Forbes Calls Vermonters “Stupid” For Closing Vermont Yankee

1. Glad you like my rebuttal

2. You will believe whatever you choose to believe. You can’t point to one piece of legislation that the Vt. General Assembly passed that regulated safety. Shumlin ran on closing VY and got elected; twice. VY finally closed because they were going to have to open their books to the NRC.
   If you think that name calling was responsible for VY’s closure then there’s no point in me continuing any dialog with you.

3. Ken, I won’t hold it against you that Stannard is sticking up for you.
   Stannard, I am hardly “in the tank” for Entergy (whatever that even means). You should not assume that I agree with everything Conca wrote. All I’ll say is that you and I disagree on virtually everything about the state’s policy toward VY, and that I agree with the four federal judges who found that the Vermont legislature pursued a vendetta against VY and acted illegally. Did the state’s hostile, confrontational, politically-motivated attitude (including the use of propagandistic terms like “Entergy Louisiana”) over the last several years contribute toward Entergy’s decision to close VY? I believe it did.

4. Ken is right to be angry. Conca’s piece is rife with inaccuracies and is insulting to the State of Vermont. I wouldn’t expect you and Jcarter to think so as you are both in the tank for Entergy. I understand and you’re entitled to do so. But this column by Conca is full of misleading statements. He accuses others of not doing their homework, which leads me, at least, to believe that he must’ve done his homework and intentionally lying to us.
   At least he’s consistent with the Entergy execs., which means that he won’t go over well with the majority of Vermonters.

5. Oh, my responses are in CAPS; not that I’m screaming at this guy, but so that you can distinguish my words from his.

6. Let me save you folks the trouble of going to the article. Here it is with my rebuttal. Conca accuses Vermonters of not doing their homework. Bad form.
   In a week when we
   celebrated one of the greatest speeches in history, we also saw discrimination
   win over science. Again. Ideology defeated reason. As a
   scientist, I was saddened in a way I am not usually wont.
   The Great State of
   Vermont threw away cheap clean energy this week out of ignorance and fear.
   Vermont chose to be stupid, and will hurt the environment as a sidebar.

   IN HIS OPENING REMARKS CONCA STATES THAT “DISCRIMINATION
   WINS OVER SCIENCE” AND THAT “VERMONT THREW AWAY CHEAP CLEAN ENERGY OUT OF
   IGNORANCE AND FEAR”

   THIS IS NOT TRUE. THERE WAS NO SCIENCE INVOLVED IN ENTERGY’S DECISION TO CLOSE ITS
   PLANT. ENTERGY CLOSED ITS PLANT BECAUSE
   IT WAS NO LONGER ECONOMICALLY VIABLE.
   VERMONT DID NOT “THROW AWAY CHEAP CLEAN ENERGY….” VERMONT UTILITIES CEASED BUYING VY POWER,
   BECAUSE IT WAS NOW LONGER FINANCIALLY A GOOD DEAL.
   Move up http://i.forbesimg.com t Move down

   Earlier this week, Entergy Corporation announced
   plans to close and decommission its Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant in
   Vernon, Vermont. The power station was producing 0ver 70% of the State’s power,
   carbon-free. I guess we don’t have to envy Vermonters anymore.

   THIS STATEMENT IS PRESUMABLY INTENTIONALLY
   MISLEADING IF MR. CONCA DID HIS HOMEWORK AS HE ACCUSES OTHERS OF NOT
   DOING. YES, 70% OF THE POWER PRODUCED
   INSIDE VERMONT CAME FROM THIS PLANT, BUT AT NO TIME DID VERMONT EVERY RELY ON
   70% OF THIS POWER. TYPICALLY, WHEN I FEEL
   SOMEONE IS INTENTIONALLY MISLEADING ME (MUCH LIKE ENTERGY’S EXECUTIVES BEFORE
   THE PSB I TEND TO LOSE RESPECT FOR THEM).
   The station will stop
   power production after its present nuclear fuel runs its course and move to
   safe shutdown at the end of 2014. The station will remain under the oversight
   of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission throughout the decommissioning process and
   for the decades following until final disposition of its waste, and the
   building itself, is finalized.

   IF YOU BELIEVE THAT LEAVING OVER 600 TONS
   OF SPENT FUEL IN AN UNDER-PRETECTED POOL FOR 60 YEARS IS SAFE; GOOD FOR YOU. I DON’T.
   The official reason given
   by Entergy ETR +0.33% was a combination of financial
   factors including:
   – abundant low-cost
   natural gas from fracking,

   THIS IS THE REASON WHY THEY ARE CLOSING.
   – financial investments
   required by an increasingly onerous regulatory environment brought on by
   unfounded fears from the Fukushima disaster even in the face of a stellar
   safety record and a completely different safety case, and

   HAVING TO MAINTAIN AND UPGRADE THEIR PLANT
   TO MAKE IT SAFER IS ANOTHER REASON WHEY THEY’RE CLOSING. IF ONE WERE TO LOOK AT THE TRACK RECORD OF
   THIS PLANT; I.E. DO THEIR HOMEWORK, THEY MIGHT NOT CALL VY’S SAFETY RECORD
   STELLAR.

   – wholesale market design
   flaws that maintain artificially low energy and capacity prices in the region,
   and actively suppress the benefits of the lowest costing energy that merchant
   nuclear and hydroelectric plants have long provided the people of Vermont (Marv Fertel, NEI).

   IN RESPONSE TO THIS ALLEGATION THE ISO IN
   YESTERDAY’S PAPER DECLARED THAT THE MARKET IS NOT SKEWED AND THAT THIS WAS NOT
   A REASON TO CLOSE THE PLANT.

   But we all know the real
   reason. Nasty politics and ignorance. The latter is forgivable and rectifiable
   with a little homework. The former is not. Dr. Art Woolf, Professor of Economics at
   University of Vermont, put it best in the BurlingtonFreePress
   –

   AGAIN, THIS IS FACTUALLY INCORRECT AND
   COULD HAVE BEEN VARIFIED BY DOING A LITTLE HOMEWORK. THE OVERWHELMINGLY 26-4 SENATE VOTE AGAINST
   CONTINUED OPERATIONS BEYOND 2012 WAS ACHIEVED PRIMARILY BECAUSE OF ENTERGY
   LYING BEFORE THE PSB & THE LEGISLATURE.

   “The current [upward]
   trajectory of electricity prices is likely to continue as Vermont mandates
   production from much more expensive renewables and provides a variety of
   subsidies to producers of renewable energy. Electricity from wind can cost up
   to 20 cents per kilowatt hour and solar between 20 and 30 cents. Compare that
   to the current wholesale price of electricity from Hydro-Quebec, which costs
   about six cents per kilowatt hour [similarly for natural gas]. Vermont recently
   decided not to purchase electricity from the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant,
   which was selling electricity to the state for less than five cents a kilowatt
   hour” (Electricity Prices in Vt Among Nation’s Highest).
   Vermonters should only be
   paying 8¢/kWhr, not the 18¢/kWhr they’re paying now, nor the 20¢/kWhr they’ll be
   paying in the next few years.
   These upside-down cost
   situations occur because what we pay for electricity has little to do with what
   it costs to produce it. The real costs of producing electricity such as
   construction, fuel, O&M, decommissioning, have little to do with what its
   price on the wholesale market. The price has more to do with financing, tax
   credits, subsidies, mandates, power purchase agreements, weekly power bidding,
   and other non-technical drivers. These determine the price in a virtual orgy of
   artifice and short-term profit arrangements, spiced up with a bit of political
   shenanigans. (An excellent discussion of this is given by Michael Overturf of ZF
   Energy
   Development in The Price for Power.)

   WOOLF’S COMMENTS DO NOT REFLECT “NASTY
   POLITICS”. IF ANYTHING HE POINTS OUT
   VERMONT’S COMMITMENT TO TRY TO DO BETTER WITH RENEWABLE FUEL THAT DOES NOT RUN
   THE RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH ALL OTHER FUELS.
   This situation resulted
   directly from many years of very effective and concerted lobbying to bias
   elected officials in Vermont against nuclear energy. The public let them.
   Entergy was not prepared to counter this anti-nuclear push. They even seemed
   oblivious to its magnitude and effect, and bumbled communications and response.
   Or maybe they just got tired and resigned to letting Vermont get what it
   deserves.
   WERE IT NOT FOR THE FACT THAT CONCA HOLDS
   HIMSELF OUT TO BE ONE WHO DOES HIS HOMEWORK AND SOMEHOW GETS HIS WORK PUBLISHED
   IN FORBES, THIS PARAGRAPH WOULD STRIKE ME AS HILARIOUS. BUT IT’S NOT.
   TO SAY THAT “ENTERGY WAS NOT PREPARED TO COUNTER THIS ANTI-NUCLEAR PUSH”
   IS A LIE. I SAY IT’S A LIE, BECAUSE IF
   CONCA HAD DONE HIS HOMEWORK HE WOULD HAVE DISCOVERED THAT AT ONE POINT THERE
   WERE NO FEWER THAN 22 LOBBYISTS WORKING ON ENTERGY’S BEHALF. ENTERGY OUTSPENT THE ANTI-NUKE LOBBYING
   EFFORT BY TEN FOLD; AT LEAST. ENTERGY
   WAS NOT OBLIVIOUS EVEN A LITTLE BIT.
   THEY WERE BUMBLERS, BUT THEY WERE KEENLY AWARE OF THE FIGHT. HIS ASSERSIONS HERE ARE JUST WRONG.
   You know, folks, I
   understand nasty politics, but there is only one reason for being
   ignorant. Not doing your homework. I’m a scientists and even I don’t like
   to do homework. But you need to do your homework.

   AGREED. TOO BAD MR. CONCA OPTED NOT TO DO SO WHEN HE
   WROTE THIS PIECE.
   Most Vermonters were led
   blindly into throwing away the cheapest, cleanest energy available. Energy that
   made Vermont one of the lowest carbon emitters per capita in the world, a feat
   that will no longer be possible. Vermont Yankee is already mostly paid for, it
   had 20 years left, and mothballing it won’t save any money for the State, or
   reduce the risks that much either. The best thing to do with a nuclear power
   plant is to run it. Mothballing an active reactor ahead of its time is a wicked
   expensive waste.

   THE OPENING SENTENCE OF THIS PARAGRAPH IS
   NOT TRUE. VERMONTERS DID NOT THROW AWAY
   ANYTHING. VERMONT UTILITIES OPTED TO GET
   A FAIR DEAL BY PURCHASING THEIR POWER FROM OTHER SOURCES. HE ALSO STATES THE VY HAD 20 YEARS LEFT. NO NUCLEAR POWER PLANT HAS EVER LASTED 60
   YEARS. AS A “SCIENTIST” DOING HIS
   HOMEWORK HE SHOULD KNOW THAT THIS STATEMENT IS FALSE.
   Vermont Yankee has
   produced almost 200 billion kWhrs since it began operations. If this energy had
   been produced by coal or gas, over 50 million tons of carbon, sulfur and
   nitrogen would have been emitted into our atmosphere. But Vermonters were smart
   and ahead of their time. Vermont Yankee contributes about $500 million to the
   local economy employing 600 highly skilled professionals and funding the 1,800
   indirect jobs associated with them. This closure will be a huge blow to the
   local economy. Does this matter to anyone?

   YES, EVERYONE KNOWS THAT THERE WILL BE AN
   IMPACT IN SO. EASTERN VERMONT. WE’VE
   SEEN THIS COMING FOR 40 YEARS. DID THE
   DOUGLAS ADMINISTRATION PROPERLY PREPARE THIS AREA OF THE STATE FOR THE
   IMPENDING CLOSER OF THE PLANT IN 2012?
   While about 30% of
   Vermont’s electricity comes from hydro and methane digesters, without nuclear
   power the State’s GHG emissions will increase, especially as natural gas use
   for power generation is increasing faster than any other source.

   PROBABLY NOT TRUE. VERMONT’S UTILITIES HAVE ALREADY REPLACED VY’S
   POWER WITH HYDRO AND NUCLEAR; BOTH OF WHICH ARE CARBON FREE; AT LEAST ACCORDING
   TO CONCA.
   Better yet, ISO New
   England Inc., the Regional Transmission Organization (RTO), is rushing to fill
   this new electricity shortage with oil and gas. 2.3 billion kilowatt-hours of
   new oil-fired generation will dump 1.6 million metric tons of CO2 into the air,
   and 4.1 million more tons will be emitted by increased gas-fired production,
   just to compensate for this unnecessary execution.

   VY WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR ONLY 2% OF THE
   GRID. TO SAY THAT THE “ISO IS RUSHING TO
   FILL NEW ELECTRICITY SHORTAGE…” IS FALSE.
   THERE IS NO SHORTAGE OF CHEAP ELECTRICITY, WHICH, BY THE WAY, IS WHY
   ENTERGY IS CLOSING VY.
   As a member of the
   Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), how will Vermont square this huge
   increase with other members?

   VERONT STOPPED BUYING VY POWER OVER A YEAR
   AGO AND THUS FAR HAS NOT EXPERIENCED “HUGE INCREASES”.
   Closing Vermont Yankee in
   the end will cost Vermonters about $200 million per year for the next 20 years.
   But Vermonters escaped the worst of that other “wholesale market flaw”, the
   default credit swap and other financing ideologies, and haven’t been hurt at
   all by the economic slump of the last few years, so the people of Vermont won’t
   even notice the lost $200 million. I mean it’s not like it’s 10% of their total
   State tax revenue or anything.

   NO ONE HAS ANY IDEA WHAT THE COST IMPACT
   WILL BE OVER 20 YEARS. THERE ARE MANY
   VARIABLES THAT IMPACT OUR FUTURE. I LOOK
   FORWARD TO MR. CONCA REVISING HIS COMMENTS IN A FEW YEARS.
   Now when children ask,
   “Why do I have to do my homework?” parents can point to Vermont on the map and
   say, “That’s why!”

   THE ONLY ONE WHO HAS CLEARLY DEMONSTRATED
   THAT THEY DESERVE AN “F” ON THEIR HOMEWORK ASSIGNMENT IS MR. CONCA.

7. Ditto. Good grief, Ken. Your piece, reeking of your personal opinions and your anti-VY, anti-nuclear, anti-Wall Street, and anti-corporate venom, shows that your bias meets or exceeds the ignorance you accuse Conca of. In fact, it appears you used Conca’s piece as a convenient foil to spout your own left-wing opinions. Good thing for you he wrote that piece, huh?

8. Please read the incredible thread that accompanies the Forbes article. Several Vermonters – led by Bob Stannard – respond. I’m wondering if the author wants to visit to visit Vermont for a debate. I only wish Fred Tuttle was here to help another flatlander understand just how “stupid” Vermonters are!!

9. Holy Cow… the pot..kettle… geez Ken. I know this guy got under your skin for the “stupid” remark but take a deep breath…
   The article is so biased and skewed its unbelievable. I mean it’s seriously terrible.

10. Oh please… all they are doing is turning an ancient boiler into a storage facility for the spent fuel rods… quit the smoke and mirrors… It’s sister plant in Rowe, Ma (built in the same year by the Navy) blew up 20 some years ago, the Albany station showed it completely immersed in foam, just the reactor dome peeking through and then voila! news blackout. It was decommissioned. Vermont Yankee is on a river… have you heard of Hurricane Irene that overflowed just about every river and stream in Vermont? or Fukushima? get a grip and move into the future. You may not be giving your readers the best attitude or advice in this really silly and demeaning (for you) article. Do you live near spent fuel rods on a river? Do you like eating Vermont products like brown and speckled trout, apples, blueberries, all kinds of amazing and delicious produce, maple syrup, our incredible artisan cheeses, wines, beers (ever had a Heady Topper?) just to name a very few.. just leave us to our business and get back to giving GOOD advice to your readers… move on without the silliness and vitriol and we just might let you come visit our beautiful State….maybeh.. http://www.yankeerowe.com/

Comments are closed.