People Power Trumps Corporate Power: R.I.P. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant (Carolyn Baker)

Carolyn Baker interviews a tireless Vermont activist

Feb. 28, 2010 (CarolynBaker.net) -- Last week I had the honor of speaking with Kathleen Krevetski of Rutland, Vermont, who has worked hard to publicize the adverse effects of radiation from nuclear power plants on people's health, especially on women and children who are the most vulnerable.

<snip>

Carolyn Baker: Kathleen, please tell us what motivated you initially to begin organizing for the closure of Vermont Yankee.

Kathleen Krevetski: In my work, I am standing on the shoulders of many anti-nuclear activists who have worked tirelessly over the years fighting a corrupt nuclear industry that cares more about its proliferation than the health of the people who are affected.

Last week's vote against the relicensing of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power plant near Brattleboro is considered historic because it has allowed the voices of Vermont people to be heard through their elected leaders who voted against allowing Vermont Yankee to continue past its expected lifetime of 2012. It has allowed the people to say what Entergy and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission have been doing: Allowing contamination of the air we breathe and the water we drink, and that is not acceptable. The NRC has never said no to the nuclear industry, and I feel that the NRC is corrupt and is in collusion with the industry, allowing aging nuclear power plants numerous license amendments and exemptions from safety testing over the years.

more

http://worldnewstrust.com/index.php?option=com_flexicontent&view=items&cid=121:news-wnt-original&id=7562:people-power-trumps-corporate-power-rip-vermont-yankee-nuclear-power-plant-carolyn-baker

I for one don't want a windmill on every peak in Vermont.

Replacing Vermont Yankee for a Clean Energy Future
...We are on the edge of making the biggest decision about Vermont’s energy future in the past 40 years. The choice to repower Vermont with renewable energy resources or commit to an additional 20 years of Vermont Yankee will determine the legacy we leave future Vermonters.

Closing Vermont Yankee and moving forward with energy efficiency and local renewable energy would cost Vermonters 47–50% less, between 2012 and 2032, than relying on Vermont Yankee at predicted market prices. Replacing Vermont Yankee with local renewable energy resources would also add tens of millions of dollars to our state tax base and support the creation of hundreds if not thousands of new jobs.

The way that electricity is being produced, distributed and even used is undergoing monumental change. Wind power and solar power, which were once fringe energy sources, are now being talked about as main stays of our energy future.Massive coal and nuclear plants are increasingly seen as symbols of the past and not compatible with a smart energy grid. Clean technology is moving fast to develop large scale energy storage and advanced batteries for plug-in hybrid and electric vehicles, and our traditionally slow-to-change utility industry is running to keep pace.

The old ways of generating electricity— oil, coal, and nuclear—have created unsustainable environmental and economic costs. Continued reliance on these old technologies will only worsen the situation we face in years to come and we cannot simply pass these costs on to the next generation....
http://www.vpirg.org/repowervt


Full report here: http://www.vpirg.org/download/2009-VPIREF-Repowering-VT.pdf

The choice isn't between coal and nuclear. What is wrong with you nuke nuts? Have you ever heard of logical reasoning skills? EVER?

Christ.

I've spent a lot of time in Vermont and it is often cloudy and/or snows, which would cover the panels. How do you propose to supply energy when the solar is effectively offline?

Solar panels haven't had problems with cloudy or being covered in snow in decades.

There is a Canadian Solar company that has a panel that works at peak efficiency in -60 degree weather while burried under 3 feet of snow. Get with the times.

Been getting it there for a long time.

Vermont Yankee is an old power plant which has been run hard and put away wet for decades. Extending the life of that facility is ludicrous, it's too old to have another 20 years run out of it. Not to mention that it does not have a outer shell like most nuclear plants. I'm pro-Nuclear, but this place is a mess, and should be shut when its license expires on March 21, 2012. If Entergy is committed to this idea, don't wait until 2067 to dismantle it, pull it apart now and build a new one with all of the latest nuclear technology in its place.

Nuclear energy is a good thing for the environment, and modern reactors cannot have the sort of accidents that crippled Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, and if we use it, we don't have to deal with the air pollution of coal-fired station. Wind, water and solar power are ideas that should be followed when we can, but they won't work everywhere, and where they don't, nuclear might be the solution. If we go down the road to electric cars and high speed trains, we're gonna need more power then, too.

Your assessment of the potential of renewables isn't accurate. The plan at post #3 by the Vermont Public Interest Research Group is an outline of the viable noncarbon options tailored to Vermont.

The cost of nuclear is through the roof, btw. It is forecast by independent analysts that the power will cost between $0.25-30/kwh.

Three papers that might be of interest.
Evaluation on all factors except cost:
Jacobson
http://www.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/revsolglobwarmairpol.htm

Two independent and recent cost analyses:
Severance
http://climateprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/nuclear-costs-2009.pdf

Cooper Report:
http://www.vermontlaw.edu/it/Documents/Cooper%20Report%20on%20Nuclear%20Economics%20FINAL%5B1%5D.pdf

I hadn't been at all anti-nuclear until i moved close enough to Vermont Yankee to be in the evacuation zone.

I might possibly trust Nuclear Power Plants if i could AT ALL trust THE COMPANIES THAT RUN THEM. Entergy is just as bad as Monsanto. V Yankee is in disastrous shape and running at 120% (picture pipes bursting and shaking bolts). I've seen too many Nuclear apologists on this board claim it was safer than the local grocery store (i'm talking to you NNadir) or manufacturing plant, without having ANY knowledge of the local situation.

Again, i don't agree with some of what you said, but i appreciate the fact that you were willing to admit VY needs to be shut down...

cheers