All posts by Daniel Hoviss

Shift – new directions…

Brattleboro Vermont has long been a town known for the healing springs, and a confluence of water ways. Many healers have set out a shingle. If you google Brattleboro Healers you can see how many there are:

Old news….

This site was originally created to help raise awareness of the dangers of nuclear power in our neck of the woods, and thanks to the constantly vigilant effort on the part of the many grass roots organizations (NECNP – VPIRG – VECAN – The Brattleboro energy committee – Traprock Peace and Justice – and other groups – plus all of the people who supported or attended mass events over the years) we now have a Nuclear Free Vermont. Almost…

Almost, because we still have a Power Plant plant in the state (on the banks of the CT River), that contains radioactive elements like spent fuel rods, potentially leaking caskets with high level radio active waste and contaminated ground water. Not ideal but better than 20 years ago. We still have the potential for massive fall-out should the dry caskets be breached in an attack of any kind. We still store the caskets at the site in Vermont.

In case you missed it – The plant has been sold. Cleanup will begin in 2021 – you can read about it here in the Burlington Free Press.

You can read all about the new company and Decommissioning plans.

You can still get involved in the many organizations that continue to pressure companies to do the right thing, and to be more proactive with public safety. You can still encourage the State Of Vermont to increase (not decrease) incentives for solar energy.

State appeals Entergy decision

byReformer Staff

Posted:   02/18/2012 10:00:27 AM EST
Updated:   02/18/2012 11:02:17 AM EST

Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant in Vernon (Entergy Corp.)

Saturday, February 18, 2012

BRATTLEBORO — Vermont Attorney General William H. Sorrell on Saturday morning filed an appeal of the federal district court’s recent decision in favor of Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee.

Federal Court Judge J. Garvan Murtha rendered his opinion on Jan. 19, ruling the state Senate crossed over into federal territory when it voted to prohibit the Vermont Public Service Board from issuing a certificate for public good for continued operation.

“We have strong arguments to make on appeal,” Sorrell said. “The district court’s decision improperly limits the State’s legitimate role in deciding whether Vermont Yankee should operate in Vermont beyond March 21, 2012. The court’s undue reliance on the discussions among our citizen legislators, expert witnesses, advocates, and their constituents has the potential to chill legislative debates in the future. Left unchallenged, this decision could make it harder for ordinary Vermonters to clearly state their views in future legislative hearings.”

Murtha ruled the Senate inappropriately considered the radiological safety of the power plant — which is under the sole jurisdiction of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission — in deliberations over the future of Yankee. In his decision, Murtha prohibited the state Legislature from taking part in the issuance of a CPG. However, Murtha affirmed the PSB’s authority to issue a CPG, as long as it only considers “economics, reliability, and other objectives over which the other entities may have jurisdiction …”

Murtha also found that the PSB cannot condition the issuance of a CPG on the existence of a below-wholesale-market power purchase agreement or at rates below those available to wholesale customers in other states.

Murtha’s ruling was based in part on discussions conducted in the Legislature about the future of Yankee, discussions that invoked the safety of the plant.

But Sorrell has contended — before, during and after the hearings in September — that the state Legislature has the right to explore the bounds of its authority before writing legislation or taking a vote. Prohibiting a legislature from doing so would tie its hands, he has said.

A release from the Attorney General’s office states that the district court, in its Jan. 19 ruling, invalidated two Vermont statutes that gave the Legislature a say on the ability of Vermont Yankee to continue operations when its current state license expires on March 21, 2012.

Sorrell stated on Saturday that the State has appealed all aspects of the judgment entered by the district court.

“I have taken seriously my responsibility to make this decision. We consulted with Governor Shumlin, other executive branch officials, legislative leadership and others. We took the necessary time to thoroughly consider our options. We look forward to defending our laws in the Second Circuit,” Sorrell stated.

Gov. Peter Shumlin has always said he did not agree with Murtha’s decision and lauded Saturday’s announcement.

“We as a state have had many important and legitimate concerns with Entergy Louisiana and its operation of Vermont Yankee that are not reflected in the opinion,” Shumlin said. “I support the Attorney General’s work in getting a positive result on appeal.”

Shumlin added that his administration would be focusing on Vermont’s continuing authority over Vermont Yankee.

“I support the decision by Vermont to appeal the flawed ruling by Judge Murtha in the Vermont Yankee litigation,” Sen. Bernie Sanders stated after news of the appeal was announced. “I believe the law is clear that states have the right to reject nuclear power based on economic and other reasons that have nothing to do with safety.

“The Vermont Senate in a bipartisan 26-4 vote decided against renewing Vermont Yankee’s license,” Sanders continued. “If Vermont wants to move to energy efficiency and sustainable energy, no corporation should have the right to force our state to stay tethered to an aging, problem-ridden nuclear plant.”

The appeal will be heard by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in New York

There will be much more coverage in Monday’s Reformer.

Nuclear Energy Steals Billions from Other Technologies

Stephen Leahy* BERLIN, Jul 31 (IPS)-InterPressService)

Why is nuclear energy back on the table?

One reason is a powerful U.S. lobby where 14 energy companies spent 48 million dollars in 2007 alone to convince American politicians to give the industry huge loan guarantees because they cannot get financing anywhere else, says Ellen Vancko, a nuclear energy analyst at the Union of Concerned Scientists, a U.S.-based non-governmental organization (NGO).

This lavish lobbying effort by the energy and nuclear power sector has been ongoing since the mid-1990s, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a U.S. NGO, and now totals at least 953 million dollars.

Even more has been spent to convince the public that nuclear is one of the keys to energy security so that there is significant public support for new reactors, a Gallup Environment Poll reported this year.

There are lots of senators and members of congress talking about nuclear as a clean, renewable energy resource, Vancko says.

The other reason is the French.

France gets about 77 percent of its power from 58 reactors and is often cited as the model for other countries. France is a special case. The entire industry is 85 percent owned by the government, says Mycle Schneider, a Paris-based energy and nuclear policy analyst.

The French nuclear industry gets direct and indirect subsidies, government loans and loan guarantees on practically anything they want, Schneider told IPS.

And despite a well-polished reputation for efficiency and low-cost, the French nuclear industry has been plagued by cost-overruns, equipment failures, and relatively low levels of reliability. Even though French reactors are all of similar design, the cost to build a plant in 1998 was 3.5 times higher than the first plants built in 1974, says Steve Thomas, professor of energy policy at the University of Greenwich in the U.K.

Unlike wind or solar energy or virtually any other technology, the costs of nuclear go up over time rather than down even in pro-nuclear France, he said. I think that is rather telling about the technology, Thomas told IPS.

The current Finnish nuclear experience echoes the industry’s long history.

Backed by French government loan guarantees, Areva, the French government-owned nuclear energy company began construction in 2005 on what is supposed to be the world’s largest and safest nuclear plant at Olkiluoto, Finland.

Plagued by thousands of construction and design problems, it is currently 2 to 3 billion dollars over budget and three to four years behind schedule.

It’s a total disaster for Areva, Schneider says. Areva will have to sell another 12 reactors to cover the cost overruns thus far or else French taxpayers will, he said.

The hype around a nuclear power revival or renaissance was based on nothing and is effectively dead.

Last month Canada backed out of ordering two 1,200-megawatt reactors because cost estimates of 10,000 dollars/kW were three times higher than expected.

However there is real danger that the nuclear industry will continue to promote itself as a ‘silver-bullet’ solution to climate change and give politicians the kind of mega-projects that gets them publicity, warns Schneider.

Equally important is that corporate shareholders of large utility companies can do very well financially on such projects when governments guarantee to cover any losses.

The worst thing about new nuclear is that it steals billions of public dollars from other more effective things like energy efficiency, he says.

*This is the second of a two-part series on nuclear energy and subsidies by Stephen Leahy, international science and environment correspondent for IPS.) —
“We don’t have to wait for some grand utopian future. The future is an infinite succession of presents, and to live now as we think human beings should live, in defiance of all that is bad around us, is itself a marvelous victory.”……….. Howard Zinn