Vermont Yankee Ends Operations After 42 Years

[bananas]

Source: Associated Press

The Vermont Yankee nuclear plant stopped sending power to the New England electric grid at just after noon Monday following more than 42 years of producing electricity from the southeastern Vermont town of Vernon.

The shutdown came at 12:12 p.m., as the plant completed its 30th operating cycle when operators inserted control rods into the reactor core and stopped the nuclear reaction process, the plant’s owner said.

<snip>

Bill Mohl, the president of Entergy Wholesale Commodities, said economic factors, especially related to the natural gas market in the Northeast, were the primary reason for the shutdown.

“The Northeast has undergone a shift in supply because of shale gas, resulting in sustained low natural gas prices and low wholesale energy prices,” Mohl said in a statement.

<snip>

Read more: https://www.wbur.org/2014/12/29/vermont-yankee-power-plant

---

[NutmegYankee]

1. What a crock of complete shit RE:natural gas. Massive Electric Rate increases on Jan 1.

The electric rates in New England are rising 25% once this plant shuts down because the operators say they can't move enough natural gas in the region. Thousands will go cold this winter because they can't afford the electric rates.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2014/09/29/electric-rates-soar-in-stranded-new-england

http://www.npr.org/2014/11/05/361420484/new-england-electricity-prices-spike-as-gas-pipelines-lag

If we didn't have Millstone, we'd have blackouts.

[RobertEarl]

12. Rates will continue to rise

They have to pay for the decommissioning of nuke plants somehow.

A coal plant can be sent to the scrap yard. The remains from a nuke plant can not be recycled. The remains will have to be watched over and contained for a thousand years. Nuke plants are a present to future generations. A bad nasty present.

We should be taxing nuke supporters to pay for that. Any honest nuke supporter will willingly give up their fortunes to pay for their mistakes, eh?

[NutmegYankee]

13. It's a deregulated market. The utility isn't responsible for the power plants.

And the other plants are not responsible for it either. They buy power, not debt.

[RobertEarl]

15. Not responsible?!?!?!

Heh, yeah, nuke plant owners are NOT responsible for anything. That's how they play it, anyway.

So, who in your book is responsible for the decommissioning and clean up of nuke plants?

[NutmegYankee]

20. The plant owner is not the utility. Each power plant is owned by different companies.

They sell their power to the utility, who delivers it to your home. Once the plant is offline, the business with the utility stops. The ratepayers therefore do not pay for the cleanup. The company that owned the plant covers that. That's a deregulated utility market.

[FBaggins]

23. The rate increases have nothing to do with decommissioning costs of the plant

By law, the plant has to have a decommissioning fund that's funded by part of the cost of every watt sold by the plant. That's been happening for decades now. That fund is already sufficient to pay the expected decommissioning costs over the coming decades.

[RobertEarl]

24. Folks

Make note of those whose faith in nuclear power makes them post here, trying once again to whitewash the evil industry.

They believe, against all science based reasoning, that nuke plants are mere mistakes that will all be taken care of without having to raise additional funds to pay for the thousand years of nuclear pollution.

The industry and its faith based believers have told so many lies the only thing they can do is tell more.

[NuclearDem]

26. What on earth is this paragraph supposed to mean?

They believe, against all science based reasoning, that nuke plants are mere mistakes that will all be taken care of without having to raise additional funds to pay for the thousand years of nuclear pollution.

Ive actually hurt my brain trying to figure out what this argle bargle actually is.

[Union Scribe]

19. Yes but some scared people feel better.

Isn't that what's really important?

[RobertEarl]

28. Typical pro-nuke response

A response that goes against science. Against the science that says what the nuke power plants have generated long-term will end up killing life off.

There was an Admiral named Rickover, who was in charge of nuclear ships in the US navy. Here's his testimony:



Adm.Hyman Rickover, the Father of the Nuclear Navy and of Shippensport nuclear reactor. In the twilight of his career, he testified before Congress in January 1982. Below is an excerpt from his testimony. Given who this man was and what he did, his statements were profound.

Here’s an excerpt from Rickover’s testimony:

“I’ll be philosophical. Until about two billion years ago, it was impossible to have any life on earth; that is, there was so much radiation on earth you couldn’t have any life — fish or anything. Gradually, about two billion years ago, the amount of radiation on this planet and probably in the entire system reduced and made it possible for some form of life to begin…

Now when we go back to using nuclear power, we are creating something which nature tried to destroy to make life possible… Every time you produce radiation, you produce something that has a certain half-life, in some cases for billions of years.

I think the human race is going to wreck itself, and it is important that we get control of this horrible force and try to eliminate it… I do not believe that nuclear power is worth it if it creates radiation.

Then you might ask me why do I have nuclear powered ships. That is a necessary evil. I would sink them all. Have I given you an answer to your question?”

On the hazards of nuclear power.
Testimony to Congress (28 January 1982);
published in Economics of Defense Policy:
Hearing before the Joint Economic Committee,
Congress of the United States, 97th Cong., 2nd sess., Pt. 1 (1982)

_____________
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Hyman_G._Rickover

[Union Scribe]

29. Typical pro-pollution response

So when does "science" predict all life will cease to exist because of "nukes"? Let me know so I can stop paying my bills okay?

[RobertEarl]

30. There is a number where *all* life is killed

Not sure what it is but we are getting closer to it every day.

The science says that some life forms are more susceptible to lower doses of radiation and some can manage quite a dose before its life ceases.

Presently, there is an argument to be made that many lifeforms are being severely impacted. Birds, for instance, sea stars, another. Cancer rates among humans has shown a rapid increase since the advent use of fission by man.

One of the problems the scientists have is that the PTB have suppressed the science of the consequences of man made radioactivity because: money.

[RobertEarl]

31. Hey, buddy, where'd ya go?

We were just getting started.

And I get no reply to the info I've shared with you. Durn.

[bananas]

2. Activists Permanently Shut Down Vermont Yankee Nuke Plant Today

http://ecowatch.com/2014/12/29/vermont-yankee-shuts-down/

Activists Permanently Shut Down Vermont Yankee Nuke Plant Today
Harvey Wasserman | December 29, 2014 7:55 am

The Vermont Yankee atomic reactor goes permanently off-line today, Dec. 29, 2014. Citizen activists have made it happen. The number of licensed U.S. commercial reactors is now under 100 where once it was to be 1,000.

Decades of hard grassroots campaigning by dedicated, non-violent nuclear opponents, working for a Solartopian green-powered economy, forced this reactor’s corporate owner to bring it down.

Entergy says it shut Vermont Yankee because it was losing money. Though fully amortized, it could not compete with the onslaught of renewable energy and fracked-gas. Throughout the world, nukes once sold as generating juice “too cheap to meter” comprise a global financial disaster. Even with their capital costs long-ago stuck to the public, these radioactive junk heaps have no place in today’s economy—except as illegitimate magnets for massive handouts.

So in Illinois and elsewhere around the U.S., their owners demand that their bought and rented state legislators and regulators force the public to eat their losses. Arguing for “base load power” or other nonsensical corporate constructs, atomic corporations are gouging the public to keep these radioactive jalopies sputtering along.

<snip>

[bananas]

3. Gov. Shumlin Statement on Closing on Vermont Yankee

http://governor.vermont.gov/node/2166

Gov. Shumlin Statement on Closing on Vermont Yankee

MONTPELIER – Gov. Peter Shumlin issued the following statement on the closure of Vermont Yankee.

“The closure of Vermont Yankee marks the end of years of controversy over operation of a nuclear plant in our state. I have long advocated for the closing of this plant at the end of its original license, and I believe the ceasing of operations today after nearly 43 years represents a positive step for our state and our energy future. Today, thanks to investments in renewable energy such as solar, Vermont's energy future is on a different, more sustainable path that is creating jobs, reducing energy costs for Vermonters and slowing climate change.

“I know this is hard news for the many Vermonters who have relied on the Vermont Yankee plant for employment and economic opportunity in Windham County and beyond. I want to thank the employees of the plant for their hard work over the years. My administration will continue working with local communities to ensure that the Windham County region grows jobs and economic opportunity as operations wind down at Vermont Yankee. We will also continue to work with Entergy and community partners to ensure that decommissioning happens as promptly and smoothly as possible.”

In Dec. 2013, the Governor, Attorney General Bill Sorrell, and Bill Mohl, President of Entergy Wholesale Commodities, announced a settlement agreement between the State and Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee that resolves all ongoing litigation between the State and Entergy VY and provided a path to resolve proceedings at the Public Service Board.

Under the terms of that agreement, Entergy VY will provide $10 million in economic development for Windham County over five years and $5.2 million in clean energy development support for Windham County and elsewhere, as well as a transitional $5 million payment to the State for calendar year 2015. Entergy VY also agreed to set aside a new $25 million fund to ensure the site is restored after decommissioning.

[bananas]

4. "cost to decommission the plant at $1.24 billion ... currently has about $600 million in the fund"

http://vtdigger.org/2014/12/29/vermont-yankee-powers-good/

Vermont Yankee powers down for good
John Herrick Dec. 29 2014, 12:25 pm

<snip>

The company will remove the spent nuclear fuel rods from the reactor and place them into a cooling pool. By 2020, the company plans to load all of the fuel into dry casks where the rods will be stored on the 125-acre site along the Connecticut River indefinitely.

The company estimates the cost to decommission the plant at $1.24 billion. Entergy will begin tearing down the plant only when it has enough money in the decommissioning trust fund to complete the process. It currently has about $600 million in the fund. The company is allowed 60 years to decommission the plant under federal rules, but has promised to do so sooner.

<snip>

[FBaggins]

22. The math isn't that complex, bananas

Last edited Thu Jan 1, 2015, 02:10 PM - Edit history (1)

Let's say for instance that you were funding your 40-year retirement with $600,000 in savings. If you assume a 5% return and 3% inflation, that would give you an income of a tad less than $3,000/month (drawing down principal as you go to arrive at $0 40 years from now).

Your total withdrawals over that time would be a little less than $1.5 million. So $600 million is plenty to pay out $1.24 over a multi-decade period given reasonable real investment returns.

[bananas]

5. Statement of VPIRG Executive Director Paul Burnson the closure of Vermont Yankee

http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/story/news/2014/12/29/vermont-yankee-plant-prepares-shut-down/20992137/

Vermont Yankee ends operations after 42 years
Associated Press 1:56 p.m. EST December 29, 2014

<snip>

Statement of VPIRG Executive Director Paul Burnson the closure of Vermont Yankee

It's possible that no single issue has received more attention from VPIRG staff, activists and attorneys over the past 42 years than Vermont Yankee. In fact, VPIRG was founded in 1972, the same year that Vermont Yankee came online.

From the beginning, VPIRG has advocated for less costly and more sustainable ways to generate the power we need in Vermont. Over the years, our organizers and volunteers fought to hold plant owners accountable in many forums. We opposed plans to develop a high level nuclear waste site in state, pressed for tough cleanup and closure requirements, urged legislators to retire the plant as scheduled in 2010 and later stood ready to oppose another 20-year license for the plant had Entergy Louisiana not decided to shut it down this year.

Vermont's last long-term energy plan did not include Vermont Yankee. And Vermont utilities have not been getting any power from Vermont Yankee in recent years. Few can say they have noticed any difference.

Closing Vermont Yankee puts an end to a long chapter in our state's energy book. It's fitting that as VY is unplugged, more Vermonters than ever are plugging in to energy from clean, local, renewable sources.

The answer to our energy needs, and ultimately the solution to global warming, will come with conservation, efficiency and renewable power. These are the areas in which Vermont can lead.

Our thoughts today are with the workers at Vermont Yankee, both those who will be relocating with the closure of the plant, and those who may continue to play a vital role in securing the site and eventually decommissioning it. We wish them well. Our fight was never with them.

We are also grateful to the thousands of Vermonters and residents of neighboring states who worked so hard for so long to see Vermont Yankee safely retired. May its demise usher in the kind of clean energy future that most Vermonters so strongly support.

[NickB79]

6. Trading nuclear reactors for fracking natural gas?

[progressoid]

7. So, more greenhouse gasses then.

[bananas]

9. Yup - this is one of the reasons nuclear isn't a solution to global warming.

Maintenance costs on old reactors make them too expensive to keep running.

[jeff47]

8. Yay! More climate change!

Now we'll dump a lot more CO2 into the atmosphere from those natural gas power plants. And we'll get even more fracking to get that natural gas.

What an excellent tradeoff.

[Raine1967]

10. Haven't they been trying to close this plant down for a long time?

I find it strange that they are saying fracking is the reason why they are closing it. Fracking is relatively new, no?

[proverbialwisdom]

11. Related: "Fukushima: An In Depth Documentary" by VICE (HBO)

HBO
VICE/ Season 2/ Episode 10

Released: 2014

'Playing with Nuclear Fire' - Three years after the Tohoku earthquake in Japan, citizens and the international community are left wondering if Japan really does have the situation under control.

Michio Kaku's VICE interview (excerpted from above) begins @ 4:32.

[Vinca]

14. I live in the evacuation zone of this plant and I am relieved.

Remember . . . this is the wonderful place where a cooling tower collapsed out of the blue right after an inspection. Of course, all is not rosy since the waste will be there until the end of time.

[magical thyme]

16. Congratulations! We closed Maine Yankee I think the year I moved up here...

I'm not sure when the "bubble building" disappeared. I just noticed it was missing while driving through Wiscasset this past summer.

The fuel rods are in dry storage now. Hopefully some day sooner rather than later, the Fed Gov will honor the agreement to move them the hell out of here for permanent storage.

1 plant at a time...

In the meantime, our electric prices remain low as we continue shifting to clean renewables.

[NutmegYankee]

21. Cheap for now - but watch out!

http://bangordailynews.com/2014/12/02/the-point/bids-are-in-to-determine-maine-electricity-rates-for-2015-but-sticker-shock-awaits/

[Kurska]

17. To be swiftly replaced by natural gas burning power

Good job guys, we're really making a difference for the environment with this one.

[waddirum]

25. Vermont Yanke was a 42 year old rustbucket

It was time to shut it down, for both economic and safety reasons. The owners made the logical decision, based on the condition of the plant.

[Union Scribe]

18. Why are you applauding shale gas? nt

[NuclearDem]

27. Because Chernobyl.

Or something.