Skip to main content

Local Pols Picking on Vermont Yankee

Over at The Prog Blog, Rep. Sarah Edwards of Vermont is attacking Patrick Moore for his efforts in support of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant:
Moore said Vermont should be held up as an example of how greenhouse gases can be reduced, and that the rest of the country should follow our lead. “Vermont has the lowest per capita greenhouse gas emissions in the United States for one single reason, your power supply,” he said. While Moore is right about Vermont having low per capita greenhouse emissions, his rationale is way off base.

Moore believes that there is literally no future without nuclear power. Many of us believe there is another way to create a sane energy future in Vermont. It lies with focused economic development related to conservation, efficiency, and new, renewable energy technologies. Rather than lauding our aging nuclear power plant, we would like to see Vermont play a strong leadership role in the renewable energy industry.

[...]

As a shameless campaigner for nuclear energy, Moore presented a wholly biased view to the committee. He neglects the danger of creating high-level nuclear waste. He claims nuclear power is cheap but fails to examine the total cost. He doesn’t mention the fact that the federal government has provided massive subsidies to the industry since its inception. Since 1974, the industry has received $47.9 billion, while $12.4 billion has been given to renewables and $11.7 billion has been devoted to efficiency. Imagine how it would be if those numbers were reversed.
As we've noted before, folks like Rep. Edwards like playing fast and loose with the numbers when it comes to energy and subsidies. For a little dose of the truth, see these posts by David Bradish and N. Nadir.

For our complete file on Vermont Yankee, click here.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

How Nanomaterials Can Make Nuclear Reactors Safer and More Efficient

The following is a guest post from Matt Wald, senior communications advisor at NEI. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattLWald.

From the batteries in our cell phones to the clothes on our backs, "nanomaterials" that are designed molecule by molecule are working their way into our economy and our lives. Now there’s some promising work on new materials for nuclear reactors.

Reactors are a tough environment. The sub atomic particles that sustain the chain reaction, neutrons, are great for splitting additional uranium atoms, but not all of them hit a uranium atom; some of them end up in various metal components of the reactor. The metal is usually a crystalline structure, meaning it is as orderly as a ladder or a sheet of graph paper, but the neutrons rearrange the atoms, leaving some infinitesimal voids in the structure and some areas of extra density. The components literally grow, getting longer and thicker. The phenomenon is well understood and designers compensate for it with a …

Why America Needs the MOX Facility

If Isaiah had been a nuclear engineer, he’d have loved this project. And the Trump Administration should too, despite the proposal to eliminate it in the FY 2018 budget.

The project is a massive factory near Aiken, S.C., that will take plutonium from the government’s arsenal and turn it into fuel for civilian power reactors. The plutonium, made by the United States during the Cold War in a competition with the Soviet Union, is now surplus, and the United States and the Russian Federation jointly agreed to reduce their stocks, to reduce the chance of its use in weapons. Over two thousand construction workers, technicians and engineers are at work to enable the transformation.

Carrying Isaiah’s “swords into plowshares” vision into the nuclear field did not originate with plutonium. In 1993, the United States and Russia began a 20-year program to take weapons-grade uranium out of the Russian inventory, dilute it to levels appropriate for civilian power plants, and then use it to produce…

Nuclear Is a Long-Term Investment for Ohio that Will Pay Big

With 50 different state legislative calendars, more than half of them adjourn by June, and those still in session throughout the year usually take a recess in the summer. So springtime is prime time for state legislative activity. In the next few weeks, legislatures are hosting hearings and calling for votes on bills that have been battered back and forth in the capital halls.

On Tuesday, The Ohio Public Utilities Committee hosted its third round of hearings on the Zero Emissions Nuclear Resources Program, House Bill 178, and NEI’s Maria Korsnick testified before a jam-packed room of legislators.


Washingtonians parachuting into state debates can be a tricky platform, but in this case, Maria’s remarks provided national perspective that put the Ohio conundrum into context. At the heart of this debate is the impact nuclear plants have on local jobs and the local economy, and that nuclear assets should be viewed as “long-term investments” for the state. Of course, clean air and electrons …