Entergy offer to sell Yankee will meet resistance

Full story: Brattleboro Reformer

Discrediting itself both with false statements and leak-prone operation, Entergy Nuclear, the owner of Vermont Yankee, appears to have recognized that it permanently lost the confidence of Vermonters and the Vermont legislature.
Comments
1 - 20 of 162 Comments Last updated Jan 6, 2011
First Prev
of 9
Next Last
NSTAR

Woburn, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Dec 3, 2010
 
Considering where this guy works his misguided editorial pretending to be the voice of all Vermonters is expected. Hey James, are you from Vermont or a transplanted whining flatlander?
Concerned

Bennington, VT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Dec 3, 2010
 
Controversial rules for Texas landfill could impact decommissioning of Vermont Yankee

http://vtdigger.org/2010/12/01/controversial-...

If you can't open link go to www.vtdigger.com for story.
Local

Springfield, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Dec 3, 2010
 
Well, NSTAR from Reading, MA - it's pretty funny seeing a masshole calling a Vermonter a flatlander. Could that be because you have nothing better to counter his well-reasoned arguments?

“figuresdontlie*l iarscanfigure”

Since: Feb 10

S. Londonderry VT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Dec 4, 2010
 
Entergy offer to sell Yankee will meet resistance

By JAMES MARC LEAS Friday December 3, 2010

Discrediting itself both with false statements and leak-prone operation, Entergy Nuclear, the owner of Vermont Yankee, appears to have recognized that it permanently lost the confidence of Vermonters and the Vermont legislature.

With the plant suffering one leak after another, Entergy may also have lost some of its own confidence in the plant. Its request for a 20 year extension at serious risk, on Nov. 4 Entergy announced that Vermont Yankee is up for sale.
cont'd

With over $6 billion of revenue anticipated from operation for another 20 years -- even at current low electricity price levels -- Entergy may well be able to come up with a buyer willing to take on the risk.

A sale is likely to be accompanied by another corporate advertising campaign that a bright new day has come for Vermont Yankee. The campaign may portray the new owner as caring, include tempting promises to thoroughly inspect and refurbish Vermont Yankee from top to bottom, offer lots of cheap electricity to Vermonters, and guarantee to fill up the decommissioning fund.

The new owner may even have Vermont ties. One thing is for sure: the new owner will press for extending operation well beyond 2012.

But Entergy's attempt to sell raises a troubling question: if a company as strong and committed to nuclear power as Entergy Corporation -- the second largest owner of nuclear plants in the U.S.-- could not manage to keep this plant from leaking and retain the confidence

of Vermonters, or if Entergy's own confidence in the plant has declined, would Vermonters be wise to let anyone else operate this plant beyond 2012?
Vermonters have good reason to join with Entergy in wanting to unload this plant -- with one difference: Entergy wanting to sell, Vermonters wanting it closed on schedule in 2012.

-- Leaks are coming frequently and with no end in sight. In January 2010, Entergy announced that tritium leaked from underground piping into Vermont soil and ground water. Then, in May 2010, Entergy announced that the same underground pipes also leaked strontium 90 into Vermont soil.

In November 2010, Entergy reported that a 24-inch reactor feed water pipe leaked. Entergy also simultaneously reported that a drain line connected to the plant's high pressure coolant injection system also leaked. All this follows a fire adjacent to a transformer in 2004 and a famous cooling tower collapse in August 2007.

In February 2010 a plant employee revealed a previously undisclosed 2005 tritium leak from the underground pipes.

-- Vermont Yankee will finish its 40 year design-life in 2012.

-- Vermont Yankee has out of date designs for its reactor, reactor containment, spent fuel pool, and turbine building which would not be approved for a new reactor today.

-- Vermont Yankee holds tons of highly radioactive fission products in the reactor, in the spent fuel pool, and in casks on the shore of the Connecticut River. A major leak from any of these sources would be a disaster for Vermont and neighboring states.

These facts support the view that Vermont Yankee is an old, deteriorating, defective, dangerous, leaky nuclear plant that should close on schedule in 2012. Changing ownership will not be an improvement because it will not fix the underlying age and design problems that led Vermonters to lose trust in Entergy in the first place.

Furthermore, Vermonters have already spoken:

-- In 50 town meeting votes in March 2009 and 2010, Vermonters overwhelmingly voted that Vermont Yankee should close in 2012, that Entergy should be required to pay the full cost of decommissioning, and that the legislature should focus on safe, renewable sources of energy.

-- In February 2010 the Vermont Senate voted down allowing continued operation after 2012.

-- In November 2010 Vermonters elected the candidate for governor most vigorously promising to close Vermont Yankee.

“figuresdontlie*l iarscanfigure”

Since: Feb 10

S. Londonderry VT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Dec 4, 2010
 
In advance of any sale both the current discredited owner and all potential buyers should know that a transparent corporate maneuver to overturn our democratic decisions to close Vermont Yankee is sure to meet strong resistance.

Vermonters and our legislature carefully evaluated the facts and voted to close this plant on schedule.

We have a right to have those votes respected. Making a risky deal with Entergy to overturn those votes may poison the buyer's reputation in Vermont.

Expect Vermonters to vigorously defend our land, our water, our freedom, and our democracy in massive opposition to any corporate maneuver -- including a sale -- designed to extend operation of Vermont Yankee beyond March 21, 2012.

James Marc Leas, a former Staff Physicist at the Union of the Concerned Scientists, is a patent lawyer in South Burlington.
http://www.reformer.com/localeditorials/ci_16...
ezduzit

Manchester, NH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Dec 4, 2010
 
Maybe NSTAR and the local lumber company who would be willing to do anything to keep this flawed operation going would co-sign for the decomissioning costs that Entergy is going to try and weasel out of paying, and while they are at it make room on their property for spent fuel rods that no one seems to know how to safely store or dispose of.

If the technology was complete for these plants they would be the perfect solution, but aged, out of date plants like VY coupled with an industry that has no real answer for how to store the waste make them as dangerous as ever. Given the facts surrounding VY it has become part of the problem, not part of the solution and should be closed.
Annette

Newfane, VT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Dec 4, 2010
 
Close Vermont Yankee for good, no matter the owner. What company/corporation would risk such a purchase unless it is a spin-off of sorts of Entergy?

Entergy knew of the contract when they bought, NOW CLOSE IT DOWN!
harlz

Torrington, CT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Dec 4, 2010
 
"James Marc Leas, a former Staff Physicist at the Union of the Concerned Scientists, is a patent lawyer"

Which is he, a physicist or a lawyer? Judging from the numerous exaggerations, mis-statements, and half-truths in his comments, I suspect more the latter than the former.
.

“figuresdontlie*l iarscanfigure”

Since: Feb 10

S. Londonderry VT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Dec 4, 2010
 
harlz wrote:
"James Marc Leas, a former Staff Physicist at the Union of the Concerned Scientists, is a patent lawyer"
Which is he, a physicist or a lawyer? Judging from the numerous exaggerations, mis-statements, and half-truths in his comments, I suspect more the latter than the former.
He can be both, although I'm sure it's difficult enough for losers to comprehend merely being one, to say nothing of being accomplished @ two.

Since you cannot refute *anything* he said, you are obviously another member of the under the bridge cave dwelling element who have flooded these threads & stormed all media outlets in an attempt to silence the truth this past year.

FYI: It isn't working! We are becoming more resolved, immune & bulletproof to the e-thuggery & continued propaganda, so I guess I really should thank all of you, esp since so many have been run off & have seen the hideousness up close & personal, and, apparently vote as we do which is why Entergy is now on the run.

Keep up the great work & wonderful contribution to the cause of unmasking 'IAMVY' & the failed media blitz 'We Are Your Friends & Neighbors' along w/the pronuclear claque, fronts & orgs who routinely come to lend a helping hand to embattled scumbags & occupiers Entergy.

It's an honor.
I Know More Than You

Troy, NH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Dec 4, 2010
 
northstaridiot wrote:
Since you cannot refute *anything* he said, you are obviously another member of the under the bridge cave dwelling element who have flooded these threads & stormed all media outlets in an attempt to silence the truth this past year.
I'd be happy prove this "lawyer/physicist" is a liar and charlatan who attempts to fool the gullible anti-nuke idiots.

"Vermont Yankee will finish its 40 year design-life in 2012."

From the state's own Act 160 on VY:

"2.3 Review of NRC license renewal process
U.S. nuclear power plants are licensed to operate for 40 years. This term was specified by Congress in the Atomic Energy Act of 1954. The law was fashioned after the Communications Act of 1934, in which radio stations were licensed to operate for several years and allowed to renew their licenses as long as the stations continued to meet their charters. The Atomic Energy Act allowed for nuclear power plants to renew their licenses.

Congress selected a 40-year term for nuclear power plant licenses
because this period was a typical amortization period for an electric power plant. The 40-year license term was not based on safety, technical or environmental factors. "

Looks like another anti-nuke "expert" is nothing but an ideologue, fraud, and liar.
Local

Springfield, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
Dec 4, 2010
 
Hah! My neighbor's rusty old 1972 Ford Pinto hasn't blown up yet but only because it has never been rear-ended. Regardless, I wouldn't want to trust the lives and safety of my loved ones to it.

“figuresdontlie*l iarscanfigure”

Since: Feb 10

S. Londonderry VT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Dec 4, 2010
 
I Know More Than You wrote:
<quoted text>
I'd be happy prove this "lawyer/physicist" is a liar and charlatan who attempts to fool the gullible anti-nuke idiots.
"Vermont Yankee will finish its 40 year design-life in 2012."
From the state's own Act 160 on VY:
"2.3 Review of NRC license renewal process
U.S. nuclear power plants are licensed to operate for 40 years. This term was specified by Congress in the Atomic Energy Act of 1954. The law was fashioned after the Communications Act of 1934, in which radio stations were licensed to operate for several years and allowed to renew their licenses as long as the stations continued to meet their charters. The Atomic Energy Act allowed for nuclear power plants to renew their licenses.
Congress selected a 40-year term for nuclear power plant licenses
because this period was a typical amortization period for an electric power plant. The 40-year license term was not based on safety, technical or environmental factors. "
Looks like another anti-nuke "expert" is nothing but an ideologue, fraud, and liar.
"Looks like another pronuke "expert" is nothing but an ideologue, fraud, and liar."

Umm, this would be YOU! Ha!

Pants around ankles-AGAIN!

You have proved nothing-AGAIN!, except that everything you say is a complete & total lie!

NOTHING you said is in Act 160! Your cut & paste is likely from NRC website.

Wrong NPP dummy!

From the state's own Act 160 re Entergy/VY:
It is hereby enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Vermont:

Sec. 1. LEGISLATIVE POLICY AND PURPOSE

(a) It remains the policy of the state that a nuclear energy generating plant may be operated in Vermont only with the explicit approval of the General Assembly expressed in law after full, open, and informed public deliberation and discussion with respect to pertinent factors, including the state’s need for power, the economics and environmental impacts of long-term storage of nuclear waste, and choice of power sources among various alternatives.

(b) It is the purpose of this act to establish a statutory process to implement this policy with respect to the operation of any nuclear energy generating plant in the state beyond the date of any certificate of public good granted and in force, including any in force as of January 1, 2006.
more:
http://www.leg.state.vt.us/jfo/VY%20Legislati...

Explanation of ACT 160:

- The power of Act 160

In May 2006, after intensive citizen advocacy efforts, the Vermont legislature passed a law of truly historic proportions, Act 160.

Act 160 states that the Entergy Nuclear Corporation may not operate the Vermont Yankee nuclear reactor after its license expires in 2012 without "the explicit approval of the General Assembly".

*****Even if the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in Washington, DC decides to authorize a 20-year license extension for the aging, mismanaged reactor, the representatives of Vermont's citizens still have the authority to say "NO!"*****

legislature's vote will likely take place during the 2010 session.
more:
http://www.vtcitizen.org/index.php/act-160.ht...
I Know More Than You

Troy, NH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
Dec 4, 2010
 
northstaridiot wrote:
You have proved nothing-AGAIN!
What's the matter little baby, couldn't find the quote I posted? It's only the 5th or 6th time I've posted it here.

Now that you've had your temper tantrum, 15 min timeout for you!

“figuresdontlie*l iarscanfigure”

Since: Feb 10

S. Londonderry VT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#14
Dec 4, 2010
 
I Know More Than You wrote:
<quoted text>
What's the matter little baby, couldn't find the quote I posted? It's only the 5th or 6th time I've posted it here.
Now that you've had your temper tantrum, 15 min timeout for you!
What's the matter, Pinnochio, can't remember which NPP you're biatching about???

Here? On this thread? BS!

You posted false information-AGAIN! If you had read ACT 160, you had to know it was false, but tried once again to post something you knew was a complete lie, which you do ALL THE TIME & was caught again, as you are all the time!

You tried to 'prove' someone a liar & managed to prove yourself actually the liar-AGAIN!

Doesn't matter how many times you've posted it, if it's a lie, ontinuing to post it doesn't make it true!
I Know More Than You

Troy, NH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
Dec 4, 2010
 
northstaridiot wrote:
Watch me rant and rave like a moron when it's only a matter of time before I am shown once again to be a pathological liar and an idiot
Here's the link to the report idiot, how's that plate of crow taste?

It was "hidden" on the front page of PSB website and was the first link returned on Google for "vermont act 160 report vermont yankee"

http://publicservice.vermont.gov/dockets/7440...
NH DAD

Bellows Falls, VT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
Dec 4, 2010
 
I think its time for northstardust to pull the string that is hanging between her legs maybe time to change it you think? Your all wound up today
Concerned

Bennington, VT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
Dec 4, 2010
 
northstardust wrote:
<quoted text>
"Looks like another pronuke "expert" is nothing but an ideologue, fraud, and liar."
Umm, this would be YOU! Ha!
Pants around ankles-AGAIN!
You have proved nothing-AGAIN!, except that everything you say is a complete & total lie!
NOTHING you said is in Act 160! Your cut & paste is likely from NRC website.
Wrong NPP dummy!
From the state's own Act 160 re Entergy/VY:
It is hereby enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Vermont:
Sec. 1. LEGISLATIVE POLICY AND PURPOSE
(a) It remains the policy of the state that a nuclear energy generating plant may be operated in Vermont only with the explicit approval of the General Assembly expressed in law after full, open, and informed public deliberation and discussion with respect to pertinent factors, including the state’s need for power, the economics and environmental impacts of long-term storage of nuclear waste, and choice of power sources among various alternatives.
(b) It is the purpose of this act to establish a statutory process to implement this policy with respect to the operation of any nuclear energy generating plant in the state beyond the date of any certificate of public good granted and in force, including any in force as of January 1, 2006.
more:
http://www.leg.state.vt.us/jfo/VY%20Legislati...
Explanation of ACT 160:
- The power of Act 160
In May 2006, after intensive citizen advocacy efforts, the Vermont legislature passed a law of truly historic proportions, Act 160.
Act 160 states that the Entergy Nuclear Corporation may not operate the Vermont Yankee nuclear reactor after its license expires in 2012 without "the explicit approval of the General Assembly".
*****Even if the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in Washington, DC decides to authorize a 20-year license extension for the aging, mismanaged reactor, the representatives of Vermont's citizens still have the authority to say "NO!"*****
legislature's vote will likely take place during the 2010 session.
more:
http://www.vtcitizen.org/index.php/act-160.ht...
So far I do not see any action on voting for the closure-wonder why they didn't before the end of last session?
The Mouth of Shumlin

Bronx, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#18
Dec 4, 2010
 
@northstardust

Why did you repost the article?

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#19
Dec 4, 2010
 
I Know More Than You wrote:
<quoted text>
Here's the link to the report idiot, how's that plate of crow taste?
It was "hidden" on the front page of PSB website and was the first link returned on Google for "vermont act 160 report vermont yankee"
http://publicservice.vermont.gov/dockets/7440...
NSD,

I just went and fact checked and what he posted is word for word from that report. Page 25 to make it easier to find. As much as "I know more then you." offends me with his style of writing, As much as I wish he would be more polite in his delivery since he is pro VY, he has provided a fact backed up by a report from the legislators contracted engineering service itself.
Yah Right

Bellows Falls, VT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20
Dec 4, 2010
 
Is this an editorial or an article??

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

First Prev
of 9
Next Last
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

Other Recent Entergy Discussions

Search the Entergy Forum:
Title Updated Last By Comments
S&WB taps New Orleans capital projects director... (Jan '14) Jan '14 setup 1
Entergy Provides Preliminary Third Quarter Earn... (Oct '13) Oct '13 Fukushima Radiation Updat 1
Entergy Corp. (ETR) Updates FY13 Earnings Guidance (Oct '13) Oct '13 Fukushima Radiation Updat 1
Entergy Recognized as Worldwide Leader in Clima... (Oct '13) Oct '13 Fukushima Radiation Updat 1
Nuclear power plant in Mississippi emits smoke ... (Sep '13) Sep '13 BDV 2
VY still lobbies for new license (Oct '10) Oct '12 Mike Mulligan 134
Troubled Michigan nuclear plant shut down for m... (Apr '12) Apr '12 BDV 1
•••
•••