Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

bananas

(27,509 posts)
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 12:24 PM Dec 2014

Nuclear: Carbon Free, but Not Free of Unease

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/23/science/nuclear-carbon-free-but-not-free-of-unease-.html

Nuclear: Carbon Free, but Not Free of Unease
By HENRY FOUNTAINDEC. 22, 2014

Next week, if all goes as planned, the 42-year-old nuclear reactor at the Vermont Yankee generating station will be shut down for the last time. The steam turbine at the plant, which at its peak could make enough electricity for about half a million homes with virtually no greenhouse gas emissions, will grind to a halt.

Vermont Yankee, in the river town of Vernon near the Massachusetts border, had been the target of years of protests and lawsuits by state officials, environmentalists and others concerned about safety and radioactive waste.

But in the end, the antinuclear movement didn’t kill the plant. Economics did.

“People are always surprised when we say that really wasn’t the driver in shutting it down,” said Bill Mohl, the president of a division of Entergy Corporation that operates Vermont Yankee and four other nuclear plants, including Indian Point north of New York City. Although Vermont Yankee produced power inexpensively, was upgraded recently and was licensed to operate until 2032, the plant had become unprofitable in recent years, a victim largely of lower energy prices resulting from a glut of natural gas used to fire electricity plants, Mr. Mohl said.

<snip>

The industry’s recent struggles represent something of a reversal from the previous decade, when there was talk of a nuclear revival in the United States after nearly 30 years without any new reactor construction permits being issued. Even then, however, some experts questioned just how much nuclear power could grow in the United States and abroad, and how much it could contribute to the effort to reduce carbon emissions.

<snip>

3 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Nuclear: Carbon Free, but Not Free of Unease (Original Post) bananas Dec 2014 OP
When construction, decommission and waste protection is incl, Nuclear is FAR FROM CARBON FREE! on point Dec 2014 #1
Incorrect FBaggins Dec 2014 #2
The author obviously hasn't been paying attention FBaggins Dec 2014 #3

FBaggins

(26,748 posts)
2. Incorrect
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 12:51 PM
Dec 2014

The carbon caught up in such activities is no more significant than those for construction, maintenance/replacement and disposal of the physical aspects of solar, wind, or hydro.

FBaggins

(26,748 posts)
3. The author obviously hasn't been paying attention
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 12:59 PM
Dec 2014

He must have missed the dramatic swing in energy prices in the area

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Editorials & Other Articles»Nuclear: Carbon Free, but...