Vermont Yankee: Nuclear power plant loses bid to remain open as lawsuit proceeds

[kristopher]

Nuclear power plant loses bid to remain open as lawsuit proceeds
Jul 18, 2011


A federal judge on July 18 said he would not order the 605 MW Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant to remain open while a lawsuit against the state continues.

The Associated Press reported that Entergy (NYSE: ETR) went to court in June 2011 asking for a preliminary order allowing the generating station to stay open while the lawsuit went to court, perhaps through appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court. The federal judge ruled there was no need for an order because the main trial is scheduled for mid-September.

Entergy reportedly told the judge it needed a decision by July 23 to order nuclear fuel it needs for a scheduled refueling outage in October.

The Vermont Senate and the governor voted to close the plant when its 40-year license expires in March 2012. Entergy Corp., the plant’s owner, received a 20-year license extension from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission in March 2011 and filed a lawsuit claiming that the NRC’s action pre-empted that of the state.

Vermont law requires...

http://www.cospp.com/articles/pe/2011/07/nuclear-power-plant-loses-bid-to-remain-open-as-lawsuit-proceeds.html

[FBaggins]

1. It wasn't a bid to "stay open"...

...it was a bid to get the judge to lower the risk of buying more fuel when they didn't know that they would be able to use it before being shut down.

Well that's just tough. If they think they can win (and I don't see how they can), then buy the fuel. It isn't as if it's that much money if you think you have a shot. If, OTOH, they think they won't win, then they can probably run just fine through a March shutdown.

[kristopher]

2. Sure it was.

[FBaggins]

3. Not according to the judge.

There's no reason to order something to remain open during a time period when it isn't due to be closed.

Entergy would have been able to stretch out the case for years in appeals even if it expected to finally lose at the USSC level (so even if they lose they win millions). There isn't any reason for the judge to facilitate that kind of strategy. They can ask again when/if they lose at this level.

The judge said that the best way to handle their concerns was to accelerate the case and rule as quickly as possible. My favorite kind of judge. :)

[madokie]

4. Its about, if not the most dangerous nuke plant we have

I'm way over here where it matters to me not so much but from what I've been reading these last couple years they should be shut down for lying to the regulators and everyone else too. How do you as a regulator body deal with an entity that you can't believe a word they say. The reason for not being able to believe them is due to the pattern they had/have to whitewash and if that doesn't work outright lie whenever it was anything that the public might be concerned with. Shut them down and leave them shut down.
Can the site that a plant like that occupies ever be safe for humans again? How much will it cost to get there if it can be done? Someone said and some here say that nuclear energy was/is cheap, HA HA to them. Nuclear energy is neither safe, cheap or clean. Only time a nuke plant is somewhat environmentally clean is when they're making electric and that is debatable. Getting to that point and fueling them is very co2 intense. Hopefully we'll find out what it cost to safely, if that can be done, decommission and remove them from the premises. Where would you put all that steel and concrete, conduit, piping, electrical wiring and a whole slew of other shit too? Where does that shit go. Well I can say this, we were asking these questions 40 years ago when PSO tried to ram one down our throats and we were assured they had it all figured out, then when we questioned that, they got all pissy and started lying to us. Who is going to pay for the removal and safe disposal of a nuclear power plant? Who