Entergy: Fear should not be PSBa guide

Entergy: Fear should not be PSBa guide

There are 59 comments on the Brattleboro Reformer story from Aug 12, 2009, titled Entergy: Fear should not be PSBa guide. In it, Brattleboro Reformer reports that:

Unsubstantiated claims and arguments submitted to the Vermont Public Service Board by parties opposed to the relicensing of Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant should not stand in the way of the plant's continued operation past 2012.

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

Rod Adams

Dundalk, MD

#21 Aug 15, 2009
I have been following this issue for quite some time. Reading between the lines, it appears to me that the main stumbling block is that the state of Vermont seems to believe that they should continue receiving electricity from Vermont Yankee at something close to the current price, which happens to be significantly below the market price in the New England area.

Entergy is addressing in public the publicly stated concerns, but I predict that both sides will bring this issue right to the brink before reaching any agreement.

If I was at the table, I would call the state's bluff. Entergy should be in a position to shut the plant down for a while if the state fails to agree that it serves a public good. If the situation progresses to that stage in the negotiations, the residents and businesses in Vermont should get a good feel for what it would be like to have Vermont Yankee in the state, yet not operating. If they like the resulting prices and the resulting pollution...

Just a thought.
Mike Mulligan

Roslindale, MA

#22 Aug 15, 2009
Sheffrey wrote:
Vermont is lucky to have a nuclear power plant that is already built and operating. Green nuclear power is the only practical long-term solution to (1) ameliorate global warming,(2) avoid dependence on foreign oil/gas, and (3) overcome oil/gas depletion after 2040. Only two prime energy sources, coal and uranium, can affordably deliver terawatts of "mother" electricity for:(A) heavy industry, i.e. manufacture of autos, ships, airplanes, etc; (B) power for vast fleets of future electric plug-in autos; and (C) production of portable synfuels (hydrogen and ammonia) and biofuels for long-haul propulsion of land-, sea-, and air-craft when oil is gone. However coal worsens global warming and must be preserved as raw material to make organics and plastics when oil is gone. This leaves uranium as the only "big-mama" green energy source, an "inconvenient truth".
Green solar and wind energy are useful for small-quantity power generation in select locations. But at terawatt levels, immense areas of land and/or sea would be needed, necessitating enormous maintenance operations, spoiling scenic land- or sea-scapes, and destroying local ecosystems. Jeff W. Eerkens,
Adjunct Research Professor,
Nuclear Science and Eng'ng Institute
U of Missouri, Columbia, 65211
Jeff,

Vermont Yankee in around 2005 was the most destined nuclear plant to get relicensed in the USA...to get the state approval to run another 20 years. What happened. What stirred the hornets nest of the anti’s? What has turned so many Vermonters against Vermont Yankee?

I mean, what is it about the nuclear organizations and bureaucracy that makes employees, managers and executives stupid?

I would agree with most of what you said, I mean have you ever got a taste for the size of our country.

It is too bad you have to downplay the suffering of people around Chernobyl...the terrible accident was a evil government centric accident. The communist would do anything to maintain their control of power...even create a defective nuclear plant design and then make believe it wasn’t there to maintain power. So you are saying Chernobyl wasn’t that bad...you are saying the Russian government wasn’t as bad as they were, there wasn’t as much suffering as we thought with such a corrupt and evil government?

I spent a lot of the mid 1970’s patrolling the coast of Russia in a fast attack submarine...spent 50% to 65% of my time under the water during those days.

What do you think of the megaton to megawatt program?

Thanks,

Mike Mulligan
Hinsdale, NH
Mike Mulligan

Roslindale, MA

#23 Aug 15, 2009
Rod Adams wrote:
I have been following this issue for quite some time. Reading between the lines, it appears to me that the main stumbling block is that the state of Vermont seems to believe that they should continue receiving electricity from Vermont Yankee at something close to the current price, which happens to be significantly below the market price in the New England area.
Entergy is addressing in public the publicly stated concerns, but I predict that both sides will bring this issue right to the brink before reaching any agreement.
If I was at the table, I would call the state's bluff. Entergy should be in a position to shut the plant down for a while if the state fails to agree that it serves a public good. If the situation progresses to that stage in the negotiations, the residents and businesses in Vermont should get a good feel for what it would be like to have Vermont Yankee in the state, yet not operating. If they like the resulting prices and the resulting pollution...
Just a thought.
OK, I will frame the issue by posing a question?

Have we entered a unprecedented and historic period of electric grid and home electric price and cost deflation...I am talk a huge utility deflation? As a national policy, should we artificially support the price of electricity through our governmental and private regulators? To much debt and no demand to waht we are choaking on??

You remember the 1930 depression...where we were pouring good milk in ditches in a effort to support the price of milk. Should we pour electricity in ditches today in order to support the price of electricity?

Mike
Mike Mulligan

Roslindale, MA

#24 Aug 15, 2009
I would parked a disassemble empty cask on the grass of the Governor Hunt House grass, had hot dogs and drinks for everyone who wanted to come, let the kids play on the cask.

Instead Entergy is having today a all hands picnic up in Greenfield, Ma.

I hope you are sending some delicious barbequed chicken up to the employees who are working today at plant, and shift work.
Sheffrey

West Sacramento, CA

#25 Aug 15, 2009
A stale anti-nuclear cry is "what about all the long-lived radioactive nuclear waste". The volume of waste amounts to one aspirin tablet per year per person using nuclear electricity, compared to many tons of air pollutants and mega-tons of globe-warming gaseous CO2 emitted by coal or fossil-fuel combustion. Nuclear waste can be easily stored and safely transported, as the US nuclear navy has done for half a century. Contrary to allegations that uranium and plutonium in spent fuel elements pose a problem because of million-year half-lives, they will be separated from fission products by reprocessing and burnt as fuel in future fast-breeder reactors; they will not be dumped. This reduces 400 tons from a one-year accumulation of spent fuel per reactor to 2 tons of fission products, taking centuries instead of decades to fill the Nevada or other national waste repository. The notion that long radioactive lifetimes are undesirable is also erroneous. The longer the decay lifetime, the less the radiation emitted per gram of radio-isotope. All humans are "hot" because everyone has radioactive potassium-40 (K-40; 0.012% abundance) in the cells of his body, which continuously emits beta particles with a half-life of one million years! Man successfully evolved in this environment.

Energy is man's third most important need after water and food. Those who hinder expansion of nuclear power will be viewed as irresponsible neo-luddites by future generations. They may not realize it, but they are promoting the eventual collapse of modern civilization, which is precisely the goal of Al-Qaida. Any further delay of a committed US nuclear energy program will cause certain impoverishment and death of many US citizens by 2050. Those responsible will and must be held accountable for this. Originally the US had planned to have 300 reactors by the year 2000, but instead there are only 104 today. After the Three-Mile-Island (TMI) reactor meltdown in 1979 in the US (with 0 casualties) and Russia's Chernobyl accident in 1986 (with 57 fatalities), public hysteria and fabricated false propaganda fanned by fear-mongering antinuclear activists caused cancellations and moratoria on construction of new nuclear plants after Chernobyl. While the USA was once the leader, most US businesses with reactor manufacturing know-how closed. Instead France, Russia, Japan, South-Korea, India, and China are now the leaders. Anti-nuclear lobbyists and mal-informed federal and state governments have created our looming energy catastrophe. We are entering an energy-crisis period as serious as WW-II and Al-Qaida. Strong bipartisan Manhattan-Project-like leadership is needed to implement a rapid expansion of nuclear power in the USA!

Jeff W. Eerkens, PhD
Adjunct Research Professor,
Nuclear Science & Eng'ng Institute
University of Missouri - Columbia
[email protected]
Solarman

Cathedral City, CA

#26 Aug 15, 2009
Mike Mulligan wrote:
<quoted text>
OK, I will frame the issue by posing a question?
Have we entered a unprecedented and historic period of electric grid and home electric price and cost deflation...I am talk a huge utility deflation? As a national policy, should we artificially support the price of electricity through our governmental and private regulators? To much debt and no demand to what we are choaking on?
You remember the 1930 depression...where we were pouring good milk in ditches in a effort to support the price of milk. Should we pour electricity in ditches today in order to support the price of electricity?
Mike
I don't know about you, but energy is probably the most important issue at hand. Remember in the 1960's we were going to have nuclear electric generation nationwide with the mantra,"too cheap to meter". Many states are trying to deregulate power, without adequate 'over' production of energy. Without over production you have no cost incentive or regulatory valve to keep energy cost low with competition. All the tax monies we pay for programs in this country, every Federal,State and local entity ususally has an office that needs electricity to keep going. A lot opf our tax dollars are going to electric bills instead of resources. This affects every one of us. Make energy a non issue, will free tax dollars to do more of what the public entity is there to do. Think of all the Libraries, Fire houses, Police stations, Hospitals, Schools and other public entities who use electricity, our tax dollars. It's time to make that decision, to put power production on the front burner, get the electrical grid up to par with robust interconnects and interties to areas where new sources of energy can be generated,IE) solar and wind. New technology reactors could very well solve the problem with current nuclear waste streams.
Mike Mulligan

Roslindale, MA

#27 Aug 15, 2009
Sheffrey wrote:
Energy is man's third most important need after water and food. Those who hinder expansion of nuclear power will be viewed as irresponsible neo-luddites by future generations. They may not realize it, but they are promoting the eventual collapse of modern civilization, which is precisely the goal of Al-Qaida. Any further delay of a committed US nuclear energy program will cause certain impoverishment and death of many US citizens by 2050. Those responsible will and must be held accountable for this. Originally the US had planned to have 300 reactors by the year 2000, but instead there are only 104 today. After the Three-Mile-Island (TMI) reactor meltdown in 1979 in the US (with 0 casualties) and Russia's Chernobyl accident in 1986 (with 57 fatalities), public hysteria and fabricated false propaganda fanned by fear-mongering antinuclear activists caused cancellations and moratoria on construction of new nuclear plants after Chernobyl. While the USA was once the leader, most US businesses with reactor manufacturing know-how closed. Instead France, Russia, Japan, South-Korea, India, and China are now the leaders. Anti-nuclear lobbyists and mal-informed federal and state governments have created our looming energy catastrophe. We are entering an energy-crisis period as serious as WW-II and Al-Qaida. Strong bipartisan Manhattan-Project-like leadership is needed to implement a rapid expansion of nuclear power in the USA!
Jeff W. Eerkens, PhD
Adjunct Research Professor,
Nuclear Science & Eng'ng Institute
University of Missouri - Columbia
[email protected]
That is exactly the same way I feel ...the nuclear Ayn Rand conservative republican’s sabotage the nation with the executive oversight of the US nuclear industry...their behavior just created barely enough public credibility to dinosaur the first few generations of nuclear...but not enough credibility to make it a bigger player of a power produce...they never create enough public credibility and good will to support the long term existence of the nuclear industry.
You more like a propagandist...most of your employees would agree with if they could tell the truth.
Mike Mulligan

Roslindale, MA

#28 Aug 15, 2009
Solarman wrote:
<quoted text>I don't know about you, but energy is probably the most important issue at hand. Remember in the 1960's we were going to have nuclear electric generation nationwide with the mantra,"too cheap to meter". Many states are trying to deregulate power, without adequate 'over' production of energy. Without over production you have no cost incentive or regulatory valve to keep energy cost low with competition. All the tax monies we pay for programs in this country, every Federal,State and local entity ususally has an office that needs electricity to keep going. A lot opf our tax dollars are going to electric bills instead of resources. This affects every one of us. Make energy a non issue, will free tax dollars to do more of what the public entity is there to do. Think of all the Libraries, Fire houses, Police stations, Hospitals, Schools and other public entities who use electricity, our tax dollars. It's time to make that decision, to put power production on the front burner, get the electrical grid up to par with robust interconnects and interties to areas where new sources of energy can be generated,IE) solar and wind. New technology reactors could very well solve the problem with current nuclear waste streams.
That would be a nightmare alliance...nuclear, solar and wind. Then we could align our electric system into meeting ends of the nuclear, solar and wind coalition...big corporations...instead of designing the gird to serve the public and the nation.
Mike Mulligan

Roslindale, MA

#29 Aug 15, 2009
Yep, if it wasn’t for the mismanagement of the Ayn Rand republican conservatives, the old nukes like Vermont Yankee would have been shutdown decades ago, decommissioned, Yucca Mountain would have been operational, all the old plants like Vermont Yankee would have been replaced with new technology...brand new plants. We would have had a dramatically newer and efficient fleet of nuclear plants today. You would have had a unprecedented opportunity to build out the nuclear industry in a energy crisis like this.

How could we let a ideology serve the nuclear industry and the nation so poorly.
Mike Mulligan

Roslindale, MA

#30 Aug 15, 2009
Rod Adams wrote:
I have been following this issue for quite some time. Reading between the lines, it appears to me that the main stumbling block is that the state of Vermont seems to believe that they should continue receiving electricity from Vermont Yankee at something close to the current price, which happens to be significantly below the market price in the New England area.
Entergy is addressing in public the publicly stated concerns, but I predict that both sides will bring this issue right to the brink before reaching any agreement.
If I was at the table, I would call the state's bluff. Entergy should be in a position to shut the plant down for a while if the state fails to agree that it serves a public good. If the situation progresses to that stage in the negotiations, the residents and businesses in Vermont should get a good feel for what it would be like to have Vermont Yankee in the state, yet not operating. If they like the resulting prices and the resulting pollution...
Just a thought.
As I got out of the NE ISO CEO, grid price are 70% less than last years prices. VY prices are marginally better than everyone else. With their plant reliability and organizational stability in a decline as we speak. 70% present less cost is astonishing price collapse. Why don’t they just dump VY and get the make up juice form the spot market for a few years. As I talked about coal and natural gas prices have collapse also. All of these players, the energy producers, the railways, all the US utilities and foreign utilities, they all got big debt and collapsing grid load. These guys will give away electricity at a lost just to float their unsustainable debt. As we speak , retail sales indicating this is going to persist.\

Entergy’s profits are collapsing as we speak, even as coal price and natural gas prices are collapsing. The Entergy nukes are at the heart of why profits are disappearing in there most recent reports. You had a slam dunk just a few years ago with Vermont Yankee getting relicensed. Lets say you shutdown VY...everyone knows its because Entergy didn’t manage their image and the politicians in Vermont. So what if we start thinking the shutdown of VY is a systemic defect in Entergy nuclear and just plain Entergy. They are even showing signs of panic with creating Enexus. They shutdown VY, that going to signal to the institutional investors that Entergy’s has massive management problems with the nuclear fleet. What if this is just the opening rounds with expensive troubles and plant shutdowns...where profits disappears in the black hole of their nuclear fleet. When they shutdown VY, it would be proof that Entergy can’t control the expenses of the nuclear fleet to the institutional...I like to know if they ever made any money sense they bought VY? They are going to have many quarters and years of choaking exspences wwith the nuclear fleet...then they are going to shutdown, that is horrendus managment image. What these institutional will think, low grid load and extraordinarily low prices for coal and natural gas, and these dying nuke plants are sucking the life out of the profits of Entergy.

The only problem with this scenario is the utilities got the politicians and the regulators in their pocket, they just might stabilize the price of electricity with non competitive expensive electricity...they might put a floor on the price of electricity buy choosing to make a contract through excessive prices on electricity. The high cost producer sets the price electricity.

We abuse altruism to an enormous extents today. What if all this Green and Global Warming electricity, we think these kinds of sources are enemies of the electric utilities, but what if all this expensive electricity is a utility scam to boost profits. I think they make a greater profit margin on expensive electricity than inexpensive electricity.
Mike Mulligan

Roslindale, MA

#31 Aug 15, 2009
By the way, that 70% collapse of grid prices today, it is so much worst than the middle east collapse of energy prices that we had in the 1980’s and early 1990’s.

It is all propaganda ideological bs that regulation in the 1970 and 1980‘s almost kill the nuclear industry, with deregulation and better management bringing the nuclear industry to a spectacular comeback nuclear renaissance. What almost killed the nuclear industry ending in the end of the 1980 was the low price of petroleum, translating into inexpensive electricity, lack of resources to the nuclear plants, what saved the industry was a reflation of the price of petroleum and skyrocketing electric prices. Believe me it wasn’t better management.

This whole ideological nuclear storyline, the apparent history...it is a figment of the republican imagination.

Actually the nuclear industry today is in a unprecedented and historic crises...their competiveness has severely eroded, and in a unprecedented historic fashion, their industry has become unprofitable...these nukes are stranded from making a adiquate profit for a decade.

We are in a nuclear national crisis. I bet you we will get a lot of nuclear accidents in the near future where the obsolete components will wear out faster than they can pump in resources to maintain plant reliability. I believe their safety and credibility culture will collapse first, then the accidents.

Anemone

Fairlee, VT

#32 Aug 16, 2009
Please use common courtesy, one name per topic.
Mike Mulligan

Roslindale, MA

#33 Aug 16, 2009
Anemone wrote:
Please use common courtesy, one name per topic.
What ever that means.
Anemone

Concord, NH

#34 Aug 16, 2009
Mike Mulligan wrote:
<quoted text>
What ever that means.
Mike Mulligan, please respect others by refraining from posting under multiple names.
Solarman

Cathedral City, CA

#35 Aug 16, 2009
Mike Mulligan wrote:
<quoted text>
That would be a nightmare alliance...nuclear, solar and wind. Then we could align our electric system into meeting ends of the nuclear, solar and wind coalition...big corporations...instead of designing the gird to serve the public and the nation.
What nightmare alliance? If you put in all nuclear plants, get fusion up and online or generate power by solar or wind,what does it matter how you generate the power? If you don't have the grid infrastructure, the generation will not matter. Did you miss that point?
mike mulligan

Roslindale, MA

#36 Aug 16, 2009
test
mike mulligan

Roslindale, MA

#37 Aug 16, 2009
Anemone wrote:
<quoted text>
Mike Mulligan, please respect others by refraining from posting under multiple names.
You idiot, I have multiple personalities not multiple identities...
Man Overboard

Reading, PA

#39 Aug 17, 2009
kkrevetski wrote:
Entergy made billions last year paying their CEO 26 million yet they have not maintained their VY reactor and they are refusing to fund the decommissioning fund. The latest Vermont Yankee Reliability studies are available on the DPS website and reports that Vermont Yankee is now considered among the 25 worst nuclear plants in the United States according to the “Equipment Reliability Index”
VY’s main transformer is not off-the shelf or an in stock item from a manufacturer. To obtain a replacement transformer in a timely manner could potentially take several years for delivery according to this reliability study. The current designated spare transformer at VY is a previously broken one that was removed from service prior to the uprate of the plant. The transformer was experiencing gassing issues. The spare transformer, the broken one, is considered to be the backup if the currently installed transformer fails, but the gassing issue in this broken transformer was not repaired.
According to this reliability study, VY’s condenser has been in operation for 37 years. Yet most nuclear power plants replace their condensers between 20 and 30 years of operation. You think it was working well. Not according to the this reliability study:“VY recognizes that they have issues involving the plant’s condensers. Chemistry index continues on an adverse trend. The options to retube or replace the condenser with erosion resistant materials to mitigate these effects or to increase demineralizer capabilities are on hold until the decision is made regarding the plant license extension. Actually, Entergy is delaying the repairs until 2014.
Previously, VY had a stable workforce. However, the study notes that there has been an influx of new employees, especially in the Operations Department and the Maintenance Department Electrical and Instrument and Controls sections. These newer individuals are thought to be more dependent upon detailed procedure guidance. In recognition of these procedure shortcomings, ENVY supposedly developed an action plan to improve station procedures that supersedes the procedure efforts previously ongoing in the Maintenance Department. NSA review found VY procedures were technically correct but not up to current industry standards as they lacked specific guidance with ‘if desired” and “when necessary” statements, which left it open to interpretation and judgment by workers.
NSA also found issues with Human Performance at VY that did not meet expectations and even with training, the issues are ongoing. Benchmark data showed that ENVY is in the bottom quartile with respect to OSHA employee reportable incidents when compared to the sister plants.
Entergy is paying the Vermont Department of Health for their oversight which has been good for Entergy (they too forgot to monitor the radiation off the dry storage casks but abominable for Vermont public health. This is what we are able read off the website. We learn the rest from their continued noncompliance being revealed as oversights. These are the facts. See for yourself.
Your comments are entirely irrelavant and only serve to illustrate your lack of evidence and poor argument stategy.

Issues like condensors, transformers, and grassing are not unique to VY or ANY nuclear power plant! Coal plants, gas turbines, incinerators, and even hydroelectric facilities face some or all of these same issues.

Much like the Oyster Creek relicensing, you will lose this debate as well. Get yourself some facts and then we'll talk, otherwise, stop wasting government time and taxpayer money forcing them to entertain your fear.
Man Overboard

Reading, PA

#40 Aug 17, 2009
Mike Mulligan wrote:
By the way, that 70% collapse of grid prices today, it is so much worst than the middle east collapse of energy prices that we had in the 1980’s and early 1990’s.
It is all propaganda ideological bs that regulation in the 1970 and 1980‘s almost kill the nuclear industry, with deregulation and better management bringing the nuclear industry to a spectacular comeback nuclear renaissance. What almost killed the nuclear industry ending in the end of the 1980 was the low price of petroleum, translating into inexpensive electricity, lack of resources to the nuclear plants, what saved the industry was a reflation of the price of petroleum and skyrocketing electric prices. Believe me it wasn’t better management.
This whole ideological nuclear storyline, the apparent history...it is a figment of the republican imagination.
Actually the nuclear industry today is in a unprecedented and historic crises...their competiveness has severely eroded, and in a unprecedented historic fashion, their industry has become unprofitable...these nukes are stranded from making a adiquate profit for a decade.
We are in a nuclear national crisis. I bet you we will get a lot of nuclear accidents in the near future where the obsolete components will wear out faster than they can pump in resources to maintain plant reliability. I believe their safety and credibility culture will collapse first, then the accidents.
That's funny - I get a check in the mail every three months in the form of dividends from Exelon stock. If nuclear is so unprofitable...then were are the profits coming from? Perhaps you might do your DD and then save face by revising your statement.
Mike Mulligan

Roslindale, MA

#41 Aug 17, 2009
What a dog of a stock you chose...the stock price is down almost 50% from a year ago, down 2.25 percent today.

You can’t purchase a bag of potato chips for those dividends.

You better sell your stocks, the price will be cut in half in another year.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

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.

Entergy Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Weird 29 mins ago 7:16 p.m.Bird droppings blame... Mar '16 Rubio s Foam Partays 4
News S&WB taps New Orleans capital projects director... (Jan '14) Jan '14 setup 1
News Entergy Provides Preliminary Third Quarter Earn... (Oct '13) Oct '13 Fukushima Radiati... 1
News Entergy Corp. (ETR) Updates FY13 Earnings Guidance (Oct '13) Oct '13 Fukushima Radiati... 1
News Entergy Recognized as Worldwide Leader in Clima... (Oct '13) Oct '13 Fukushima Radiati... 1
News Nuclear power plant in Mississippi emits smoke ... (Sep '13) Sep '13 BDV 2
News VY still lobbies for new license (Oct '10) Oct '12 Mike Mulligan 134
More from around the web