U.S. Nuke plants to enter digital age – soon

Just when I thought the U.S. nuclear industry couldn’t get more pathetically ridiculous than it already is, a news item today proudly announces that a nuclear reactor in South Carolina will become the first in the country to have digital controls installed on its safety and operating equipment.

Think about it.

The technology they’ve been using to ensure the safety of everyone around them is no more advanced than your grandfather’s wind-up alarm clock and slide rule.

Pilgrim Nuclear goes on “unplanned” shutdown

As long as we’re on the subject of safety, the Pilgrim Yankee Nuclear power plant in Plymouth suddenly shut down two weeks ago. The company would only say it was “operator error,” but couldn’t say how long it would stay shutdown. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission, meanwhile, said its sending a special investigative team to find out what happened, something that they’ve done only a handful of times before.

Seabrook concrete weakened by water seepage

Just up the coast from Plymouth is the Seabrook Nuclear plant in Seabrook, NH. A report issued last week found that groundwater was undermining the concrete housing of the cables that run the plant’s safety system. Leakage into the tunnels could short circuit the safety system. This was first discovered sometime last year, but not publicized until last week. No sense rushing things. The NRC is happy to report no danger to the public.

It might be useful to remember it wasn’t the earthquake that caused the meltdown at Fukashima, but water from the tsunami that short-circuited the backup safety system.

Fight over Haddam wildlife sanctuary makes a mockery of conservation effort

The Clark Creek Wildlife Management Area in Haddam, Conn., sits on a sandy bluff overlooking the Connecticut River. It’s not very large, just 17 acres, but it’s a valuable riverine habitat, home to a wide array of plant and animal life, some of which may be endangered or protected species.

The parcel was considered so significant that the state of Connecticut determined it was worth preserving, and paid $1.3 million in 2003 to purchase it.

Adjacent to the parcel is the Riverhouse banquet facility. They would like to build a hotel and retail complex on the land. They’re chanting the jobs and boosting the local economy mantra.

To accomplish this, they propose to swap 87 acres of nearly worthless land they own in Higganum. It was land they had purchased for $450,000 in 2009 for a housing development that never materialized. Their plan is backed by the local business community, and they have a powerful political ally, state Sen. Eileen Daly (D-Westbrook) who chairs a legislative finance committee.

Sen. Daly plans has attached the land swap as part of a larger state property conveyance bill. The attempt has failed twice before.

And there’s a new threat on the horizon. The incoming state commissioner for energy and the environment has said he supports the swap, and may approve the swap administratively, with no legislative approval needed.

Meanwhile, conservationists are once again rallying support for saving the sanctuary.

The implications of this deal go way beyond preserving one small parcel. The land was purchased with public money for the purpose of preserving it. To give it up at the whim of a private development makes a mockery of whole notion of land conservation.

In Case of Nuclear Disaster, Don’t Call the President

I had always thought that should a major nuclear disaster occur, something like Fukashima, that the response would be in the hands of the president. Not so.

A recent article in the Wall Street Journal points out that the sole authority for the response to an emergency lies with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. What measures to take to control the situation will come from the NRC chairman, currently Gregory Jaczko. As for evacuation orders, those have to come from state and local officials, not the president.

So what can we expect?

If history is any guide, their first response will be “there is no risk to the public.” This is what they always say whenever anything goes wrong at a nuclear plant. As for accurate information, forget it. It took three years before the true details of what happened at Three Mile Island became public.

During this ongoing crisis in Japan, information has been equally hard to come by. The mainstream news media has gone on to more important things – like Schwarzeneger’s love child and the royal wedding.

 You might recall that the news media was scrupulous in not calling what was going on a “meltdown.” Now that the media is no longer reporting anything about this, the nuclear agency in Japan last week conceded that a meltdown had indeed occurred at one of the reactors. You might also recall that they kept saying how this wasn’t as bad as Chernobyl, but they eventually had to concede it’s pretty darn close.

Among the other things that have gone largely unreported – Congress has decided to cut funding for safety inspections and measures at nuclear power plants, as part of the emergency budget adopted to avoid a government shutdown.

As time runs out for Vt. Yankee, debate heats up

With less than a year left before its operating license expires, the debate over the future of the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant is reaching radioactive levels.

On one side are the 39-year-old plant’s owners, Louisiana-based Entergy Corp., and its supporters, mostly business interests and plant workers who say the Vernon, Vt., plant is vital to the state’s economy. On the other are a growing number of Vermonters, including Gov. Peter Shumlin and many in the legislature, who cite a string of problems over the years and say the plant is unsafe and should not be given a 20-year extension to its license.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which has never denied a license to any plant, has given its approval to the renewal. In issuing the approval, the NRC insisted that the plant is safe to operate in spite of a long history of problems. It also ignored its own report on recent problems that exonerated Entergy from any fault, instead blaming problems with the original construction.

However, Vermont is the only state where the people still have a say in the process. The renewal requires the approval of the legislature, which has already voted against it once, though the matter can come up again before next year’s expiration date.

The debate is being carried out against the backdrop of the ongoing nuclear disaster in Japan and the Obama administration’s support of nuclear energy. The discussion is further clouded by broken promises, falsehoods, and misrepresentations by Entergy officials.

Last week, Entergy filed suit in federal district court in Burlington arguing that the Vermont legislature should not be able to override the NRC’s approval of the license renewal. The company also filed an injunction requesting that the plant be allowed to continue past the March 2012 closing date until the suit is settled.

Gov. Peter Shumlin and other state officials have vowed to fight Entergy’s lawsuit.

When Entergy purchased Vermont Yankee in 2002, the company agreed to abide by the state legislature’s jurisdiction over the plant. Entergy CEO J. Wayne Leonard last week took out a full page advertisement in several Vermont newspapers to explain why they are reneging on the agreement.

His reasoning?

“That was not a concern to us back in 2002,” he writes.

As recently as 2009, a company spokesman reiterated Entergy’s support for public involvement in the approval process. Up to that point, while there was some opposition to the plant, most Vermonters  generally seemed to accept it.

Then came the reports of leaks, with conflicting information from both Entergy and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. At one point Entergy and the NRC tried to organize a meeting about the problems – but scheduled it out-of-state (in New Hampshire), did not invite the press, and invited only public officials and others who supported the plant. Once that became public, the plan was quickly scuttled in favor of a more open forum in Brattleboro.

The ongoing nuclear disaster in Japan sharpened the debate even further, since the Japanese reactors are of the same design as Vermont Yankee. Nevertheless, plant officials continue to insist “it can’t happen here.”

Earlier this week, Vermont’s third largest utility company decided not to enter into a new contract with Vermont Yankee. A company representative insisted that a major accident was unlikely. While it’s true that a tsunami in Vermont is unlikely, and a major earthquake is unlikely, there are many other scenarios that could trigger a disaster.

In fact, just a few years ago one wall of a cooling tower collapsed for no other reason than it was poorly built.

And so it goes.

Opposition gains ground in battle against Northern Pass

Maybe the developers of the Northern Pass transmission line thought they could slip their plans by without anyone noticing – but no such luck. After the initial round of public hearings and a groundswell of opposition, the project has been delayed while they go back to the drawing boards and come up with something different.

The plan is to build a high-voltage transmission line from the Canadian border near Pittsburg, NH, to Franklin, NH, a distance of some 140 miles. Steel towers from 70 to 150 feet high, one every 1,000 feet, would support the line along 400-foot right-of-way.  It’s all part of a deal between Northeast Utilities and Hydro-Quebec to bring power from Canada to southern New England.

It should be noted that this is strictly a private enterprise. No government agency or entity requested it. But the early publicity was seductive. Lots of cheap new power from a popular alternative source – hydropower, lots of new jobs, etc. It looked like a done deal. New Hampshire’s governor was all for it.

The same consulting firm that drew up the initial plans was then hired by the EPA to write the environmental impact report.

But wait! Doesn’t that sound like a conflict of interest?

And then people found out that all this wonderful power would flow through a big cut into the White Mountain National Forest, and through some prime tourist area. Questions were raised.

Then, Sen. Kelly Ayotte and Rep. Charlie Bass – most of New Hampshire’s congressional delegation = asked the U.S. Dept. of Energy to take a closer look at this.

The result is a small, maybe temporary victory for opponents. The developers have asked for an extension while they go back and re-work some of their plans. Stay tuned.

Someone doesn't like my blog

Following up on a previous blog about BP resuming oil drilling in the Gulf and Transocean giving millions in bonuses to their executives, I wrote another blog entry this morning discussing the decision to put the bonus money into a victims compensation fund. The main theme was that a little outrage can do some good.

I went on to point out that both Transocean and BP have been dragging their feet in paying out the compensation money to Gulf oil spill victims. When I was done, I expected it to be shared on my Facebook page, but to my surprise I received a notice informing me that it  had "content marked as abusive" and some other nonsense, and so it was blocked.

Anyone reading this on the Ecocryptic blog website only needs to read the next entry down to see how ridiculous this is. I'm asking for a clarification, but haven't heard back from the Facebook people.

It'll be interesting to see if this entry gets bocked as well.

A Little Outrage Helps Transocean See the Light

If anyone doubts the effectiveness of shedding a little daylight on corporate behavior, consider the outburst following the revelation that Transocean paid out millions in bonuses to its top executives for its “exemplary safety record.”

This was the company that was building the Deepwater Horizon oil rig that exploded in the Gulf of Mexico, killing 11 workers and spilling millions of gallons of oil into the gulf. They had either forgotten the whole thing, or considered the workers expendable – just the cost of doing business.

When news of the bonuses surfaced a few days ago, the blogosphere lit up with outrage that finally filtered to the larger news media. The company thought better of their decision, and the executives announced the money would go to the victims’ compensation fund.

That sounds nice, but the story’s not over. Both BP and Transocean have set up victims compensation funds, ostensibly to pay for the damages they caused. BP has launched a slick PR campaign making it seem that everything has gone back to normal, and people are getting the money they deserve for the losses they suffered.

Not so.

Both Transocean and BP have been dragging their feet paying out for the damage they caused, either by being slow in issuing checks, paying out way less than expected, or in many cases simply not paying at all.

 The state governments of Louisiana, Mississsippi, and Alabama are all in the process of filing lawsuits to get them to shake loose some of their billions.

We see the ads, but we don’t see the news. Why not?