NRC wants waste stored for century

NRC wants waste stored for century

There are 40 comments on the Brattleboro Reformer story from Jan 4, 2011, titled NRC wants waste stored for century. In it, Brattleboro Reformer reports that:

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has written a revision of the Waste Confidence Decision which could allow spent fuel and high-level waste to be stored at nuclear facilities for more than 120 years.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Brattleboro Reformer.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
This Vermonter

Barnet, VT

#21 Jan 4, 2011
Thomas wrote:
Too bad I can't edit my post as on other sites. I am not up to date on this issue, I just hope that it gets properly solved.
http://www.topix.com/forum/source/brattleboro...
Thomas, it is better to first understand who or what you are having a conversation with. As far as I am able to tell, your post was fine, no need to edit it.
Brooklyn Accent

Springfield, MA

#22 Jan 4, 2011
120 years? That's just great.
Snodgrass

Contoocook, NH

#23 Jan 5, 2011
You guys are so entertaining! This is great stuff. It amazes me that you people think any of this bickering does any good. None of us has any control over any of this. We never will either. stop bickering and go out and enjoy your lives while you still can. We don't get enough time on this planet to waste it worrying about this crap.

“figuresdontlie*l iarscanfigure”

Since: Feb 10

S. Londonderry VT

#24 Jan 5, 2011
Snodgrass wrote:
You guys are so entertaining! This is great stuff. It amazes me that you people think any of this bickering does any good. None of us has any control over any of this. We never will either. stop bickering and go out and enjoy your lives while you still can. We don't get enough time on this planet to waste it worrying about this crap.
No wife & kids around to bellow at, Mr. multi-alt? I see *you* are here, consider it important enough to shoot your mouth off, though you had to take the time & trouble to sign in to deliver your selfrighteous rant.

Run along now, Mr. Hypocrite.
- It amazes me that you think any of this bickering does any good
- none of us has any control over any of this, never will either.
- go out and enjoy your life while you still can
- and, we don't get enough time on this planet to waste it worrying about this crap

So, wadr kindly put a sock in it sir.
mike mulligan

Charlestown, MA

#25 Jan 5, 2011
So is this a ploy for the utilities to reclaim their fuel disposal monies? If yucca mountain is dead and we decide as a nation we are going to store fuel onsite.. then the utilities got damage moeny for Yucca Mountain and then the monies left over get dispersed back to the utilities. What is it 20 billion dollars left.

Is this the utilizes money or the rate payers.

Can you imagine how much it would cost to ship high level waste to Yucca Mt and any depository. Is this the utilizes money or the rate payers.

Is this all about saving the utilites money? I wonder if underneath it all if the utilites really want to reopen the Mountain...who is really behind it?

I mean the utilities would gray neutral on the outside not wanting any controversy....but underneath it all what do they want?



mike mulligan

Charlestown, MA

#26 Jan 5, 2011
So you got a 100 to 150 billion dollar nuclear waste repository industry competing against the anti nukes and the utilities.

I think onsite storage is Obama's secret corporate welfare program.

We have come a long ways from a centralized storage, and now the efficient stoop and poop policy. This is our rendition of the coal plant ash ponds. Everything we do is concentrated.

I mean, think of all the monies spent in advocating for either side over the years, the political careers, how much fueled the politicians and media...that in itself is industrial scale.

If I was a politician and the media, the special interest groups...I'd want a stand off that nobody can ever win. Being paralyzed it good, let play catch forever. We are doing just fine making money and gaining power this way....

Jason

Plymouth, VT

#27 Jan 5, 2011
I'm calling straw man on this "politics of fear" bit. Of course it is possible to blow risks out of proportion. But that doesn't invalidate the precautionary principle. The label "politics of fear" is deftly misused by pro-industry communicators to make skeptics feel ashamed of their concerns.

Nuclear power is a gamble on the continued integrity of the regulatory and technical infrastructure that has allowed US nuclear power to proceed till now without a serious accident. With long-term economic contraction ahead, it's not reasonable to take that integrity for granted.

A nuclear accident is a low-probability/high-severity type of risk, with the probability likely to increase in an unpredictable fashion. For this reason, nuclear power is a bad deal for people who live near a plant.

Interesting question, Mr. Mulligan. I suppose the utility in question sees the PR value in a new opportunity to ship VY waste out, in that it may help calm the opposition to relicensing. But that's just an outsider's guess.
mike mulligan

Charlestown, MA

#28 Jan 5, 2011
I am having trouble swallowing you mono visionist...the facts are the world is in unpredictable motion and all of our energy source are extremely brittle. Our economics and Wall Street makes it so.

You simplify the world down to nothing but single issues. As I mentioned, we debate everything endlessly and do nothing, interest make a lot of money over this...that is the times we live in.

Knock coal out, knock natural gas or nuclear, then we are in a world you can't imagine.

We may just be in the process of knocking off the table petroleum with high prices...

There are a lot of lower probable and consequence accident scenarios out there that is almost as damaging at the worst, you won't be able to feel the difference except in the calculation of risk.

You idiot, they aren't moving any old fuel or buiding material for decades...earth to Jason.

I give you one, I rather have a nuclear melt down next to me than having any dependancy for lying wind power.

Hey, right, we are purchasing faux altruism and cheap feel good from the utilities not energy anymore...

How good to do feel today?
JimHopf

North Salt Lake, UT

#29 Jan 5, 2011
What it's really about, Jason, is people making a huge issue over minor risks/impacts while completely ignoring vastly larger risks/impacts. These misplaced "concerns" are not harmless. They result in the choice of paths that are actually much more dangerous.

The risks and impacts of fossil fuel power generation are thousands of times larger than any associated with nuclear power. The worst-case nuclear plant accident you worry about would have an impact that is much smaller than the ANNUAL public health and environmental impact from fossil power plants (which cause 25,000 deaths every single year in the US alone according to EPA, and which are the leading cause of global warming). And while these fossil plant impacts occur continually (every year), a severe nuclear plant accident has never occured (over the industry's 40+ year history) and is unlikely to ever occur in the future. Nuclear is clearly a very good deal, for the local population as well as the nation.

And yet, in VT, there is a campaign to shut the nuclear plant while the same people largely ignore the huge number of dirty, old fossil plants in the region. The result? VY's power will largely be replaced by old, dirty fossil units that will be brought out of mothballs. This in turn will result in more regional pollution, more overall public health risk, more CO2 emissions, and higher power prices.
mike mulligan

Charlestown, MA

#30 Jan 5, 2011
It is just that nobody trust Entergy and there is two years of energy sitting in the core.

Coal plants can't do that trick.
Same old saw

Springfield, MA

#31 Jan 5, 2011
Yeah yeah, we've heard it all before. Well, except for the mothballed fossil fuels plant threat, that's a new one for me. Tell me, JimHopf from Utah, exactly how many mothballed fossil fuel power generating plants do you think we have here in VT? My guess as to the true number? Exactly zero.
JimHopf wrote:
The result? VY's power will largely be replaced by old, dirty fossil units that will be brought out of mothballs. This in turn will result in more regional pollution, more overall public health risk, more CO2 emissions, and higher power prices.
I Know More Than You

Farmington, NH

#32 Jan 5, 2011
Same old idiot wrote:
Yeah yeah, we've heard it all before. Well, except for the mothballed fossil fuels plant threat, that's a new one for me. Tell me, JimHopf from Utah, exactly how many mothballed fossil fuel power generating plants do you think we have here in VT? My guess as to the true number? Exactly zero.
Both GMP and CVPS have stated that if VY does close, power prices will go up and the replacement power will emit more CO2.

Stay ignorant.

“figuresdontlie*l iarscanfigure”

Since: Feb 10

S. Londonderry VT

#33 Jan 6, 2011
I Know Nothing wrote:
Both GMP and CVPS have stated that if VY does close, power prices will go up and the replacement power will emit more CO2.
Stay ignorant.
"Both GMP and CVPS have stated that if VY does not close, power prices will go up and the replacement power will emit more CO2." - If they buy it from grid.

This may have been true at one time, but w/the contracts they have signed w/renewables as well as H-Q now being in the mix, plus not asking for or even needing as much as either VY or H-Q offered, this is a savings of power as well as resulting emissions.

Power prices will go up WITH or WITHOUT Yankee! VT was also looking at replacing 1/2 of the power we get from VY @ the time.

Power prices would be much more WITH Yankee.

Stay ignorant.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#35 Jan 6, 2011
NSD I thnk you should end each of your posts with "stay ignorant". As everyone who has read your vile knows that is what you intend to do.
I Know More Than You

Farmington, NH

#36 Jan 6, 2011
northstaridiot wrote:
This may have been true at one time, but w/the contracts they have signed w/renewables as well as H-Q now being in the mix, plus not asking for or even needing as much as either VY or H-Q offered, this is a savings of power as well as resulting emissions.
Prove it or zip it!

“figuresdontlie*l iarscanfigure”

Since: Feb 10

S. Londonderry VT

#37 Jan 6, 2011
hhmmmmmmmmmmm wrote:
NSD I thnk you should end each of your posts with "stay ignorant". As everyone who has read your vile knows that is what you intend to do.
A cheap shot which means nothing like everything else you so foolishly post.

So, this includes your bada&s best bud, right:

"I Know Nothing Hooksett, NH #32 10 hrs ago

My guess as to the true number? Exactly zero.
Both GMP and CVPS have stated that if VY does close, power prices will go up and the replacement power will emit more CO2.

Stay ignorant."
I Know More Than You

Farmington, NH

#38 Jan 6, 2011
northstaridiot wrote:
<quoted text>
A cheap shot which means nothing like everything else you so foolishly post.
So, this includes your bada&s best bud, right:
Once again, the joke went right over your head. Why am I not surprised.

Stay ignorant.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#39 Jan 6, 2011
I do not know that poster nor is he my bud. I agree with much of the info he provides, but I do not always agree in the manner he provides it on this site. Why must you swear so much in your posts NSD? Are you unintelligent enought that you cannot post your side of the argument without profanity?

Power being cheaper without VY then With, yet another lie.

Stay ignorant

“figuresdontlie*l iarscanfigure”

Since: Feb 10

S. Londonderry VT

#40 Jan 6, 2011
Picking apart small details, spelling, grammar etc is scraping bottom of barrell & only done when there's nothing else to biatch about.

Go ahead & claim I'm 'unintelligent', I've been called worse. Wisdom is justified of her children as is folly.

I'll gladly take your spitball instead of an AK any day. Saves my ammo & energy returning fire. Many thanks!

=<^.^>= Meow!
Big Cheese

Brattleboro, VT

#41 Jan 6, 2011
northstardust
BlahblahblahblahblahblahblahBl ahblahblahblahblahblahblahBlah blahblahblahblahblahblahBlahbl ahblahblahblahblahblahBlahblah blahblahblahblahblahBlahblahbl ahblahblahblahblahBlahblahblah blahblahblahblah you are a moron:)

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Vernon Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Vermonts new economy (Jun '14) Mon Community Disorga... 212
News Sex abuse suit against Williston Northampton Sc... (May '10) Apr 29 Springfield Pervert 14
Truth reason knowledge (Dec '12) Apr 25 AlexJones4Trumps ... 771
Marble is still missing, and a year of silence? Apr 22 BrattNative 1
Murder in Brattleboro, 1950 to 1956 (Apr '10) Apr 16 Shadorider 34
News SIT student claims he was profiled at Bratt sup... (Nov '13) Apr 11 Community Disorga... 61
When ‘Religious Liberty’ Was Used To Deny All H... (Mar '14) Mar '16 Not In SF 325
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Vernon Mortgages