(Re-bumped to the top for updates - promoted by odum)
Update #2 (from odum): I'm delighted to report an "I was wrong," in that it sounds as though the debate was - as they say - fair and balanced. Couldn't be happier that it ended up being a fair fight after all, regardless of how it was set up and promoted.Updated by Sue Prent:
Well! That was interesting. At almost the last minute, Meredith Anguin took Howard Shaffer's place in the debate, as Mr. Shaffer was indisposed.
I had a parking challenge and arrived, a little late, just as Ms. Anguin took the mike to deliver her opening remarks. She focussed rather narrowly on the tritium leaks, attempting to persuade the audience that tritium is simply not such a big deal. Then she dismissed the collapsing tower as not central to operation of the plant, breezed over other condition issues and devoted most of her time and energy to arguing that closing VY would represent an economic calamity for businesses in Vermont
No doubt her views are sincerely held, but she failed to address the over-arching issues of mismanagement, negligence, lying and simple obsolescence. Later, she seemed to imply that she thought the solution to all the issues might be a simple matter of new management(!?) She was of course at a disadvantage, since Howard Shaffer presumably prepared her slide presentation and notes, but all in all it was a pretty superficial stream of argument with a lot of attention devoted to the banana and "Exit" sign analogies in order to minimize the significance of tritium leaching into drinking water.
Arnie Gundersen, on the other hand came fully prepared. Launching a well-planned slide presentation, he began by saying that the purpose of the forum was not to argue the pros and cons of nuclear energy, but rather to discuss why VY should or should not specifically be shut-down. He then proceeded to explain, in a relaxed and articulate manner, all of the technical issues, managerial issues and some of the ethical issues that have lead him to believe that VY must not be allowed to operate beyond it's planned expiry. Arguing that closure of VY will have much less of an economic impact than is projected by VY supporters, Mr. Gundersen described the manner in which pricing and supply works on the New England Grid, and said that hundreds of jobs will be created after VY closes; first, to keep the plant safe and secure while it awaits decommissioning, and later to carry out the actual dismantling and disposal operations.
Each speaker was allowed a brief rebuttal, during which Mr. Gundersen defused the "Exit" sign analolgy with a little science, and reminded the audience that tritium was just the fastest moving (and therefore most quickly identified) substance leached from the broken pipes. He pointed out that additional radioactive substances of much more deadly portent, were released at the same time but hadn't yet travelled as far as the "plume" of tritium, which has already entered the Connecticut River.
Ms. Anguin's rebuttal retrenched her economic arguments, and then, oddly enough, became focussed on Mr. Gundersen's use of quotes from regional newspapers. These were provided in his slide presentation to chronicle the growing public distrust that has accompanied VY and Entergy's persistent misrepresentations, but Ms. Anguin seemed to find them really annoying. When the rebuttal segment concluded, Mr. Lynn opened the floor to audience questions. Only one (from John McClaughry, of course) was really angry and hostile to Mr. Gundersen, but that was quickly snuffed-out with a cool-headed response. I think it was in reply to a question from an audience member that Mr. Gundersen said that it now does not appear that closing VY will in any way threaten the reliability of energy in New England. This news seemed to take many by surprise, including an uncharacteristically subdued Emerson Lynn, who looked positively crest-fallen. The big economic boo-hoo they were depending on just didn't deliver.
There was a sense in the end that the wind had unexpectedly left the sails of the VY Tiger team. Nicely done, Mr. Gundersen!
It says something that conservatives so often feel they can't win an argument unless they can fix the game. Get a load of this:
On Thursday, Feb. 24, hear two experts on nuclear energy debate the issue in the next installment of UVM's Janus Forum: "Vermont Yankee: Shut It Down or Keep It Running?"
[...] Speaking in support of Vermont Yankee is Howard Shaffer, who has been a member of the American Nuclear Society (ANS) for 34 years.
[...] His opponent in the debate is Arnold Gundersen, chief engineer of Fairewinds Associates, the firm responsible for analyzing the shortfall in Vermont Yankee's decommissioning fund, which resulted in a review of such funds at nuclear sites around the country.
Sounds interesting, yes? It is a slightly odd combination. As anyone who follows the issue knows, Gundersen is an obvious choice for the anti-VY side. Shaffer (of the "Christian Nuclear Fellowship" - no kidding), on the other hand, is a peculiar one under the circumstances, as Shaffer wrote to the Vermont Board of Professional Engineering and tried to have them demand that Gundersen could not call himself an engineer, because he was not a "Registered Professional Engineer."
But that's the tip of the iceberg. Dig this:
The is the sixth installment of the Janus Forum, a debate series founded by James Gatti, a finance professor in UVM's School of Business Administration; Arthur Woolf, an economics professor in the College of Arts and Sciences; and Richard Vanden Bergh, also of the School of Business Administration.
Yeah, that would be Art Woolf, the patron saint of Vermont's laissez-faire right wing and the poster boy for the hard-right Vermont Tiger blog. And Gatti? He's only the Chair of the Ethan Allen Institute, John McLaughrey's baby Heritage Foundation for Vermonters.
The forum will be moderated by Emerson Lynn, editor and publisher of the St. Albans Messenger.
Yes, that would be Emerson Lynn, Vermont's leading media right-wing ideologue. Also a favorite of Vermont Tiger. Now, who are we missing... let's see... oh, yeah! The Gundersens received a last-minute call from UVM Associate Communications Director Jeff Wakefield inviting Arnie to promote the event on a local radio show! Mark Johnson? Nah. VPR? Wrong again... it was... wait for it...
Rob Roper's new show - yep, the former GOP Chair, True North Radio Host, and Vermont Tea Party favorite. Did you know he had a new radio show? Well, by jinkies he does! WDEV's "Common Sense" radio show, sponsored by... The Ethan Allen Institute! What a coincidence!
See, the Ethan Allen Institute is not in favor of government sponsorship of...well... anything, really. Except that they seem to have no problem setting up a phony event to promote their agenda and ambush one of their favorite targets through the University of Vermont's publicly funded platform.
Arnie will handle himself fine. Not only is he right on the issues, he's smarter than the combined entirety of the sewing circle aligned against him. But this is still pretty gross, all in all. If the conservative pantheon wants to hold a "debate" on their terms, moderated by their person, promoted to their people through their media, and invite one of their favorite targets, just do it openly - through the EAI proper, with full disclosure - rather than engage in this weird, sneaky stuff.
