Some recent local news videos explain a lot about the injunction ruling in a short time-frame.
Jobs
The first is a two-minute clip from WMUR in Hinsdale, New Hampshire, across the Connecticut River from the power plant at Vernon. The video gives a neighbor's view of the potential Vermont Yankee closing.
Legal Implications
The second is a five minute clip of Cheryl Hanna of Vermont Law School, sharing her view of Judge Murtha's ruling. In summary, Hanna says that Entergy has lost this battle, but not lost the war. She also recommends that people read the footnotes in Murtha's ruling.
3 comments:
If I were Entergy’s Chief Nuclear Officer I would be on the phone Friday to GE, telling them “make us that VY reload – but make sure it will also work in the core of my Fitzpatrick or Pilgrim BWRs”.
Even if you are already threatening your opponents queen, doesn’t hurt to castle.
@Atomikrabbit,
Are you suggesting that they would *start* the fuel in VY, then in the future, move it to another plant to burn down the rest of the unused fuel?
Can you legally, safely transport fuel rods that are partially used? I thought that after you put them in a reactor, they become highly, highly radioactive, and it would not be possible to transport them to another site (at least, not without cooling them for like 30 or 60 years first)?
Of course not. I didn't think it was necessary to say "before reload".
By October, when the outage is scheduled, with the new fuel standing by, they will already know the outcome of the court case. If they don't prevail, send the (still new) fuel to another BWR of the same design.
But spent (irradiated) fuel CAN be shipped safely. It's been done thousands of times.
Post a Comment