Vermont Nuclear Plant Seeks Decommission But Lacks Funds

mdsolar (1045926) writes with this bit of news about the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Plant shutdown. From the article: "On Friday, the Vermont Public Service Board voted to authorize Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., the operators of the Vermont Yankee electricity generating station ..., to close down their nuclear power plant by the end of this year. Because Entergy planned to shut the Vermont nuclear plant down prior to its licensed end-term, the board was required to approve the shutdown....

Entergy has reserved just over $600 million to date for decommissioning the Vermont nuclear plant, according to the Department of Public Service. This amount will not be adequate to meet the costs of full deconstruction, estimated at more than $1 billion according to the company's 2012 Decommissioning Cost Analysis report."

Comments

If you take the profits

[Pop69]

Then you pay the costs associated with them.

If they've failed to properly provide for shutdown and decomissioning costs then it's their problem, they should be forced to pay them rather than pleading poverty and being allowed to walk away from their responsibilities

Re:If you take the profits

[peon_a-z,A-Z,0-9$_ !]

Except in this case the plant was approved for twenty additional years of operation in 2011 and is now being shut down.

Therefore, contrary to your assertion, they were properly planning for the costs but that planning did not encompass irrational public opinion shutting down the plant ahead of schedule.

The people therefore who demanded it be shut down will also be the people who pay the extra costs associated with shutting it down.

Re:If you take the profits

[n1ywb]

Entergy is shutting it down because it's unprofitable. It's purely by choice. The state's efforts to shut it down were thrown out in court.

Re:If you take the profits

[AmiMoJo]

Bananas are not good units to use because the potassium they contain is not very dangerous to humans. The body maintains a fairly constant level no matter how many you eat, passing the excess out.

Compare that to what is being released from, say, Fukushima. It bio-accumulates and ends up sitting inside your organs for decades, slowly irradiating them. Although the radiation level is low it is also constant, which is why your risk of getting cancer goes up.

People who use the banana equivalent dose don't seem to understand this rather basic and crucial fact. It's also why you don't hear experts on the subject using it.

Re:and yet even more

[imikem]

Of course. It's so silly that no other industries ever get subsidized by tax dollars.

Re:and yet even more

[jythie]

Well, that is how they stay competitive with all the other subsidized industries.

Most appropriate tag line ever

[wayne_t]

The Slashdot quote at the bottom of the page when I scrolled down was:

"Consequences, Schmonsequences, as long as I'm rich." -- "Ali Baba Bunny" [1957, Chuck Jones]

That may be the most relevant one I've ever seen.

Negative subsidy [Re:subsidy]

[Geoffrey.landis]

Neither to the extent, nor in the manner of nuclear. Other industries get tax breaks, free use of government research, etc.

It's worth pointing out that nuclear power actually gets a negative subsidy. They have been charged a fee for nuclear waste disposal... but the nuclear waste disposal program was cancelled, and there is no replacement plan.

The fee was suspended by court order last November... but the money collected has not been refunded.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11...

Re:But I thought nuclear power was cheap

[mellon]

Um. The plant was originally licensed to operate for 40 years. It is falling apart. Literally: a few years back one of the cooling towers collapsed. Buried pipes are leaking, and nobody knows where the pipes are or where the leaks are. Sources for backup power have dried up because the providers don't want to be held liable in the event of an accident. The idea of extending its operating permit for another 20 years was incredibly irresponsible. The State of Vermont refused to certify its continued operation, but the courts overrode the state.

It is bloody unfortunate that the low cost of shale oil is what finally did the plant in, but closing it is the right move. The only decent alternative would be an extremely costly remodel, which would not likely be cheaper than closing it and building a new one with better technology. The alternative Entergy wanted was to keep running it, and damn the safety concerns, because they wouldn't have to pay if it failed catastrophically anyway.

Re:Nuclear gets the biggest subsidy

[mellon]

Excuuse me? You think some Johnny-come-lately power plant, by virtue of having been here for a mere 42 years, has some kind of special right to continue operating outside its safe lifetime at the risk of all the homeowners in the area, just because some of them arrived after the plant was built? As it happens, I grew up about five miles downstream of the VY site, and was 7 when it started operations. But even if that weren't the case, your logic is offensive. A brief incumbency in the neighborhood does not give a corporation special privileges with respect to imposing its externalities on its neighbors. The natural heritage that exists in the general area of the VY power plant has tremendous value, and should not be placed at risk in the service of short-term expediency.