The Decommissioning Panel and the Three Conspiracies

Not a Conspiracy

Okay, I have to start by saying there are no real conspiracies about the Vermont Yankee Decommissioning Citizens Advisory Panel.  But still...

Sometimes, you know, you just gotta laugh.

The First Conspiracy: Two Meetings Scheduled!

The first meeting of the Vermont Nuclear Decommissioning Citizens Advisory Panel (VNDCAP) will be held at Brattleboro High School on Thursday, September 25, from 6 to 9 p.m.  One panel member is New Hampshire State Senator Molly Kelly, who represents the New Hampshire towns closest to the plant.

At the very same time as the VNDCAP meeting, a different meeting was planned in New Hampshire, on the same subject. As described in the Reformer, the New Hampshire meeting would involve New Hampshire officials and representatives from New Hampshire Homeland Security and Emergency Management.

And here comes the first conspiracy theory. Green Mountain Daily is a website that is steadily against Vermont Yankee. One of their writers, Sue Prent, describes herself as "associated with Fairewinds Energy Education." (Fairewinds is Maggie and Arnie Gundersen's company.)  In her article There's a meetin' tonight: there's a meetin' tonight, Prent writes about the overlap in meetings. She notes that the conflicting meetings "would be a shrewd way to ensure that the well-organized effort that opposed Vermont Yankee's continued operation would not have a full-strength presence in public discussions of decommissioning issues."

Ladies and Gentlemen, we have our first conspiracy. Well, at least we have our first conspiracy theory.

Second Conspiracy: Only One Meeting

Howard Shaffer had hoped to be the New Hampshire representative to VNDCAP.  When Senator Molly Kelly was appointed to that position, he offered to help her. Shaffer realized, looking at the two meetings, that Senator Kelly could not be in two places at the same time.  He alerted people in New Hampshire about the situation. Perhaps due to his efforts, the New Hampshire meeting was postponed.

Shaffer then commented on the Green Mountain Daily post, noting that people might look for human error before looking for conspiracies.  Ms. Prent quickly wrote two snarky replies. Shaffer answered her as follows: Now that the Hinsdale meeting has been cancelled, where is the conspiracy?  I know!  Get the antis all together in one place so they can be identified! (There's always a conspiracy somewhere!!)

Ladies and Gentlemen, we have our second conspiracy theory.  This one is tongue-in-cheek, however.

Third Conspiracy: Exclusion by Religion?

Shaffer is planning to go to the meeting in Brattleboro.  I will not go.  The meeting is on Rosh Hashanah, one of the Jewish High Holidays.  This is clearly a third conspiracy, to exclude people like me!

The above sentence is a joke. I am sure the meeting date is not a conspiracy.  It is clear from everything written above that these meeting planners are a gang that can't shoot straight.  They probably would not have noticed if they had scheduled the meeting on Easter.

A Good and Sweet New Year

I wish all my readers and all my friends--- a good and sweet New Year.

Rosh Hashanah foods and Shofar

-------

End Note: Background about the Advisory Panel Meeting

The first meeting of the Vermont Nuclear Decommissioning Citizens Advisory Panel (VNDCAP) will be held at Brattleboro High School on Thursday, September 25, from 6 to 9 p.m. There are nineteen members of the panel, including many plant opponents. Entergy and the plant union (IBEW) also have members on the panel.  One panel member is New Hampshire State Senator Molly Kelly, who represents the New Hampshire towns closest to the plant. You can read the list of panel members in the Brattleboro Reformer article Yankee Decomm Panel to Meet Sept 25, and you can read my opinion of the panel at my post about the panel appointments: Good, Bad and Ugly.  Howard Shaffer wrote about the panel at ANS Nuclear Cafe: The Latest Sop to Nuclear Opponents.

Entergy Awards and Steam Dryer Inspections

Steam Dryer Inspection Completed with New Robotic Tool

The steam dryer inspection has been completed. The steam dryer is doing well and in good shape. On the other hand, the rhetoric in the press looks like this: World Comes to An End. New Crack Discovered in VY Steam Dryer.

Vermont Yankee recently put into service an award-winning steam dryer inspection tool. This tool is unique to Vermont Yankee. As the NEI press release about the Vermont Yankee award stated:

Entergy Nuclear employees at Vermont Yankee are recipients of the Maintenance Process Award for developing innovative tooling for the inspection of a boiling water reactor steam dryer.

The tool has led to better inspection of the steam dryer (of course) and a lot of negative publicity for the plant (of course). The video below describes the new tool and the award.

Steam Dryer Inspections at Vermont Yankee

In July, Entergy reported the results of using their new tool to inspect the steam dryer. I have uploaded their official report to the NRC and you can read it here. During this inspection, various indications within the dryer were assessed in importance. Some were uprated, more were downrated. (During inspections, results are called "indications" until one can assess whether they are cracks, some other type of flaw, or a bit of corrosion product sticking to the metal.) One crack was considered to have grown. The use of a new steam dryer inspection tool led to better results, and much reclassification of indications and cracks.

The bottom line was quite clear. On the last page of the inspection report, the conclusion states:

The VY Steam Dryer inspection has been extensive and the results show that the dryer is in good condition...The improved inspection tooling provided higher quality footage of the dryer and provided a high level of confidence that the dryer is in good condition.

The improved inspection tooling at VY is the envy of other power plants. It had clearer results and led to a more accurate inspection of the steam dryer.

The Reaction to the Inspection

If you read some of the local papers, you would never know that VY has a new inspection tool, or that the conclusion of the inspection was that the steam dryer was in good shape.

The Time Argus described the indications and so forth fairly well, including good information on what a stream dryer is, and what it does. However, the short article ended with an ominous mention of pieces of the steam dryer falling into the reactor at other (un-named) power plants at (un-specified) times in the past. The article did not mention the new inspection tool.

Maybe the Times Argus didn't realize that a new inspection method is likely to give new and better results. Maybe they didn't notice the innovation-inspection award. Maybe they didn't understand that industry-wide innovation awards are a big deal, in every industry, and should probably be mentioned in articles that directly pertain to the subject of the award.

Entergy is setting the standard and getting awards for inspection methods, but the local papers haven't noticed.

Industry Awards

There is a constant drumbeat of comments that Entergy lies, Entergy doesn't care about maintenance, etc. I want to point out that last year, Entergy people at VY won the Maintenance Process award for their Steam Dryer Inspection tooling. This year, Entergy won the top industry award, the Best of the Best Award, for an innovative reactor head vessel inspection tool. From the May 2010 NEI press release about that award:

SAN FRANCISCO, May 19, 2010—Entergy Nuclear employees at the Palisades nuclear power station in western Michigan have been honored with the B. Ralph Sylvia Best of the Best Award for developing an innovative device that improves the inspection of reactor vessel heads.

My conclusion: Entergy is doing a great job building innovative inspection tools that are the model for the industry. It is about time they were given some credit.

Carnival Time Again!

The Twelfth Carnival of Nuclear Energy is posted at Idaho Samizdat, and Dan Yurman did a terrific job of choosing posts and describing them succinctly. Cheryl Rofer of Phronesisaical tackles the New York Times estimate of the amount of plutonium at Hanford, while Rod Adams of Atomic Insights encourages the New York Times to use some fact-checkers next time they estimate the cost of solar power. Barry Brook of Brave New Climate points out that if Climate Change is the Inconvenient Truth, than the inconvenient solution (inconvenient for people who have spent their life campaigning against nuclear power) is staring us in the face. It's nuclear.

Join the fun at the Carnival!

Addendum: Meanwhile, Green Mountain Daily Views with Great Alarm

The Green Mountain Daily (GMD) viewed the inspection results with great alarm. My friend Howard Shaffer attempted to explain what a steam dryer does, and his comments received the odd comment that it was good that he was no longer making threats against people. I think (not sure) that this "making threats" business comes from Shaffer pointing out that an earlier GMD post about me and Rod Adams could be considered libel. On the other hand, maybe something else Shaffer said was considered to be a threat. I can't keep up with the people at GMD. Everything that happens at the plant is a threat, and things Howard says or I say are threats. They live in a rather scary world over there.

Here's how Howard Shaffer answered these comments. He was very gentlemanly in his response. He was accused of "personal threats" and changed it to "personal attacks" when he answered.

I reread my earlier comments. I don't feel quoting someone or pointing out where their facts are wrong are personal attacks. For example, Mrs. Gundersen said at a public meeting at Vermont Law School that she believes the entire nuclear power industry should be shut down. I disagree with her on this national policy, but that is not a personal attack. It does give me insight into the actions her company takes, and those of her Chief Engineer.

Green Mountain Daily and Me

Today, in the Green Mountain Daily, Ms. Maggie Gundersen made several statements about me which are not true.

My first idea was to ignore these statements. However, my friends told me that a charge un-answered is a charge believed. Okay. I'll answer.

My second idea was to answer the statements by leaving a comment on the Green Mountain Daily site. Unfortunately, you have to create an account on that site in order to post a comment. In other words, you have to give Green Mountain Daily your email address, get a password, etc. Setting up such an account is usually considered to be "opting in" to mailings from a web site, and becoming an addition to the site's mailing lists. Most people believe you should only set up such accounts with websites you trust. Since the latest Green Mountain Daily posting is filled with lies about my affiliations and background, I don't trust the site. Obviously, I chose not to set up an account.

Please note. I am not accusing Green Mountain Daily of mis-using their email lists. I am simply saying that I don't personally trust them, and I don't want to be on their lists.

So I had a third idea: answering the charges on my own blog and hoping Ms. Gundersen reads it. That's what I am doing here.

Lies and Truth

So. What did she say? Material in italics is written by Ms. Gundersen.

Finally, pro-nuke blogs from around the country, led by Vermont's own Nuclear Energy Institute's connected Yes Vermont Yankee, also jumped in to condemn the NRC meeting with the Intervenors.

Pro-nuke blog Yes Vermont Yankee is written by an industry insider who makes her money working for the industry as does Rod Adams with his Atomic Insights. Although they all portray themselves as independent concerned citizens, all receive income from the nuclear industry and are part of an online group that spreads the same biased (sic) throughout the country. Like the Vermont Energy Partnership, these blogs are heavily connected to the lobbyists and nuclear industry groups of which they claim to have an unbiased opinion. [Don't believe what I say, do the research yourself via SourceWatch and Google.]

Some General Issues

Where to start on Gundersen's assertions and lies?

Insider: I like the "insider" statement, so I will start there. Yes. I am very knowledgeable about nuclear energy. Does this make me an "insider" or an "authority"? You can guess the word I would choose.

NEI: Gundersen says I'm connected to Nuclear Energy Institute. No. I have no connection with Nuclear Energy Institute, beyond having their blog on my blog roll and having visited their offices once. They served some coffee, as I remember. (Maybe Ms. Gundersen is confusing Nuclear Energy Institute with EPRI. I was a project manager at EPRI, a research institute, and I am proud of it.)

Connections: I am not sure what Ms. Gundersen means by "heavily connected" to the industry. Does "heavily connected" mean that I read blogs and have friends? That I used to work in the industry? All true, and nothing I am hiding. (My blogger profile is a pretty good summary of my background. ) Perhaps Ms. Gundersen would like to be described as "heavily connected to anti-nuclear groups"? Sounds kind of sinister, doesn't it?

Sourcewatch and Google: I'm not on SourceWatch, and Googling me shows boring stuff about this blog and my company, Carnot Communications. However, there is a Meredith Angwin who lives in Australia, used to work for IBM, and visits Thailand. When I Google myself, I find her. I think she leads a more interesting life.

Down to the Real Issue: Do I Get Paid?

I'm not paid to blog. I'm not paid by the industry. Gundersen is simply lying about this. No possibility of just having made a mistake. (Nuclear Energy Institute versus EPRI could be a mistake.)

I do not "receive income from the nuclear industry" except for an occasional free-lance writing job for Fuel Cycle Week. These small freelance gigs add up to less than $1500 a year. This is not a major part of my income.

Ms. Gundersen also accuses Rod Adams of being an insider and "receiving income." Rod is a Naval Officer and unpaid nuclear blogger. He writes for Fuel Cycle Week on occasion and probably makes about the same amount of money I do. I know Rod pretty well, and he has no other income from nuclear.

Gundersen Gets Paid

Mr. and Mrs. Gundersen are heavily connected to anti-nuclear groups. (Hmm. I might enjoy writing this way. Live and learn...) Mr. Gundersen used to be paid by the New England Coalition. Now, Mr. Gundersen gets lucrative contracts on Vermont legislative panels, where his main activity is attacking Vermont Yankee.

Mr. Gundersen's going rate in Vermont is $185 to $300 an hour, according to public records. Unfortunately, though the contracts are public records, they are not easy to access. However, I was informed of Gundersen's rates in emails from the Vermont Department of Public Service (DPS) and the Vermont Joint Fiscal Office. The Joint Fiscal Office also sent me a copy of their contract with his company, and I think I might be able to find the DPS contract if I were willing to spend more time on it.

Okay. I will also admit to finding these contracts a little weird, because Gundersen is not a Licensed Professional Engineer, and I thought that state governments were required to hire Licensed Professional Engineers for engineering assessment projects.

At any rate, we see that anti-nuclear activists often make a living at activism. Sometimes, like Gundersen, they make quite a good living.

In Contrast to Mr. Gundersen...

I don't have a job in nuclear. I don't get paid for blogging. I receive trivial amounts of money for writing occasionally for Fuel Cycle Week.

I think the Gundersens should follow my lead, and simply do everything they do---for free. They should aim at true purity of purpose.

Or maybe, just maybe, they should do whatever they want to do and earn money from people who will pay them. You know, it's a free country and all that.

However, they should also stop lying about how other people earn money, what institutions other people are associated with, and so forth. Instead, they should spend some time putting their own rather questionable (professional engineer? anti-nuclear guru?) house in order.