consumers want to transfer onto investors and how much are we willing to shoulder by ourselves? IMO, a purposeful allocation of risks and rewards should drive electricity market structure and getting that right will lead to the best outcome for consumers and for our economy.
I came across a recent report by SeacoastOnline about a company in Portsmouth called Powerspan that's doing some pretty cool work with carbon capture technology. Apparently, the firm just completed a pilot program on a 1 megawatt coal plant in Ohio that helped prove out their technology and lay the groundwork for a future commercial deployment.
Carbon capture is a technique that helps clean up the output from coal-fired power plants. In NH, PSNH is working on cleaning up emissions from our largest coal plant, Merrimack Station, but this effort will only remove mercury and sulfur dioxide, not carbon.
As I've mentioned before, for lots of reasons, coal is likely to be an important part of our energy mix for decades to come. Anything we can do to economically clean up the output from coal power plants is a good thing. It's neat that we've got a company right here in the seacoast of New Hampshire that's helping to solve this tough worldwide problem.
Although this is promising technology, Powerspan still has some big work ahead of them, especially in terms of economics. The firm's press release on the pilot indicates that using their technology will cost around $50 per ton of carbon removed from a coal plant's output. While this is apparently a breakthrough compared to competing carbon capture technologies, $50 per ton is still nothing to sneeze at.
For some perspective on that cost, consider the data in my power generation economics post from last July. In one of the later graphs, I priced carbon emissions at $20 per ton to show the impact of emissions on the economics of coal generation (see graph above). Generating a megawatt hour of power using coal can easily produce a ton of carbon emissions, so adding in a $50 per ton charge instead of $20 would significantly increase the cost of power from coal. In fact, adding $50 a ton for carbon capture would move coal's fuel and operating cost from 4.5 cents to 7.5 cents per kWh in the graph above. That could make coal uncompetitive versus other approaches.
Still, we shouldn't be too negative about the costs of carbon capture. The technology is still in its infancy and we're likely to see major breakthroughs along the way. Also, as long as we're subsidizing other emerging clean power generation technologies like wind and solar, it seems only right that carbon capture is included in the mix.
IMO, we should think of investing in power generation technology the way we think about personal investing. We should take a "portfolio" approach and diversify in order to minimize our risks and maximize opportunity. Even though wind and solar are showing great promise right now, we shouldn't put all our research eggs in one basket.
It's going to be a long haul to get to a cleaner energy future and I don't think anyone really knows what that future will look like. Personally, I'm glad to see these local folks working hard and smart to help us find the best way there.
Fallout from the credit crisis and financial meltdown of 2007-2008 is still all around us these days. Even with improving conditions, you can hardly read a newspaper or watch the news on TV without some mention of the crisis and its impact. Although many people and businesses have been financially impacted, physical signs of the crisis are just now starting to show up on our local landscape.
I was in Portsmouth the other day and I did a quick photo shoot of some of the development projects underway. I had done a similar tour earlier in the year and while some of the projects seem to be going along strong, others have been delayed or scaled back. Causation can be hard to pinpoint, but it's probably a safe bet that many of the delays in these projects are due to financing issues or concerns about the economy.
In downtown Portsmouth, the Portwalk project is still moving along, although the developer split the project into three phases and is only working on phase I currently. Phase I includes a 128 room Residence Inn by Marriott and 12,000 sq feet of retail space. Phases II and III include condos (or maybe apartments), more office and commercial space, and a parking garage but seems to be on hold indefinitely at this point.
A Westin Hotel has also been approved across the street from the Portwalk project. The Westin project appeared ready to go, and the hotel was even listed on the Westin's website. However, there are no signs of construction and the hotel listing on the Westin website has been removed. There's no official word on the status of the project at this point.
Also downtown, the Martingale Wharf project is just now coming out of a 9 month long stall. Work has recently started again on this 50,000 sq ft retail, commercial, and residential condo project on Bow Street after months of sitting idle.
On the positive side, the project at the old Pier One Restaurant site (soon to be residential condos) appears to be moving along despite the tough economic conditions, as shown in the photo below.
Finally, the City of Portsmouth project to relocate the waterfront deck at Poco's Restaurant and rehabilitate the public right-of-way seems to be coming along. With the construction of a new building at Martingale's Wharf, this area now offers the only riverfront view on this section of Bow Street.
Residential Sprinklers - What's a life worth these days?
... The cost-per-life-saved for residential sprinkler systems is estimated at between $2-$36 million (in US dollars) according to reports from New Zealand and Canada.
According to a recent WMUR-TV report, the New Hampshire State Building Code Review Board has voted to require sprinkler systems in new residential construction starting in 2012.
Most fire safety officials laud the use of sprinkler systems for their ability to save lives, reduce injuries to building occupants and firefighters, and reduce the costs of fire damage. There's not much debate about whether sprinkler systems save lives and reduce property damage. They do.
The debate comes in when officials try to figure out if the savings are enough to offset the estimated $1.00 to $1.50 per square foot that sprinklers will add to the cost of constructing a new home. With the average square footage of new construction in New England running at around 2200 square feet, sprinklers could easily mean a $2500 to $3000 increase in cost.
That's where the analysis starts to get interesting and the squeamish head for the exits. Just how much is a life worth anyway? People say you can't put a value on a human life, but I say heck, engineers and safety officials have to do it all the time. Vehicle designers, transportation system planners, and of course, medical professionals are all too familiar with this gruesome mortality math. To start, I found this encouraging table from the US Fire Administration that shows that NH has the lowest fire death rate in the country, at 4.6 deaths per year per million. Regardless of where you stand on the sprinkler issue, that's good news.
Next, I did some quick googling and the first sources on cost-per-life-saved for residential sprinkler systems that I found were outside the US. (I wonder if this says something about our collective squeamishness here in the US).
This report from New Zealand estimates the cost per life saved at around $2-$5 million dollars (I did a currency conversion from the numbers in the report). Another report from Canada put the cost per life at a whopping $36 million. Still another report from the UK puts the number at around $1 to $2 million. Finally, the only US report I could find in my quick google search, from the Pennsylvania builders Association, puts the cost at over $80 million per life saved. Obviously, there's plenty of room for fudging the numbers and some of the groups producing these estimates have a vested interest in inflating the numbers to avoid new regulations, but at least you can get an idea of the order of magnitude.
To be fair, advocates of these mandates point out that they not only save lives and reduce injuries, but they also can protect property by reducing the severity of fires. The economics might be a bit tenuous, but I can't really blame the folks that have to run into burning buildings for advocating for more fire-safety equipment. These regulations would almost certainly make the outcomes they witness in their day-to-day jobs a lot less horrific.
"...the ultimate challenge for the bonsai designer is to expose the essence of the tree. "
Beginning in the early 1990s, electricity markets in New Hampshire and across the country have been restructured and reorganized. As with the Bonsai tree pictured above, regulators have worked hard to shape these new markets, trimming, pruning, and pinning up where necessary. The goal is to coax the new electricity markets to take on the shape of capitalism's beloved free markets.
In the early days of commercial electric service, electric companies mostly developed into natural monopolies. Although there were exceptions, especially in the early wild-west days of the industry, it was soon recognized that it didn't make sense to string up redundant sets of wires to serve each potential customer. For most of the twentieth century, electricity was provided under the staid and stable regulated monopoly model. Electric utilities were vertically integrated and provided everything from power generation, to transmission, to neighborhood distribution and customer service. Utilities were typically organized as investor owned for-profit firms, or municipal non-profits. Under either model, outcomes were generally stable and predictable for everyone involved.
Then in the 1980s, there was a national trend to deregulate and restructure several industries that had historically been heavily regulated. This move was partly fueled by the success of the conservative movement under Ronald Regan, and was later spurred along by the collapse of communism in the Soviet Union and a nearly worldwide change-of-heart on the benefits of free-market capitalism . By the early 1990s, in the US and around the world, several industries, including airlines, telephony, and gas and electric utilities, were deregulated or restructured in hopes of harnessing the forces market competition to the benefit of investors, customers and the economy.
The timing of the global sea-change toward free markets couldn't have been worse for regulated electric utilities. By the late 1980s, the industry was suffering from the effects of multiple energy price shocks during the 1970s followed by a nasty nuclear hangover. The cost-plus-guaranteed-return pricing model of regulated electric utilities was a natural fit for nuclear power's high capital cost, low energy cost model. With nuclear power, utilities hoped to leverage their cheap access to debt and lock in the price of electricity for years to come.
Nuclear power promised boundless clean electricity that according to its advocates would be "too cheap to meter." If only it had turned out to be so. By the late 1980s, the nuclear "experiment" was floundering in a sea of red ink and ratepayers across the country were fed up. Businesses and industrial users in the Northeast were especially hard hit by high electricity costs and demanded action from their state legislators.
Meanwhile, supporters of "deregulation" suggested that the utilities' experiment with nuclear power wasn't the problem per se. It was just that the risk-model was broken and the regulations were excessive . They suggested that with a free-market approach, investors would be free to search out new ways to generate electricity as they saw fit. With enough competition and enough experimentation, free-markets would ferret out the lowest cost solution and everyone would win. As a bonus, it would be hapless investors who would bear the costs of the failures, not ratepayers.
The plan to move the electricity industry toward a free market structure started with an analysis of where competition had the best chance of working. Electricity generation seemed like the most obvious place to start. The idea was that if independent power producers were given open and free access to statewide and regional electricity grids, market competition could flourish.
To make way for competition in power generation, the market power that utilities enjoyed in both generation and transmission had to be diminished. Different states took different approaches, but New England generally followed the design presented in the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (FERC) Order 888, which was issued in 1996. This order, along with subsequent orders, presented a framework where utilities would sell off their generation capability and give up control over the power grid to pave the way for competition. Most reform plans included the creation of a regional transmission organization to manage the power-grid and create a fair and open process for connecting to the grid. The groundwork for restructuring in New Hampshire was kicked-off with the creation of ISO-NE in 1997. Regional system operators were also charged with the task of creating standardized wholesale power markets, where market participants could sell and buy electricity as though it was a commodity.
The creation of standardized wholesale power markets paved the way for another market reform. Once power could be traded like a commodity in a "virtual world" running parallel to the wires and transformers, end-customers could choose who to buy their power from. Regulated utilities would still maintain the distribution infrastructure, but customers could choose to buy their power from an independent "power marketer" instead of their local utility. The model was similar to long-distance phone service, where customers could choose a long-distance provider other than their local telephone company.
Finally, restructuring would leave legacy utilities as regulated monopolies to maintain local power distribution systems and take care of customer service. In New Hampshire the original idea was for utilities to sell off their generation and transmission resources, however some utilities, most notably PSNH, were permitted to retain some "grandfathered" resources until the end of their useful life. All regulated utilities in New Hampshire are prohibited from building or owning new power plants and new transmission resources.
As I've mentioned in previous posts, New Hampshire relies on ISO-NE for both maintaining the power grid and operating regional power markets. I've also posted about the companies in New Hampshire that own and operate power plants as independent power producers. ISO-NE also maintains a connection queue so that power plant owners can get open an fair access to the power grid.
So far, so good, but unfortunately, it's not all roses from there. The model for competitive electricity markets here in New Hampshire is complicated and evolving. For lots of reasons, it's been tough to get the structure just right, and some believe that the current "sort of a free-market" system is deeply flawed. Still others are confident that the right mix of regulation and market incentives can and will be found, and the benefits will far outweigh the costs.
There's lots to cover with this topic, so the plan is to do a short series of posts on some of the challenges that we're facing with restructuring here in New Hampshire and around the country.
David Brooks at the Nashua Telegraph and GraniteGeek put up a post today on nuclear power and the issues around extending the license on the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant. As Dave pointed out earlier, the Seabrook Station nuclear power plant is also applying for a license extension. Dave says that he's "pro-nuclear, but ready to waffle at a the drop of an isotope."
Well, I'll see Dave's waffle-readiness and raise him one. I'm decidedly undecided on nuclear, but ask me again in 5-7 years and I may have an opinion. I suppose my wait-and-see attitude puts me more on the side of the nattering-nabobs-of-negativism for now.
There are around 50 nuclear power plants under construction worldwide (~24 in China, none in the US). Included in that mix are three next-generation plant designs that are purported to have much better economics than nuclear designs of years past. As I indicated in an earlier post on Westinghouse Electric in Newington, the three new designs are the AP1000 from Westinghouse, the ESBWR and ABWR from GE-Hitachi, and the EPR from French owned Areva.
If these new designs pan out and can 1) keep construction delays to a minimum, 2) stay roughly on budget, and 3) operate reliably for a few years, we'll find ourselves in a new era of nuclear power. If that happens, there could be a seismic shift in our approach to emissions-free base load power generation.
OTOH, the capital markets are still loudly saying no-thanks to nuclear power. That's why the nuclear projects underway today are mostly being built by oppressive regimes with excess cash (China can only buy so many US treasuries), and by state-run or regulated monopolies that are able to push nuclear power's project risk onto ratepayers. By anyone's math, getting nuclear power to be economical is a tough nut to crack. The cost-of-capital problem for nuclear is insurmountable without ratepayer guarantees, government financing, or a big change in market sentiment. To make matters worse, recently there's been some bad news on the next-gen design front (see here and here). IMO, it's too early to tell how serious these design issues are and I still have an open mind on the future. But, it's going to take a while to see how this movie ends.
As far as the old plants go, I'm for milking them for all we safely can. Seabrook just finished refueling this month and is back online and good to go for another 18 months. The emergency sirens were tested last Wednesday and since I'm in the evacuation zone, I was able to hear them loud and clear.
Perhaps I'll be proven wrong, but with nuclear power, I'm less worried about safety and much more worried about economics. Sure, the safety and disposal challenges are real, but IMO, the economic issues are bigger. Many people claim Seabrook is providing us with loads of economical electricity. Unfortunately, that's only true if you ignore the PSNH bankruptcy, the huge losses by investors and ratepayers, and the fire-sale of the plant to FPL/NextEra. Granted, some of the delays at Seabrook were due to regulatory/licensing issues, but that wasn't the whole story.
In the end, with Seabrook we made the ultimate investing mistake of buying high and selling low. I suspect FPL did fine with their investment in Seabrook, but for the rest of us, not so much. As for this new generation of nuclear power plants - only time will tell.
So ask me again in 5-7 years and I may have an opinion.
Thanks to generous federal and state incentives, solar PV electric systems are currently ON SALE in NH for almost 50% off!
New Hampshire resident Heather Parker included solar photovoltaic (PV) electric modules as part of her ambitious project to construct a super-efficient solar home in Portsmouth, NH. This new home lives and breathes energy efficiency, right down to its bones. The house sports a passive solar design, super-insulating materials throughout, and a solar-thermal hot water heating system. Each of these systems is interesting on its own, and you can read more details here and here. But for this post, I'd like to focus on the home's solar photovoltaic electric system.
The photo above shows the array of 16 SunPower 210 watt PV modules, mounted on the right-hand side of the home's roof. The 3.4 kW solar electric system was designed and installed by ReVision Energy, of Liberty, Maine. Because Heather's home is so efficient, this 3.4 kW system should provide a large portion of the home's annual electricity needs.
In the photo above you can see the SunPower 3000m inverter, which was mounted on an outside wall to conserve indoor living space. In addition to the inverter, ReVision Energy also installed a separate solar meter between the inverter and the home's main circuit panel. Just underneath the solar meter is PSNH's electric meter. This appears to be an Itron model C1S solid-state watt meter. According to Itron's website, these meters can be equipped with optional "personality modules" to provide advanced features such as time-of-use (TOU) metering, load profiling, and RF-transmission.
The cost of photovoltaic (PV) solar modules has dropped rapidly recently and the efficiency of PV systems is ever increasing. You'd think that generating clean electricity from the sun would be an economic no-brainer. Well, as usual, it's not so simple.
According to the SolarBuzz.com retail price summary, PV modules currently retail for around $4.34 per watt in the US. An inverter to convert the system's DC output into AC that can be tied to the power grid runs another $.71 per watt. Add in the cost of other supplies and installation and the total cost for a complete solar electric system can easily range between $6 and $10 per watt. A new PV solar electric system, sized at 5kW-7kW to cover a good portion of a typical NH home's electricity usage of 7,000 kWh per year, could easily cost upwards of $50k. That's a serious investment! Of course, the easiest place to start reducing costs is with lower consumption, which Heather's house shows is possible. Thanks to its super energy-efficient design, it uses about half the power that a conventional house uses each year.
OK you say, the upfront cost for a new solar electric system may be high, but it's a one-time charge and in exchange you get clean and free energy for years to come. Also, in New Hampshire there's a $3 per watt rebate from the RGGI renewable energy fund, administered by the state of NH and the NH Public Utilities Commission (up to $6k max). In addition, residential installations can qualify for a federal tax credit worth 30% of the installed cost of the system. With all these great incentives, it's should be much easier for PV solar electric systems to be economical, even here in New Hampshire.
Running the numbers - Can a PV project make economic sense?
To find out how economical a new solar electric system might be, we need some data. We need to determine how much electricity the system will generate. A system that's rated at 5 kW, can only produce that peak output with perfect conditions. As with other electricity generation approaches, we need to know the system's "capacity factor" or it's annual production rate. Also, solar panels produce DC current that must be converted to AC for home and electrical grid use. This conversion, along with other system losses, reduces efficiency. We need to somehow find a way to take all this into account and extrapolate from raw system capacity into a realistic estimate of actual kWh production. Then we need to somehow convert that production into dollars so we can perform a discounted cash flow analysis to see if it's all worth it.
As I said before, Portsmouth solar home owner Heather Parker was generous enough to share the details of her solar electric project, so we can use this "real world" data in our analysis. The image above is a composite of four photos that shows the alternating output from Heather's DC to AC inverter. I took these shots late in the afternoon near sunset, so the array was only producing 527 watts at the time. In the mid-afternoon, the array produces as much as 2,700 watts. Another inverter display shows that the system produced a total of over 9 kWh of electricity on the chilly November day I visited. You can also see that since the system was installed a couple of months ago, it has produced a total of 735 kWh of electricity. Finally, the home's reduced intake of electricity from PSNH has already lowered carbon emissions from local power plants by an estimated 1,250 pounds.
Lots of good stuff in the PVCalc output, that's for sure. You really can see that the tax credits and rebates are an important part of the equation. In Heather's case, the credits covered almost 50% of the system's installed cost. For fun, I manually calculated a break-even kWh price for the project. It worked out to 22.1 cents per kWh without the tax credit and rebate factored in and 11.5 cents per kWh after subtracting them out.
The PVCalc tool also does some sophisticated capital project analysis. In particular, the tool performs a discounted cash flow (DCF) analysis to compute an internal rate of return (IRR) and net present value (NPV) for the project (these are shown on the amortization tab). You may recall that I mentioned DCF when we did our analysis of commercial wind projects in NH. When analyzing capital projects, even home solar electric projects, DCF is the gold standard because it factors in the idea that a dollar received today is worth a lot more than a dollar received in 30 years.
To compute a net present value, the project's future cash flows are "discounted" or adjusted to "today's value" dollars. Next, these "present values" are added together and the initial project cost is subtracted from the sum or netted out. If the resulting NPV is positive, the project will yield net savings (because the present value of future cash flows is greater than the project's cost). If NPV is negative, the project is not likely to be economical. Also, the higher the NPV, the better. NPV is computed using a "discount rate" that takes into account the project's riskiness. Since home energy efficiency projects are pretty low risk, a discount rate of 5% (which is the PVCalc default) seems appropriate. It might even be little on the conservative side, but better safe than sorry.
Running the Numbers - What if things don't go as planned?
Below I made a table that shows what happens to the PVCalc outputs when some of the key input parameters are changed. This "sensitivity analysis" helps identify how dependent the project's success is on the accuracy of the inputs. Since it's impossible to predict the future with certainty, sensitivity analysis is helpful to show whether a project will still be economical if things don't turn out exactly as planned.
Right away, you can see that success for Heather's project is highly dependent on how fast PSNH's electricity rates increase over the life of the project. The tool's default assumption is a 5% annual increase in rates. The table above shows that with a more modest 3% annual increase, the NPV of the project declines significantly. That's no surprise, since the value of the electricity produced by Heather's solar array is directly related to PSNH's electricity rates. Still, even with a very modest 3% annual increase in rates (we wish!), the project still has a positive NPV, which means it will be economical even in that unlikely circumstance. On the flip side, should electricity rates increase by 7% a year, the project's NPV would increase to nearly $9k, more than double the NPV of the baseline scenario. A 7% rate of increase in electricity prices may sound high, but when you consider expected inflation rates, the long-term outlook for fossil fuel prices, and pending carbon-pricing initiatives, 7% doesn't seem far-fetched at all.
You can also see from the table above that the system's derate factor has a huge impact on the project's economics. The derate factor represents the overall efficiency of the system. The solar array's raw DC output is multiplied by the derate factor to determine net electricity production, so the higher the derate factor the better. With a 69% derate factor, instead of the 77% default, the NPV practically drops in half. Conversely, with an 85% derate factor, the NPV increases by nearly 50%. This shows that the PV array's nameplate rating is only part of the story. The efficiency of the whole system has to be considered. As an example, according to this NREL derate calculator, increasing inverter efficiency by just 3% and keeping the panels from getting soiled could increase a system's derate factor from 77% to over 83%.
Next, I varied the azimuth angle to see what that would do. When Heather was deciding how to position the house on the lot, she had a dilemma. By positioning the house so the roof faced south east instead of due south, she got a much nicer view. However, Heather knew that facing the solar array at 155 degrees instead of due south at 180 degrees would reduce her available solar energy. Using PVCalc, we can see that this decision only dropped the NPV by $500 and still left her with plenty of net savings. Considering the nicer view, it seems like a smart tradeoff. I also experimented with a 40 degree roof pitch to simulate what mounting the array on a 10/12 roof would do, compared to using Heather's 12/12 pitch roof (45 degrees). That change actually resulted in a slight improvement in the NPV.
Finally, I experimented with some financing options to see how they might affect the project's NPV. I assumed cash payment for all my earlier scenarios, but I wanted to see how using a home equity loan would impact the results. Since a home equity loan is usually tax deductible, part of the interest paid on the loan is "refunded" and that will defray the project's costs. You can see that with a 5% home loan, the NPV of the project increases from $3,719 to $4,971. That increase in NPV is largely the result of the tax break on the financing, as shown on the last page of this pdf report. To do a complete cash vs. finance analysis, you'd need to also factor in the after-tax return you expect to receive by investing the cash instead of using it to pay for the project.
Solar Electric Systems - What's the bottom line?
As you can see, varying these input parameters causes the NPV to bounce around all over the place. This is why sensitivity analysis is so important. It let's you evaluate a project under a range possible of outcomes. Based on this analysis, it's a pretty good bet that the project's NPV will fall somewhere between $0 and $9000, and any of these outcomes would be great for Heather. Our sensitivity analysis has shown that in the face of many uncertainties, the project's economics are quite robust.
So after lots of number crunching, it looks like Heather's solar electricity project is a winner, both for the environment and for her pocketbook. Even if some of her assumptions about the system's efficiency or PSNH's future electric rates turn out the be wrong, it's very likely that this project will still be a great investment. Plus, no matter how you slice it, dumping 2 tons less of carbon into the air every year can't be a bad thing!
Yesterday, our washing machine died after a relatively short life of only six and a half years. It's one of those newfangled front-loading machines. These new machines can really get clothes clean and they're great from an energy efficiency standpoint, but IMO they're much less reliable than the old-fashioned top-loaders of yesteryear. Our last top-loader gave us around 15 years without a service call before it died. Granted, my sample-size is small, but I'm beginning to wonder if the higher capital costs and replacement costs of these new designs negate all the efficiency savings benefits. Replacing your washer twice as often is expensive and can't be very environmentally friendly.
Anyhow, despite the fact that our old washer was energy efficient, I thought we might be able to benefit from the appliance rebate program that was part Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (stimulus bill). Some have called the program cash-for-appliance-clunkers. Unlike the auto cash-for-clunkers program, the appliance rebate program is administered by the states. Each state is allocated funds for the program ($1.2 million for NH) and submits an implementation plan to the US Dept. of Energy for approval.
Now the bad news - well for me anyway. New Hampshire decided to buck the national trend and try to be a bit innovative in their implementation of the appliance clunkers program. Instead of offering rebates for air conditioners, refrigerators, washing machines, and other appliances, New Hampshire's Office of Energy and Planning decided to target the rebates at home heating equipment and hot water heating systems (including solar-thermal). Their official press release notes that there's already a state rebate program for energy efficient appliances, so targeting these new rebates toward heating and hot-water applications will give New Hampshire a bigger bang for the buck, energy efficiency-wise.
On its face, the plan seems to make sense and it's always good to see New Hampshire leading rather than following the herd in terms of innovative state programs. I'll try not to be bitter that Uncle Sam won't be helping to buy us a new washing machine.
It's 9:00 am, do you know what the bulk price is for electricity in New Hampshire?
A competitive electricity market depends on the the ability of producers and consumers of electricity to transact business in an environment that's organized, transparent, and free from manipulation. The producers of bulk electricity are power plant owners while the consumers include regulated utilities, large businesses, and power marketers. Power marketers are companies that resell energy to customers as their their "energy supplier." Currently in New Hampshire, residential customers must purchase energy from their utility because no power marketers have chosen to serve residential customers. Businesses in New Hampshire can choose from among a dozen or so energy suppliers.
In New England, the bulk electricity market is operated by ISO-NE. You can think of ISO-NE as running something like a stock exchange, where buyers place bids for the power they need and generators place offers for power they're willing to supply. The photo above is a screenshot from ISO-NE's website that shows the real-time location-based marginal prices (LMP) for bulk electricity at 9am yesterday. The differences in prices between the states are due to transmission line losses from power having to travel greater distances and from congestion surcharges resulting from power having to travel over congested transmission lines. In reality, the bulk power market system is much more complex than this map shows. It contains over 900 distinct pricing "nodes" (pg 12) that include every generation station and many aggregation points for bulk load. In addition, there are several pricing nodes at key transmission system interconnects. The graph only shows representative data from key nodes throughout the system.
The prices shown in the map above are for a megawatt hour (MWh) of electricity. One MWh is 1000 kilowatt hours (kWh), so a price of $39.10 per MWh comes out to about 3.9 cents per kWh. That's the bulk price at a relatively low-demand period. For comparison, the retail energy charge for PSNH residential customers is around 9 cents per kWh. PSNH's regulated 9 cent rate is much higher than the 3.9 cent rate because it's an average rate and it takes into account peak demand periods where the bulk rate can jump to over $150 per MWh (15 cents/ kWh). PSNH's retail rate also includes a wholesale to retail markup. You can see why many are calling for time-of-day metering to more closely tie the price people pay for electricity to the actual cost of electricity. If using electricity in the afternoon cost 3 times as much as using it overnight, would you change your behavior?
ISO-NE's bulk power market is only virtually connected to physical electricity production and consumption. This connection is accomplished through a web of regulations and contract settlement procedures. A purchase on the bulk market doesn't suddenly start the flow of electricity to the buyer nor does a sale mean that a generator must start their turbines spinning. These bulk markets are a parallel financial universe that mirrors the physical world and provides a means for market participants to "settle up" for the power they produce or consume.
Generally, power plant owners and bulk electricity "loads" have three options at their disposal for exchanging virtual "rights" to electricity. The first two options are operated by ISO-NE and include the real-time market described above as well as a day-ahead market. The day-ahead market can be used by utilities and other loads to cover part of their estimated demand for the next day with pre-purchased electricity. This gives participants protection from minute-to-minute market volatility and provides important price stability to both generators and loads.
The third way for generators and loads to pre-negotiate prices for electricity is through bilateral contracts. A bilateral contract is a contract between a generator and a load to supply a specified amount of power at a pre-negotiated price during a pre-negotiated period. These contracts can be for power supplied the next day, or they can be for power to be supplied over a period of years. They're an important component of competitive electricity markets because they provide long-term stability and predictability in an otherwise highly volatile market. Bi-lateral contracts are essential for plant owners to secure long-term financing and they also allow utilities and large businesses to control their exposure to unexpected spikes in the price of electricity.
Finally, in addition to managing the market for bulk electricity, ISO-NE also manages several other electricity related markets and auction processes. The goal is to create what I'd call "virtual electricity products" which include things like financial transmission rights, forward capacity payments, ancillary services (eg providing spinning reserves), and renewable energy credits. ISO-NE, under the guidance of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), attempts to harness market forces to manage both the supply and demand of things like transmission line capacity, generation capacity, backup reserve capability, and renewable electricity generation. These artificial markets are very complex and regulators are continuously tweaking them to make them operate more effectively. That's a good thing, because badly functioning electricity markets can really make a mess of a state's economy, as California found out a few years back.
When I visited Concord, NH a few weeks ago to attend the tax summit, I got a chance to visit our state capital for the first time. Living in the seacoast, I don't make the trip over to Concord very often. I've been to the LL Bean Outlet, Company C, and even a few of the shops on Main Street. But I'd never been inside the State House.
The tax summit was actually held in the Legislative Office Building, but since there were several breaks over the course of the two day summit, I had plenty of time to wander around to the other government buildings.
Once I got past the State House entrance hall (called the Hall of Flags), walking through the interior hallways and past the offices of the grand old building reminded me of the classrooms at my old college. The NH State House was originally built in 1819 and apparently is the oldest state house in the country that still houses the legislature in their original chambers.
The Senate Chamber (above) is located in the northeast corner of the State House on the second floor.
After checking out the normal visitor photo spots throughout the State House, I ventured into some areas that are probably less traveled by visitors. In particular, I headed down into the basement to the cafeteria.
Since I had some time before the next summit meeting session, I decided to hang out in the cafeteria and take advantage of the free public wifi provided throughout the State House. The food in the cafeteria was reasonably priced, and I could enjoy it while catching up on my email and the news of the day.
The cafeteria is a bit on the austere side as you can see from the photo above. There were no fancy sinks or marble countertops here. Still, it proved to be a great spot to rest and re-group before heading to the afternoon tax summit sessions.
As an added bonus, I saw a few well-known elected officials taking their lunch breaks. I wonder if any other state governments offer their citizens the opportunity to share a brown-bag lunch with their legislators in a basement cafeteria?
"Secret" underground passageway between the State House and the Legislative Office Bld.
Wandering around out of the cafeteria, I discovered a "secret" underground passageway that leads back to the Legislative Office Building (LOB). It was great to be able to stealthily move between the State House and the LOB without having to face the protesting mob above - ok, there were only 20 or so tax-protesters and they seemed pretty well behaved.
I think there's another tunnel to the annex building that's across Capital Street, but I didn't check that one out.
Once through the tunnel, I arrived in the basement of the Legislative Office Building, which was built in around 1875 as a post office. At one time, the building was used to house the US District Court. Today, it provides meeting space and offices for several legislative committees.
Overall, I found the NH State House and associated buildings very approachable for visitors. I double-checked to make sure I could take photos and then wandered around freely looking for good shots.
At one point, a NH State Trooper approached me to ask if I needed directions. It was right after I finished taking the tunnel photos and I'm pretty sure I may have been caught on video looking suspicious (I mounted my camera on a monopod to get the shot without a flash). Anyhow, the officer was very friendly and when I explained that I was taking pictures for my blog, he wished me luck and headed on his way.
So if you haven't visited "your" state capital yet, I highly recommend it. When you go, be sure to check out the secret tunnels and the free wifi in the basement cafeteria.


For most parents, potty training is a challenge like they never could anticipate. Whether it be because our kiddo is reluctant or finds the toilet scary, or because we simply don't have the time we need to commit, it's usually so hard. Finding any tools to aid us in our mission to get our kids out of diapers is always a goal. And there are many ways to do it. Songs, videos, books, you name it. And now, after years and years of parents begging, Australian super group The Wiggles have finally come out with a song that helps kids go.
Simply called, "The Toilet Song," animated versions of The Wiggles encourage kids not to be afraid of going to the potty. We got to have a chat with Anthony, the blue Wiggle, and have him explain not only the motivation behind the song, but just what took them so long to release it.
"Parents have been asking for the 30 years The Wiggles have been together," he admits. But potty training isn't quite as easy to talk about as say, washing your hands, which is another song the group has already taken on. There is a certain amount of care that needs to be put into encouraging young kids to go on a toilet. Because potty training is really hard, not just for parents, but also for kids.
Anthony talked pretty openly about how hard potty training one of his daughters was. "It was actually quite traumatic, trying to encourage my daughter to use the toilet," he said. His daughter is 15 now, and he says that she still remembers the day she was stuck in the bathroom with her mom trying to use the toilet. So, he understood parents' need for a song, but also understands that there is a line between making kids feel bad and the right level of encouraging.
"The Toilet Song" definitely gets that balance just right. Animated by Super Simple Songs, Emma and Lachy (the Yellow and Purple Wiggles) guide kids through the process of sitting down on the toilet and going poop. Because all parents know that getting our kids to poop on the potty is literally the worst part of potty training. But any song where you end by getting to flush a toilet is actually pretty fun. "Children have a lot of fears about the toilet," Anthony adds.
"We've always thought about it, but it's a really sensitive subject," he notes. And because we never know the circumstances of potty training, it does take a good amount of care. Sometimes, we have no choice but to potty train kids before they may feel comfortable out of necessity. Much like many preschool's in the US, Anthony talks about needing to have his daughter potty trained before she could attend preschool. Situations like that add to the already intense pressure.
In the song, kids are being asked to use their imaginations to make going easier. By pretending that they're a prince or a princess sitting on a throne, they can forget how scary a toilet is. And because it's a video, it gives them something to watch, which can also be a helpful distraction while sitting on the potty.
By turning going to the bathroom into a little game, The Wiggles have taken the pressure off kids. "Can you take the toilet challenge?" Lachy asks. "Can you sit on the toilet for this whole song? And at the end you can press the button to flush!" Kids like playing games. And if your kiddo has a bit of a competitive side, this may be an awesome way to get them going.
"You have to make it fun," Anthony admits as one of the biggest challenges of writing such a song. "But it encourages them to try," he says.
Parents of kids who are already potty trained will definitely wish they had this song. But parents who are currently going through it will be happy to have it in their arsenal. And then you can follow it up with The Wiggles' tune about washing your hands.
This is why we love The Wiggles, because they always find ways to help make our lives as parents a little easier.


PRO Flat Makeup Brush Face Contour Concealer Foundation Powder Blush, Cosmetic Tool Great for Travel, Compact Size, Black Wooden Handle.
It's a good gift for your lover, family, friend and co worker.
MAC #187 Stipple Duo Fiber Makeup Blending Brush Flat Top Polishing Facial Liquid Foundation, Powder, Blush, Pigments.
A large full circular flat top brush used for lightweight application and blending of face foundation, powder or pigments. Use to create soft layers or add textures. Made from a soft blend of goat and synthetic fibres. Because of the synthetic fibers, the brush allows you to stipple the perfect amount of foundation on the skin and the natural fibers, allow you to buff the product into place, leaving you a flawless finish and buildable coverage.


Dear Melanin – An everything blog for everyone.
An everything blog for everyone.
Welcome to Dear Melanin, an everything blog geared towards female empowerment, understanding love & life, as I share my opinions about…everything. Writing has always been a passion of mine and blogging allows me a way to express my thoughts while helping others.
You can expect at least two new blogs every week, topics ranging from advice based on Dear Melanin questions, personal improvements that I want to share and tips on fashion, dating, parenting, and food. In no way am I an expert on any of the subjects I'm covering, but I do research my topics before I begin writing about them; and personal anecdotes are used strictly as examples and suggestions.
There is no perfect way to live life, no chosen path that will get you from Point A to Point B without any obstacles. This blog is not an instruction manual, but a guidebook with recommendations that I think would be helpful in navigating this crazy circus called life.
I hope you enjoy reading my blog, and I look forward to your feedback and suggestions.


text:
« More proof (from Scientology) that it's never been a better time to be a Scientologist!
VIDEO LEAK: Rare look at Captain David Miscavige giving shipboard Scientology briefing »
TEN YEARS GONE: Shelly Miscavige, the wife Scientology's leader wants us to forget
By Tony Ortega | September 7, 2015
It was late summer 2005. That much our sources agree on. It might have been late August, or it might have been early September. But it was a full ten years ago, say our eyewitness sources, that Shelly Miscavige vanished.
When we started writing about Shelly and her strange situation, back in 2012, there was some confusion about the timing of her disappearance. But since then we developed new sources who were at Int Base and personally saw the events leading up to Shelly's sudden departure. And those sources are sure of one thing: It was ten years ago, they tell us.
Ten years ago.
We've told Shelly's story numerous times, and it also got a lengthy treatment in Vanity Fair. Leah Remini caused a stir in 2013 when she tried to get the Los Angeles Police Department to look into Shelly's whereabouts. (They visited Shelly and reported that she was not only alive but didn't want to make a public statement.)
The thing is, we know where Shelly has been the last ten years. It's really not a secret, and we continue to get more evidence that confirms her location. But the astounding thing about Shelly is not that she's "missing," because she isn't. The remarkable thing is that Scientology leader David Miscavige has gotten away with banishing his wife, who once helped to run Scientology with him, to a small compound in the mountains above Los Angeles.
Shelly Miscavige is not missing. David Miscavige has known exactly where she's been for the last ten years, because he put her there.
And Shelly's story is not a simple one. We asked numerous people for their memories of Shelly this week, and they weren't all positive. Shelly was, along with her husband, a tough-as-nails Sea Org executive who wasn't shy about berating people to get things done. But, as we explained in the 2013 story "Love in the time of Miscavige," there were signs, in 2005, that her relationship with her husband was unraveling. We're going to quote a key section from that story for our readers who may not be up on the Shelly Miscavige story.
At the beginning of 2004, Miscavige had ordered dozens of top executives into a locked room, calling them "SPs." (A "suppressive person" is someone with evil intention to Scientology — being declared an SP is the church's form of excommunication.)
Over time, that office-prison became known as "The Hole" as up to 100 base executives were held in it day and night, sleeping on the floor and eating from buckets of soupy slop.
Miscavige was becoming less and less predictable. Every Sea Org official walked on eggshells around him, and were hypersensitive to any of his rants, looking for ways to stay in his good graces.
And then, in 2005, a surprising thing happened.
Miscavige announced that he was going to Los Angeles to work on a new set of re-edited L. Ron Hubbard books he wanted published. (They would come out in 2007 and be called "The Basics," and every Scientologist would be pressured to purchase multiple sets, with lectures, for about $3,000 each.)
Shelly, however, said she was staying at Int Base. And she asked the young woman [an assistant to Shelly] to stay with her.
It was the first time in the young woman's career that David and Shelly Miscavige hadn't traveled someplace together.
The young woman did what she was told, and she stayed at the Base.
While Miscavige was gone, Shelly got to work. She filled the org chart with names, and then informed those employees that they had new jobs. [Miscavige had complained bitterly that an "org board" — a personnel chart for the base — had long gone unfinished.]
Finally, the org chart would no longer be an issue.
Miscavige also had continually groused that he was going to need to move out of his quarters in the "Villas" — three buildings on the north side of the property — so they could be renovated and turned over to CMO Int, one of upper management's alphabet soup of entities. "I'm going to give you the Villas, you assholes," Miscavige would taunt his top lieutenants.
So while he was gone, Shelly finally made that happen. She had COB's things crated up and moved out of the Villas to a drab set of quarters known as the "G's."
At about this time, Scientology spokesman Mike Rinder arrived at Int Base after visiting Miscavige in Los Angeles. He was immediately cornered by Shelly as soon as he arrived.
"She took me to the back patio of the RTC building, which is really isolated. There was no one around," Rinder tells us. "She asked me, 'When you saw him, was Dave wearing his gold or platinum wedding ring?'"
Rinder says he thinks she knew it would have been too much of a giveaway to simply ask if Miscavige was wearing a ring at all, which is why she asked it that way. Rinder had no idea if Miscavige actually had more than one version of his wedding ring.
"Oh, you know, I didn't notice," he told her.
"The question was so out of the blue, and so bizarre," he tells us. "I knew that she was in deep shit. She was worried that he was going to abandon her."
Rinder wonders if, knowing that she was on thin ice, she was suddenly taking on the things Miscavige always complained needed to be done — the org chart and the renovation of the Villas — as a way of getting into his good graces. Shelly was trying to make things go right for COB.
"That was the last conversation I had with Shelly," Rinder says. (He was not around when Miscavige returned. He was later put into The Hole as a prisoner for more than a year, and then defected from Scientology while he was in London in 2007.)
By the time Miscavige did return to the base, a couple of months after he'd gone to LA, the org chart had been filled and the Villas were gutted.
He was not pleased.
"He had a total psychotic fit," one eyewitness tells us. "He said we were a bunch of treasonous fucks."
A week later, Shelly Miscavige vanished.
Since we wrote that story in 2013, we talked to two new sources who were at the base at the time, who filled us in on a new detail we haven't seen reported elsewhere. Over the course of that week between Miscavige's meltdown and Shelly's disappearance, something telling happened. Our new sources tell us that Miscavige went back to Los Angeles, and then Shelly, apparently knowing she was facing oblivion, took the unusual step of driving from the base to LA to see if she could patch things up with her husband. Apparently, that mission didn't succeed. And someday, we'd love to know how that scene unfolded.
Shelly soon returned to the base, and then she vanished.
We know now, from multiple lines of evidence, that she was transferred from the International Base near Hemet to a super-secret compound near Lake Arrowhead in the mountains above Los Angeles. The compound is the headquarters for Scientology's most secretive entity, the Church of Spiritual Technology. We've written extensively about CST and its underground vaults, where L. Ron Hubbard's works are stored so they can survive a nuclear holocaust. For the past ten years — except for a couple of days in the summer of 2007 when she was let out to attend the funeral of her father, Barney Barnett — Shelly has been living and working at CST's headquarters compound, which Scientologists call by numerous different names, depending on whom you ask: Twin Peaks, Rimforest, Rim of the World, or Crestline.
Whatever you call it, it's a small complex that houses maybe a dozen people who work on the project to archive Hubbard's works. Since she was transferred there, Shelly, who once was a major figure in the church and even helped select girlfriends for Tom Cruise, has attended no public church events and has not even been allowed to see her own family. Is Shelly happy working there? Is she being held against her will? Would she take the opportunity to escape if she could?
We reported in 2013 that Shelly does have some limited communication with the outside world, and was asked by a family member how she might be able to leave the base. "There's only one way," she responded, and former Scientology spokesman Mike Rinder told us he interpreted that to mean that only another family funeral would allow Shelly to go outside the confines of the compound.
That same year, Leah Remini made her missing-person report about Shelly to the LAPD on Monday, August 5. By Thursday afternoon, August 8, police told a reporter that they had checked on Shelly and considered Leah's report "unfounded." What happened? Well, LAPD Lt. Andre Dawson sent two of his detectives to meet Shelly. A missing-person report has a very narrow goal — to find out if a person is, well, missing. When Dawson's detectives found that Shelly was fine and that she didn't want to make a public statement, the case was over. But we asked Dawson — had his detectives questioned Shelly in the presence of other church executives?
"That's classified," Dawson said to us. (Since then, we've noticed that Lt. Dawson has been a participant in numerous Church of Scientology activities.)
And that brings us up to date on the disappearance of Shelly Miscavige. We believe that she's still at the CST headquarters, and she may or may not be resigned to her fate. We've been assured by former Scientology executives that David Miscavige put her there after making her a non-person, and that he will never let her leave.
So, ten years after she vanished, we asked some of the people who knew her to send us some of their memories of her.
CLAIRE HEADLEY: It's hard to imagine the Sea Org without Shelly Miscavige. Some people hated her. And I certainly saw just cause for that at times. Personally, I thought Shelly was quite simply in an impossible situation, as so many of us were at the Int Base. It was a twilight zone, a horrifying dog-eat-dog world where one did as one was told or faced impossible and life-destroying consequences. In the end I have Shelly to thank, in some ways, for helping me wake up. You see, Shelly explained to me on multiple occasions that when you became a member of RTC (the Religious Technology Center, run by Miscavige himself) one has then foregone the right to leave — you'd be hunted to the ends of the earth if you tried to escape. I thoroughly believed her. After all, I'd heard of Sue Gentry being brought back when she blew to Africa! Marty Rathbun blew twice and was brought back both times. No one was capable of escaping RTC's reach, it seemed to me at the time. So when I was booted out of RTC for refusing to divorce Marc, and Marc then blew just a few months later, Shelly's words came back to me in my final analysis. And since I was no longer in RTC, I figured I had a fighting chance of actually making it out of there. And that's all I needed in the end, a firm dose of belief, someone on the outside to help me (Marc), and a purse to sit on in the middle of the Las Vegas bus station when they came after me. Of course there was a bit more to it than that but there you go. I hope Shelly is OK, and that perhaps one day, she too will find the strength of will to get out of there. I know that would make her father, Barney, happy. May he rest in peace.
JEFFERSON HAWKINS: Some people called her the "ice queen" and thought she was pretty cold. I occasionally saw a softer side to her. It seemed at times like she was almost embarrassed by Dave's excesses, and she would sometimes come around afterwards and try to patch things up or smooth things over. On several occasions after Dave had raked me over the coals verbally or beaten me up physically, she would call me and try to smooth things over and mitigate the damage. She would ask me how I was doing, if I was getting any auditing and so on. She seemed genuinely concerned. I don't think Dave knew she was doing this. Publicly, she was always 100 percent supportive of Dave. At the same time, I think she had private doubts about his increasingly erratic behavior. And I think she thought the best thing to do to support him would be to try to rein in or mitigate his behavior when she was able to do so. That may have been her downfall.
MARC HEADLEY: Shelly was at the Int Base the entire time I was there. I worked very closely with her sister Clarisse for years, so I heard many stories about them when they were on the Apollo with LRH and growing up as his messengers. I had many interactions with Shelly over the 15 years I worked at the Int Base and on most occasions it seemed she would do David Miscavige's bidding but with her own twist. There were also times when she pleaded with us to get stuff done so that Dave would not "lose his temper" and get violent with us. There was one conversation Shelly had with me in 1994 that I would never forget. She asked me how old I was and after I answered she told me, "COB was running all of Scientology when he was that age." It was one of the first personal conversations I had with her. What stuck me is that even when just talking personally, she referred to Dave, her husband, as "COB." I don't think she will ever escape his control and it is likely she will die never knowing true freedom.
MARK FISHER: I worked for Shelly for almost seven years and knew her much longer than that. Many of the people who were at the Int Base and had interactions with Shelly will tell you that she was not a very nice person to deal with. She had her moments where she tried to be nice to me and our staff, but you never knew when she might flip on you and tell Dave something which would get you or your staff in trouble. Shelly was very much a loner. She worked with Dave in his office and went with him many times on his motorbike around the base to observe and write down things he wanted done. She would then enter these "orders" into a computer log with an expected due date for these wild actions to be done. If they were not done, there was hell to pay with her. My biggest objection was about staff getting sec checked (interrogated). Reports from these private sessions were forwarded to Shelly, and she would then gladly forward the "juicy" details to Dave who could use them against that person the next time he saw them. Shelly was not well educated at all, never finishing even high school. She was, however, a true believer and she would quote L. Ron Hubbard's writings to others all the time. Because of her position being the wife of Miscavige, she was protected for many years even before she worked directly for him. She loved being close to DM and his power and being the "Queen of Scientology." She loved to spend money and if she could get something covered by Church money, she would gladly do it – expensive gifts to celebrities etc. All in all, she was not well liked by the staff at the base and did not have any friends, or if she did, they eventually did not last because they would get into trouble. That being said, if Shelly escaped and came out into the real world, I would give her a big hug and forgive her as I and many did Mike Rinder and Marty Rathbun.
KAREN DE LA CARRIERE: Shelly was an unhappy little girl on the Apollo. She was younger than the other Messengers and so they wouldn't take her along to places in port. Her only role model was L. Ron Hubbard. She was often sullen and withdrawn when I saw her. Years later, at Int Base Shelly was a queen. The staff might have been paid pennies, but if Shelly needed a $5,000 evening gown, she got it. But Shelly was not unfeeling: She actually anticipated her husband's brutality. She dutifully followed him around as part of his entourage and carried antiseptic, cottons swabs and first aid. When Mark Fisher was hit in the face by Miscavige and his nose was streaming with blood, Shelly was there within seconds to dab the blood because she was already walking around with a first aid kit. In 1985, after Shelly's mother Flo died under unusual circumstances, I ran into Shelly during a social gathering, a barbecue, at Int Base. I told Shelly how sorry I was that her mother had died. "Good riddance to the bitch," Shelly snarled at me. But that was Hubbard — we're just thetans, and family relationships are an illusion. She was just doing what she'd been trained to do. And now, she's incarcerated and I'm sure she doesn't know her civil or constitutional rights.
TOM DEVOCHT: I guess I first met her in 1983. I liked Shelly. A lot of people didn't. She liked my brother and took care of him, in whatever weird way you took care of someone in a cult. I have three really strange anecdotes I can tell you about Shelly. Make of them what you will. One of them happened at Building 50 — the RTC building — that was being constructed at Int Base. I was called over there, and Dave and Shelly were walking through it — Dave did that every day to watch the progress. We were in the legal department of the building and there was a vault being put in. It was where they were going to store the trademarks and copyrights and other things. Dave told Lou (his "personal communicator") to get some coffee. After she left, it was just Shelly, Dave, and I. Dave got really agitated and said, "Shelly, where do we put the gold? Do we bury it? Do you remember where I put the gold?" It's like he flipped out for a minute. Then he snapped out of it, and we walked on like nothing happened. But it was really eerie, a really weird thing. We then parted ways, and about a half hour later Shelly called me over. She told me that Dave was going "Type III" — Scientology jargon for someone losing their mind and going psychotic. She wasn't kidding. Another story: I was married to Jenny Linson, and she worked with Miscavige a lot. At one point, Shelly came into my office, slamming the door. She was in a rage. "You get your bitch whore cunt wife away from my husband!" she yelled at me. "She's in there hanging her tits in his face and I know she's trying to seduce him!" I didn't know what to say. We all worked so closely together all the time. Two days later, I got a call — come up to Building 50. I was walking down the hall and Shelly came walking up to me, crying. "She's doing it again. She's hanging her tits in his face!" and she ran past me in tears. Another weird detail: Dave tried to get me to call my wife Jenny "sir" when I was in his presence — in the Sea Org, everyone is a sir, even the women. But I refused. And one more story. Also at Building 50. The last conversation I had with Shelly. She took me into an auditing room to ask me something in private. "Listen, I need to know something from you," she said. "Can you be salvaged?" This was after the "Hole" had started, after Marty Rathbun had left, and Dave was accusing everyone of betraying him. "Dave has no friends," Shelly said. "Everybody's gone. He can't trust anyone. They're all SPs. I just need to know, can we trust you? He needs to have friends and you're his last friend. Can I count on you?" And I said, "No." I was so disaffected at that point. There wasn't a chance I wanted to be connected to him. I don't know if she talked to Miscavige about that. She and I both left about the same time — I left Scientology, and she disappeared. I liked Shelly, I actually liked her. There was a side of her that I thought was really normal. But then she'd start spouting "Simon Bolivar" at you and talking like Hubbard. I felt she just needed someone to talk to, and that's when we had those conversations.
We want to thank all of the people who responded to our questions. One of the questions we get the most from readers is about Shelly and her fate. Why, we're frequently asked, can't law enforcement rescue Shelly if we're so confident we know where she is? Well, as these anecdotes indicate, Shelly's situation is a complex one. She may be resigned to her fate of working to preserve the words of L. Ron Hubbard, whom she regarded so highly. But it sure would be interesting to ask her if that's really how she wants to spend the rest of her life, cut off even from her own family — and to conduct that interview away from other members of the church. We really don't know how she'd answer.
After ten years of banishment, is Shelly Miscavige ready to come home?
We didn't get a chance to include photos in our book, so we've posted them at a dedicated page. Reader Sookie put together a complete index and we're hosting it here on the website. Copies of the paperback version of 'The Unbreakable Miss Lovely' are on sale at Amazon. The Kindle edition is also available, and shipping instantly.
Tony Ortega's upcoming appearances (and check out the interactive map to our ongoing tour)…
Sept 15: Phoenix, Barrett the Honors College, Arizona State University, ASU in Downtown Phoenix campus, Walter Cronkite Theater, 5:30 pm
Sept 23: Cleveland, Parma Heights Library, 7pm sponsored by Center for Inquiry – Northeast Ohio
Sept 24: Minneapolis, Grumpy's Bar & Grill, 2801 Snelling Ave, Roseville, 7 pm, sponsored by Minnesota Atheists
Sept 27: Portland, Friendly House, 1737 NW 26th Ave, 12:45 pm, sponsored by Humanists of Portland
Sept 28: Seattle, Razzi's Pizzeria, 7 pm, with Seattle Skeptics and Seattle Atheists
Sept 29: Vancouver, BC, Seven Dining Lounge, 7 pm
Oct 14: London, premiere of Louis Theroux film, 'My Scientology Movie'
Oct 23: Sydney, Giant Dwarf Theatre (with Sen. Nick Xenophon)
Oct 25: Melbourne, venue secured (announcement coming later)
Oct 28: Adelaide (with Sen. Nick Xenophon)
Oct 30: Perth
Past dates: Santa Barbara (5/16), Hollywood (5/17), Orange County (5/17), San Diego (5/20), San Francisco (5/22), New York (6/11), Chicago (6/20), Toronto (6/22), Clearwater (6/28), Washington DC (7/12), Hartford (7/14), Denver (7/17), Dallas (7/20), Houston (7/22), San Antonio (7/24), Austin (7/25), Paris (7/29), London (8/4), Boston (8/24)
Posted by Tony Ortega on September 7, 2015 at 07:00
E-mail your tips and story ideas to tonyo94 AT gmail DOT com or follow us on Twitter. We post behind-the-scenes updates at our Facebook author page. Here at the Bunker we try to have a post up every morning at 7 AM Eastern (Noon GMT), and on some days we post an afternoon story at around 2 PM. After every new story we send out an alert to our e-mail list and our FB page.
BLOGGING DIANETICS: We read Scientology's founding text cover to cover with the help of LA attorney and former church member Vance Woodward
PZ Myers reads L. Ron Hubbard's "A History of Man" | Scientology's Master Spies | Scientology's Private Dancer
The mystery of the richest Scientologist and his wayward sons | Scientology's shocking mistreatment of the mentally ill
The Underground Bunker's Official Theme Song | The Underground Bunker FAQ
September 7th, 2015 | Category: Scientology Armageddon

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Hungry Howie's Pizza has an Appetite for Growth
Written by Dana Tanyeri	 August 07, 2011
Endeavoring to become a national player in the über-competitive pizza segment is not for the timid. Nevertheless, it's a goal that Hungry Howie's Pizza has set out to accomplish by taking its core strengths — freshly made, flavored-crust pizza to-go — to market in new, strategic ways. The Michigan Heights, Mich.-based chain has rolled out a new prototype, freshened up its look, established new marketing initiatives and tightened up its operations to reduce costs, ensure consistency and enhance speed of service.
With 575 units currently open, Hungry Howie's is no newcomer to the pizza segment. The company was founded by James Hearn in 1973 in Taylor, Mich., in a converted 1,000-sq.-ft. hamburger shop. Current president Steve Jackson joined the first location as a delivery driver and together the pair opened a second unit in 1976. Franchising began in 1982 and has since become the chain's ticket to growth. Today, independent franchisees own all of the chain's units. The largest concentration of stores is in Michigan and Florida, with units also operating in 22 other states including Arizona, Texas, California, Missouri, Ohio, Colorado and Arkansas.
While some units offer dine-in service, the company built its business primarily on delivery and carryout. The delivery/carryout sales split consists roughly 50 percent phone orders for delivery, 40 percent phone orders for carryout, and 10 percent walk-in for carryout. Online ordering, a recent system-wide addition, is growing fast as a more convenient option that also helps speed service, according to Brian Ognian, vice president of franchise development.
Hungry Howie's offers a limited menu of items, including a variety of fresh salads, oven-baked calzone-style subs, flavored breadsticks (Howie Bread), Three-Cheeser Bread with zesty tomato dipping sauce, and traditional and boneless chicken wings. But pizza, of course, is the calling card, accounting for 90 percent of sales. Like others in the segment, the usual assortment of sizes and toppings is available but Hungry Howie's takes customization a step further. Known as the "Home of Flavored Crust Pizza," it offers eight crust flavor options — a twist that's been its signature point of difference since 1985. That's when a Hungry Howie's franchisee began tinkering with ideas for how to get customers to stop leaving behind uneaten crust.
"It's our biggest and most important differentiator in a segment that's tough to really differentiate yourself in," says Ognian. "Our customers love it. It's the exception if a pizza goes out of one of our stores without flavoring added to the crust. The whole idea was to offer a pizza that's as good from first bite to last. And customers get to choose what they want that bite to taste like."
Core crust flavor options, which are available at no additional charge, include sesame, butter cheese, butter, ranch, garlic herb, onion, Cajun, and original (plain). Customers can choose one flavor or mix and match as many as they like to create their own favorite flavor profile. Depending on the selection, culinary staff brush or sprinkle the flavorings onto the edges of the crust. "Each flavor takes a little different approach operationally," Ognian says. "It sounds time consuming, but it's really not. We've got the equipment customized with accessories to hold the flavorings and we have the systems in place to make it fast and efficient. You can't order a pizza from us without having us ask you if there's a crust flavor that you'd like added. From that point, some of the flavors are applied prior to baking and some are applied after the pizza comes out of the oven. Over the years it's become a flawless system."
Flavored crusts represent a major draw but the fact that Hungry Howie's makes all of its dough fresh every day is another point of difference. "We don't have our dough shipped in from a commissary. It's made fresh every day in the stores. In fact, everything's prepared fresh in the stores," says George Schlickenmayer, director of construction for the chain. Each unit's kitchen includes a dough prep station. Once the dough is prepared, it gets cut into the appropriate weights for different pizza sizes, placed on proofing racks and proofed in a walk-in cooler for 24 hours before it's ready for use.
New Prototype, New Attitude
With its basic business model and menu well established, Hungry Howie's is now intensely focused on growth. The company made a number of key strategic changes over the past three years to kick-start that growth. Top among them is a new store prototype, designed to freshen the concept's look and feel as well as to make an impact on operating efficiency and costs.
Sized at an average of 1,200 to 1,400 sq. ft., the new units are slightly smaller, more open in design and more contemporary than the original units. "The new prototype re-launches the chain cosmetically," notes Rob Elliott, vice president of strategic marketing. Elliott, originally a consultant to Hungry Howie's, helped design the new look, sketching the layout out on a napkin that was later presented to the company's architectural and design firm for refinement and execution.
"We've introduced a new corporate identity on a number of levels. In the stores, we've kept our signature yellow color palette, but we've upgraded many of the cosmetics and the surfaces," Elliott says. "We've installed new menu board systems. We've integrated beautiful yellow glass ceramic tile, vinyl graphics and a lot of stainless steel for visual cues of clean and fresh. And we've taken down barriers between the ordering area and the kitchen so that customers can see into the kitchen, watch preparation take place and interact with employees."
In the kitchen, a new customized, energy-efficient refrigeration system is being integrated and new heated cabinets for holding pizza at the proper temperature were brought in as part of a complete equipment package upgrade. Standard equipment that's been modified to meet Hungry Howie's specifications, the holding cabinets are strategically positioned next to the pizza cutting table, in full view of customers. They're emblazoned with the word "Hot!" to convey freshness and quality.
In addition to the dough-prep area and a cut-and-box station, which is manufactured to company specifications, key kitchen stations include POS areas both at the front counter and in the rear of the store. Incoming orders are sent to the pizza make line, which typically is manned by two to three employees depending on time of day and volume. Per the company's marketing tagline, "We make it FRESH, we make it FAST and we make it JUST FOR YOU," no pizzas are assembled or baked before they're ordered. The make table itself measures slightly more than nine ft. long and contains all components employees need to prepare any type of pizza a customer may order. Schlickenmayer says it's a standard pizza make table, but one that has been modified with accessories to provide storage and refrigeration for the various pizza crust flavorings the chain offers.
Adjacent to the pizza make table is a refrigerated unit for sub sandwich and salad ingredient holding and preparation, usually manned by one employee. Other staff positions on a typical shift include one or two counter employees, two prep cooks/expediters, and two to five drivers, again depending on time of day and volume. "All employees except drivers are cross-trained," notes Schlickenmayer. "Everyone in the store can do any position."
In changing the prototype, the back-of-the-house space was condensed slightly for greater efficiency and some of the space saved was shifted to the front lobby. "We found from an operations standpoint that when we tightened up the kitchen we were far more efficient. Our employees have fewer steps to take and everything is set up in stations so that all components an employee needs are within reach. As such, we were able to add a bit more room in the lobby for customers," says Schlickenmayer.
Apropos of its delivery/carryout business model, the front of the house at most Hungry Howie's locations is small. Except for a handful of units that offer limited seating, the lobby area per the new prototype comprises roughly 200 sq. ft. of the average unit's 1,200 to 1,400 sq. ft. of space.
Fresh, Value-Focused Marketing
Part of the change in the company's graphic identity included freshening up its logo and giving its "Howie" character depicted in the logo a contemporary look. "It's not a huge departure from where we were," Elliott says. "We're still using the heritage branding, so it still has our letter style but it's been beefed up a bit. The typography is updated and we promote our Flavored Crust Pizza more strongly, right in the logo."
Always a strong value, the chain has worked in recent years — particularly during the recession — to up the ante. In 2009, Hungry Howie's debuted its bundled meal deals priced at $5, $10, $15 and $20. The $5 deal, for a medium one-topping pizza or a small one-topping pizza with a 20-oz. Pepsi, positioned Hungry Howie's squarely among big value players in the segment such as Little Caesars, whose $5 Hot-n-Ready deal has been an industry game changer.
"Value is a huge part of our positioning and these deals have been great retail hooks. But we're careful to define value not just in low price, but also high-quality product. We use 100 percent mozzarella cheese, our dough is made fresh daily, we're fast and we're convenient," Elliot says.
New Specs Drive Equipment Buys
Along with its image makeover and more efficient use of space, the new Hungry Howie's prototype reduces operational costs thanks to an updated, more energy-efficient equipment package. In addition to new holding cabinets for finished pizzas — which also improve end-product quality, Ognian notes — the company moved to develop specs for system wide use on all equipment purchases. Whereas franchisees were once free to shop around and select from among various brands, they are now required to purchase equipment packages according to specifications set at the corporate level. "We select the manufacturers and the models and specify those for our franchisees," Schlickenmayer says. "It keeps things consistent throughout the system, it enables us to control our purchasing and better leverage our volume."
"Storage is really important for us," he adds. "We hold our product at very set temperatures from the cooler into our pizza make line to our holding cabinets. Because that's so critical, we specced out all of the requirements. As a result, we're holding products better than we've ever held them before while reducing our energy consumption. In making the equipment package changes, we really considered speed, service, efficiency and quality of product. Yes, it's helped us streamline our processes and bring costs down, but in the end our customers are also getting a better, more consistent product."
That type of tight specification approach now applies to the entire unit opening process, as well, according to Ognian. To simplify things and ensure a short timeline from lease signing to opening, the company developed a turnkey solution with strict bid guidelines. It's a move he says has greatly reduced construction costs as well as time to open. "We use a designated architect and manage the bid process," he says. "We get three bids for every job so we're sure we're getting the best price on construction. We track each bid and by following certain specs we're in a better position to negotiate and bring costs down. We also work off strict time limits so that we can shorten the gap between when the lease is signed and the unit opens. It's now between 30 and 45 days, on average, a scenario that also helps to reduce costs for franchisees. They're no longer paying rent and sitting out there waiting for their construction to begin or be completed. Because we've established one-stop shopping for equipment and fixtures and we've streamlined the build-out process, it eliminates a lot of time that we were losing before."
Having made refinements and updates to its system, from build-out to hot-pizza holding, Hungry Howie's is, indeed, a company in transition. Going forward, the company plans to expand through franchising — ideally with multi-unit operators and area developers — within its existing marketing areas as well as to break new ground nationally. Initial key expansion markets include Louisiana and Texas. All new units will utilize the new prototype, and so far the results of the change are promising. According to Ognian, sales in newly opened stores with the new prototype have been up to 40 percent higher than previous units.
With nearly 600 units system wide, conversion of existing Hungry Howie's units on a large scale to the new prototype will necessarily be a gradual process as franchisees can make the investment to remodel. But of the dozen or so that have done so over the past 18 months, the results have been "very, very positive," Ognian says. "It's too early for us to release specific figures, but we've seen significant sales increases with each one and we're very excited about the future. We took the time when both the economy and our expansion slowed down and stepped back just to be able to take some steps forward when things started turning around. In the end, it was the perfect time to refresh our brand and make these changes. We're now strongly positioned for growth."
Facts of Note
Headquarters: Madison Heights, Mich.
Menu signature: Flavored crust pizza
Service model: Fast-casual/QSR
Services: Delivery, takeout and catering; dine-in in some locations
No. units: 575, all franchised
2010 sales: $249.9 million
Typical location: Strip mall
Key expansion markets: Existing markets, plus Louisiana, Texas
Hours of operation: 11 a.m. to 11 p.m. weekdays; 11 a.m. to 1 a.m. weekends
Average unit size: 1,200 to 1,400 sq. ft.
Total unit cost: $225,000 to $360,000
Average kitchen space: 1,000 sq. ft.
Total equipment investment per unit: $90,000 to $110,000
President: Steve Jackson
Vice President of Marketing & Product Development: Jeff Rinke
Vice President of Franchise Development: Brian Ognian
Vice President of Operations: Paul Pfeiffer
Vice President of Strategic Marketing: Rob Elliott
Director of Construction: George Schlickenmayer
Food Distributor(s): Hungry Howie's Distributing (East) & Roma Foods (West)
Smallwares & Equipment Company: Northern Pizza Equipment Co., Dexter, Mich.
Architect & Design: Foresta Group, Plymouth, Mich.
Signage: Harmon Signs, Toledo
chain news


text:
Everything You Need To Know About the Halo
Written by Tessa Lee Edited by Harshi Vashee
The recent collision between Red Bull Racing's Max Verstappen and Mercedes' Lewis Hamilton in Monza highlighted the crucial role that Halos play in a sport as dangerous and thrilling as Formula One.
The Halo is made of titanium metal and is fitted on the car's cockpit. It circles the driver's head and protects the driver from head injuries on the track caused by flying debris from car collisions or crashes into large barriers. With its ability to deflect and stop large debris from contacting the driver's head, it is one of the most essential safety installations the FIA has introduced into the sport. Heralded as the 'strongest part of the car', the Halo can absorb 12 tonnes (12000 kilograms) in weight and has been quoted by Mercedes to withstand "the weight of a London bus".
When and Why it was introduced
Between 1950 to 1994, 37 fatalities were spanning across 29 Formula One circuits. Late F2 driver Henry Surtees was killed in 2009 when he was struck on the head by the wheel and tyre of a neighbouring car at the Brands Hatch Circuit in England. At the 2014 Japanese Grand Prix in Suzuka, late F2 driver Jules Bianchi perished after sustaining a head injury after a fatal crash. In 2015, late IndyCar driver Justin Wilson was declared dead after a piece of debris from another car struck his helmet at the Pocono Raceway in Pennsylvania. The three fatal incidents were catalysts for the officials' decision to first introduce the Halo to F1 in 2018. The FIA subsequently added it to F2, F3, F4 and other open-wheel racing series like IndyCar and Formula E.
The Initial Controversy Surrounding the Halo
When the FIA first introduced the Halo cockpit protection system, the mandate was met with strong protest from F1 drivers and fans alike. F1 fans were especially robust in their opposition, with some arguing that it would ruin the overall aesthetic aspect of the car. Others believed that it would interfere with the drivers' on-track visibility. With how it would interfere with the onboard pole lap videos, fans would also have trouble seeing the drivers in the cockpit. To most, the fans perceived that the Halo would rob the sport of its traditionally risky open-cockpit racing concept.
While current Alfa Romeo driver Kimi Raikkonen so aptly described halo visibility as "OK" when it was mandated in 2018, other drivers criticised the newly introduced frontal protection device. Similar to the fans, former Haas driver Kevin Magnussen was scathing on the aesthetics factor of the halo and supported his claim by stating that "It takes away some of the passion that F1 is talking about" and referred to how "[the halo] looks shit, it is shit." Additionally, current Red Bull driver Max Verstappen thought the car needed to retain its "certain element of risk" and stated that "It's not just the looks, I don't think it is necessary."
While the device did indeed encounter a fair amount of criticism, it also faced exceptional support. Current Aston Martin driver Sebastian Vettel and Alpine driver Fernando Alonso had spoken out in favour of the Halo after the FIA's statistics had been presented to the drivers. Current Mercedes driver Lewis Hamilton, who had initially objected to the physical appearance of the Halo, supported the decision after FIA studies demonstrated that, with the Halo, the chances of surviving an accident would increase by 17%.
Significant Events in F1 Since the Introduction of the Halo
Despite the initial criticisms and condemnation of the Halo, recent events in F1 have been a blatant testament to its vital role in ensuring the safety of the drivers and protecting them from fatal accidents.
1. Romain Grojean's Crash in Bahrain 2020
An unexpected situation in modern-day F1, former Haas driver Romain Grosjean's fiery crash into the Bahrain barriers and the medical car's quick response made the frontlines on all race coverages. Despite the vehicle being split in half and engulfed in flames, the FIA's safety precautions – Halo included – prevented Grojean from sustaining severe and potentially fatal injuries, allowing him to escape virtually unscathed from the incident.
Alongside the other drivers, Grosjean had opposed the proposition of a Halo when it was first suggested, stating that "[he still didn't] think it [had] a place for it in Formula One." Had the crash occurred before the compulsory installation of the Halo, it is likely that Grosjean would not have survived the crash. "I wasn't for the halo some years ago, but [now] I think it's the greatest thing that we've had in Formula One and without it I wouldn't be able to speak to you today", said Grosjean.
2. Max Verstappen and Lewis Hamilton's Crash in Monza 2021
The collision between championship rivals Max Verstappen and Lewis Hamilton is one for the history books. Despite the criticism towards the Halo, its usefulness has been emphasised repeatedly, and none more so than now. The crash had Verstappen's Red Bull lift off a sausage curb and its rear wheel land on seven-time world champion Lewis Hamilton's helmet through the protective halo, resulting in the Red Bull landing on top of the Mercedes in the gravel.
While the wheel did indeed hit his head, the Halo had prevented a major impact. "I feel very, very fortunate today. Thank God for the halo. That did ultimately save me, you know, and saved my neck," said Lewis Hamilton to reporters. Afterwards, Hamilton stated that he would have to meet a specialist to receive a routine medical check-up for the blow to his head.


The Reusable 2in1™ Regular Therapy Compress provides direct hot or cold therapy through deep penetrating moist heat or soothing cold. The item is economical with a dual purpose and best of all reusable.
When water is added this item is 11"L * 5"W, 13.6 oz. The compress is filled with a unique non-toxic gel. It is made with our Exclusive Feel-Soft Fabric which is smooth and comfortable to the touch. The product is flexible and remains flexible even when cold.