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 02-25-2010, 02:03 PM
 
Location: Western views of Mansfield/Camels Hump!
1,942 posts, read 3,237,232 times
Reputation: 1085

Advertisements

I'm surprised no one mentioned this yet....what do we think will happen?? Asides from electricity rates rising....

Vermont Scuttles Plans for Reactor - WSJ.com
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-25-2010, 02:17 PM
 
Location: The Woods
16,957 posts, read 22,271,168 times
Reputation: 9066
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...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-25-2010, 02:39 PM
 
Location: Winter Springs, FL
1,789 posts, read 4,066,340 times
Reputation: 925
The idea of renewable energy is an idea everyone likes, but as long as it's not in their back yard. Look at the turmoil created from the wind projects that can't even get their foot off the ground already. I agree as well that the power plant had to go, but a plan should have been in place before the vote to shut it down. Purchasing power from an outside source is going to cost more.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-25-2010, 05:19 PM
 
1,135 posts, read 2,050,971 times
Reputation: 1486
I'm surprised the plant is still open considering all of the safety violations that have been reported over the past decade, but yesterday's vote leaves me with a lot of questions.

1) Vermont Yankee provides 33 percent of the state's electricity. Will we be able to get that electricity somewhere else?

2) How will the plant's closing impact the average Vermonter's electricity bill?

3) The plant pays millions of dollars in state taxes. Will we be able to recoup the lost revenue somehow? If not, how will the state budget be affected and what impact will this have on taxes?

4) If the plant closes 600 jobs with an average pay of $80,000 will be lost. What will the state do to provide new jobs?

5) What is the environmental impact of a closed nuclear power plant? Can nuclear waste leak out? Will it just be boarded up indefinately or will it be replaced with a new plant at some point?

6) While the idea of renewable energy has been tossed around there are no wind farms or solar panels in Vermont that can provide enough electrical power to supply an entire community. Is the state willing to pass laws making it easier/cheaper to create renewable energy?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-25-2010, 05:43 PM
 
Location: Vermont
10,308 posts, read 11,225,495 times
Reputation: 14189
There was a good discussion of these questions with Michael Dworkin and John Dylan on Vermont Edition today.

A couple of important points are:

1. Entergy wasn't offering to keep selling us 33% of our requirements; they were offering to sell us 11% at a 50% price increase, with an inflation clause. GMP and CVPS say they already have contracts for their requirements after 2012 at a price at least as good as what Entergy was offering.

2. Even before the tritium leak the decommissioning costs were pegged at about a billion dollars, with the fund $600 million short.

3. The cheapest power we are getting now, and in the foreseeable future, is from conservation. We can look to Efficiency Vermont for a substantial chunk of what we need.

4. Would you want to be in business with a company that repeatedly lies to you, the way the VY people have? Me neither.

5. I agree that it should be easier to site wind farms and other renewable sources. I'd like to hear some of the people complaining about how the wind turbines are going to look express even a little concern for the people who are getting mountaintops blown up in their neighborhood in West Virginia, but I haven't heard a peep out of them.

6. Kind of makes those small hydro plants on the Connecticut River that Douglas didn't want look like a better deal, doesn't it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-25-2010, 06:27 PM
 
894 posts, read 1,287,445 times
Reputation: 259
Brownouts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2010, 01:40 PM
 
Location: The Woods
16,957 posts, read 22,271,168 times
Reputation: 9066
Pretty simple:

A) power rates will go up significantly as we'll need to import more power (putting us at more danger of losing power)

B) the jobs will just go away like every other job the state has lost. There will be some temporary jobs cleaning the plant up but that'll be that.

C) either the waste will be stored on site or sent somewhere else. The feds have dropped the ball on coming up with a safe place to put the waste, and they won't let fuel be re-processed (which reduces waste).

D) the legislature will just pretend there is no problem like everything else.

E) taxes will go up to make up for the loss in revenue

When you let these out of state environmentalist groups like greenpeace write our energy policies, this is what you get...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2010, 05:48 PM
 
894 posts, read 1,287,445 times
Reputation: 259
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...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2010, 09:52 PM
 
Location: Winter Springs, FL
1,789 posts, read 4,066,340 times
Reputation: 925
On WCAX this AM was a story on the shutdown and it's impact on the area. The person being interviewed had a role in the power plant in Maine that was decommissioned. Vermont Yankee is not going away because there are no funds to decommission the plant. He stated that the plant will most likely sit there for about 50 years in it's current state. The fuel rods will eventually be moved out and power will stop being produced. Any radioactive waste on the sit(soil, etc) will not be removed until the plant is taken apart and removed.
A congressman was talking about using HydroQuebec to replace the lost output or at least use them when the contract is renegotiated in a few years.
Every time I hear talk of wind and solar power I have to shake my head. It's a great idea and it works, but no one wants to see it. I'm not sure if all towns in Vermont tax extra if you have a view, but I know several towns do. People don't want their views unsightly. A co-worker who lives in Huntington had to move his solar panels and turbine because it ruined his Neighbors view. There is also a heated battle in the NEK over wind turbines they want to build on a mountain top. Some are for it, but most are against it. They want it somewhere else.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2010, 09:00 AM
 
Location: Vermont
1,475 posts, read 3,671,083 times
Reputation: 829
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...
Electricity will go up a little. It was going to go up anyway. Nuclear waste leaking into a river? No thanks. See ya'.
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