Celebrating and Advocacy

Collage of the Chicago Victory
Courtesy of Generation Atomic

The nuclear advocacy blog

I have a new post at my meredithangwin.com website blog.  I call that blog the Nuclear Advocacy blog, because my posts are all about advocacy, rather than general news.

My latest post is Joy and Celebration: Part of the Activist Toolkit.  Advocates saved the Illinois nuclear plants. Time to celebrate!

Celebration

In many circumstances, celebrating a win might  be just, "Of course we celebrate. That just goes without saying." However, I think that nuclear advocates sometimes skip that step.  We tend to look at the work-that-lies-ahead, which is admirable.  But it is also admirable to celebrate, because it is helps us stay motivated.  "YES!  We DID this!"   That's a good feeling, and makes us want to go out and do this again!

My husband used to be a member of the Western Wheelers bicycling club, and he often rode the Sequoia Century (and part-Centuries with the kids, when the kids were younger).  He told me when that when he was bicycling up a hill, he never looked up at the top of the hill.  It always felt discouraging to look at the top.  He said: "I just keep pedaling." Good advice for everyone.

And when you get to the top, celebrate!

---
And please visit my new blog if you can!  I have a few posts up there already....
 

Pro-Nuclear Rally in Chicago

Pro-nuclear activists in front of fossil lobbyist offices, Chicago
Pnoto courtesy of Environmental Progress 

The March

The weekend of October 22, 2016, I joined about 70 pro-nuclear people in Chicago.  We held a planning session and protest march. The march showed visible and effective support for keeping Illinois nuclear plants open.

The marchers gathered in front of ELPC,  an anti-nuclear lobbying organization that proclaims itself as an environmentalist group.  Their offices are at 35 East Wacker Drive. The picture above this post shows our group outside their offices.  (I went on the march, but did not continue as far as the building.)

Why did Clean Power Coalition decide to target this anti-nuclear group?  I was not involved in the decision-making, but I think I know.  At this point, we have to get back to basics.  Who opposes nuclear power, and what can we do about it?

The main thing we can do is:  Encourage pro-nuclear public opinion. 

Nuclear opponents and the fossil lobby

If we are encouraging nuclear energy, who do we consider to be opposing it?  Unfortunately, there are many groups that have claimed the mantle of “environmentalism” while making it their business to oppose the most effective source of clean energy in the world.

I think we have to stop calling these groups “environmental” groups.  They aren’t.  They are in the business of lobbying and campaigning against nuclear energy.  Many of them get well paid for their efforts: by fossil fuel companies.  Not all are paid by fossil fuel companies, of course.  But some are.

For example, let’s look at the Environmental Progress fact page on ELPC.

Here’s a quote from that page:

Earlier this year ELPC raised at least $137,500 from natural gas, renewables or financial companies that would benefit from ELPC’s efforts to kill nuclear plants. ELPC raised it at its dinner where “recognition from the podium” was given by groups like Invenergy, a natural gas and wind company, for investing $10,000 to $25,000 to ELPC.

"Everybody looks with excitement when a new natural gas plant is build," ELPC head, Howard Learner said when justifying his efforts to replace nuclear plants with fossil fuels.

And of course, we cannot forget the Sierra Club finally admitting it took $26 million from natural gas companies.  Time magazine has an excellent article about this.

Encouraging Pro-Nuclear Public Opinion

I stated the goal of the march as encouraging pro-nuclear public opinion.  In my view, this is the ultimate goal of pro-nuclear activism.

It almost doesn’t matter the official description of what is happening: a vote in a legislative body, a public service board hearing, a lawsuit, a referendum.  In all these cases, pro-nuclear public opinion will make a difference.

I remember when I was first starting out in pro-nuclear advocacy.  I wondered why local anti-nuclear groups were holding rallies outside a courthouse where a judge was deciding a legal case about nuclear energy.  A man who was much wiser than me explained: “Judges read the papers, too.” After that, I was quite willing to hold rallies outside of courthouses, right there with the anti-nuclear groups!

Exposing Opponent Ties to Fossil Fuels

One way to build pro-nuclear public opinion is to call the anti-nuclear groups exactly what they are: anti-nuclear groups.  Not “environmental” groups or any other green-washed words.  They are anti-nuclear lobbying groups, plain and simple.

Yes, of course, nuclear advocates have to present our positive vision of a world with abundant clean energy.  But we also need to show that our opponents are not honorable young Boy Scouts.  That’s how the opponents want to be seen.  

They aren’t Boy Scouts.  They are lobbyists.

To sway public opinion, we have to show their motivations, as well as our own.

-------
The organizing group

The Chicago event was organized by Environmental Progress and other groups of the Clean Power Coalition. Here’s a group picture from the meeting.   (I’m in the middle, in a pink turtleneck with a very visible necklace.)

Pro-Nuclear Environmentalists March to Save Illinois Nuclear Plants: Eric Meyer Guest Post

Clinton Power Station

With Time Running Out for Illinois Nuclear Plants, Independent, Pro-Nuclear Environmentalists to March 

WHEN: Monday, October 24th, 2016, 11:00 AM
WHAT: Protest March and Rally at Invenergy and Environmental Law and Policy Center.
WHO: Pro-Nuclear Environmentalists
WHERE: Starts at W. Monroe and S. Wells St., Chicago, ending with a rally and press conference at ELPC at 12:30 (see map)
WHY: To urge passage of legislation to save Illinois nuclear plants

CHICAGO -- On Monday, October 24th at 11:00am, independent pro-nuclear environmentalists will march, rally, and sing in support of provisions in the Next Generation Energy Plan (NGEP) that would allow for continued operation of Clinton and Quad Cities Nuclear Plants.

Illinois legislators could still act in a “veto session” after the November 8 elections to save both plants as part of a package deal that includes generous subsidies for renewables and energy efficiency.

The march is being organized by the Clean Power Coalition, a new pro-nuclear environmental coalition consisting of Environmental Progress, American Nuclear Society - Young Members Group, Mothers for Nuclear, Thorium Energy Alliance, and the International Youth Nuclear Congress.

Coalition marchers will march on the headquarters of two organizations they view as hostile towards nuclear power — Invenergy and the Environmental Law and Policy Center (ELPC).

“The ELPC has accepted funding from fossil energy companies including Invenergy to lobby against nuclear,” said Alan Medsker, IL Coordinator of Environmental Progress, a pro-nuclear environmental organization, “but we won’t let them shut down these two climate change champions, Clinton and Quad Cities.”

“There are only a few regions in the world that have actually been able to stop burning fossil fuel for power — places like France, Sweden, and Ontario — and they did so with nuclear power,” said University of Illinois nuclear engineering student and ANS student president Aries Loumis,   “Illinois could be one of those places.”

If the Next Generation Energy Plan passes with the nuclear component intact, the plants will get the small subsidy necessary to remain competitive in a market flooded with cheap natural gas.  “This is just smart energy policy,” said Lenka Kollar of IYNC, “Keeping these valuable assets online is crucial for mitigating climate change and ensuring energy security for the future.”

“Abandoning these plants would lead to 2 million cars worth of pollution and over 4,000 people losing their jobs,“ added Natalie Wood, President, North American Young Generation in Nuclear.  "If we need to march to ensure fair treatment of nuclear power, we will.”

“It takes guts to defend nuclear power in this hostile political climate,” noted Brett Rampal, President of American Nuclear Society's Young Members Group. “But with all the information, I trust the legislature will do the right thing.”

About the Clean Power Coalition

The Clean Power Coalition is composed of environmental, academic, and industry organizations including Environmental Progress, Mothers for Nuclear, the International Youth Nuclear Congress, North American Young Generation of Nuclear, Thorium Energy Alliance, and American Nuclear Society Young Members Group.

Click to expand map

About Environmental Progress

Environmental Progress is an environmental research and policy organization building a movement of citizens, scientists and conservationists advocating ethical and practical energy solutions for people and nature.

To learn more visit www.environmentalprogress.org,
 or email us at info@environmentalprogress.org.

Monday: Rally for Nuclear at the New York State Capital

State House, Albany New York

The Standard and the Rally

New York State is considering a Clean Energy Standard that includes nuclear power plants. This is a big deal.  Many states have Renewable Portfolio Standards that give preference and subsidies to renewables, supposedly in the interest of preventing climate change, but give no value to the fact that nuclear plants do not emit carbon dioxide, any more than wind turbines do.

This coming Monday, there's an important hearing at the New York State Capital about the Clean Energy Standard.   Two organizations: Environmental Progress and Mothers for Nuclear,  are coordinating a rally in Albany for the standard.  After the rally,  we will attend the hearing. I say "we" because  I will be there, hopefully with some others from this area. I'm driving 140 miles to attend, and I am glad to do it!

 Hopefully, the Clean Energy Standard will be enacted, and nuclear plants will be given credit for their clean-air qualities!

If you are interested in coming to the rally, but not sure...email me offline at mjangwin at gmail.

This is very exciting, and I am happy about it.

New York and Vermont

This possibility/ probability in New York shows that nuclear can make progress and get support.  I am very pleased with this development, and happy that nuclear supporters who have been in Albany will go to the plant area for an extension of their rally. The people of Oswego have every reason to be proud of themselves for their work in gaining support for nuclear plants.  Shellenberger gives them abundant credit in his article on How to Save a Nuclear Plant.

However, the contrast with Vermont makes me sad.

In New York, the Governor was in favor of keeping the upstate plants operating. (He wanted to shut Indian Point, however.)  In Vermont, when Peter Shumlin ran for governor the first time, I swear Shumlin was running against Vermont Yankee more than he was running against Brian Dubie.  As a matter of fact, he told Brian Dubie that Dubie  cared more the shareholders of  "Entergy Louisiana"  than he cared about the people of Vermont.  Here's my blog post on that: Taking It Personal: Shumlin Accuses Dubie of Serving the Interests of "Entergy Louisiana."

All politics is local, and local politics in Vermont can be painful.

Relevant Links:

Here's Environmental Progress's review of the history of the standard: How to Save a Nuclear Plant, by Michael Shellenberger.

Here's the schedule and sign-up link for the rally. It starts at 8:30 a.m. in Albany, and then moves on to the plant area (Oswego) later in the afternoon. Save the Climate rally information.  I personally will not be going to Oswego, but I expect that many people in that area will be glad to see people who went to Albany to defend their plants!


Here is my July 17 blog post on writing in support of the Clean Energy Standard. It  includes a link to the standard itself. Write a Comment! Support New York Nuclear Plants.

And if you can't come to the rally, you can donate to Environmental Progress with the Donate button on this page. 

Pro-Nuclear March in California starts June 24

Worldwide Clean Energy Decline

Clean Energy on the decline

A new organization,  Environmental Progress,  calculates that the percentage of electricity generated by clean energy sources is on the decline world-wide.  Fossil plants are being built all over  the world.  Yes, fossil plants are being built in the United States, too.  Natural gas plants are being built here.  The United States natural gas industry has tried to convince everyone that burning natural gas is good for the environment, but gas plants are still fossil plants.

Meanwhile, due to political (mostly) and economic (some) forces, nuclear plants are closing.  More fossil plants are being built. Therefore, the percentage of electricity generated from clean energy sources--- is declining worldwide.

As nuclear closes down, wind turbines do not and cannot make up the loss.  Fossil plants are doing it.  In the Northeast: closing Vermont Yankee meant more gas was used, and this led to 5% more carbon dioxide emitted from the electricity sector in New England.  That is what happens when a nuclear plant is closed.

The Purpose of the March

In response to the clean energy decline, three organizations are sponsoring a multi-day march in California, starting on June 24.  As their website says:

March for Environmental Hope

Because the Stakes Couldn't Be Higher

The three sponsoring organizations are
Mothers for Nuclear
Save Diablo Canyon
Environmental Progress
Two other groups are marching with them:
Californians for Green Nuclear Power.
Thorium Energy Alliance

(It is wonderful to see several groups actively supporting nuclear energy.  I hope this is a trend. They say trends often start in California.)

From Mothers for Nuclear

The March itself

The march seems very well organized.  Scroll down here to see the full official schedule, camping arrangements, etc.

• The march starts in San Francisco, with a march to Greenpeace and Natural Resource Defense Council headquarters. 
• Then the march moves to East Bay, with camping near Lake Solano. 
• Then the bicycle-city of Davis California. 
• The march finishes at the State Capital,  Sacramento, at a Lands Commission Meeting.  

The State Lands Commission is considering whether to renew Diablo Canyon's permits for ocean intake and outfall pipes. The Land Commission permits expire six years before the NRC license would need to be renewed.

Donate

Not all of us can be in California, but we can all donate to the march. If you can attend, this is the signup sheet.  The organizers are asking marchers to donate $25 a day for camping fees and food.  Not all the marchers will be able to do this.  Click the donate button on this page and perhaps donate enough for one camper for one day (or enough for two campers for two days, or...well, you get the picture).

Support the March!

Governor Cuomo, Fitzpatrick, and Money

Fitzpatrick Plant

James A Fitzpatrick Nuclear Power Plant

 Early this fall, Entergy announced that both the Pilgrim plant and Fitzpatrick plant were losing money, and that Entergy would soon decide whether to continue operating those plants. Entergy said they would make the decision by the end of October.

The Pilgrim plant has been decided: Vice President Bill Mohl of Entergy announced that the Pilgrim plant in Massachusetts would close by 2019.  At the same press conference, Mohl said that Entergy has not yet made a decision about whether it would to continue to operate the James A. Fitzpatrick plant in New York State. (You can read about the press conference here, and even see the video of the whole conference.)

Entergy has not made the decision about Fitzpatrick.  However, on October 16, Entergy took a $965 million charge against earnings, writing down the value of the Fitzpatrick plant by that amount.  (Yes, that's about a billion-dollar write-down.)

The people in the Fitzpatrick area do not want the plant to close. Hundreds  of people in upstate New York rallied in favor the plant. You can see a short video of the rally here; the video includes interviews with local legislators who support the plant. The Syracuse.com article that describes the write-down also has more than thirty pictures of the rally.

Negotiating with the Governor

Andrew Cuomo

Entergy is attempting to negotiate a deal with New York State that would keep Fitzpatrick open.  As quoted in the Time-Warner article and video about the rally, State Sen. Patty Ritchie said: "I've been in a number of conversations with the governor's staff and also had an opportunity to talk to the governor, he's engaged in the issue."

However, Governor Cuomo's engagement is something that is rather hard to define.  Despite the fact that Entergy closed Pilgrim and despite the fact that Entergy took almost a billion-dollar write-down on the Fitzpatrick plant, Cuomo is treating the situation as if it is all about….well, all about him.

Cuomo's view is that Entergy is threatening the state with "job losses" and Entergy won't get away with this. Yes, Cuomo himself plans to stand up to Entergy, despite their "threats." What a guy! (sarcasm alert)

A quote from a letter Cuomo sent to Entergy, as reported by Tim Knauss in Syracuse.com:

I strongly caution Entergy not to use the threat of job losses as a means of prodding economic relief to help their bottom line. This tactic has been attempted by others i‎n the past and has been unsuccessful. In this state, an entity called the Public Service Commission has oversight over services deemed to be in the statewide public's best interests.

Entergy should keep that in mind. Any decisions will be made on the merits 

Entergy didn't write an answer to Cuomo directly. Instead, Vice President Bill Mohl wrote a note to the employees which indirectly referenced the Cuomo's accusations of "threatening job losses."  Once again,  Knauss has the story in Syracuse.com.  Here's a quote from the Mohl letter to the employees:

While we have been unsuccessful to date, our discussions [with the state] are continuing as we approach a final decision. Quite frankly, our desire has been to engage in meaningful discussions regarding continued operations of Fitzpatrick without first having to provide formal notification of a Fitzpatrick shutdown decision to the State of New York, as some have indicated is necessary. Most recently, we have heard inaccurate claims that we are "holding employees hostage" or "only seeking to improve our bottom line." That is simply not the truth. We are facing substantial financial challenges at Fitzpatrick and have been negotiating in good faith with New York State over the last several months to obtain certainty for this facility.

I am Shocked, Shocked

Governor Cuomo acts as if New York State has never made any kind of concession to attract or keep a business. He is shocked that a business would ask for such a thing, in order to continue to employ people in New York. He is shocked, shocked!

Meanwhile, here in Vermont, we can only envy the deep pockets and major financial concessions that New York gives to businesses.

New York basically outbid Vermont to have a new wafer fabrication plant placed in their state.  New York was able to offer $1.865 billion dollars in concessions to the plant owners, the emirate of Abu Dhabi. Poor little Vermont could offer---a $4.5 million dollar "Enterprise Incentive Fund." (An existing plant in Vermont will continue operating, however.)  It's a long story, and well told in this VTDigger article Global Foundries to Keep IBM Plant in Essex Going. Some quotes:

GlobalFoundries’ footprint in New York vastly outstrips that of Vermont. The company…is wholly owned by the emirate of Abu Dhabi…..

New York state has offered GlobalFoundries about $1.865 billion in financial incentives to establish itself in the state, according to a recent situational analysis of IBM’s plant in Essex Junction by the Greater Burlington Industrial Corp.

In May, the Vermont Legislature budgeted for a $4.5 million Enterprise Incentive Fund, which Gov. Peter Shumlin can tap at his discretion with limited legislative oversight….

Perhaps when Governor Cuomo gets over his advanced state of shock, he can think about agreeing to some small concessions to keep a steady, reliable electricity supplier, with a steady, reliable payroll, operating in his state.  He won't even have to figure out how to explain why he is sending almost $2 billion dollars of New York taxpayer money to Abu Dhabi.  Because he won't be sending any money to Abu Dhabi!

By keeping Fitzpatrick operating, Cuomo will be taking care of his own people.  I think that is what a governor is supposed to do. I urge him to do so.

My Comment to the PSB in Support of Vermont Yankee

Opponents and supporters of Vermont Yankee
Court house, Brattleboro  Sept 27, 2011

There is still time to comment

The Vermont Public Service Board is still accepting comments in favor of granting a Certificate of Public Good for the last few months of Vermont Yankee's operation.  Here's the link for your comment:  http://psb.vermont.gov/docketsandprojects/public-comment?docket=7862


Meredith Angwin's Comment to the Public Service Board

I am a supporter of Vermont Yankee.

I remember standing on the streets of Brattleboro while the federal court case was underway.  I held up my "Vermont Yankee" sign and the opponents held up signs saying "I support Vermont."

In those days, it was "Vermont Yankee" versus "Vermont."

Vermont Yankee supporters on Sept 27, 2011

That was then and this is now.

Vermont and Vermont Yankee have come to an agreement. This agreement will provide an orderly shut-down of the plant, support for Windham County and plant employees, and an end to lawsuits.

Vermont and Vermont Yankee are on the same side now.

Please support the state agencies of Vermont AND the workers of Vermont Yankee. Grant a Certificate of Public Good based on the state agreement with Vermont Yankee.

Meredith Angwin

Wilder, Vermont

----------

This is one of a series of posts: people's comments to the Public Service Board in favor of granting a Certificate of Public Good (CPG) to Vermont Yankee for its final year of operation.

I hope these posts will inspire you to write YOUR  comment to the board. http://psb.vermont.gov/docketsandprojects/public-comment?docket=7862

For more information on the Public Service Board hearings and the Memorandum of Understanding, see the blog post Take Action: Comments to the Public Service Board.  It has many links to background information.

Yesterday's post was John McClaughry's excellent comment about whether Entergy could trust the state of Vermont.

Vermont Yankee is Refueling and I Sort of Told You So

Carla Heath holds sign about Vermont Yankee's future
March 2012 rally for Vermont Yankee, at the plant gates

Vermont Yankee will refuel this spring.  An article Wednesday in the Burlington Free Press was headlined: Vermont Yankee plans refueling with eye on 20 more years.  This article by Terri Hallenbeck includes the following quote from Vermont Yankee spokesman Rob Williams:

“We’re proceeding business as usual and making upgrades where necessary,” Williams said. “As we plan this outage our assumption is we’re operating until 2032."

A more complete list of planned upgrades can be found in the Vermont Business Magazine article by Timothy McQuiston: Vermont Yankee Will Refuel This Spring.  According to that article: Among the operations planned for the outage to keep the plant up-to-date are: replacing and refurbishing some components; general preventative maintenance; replacing a large transformer; overhauling one of the three feed-water pumps; and replacing a recirculation-pump motor.

So why am I saying "I sort of told you so"?  These articles were posted on February 20, and this blog post is February 22.  I am just catching up with the news, right?

Not completely.  The background for this story always includes a recent financial analysis report by UBS.  The report claims that Vermont Yankee is uneconomical and may well be closed by Entergy.  Andrew Stein at Vermont Digger reports on this analysis. An earlier article by Stein provides a link directly to the UBS report.

I was interviewed about the UBS report last week.  I felt its conclusions were umm...overstated. In other words, I am not surprised that Vermont Yankee is refueling instead of closing down.

To some extent, I told you so. I told you last week.

Is Vermont Yankee Uneconomical?

Last week, Pat Bradley of WAMC interviewed three people about the UBS report.  I was one of the interviewees.  Bradley does a great job of summarizing the arguments in about three minutes.

As you might guess, I was the only interviewee who said Vermont Yankee was probably not going to close.  This was not just Meredith-being-optimistic. My reason was that natural gas prices set the price on the grid, and natural gas prices are high in the Northeast. So grid prices are higher here than other places.  Therefore,  merchant nuclear plants in this area can probably make money, especially since gas prices are very likely to rise in the future.

 You can listen to three people (including me) interviewed by Bradley at this link: Financial Firm Predicts Closure of Vermont Yankee.    About a day later,  Matt Wald of the New York Times wrote an article about gas and electricity prices: In New England, a Natural Gas Trap. His article confirmed what I said on the radio about gas and electricity prices in this region.  I also suggest reading Jim Hopf's ANS Nuclear Cafe post on Potential nuclear plant closures and what could be done to stop them.  The early section on natural gas prices is most relevant to Vermont Yankee.

In my opinion, the UBS report assumes natural gas prices are going to stay low for a long time.  There are many reasons to think the opposite.  I think:

• natural gas prices will be highest in the Northeast (due to pipeline constraints)
• prices will rise all over the country (as the gas glut diminishes over time).  

This means grid prices will be higher in the Northeast and merchant nuclear plants in this area will be in a good situation in the near future.

I think Entergy probably came to a conclusion similar to mine.

Vermont Yankee is refueling.

Three Pro-Nuclear Events: Hearing, Marches and Rallies in Tennessee, Canada and Japan

The World Tour

Okay, I'm your friendly neighborhood pro-nuclear blogger, and this time I'm not writing about Vermont. Here we go on a world pro-nuclear tour! There were three pro-nuclear events, none in Vermont, and they don't get much attention in most of the media.

 But, before we get started:

Something You Can Do Right Now

It takes almost no time to vote Yes on the question: Should the World Increase Its Reliance on Nuclear Energy at this Wall Street Journal poll. Do it now!

And the tour begins in Tennessee. 

Tennessee MOX Hearing

Hearing room at the MOX meeting

ANS members and ANS student members testified at a hearing about MOX fuel in Tennessee.  The Tennessee valley hearings are noted for anti-nuclear "zombies."  These are people wearing torn clothes and fake blood, and they come to hearings and make about as much sense as real zombies would make...if there were real zombies.

At this hearing, ANS members were informed, articulate and visible.  Many wore blue ANS t-shirts, visible in the picture at the left.  At the hearing, nuclear and anti-nuclear people spoke politely, and some even chatted and exchanged information after the meeting.

The meeting was livetweeted using the hashtag #MOXChat.

Laura Scheele of ANS Nuclear Cafe wrote an excellent retrospective about the meeting.  The future of nuclear at #MOXChat at ANS Nuclear Cafe.

Oh yes, I suspect the zombies might have heard that the ANS members would be at the meeting, because....no zombies appeared.

Gentilly 2 Pro-Nuclear March in Quebec

Hydro-Quebec owns the Gentilly-2 nuclear plant, and Hydro-Quebec recently decided to shut the plant down.  The people in the area did not take this quietly.  This Sunday they marched in favor of keeping the power plant open.  You can see pictures of the march on this pro-Gentilly FB page, which has over 1000 "likes":

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Nous-appuyons-la-réfection-de-la-centrale-nucléaire-Gentilly-2/108833445800977

I am particularly fond of these pictures which I "borrowed" from the FB page.

One picture talks of the fate of  800 families, and two pictures are about the children  (Les Enfants) of Gentilly.

Les Enfants?  What is that about?  Well, there's a film about Gentilly which focused on birth defects, childhood cancer, and so forth, all supposedly caused by the plant.  The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission wrote a one-pager about the falsehoods in the film. The one-pager is an excellent answer to many falsehoods about nuclear energy.

The young people in the parade and with their pictures on the poster are another answer to these falsehoods.

In the interview below, local officials speak of their support for the plant and the announcer says 1000 people are there for the march.

http://staging.fr.video.canoe.tv/video/1869420841001/#1869485339001

Pro-Nuclear in Japan

Well, this is NEVER going to get into the main media, I suspect.  But here's a 1000-person pro-nuclear rally in Japan, in front of the Prime Ministers house! It's only reported in somethng called The Liberty Web, but it happened all the same.

1000 people gather for a pro-nuclear power demonstration on Sept 25.  One of the spokesmen presented a statement to the cabinet, including these words:  “We have heard from the factory mangers that they have had to fire part-time workers, because the company took measures to save electricity. However, the victims of this policy could not speak up on account of the flooded denuclearization media coverage."

Not a demonstration, but a Japanese professor is battling the flood of mis-information in a letter and blog post. You can read Jun Takeda's post here.  Here's a quote:  Based on radioactivity dosage, the risk of Fukushima residents developing thyroid cancer is less than one person per 10 million per year. Since the population of Fukushima Prefecture is two million, thyroid cancer will not result from these low doses. Truly, people with only amateur knowledge of radioactivity need to stop paralyzing the citizens of Fukushima and the entire country with fear.

All Over the World

All over the world, people are standing up in public and supporting nuclear power.

The times they are changing, and it's about time.

Show Up for Nuclear in Chattanooga

ANS members at MOX hearing

Tennessee Activism

In two recent blog posts, I wrote about the students and ANS members who Showed Up for Nuclear at the recent NRC meeting about MOX fuel in Chattanooga.  My posts were:

MOX and Hearings in Chattanooga
Meeting Success Story in Chattanooga

However, there was one thing wrong with my posts. I wasn't there. I was following the action from Vermont.

The view from Chattanooga

Steve Skutnik was in Chattanooga, and he was one of the people who organized some of the ANS student attendance.  He has a great blog post about it at Neutron Economy  Mixing it up over MOX--A wrapup from Chattanooga. 

Showing up worked in Tennessee.

Let's start with what didn't happen: the "nuclear zombies" didn't show up.  These zombies are people who come to meetings in Tennessee in costumes doused with fake blood.  They weren't there, and the meeting wasn't filled with street theater.

What did happen: people at the meeting got a chance to talk, and people were polite to each other.  Some productive conversations even  took place afterwards in a local restaurant. The whole thing sounded quite civilized. I have to admit, however, that Steve noted: A particularly interesting facet of the meeting was in how one could readily identify MOX opponents before they even got to their arguments - solely by their tone of voice. In nearly every case, opponents would grow progressively louder as they spoke.

What worked: I think that the reason things went so well is that so many pro-nuclear people showed up.  In many meetings around here, the opponents completely outnumber the supporters, and the opponents are emboldened by their numbers.  Loud voices and street theater often dominate a meeting when nuclear opponents hold a strong majority.

IMHO, when representation is more even, meetings are more polite.

In other words, Just Show Up for nuclear.

The Skutnik Post

I like Skutnik's post for three reasons:

1. It's the story of a successful event, and it is vivid enough so I feel as if I had been there.
2. I learned a lot about MOX in his post.
3. Skutnik calls me and Howard Shaffer the patron saints of nuclear activism. Nobody has ever called me a saint before... 

Catching Up: The River, Lawsuits and Some Anniversaries

September 12, 2011
In front of courthouse in Brattleboro

It's time for a little catching-up.

Shaffer at ANS Nuclear Cafe on Plant Cooling

At  Vermont Yankee, as at other plants, heat rejection includes the river. (At VY, I say "includes the river" because there are also cooling towers.) Opponents use the thermal discharge as a way to attempt to shut down the plant, or alternately, to harass the plant into unnecessary and expensive use of its cooling towers in all weather.  Howard Shaffer has an excellent post on water issues at Vermont Yankee, and how they are distorted by the plant opponents. His post was published at ANS Nuclear Cafe Tuesday: Plant cooling a stumbling block?

Lawsuits: The Present

Lawsuit about discriminatory taxes: New Lawsuit

Yesterday, Vermont Yankee filed a lawsuit against the state of Vermont in federal court  Vermont Yankee had been paying $5 million a year in a generation tax to the state of Vermont. It had also been paying another assessment, calculated by a formula, to the Clean Energy Development Fund (CEDF).  Entergy agreed to this when it moved some of its fuel rods into dry cask storage.

Vermont Yankee paid around $7 million to the CEDF some years.  However, the agreement to pay into the CEDF ended on March 21, 2012.

 In January of 2012, the Vermont Legislature passed a bill requiring Entergy to pay more than $12 million in a generation tax. In other words, as the CEDF agreement with Entergy ended, the state just added that $7 million to the generation tax. The state didn't want the revenue stream to end when the agreement ended. You'd think that an agreement is an agreement, with a date on it.  Not in the Vermont legislature, apparently.

Yesterday, Entergy sued the state in federal court against this discriminatory taxation.

I will blog about this more in the future.  Meanwhile, this AP article gives a good description of the grounds of the lawsuit: Vermont Nuke Plant Sues Over New State Tax.  You might also enjoy reading the comments on this short WCAX article on the lawsuit.

And oh, I can't resist.  A link to my January blog post:  Taxing Fuel Rods: The Vermont Legislature Plans Another Law Which Will End Up in Court.

I was right.  It ended up in court.

Lawsuit about Federal Pre-Emption: New Briefs in Old Suit

Vermont Yankee won its case in Federal Court, and Attorney General Sorrell filed his brief for the appeal. I blogged about his brief in June: It's the Renewables, Stupid? Vermont Files a Brief.

Since then, Entergy has filed its brief, and Amicus Curiae briefs have been filed.  I am not  on the opponent mailing lists, but I am on Entergy's mailing list for plant information.  Therefore,  I received copies of Entergy's brief and the plant supporters Amicus Curiae briefs. (These documents are all part of the public record as soon as they are filed.)

The Vermont Attorney General's Office has a webpage for Vermont Yankee filings, but alas, it is out of date at this point.  But I fixed that!  I didn't fix the AG's website, but I put up a web page on the Energy Education Project Website.  Here it is:

Filings in Entergy Appeal.

This page includes Judge Murtha's ruling, the State brief, the Entergy brief, and five pro-Entergy Amicus Curiae filings.

Anniversaries: The Past and the Pictures

I thought about September 11, and I will always think about it. I didn't blog about it this year, but here's a link to my blog post of last year: The Tenth Anniversary and Conspiracy Theories

More cheerfully, a year ago September 12 was the first day of the court hearing in Brattleboro on the Vermont Yankee federal lawsuit. Anti-Vermont Yankee people, mostly dressed in black, held a vigil in front of the federal courthouse. Vermont Yankee supporters, many with white t-shirts, held a rally.

 I decided to illustrate this post with some pictures from that day.  The picture at the top shows plant supporters on the right, plant protesters on the left, and a documentary film-maker taking a movie of it all. You can read more about the rally at my blog post: Rally Retrospective: On the Sidewalks for Vermont Yankee.

Celebrating Vermont Yankee: ANS Nuclear Cafe and the Rally

Today. my guest post at ANS Nuclear Cafe describes the recent rally at Vermont Yankee: Celebrating at Vermont Yankee: A successful rally on St. Patrick's Day. My post describes the rally, and compares it to the the opponent demonstration that was held a few days later. Our rally was different from their demonstration. We didn't have stilt walkers.

In all seriousness, though, if an ordinary working person was watching their event on TV, would that person want to join? Is a man with megaphone saying that Entergy is a "rogue corporation" a convincing soundbite? Is there a pent-up desire for death-mask masks and funny hats?

The ANS post also includes new pictures from our St Patrick's Day rally. The picture above includes VY engineer Larry Cummings at the left, Howard Shaffer in the middle, VY engineer Kenyon Webber to the right.

In the past few days in Brattleboro, nuclear energy supporters spoke up. (This is not just about our rally. Read the ANS post for more of the story.)

Some more links:

Kenyon Webber and Brian O'Callahan, young engineers at Vermont Yankee, interviewed for National Engineer's Week.

My earlier blog post on the rally Vermont Yankee Rally: Green Power for St. Patrick's Day.

My local newspaper, the Valley News, on the opponent's event, including Governor Shumlin's statement in support of their demonstration. Article by John Gregg.

Brattleboro Reformer article on our St. Patrick's Day rally. Article by Josh Stilts.

Commons (of Windham County) article on our St. Patrick's Day Rally. Article by Randall Holhut.

Vermont Yankee Rally: Green Power for St Patrick's Day

The Rally at the Plant Gates today went very well. The weather was wonderful, and we had the biggest turn-out ever: over 70 people! The homemade signs were terrific! People had a super time waving at cars at shift change, and chatting. Finally, we went in to the Governor Hunt house for a snack, including a cake with green trim, green icing shamrocks, and the message: "Green Power for 20 more years."

I am posting a few pix, but I really didn't take very good pix, so I hope to get more pix from others and post them. Here are a few pictures from near the beginning of the rally.

Smart Phones and Teenagers

The picture below deserves some explanation. It shows the Twarog family. They are wearing green hats provided by Howard Shaffer, and their son is concentrating on a smart phone.

Their son is helping me out. I had been on WPTZ TV Friday evening (the local NBC station) and WPTZ asked me if I could email them some pix of the rally by about 5:30 Saturday to be on the 6 p.m. news. And maybe I could email a video, too? They explained I could just send these from a smartphone, no problem.

But there was a problem. I don't have a smartphone. What to do? How could I get the pictures taken and sent to WPTZ for the 6 o clock news?

Of course, you already know how this story is going to end. At the rally, I asked a teenager. Cam Twarog took the pix, sent the pix, and obviously enjoyed himself doing it.

Everybody had a great time.

A tough week coming

The coming week looks like a tough one for the Brattleboro/Vernon area. Opponents have several sets of demonstrations planned for the day after the plant was "supposed" to shut down. The papers have also been full of calls for "direct action" to shut the plant down, and the importance of having taken the "non-violence training." (Nobody at our rally was violent, and we didn't need any training.)

Some of the talk at the rally was about the coming week. Many people had attended a Thursday meeting with the Vernon selectboard and police chief, talking about safety preparations for the upcoming demonstrations. Here's a Brattleboro Reformer article about that meeting: Vernon Gets Ready for VY Protests: Preparing for the Worst, Hoping for the Best.

We are glad we could come out and do our positive-energy rally at the plant today.

Update

I just added this short video. Thank you to the Twarog family for sharing

Pix: Carla Heath has sign 7300 more days. Fran Jerard has Green Clean sign with shamrocks.

March 17 Rally In Support of Vermont Yankee

Mark Your Calendars for March 17

Thanks to YOU, we have had two very successful Rallies. Supporters have said they want to have another rally, and we have decided to hold one on March 17 (St. Patrick's Day).

We have chosen March 17th because it is a Saturday, and also near the March 21 date when the plant's original license was due to end. The license is not ending, and we want to be at Vermont Yankee to celebrate. We are happy that Vermont Yankee will continue to operate!

When and Where

We are planning for the rally at the plant gate from 5:00-6:30 p.m. on Saturday March 17. The 5 to 6:30 rally is during shift change. We will hold signs, wave and show support for the people of Vermont Yankee. It will be Daylight Savings time, so we won't be finishing in the dark.

Saturday March 17 is St Patrick's Day, so we will work this into our plans. We will have some signs, but please feel free to think about making your own signs, For example: "Celebrating GREEN power on St. Patrick's Day!"

Important UPDATE: We will be holding the rally between 5 and 6:30, and we will not be using the Governor Hunt House for discussion earlier in the day. Sorry for the change in plans!

Why the 17th?

The opponents are planning marches and activities around March 21, but have nothing scheduled on the 17th. We want to be on our own again. This is especially important because the opponents are talking about civil disobedience, non-violence training, etc. As always, we want this rally to be non-confrontational. Also, we hope our rally will not be too much trouble for the plant security staff. We have their permission to hold the rally.

Howard Shaffer has the lead for planning. If you can let him know you are coming to the rally, that would be great.

Howard Shaffer PE

PO Box 299

Enfield, NH 03748

603-632-5139

603-304-9157 cell

hshaffer3@myfairpoint.net

This Rally is planned by the Vermont Pilot Project of the American Nuclear Society: this project is headed by Howard Shaffer. Also by the Energy Education Project of the Ethan Allen Institute: this project is headed by Meredith Angwin.

About the Previous Rallies

The first Rally was September 12, 2011 in Brattleboro, in front of the Courthouse building. The trial of the Entergy vs. the State of Vermont was in its first day. Opponents were also holding a vigil a the same time. The purpose of our rally was to provide visibility to the media and public, and prove that there are supporters for Vermont Yankee! (Note that current polls show about 44% Vermonters in favor of VY, 42 % opposed.)

You can view a photo album of the September rally at the Energy Education Project website

The second Rally was held on October 23, 2011 at the plant gate. It was held over shift change during the refueling outage. The purpose was to show support to the plant staff and contract outage crafts. The rally was very successful, and much appreciated by both plant staff and management. Media coverage was good. The photographs on this page are from this rally.

You can read a blog post about the October rally at ANS Nuclear Cafe.

Nuclear Bloggers Carnival and the Rally at Vermont Yankee

The 75th Nuclear Bloggers Carnival is up at Atomic Power Review. Will Davis starts the Carnival with a picture from the nuclear past: what is this? I kinda guessed, but, close is no cigar...

Many of the posts are about nuclear communication, including Suzy Hobbs on a Facebook debate with celebrity Christie Brinkley. Yes, Ms. Brinkley considers herself an expert on the dangers of nuclear energy. Brian Wang wonders how wrong Armory Lovins can be, over the years, and still be considered an expert. (The jury is still out on that one). ANS Nuclear Cafe features stories of mothers in the nuclear industry. Steve Skutnik of the Neutron Economy acknowledges the fear that civilian nuclear development is a cover for more warlike intentions, but that is not how things really happen.

This is a very enjoyable Carnival!

Rally to Support Vermont Yankee, Just Outside the Plant Gates

I have spent the past two days assisting Howard Shaffer in planning the Rally at the Plant. Fifty people came to show their support for Vermont Yankee. We came at shift change. As cars went by, we held signs, waved, and encouraged the people who are working the refueling outage. They get a lot of negative feedback, what with the anti-nuclear puppet shows and all. We wanted to be sure to give them some positive feedback. After all, they supply our power!

I will blog about this more in future days. but for now, I will just link to the Brattleboro Reformer article about the rally, and include one picture I swiped (with permission) from the Vermont Yankee Facebook album. The man sitting on the chair is 92 years old, and came out to support the plant. The rally included children, workers, tavern-owners, and retirees. It was a great family occasion!

More later.

Rally This Sunday in Support of Vermont Yankee

Rally in Support of Nuclear Power

Supporters of Vermont Yankee to hold rally Sunday, Oct. 23 outside the plant gates

On Sunday, October 23, from 4:30 – 6:30 pm outside the front gate at Vermont Yankee, there will be a rally of support for the plant staff and the outage team.

“We need to show them that they are appreciated,” said co-organizer Meredith Angwin, director of the Energy Education Project of the Ethan Allen Institute. “We will show our support for nuclear energy!”

“Why are we doing this now? Partially because of the outage: we want to support the plant and the workers. Also, the following weekend, an opponent group is holding a shut-it-down rally at the plant,” Angwin said. “We discussed holding our rally the same day to provide balance, but decided that was a bad idea. Multiple rallies held near the plant gates can raise security issues. So we are holding our rally this weekend.”

"The people working the outage will appreciate our support," said co-organizer Howard Shaffer, coordinator of the Vermont Pilot Project of the American Nuclear Society. "We are grateful to Entergy for giving us permission to be at the Governor Hunt House for the rally."

Contact:

Howard Shaffer

Vermont Pilot Project of the American Nuclear Society

hshaffer3@myfairpoint.net

603-632-5139

or

Meredith Angwin

Energy Education Project of the Ethan Allen Institute

Meredith@ethanallen.org

802-291-9172

-----------

This is a press release I sent out earlier today. Last time we held a rally, we were in downtown Brattleboro near the Federal Court House. This time, we wanted our rally to be visible to people at the plant.

About the Governor Hunt House. It was built in 1789 by Governor Hunt, who was the last Lieutenant Governor of the independent Republic of Vermont. It is now near the gate to Vermont Yankee.

Photos below of the house. (From the Restoration Trades Directory Portfolio)

The Sound and the Fury and Some News

It is a tale

Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,

Signifying nothing.

The Sound

Macbeth was talking about his life, but he could have been talking about the upcoming Vermont Yankee relicensing vote.

Yesterday, my local paper had a top-of-the front page article: Many Vt Senators in the Valley Say They'll Vote Aganist Vt Yankee The article was in the Valley News Friday February 19, and was written by John Gregg. In this article, Senator Mark MacDonald says

"I think we'll vote no, and I don't think it will be close." However, a few sentences later, the article says "MacDonald also said a no vote was not necessarily a 'stake in the heart' of Vermont Yankee's future, since a vote in favor of Vermont Yankee could still potentially occur in 2011 or 2012. The company might also still take the matter to court."

(This paper does not keep a strong archive on-line, and this link may go dead fairly quickly. I have quoted the important part.)

In other words, the upcoming vote is advisory. A "no" vote would certainly be a set-back for Entergy. If the split takes place completely along party lines, a 23 to 7 vote would be a major setback. But, despite all this excitement, the vote means very little. The legislature can chose to vote the opposite way next year. Or the whole matter can go to court instead of being voted upon.

By the way, as usual in politics, the vote situation is not intuitively obvious. The bill that will be voted on would instruct the Public Service Board (PSB) to allow Vermont Yankee to operate past 2012. If the Senate votes no, the House does not see the bill, and the PSB is not instructed to renew Vermont Yankee's license. So, if they vote "no"- -basically, nothing happens. The PSB is not instructed in any way, though a 2006 law, passed by the Vermont legislature, says PSB must be instructed by the legislature in order to rule that continued operation of Vermont Yankee is in the best interests of Vermont.

I think this is going to be settled in court, but that is another blog post entirely.

The Fury

Anti-Vermont Yankee efforts have been stepped up. For example, there have been ads and announcements in our local paper that the following event is taking place: (quoted from Valley News Calendar)

Voices from Chernobyl: The Oral History of a Nuclear Disaster, play reading and discussion by theater professionals and community leaders of the one-act play: 7 p.m., Montshire Museum of Science, 1 Montshire Road, Norwich. Free. Refreshments provided. 802-885-4826 or drr@dartmouth.edu.

In an ad for the performance, the title is "Should the (sic) Vermont Yankee be re-licensed."

I called the number, and discovered that this play is written by a Vermont woman and is being performed throughout Vermont, with "nuclear experts" in the audience. In speaking to Mr. Belenky on the phone, he assured me that these experts would have arguments that I would find "hard to counter." Unfortunately, I messed up the phone conversation by saying that I didn't really want to talk much about this, we wouldn't have much to say to each other, but I wanted to know more about the performances. This gave him the perfect opening to explain how everyone has to be open to dialog, and he never heard of someone saying something like this about a conversation etc.

This was my bad. It was completely my bad. I don't know why I am writing it here. Self-flagellation, I guess. Admission that I am suffering from a bit of burn-out. I do try to have a dialog. I really do. But a person can hear this junk about an RBMK reactor being just like a LWR reactor only so many times. I think I have heard it enough.

The charter of the Montshire Museum does not allow it to host political meetings. So I suppose this playreading about Chernobyl-and-Vermont-Yankee is considered educational.

Tomorrow afternoon, there's a big anti-VY meeting in Brattleboro, with a full cast of anti-VY groups. Here's the list from that announcement

Paul Gunter, executive director of the Washington, D.C., -based nuclear watchdog group, Beyond Nuclear;
David Dean, Vermont State Representative and Riverkeeper for the Connecticut River Watershed Council;
Clifford Hatch, organic farmer in Gill, Mass.;
Dr. Ira Helfand, co-founder and past president of Physicians for Social Responsibility;
Deborah Katz, executive director of Citizens Awareness Network;
Clay Turnbull, staff member of the New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution; and
Chris Williams, organizer, Vermont Citizen Action Network.

Chris Williams used to be with Citizens Awareness Network. I think the Vermont Citizen Action Network is relatively new. Some of the Usual Suspects are not attending the rally tomorrow. VPIRG and the Union of Concerned Scientists seem to be missing. We face quite a crew around here.

And they are well-funded. There was a half-page, full color ad opposite the opinion page in our local paper, with the usual cooling tower picture and exhortations to write your legislature. I am sure this ad appeared in all local Vermont newspapers. Meanwhile, in electronic media, anything with the word nuclear triggers a Google Adsense ad to shut Vermont Yankee. I see this on most of the pro-nuclear blogs I read.

We are such a small state. 700,000 people, and not growing. Where does all this money come from?

Old News Or New?

Arnie Gundersen wrote a note about a phone call from an anonymous whistle blower claiming that Vermont Yankee repaired a leak in the same area two years ago. Vermont Digger has the story. I link to the document obtained from the Department of Public Service. This story will be heavily covered in future days, no doubt. We have faith that Mr. Gundersen is not being devious or dumb in sharing his report of the phone call.