VT is nuclear state

[mondeo]

I haven't heard anything about solar, but I'm sure someone will find something to b!tch about.

Well, there's always the fact that (at least a year or two ago) they could take more energy to produce than they'd recover over their lifespan. The ones most commonly used for power generation take 8 years to recover the invested energy, and overall just aren't cost effective. But practicality, unfortunately, isn't allowed in the energy debate.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Economics will drive the switch to cleaner power. Technology will drive down the prices there as the cost of oil keeps going up.

 

[drjeff]

I find it interesting that a lot of different groups oppose a lot of different power sources. Sure, it's all give and take...but we need electricity.

Hydro power: Bad for the fish.

Wind power: Bad for the bird/ it's ugly and blocks my view.

I haven't heard anything about solar, but I'm sure someone will find something to b!tch about.

I'm sure some whacko intra-web "researcher" will CLAIM something like the non-captured solar rays near a collector will increase the risk of the pink polka dotted 42 toe speckled horny toad getting cancer of its 3rd pinky toe or something like that

 

[wa-loaf]

I haven't heard anything about solar, but I'm sure someone will find something to b!tch about.

It's bad for the trees. You have to cut them down so they don't block the sun. ;-)

 

[RootDKJ]

certainly

My folks reside there as well. For reasons I'll never understand, they sold their place in Vt and retired to FL.

I'd have a hard time with that also. Jersey to Flordia is easier to understand.

 

[Glenn]

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Economics will drive the switch to cleaner power. Technology will drive down the prices there as the cost of oil keeps going up.

x2 Nothing should be forced by the goverment. But that's another thread...

drJeff is on to something. How about a little stream side smoked chicken? The skin will be crispy....and may glow a little! :beer:

 

[bvibert]

All the stats I hear on VPR.

After searching for a few minutes the newest data I could find was from 2005, which shows that 72% of Vermont's power is generated by nuclear. That matches up with what website above says..

http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/nuclear/page/at_a_glance/states/statesvt.html

 

[ctenidae]

x2 Nothing should be forced by the goverment. But that's another thread...

drJeff is on to something. How about a little stream side smoked chicken? The skin will be crispy....and may glow a little! :beer:

Makes it easy to find leftovers later that night.

Wind's getting close to grid parity, solar's still a bit off. Add in carbon taxes, and all of a sudden wind's cheap and solar isn't too bad.

 

[TheBEast]

I find it interesting that a lot of different groups oppose a lot of different power sources. Sure, it's all give and take...but we need electricity.

Hydro power: Bad for the fish.

Wind power: Bad for the bird/ it's ugly and blocks my view.

I haven't heard anything about solar, but I'm sure someone will find something to b!tch about.

This is so true.....don't want this and don't want that as they turn their lights on and power their home! I too am personally okay with Nuclear.

 

[GrilledSteezeSandwich]

Three eyed fish in Lake Champlain..I can't wait..

 

[riverc0il]

Can we store the spent fuel rods in your back yard?

I'm not particularly apposed to Nuclear Power, but no one is willing to deal with the waste.

On the flip side, no one wants a coal power plant in their back yard either. I am opposed to Nuclear Power in principle only. Realistically, it is better than the alternative in my aspects. Do we want smokestacks or spent Nuclear fuel. Either way it is a problem and anti-Nuke folks will need to find an answer to that question before opposition to Nukes becomes a viable stance, IMO.

 

[ctenidae]

The new generation of nuke plants are even better .. of course someone might say I am a little biased on this topic..

Spent fuel was supposed to be reprocessed in the beginning not buried. In the 20 years of operation at Seabrook we could easily fit the spent fuel volume in your backyard ..it doesn't take a up alot of space ..

I think NFS is about to break ground on a reprocessing plant. IMO, that's a huge step forward. About time.

No matter what, NIMBYs are going to be a problem for any project. Even worse are the BANANAS (Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything)

 

[ski_resort_observer]

The Vermont Yankee plant has been a pretty hot button issue in the state recently for a couple of reasons. It's license to operate expires in 2012 and there is a pretty hot debate going on in Vermont whether to re-issue the license in view of all the problems the plant has had the last two years. One being the collapse of one of it's main cooling towers a few months ago. It's sister plant in Maine, Maine Yankee was built at the same time and torn down about 8 years ago. Gov Douglas strongly supports the re-issuing of VY's license.

Here is one recent article
http://www.reformer.com/ci_12189188?source=most_emailed

This article of a couple of months ago says Hydro-Quebec supplies about "one-third" of the power for Vermont and can increase that if Vermont Yankee is shut down. Hydro-Quebec's contract is up soon as well.
http://www.vpr.net/news_detail/79390/

 

[drjeff]

Maine Yankee and VT Yankee were not sister plants. They might have been built around the same time but were of different reactor designs. Maine Yankee was of a PWR design - pressurized water reactor but VT Yankee is of a BWR design - boiling water reactor. Completely different reactor designs. Maine Yankee shut down due to the cost of proving that their emergency core cooling system was adequate and that the reactor vessel could stand the stress during a ECCS event.

Thanks for the explanation OSME! I bet if something went wrong and you were there, that a good 'ol whack with that wrench in your avatar pic could fix it

 

[ski_resort_observer]

Maine Yankee and VT Yankee were not sister plants. They might have been built around the same time but were of different reactor designs. Maine Yankee was of a PWR design - pressurized water reactor but VT Yankee is of a BWR design - boiling water reactor. Completely different reactor designs. Maine Yankee shut down due to the cost of proving that their emergency core cooling system was adequate and that the reactor vessel could stand the stress during a ECCS event.

Hey, don't yell at me...this is how the news media is always referring the two plants as. :wink:

 

[Glenn]

Even worse are the BANANAS (Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything)

LMAO! I've never heard that one before! I'm going to have to use that one more often. :beer:

 

[thetrailboss]

I find it interesting that a lot of different groups oppose a lot of different power sources. Sure, it's all give and take...but we need electricity.

Hydro power: Bad for the fish.

Wind power: Bad for the bird/ it's ugly and blocks my view.

I haven't heard anything about solar, but I'm sure someone will find something to b!tch about.

+ 1. That's the problem we have when trying to accomplish anything here in VT.

 

[Johnskiismore]

Here is interesting interactive map of visualizing U.S. Electric Grid.

http://www.npr.org/news/graphics/2009/apr/electric-grid/

Select "SOURCE OF POWER", and then select "MAJOR POWER SOURCES" to Nuclear. I was surprised to find out that nuclear power provides 71% of VT's electric power, highest percentage in the nation. Actually, nuclear provide the most power for the state of VT, NH, CT, NY, NJ, SC, IL.

Very interesting link, which has lead to an interesting thread, thank you