RutlandHerald.com - We Are Vermont

"Name Change, you seem to think that Vermont exists in its own power silo; that just because (unlike the rest of New England) we haven't diversified our power sources, we never CAN diversify those sources."

I do not think that. Vermont has limited amount of people and a huge amount of potential. We also depend on our serene beauty to attract the tourists that Montpelier is so He$$bent on keeping versus industry etc. 600,000 people can not afford a $500 million dollar shut down cost, for clean up etc. That will be absorbed by the largest Utility owners and passed on to Vermonters in their Rate Bills.

"Once again: VY currently provides New England with just around 2% of its total power load. That's it. You seem to think that mothballing VY in over two years will drastically raise Vermonters' power rates because of the giant gaping hole that VY will leave in the New England power market landscape; this simply isn't so."

It is so. Vermont has how many homes and businesses? If all 600,000 people were burning 1000 watts we would need all of VY, we don't. Many get their power from Hydro Quebec, from Niagra and from smaller companies such as Central Vermont Co-Op, Vermont Electric and others. We have a couple of dams and I wonder how long those old cement structures will last before everyone down stream will have to move?
If the 620 mega watts is gone, who is going to replace it and from sacrificing from where to do so? Vermont has the site for VY and that was probably why we got the cheapest rates. It may have been an agreement like I-89 was. There is no way, and I do not care how you do the math, that you can remove 620 megawatts from the grids and expect the rates to stay the same or go down. You sound like Ben Day selling the "Doe Seasons" to the Hunters.

"The grids have grown accustomed to that power"? These are fluid power markets, not people, for God's sake. There are plenty of regional power sources ready to step in and fill the small hole left by VY. And for what it's worth, you keep conveniently forgetting to mention that, after 2012, Entergy intends to sell the vast majority of those megawatts OUT of state."

I do not care about the business side of VY. I know nothing about it and don't care to, what I do care about is afordable and clean energy versus putting a heavier load on the Coal Burning plants. Nuclear is Safe. We can easily put conditions on the renewal and make more people happy. If you look at the photos of VY or even tour the facilities most is all cement and that should last for decades more, if not we better start getting ready to take Lake Meade off of the maps or Wilder and Hartford.

"Then again, that seems to be a common thread among those defending Entergy: Save our 650 jobs! (Except, of course, that most of those jobs go out of state and aren't really "ours"!) Save our 620 megawatts! (Except, of course, that most of those megawatts are sold out of state and aren't really "ours"!)"

Sure some do go out of state and if Vermonters had the gumption they would have been hired instead. IBM brought in 1100 from Virginia years ago and now they hire lot of Vermonters as well. So what. Jobs are money and if they are out of staters living here, they are no longer out of staters and they spend their money here, that is if we have anything to attract them to do so.

"We made it 40 years with "no major problem and no deaths"? Great news. Now we have a forty-year-old plant falling apart at the seams; one its owners want to push even harder to maximize profit over the next two decades; one they want to transfer to a debt-laden shell company in order to shirk their financial responsibility. You really think the future will be as smooth as the past?"

Has anyone gotten an estimate to see how much it would be to bring VY up to Newer Plant standards. It seems the conversations have been more Close or Nothing.

http://www.physics.isu.edu/radinf/np-risk.htm

"Since air pollution from coal burning is estimated to be causing 10,000 deaths per year, there would have to be 25 melt-downs each year for nuclear power to be as dangerous as coal burning. "


"Look, I had a car that I drove for twelve years. It was a good car; I put a lot of miles on it, put a lot of wear and tear on it, and it came to the end of its life. You know what wouldn't have been smart? Betting the farm that I could get another six years out of it while driving it harder and faster than ever before at the same time that the car's company was going out of business AND knowing I'd never be able to sell it, trade it in, or even get rid of it without paying an extra penalty to do so."

Look at the diagram at this site and then tell me, what needs the fixing.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/nuclear/page/at_a_glance/reactors/vermontyankee.html

How mcuh would the fixing cost and how soon can it get done? If not then why?

---