Update on Vermont's Nuclear Cooling Tower Collapse and Emergency Shut-down

[garybeck]

Two weeks ago one of Vermont Yankee’s two cooling towers collapsed. Then, last week, the plant was forced to initiate an emergency shut-down, or reactor Scram, after several steam valves malfunctioned simultaneously.

Both failures are even more shocking because they come on the heels of state and federal regulators giving Vermont Yankee a clean bill of health to operate at 120% of its designed capacity.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Entergy Nuclear, the Louisiana-based corporation that owns Yankee has been quick to downplay both accidents, referring to the cooling tower collapse as just “deformation in some of the wood.” The company also continues to disingenuously pushing their claim that the 35 year old plant is running like new.

In response James Moore, Clean Energy Advocate for VPIRG stated “Vermont Yankee telling us that the plant is running like new is like your hair dresser telling you that you look twenty years younger, nice to hear but far from the truth.”

To read VPIRG’s full press release on the cooling tower collapse click here. To read recent news coverage click here.

[BeFree]

1. Ya have to ask

If Nuclear power was so great, why aren't more companies investing?

Is it because they are afraid of Greenpeace or some of the members of DU's E&E forum?

[phantom power]

3. Two things...

1) Investment in nuclear power is, in fact, increasing.

2) In a manner of speaking, investors *are* afraid of Greenpeace. Most people fear anything having to do with "nuclear" in pretty much the same way that Greenpeace does. The forces of NIMBY-ism are more powerful for nuclear energy than for any other issue that I can think of. And fearful communities can absolutely shut down a nuclear project, as we saw in the 70s and 80s. You bet investors are afraid of that. I can't say I blame them. I'd be quite reluctant to put up my money if I knew that my investment might get torpedoed by public hostility half-way through.

[BeFree]

4. Well

It is good to know that the people have done SOMETHING cuz, after all, the people, AFAICT, haven't done anything but allow the destruction to proceed forthwith on all other accounts.

Score one for them damned in-varmint-alists!

'Course the score is like one billion to one... but who's counting, eh? Heh, we got on the scoreboard!

[bananas]

8. Congressional Budget Office and independent analysts say 50% risk of financial default

on the new nuclear plants - it's got nothing to do with Greenpeace:

Whoops

Slang for the Washington Public Power Supply System (WPPSS), which made the record books with the largest municipal bond default in history.

During the 1970s and 80s, the WPPSS financed the construction of five nuclear power plants through the issuance of billions of dollars worth of municipal bonds. In 1983, due to extremely poor project management, construction on a couple of plants was canceled, and the completion of construction on the remaining plants seemed unlikely. Consequently, the take-or-pay arrangements that had been backing the municipal bonds were ruled void by the Washington Supreme Court. As a result, the WPPSS had the largest municipal debt default in history.... Whoops!

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/w/whoops.asp

[GliderGuider]

2. It's grimly amusing

The anti-nukes are apparently winning the battle. What's amusing about it is wondering what they will say as coal use continues to ramp up world-wide. They will try and stop that too, of course, but when it comes down to keeping the lights on most of the 6.6 billion regular people on the planet are going to say "Screw Climate Chaos, let there be light." And the CO2 (and the oceans) will rise, but at least we won't have to worry about the nukulars coming to get us.

[BeFree]

5. The trade-off

As you well know is no bargain.

If the nuke-firsters spent half the time they do trying to nuke us, working to get coal emissions cleaned up we'd be breathing a little better.

But no, while they love nuke tech, they have no love for clean coal tech and fight that tech the whole way.

I have fought both nukes and coal and have gotten too little support from anyone. It's not anti-nukers who are to blame for this mess, it's dumb asses around the world.

[NickB79]

6. "Clean" coal is a cruel pipedream

I have no love for it because I see it for what it is, a greenwashing by the coal industry.

[hunter]

7. There is no "clean coal tech..."

...in exactly the same way as there are no "healthy cigarettes."

You are a smoker, or you are not a smoker, and if you smoke you will be worse off than if you didn't smoke.

There is very dirty damned despicable coal, and very dirty coal, and just plain dirty coal, but there is no "clean coal."

There are no clean nukes either, but in comparison to any form of coal fired power production they look pretty good to me.