Viability of Yankee part of energy puzzle
Toolbox
Published: August 5, 2007
The owner of the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant moved a step closer this week to winning approval for a license extension allowing it to operate an additional 20 years.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission found there were no environmental reasons why the plant should not continue to operate beyond the expiration of its present license in 2012. The commission had some extra safety questions about the plant that the owner, Entergy Vermont, expected to address this fall.
In the last five years Entergy has faced a series of regulatory hurdles to carry out its plans for the plant it purchased in 2002. It had to win approval from the Legislature to store radioactive waste in dry casks on Entergy property in Vernon. Dry cask storage became necessary because the plant was running out of storage capacity.
The next step for Entergy was to win approval for a 20 percent increase in output at the plant. The power boost drew the opposition of nuclear opponents and also raised safety concerns on the part of the state Department of Public Service. Review of the power boost focused on the plant's capability for handling increased stress; eventually the state of Vermont and the NRC were satisfied about the safety of Entergy's plans.
The final step is for Entergy to win approval for a license extension that would allow the plant to operate until 2032. Nuclear opponents who view the operation of nuclear power plants with horror see a license extension as an invitation to disaster. They point to the unresolved question of long-term waste storage and the danger of breakdown or terrorist attack, with the possibility of a widespread catastrophe.
These dangers require the utmost vigilance on the part of regulators, and the state Public Service Department has done well to seek answers to important safety questions during the process. Making life easy for Entergy or the NRC must not be the aim of the state's nuclear regulators. State regulatory officials, as well as nuclear critics, do a service in forcing strict scrutiny of Entergy's proposals, even if the critics view the eventual approval of Entergy's proposals as a defeat.
The importance of Vermont Yankee as a source of power ought not to determine the outcome of safety or environmental reviews. A dangerous or damaging plant ought not to be approved, no matter how much the state needs it. But the continuing operation of the plant, should it be deemed safe, would ensure that Vermont's utilities had a ready source of relatively inexpensive power long into the future.
In the next eight years contracts for power from Vermont Yankee and from Hydro-Quebec must be renegotiated by Vermont's utilities, and Vermont would be in dire circumstances were power from Yankee unavailable. The plant provides the state with about a third of its load; Hydro-Quebec provides another third.
The development of wind and solar power and increased conservation will help meet the needs of the state above and beyond the state's base load needs. But without Vermont Yankee as a source, Vermont ratepayers would likely face much higher rates for power purchased from fossil fuel sources on the open market.
It was the state's reliance on Vermont Yankee that formed the backdrop to the controversy in the Legislature this year over a plan to pay for energy conservation with a new tax on Yankee. One of the reasons legislators upheld a veto by Gov. James Douglas of the Legislature's energy program was concern about future contracts with Yankee.
Controversy over Vermont Yankee is bound to continue, even if the NRC moves toward final approval of the license extension. The Legislature passed a bill in 2006 requiring that a license extension must receive legislative approval. The Public Service Department is working on studies to help the Legislature weigh the challenges, bringing the issue of nuclear power and Vermont's energy future into the political arena.
It is growing increasingly likely that Yankee will be around for awhile. At the same time, it is essential that the state pursue alternative power sources — wind power and conservation — which can absorb a sizable chunk of the additional power needed by Vermont ratepayers. The governor and the Legislature have been focused on different pieces of this puzzle. All the pieces are important.
38