About
Learn More about our progressive online community for the Granite State.

Create an account today (it's free and easy) and get started!
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Search




Advanced Search


The Masthead
Managing Editors


Jennifer Daler

Contributing Writers
elwood
Mike Hoefer
susanthe

ActBlue Hampshire

The Roll, Etc.
Prog Blogs, Orgs & Alumni
Betsy Devine
Blue News Tribune (MA)
Democracy for NH
Live Free or Die
Mike Caulfield
Granite State Progress
Seacoast for Change
Susan the Bruce

Politicos & Punditry
Krauss
Landrigan
Lawson
Pindell
Primary Monitor
Scala
Schoenberg
Spiliotes
Welch

Campaigns, Et Alia.
Paul Hodes
Carol Shea-Porter
John DeJoie
Ann McLane Kuster
ActBlue Hampshire
NHDP
DCCC
DSCC
DNC

National
Balloon Juice
billmon
Congress Matters
DailyKos
Digby
Hold Fast
Eschaton
FiveThirtyEight
MyDD
The Next Hurrah
Open Left
Senate Guru
Swing State Project
Talking Points Memo

50 State Blog Network
Alabama
Arizona
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Missouri
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin

What's a Little Radioactive Waste Between Neighbors?

by: susanthe

Fri Feb 19, 2010 at 09:10:31 AM EST


this was published as an op-ed in today's Conway Daily Sun.

Vernon is a small town located in the very south-easternmost corner of Vermont. Vernon is just across the Connecticut River from NH, and was once part of the NH town of Hinsdale. Vernon, VT is best known for being the home of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant. VT Yankee has been making news recently, because of radioactive tritium leaking from the plant. Tritium is leaking into the Connecticut River, which is a source for drinking water in the area. Five NH towns are included within the ten mile evacuation zone surrounding the plant. They are:  Chesterfield, Hinsdale, Richmond, Swanzey, and Winchester. The entire towns of Chesterfield, Hinsdale, and Winchester are within that 10 mile zone.

susanthe :: What's a Little Radioactive Waste Between Neighbors?
Vermont Yankee is no stranger to problems. The plant went online in 1973. During its first 17 months of operation, the plant was shut down 19 times.  In the 70's there were problems with faulty fuel rods, a cracked torus, and there was the accidental dumping of 83,000 gallons of tritium contaminated water into the Connecticut River in 1976.

The plant was given a 40 year license, which expires in 2012. At that time, the plant is supposed to close down and be decommissioned. VT Yankee is owned by Entergy Corporation, a company that owns a number of nuclear plants, and has been quite successful in extending the licensing of old, unsafe plants that could not be built today. They're trying to do the same in VT. Entergy is trying to extend the license of VT Yankee for another 20 years.  They're also planning to unload 5 old nuke plants on a subsidiary called Enexus. Enexus seems to be comprised solely of debt and antique nuclear power plants, which sounds like a sure fire recipe for success, in an Enron sort of way.

Over the last decade, Vermont Yankee's problems have increased. In July of 2003, a drill revealed that the emergency alert system wasn't working. In the event of an accident at the plant, the sirens would not have gone off.  In June of 2004, a fire shut down the plant. The fire was caused by a part of an expansion joint that fell off into a duct, and created electrical shorts that started the fire. The duct conducts electricity from the generator to the transformer, and was part of the original construction of the plant, which was 32 years old at the time.

In 2005, Entergy hired a company to do an inspection of the plant (notably the cooling towers), and the company gave VT Yankee a glowing report, which Entergy presented to the NRC. In 2007, one of the cooling towers collapsed. The cause of the collapse was rotting beams inside the tower. Entergy used robotic cameras to perform inspections, and the cameras weren't able to reach the areas where the rot was greatest.  Entergy promised to be more vigilant. Federal and state regulators were pleased. The NRC performed an inspection in 2008 and found only 3 minor faults. The plant got high marks. Then more beams collapsed in a cooling tower.  Entergy promised an improved quality assurance program that would include new hiring. In 2009, Entergy announced a hiring freeze.

In May of 2009, Jay Thayer (then) Vice President of Operations at VT Yankee told the Vermont Public Service Board that there was no underground piping at VT Yankee.  On January 7, 2010, Vermont Yankee reported that the plant was leaking radioactive tritium into several groundwater monitoring wells. It turns out that the tritium is probably coming from underground pipes. The same underground pipes that Entergy said didn't exist, only last year. Turns out there are several thousand feet of underground pipes. You may be discerning a pattern here, on the part of Entergy. It goes like this, lie, promise, and lie some more. Jay Thayer was outed as a liar, and has been placed on "administrative leave" pending investigation, which could be interpreted as "he'll be back when the furor dies down." Until his return, Entergy has practiced fibber Rob Williams as their spokesperson for VT Yankee.  Rob Williams was the spokesliar for Seabrook Station back in the good old days of the junk-bond bail-out.

Vermont is the only state that gives its legislature a say in the licensing of nuclear plants. Other states leave it up to the state utility regulators and the NRC. As we know from the FairPoint debacle, state utility regulators are certainly not infallible. The NRC has never been an effective regulatory body. They prefer to cheer lead for the industry, as opposed to ensuring safety.  Vermont's decision to give the legislature a say ensures that the people of VT will have a voice for their concerns about the safety of this plant. The legislature must agree to extend that license, and the likelihood of that extension being granted isn't looking good.

In NH, the reporting on this issue has been pretty negligent. The Keene Sentinel is the only paper I've found that's done a responsible job of covering VT Yankee. Keene, of course, is mighty close to the 10 mile evacuation zone. The rest of the media has been quite selective in their coverage.  Congressman Paul Hodes, who is running for Judd Gregg's US Senate seat has been vocal in his concerns about VT Yankee and its impact on NH.  I spoke with Congressman Hodes earlier in the week, and he said that NH should have a voice in the oversight of VT Yankee, since leaks do not respect state borders, and that those leaks have an impact on the people of our state and the Connecticut River. Hodes intends to introduce legislation in Congress that would give states that would be affected by neighboring nuclear power plants more authority over them.

Meanwhile, the excavation of the formerly non-existent underground pipes at VT Yankee continues, in an effort to learn where, exactly, that radioactive tritium is coming from, as it continues to leech into the Connecticut River.

"In essence, a nuclear reactor is a very dangerous, expensive way to boil water - analogous to cutting a pound of butter with a chain saw." Dr. Helen Caldicott  

Tags: , , , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
And this issue is not unique to NH & VT. (0.00 / 0)
A mere glance at a map of the nuclear power plants in operation in the US reveals that a majority are located "on the borders" of other states:  

http://www.insc.anl.gov/pwrmap...

It has long been a principle of American government that there should be no taxation without representation: that the citizens should not be subject to a loss or damage to their income without having a voice in the process.

It is not a stretch to require that those who bear the risk and the cost should also share in the benefit and have a voice in the process.

At a minimum, the communities in the evacuation zone - regardless of the state in which they lie - should share in the electric rate and property tax reductions; and all states in the Evac Zone should have a say in the licensing procedure.

The current process encourages states to locate plants right on the border, where they can minimize in-state opposition while maximizing in-state benefits, to the detriments of their neighbors.  

If a state really wants a power plant, then let them locate the plant in such a way and with such safeguards that the states' citizens support its  operation.  Such a method insures broad based support, and avoids off-loading of risk and cost to those who have no say.

Common sense cost-benefit issues if you ask me...and frankly, I'm not opposed to nuclear power...just to dumping costs on others.


why Thomas (0.00 / 0)
I'm surprised to hear you condoning socialism!

The nuclear industry is almost completely subsidized by the government. We the taxpayers pay to build the plants, we pay to insure them (Price Anderson Act), the ratepayers buy the overpriced power they generate, and then they pay to decommission/clean up the plant.

Why doesn't the free market have any use for nuclear power? And what is a libertarian doing supporting this????  


[ Parent ]
Why would a libertarian support the current process? (4.00 / 1)
(and I expect you wrote your response with at least a little bit of your tongue firmly planted in your cheek :-))

Libertarians do not support government subsidies to business.  Conservatives might, mercantilists might....but those who hold to a classic capitalist position would tell you that if the citizens are not willing to support a product with their purchases at an unmanipulated price;  and if investors are not willing to absorb the risk of the investment...then those are market signals that should be heeded, and government should not force taxpayers to support that which they would not if given a choice.

Second, libertarians are strong believers that 'those who make the mess should be responsible to lean up the mess.'  Not taxpayers, and certinaly not victims. We are 'strict liability' folks in that sense.

And as I said, there is no way to justify asking someone other then the consumer and producer of a product to bear the cost of that product, and that is precisely what is happening with a number of these plants.

I think the real lesson here is that libertarians share many of the goals that liberals, (and yes, sometimes conservtives )have.  Political goals are not "mutually exclusive." They overlap. And there are places to work together.

Of course, there are many who tell me that technicaly I am a "Left Libertarian," which might explain this :-)


Tritium in the Connecticut River? (0.00 / 0)
I went to read more about this and it's the opposite of what the AP story that appeared in the Boston Herald stated - which says "The nuclear plant, located in Vermont's southeastern corner, is now monitoring drinking water wells on site and the Connecticut River on a daily basis, although the radioactive isotope hasn't been found in either."  Maybe the AP story is wrong, of course, but I'm wondering what the source is that says there's tritium in the river when the AP story is saying it's not even in drinking water wells.

interesting (0.00 / 0)
that you could do research, yet fail to look into the very question you are asking.

I have little patience with the disingenuous, Vis Unita Fortior.

VT public health officials say so.

http://www.masslive.com/news/i...

Dr. William E. Irwin, the radiological health chief for the Vermont Department of Health, said Thursday that tritium has not yet been detected in the nearby Connecticut River, but it probably has reached it.

"It is reasonable to assume based on what we know about the plume. Our inability to confirm this is due to the large volume of water (in the river) and the rapid flow of the river," he said.

This is an ongoing problem. During the course of your research, you may have happened upon the story of a tritium leak a couple of years ago that was covered up by Entergy.

http://www.rutlandherald.com/a...

An ongoing problem, indeed. VT Yankee submitted a report to the NRC in May 2009 that addresses a radioactive plume of tritium moving toward the Connecticut River.

http://greenmountaindaily.com/...


[ Parent ]
Comparison with radon from natural gas (0.00 / 0)
Another thing I've just been reading about is the radon in natural gas; see here in this book, Fundamentals of natural gas processing, it says
"...radon decays into lead-210, then to bismuth-210 and polonium-210 and finally into stable lead-206.  These daughter products of radon, some of which have long half-lives, condense on pipe walls and form a low-level radioactive scale, which may flake off and collect on inlet filters... Discarded piping with the scale generates large quantities of low level radioactive waste that must be discarded in disposal wells."
So how does this tritium leakage of however many picocuries in the ground underneath the Vermont Yankee plant compare to pollution from other radioactive sources such as radon or to pollution from other carcinogens?  I figure I get a good dose of benzene every time I put gas in my car, how does it compare to that?

Connect with BH
     
Blue Hampshire Blog on Facebook
Powered by: SoapBlox