Anti Nuclear Nut Jobs want to deny Vermont NP, use of Water from river.

[Sonny]

Like at most power plants, Fishing is popular in the warm waters discharged from Vermont's Yankee power plant. The Anti Nuclear Nut Jobs are trying to deny the Power plant access to water by claiming the warm waters discharged from the plant are a "Thermal Pollution" and harmful to fish..

I call Bull Shit, ,because people wouldn't go there to fish if the If the fish weren't attracted to the warm waters.

so I ask you to say no to the anti Nuclear Nut Jobs...
Say NO to their Thermal Pollution conspiracy and other such rhetoric from Nut Jobs..
tell em you want affordable clean electric power..
Tell em to fugg off
~
http://www.nhpr.org/post/vermont-yan...ce-plant-close

[linttrap]

Warm fishing water is not really the heart of the matter with this NP. It is part of a larger battle about States Rights, not to mention lots of other issues with it....including safety cover-ups by the POS company that now owns it.
********************

In the US, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has thus far granted 20 year license extensions to 72 of the nation’s 104 nuclear power reactors. It has denied none.

The 20 year license extensions are one of the key strategies the US nuclear industry is using to keep itself alive, even as it potentially jeopardizes many thousands of our lives.

At the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant in New England, a battle over that plant’s aging reactor is coming to a head. Incredibly but typically, the NRC granted its license extension within days after Fukushima’s multiple meltdowns last year.

But, alone among the states, Vermont has a provision providing that a license extension for the nuclear plant must be approved by the state legislature. That approval was not forthcoming after the NRC’s rubberstamp.

However, Vermont Yankee’s owner and operator, New Orleans-based Entergy, filed suit in federal court, challenging Vermont’s authority to deny the license extension. Entergy bought up Vermont Yankee on the cheap, as nuclear plants go, and has been pushing it as hard as it can ever since.

Entergy infamously let its New Orleans subsidiary go broke after the Katrina disaster. More recently, in Vermont, after a radioactive lake was discovered under Vermont Yankee (which sits on the Connecticut River), Entergy claimed that underground pipes carrying such radioactive substances did not exist. But it emerged they did. Entergy also refused to shut down the plant while the radioactive leaks were searched for and subsequently fixed.

Nevertheless, on January 19 Judge J. Garvin Murtha of US District Court ruled that the Vermont law ‘violated an earlier federal law,” according to the January 24 Associated Press.

Entergy lawyers argued that public safety was the “primary concern” Vermont legislative officials had in acting to deny Vermont Yankee’s license extension, the AP reported. According to Entergy’s Orwellian logic, only the federal government, through the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, has the authority to decide matters of public safety in nuclear power matters. Thus the NRC’s decision to allow Vermont Yankee to operate for another 20 years, issued in the wake of the Fukushima meltdowns, should stand. And Judge Murtha agreed.

Vermont had 30 days from that decision to appeal.

This case is now under appeal and is viewed as a an important one in clarifying the border between State's rights and the Federal Government. It is a complex case and should be read about separately to properly appreciate the details.

MONTPELIER, Vt. (AP) — A group that advocates for state legislatures filed court papers Monday saying a federal judge erred when he relied on excerpts from Vermont's legislative record for a ruling that sharply limited the state's authority over the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant.

The National Conference of State Legislatures was among several parties filing friend-of-the-court, or amicus, briefs supporting the state's appeal of a January ruling by Judge J. Garvan Murtha of the U.S. District Court in Brattleboro.

http://www.chem.info/News/2012/06/Al...-Vt-Nuke-Case/

Vermont’s Public Safety Board still has to give final approval to the license extension. But “Entergy’s lawyers sought in court to sharply narrow grounds on which the board could prevail,” the AP reported.

Vermont Yankee’s current operating license expired on March 21 of this year.

In another slap in the face to Vermont, if the plant continues to operate, Entergy will sell all its electricity out of state, according to the AP.

Vermont Yankee has been operating since 1972. Its reactor design is the same as those that melted down at Fukushima.

http://obrag.org/?p=53894

[Twoolf]

"Vermont Yankee has been operating since 1972. Its reactor design is the same as those that melted down at Fukushima."



That was just a cheap shot. Those reactors did not melt down because of a reactor flaw.

[linttrap]

Now imagine how you would feel living next door to this plant. Already licensed for a life of 20 years. Now given another year by NRC, the board of which is all nuclear energy connected.

The company that just bought this plant has this history with it already:

More recently, in Vermont, after a radioactive lake was discovered under Vermont Yankee (which sits on the Connecticut River), Entergy claimed that underground pipes carrying such radioactive substances did not exist. But it emerged they did. Entergy also refused to shut down the plant while the radioactive leaks were searched for and subsequently fixed.

How safe do you think you will feel?

[Brihard]

Originally Posted by Twoolf

"Vermont Yankee has been operating since 1972. Its reactor design is the same as those that melted down at Fukushima."

That was just a cheap shot. Those reactors did not melt down because of a reactor flaw.

It is nonetheless an obsolete design. They function, yes, but they do not default to a safe state in the event of massive failure like other more modern plants do. I believe it is reasonable to embark on a program of rapidly and aggressively modernizing the nuclear infrastructure to safer designs and, if feasible, safer fuel cycles.

[Curious]

The "fish" of course are just an excuse.

The REAL ISSUE is that the plant is already 40 years old, is of a mid 1960's design, the plant's components are now older with the steel more brittle, the concrete having age issues, etc. etc., AND the NRC is acting like a cheering squad versus asking hard questions about the old plants that it is relicensing.

Does anyone but me remember the Iowa nuke plant last summer that fortunately was shut down for refueling when the Missouri River basically put the plant UNDER WATER FOR NEARLY 2 MONTHS?

That Iowa plant was orginally licensed under the same review standards as Vermont Yankee ... and NO ONE SEEMED TO EVEN NOTICE THAT IT WAS CLEARLY BEING BUILT BELOW THE LEVEL THAT THE RIVER WOULD BE IF THEY OPENED UP THE DAM SPILLWAYS UPSTREAM. (and the NRC is looking to relicense that plant even after all those issues last year!!)

Sheesh ... doesn't give me at least much one confidence with what the NRC is doing wrt to original nuclear plant issues, OR to potential problems when it comes to relicensing.

The US Nuclear Plants were designed for a 40 year operating life. Yes there was a safety margin built into their design, but as one goes past that 40 year life that safety margin will begin to be compromised. This applies to the steel, the piping, and yes even the wiring of the plant. The further past that original 40 year design life one goes the more quickly problems WILL show up in the now old equipment.

We have now seen four major meltdowns of nuclear plants in the world since this particular plant was designed, and NONE of those meltdowns were expected. This is by far much greater than the calculated statistical odds at the time the older plants were designed. Time imo for the NRC to be MORE cautious ... not to be a cheerleader.

Curious


-----------------------------

four plants were in order of accidents:

*Fermi 1
*Three Mile Island
*Chernobyl
*Fukushima
*and don't forget Davis Besse which came within 3 minutes or so have having it's own Three Mile Island style meltdown

(it may be a statistical abberation, but notice that for each of those accidents each one was worse than the one proceeding it)

... everytime I drive past Fermi 1 I always wonder about that mess
... ditto with Three Mile Island every time I drive past it
... and of course Davis Besse, which makes me nervous to this day since I go past that plant regularly and their history is one of POOR management/safety - in addition to their near meltdown in 1985 they also almost had the reactor head blow out in 2002 since although they said they were inspecting it every 3 months or so, they were NOT and acid had eaten away so much of the 6" head, from the top outside down towards the core, that only 3/8" of the head was left where an easily seen HUGE hole had developed on the top of the reactor! (holding back about 2500 PSI of pressure inside the reactor)

[linttrap]

Plutonium particles will be here "forever".

For stupid humans, the operational definition of "forever" is: longer than I will live.

For average, sort of, humans, it means: my grandchildren might be affected.

For those with well-developed frontal lobes, it means: humans are too stupid to understand the risk/benefit ratio of letting humans be in charge of something as dangerous as radioactive particles.

As long as greedy humans make money from nuclear plants, there will be corners cut on safety.

As long as greedy humans control nuclear energy, they will never include the worst case scenario in planning.

As long as ordinary humans are employed there, they will make mistakes, and there will be no safety systems to compensate for their mistakes because greedy humans are in control.

Ergo, we should not be in the nuclear business when alternatives exist which are less fatal AND more efficient. Screw the cost. What is the price of human existence? What is the price of our grandchildren and their grandchildren?

Risk/benefit, people---money doesn't begin to enter into a calculation involving human existence. If your brain is evolved.