At an NRC and Entergy mandatory public meeting on April 13, 2016, the NRC, Entergy, Pilgrim workers and several watchdog groups made statements against and for Pilgrim. Early the very next morning, Entergy publicly announced it would refuel in 2017 and not close down until 5/31/19. So the farce and sham of the public meeting was in full display as well as the cozy lapdog relationship the NRC has with Pilgrim and all other nuclear power plants. Written by Christine Legere, longtime truth telling reporter about Pilgrim, she subtitles her article: "Plant owner to spend $70M on refueling rather than shutter plant early.... State Sen. Daniel Wolf, a Harwich Democrat who has been outspoken [major truth-teller] in his opposition to Pilgrim, called the planned continued operation 'an insult to the region. I t's the worst-performing plant in the country,' Wolf said. 'Our policy regarding that plant should be to shut it down as soon as possible and transfer the spent fuel rods from wet storage to dry storage.'"
Since Pilgrim is third from the bottom of nuclear power generated in the country at 5,769 megawatts,it is not that we use a lot of energy from nuclear power here in MA. [See p. 30 of 2015 report from Department of Energy on NRC official site - this is an incredible site.]
Arkansas Nuclear One, Arkansas - Entergy Operations, Inc.
"According to the Federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission this plant is in the column four category. To give you an idea of the severity of that ranking, column five is the worst and at that level a plant can not operate."""'Now the issues that we're talking about have been corrected and again. They do not pose a risk to public health or safety,'Lara Uselding [spokesperson for the NRC] says ." Published by Arkansas matters.com, May 12, 2015. [Short good video included that takes a while to come up.]
Columbia Generating Station, Washington State - Energy Northwest
About statement below: "Beginning the fall of 2011, a number of environmental groups in the region began to organize against extending the operation of this demonstrably dangerous nuclear plant. These groups include the Oregon and Washington Chapters of Physicians for Social Responsibility, local chapters of the Sierra Club, Heart of America Northwest, Columbia Riverkeeper, Western Washington Fellowship of Reconciliation, the Ground Zero Community, Oregon Women's Action for New Directions, the Alliance for Democracy, and No Nukes Northwest."
"It is time to shut down the Northwest's Fukushima-style reactor on the banks Columbia River"
"The CGS nuclear plant is an aging hazard to our river and the entire Pacific Northwest. Here are a few pertinent facts about the plant:
* The reactor is poorly designed, vulnerable to catastrophic radiation releases. It is a GE Mark II Boiling Water Reactor similar to the four Fukushima Dai-ichi plants that experienced catastrophic accidents in Japan last year. It has an elevated spent fuel pool, inadequately reinforced, identical to one which nearly collapsed at Dai-ichi #4, and still threatens Japan and the North Pacific with another massive release of radioactive material.
* The reactor has the potential to suffer hydrogen explosions. The CGS nuclear plant also shares the potential problem of improper venting that caused hydrogen explosions at three of the Fukushima reactors when they lost their coolant.
* The local earthquake danger is greater than the plant was designed to withstand. The CGS nuclear plant is threatened by additional documented earthquake faulting in the Yakima Fold and Thrust belt, putting the nuclear site at greater risk of seismic activity at a ground motion twice the maximum that the plant was designed to withstand"
* We don't need the power. According to State of Washington figures, this plant has produced less than 4% of the electricity Pacific Northwest residents consumed over the past decade -- and in 2012, due to an extended six month shut down for repairs, it produced even less. Energy conservation alone could make up the 4% difference, and wind and solar energy are also viable substitutes.
- Shutting it down will save money. Respected utility economist Robert McCullough estimates that Northwest ratepayers could save $1.7 billion over the next 17 years if the plant is shut down. [These two sentences are paraphrases by the Consortium of groups who posted the original article. Here is the link to the original article being paraphrased.]
"Many of us who have looked closely at nuclear power issues believe continuing to operate this aging nuclear plant simply makes no sense. If the true costs are included, the energy produced is extremely expensive and the toxic wastes produced pose an unacceptable health risk."
On January 29, 2016 in The Oregonian/Oregonianlive, we read that"The executive board of the region's only nuclear power plant agreed Wednesday to hire an independent investigator to look into whistleblower allegations that the plant's performance has steadily declined, that it ranks among the worst in the country and that management has been hiding those results from employees, the board and members of the public. An anonymous letter attributed to employees was circulated to several board members and The Oregonian/Oregonlive i n recent weeks. It suggests managers have been glossing over operational and potential safety problems at the plant and pushing to keep it online 'at all costs.'"
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
3
2
1
