Showing posts with label Video. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Video. Show all posts

Sunday, February 25, 2018

Department of Energy: Nuclear policy, nuclear money, and the millennial caucuses

Secretary Rick Perry and Millennial Nuclear Caucus
October 2017
From Department of Energy website
Millennials 
Starting this past fall,  I finally noticed that the current Department of Energy was not the old Department of Energy. In October 2017, DOE cooperated with the Nuclear Energy Institute and held the first Millennial Nuclear Caucus, in Washington DC. At that event, Secretary of Energy Rick Perry met with a group of young nuclear professionals.  In a post on the DOE website, Secretary Perry said: "I had the pleasure of meeting with a number of young visionaries in the nuclear field this morning." As a matter of fact, the hashtag for the Millennial Nuclear Caucus meetings is #NuclearVisionaries.  Here's a brief video of part of the meeting.


More to come
When I saw the announcement of the first caucus, I felt terrific. The Department of Energy promoting young people and nuclear! Well, the only word was--- awesome!

Next, I realized there was more to come. I learned that the Washington meeting was going to be the first of a series of caucuses.  So far, there has been the first Caucus in Washington, another in Ohio, and a third a few days ago at Texas A&M University.  The Caucuses are listed on this page of the Department of Energy website.  https://energy.gov/ne/millennial-nuclear-caucus Videos of the Caucuses are at the U. S. Department of Nuclear Energy Facebook page
https://www.facebook.com/NuclearEnergyGov

UPDATE: The next Millennial Nuclear Caucus will be March 7 in Washington D.C. https://www.eventbrite.com/e/millennial-nuclear-caucus-tickets-43452885751

The most recent Caucus took place at Texas AMU on February 20. Once again, the millennial panelists were from various types of nuclear facilities: national labs, start-ups, operating plants. This time, the leader from DOE was Suzie Jaworowski, senior advisor to the DOE Office of Nuclear Energy. Here (hopefully) is a direct link to video of the meeting on the DOE Nuclear Facebook page
https://www.facebook.com/NuclearEnergyGov/videos/215074865735271/

Hype or real?
Now, first of all, I would be happy even if this new look by DOE were only hype. I am happy that the the government is holding and co-sponsoring events like the Millennial Nuclear Caucus. Previous administrations tended to act as if nuclear power were some sort of embarrassment. The current DOE Facebook page and the nuclear-positive events show a change in attitude.

However, if you go to the video of the Texas meeting on the Facebook page,  you will see Rod Adams ask a question that he admits puts Suzie Jaworowski "on the spot."  (Move the slider to about 1:02) To paraphrase Adams's question: This is all very good, but the DOE budget proposal has less money for nuclear for next year than it had for this year.  Is DOE really going to be able to support nuclear?

Side note:  Optimism, pessimism, realism  and everything in between before the official start of the Advanced Reactor Summit V is Rod Adams post which includes his comments on the Millennial Caucus meeting.

What was Jaworowski's answer?  Since the budget isn't totally set, the answer couldn't be totally set either. Jaworowski answered that DOE is focusing on its priorities. High priorities include keeping the existing fleet going, and keeping the pipeline of future projects underway. There are also plans for public-private partnerships, with government and private money leading to innovations.

Policy or money?
You might say Jaworowski gave a standard-issue answer, and maybe it was.  But I notice the nuclear group at DOE running events, making videos, posting to FB, and I am encouraged.

The federal government has been running immense deficits for years, and the Republicans are the party of "small government and decreased government spending." Therefore, budget cuts were inevitable, from both a practical (deficits) and policy (Republican) point of view.  Considering that budget cuts will be coming, the new pro-nuclear initiatives of the current administration are very welcome.

In other words, if the major role of the government is to spend money, then things are looking bad.  If the major role of the government is to set policy, then things are looking better.  I think this administration's policies will be pro-nuclear. I believe these policies will have an impact.

I am well aware that support of energy initiatives usually requires both policy and money.  I know money/policy is not a simple either-or.  However, setting policy is the first step.

If you look at Rod Adams post (linked above) you can see a somewhat more pessimistic evaluation of the future of nuclear. I'm not so sure of myself as to say he is wrong.  And he isn't completely pessimistic, either. Maybe I am just an optimist.  Still, I am optimistic about the DOE initiatives.

Only time will tell.






Saturday, November 11, 2017

Becoming an Advocate: Vote802 Video





Pat McDonald of Vote802  and Ben Kinsley of Campaign for Vermont Prosperity interviewed me in October.  The Vote802 show is recorded at ORCA Media in Montpelier, and is picked up by community access TV stations throughout Vermont. (802 is the area code for Vermont.)

Pat and Ben asked great questions, ranging from the state of the cleanup at Vermont Yankee to questions about my book and "advocacy for the shy." There were some "noises off" during part of the show, but it is worth hanging in there, due to the excellent questions.

We started the show with a video of Eric Meyer of Generation Atomic singing the Thorium Aria. Rewritten operatic arias are not what people expect to hear on a show like this! Later in the show,  I describe several nuclear advocacy groups, including Generation Atomic.

This Just In:

Iida Ruishalme writes the very thoughtful blog, Thoughscapism. In today's blog post, she describes some scary adventures in Bonn outside the COP23 climate meeting. Wild Wild Bonn: Anti-nuke protesters get up close and personal, try to get me seized by the police.  

Anti-nuclear hooligans (sorry but that is how they were acting) attempted to grab her camera while she was filming Eric Meyer singing Thorium Aria, the same aria that starts the Vote802 video above.  Meyer was singing to a group of anti-nuclear people who had just finished their own singing.

(Yeah, some of the anti-nuclear actions in Bonn remind me of NRC meetings in Brattleboro.)

Watch the video (above) and read Ruishalme's blog. Videos and drama--two pro-nuclear ways to enjoy the weekend.

Friday, February 3, 2017

Vermont Renewable Mandate (video)

The "90% renewables" solution

Vermont has an energy policy that requires that 90% of Vermont's energy come from renewables by 2050. This policy includes all of Vermont's energy, including heating and transportation.  Such a change can most generously be described as "unlikely."  I have at least two blog posts on this subject:  What 90% renewables would look like in Vermont,  and Vermont's renewable plan is wishful thinking   These posts are from 2013.

The renewable policy might become a law

So far, this renewable policy is not law, but it might become law.  The legislature is in session, and, as Mark Twain said: "No man's life, liberty or property are safe while the legislature is in session."  Bills are being introduced to make this policy into an actual law.

The Ethan Allen Institute recently made a video on the folly of 90% renewables for Vermont.  I appear briefly in the video.  I hope you enjoy it.


Saturday, January 7, 2017

Ending the Fear of Nuclear Energy (video)

My friend Michael Shellenberger delivered a TEDxCalPoly talk: How Fear of Nuclear Ends.

This is a terrific talk, tracing opinions on nuclear energy from the days when the Sierra Club policy "Atoms not Dams, (because of the huge ecological impact of hydro plants).  Then he describes  the controversy and confrontation within the Sierra Club as subgroups pushed against nuclear power. The quotes from the early anti-nuclear people are very telling: these people are basically against clean power because it would lead to population growth or economic growth or both.

Shellenberger talks about how anti-nuclear fears were nurtured by a small group of people, and how anti-nuclear fears will end.  One reason they will end is because everyone wants---a better world for our children.


Sunday, September 4, 2016

On Pat MacDonald's TV show about Clean Energy Standards, Grid Payment

I was on Pat MacDonald's show, Vote for Vermont.  The motto of her show is "Listening Beyond the Sound Bite."  I appeared on her show last year, also.  The recent topic was "Life After Vermont Yankee, part 2."   We covered a lot of ground, and had a good time!

Our discussion included:

  • The New York Clean Energy Standards and what they mean
  • Payments on the grid, and what types of plants get subsidies
  • Effects of Vermont Yankee closing 
  • Carbon dioxide footprints
  • My upcoming book
A hearty thank-you to Pat for inviting me on her show, and for all the preparatory work she does before a show.  I hope you enjoy watching!





My opinions about payments to gas-fired plants

In  my opinion, gas-fired plants get major subsidies, but they call it "capacity payments." Nuclear plants get these also, but capacity payments are a very small portion of the income for nuclear plants.  Capacity payments are a major portion of the income for gas-fired plants.

 If gas-fired plants had to make their money selling kWh, they couldn't sell kWh as cheaply as they do.  If gas plants didn't get capacity payments, but had to make their money selling kWh, nuclear plants would be very competitive, even with currently-low gas prices.

Some back-up for my statements:
My  post on the New York Clean Energy Standards: Clean Air versus Efficiency Charges. Clean Air Wins.
My article in Nuclear Engineering International magazine, about payments on the grid: Pay for Performance and the US grid. 

Update: This video was chosen to be the Friday Matinee at the ANS Nuclear Cafe blog.  I am very pleased!  Life After Vermont Yankee, Part 2--An Interview with Meredith Angwin

Wednesday, May 25, 2016

The Distribution Grid: Christine Hallquist on Grid Controversies

Hallquist and the grid

Christine Hallquist, CEO of Vermont Electric Cooperative, presented the third class in my course: The Grid: What Your Electricity Bill Won't Tell You.

On May 3, 2016 at my class on grid issues, Hallquist described the grid  from the perspective of a rural electric cooperative in Vermont. She heads Vermont Electric Cooperative (VEC). This utility was one of the rural Cooperatives of the Rural Electrification movement: it was founded in 1938 to bring electricity to rural Vermont.  It is now the largest locally-owned electric distribution utility in Vermont.  VEC is dwarfed by Green Mountain Power, a utility with a very Vermont-y name. However, Green Mountain Power is actually a wholly-owned subsidiary of Gaz Metro of Quebec.

In my opinion, Vermont Electric Cooperative is the quintessential Vermont utility. It started in the Rural Electrification movement of the 30s, and and it is a cooperative in which the owners and the consumers are the same people.

Update 2018: The videos still exist, but their URLs have changed. Here's the link to this video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4zN0D_CAkKE


As CEO of VEC, Hallquist is concerned with the cost shifts involved in net metering, since  VEC's service area includes low income areas of Vermont. When your owners are your customers, you pay sincere attention to the economic issues.

Late in the talk, Hallquist also discusses grid stability.  Intermittent power tends to be destabilizing: the grid was set up for rotating electric machinery. Rotating machinery has a healthy inertia which helps keep the grid stable. Starting at about 1:20 (1 hour 20 minutes into the talk), Hallquist shows the jagged effects of wind and solar, and the almost un-analyzable harmonics of the intermittents on the grid.  Few utilities collect this type of data.

I am very grateful to Christine Hallquist for sharing her information and her wisdom with our class.

It happens first in a village

Agatha Christie's Miss Marple is able to solve crimes because she has carefully analyzed many (supposedly) smaller issues in a small village.

To a large extent, Vermont Electric Cooperative is a "village" for the growth of renewables.  The owner/customers are not rich, and they need to keep electricity costs low.  While places like Germany can boast of their renewables while simultaneously building lignite-fired plants, VEC is actually adding renewables and dealing directly with the costs and stability issues that renewables  present.

For example,  the owner/customers have made decisions, very recently,  on how to keep wind energy from being curtailed on their grid.  They are making decisions, right now, on how much net metering the customers can afford.

VEC is hopeful about advances in energy storage and weather forecasting and so forth. (See Hallquist's last slide on "What are we doing about it.")  But right now, there are very real limits for renewables on a small grid, and VEC is reaching those limits.

-------
Previous sessions 

The first session was The Grid: Power and Policy Introduction, and Howard Shaffer on the Physical Grid.  The second session was Payments on the Grid: What Every Citizen Should Know.  This post is the third session.  The fourth session was a field trip to ISO-NE, the grid operator headquarters.


Sunday, May 22, 2016

Patty O'Donnell at the Department of Energy Summit on Nuclear Power Plants

A lilac 
Department of Energy Summit on Improving the Economics of Nuclear Power Plants

On May 19, the Department of Energy held a summit on Improving the Economics of America's Nuclear Power Plants.  The four-hour meeting included many distinguished speakers, including Department of Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz, Senator Cory Booker, and more.  You can watch the entire meeting at this link.

A major purpose of the meeting was to find ways to keep America's nuclear fleet running.  Scientific American reported on the meeting. They quoted Secretary Moniz: "We are supposed to be adding zero carbon sources, not subtracting or simply replacing (them)..." The Scientific American article features a picture of Vermont Yankee. The Bloomberg article on the meeting has the following title -- Moniz: Closing Nuclear Plants Poses 'Huge Problem'.

Vernon's own Patty O'Donnell spoke at this meeting.  O'Donnell described the human impact due to Vermont Yankee closing.  If you move the video slider to the 2:39 mark (2 hours and 39 minutes into the four hour video) you can watch her ten minute talk.  It was an important and moving description of the effects of the plant closing. Her talk showed a part of the human face of "why we need nuclear energy."

Adams blog focuses on O'Donnell's talk

Rod Adams' Atomic Insights blog post about the meeting focused on O'Donnell's talk. His post is Real people are harmed when other people decide to close nuclear plants.  I encourage you to read it, and also to read the comments. Adams blog gets interesting and knowledgable comments.

Adams also made a YouTube of O'Donnell's talk.  He has it posted on his blog post, and I am sharing it here.  Big THANK YOU to Rod Adams!  A ten-minute video is so much more appealing than a four hour video. I share his video below.





********
Two little notes:

I used a picture of a lilac on this blog post because a lilac is blooming outside my window now, and because I imagine myself handing a bouquet of flowers to Patty O'Donnell.

My own major blog post on this subject is Circles of Pain around Vermont Yankee Closing.

Tuesday, May 17, 2016

Payments on the Grid: What Every Citizen Should Know

Payments on the Grid

In my opinion, payments and policy on the grid will determine our future energy mix.

Most people believe that they know about power sources: gas, nuclear, hydro, coal, solar, wind.  We know what the plants look like, and we have opinions.

In contrast, most people know almost nothing about the grid: how plants are dispatched, how plants are paid, what the controversies are.  Yet these grid-level decisions will determine our power mix in the future.


Update 2018: The video still exists, but its URL has changed.
Here's the new URL.
http://reflect-catv.cablecast.tv/vod/4853-OSHER-Grid-Class-2-April-2016-Medium-v1.mp4

I think that most people will learn something from watching this video, and pro-nuclear people will find it especially interesting.

(The first class session consisted of an introduction to the course, followed by an introduction to the physical  grid. Howard Shaffer gave the guest lecture on the physical grid. The entire first class session is posted at The Grid: Power and Policy Introduction and Shaffer on the Physical Grid.)

Tuesday, May 10, 2016

The Grid: Power and Policy Introduction and Shaffer on the Physical Grid

I gave a three session course at OSHER, called The Grid: What Your Electricity Bill Won't Tell you.

The first session was an introduction to the course (power and policy) and Howard Shaffer's explanation of the physical grid....that is, electricity and how it flows.

The second session will be about policy and controversies on the grid, and the third session was the guest lecture by Christine Hallquist, CEO of Vermont Electric Cooperative.

Because of the interest in the course, our local Community Access TV (CATV8) station videotaped it, and is also putting it on VIMEO.

I embed the first video below.


Update 2018: The videos still exist, but their URLs have changed.  Video link below.

http://reflect-catv.cablecast.tv/vod/4807-OSHER-Grid-class-April-2016-Medium-v1.mp4

Sunday, May 1, 2016

Video: Vermont Yankee people moving on

May 5 Layoff Day

On May 5, almost 100 Vermont Yankee employees will be laid off.  As Entergy spokesman Marty Cohn notes in this video: there were nearly 650 employees when he started work at Vermont Yankee: in a few days, there will be  only 150 employees. (approximate numbers).

In the 22 minute video below, Marty Cohn speaks to two employees that will be laid off.  They happily discuss what they liked about working at Vermont Yankee. In both cases, their future plans take them away from Vermont.

Yes, there are sad moments in this video.  These affected me:
  • When Larry Doucette notes that when he moved to Vermont, it took some some time to get used to the local anti-nuclear attitudes. 
  • When Becky Josey describes her life-long residence in Vernon, and how her mother was a state representative who supported construction of the plant.  Josey has deep roots in Vernon, but she plans to leave.  Her plans are not completely due to Vermont Yankee closing, however.
I  admire everyone at Vermont Yankee, because they are strong people and they did Finish Strong.  I have so much admiration for them.



About the videos

Marty Cohn of Entergy has been hosting a series of videos about Vermont Yankee: SAFSTOR Matters. This series was chosen as 2015 Best Series of the Year at Brattleboro Community Television.

Thursday, January 28, 2016

Updated: Overreach at the Attorney General's Office: Guest Post by Deborah Bucknam

I need to update this post with a link:

As described in the blog for Vermonters for a Clean Environment, the complaint about Annette Smith originated with David Blittersdorf, a wind developer in Vermont. 
https://vermontersforacleanenvironment.wordpress.com/2016/01/31/i-represent-david-blittersdorf/

Overreach at the Attorney General’s office 
By Deborah T. Bucknam, Esq.

Vermont’s Attorney General has filed a complaint against Annette Smith, the activist who helps Vermonters opposed to Industrial Wind, navigate the administrative jungle that best describes the Public Service Board proceedings. I have represented folks opposed to Industrial Wind at the Public Service Board, and the hearings are overrun by lawyers—most of whom favor the government’s and the developer’s positions on Industrial Wind. Neighbors opposed to an Industrial Wind project face a phalanx of government and industry lawyers in a proceeding that is costly, time consuming and often confusing. In other words, the fix is in.

Now the Attorney General is siding with Vermont’s large law firms and big lobbyists to deprive opponents of Industrial Wind the advice of a person who knows the intricacies of the proceedings and can help those who cannot afford the high priced lawyers the developers can. And make no mistake: even though this is a preposterous charge, and will likely be thrown out, its purpose will be fulfilled: to chill anyone’s free speech rights who dares to question the powerful in Montpelier.

“Practicing law without a license” is a hoary concept left over from the medieval guilds where skilled tradesmen (including lawyers) sought to keep out competition. It was revived in the early 20th century when the newly organized Bar attempted to persuade legislatures to define the practice of law and regulate it—to the Bar’s advantage. Legislators were wary of such a regulatory scheme, so the effort waned until the Great Depression, when lawyers’ incomes plummeted, and the organized Bar launched a new effort to keep out those who were in competition for their services. This time the Bar sought the help of the Judiciary, which took up the cause. That is where it stands today: the unauthorized practice of law is regulated in large part by the Judiciary. Over the years, lawyers targeted different groups: realtors, bankers, and investment advisors, with varying success. The reason for this effort was supposedly to protect consumers from service providers who did not adhere to the strict professional conduct rules of the Bar. However, with the advent of strong consumer protection statutes and competition among providers, this “protection” is mostly a red herring.

The concept of unauthorized practice of law is so vague as to call into question its constitutionality. The practice of law is, according to the Vermont Supreme Court, "the rendering of services for another involving the use of legal knowledge or skill on his behalf -- where legal advice is required and is availed of or rendered in connection with such services.” Under that standard, hundreds of public servants in Vermont provide “legal advice”—providing information about relevant statutes, procedures and regulations---to the public and to Vermont attorneys smart enough to get the information directly from those in the know at state agencies. Yet these public servants will not –and certainly should not--be prosecuted. Only Ms. Smith, who provides similar information to those who cannot pay for those high priced lawyers is prosecuted by the Attorney General. This is precisely the constitutional issue: a rule violates the Due Process clause of the constitution because it is too vague to put the public on adequate notice as to when a violation occurs, and it opens the door for selective prosecution—exactly what has happened here. The Attorney General’s action appears to be an effort to silence opposition to Industrial Wind, and to help the large Burlington law firms and their clients to keep from having to deal with pesky Vermonters who oppose their clients’ projects.

Vermonters are being strangled by government overreach. The Attorney General’s action is a disgraceful example. If you don’t agree with the powerful and well-connected in this state, then just shut up, or you may be the target of the Government and its unlimited resources.

---
About the Author

Deborah Bucknam, Esq. has practiced law for 37 years, and has a private practice in St. Johnsbury, Vermont
-----

About the post

In the last two weeks, opponents of industrial wind have rallied in Vermont, and the Vermont administration is beginning to "investigate" them.   Below is a brief summary and history.

A bill against industrial wind

Two Vermont legislators introduced a bill to ban industrial wind on our ridge lines.  They held a press conference in Montpelier on January 21: the press conference was attended by many supporters.  The supporters wore green vests and cheered for banning industrial wind.  

The Ethan Allen Institute (my Energy Education Project is part of the Institute) made made a three-minute video of the highlights of the press conference.  Ethan Allen Institute posted a blog post with the video, and Rod Adams posted about the conference at his blog: Vermonters Say They Want Industrial Wind to Go the Way of the Billboard. Both posts have lively comment streams.  I have also posted the video at the bottom of this post.

The Administration strikes back

 The press conference and the Ethan Allen Institute post took place on January 21, 2016. Perhaps purely by chance, on January 22, the Vermont Attorney General opened an investigation into whether Annette Smith, the highest-profile anti-wind advocate in Vermont, is "practicing law without a license."  This was reported in a VtDigger article by Mike Polhamus on January 23: AG's office investigating complaints against Annette Smith, anti-wind advocate.  As Polhamus points out: this is a charge with penalties left entirely to the court's discretion.  He also quotes Ms. Smith: "I believe this has the potential to shut down my organization of 16 years. It clearly falls under the definition of harassment.”

There are (at this writing) 147 comments on the Digger post. The vast majority are in support of Annette Smith. An early comment was written by Peter Galbraith, a former Senator in Vermont (and a Democrat). A short quote: "Annette Smith is a person of integrity who has helped the weaker party in what would otherwise be a very uneven contest. This investigation will have a chilling effect on all citizen advocates."

This post:

I wanted to write something really powerful about this issue: about the environment, about freedom of speech, about government harassment of dissenting views, about crony capitalism.  Then, to my great relief, I received this press release from Deborah Bucknam in my email inbox.  I have never met Ms. Bucknam, but she said it all, much better than I could.  Thank you, Ms. Bucknam. 


 Video by Ethan Allen Institute

Sunday, December 27, 2015

Save Fitzpatrick: An Opportunity to Help

Fitzpatrick Nuclear plant is now the subject of a hard-hitting website, Upstate Energy Jobs.  The name of the site's video expresses why Fitzpatrick should be saved: This is What Closing a Power Plant Looks Like. (Video is also embedded below.)

You can take action to save the plant. On the home page, there are links to Sign the Petition and a link to Contact the Governor.   I urge you to follow both links.  Also, I encourage you to explore the website, which includes links to news about Fitzpatrick.

From the About page of the website:  Upstate Energy Jobs is funded by the County of Oswego Industrial Development Agency.  All hail to the sensible people of Upstate New York!  (My husband was born and raised in Upstate New York.)

Go to the Home Page, sign the petition, write an email to the Governor. I am grateful to Oswego Industrial Development Agency for building a page with convenient links--to help us make a difference.




Sad side note: Can you imagine any official Windham County governmental organization doing anything to save the jobs at Vermont Yankee?  I can't.  Looking back at everything, I am amazed by the lack of community feeling in greater Windham County.  End note.

Since upstate New York has a local movement that is trying to save the plant, let's help them.

Thursday, November 26, 2015

Asthma Society of Canada testimony in favor of relicensing Bruce Power

Thankful for Nuclear Power

Everyone can be thankful for the existence of nuclear power. Nuclear provides great quantities of electricity without simultaneously providing dirty air.

In this video, the Asthma Society of Canada testifies in favor of relicensing Bruce Power nuclear plants.    In the first part of the video, Mr. Oliphant of the Asthma Society describes the prevalence and health consequences of asthma. The Asthma Society used to focus on helping people manage asthma through medication. It is now taking a more pro-active role by helping society minimize asthma. The Asthma Society encourages technologies that do not lead to dirty air or global warming.

Starting at 5:50 (five minutes, fifty seconds) Oliphant describes how energy choices have health effects, and these effects must be considered. Ontario phased out coal generation: they could not have done this without nuclear power.  The last half of the presentation is a strong message of gratitude for the clean air gifts of nuclear power!

Enjoy the video. Enjoy the turkey. Enjoy clean power from nuclear plants!

We all have much to be thankful for.  I will also say:

We nuclear advocates especially have a lot to be thankful for. We know that we are making the world a better place.


Thursday, November 5, 2015

Pilgrim, Fitzpatrick, Rod Adams, and The Boxer



The Double Shock

Yesterday, Rod Adams wrote about the double shock of Pilgrim and Fitzpatrick closing.  It was a terrible set of events. We need every nuclear plant to keep operating.  We need them for their clean reliable power, for their ability to supply power without greenhouse gases and nitrogen oxides, for their ability to supply power during polar vortexes and other fossil-fuel supply crunches.

Adams said this better than I can, in the post
Deeply troubled by FitzPatrick and Pilgrim announcements. We need their clean electricity production to continue

A long time ago, I did a post: I am not Spock, at the American Nuclear Society blog. In this post, I wrote that I am not Spock.  I am a person with emotions.  I am committed to nuclear energy for the sake of my children and grandchildren.  This is an emotional commitment, as well as a logical energy choice.  I am having a deep emotional reaction, a reaction of grief, to the closing of these two plants.

The Serenity Prayer

Adams post includes his thoughts about the Serenity Prayer:

God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
The courage to change the things I can,
And the wisdom to know the difference.

I value the serenity prayer, but I don't completely follow it.  If I try to change something, and I don't succeed, was I therefore unwise? If I tried to make something good happen, but it didn't happen, was I lacking in wisdom, because the thing I tried to accomplish ended up being a "thing I cannot change"?

On the other hand, when a friend called two days ago to tell me that her cancer was no longer in remission, I clung to the serenity prayer. "I cannot change this. I cannot change this.  I can only accept it.  I can only do one thing: keep being her friend, whatever that will mean in the future."

Showing up and paying attention

This is the mantra that I use about my activism. For some issues, I find it more powerful than the serenity prayer.

Part of my comment on Adams blog post:

I personally find this mantra more helpful:
– Show up
– Pay attention
– Tell the truth
– Don’t be attached to the consequences.

In this mantra, when the consequences are not what I would like, I tell myself “Well, I did the first three steps” as opposed to “I can’t tell the difference, can I?” And I can say: “Oh well, the fourth one is always the hardest, but I did the first three.”

The Boxer

I decided to head this post with Simon and Garfunkel's The Boxer. I have been listening to it, somewhat compulsively, in the past few days.

The Boxer "carries a reminder," he carries a scar, from every blow that hurt him. He has been hurt so badly that he wanted to quit, hurt so badly that he said he would quit.

But The Boxer doesn't quit.

The last line is:
"But the fighter still remains."

Thank you

Thank you to Rod Adams for his posts and his courage.  Thank you to everyone who works in the nuclear industry, giving us clean power and clean air.  And thank you to everyone who defends the industry.

The fighter still remains.

Sunday, October 18, 2015

SAFSTOR Matters video with Joe Lynch: The Spent Fuel Line of Credit

This is the first video in the SAFSTOR Matters Community TV series.  The monthly series, produced by Entergy as part of its outreach program, recently won the Best Series Award at Brattleboro Community TV.

This video includes Martin Cohn, Senior Communications Specialist at Entergy as the host. He interviews Joe Lynch,  Entergy Government Affairs Manager.  A very important part of this video is the description of Entergy's line-of-credit for spent fuel management.

This  first video was shown on Brattleboro Community TV on April 15, 2015, and includes a general overview of the decommissioning process at Vermont Yankee, including its effects on the community. You can see more videos in the series, and read more information about decommissioning, at Vermont Yankee's decommissioning web page http://vydecommissioning.com

 



A loan for spent fuel

In this video, there's a very important point made about spent fuel financing, which starts at about 19 minutes into the video.

Some background: The money that nuclear plants use in dealing with spent fuel can be recaptured from the federal government. The nuclear plants have paid billions of dollars to the federal government for spent fuel handling and storage.  The federal government has done nothing about spent fuel (except build and abandon Yucca Mountain, an activity that has not helped any nuclear plant). The government is basically in a breach-of-contract situation.

So the plants routinely sue the federal government for breach of contract about spent fuel management, and routinely win the suits, and routinely obtain funds from the federal government after the lawsuit.

Plants who are decommissioning usually obtain a waiver from the NRC, to use decommissioning funds for spent fuel management. The plants replace that money into the decommissioning fund when they have collected from the government after a lawsuit.

But as Dickens and others have pointed out, lawsuits take time. Meanwhile, the spent-fuel-management money withdrawn from the decommissioning fund is not accumulating interest.

The line of credit: At the nineteen minute mark in this video, Joe Lynch explains that Entergy has arranged private lines of credit for spent fuel management-- these lines of credit total $145 million. The lines of credit provide the money that will be used for the initial stages of spent fuel management, and that money will be replaced by the money obtained in successful lawsuits against the government.  Meanwhile, the Vermont Yankee decommissioning fund itself will not be tapped for spent fuel management.  The fund will accumulate interest and grow without suffering spent-fuel-management withdrawals.

As far as I know, Entergy is the only nuclear owner that has arranged a line of credit for spent fuel management.  Entergy should be given credit for their foresight.

Friday, October 16, 2015

SAFSTOR MATTERS wins Best Series of Year on Brattleboro Community Television


 (l-r) Karen Wilson, show producer, Marty Cohn, show host, Sarah Burnap, show producer, and Deniz Cordell, music composer.
Vermont Yankee’s SAFSTOR MATTERS named 2015 Best Series of Year by Brattleboro Community Television

BRATTLEBORO, VT ---(October 9, 2015) --- At its annual meeting held on October 8, 2015, Brattleboro Community Television awarded Vermont Yankee’s show, SAFSTOR MATTERS, the 2015 Best Series of the Year. The program takes its name from the federal term for an extended period of dormancy that precedes actual decommissioning work.

The monthly cable television show  is not only seen on BCTV but also on the Internet through the station’s YOUTUBE channel.  It is also seen on all the cable television stations in the facility’s emergency planning zone.

“It’s something that we developed to communicate information about what’s going on with the decommissioning at Vermont Yankee to the public,” said Entergy Vermont Yankee company spokesman Marty Cohn, “And, to the best of our knowledge, is a first in the nation for Entergy.”

Cohn said, “Each month a different topic is explored with experts; from spent fuel management to the economic impact of the plant closing to emergency planning. We have repeatedly promised transparency as we shut down Vermont Yankee and work toward eventual decommissioning. The show is aimed at fulfilling that promise, and is also a venue in which Entergy can communicate directly with viewers without the opposition the company encounters in public forums.”

“From the moment the original theme music composed by Deniz Cordell plays to the rolling credits 27 minutes later, the staff at BCTV has been instrumental to the high production value of the show,” Cohn added, “We are very proud and honored to receive this award.”

Episodes of SAFSTOR MATTERS can be seen on Vermont Yankee’s web site, www.vydecommissioning.com.


--------

I plan to post episodes of SAFSTOR MATTERS at this blog in the near future.  For now, you can see the show at the VY site linked above.

Friday, September 25, 2015

Vermont Energy with Pat McDonald

Beyond the Sound Bite

Pat McDonald served many years in government in Vermont, appointed to leadership positions under both Democrat and Republican administrations.  She also represented her community as a legislator in the State House for four years.

Early this summer, MacDonald started a community access TV show "Vote for Vermont." The motto for the show is"Listening Beyond the Sound Bite."  You can read more about her show in this Times Argus article.

About two weeks ago, MacDonald interviewed me about energy issues in Vermont.  She always interviews her guests before the show is taped, to be sure she has strong, relevant questions.

This past Monday, I was on the show.  I embed it below. Because her questions were  so strong, the half-hour show flew by quickly.  I hope you will enjoy it!


Vermont Energy on "Vote for Vermont"


Thursday, March 5, 2015

UPDATE; Bullying at the NRC Meeting: Rod Adams, Dan Yurman and Steve Aplin

On February 19, I attended the NRC meeting about decommissioning Vermont Yankee.  I didn't expect it to be fun, of course.

This February 19 meeting was pretty bad.

After this meeting, I was trying, really trying, to write a post about bullying and why a federal agency would allow citizens at a meeting to be bullied.  Not just a little random shouting: the bullies make non-stop efforts to intimidate.

I think federal agencies owe the public to run their meetings so that EVERYONE can speak at a public meeting in relative safety.  I wondered why the NRC thinks that enabling bullies is such a good idea. I wondered why the safety of pro-nuclear people means so little to them.    

But I was too close to the subject.  I have a lengthy draft of a blog post, but it still needs work.  I found it very upsetting to relive the meeting and work on the post.

Happily, Rod Adams posted about the NRC meeting.  I had posted a link to the Cable TV video of the meeting in various places (including Facebook) and Rod followed the link and took action.

Rod is a hero!  From the four-hour video of the meeting, he extracted a twenty-minute video of "lowlights."  He emailed the NRC, and got some really bizarre responses (The NRC seems proud that they don't take action, even when people throw manure at other people.)  Rod has those responses in his post.

I urge you to read and circulate his post. Meanwhile, I will continue to work at my own post.  (It's hard for me.)

http://atomicinsights.com/agencies-should-not-allow-creation-of-a-hostile-environment-at-public-meetings/

THIS JUST IN!

Dan Yurman posted on this subject, including his own exchange with the NRC.  Dan is a hero, too!

Yes, it is time that everyone felt safe at these meetings.  Time and past time!

Thank you,  Rod  Adams and Dan Yurman.

http://neutronbytes.com/2015/03/05/nrc-must-do-more-to-insure-civility-at-its-public-hearings/

THIS I MISSED EARLIER

Wow, I am ever OUT of it!  Steve Aplin at Canadian Energy Issues also saw my link to the meeting video, and he has a wonderful post comparing the activities of the nuclear opponents, and the non-activity of the police in the meeting, with the methods of intimidation used against newly-freed slaves during Reconstruction.

Thank you Steve!  Great comments on this post, too!

Free speech, Monty Python, and Civil War reconstruction: anti-nukes are not funny

---

I decided to embed a video of the entire meeting. The three posts above are a far better introduction, but in case you want to see it…here it is.


Tuesday, January 27, 2015

Decommissioning Meeting Wednesday Night in Brattleboro

The Meeting and the NRC

There's a meeting of the Nuclear Decommissioning Citizen Advisory Panel (NDCAP) on Wednesday night in Brattleboro. The meeting will start at 6 p.m. at the Quality Inn and Conference Center, on Vernon Road in Brattleboro. Here's a link to the agenda.
http://publicservice.vermont.gov/sites/psd/files/VY%20NDCAP%20Agenda%201-28-15%20Final.pdf

As you may note, this is an unusual meeting because a representative from NRC will be there. NDCAP itself will continue to have meetings forever, though the Rockies may crumble and Gibraltar may tumble...no, not that long.  Wrong song.

The meeting tomorrow night may well be an important meeting, because it is during the period when the NRC is taking comments on the Vermont Yankee Decommissioning Plan, the Post Shutdown Decommissioning Activities Report, aka the PSDAR. And a representative from the NRC will be there, which is always quite a draw for the opponents.  (See my post on one of the NRC-sponsored meetings: The Politics of Intimidation.)

Update Note: I originally wrote that NDCAP would have "monthly" meetings forever.  Howard Shaffer corrected this.  He informed me that NDCAP has had monthly meetings recently, since so much is going on, but the group is only required to have four meetings a year.  So they will have meetings forever, but not monthly meetings.

Sources of Information, and What to Say

Vermont Yankee has an excellent web site on decommissioning, including links to the PSDAR. The Public Service Department also a good site, with links to presentations at NDCAP meetings.  And a big Hat's Off to Howard Shaffer, for his submission to NDCAP. There were two presentations to NDCAP by nuclear opponent groups, and Howard also has a presentation.  (See December 18 meeting notes.)

The bad news is you can spend a week reading pages and pages of information about this meeting. But, if you go to the meeting, you will only get probably two minutes to say anything at all. What might you say?

My advice would be to say that with the plant shut down, and all fuel in the pool, the emergency planning zone (EPZ) no longer needs to be in effect at the time when the NRC says it doesn't need to be in effect.  In other words, the EPZ can be shut down in early 2016.

EPZ Controversy

Well, it isn't a controversy.  All nuclear people (plant, NRC etc) agree that when the fuel has been in the fuel pool for about a year, it becomes too cool to start a fire.  At that point, the emergency planning zone no longer needs to be funded.  However, the opponents are eager to have all nuclear plants spend as much money as possible and keep the emergency planning and so forth in place forever.

Or at least, they think that the EPZ should be in place until Gibraltar tumbles and...wait.  Wrong song!  No, actually, it may be the right song.

The VY Decommissioning page includes an analysis of the public comments received by the Public Service Board about the PSDAR.  You will note that the majority of the comments:

  • Request EPZ until all fuel is in dry casks
  • Request EPZ until all spent fuel is offsite, maybe in Yucca Mountain
  • Request EPZ expansion to fifty miles.
If you go to the meeting, explain perhaps that the fuel pool will not be a danger...just about the time when the NRC says it will not be a danger.  And that the EPZ can go away....just about the time that the NRC says it no longer needs to be funded!  These dates are calculations, not coincidence. 





Will I Be At the Meeting?

Probably not.  I have to admit that I have lost my taste for watching people walk up to the microphone and endlessly repeat that they are terrified about the fuel pool. The plant is not operating. They won, and I don't want to watch them anymore.  Also,  I have lost my taste for being intimidated, and the presence of someone from the NRC may lead the opponents to having more fun (so to speak) than a normal meeting.

However, Howard Shaffer said he may go, and I may go also.  Shaffer is a real trooper, filing testimony to partially balance the testimony of the opponents. I haven't decided about this meeting. Luckily, the blizzard didn't really blizzard here, the way it blizzarded in Massachusetts. So I could go, I guess.

A lot to think about.

Thursday, January 22, 2015

On the Roof? Video about Vermont Yankee retirement

WCAX interviewed Howard Shaffer and Arnie Gundersen about Vermont Yankee's retirement.  Gundersen apparently does not know where the fuel pool is: he says that the fuel is stored "on the roof."  Really?  Last I looked, it was under the roof.

Shaffer is reasonable as usual.

Just a quick post to share this. I hope the video comes through.  If not, please follow the link.

http://www.wcax.com/story/27886195/vermont-yankees-long-road-to-retirement

  WCAX.COM Local Vermont News, Weather and Sports-