Entergy Nuclear will shut down the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant on Dec. 29, after 42 years of producing near zero-emission baseload power for New England.
Anti-nuke activists and advocates fought the plant for nearly as long. In 2010, then-President Pro Tem of the Senate Peter Shumlin maneuvered a vote through the Senate that effectively cut off Entergy’s bid for a 20-year extended license to operate the plant. Entergy, a Louisiana-based corporation, sued the state, then last year decided to close the plant because it was losing money.
The shutdown of the plant in Vernon is expected to hurt economic activity in the region, according to a report released last week. In January, 165 out of a total of 550 Vermont Yankee workers are expected to lose their jobs, and more workers at the plant will be laid off over the next five years.
In 2015, Entergy will begin the long process of removing the spent nuclear fuel from the plant and decommissioning the site. The process is expected to cost $1.2 billion and take until 2040 to complete. Meanwhile, the state and Entergy remain at odds over how the company should use money from the decommissioning trust fund.
State passes GMO labeling law, defends legal and congressional attacks
Last spring Vermont enacted the nation’s first law requiring food manufacturers to label certain products containing genetically engineered ingredients. The law takes effect on July 1, 2016. As the Vermont Attorney General’s office drafts rules to implement the law, trade groups representing some of the nation’s largest food companies are suing the state. The companies, represented by the Grocery Manufacturers Association, argue the law is unconstitutional and compliance would create an unnecessary burden.
Federal Republican lawmakers are seeking to preempt the state labeling regulations. Companies have joined Vermont in the legal fight, donated to help the state defend the law, and some, like Stonyfield, even dropped their membership with the trade groups seeking to stop the law.
Bill Sorrell, the Vermont Attorney General, estimates defending the law could cost $1 million to win and $5 million or more to lose. The state is taking private donations through a defense-fund website, Foodfightfundvt.org, and has set aside $1.5 million through state appropriations and settlement surpluses to defend the law.
Lake Champlain
The state’s previous efforts to clean up the lake have not satisfied regulations under the Clean Water Act nor have they prevented large toxic blue green blooms that have become more pervasive during the warm summer months.
Phosphorous runoff from dirt roads, farms, pavement and other sources feeds the proliferation of cyanobacteria. In some areas, the blue-green algae blooms have killed fish, closed beaches and threatened the integrity of Burlington’s water supply.
The Environmental Protection Agency has told state officials they must do more to reduce phosphorous pollution in order to comply with the Clean Water Act. The EPA has delayed a final decision on the state’s plan until spring.
The cleanup will cost roughly $155 million over the next five years. The federal government is expected to contribute $45 million over that period.
The House Fish and Wildlife Committee last year attempted to raise $4 million a year through an increase in the state’s meals and rooms tax and a surcharge on rental cars, but the Shumlin administration told lawmakers they wouldn’t support the proposal.
Since then, the administration has changed its tune and plans to raise state revenue through a tax on manure and development to pay for part of the cleanup.
Meanwhile, the Conservation Law Foundation has sued the Agency of Agriculture for failing to regulate manure runoff on dairy farms.
Transmission line developer seeks state permit
The developer of a high-voltage transmission line under Lake Champlain applied for a state permit this month. The company, New England Clean Power Link, is offering the state $300 million to improve Lake Champlain’s water quality. The power line is expected to carry hydro and wind power from Quebec to southern energy markets. Vermont utilities do not need the power, according to the state, but they could still benefit; part of the developer’s proposal includes money that can be used to reduce electric rates. Other companies are proposing similar projects in the region.
Vermont Gas pipeline overruns
Vermont Gas’ construction of a natural gas pipeline through Addison County has nearly doubled in cost since July this year. Vermont Gas announced this month the project’s total cost has jumped to $154 million, up 80 percent from the original $86 million cost estimate. It was the second time in a year that costs for the buildout went up significantly.
The company, a subsidiary of Montreal-based Gaz Metro, is evaluating the feasibility of the second phase of the pipeline extension, which would run through Rutland County. Vermont Gas has asked regulators to postpone a review of the project indefinitely.
The announcements were made last week by Don Rendall, the incoming Vermont Gas CEO, who begins work in January.
State regulators decided to allow a 40 percent cost increase in the pipeline construction project this year. The Vermont Public Service board decided not to reopen the case months after they issued the original certificate of public good permit.
Gov. Peter Shumlin supports the pipeline because he says it has environmental benefits and will help the state’s economy. Natural gas is a cleaner burning fuel and costs less than heating oil or propane.
In October, 64 protesters occupied the governor’s office on the fifth floor of the Pavilion Building in Montpelier to oppose the project for environmental concerns over hydraulic fracturing, a controversial natural gas extraction technique that has polluted groundwater in other states. Vermont and New York state have banned the practice. A state’s attorney cleared the peaceful protesters of trespassing charges.
Meanwhile, landowners who want more money for right of ways or oppose the pipeline on their properties altogether persuaded Gov. Peter Shumlin to call for a freeze on eminent domain filings until March next year.
