Sunday, March 27, 2011

NH’s Northern Pass – Can you call a bad idea a success?

New Hampshire Gov. John Lynch has come down squarely on the side of the proposed Northern Pass transmission line project, apparently accepting as gospel the power company’s usual vague assertion that it will mean cheaper electricity and more jobs.
In an interview with the Concord Monitor, Lynch also minimized opposition to the plan, saying it only remained for PSNH to convince a few disgruntled locals for the project to succeed.
PSNH, by the way, stands for Public Service of New Hampshire, the sarcastically-named power company that provides electricity for most of New Hampshire but has nothing to do with “public service.” It’s owned by Northeast Utilities, which cares not one whit for the public or for service, only for its corporate bottom line.
The plan is to bring a new transmission line from Canada through to southern New Hampshire, buying the power from Hydro-Quebec. To do that, means cutting through a part of White Mountain National Forest as well as through other undeveloped areas. It would also pass through several residential areas, bringing with it 100-foot (or more) tall towers, about 6 per mile, and a wide swath of cleared land.
A number of public hearings were held this month, and a public comment period ends next month. The problem is, the plans as laid ut are prelimnary - “fluid” – according to a company spokesman. The route can change. The height of the towers may vary. They haven’t really considered burying the cables, which would cause far less disruption.
The  Manchester Union Leader carried a pretty good outline of just where te project stands. Stay tuned.

Sunday, March 20, 2011

Japan’s meltdown prompts much-needed scrutiny

Sadly, it took a major tragedy get governments and the media to take a critical look at the pros and cons of nuclear power and the corruption of the nuclear industry and their cronies in government regulation.
Can nuclear power ever be safe? I don’t know. If it can be, would it be better to build smaller, more localized reactors, rather than the sprawling complexes we now see? Instead of watching one reactor after another explode and meltdown while all we can do is stand helplessly by, wouldn’t any accident be smaller and therefore more containable?
If not, then nuclear power becomes a dangerous and expensive way to boil water.
The media is finally - though not universally – wandering off the party line that had come to accept nuclear energy as the power source of the future. Clean. Safe. Reliable. It’s all over the industry literature.
Then there’s the unhealthy alliance between regulators and the industry. From the beginning, there were members of the scientific community who had serious reservations about the type of reactors that we see both in Japan and here in the US. They were concerned about just the type of problems we’ve been seeing all week.
But GE, the company that designed and sold the reactors told the NRC they didn’t want any interference, and so the NRC ignored the warnings. And here we are.
This is the same GE that polluted the Housatonic and is now dragging it feet on cleaning it up. The same civic-minded GE that donated carcinogen-laced soil for Pittsfield’s playgrounds. The same GE that insists it should get a contract to build jet engines for fighter planes that will never be used – those are being built by another company. This is the same GE that has profited handsomely from the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. This is the same GE that owns NBC news.

Monday, March 14, 2011

Nuclear apologists in full-court press downplaying Japan disaster

To hear the nuclear industry’s lackeys describe it, the ongoing disaster in Japan is not much more than an inconvenience.
Let’s start with our friends at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Their position is, as always, “no threat to the public safety, no need to worry.” And of course, there’s the ever-popular “it can’t happen here,” line of argument, because our nuclear power plants are so much better. Just take a look at Vermont Yankee – it’s been leaking radioactive tritium for more than a year, and a cooling tower collapsed for no other reason than it was badly built.
Their position is contradicted by the facts. First, U.S. Navy ships heading to Japan changed course when their instruments detected high levels of radiation in the air. The explanation? Their instruments were too sensitive.
Then there was Callie Crossley, Boston media commentator, appearing on CNN, objecting to the use of the word “meltdown” when all the reactor did was explode. She said she felt much better that it wasn’t actually melting down. Now officials are referring to a “partial” meltdown, whatever that might be.
And then there was an NBC correspondent this evening whose story was that the quake/tsunami victims had more the worry about than a little radiation.
All these reports, and plenty of others, seem to be designed to lull the public into thinking that we should plunge on with more nuclear plants. Where are the calls to re-think this idea?

Saturday, March 12, 2011

NRC’s Flirtation with Nuclear Disaster

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission extended its perfect record of kowtowing to the nuclear power industry with its announcement this past week that it would approve a 20-year extension to the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant’s operating license.
The commission’s “Hear No Evil, See No Evil” approach to oversight has resulted in 52 straight license approvals. In fact, it has never failed to approve a license extension for any reason.
The NRC’s blind approval is especially ridiculous given the history of Vermont Yankee. Even now, the plant has been steadily leaking radioactive tritium into the groundwater for more than a year, from several different leaks. As soon as one is located and repaired, another springs up. It’s going on right now.
A few years ago, one of the cooling towers collapsed of its own accord – it didn’t take a hurricane or an earthquake or anything else. It just fell down. The resulting investigation identified shoddy workmanship when it was first built. That’s encouraging.
Now this takes on even more urgency given the trouble in Japan. Just last nigh, on one of the news broadcasts, an “expert” asserted that Japan’s nuclear power plants were the safest in the world, designed with earthquakes in mind. Following last night’s explosion, there’s a lot of backtracking.
This raises serious concerns about allowing Vermont Yankee to continue operating. Thankfully, the Vermont state government has the final say, and hopefully they’ll take all this into consideration.

Sunday, March 6, 2011

Environmental Court ruling could spell more trouble for Vermont Yankee

In a ruling this week concerning groundwater contamination from a quarrying operation, a judge for the Vermont Environmental Court found that state regulators must take the contamination into account even though the contamination has not yet gone beyond the quarry property. Any contamination of groundwater is considered a violation of public trust. Regulators could order the operation to be shut down until the situation is corrected.
The same might said of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant in Vernon, Vt., which has been leaking tritiated water for more than a year, apparently from several different surces. Entergy Corp., owner of the 39-year-old plant, say there is no indication that the contamination has gone outside the plant’s perimeter, and poses n threat to the public.
Opponents say enough is enough. They want the trouble-plagued shut down now, or at the very least a year from now when its operating license expires. The owners are both seeking a 20-year extension of the license and trying to sell the plant.
Vermont’s environmental secretary lands somewhere squarely in the middle. Deb Markowitz told the Brattleboro Reformer that the Environmental Court’s decision does not set a precedent, and that the company is appealing the matter to the state Supreme Court. She said her department is studying the matter.
My question is, what’s it going to take?
There are really two levels of argument. One can continue to discuss the pros and cons of nuclear energy as a power source. That’s fine.
But when it comes to Vermont Yankee, with its long history of deceit, incompetence, and accidents, it’s really time to shut it down.