Showing posts with label Gundersens. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Gundersens. Show all posts

Sunday, November 27, 2011

Nuclear Advocacy and Nuclear Blogger 80th Carnival

Radiation Film and Panel

On November 30, the film Transparent Radiation will be shown at the Gund Institute of the University of Vermont. The film is about nuclear energy, but the trailers also show nuclear bombs. The trailers also include people talking about how depleted uranium will be radioactive for billions of years. As will granite, of course!

Howard Shaffer learned that there would be a panel discussion of the film, and asked to be on the panel. Actually, Howard asked if he and Dr. Ed Maher, recent past-president of the Health Physics Society, could be on the panel. They are now on the panel, along with Arnie Gundersen and others. Arnie Gundersen's wife, Maggie Gundersen, endorses the film very strongly.

I am happy that Howard and Ed will be on the panel. However, considering both the venue and the film, I thought it would be good to tell pro-nuclear people about this event, in the hopes that some of us could come and support them. I wrote an email to my email list about it. Rod Adams is on the email list, and Rod posted my email on the Atomic Insights blog today: Nuclear Advocacy Opportunity in Vermont--November 30.

I hope some of you can come. The film and panel begin at 4 p.m Wednesday November 30 on the UVM campus. The event is being held in the administration building, which has a visitor's parking lot. Details at Rod Adams blog. Thank you, Rod!


80th Carnival of Nuclear Energy Posted at Next Big Future

Neither rain nor snow nor Thanksgiving weekend stops the Nuclear Bloggers from their work. Today, the 80th Carnival of Nuclear Bloggers is hosted at Next Big Future. Okay. I admit it. It's a smaller Carnival this time. That just means you can read it more quickly!

The Carnival includes a fascinating blog post by Will Davis of Atomic Power Review on the history of PRA (Probablistic Risk Assessment). If you ever wondered what that was, but had your eyes glaze over as it was explained, this is a must-read post.

Dan Yurman at Idaho Samizdat describes the concrete cracking problems (solvable) that are delaying restart at two reactors.

Rod Adams at Atomic Insights describes attending a meeting of a student chapter of the ANS. The students want to know how the industry is going to counter the barrage of advertising from the fossil fuel industry, especially "clean" natural gas. (I want to know, too.)

Gail Marcus of Nuke Power Talk has two posts, one about Japan's hundred-year energy plan, and one about polls about nuclear power which show support--even in Japan.

Brian Wang of Next Big Future looks at anti-nuclear Chris Busby, who is selling "anti-radiation pills" in Japan (really!). Wang and environmentalist George Monbiot suggest that nuclear opponents run as fast as they can to distance themselves from this guy! Wang notes that the Fukushima reactors are nearing cold shutdown. Wang also includes two radiation surveys of Japan. One, of Fukushima workers, shows no contamination. The other, of the soils in Japan, shows contamination in some areas which must be addressed before these areas can go back to food production. Most of the radiation in one area was emitted on March 15, and in the other area, radiation came March 21. This is not cheery reading. On the other hand, the "on-going spewing from the crippled reactors" scare-mongers are just wrong. Bad things happened in March. We all noticed, and now it is time to clean up.

Saturday, July 10, 2010

New Sites and Old Sights: Blog Carnival, IAMVY, and Communications

Blog Carnival

It's time for the 9th Blog Carnival of Nuclear Energy. This one is hosted by Rod Adams of Atomic Insights, and includes the outcome of a bet (how much uranium was used in 2009) and a description of what wind energy did for Canada in the recent heatwave. (Wind energy did nothing for Canada during the recent heatwave. Just what the dog did in the night.)

Step right up! See the outcome of bets on energy usage! Place your own bets in the comment section!

Or just have a good time at the Carnival.

IAMVY

The IAMVY (I am VY) site is up again, after a long hiatus. A long miserable hiatus. I'm glad to see it back.

A little history.

I AM VY is a site about employees and safety culture at Vermont Yankee. The site was actually launched about six or seven months ago, and began operating just in time for the "They Lied About Piping" issue to come front and center. (I have blogged about this issue extensively.)

Two of the people featured on the original I AM VY site were Dave McElwee, a senior employee at the plant, and his daughter, who also works at the plant. The opponents were ecstatic when McElwee was one of the employees placed on administrative leave during the investigation. You can imagine the ruckus.

Shortly after placing McElwee on leave (late January) Entergy took him off the IAMVY site and rewrote his daughter's description of working at the plant. Greenpeace had a field day with this action. On February 10, Entergy took the IAMVY site down. Great joy was expressed in the camps of the opponents.

Happily, the site was relaunched a few days ago, featuring plant employees and plant culture again. It's definitely worth a look.

Is the Controversy Over?

The IAMVY site is still controversial. As I have noted in several posts, the Gundersens and their followers are very excited about finding background levels of strontium 90 in Connecticut River fish. I'm talking about background levels, you understand. You could get the same quantities of strontium 90 in your fish if you buy your seafood at the grocery store. However, such mere facts have never stopped an attack when ignorant people have decided to attack.

On IAMVY, plant employee Ross Rosinski says he enjoys fishing in the river and eating the fish. Yesterday, on Twitter, Nuclear Fissionary and a local reporter, Shay Totten, were going at it hammer and tongs. The excitement started with Totten's remarks about the employee being willing to eat the fish. I am not sure which person at Fissionary was posting, but I do know that some of the people on the site are recreational fishermen as well as pro-nuclear activists.

I am sure that there will be more fireworks on this subject in weeks to come.

What We Have Here Is A Failure to Communicate

Sometimes, sometimes, we hope there is a better way. That someday, plant opponents won't make mountains out of molehills. (Background levels of strontium in the fish! Close the plant down!) That nuclear proponents will do a better job of explaining themselves, and especially, of listening.

Two excellent recent posts address these problems.

Greg Molyneux, of Nuclear Fissionary, asks What Makes Successful Communication? He advises that you start by understanding the audience. Everyone in communication should read this post.

In Nuclear Townhall, Gwyneth Cravens describes her journey from Seabrook protestor to nuclear supporter. The post includes her excellent answers to the most common anti-nuclear questions. After all, they were her OWN questions, when she started out. She had to answer these questions for herself, first.

Money

Just a little note that Vermont Yankee has been running at 100% during the heat wave, and selling power to Vermont at $45 MWh, by contract. The ISO NE grid was averaging about $130 MWh, as older and more expensive plants come on line. With the cool weather and the end of the workweek, the grid is down to between $43 and $48 MWh today.

----

Once again, my picture of the carousel in the main square of Avignon. I like this picture.

Monday, July 5, 2010

It's the Nukes What Gets the Blame: A Fish Story Continued

On Friday, the Vermont Department of Public Health announced they had caught another fish in the Connecticut River, and it contained background levels of strontium 90 in its bones. The Department of Public Health website says that the fish contained 80 to 100 picocuries per kg in "inedible portions" of the fish. Generally, fish bones are tested for strontium, since strontium behaves similarly to calcium in the body.

The Vermont Health Department website made a gallant attempt to put these findings in perspective, noting that: A New York study found background levels of Sr-90 in fish to be in the range of 120 to 360 pCi/kg. Heck, a month ago, I made my own gallant attempt to put strontium levels in perspective in my post, a Radioactive Fish Story.

These Connecticut River fish have the same amount of strontium in them as any other fish.

What They Say

"Perspective" is a weak buttress against the hysteria shown by those who oppose Vermont Yankee. For example, Maggie Gundersen contributes to the Green Mountain Daily blog. Gundersen's post about the fish is thick with innuendo and conspiracy theories. Here are a few quotes:
When the Vermont Department of Health (DOH) does the heavy lifting, Entergy's Vermont Yankee plant doesn't have to lift a finger.

(The) DOH was able to post it on their website late on the afternoon prior to one of the region's biggest holidays... NEWS DUMP.

No wonder Vermont Yankee did not want to let all the press know about more contaminated fish and needed some DOH help with the NEWS DUMP. Hope folks along the Connecticut River aren't planning any fish fries for the holiday weekend. Best to throw them back.

What They Say, but Translated into English

The confusing quotes above require some translation. To understand them, you have to believe the following:
  • The fish in the Connecticut River are dangerously contaminated with radioactive strontium.
  • This strontium comes from Vermont Yankee.
  • The fish in the Connecticut River should not be eaten.
  • The Department of Health and Entergy are in deep collusion. Together, they conspire against the people of Vermont.
  • Press releases from the Department of Health reveal terrible things about strontium contamination from Vermont Yankee.
  • However, the Department of Health prepares press releases just before holiday weekends, in the hopes that nobody will pay attention to these releases.
  • The press releases are issued at low-readership times as a favor to Vermont Yankee.
  • The Department of Health's attempts to compare this fish with other fish from other rivers is part of their effort to mislead.
This might seem like a grab-bag of assertions, but there is a set of underlying themes.

Underlying Tactics

The tactics above are simple and well-used. They follow two themes:
  • Heavy-duty conspiracy theory: They are all lying to you! Believe only ME!
  • Scares and warnings of imminent danger: Hope folks aren't planning any fish fries!
When will the plant opponents stop these conspiracy theory plus scare story tactics? When will they stop telling lies about background versus dangerous levels of radiation? When will they stop maligning Vermont public officials and Connecticut River fish?

Probably never.

Fear translates directly into donations, and donations are what anti-nuclear groups require.

In the music-hall song, She Was Poor But She Was Honest, the chorus reminds us that:

"It's the same the whole world over
It's the poor what gets the blame
It's the rich what gets the pleasure
Isn't it a blooming shame?"

I would change the words a little.

"It's the same the whole world over
It's the nukes what gets the blame
It's the scares what gets the money
Isn't it a blooming shame?"

Late News

In an article in the Times Argus today, Arnie Gundersen also expresses his belief that any strontium present in these fish must come from Vermont Yankee. He ignores statements from:
  • the river steward of the Connecticut River Watershed Council
  • the Vermont Department of Health
Both say that the strontium measurements in the fish are background level.

Hmm. I'm wondering if I should have labeled Gundersen's comment "news"? If it is predictable, is it "news"?


-----
The graphic, from Wikimedia Commons, shows the Coat of arms of Narva town, Estonia. It appealed to me because of the conjunction of fishes and weapons of war.

Wednesday, February 17, 2010

Smiling Sharks at the State House

A guest post by Howard Shaffer III. He reports on a visit to the Vermont Law School and several visits to the Vermont State House where (surprise surprise) the people who are asked to testify are devoted to closing Vermont Yankee.



SMILING SHARKS IN THE VERMONT STATEHOUSE

Late January events

On January 27th, the Joint Natural Resources and Energy Committees (House and Senate committees) met to hear testimony . The Vermont Energy Education office was the first one to present their information. The Energy Education mission is to look at all sources of energy, and to teach about advantages and disadvantages. Though there are many forms of energy used in this country (for heat, transportation, etc) the presenters only talked about electric power; how it is generated and how it can be conserved. Oddly, they never mentioned steam power generation of any kind. They spoke only of wind and solar.

The next speakers were Beyond Nuclear speakers Kevin Kamps, and Lorriane Rekmans. The announcement describes Ms. Rekmans as follows:

Lorraine Rekmans grew up in the Serpent River First Nation community from Elliot Lake, Ontario. Her community has experienced increased cancers, and devastating environmental damage from exposure as a result of uranium mining.


In Montpelier, Rekmans tried to persuade us that bad uranium mining practices in Canada fifty years ago, adversely affecting indigenous peoples, are somehow a fault of Vermont Yankee. Also, shutting down the plant will correct these mining practices. Or else it was an emotional ploy. I heard Mr. Kamps again, this time with Paul Gunter, the next night in Norwich at a Sierra Club meeting.

Still in Montpelier, though, after the Joint hearing, I briefly attended a Senate Finance Committee hearing where the Department of Public Service reviewed all the issues under consideration. VY was not mentioned. I moved on to the House Natural Resources and Energy Committee where the Gundersens were describing the trail of submissions related to VY's underground piping. The conclusion was the Legislature was misled.

The committee recessed to attend the governor's press conference, where Governor Douglas said VY had lost the trust of the people over the buried piping issue. The Committee then reconvened to hear the rest of the testimony, and do a Q&A. It wasn't pretty. The Chair, Rep. Klein said he is an anti nuke. (No surprise there, since an article containing some biography said he was raised near Indian Point and his parents were suspicious of nuclear.) H He also said that the Legislature is doing the regulator's job (emphasis added) and once a vote is taken the Legislature will be out of the loop.

Early February

On the evening of February 9, there was a meeting about Vermont Yankee at Vermont Law School. The Gundersens were on a panel with Jim Moore of VPIRG and Prof. Don Kreis of the Law School. Mr. Moore had been asked to review some of the Vermont Legislative history of VY and he reviewed it.

The Gundersens discussed the situation at VY and also made a remark that made the NRC sound special and not subject to Congressional oversight. I questioned that. In response to my question about the NRC being like the other regualatory agencies, Mrs. G. said that the Commissioners were in the pocket of the industry.

Prof. Kreis reviewed more of the legal history. During the Q&A he criticized Mrs. G. for disparaging the NRC Commissioner's integrity. He said such smearing is not helpful to the process, having been a Regulator himself.

As part of the legal history review of the VY situation, Prof Kreis said that it is an OPEN QUESTION whether or not the Vermont Legislature can do what is being attempted - block VY's consideration by the Public Service Board for an extension to its Certificate of Public Good., thus keeping the plant from continuing to operate beyond the end of the current certificate, which expires on the same day as the current NRC license. In conversation with him after the program, I raised the issue of the famous Supreme Court case under Justice Marshall in 1810. In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that a following Legislature can't pass a law negating contracts with the State which were approved by a preceding Legislature. He said the Law School has a contract with the Legislature to provide advice on these matters, and could not say more. I said I understood. The moderator of the Q&A period, Prof Mears said all the lawyers expect the VY issue to wind up in court.

On February 10, I was back in Montpelier for a session of the the House Natural Resources and Energy Committee. They had chosen to have Mr. Ray Shadis, a well-known antinuclear activist testify by phone on the nuclear fuel cycle. I learned that all mining problems are a reason to shut down VY and that thorium is fissionable!!

Next on the agenda was a Senate Natural Resources and Energy Committee hearing. I have attended many different committee hearings over the past years while tracking and learning about the Vermont Yankee and energy issues. This hearing was moved from the committee's small room to a larger hearing room. On deck were Arnie and Maggie Gundersen to enlighten all about the VY situation. WCAX-TV was set up to tape the entire testimony, which was linked to a Burlington Free Press article that day. See an earlier post on this blog to watch the testimony. Better than that, read a good review of the testimony at Is Arnie Gundersen Devious or Dumb.

Before the hearing on February 10 with the Gundersens, I spoke to one of VY's Lobbyists, from a Montpelier firm. I said it looked to me like sharks circling in the water, but he has probably seen it before. He said yes, but never this bad. The sharks were smiling too.