Editor’s note: This op-ed is by James Marc Leas, a former staff physicist at the Union of the Concerned Scientists, is a patent lawyer in South Burlington.
Discrediting itself both with false statements[1] and leak-prone operation, Entergy Nuclear, the owner of Vermont Yankee, appears to have recognized that it permanently lost the confidence of Vermonters and the Vermont legislature. With the plant suffering one leak after another, Entergy may also have lost some of its own confidence in the plant. Its request for a 20-year extension at serious risk, on Nov. 4 Entergy announced that Vermont Yankee is up for sale.[2]
With over $6 billion of revenue[3] anticipated from operation for another 20 years–even at current low electricity price levels–Entergy may well be able to come up with a buyer willing to take on the risk.
A sale is likely to be accompanied by another corporate advertising campaign that a bright new day has come for Vermont Yankee. The campaign may portray the new owner as caring, include tempting promises to thoroughly inspect and refurbish Vermont Yankee from top to bottom, offer lots of cheap electricity to Vermonters, and guarantee to fill up the decommissioning fund. The new owner may even have Vermont ties. One thing is for sure: The new owner will press for extending operation well beyond 2012.
But Entergy’s attempt to sell raises a troubling question: If a company as strong and committed to nuclear power as Entergy Corporation–the second largest owner of nuclear plants in the US–could not manage to keep this plant from leaking and retain the confidence of Vermonters, or if Entergy’s own confidence in the plant has declined, would Vermonters be wise to let anyone else operate this plant beyond 2012?
Vermonters have good reason to join with Entergy in wanting to unload this plant–with one difference: Entergy wanting to sell, Vermonters wanting it closed on schedule in 2012.
* Leaks are coming frequently and with no end in sight. In January 2010, Entergy announced that tritium leaked from underground piping into Vermont soil and ground water. Then, in May 2010, Entergy announced that the same underground pipes also leaked strontium 90 into Vermont soil.[4] In November 2010, Entergy reported that a 24-inch reactor feed water pipe leaked. Entergy also simultaneously reported that a drain line connected to the plant’s high pressure coolant injection system also leaked.[5] All this follows a fire adjacent to a transformer in 2004[6] and a famous cooling tower collapse in August 2007.[7] In February 2010 a plant employee revealed a previously undisclosed 2005 tritium leak from the underground pipes.[8]
* Vermont Yankee will finish its 40 year design-life in 2012.
* Vermont Yankee has out of date designs for its reactor, reactor containment, spent fuel pool, and turbine building which would not be approved for a new reactor today.
* Vermont Yankee holds tons of highly radioactive fission products in the reactor, in the spent fuel pool, and in casks on the shore of the Connecticut River. A major leak from any of these sources would be a disaster for Vermont and neighboring states.
These facts support the view that Vermont Yankee is an old, deteriorating, defective, dangerous, leaky nuclear plant that should close on schedule in 2012. Changing ownership will not be an improvement because it will not fix the underlying age and design problems that led Vermonters to lose trust in Entergy in the first place.
Furthermore, Vermonters have already spoken:
* In 51 town meeting votes in March 2009 and 2010, Vermonters overwhelmingly voted that Vermont Yankee should close in 2012, that Entergy should be required to pay the full cost of decommissioning, and that the legislature should focus on safe, renewable sources of energy.[9]
* In February 2010 the Vermont Senate voted down allowing continued operation after 2012.
* In November 2010 Vermonters elected the candidate for governor most vigorously promising to close Vermont Yankee.
In advance of any sale both the current discredited owner and all potential buyers should know that a transparent corporate maneuver to overturn our democratic decisions to close Vermont Yankee is sure to meet strong resistance. Vermonters and our legislature carefully evaluated the facts and voted to close this plant on schedule. We have a right to have those votes respected. Making a risky deal with Entergy to overturn those votes may poison the buyer’s reputation in Vermont. Expect Vermonters to vigorously defend our land, our water, our freedom, and our democracy in massive opposition to any corporate maneuver–including a sale—designed to extend operation of Vermont Yankee beyond March 21, 2012.
[2]. http://www.safecleanreliable.com/20101104.html
[3]. Revenue calculation for Vermont Yankee over 20 years:
620 MW x 24hours/day x 365 days/year x 1000 kw/MW x $.06/kw-hr =$326 million per year
For 20 years that adds up to $6.5 billion
[4]. http://www.wptz.com/news/23638528/detail.html
[5].http://www.safecleanreliable.com/20101111.html
[6]. http://www.safecleanreliable.com/07062004.htm
[7]. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtDCG2qEa2k and http://welch.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=186&Itemid=61
[8].http://www.boston.com/news/local/vermont/articles/2010/02/24/nrc_confirms_2005_tritium_leak_at_vermont_yankee_plant/
[9]. http://www.nukebusters.org/index.php/blog-reader/items/id-20-year-vermont-yankee-extension-rejected-by-15-more-town-meetings.html
