Yankee debate, like grid, will keep humming
|
|
Toolbox
By DANIEL BARLOW Vermont Press Bureau - Published: February 28, 2010
MONTPELIER – Depending on whom you ask, last week's Senate vote blocking the relicensing of Vermont Yankee was either a meaningless gesture stuffed with political symbolism or the start of a dramatic shift for the state toward green energy and conservation.
But one thing is clear: The fight is far from over.
"The question before us was not whether or not we should shut down Vermont Yankee, but if we should let the Public Service Board continue with the (case)," said Sen. Peg Flory, R-Rutland, on WDEV radio Friday.
Flory, one of the four senators who voted Wednesday in favor of the nuclear power plant operating past the end of its license in 2012, said she expects this to be a top legislative issue next year after the 2010 elections. Vermont will have a new governor, a new lieutenant governor and a new Senate president.
"Today we are in the same position that we were on Jan. 1," Flory said.
And while the Senate vote of 26-4 against Vermont Yankee was overwhelming, it is only the voice of 30 elected officials on a broad and complex subject. The Vermont House has 150 members, but it is unclear whether that body will take up the same issue this session.
House Speaker Shap Smith, D-Morristown, told reporters late last week that he has made no decision on whether the House would vote on the future of the plant. That's a shift from an earlier position he held that the House absolutely would not vote.
"We're looking at it," Smith said. "We're also looking at decommissioning and we're monitoring the tritium leak. There are a lot we are considering right now."
There is some speculation that the House could vote on a resolution regarding the future of Vermont Yankee instead of an actual bill. But it was hard to find a House member Friday who thought the body should vote on the issue.
Even Rep. Tony Klein, D-East Montpelier, the chairman of the House Natural Resources and Energy Committee, shied away from endorsing a House vote. Less than two weeks earlier, he said he thought House lawmakers should "be on the record" concerning the nuclear power plant.
"There's still a lot of issues that we'll be looking at," Klein said. He mentioned the decommissioning fund, the proposed transfer of the plant's ownership to a heavily leveraged spin-off company called Enexus, the requirement that the plant's site in Vernon eventually be turned into a green field, and "Safestor," a potential step in the decommissioning process that would see the plant sit idle for years after shutting down. There's "a lot of concerns about that, too," he said.
Paul Burns, the executive director of the Vermont Public Interest Research Group, said he thinks the House should weigh in on the Vermont Yankee debate this session.
"I don't think this debate has ended," Burns said. "But this was a real turning point for our state."
Change is always incremental, and last week's vote was a clear indication that Vermont is likely to get more energy from renewable sources than nuclear power in the future, according to Jeff Wolfe, the chief executive officer of groSolar, a Vermont-based solar panel company.
Some have suggested that allowing Vermont Yankee to operate beyond 2012 would leave the state in the dust behind the green energy economy. Wolfe said he thinks statements like that, while probably well-meaning, are greatly exaggerated. But filling the gap in the state's energy portfolio now filled by nuclear power will result in a diversification of power.
"The senators make it clear that they don't think Vermont Yankee is reliable or cost-effective," Wolfe said. "There's a lot of doors open to us out there. The fact is, more of our energy in the future will come from in-state renewables."
If Vermont Yankee shuts down in March 2012, no one will see their lights flicker or go dark, according to the state's two largest electrical utilities, Green Mountain Power and Central Vermont Public Service.
Both utilities said last week that the Senate vote has not altered their energy planning. They already have a contingency plan in place to buy more energy in case the plant is not relicensed.
"Our plan has always been to ease off our reliance on Vermont Yankee and focus more on renewables," said Dorothy Schnure, the spokeswoman for Green Mountain Power. "We have a plan in place to fill that gap if Vermont Yankee is not relicensed."
GMP and CVPS both say they want to buy Vermont Yankee power if the plant is found to be safe and reliable. Earlier this month, the two utilities along with the Vermont Electric Cooperative signed contracts for up to 100 megawatts of mostly renewable power, beginning in or after 2012.
Steve Costello, the spokesman for CVPS, said there is no shortage of options on the energy market right now to replace Vermont Yankee's power. CVPS weighs different factors in picking energy sources, he said, including cost, carbon footprint and reliability.
He said these new energy sources likely would include options such as solar or wind, but also sources that have a higher carbon output than nuclear, including gas-generated energy. But he said there are some sources of dirty energy the utility would not consider buying in large amounts.
"I don't think we'll be signing any big deals with a coal plant," Costello said. "That's not part of our DNA."
Not everyone is giving up on Vermont Yankee.
Rep. Patty O'Donnell, R-Vernon, has been an ardent supporter of the plant in her town. She agrees with Gov. James Douglas that the vote this year should have been delayed. She is circulating a resolution calling for a new nuclear power plant to be built on the same site.
O'Donnell said Vermont should take advantage of President Obama's interest in nuclear power and his vow to help finance a new generation of nuclear power plants. Her resolution, which sits in the hands of the House Natural Resources Committee, calls on Vermont's congressional delegation to ask Obama to consider Vermont as the location of one of those new plants.
She said she envisions this second nuclear power plant being built on the same site in Vernon. With federal backing and a streamlined state regulatory process, O'Donnell said she thinks the plant could be built in five years. She also hopes that Vermont Yankee could be relicensed for a short period, such as a handful of years, so that the lives of the two plants briefly overlap.
An amendment offered on the Senate floor last week called for a new Vermont Yankee. That option was roundly rejected by senators.
"When Vermont Yankee shuts down, the workers would then move over to the new plant," she said. "This saves those jobs there and would create a tremendous economic boom in Windham County. Can you imagine how many jobs would be created when you decommission one nuclear power plant while building another?"
Daniel.Barlow@timesargus.com
5