2 thoughts on “Breaking — PSB rules on VY hearings, Entergy Louisiana request for CPG”

1. There was a letter in the Messenger tonight lamenting how “unfriendly” Vermont is for having the audacity to want to charge them a higher generation tax.

   Here’s what I wrote:

   David Usher says Vermont is “unfriendly to business.”  That must be why with 4.9% unemployment, Vermont now has the fourth lowest unemployment rate of any state in the Union.

   I’m a little tired of this complaint being made every time Vermont acts in the best long-term interest of the state rather than the short-term interest of some outside corporate behemoth.  

   This time, it is Vermont Yankee to which the state of Vermont is being “unfriendly.”  Could that possibly have something to do with Entergy’s history of extremely bad faith dealings with the state?

   Is it surprising that, if Vermont must assume the risk of having the geriatric Vermont Yankee nuclear facility operating on its soil without getting the benefit of any energy, the state thinks perhaps Entergy should compensate us for tolerating this risk, in some other way?  The generation tax seems extremely conservative from this standpoint.

   And don’t let Mr. Usher or anyone else flim-flam you with that “600” jobs claim again.  Remember; the real figure of  jobs at VY held by Vermonters is little more than 200.

   Should anything go critically wrong with the facility, the cost to southern Vermont could easily run into the billions; and that is just in terms of monetary losses.  The human and environmental losses could be inestimable.

   Remember that decrepit condenser that recently caused the plant to reduce power due to makeshift repairs gone terribly wrong?  Well, Entergy is not scheduled to replace it until 2016, and meanwhile, the plant will limp along on temporary fixes; possibly closing of its own accord well before it is compelled to replace that condenser.

   Do you honestly think that is the only costly part that needs replacement after forty years of wear?  And do you honestly think that Entergy isn’t going to apply the same spit-and-baling-wire-fixes to other faults rather than invest the multi-millions necessary to do the job right?

   Entergy is a corporation that operates FOR PROFIT.  Think about Walmart and its cost-cutting agenda.  Do you really think Entergy is any less penny-pinching with its investors’ money?

   Now, do you really think it’s a good idea for a company that must satisfy investors on the bottom line to be allowed to go on operating a 40+ year-old reactor on Vermont soil without contributing something to the state that is exposed to its growing risk?

   Am I at all worried that Entergy may pull out of Vermont due to it’s “unfriendly” attitude?  Sadly, I am not.

Comments are closed.