[68vette]

Originally Posted by arctichomesteader

My family's been here since before it was a state so I didn't move here. The people moving up here from the cities like NYC have about doubled our population since the 60's, and that is the source of the development destroying the state. Chittenden County has been ruined by the sprawl and pollution associated with it. No I am not okay with those mcmansion developments gobbling up the land. We don't need to become another NJ or MA. The line needs to be drawn at some point. When these developers started to target semi-wilderness areas in the NEK (i.e., Ferdinand) they crossed a line that should never have been crossed. If the people of Chittenden County want to pretend they're "green" despite living in a mcmansion on land that was field or forest 10 or 20 years ago, put them up in Burlington, Charlotte and Shelburne, in their backyards.

I'm not sure if you've followed the news this summer about the Lowell wind project being ordered to stop producing power at times because these wind sites cause grid instability, but these wind turbine projects do little except line the pockets of developers with government subsidies and tax credits at our expense. The grid operators have opposed the seneca mountain project because of grid issues but that hasn't stopped the developers (NH's trailer park king as I understand he's known) from pushing forward to destroy the wildest part of Vermont for some government handouts.

Wind power is most effective on a small scale. I'm for decentralizing power production and more solar and wind on individual homes. For the centralized power production needs that remain, I don't think we need to jump up to destroy our mountains and wildlife. I think thorium nuclear reactors offer some potential for fairly safe nuclear power, and VT Yankee could have been replaced with it.

Very well said. To add to the wind power argument is this very informative article. Beyond Wind Spin: Miami Herald Should Get It Right — MasterResource

[harpoonalt]

No more fighting! Everyone has stuff they do that isn't helpful to the environment. No ones perfect unless you live in a tepee and live off the land. I'd rather have wind than nuclear. Fukashima ought to bring that point home. Unless you want to live off love and laughter, power is a necessary commodity. It should be affordable so your neighbor can watch "Honey Boo Boo" and have a light on besides. I'm glad Yankee is closing. I'd rather see windmills, than kids and fish that glow in the dark.
Be real people....I love the people who oppose wind power but happily burn wood and pollute the air. I'm no woodsy owl, but I try to do what I can and choose the lesser of the necessary evils. It'd be a good thing to examine our own habits before throwing stones at others. Rant over......gonna go turn off something electric!

[FrugalYankee]

Originally Posted by 68vette

Very well said. To add to the wind power argument is this very informative article. Beyond Wind Spin: Miami Herald Should Get It Right — MasterResource

Excellent article! Thank you for posting it! I'm surprised they don't mention that fact that wind turbines draw energy out of the grid in order to optimize their orientationss - something the proponents of wind energy don't want you to know. The don't seem want to tell you how much energy is required to operate a wind farm.

[arctichomesteader]

Originally Posted by harpoonalt

No more fighting! Everyone has stuff they do that isn't helpful to the environment. No ones perfect unless you live in a tepee and live off the land. I'd rather have wind than nuclear. Fukashima ought to bring that point home. Unless you want to live off love and laughter, power is a necessary commodity. It should be affordable so your neighbor can watch "Honey Boo Boo" and have a light on besides. I'm glad Yankee is closing. I'd rather see windmills, than kids and fish that glow in the dark.
Be real people....I love the people who oppose wind power but happily burn wood and pollute the air. I'm no woodsy owl, but I try to do what I can and choose the lesser of the necessary evils. It'd be a good thing to examine our own habits before throwing stones at others. Rant over......gonna go turn off something electric!

Thorium nuclear power would be perfectly safe. Much better than the uranium power VT Yankee uses. I've got thorium all around me here-old gas mantles on my lamps and lanterns. It's radioactive but very weak and very safe.

Burning wood is carbon neutral.

[ladelfina]

Originally Posted by AmILost

Wouldn't it be nice to cut your electric bill in half?

Wasn't going to happen with VT Yankee. Their rates are higher than other sources, from what I recall, and so VT currently gets NO power from them!

Nukes are already heavily subsidized by the USG, so you/we are paying via other taxes, not just what you see on your electric bill for nuclear power. Nuclear power plants have always been a giant boondoggle invented to sop up the crap from weapons programs. Plus they haven't come even one step closer to solving the waste problem than they were in the 1950s when these plants got shoved down our throats with the promises of energy "too cheap to meter".

Plus, Fukushima, Fukushima, Fukushima. How cheap is their overall energy bill now, d'ya think?

All nuclear plants are mega-disasters waiting to happen. All it takes is for the regular grid to go down for more than a week, and the cooling ceases. They can't power their own cooling systems. The unresolved waste issues means they all have their lifetime's worth of spent fuel on site, another situation "nobody could have predicted" and which was never assumed in any design.

Grid issues are becoming more common. A blown transformer can take years to replace. Basically we have collectively hit a wall to deal with propping up most all of our infrastructure, not just our nuclear power plants. Peak oil = peak everything, including peak infrastructure support. It is all downhill from here.

Look around you and see what's happening, and tell me that Entergy is even going to be around during the decades this decommissioning is supposed to take place. When the money runs out (it already has, they just don't know it yet) they will bail… The nuke scene is just another case of privatized profits and socialized losses, just like with everything else these days.

Tepco re-used non-reinforced concrete vessels to save a buck, among other obscenities. This is what happens when life-and-death issues are left up to the "free market".

I am thrilled at the news, but will be amazed if they actually pull it off, all things considered.

[harpoonalt]

Originally Posted by arctichomesteader

Thorium nuclear power would be perfectly safe. Much better than the uranium power VT Yankee uses. I've got thorium all around me here-old gas mantles on my lamps and lanterns. It's radioactive but very weak and very safe.

Burning wood is carbon neutral.

Burning wood correctly is almost carbon neutral. Using an older stove, smoldering or wet wood, can add particulate to the air and factoring in the processing of the wood and it's not exactly carbon neutral.

Thorium is not exactly mainstream nor will it be for a long time. Most experts consider it a bridge to other faster developing alternatives as the ramp up time for mass utilization of the idea is 40 to 70 years. Economics being one of the big obstacles.

There are some exciting ideas out there, but economics drives the research and development. Until people want to pay for safe and clean it'll be market driven.

Cheers!

[SIZE=2]
[/SIZE]

[68vette]

Love or hate Vermont Yankee, there are many repercussions from the closing. The economy in Windham County is going to take a huge blow. Taxes in Vernon are going to skyrocket. The plant paid 60% of the taxes in town. The local area will see a bigger hit to the economy than what we have seen with IBM layoffs. Granted there are close to 300 of the jobs at the plant coming from Vermont residents (of about 650 jobs), but the average pay is $100,000/yr. That will be lost income to the local economy and the state. Doing simple math, that comes out to about $30,000,000. This does not include money all workers put into the local economy buying gas, lunch, etc.
Listening to the news reports this morning, there is also concern our electric rates will go up. Vermont did not purchase from Vermont Yankee, but the areas that did purchase from Yankee have to find another source for energy. Most will probably purchase from the same sources Vermont purchases their energy from and this can create a bit of a monopoly with supply and demand.
The other issue is the plant is not going away. The plant will sit in it's current state (safstor) for approximately 60 years while the plant cools down. The current hazards and threat are not going away. Entergy only has about half the money to decommission the plant. It will cost about 1 billion dollars and who needs to pay for the remainder we will have to see. Will it be the state or the Fed. The state will have little say over the decommissioning process. In the ruling earlier this month by the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York City upholding that decision, judges said lawmakers’ concern over decommissioning issues are “of little weight,” given the NRC’s purview over that process. Shumlin thinks it will be greenspace in a decade, but with the lack of funds and the state having little say, it will most likely sit in safstor for decades.

[FrugalYankee]

Originally Posted by harpoonalt

Burning wood correctly is almost carbon neutral. Using an older stove, smoldering or wet wood, can add particulate to the air and factoring in the processing of the wood and it's not exactly carbon neutral.

Small scale biomass is a solution that is tailored to Vermont. We certainly have enough low grade wood and by-products that could be used as raw fuel.

Biomass | Renewable Energy Vermont

[harpoonalt]

Originally Posted by FrugalYankee

Small scale biomass is a solution that is tailored to Vermont. We certainly have enough low grade wood and by-products that could be used as raw fuel.

Biomass | Renewable Energy Vermont

I think biomass has it's place, especially in Vermont. It's a good use of a waste product when done correctly. My concern would be the same as with any commodity. Too much demand leading to more scarce supply and higher prices. As much as everyone hates the higher oil prices, it has led to some good things. Lot's of research into alternatives. Somewhere out there is a clean, reliable, safe alternative waiting to be developed. I just hope I live to see it

I'm happy Vermont Yankee is shutting down. There have been too many issues as of late. I do feel for those put out of work and the effects on the surrounding area. All the more reason Vermont needs to attract more quality, higher paying jobs to this state. As for who's going to pay? One way or another, it'll ultimately be us.

[jackmccullough]

Originally Posted by FrugalYankee

I'm surprised they don't mention that fact that wind turbines draw energy out of the grid in order to optimize their orientationss - something the proponents of wind energy don't want you to know.

This is exactly like saying that a nuclear plant or a combustion turbine draw energy out of the grid because they need electricity to light their offices, run their computers, etc.