U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Vermont
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-27-2010, 09:07 AM
 
Location: City of Central
1,845 posts, read 3,693,073 times
Reputation: 949

Advertisements

Vermont Yankee produces about 620 MW of power . You aren't going to replace that with wind farms . Not in the short term anyway .
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-27-2010, 09:46 AM
 
894 posts, read 1,287,609 times
Reputation: 259
I've been in LI, FL and CA when there wasn't enough power available to meet demand. It happens, inconvenient for people, expensive for business. IBM said last year they would leave VT if Yankee closed. I don't know about GMCR but they built capacity in TN I'm sure they could just switch most/all of production there. Has B&J built an out of state facility? I heard they were looking into it, but keeping it quiet. There is a funny notion about decommissioning some VTers seem to want every brick of Yankee gone, it doesn't work that way. Shut it down and you still have the empty buiding.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2010, 09:58 AM
 
Location: The Woods
16,958 posts, read 22,274,224 times
Reputation: 9066
Quote:
Originally Posted by quickdraw View Post
Electricity will go up a little. It was going to go up anyway. Nuclear waste leaking into a river? No thanks. See ya'.
It's going to continue leaking radiation for years, maybe decades, to come regardless of whether it's running or not.

And to put it into perspective, I have several gun sights with tritium on them (glows in the dark). Tritium is very weak, non-dangerous.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2010, 07:54 PM
 
Location: on a dirt road in Waitsfield,Vermont
2,186 posts, read 5,994,252 times
Reputation: 1126
The Vermont PSC has said for months that replacing the power is not a problem...for the short term they can simply get it from the grid with a small increase in rates. Due to the enconomic slowdown the demand for electrical power from the regional grid is down. In addition, Hydro-Quebec announced a couple of months ago that they also would be able to replace the power.

The argument that losing the power would hurt the state economically is a myth. I was living in Maine when the same contencious debate occurred over the closing of Maine Yankee. Same "the economic sky will fall arguements" were heralded. Maine Yankee was dismantled about 5 years ago. None of that happened.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2010, 09:20 PM
 
Location: Vermont / NEK
5,773 posts, read 12,322,698 times
Reputation: 7193
Not a scientist here, but tritium has been proven to be safe when exposed to externally, meaning the gun sites and wrist watches that glow in the dark won't harm a person. But internally it is a known carcinogen, meaning if it finds its way into a body at continuing sufficient levels it can cause cancer. I think that's the main concern.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2010, 10:50 PM
 
Location: Vermont
10,309 posts, read 11,227,747 times
Reputation: 14194
Regardless of how safe tritium is or isn't, on top of the cooling tower collapses, and the leaky pipes, what else do we need to know to realize that they haven't maintained the plant and can't be trusted to maintain it in the future?

For that matter, after they lied to us about the pipes, what else are they lying about that we don't know about yet?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2010, 11:50 PM
 
Location: Midwest
4,274 posts, read 7,150,830 times
Reputation: 7259
Quote:
Originally Posted by arctichomesteader View Post
Well, with no plan to replace it, it was foolish, all sorts of games being played by greenpeace, etc., during that vote. It needs to be replaced, in my opinion, with a modern nuclear plant. Those enviro groups say replace it with renewable energy, etc., and then turn around and block wind projects...
Here's a chance to get the prez on board with another new nuke. Cost is peanuts compared to what's been blown so far.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mustmove View Post
Brownouts.
...build character.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mustmove View Post
IBM needs lots of cheap power or they will have to leave. Ice cream production is energy intensive as is roasting coffee beans. Vermont might end up with less human activity than Chernoybel...
And it won't have the benefit of glowing in the dark, either. Sad.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jackmccullough View Post
Regardless of how safe tritium is or isn't, on top of the cooling tower collapses, and the leaky pipes, what else do we need to know to realize that they haven't maintained the plant and can't be trusted to maintain it in the future?

For that matter, after they lied to us about the pipes, what else are they lying about that we don't know about yet?
A lot, that's one thing you can depend on.

BTW, I saw the clip on national news. Those VT ledgies are sure a dumb looking bunch. Just an independent observation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-28-2010, 10:52 AM
 
Location: The Woods
16,958 posts, read 22,274,224 times
Reputation: 9066
Quote:
Originally Posted by MRVphotog View Post
The Vermont PSC has said for months that replacing the power is not a problem...for the short term they can simply get it from the grid with a small increase in rates. Due to the enconomic slowdown the demand for electrical power from the regional grid is down. In addition, Hydro-Quebec announced a couple of months ago that they also would be able to replace the power.
Demand won't stay down, though, and then we're at the mercy of the demand from big cities versus ours. We didn't lose power all over Vermont during that massive northeastern blackout, but if we become more reliant on those power sources we will have that greater danger of power shortages. Nationally, power consumption is expected to increase, yet, new production is not keeping up. We can't get rid of such a big power producer and not replace it, and not expect future problems.

We shouldn't be relying on a foreign country for our power, either. Look how well that's worked for oil...


Quote:
The argument that losing the power would hurt the state economically is a myth. I was living in Maine when the same contencious debate occurred over the closing of Maine Yankee. Same "the economic sky will fall arguements" were heralded. Maine Yankee was dismantled about 5 years ago. None of that happened.
And aren't Maine's power rates now among the highest in the nation? You better believe it has damaged their economy. And with so many people struggling to get by as it is, many literally can't afford a rate increase...along with the new taxes, etc.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-28-2010, 10:54 AM
 
Location: The Woods
16,958 posts, read 22,274,224 times
Reputation: 9066
Quote:
Originally Posted by jackmccullough View Post
Regardless of how safe tritium is or isn't, on top of the cooling tower collapses, and the leaky pipes, what else do we need to know to realize that they haven't maintained the plant and can't be trusted to maintain it in the future?

For that matter, after they lied to us about the pipes, what else are they lying about that we don't know about yet?
I agree, I want Entergy out of this state, for good. I don't trust them at all. But we could have gotten rid of them, given an extension to operate until a replacement is built under different management, and then shut it down. I think the legislature just acted too rashly and emotionally rather than logically looking at the situation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-01-2010, 12:44 AM
 
459 posts, read 907,582 times
Reputation: 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by arctichomesteader View Post
Well, with no plan to replace it, it was foolish, all sorts of games being played by greenpeace, etc., during that vote. It needs to be replaced, in my opinion, with a modern nuclear plant. Those enviro groups say replace it with renewable energy, etc., and then turn around and block wind projects...
Never understood the blocking of wind projects. Must be that NIMBY mentality.
I don't have much of an opinion on VY, I don't know much about it. Although, if it's leaking radioactive material into the groundwater, thats probably not good.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Vermont
Similar Threads
View detailed profiles of:
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top