|
Entergy Nuclear Unwilling to Face Public to Make Case
for Relicensing
from: Dan DeWalt
replaceVY.org
802.348.7701
patrioticresponse@yahoo.com
Please take a moment to read about Entergy Nuclear's refusal to
meet with citizen groups in Vermont to discuss the relicensing application
for VY.
Citizen forums have already been scheduled for 2/26 in E. Corinth,
and Tunbridge on 2/10, and in Brattleboro on 2/19.
Presentations of German physician Winfrid Eisenberg about childhood
cancer in children living near nuclear power plants (see facts about
Windham county below) will be held on 2/17 at Hazen high school
in Hardwick, and on 218 at Sterling College in Craftsbury.
With 45 Vermont towns preparing to debate and vote on a town meeting
resolution calling on the legislature to: 1. reject certification
of Vermont Yankee's 20 year operating license application because
it is not in the Public good, 2. ensure that Entergy fully fund
the decommissioning fund as promised, and 3. embrace a vigorous
plan to develop efficiency and clean sustainable power production,
Vermonters are asking that they be fully informed before deciding
on the issue.
To this end, citizens in several Vermont towns, Tunbridge, Westfield,
Brattleboro, Corinth, and Hartford, to name just a few, are organizing
informational forums where the facts about nuclear power can be
fully aired. To ensure balance, representatives from both sides
of the issue have been asked to present their case to the public.
And while VPIRG, VCAN and others have agreed to present their reasons
why this resolution should be supported, Entergy Nuclear has declined
to participate. Without further explanation, VY representative Brian
Cosgrove said that “in view of the circumstances” VY
was declining to participate in a dialogue with Vermonters.
Maybe the most glaring circumstance is that there is no good power
deal on the table right now. Entergy is now saying that it will
only offer either a revenue sharing agreement, or a reduced rate,
and any reduced rate will be short lived with Vermonters paying
the same rates as other New Englanders.
Why is Entergy afraid of sending someone to speak with Vermonters?
It may be that it doesn't want a presentation of facts to take the
gloss off of its public relations efforts that have thus far given
at least some Vermonters the notion that nuclear power is not a
health hazard, as well as the mistaken belief that without the nuclear
reactor's power, the lights would go out in Vermont. Maybe it doesn't
want its spokespeople to have to squirm in their seats while proponents
of the resolution talk about elevated cancer rates among the Windham
county children who live near the reactor, or about the alarming
accumulation of radioactive strontium-90 in the baby teeth of children
from around the plant (at rates 62% higher than non-Windham county
children).
Maybe it doesn't want to describe how it plans to store its highly
radioactive nuclear waste on the banks of the Connecticut for as
long as it takes (if ever) until the federal government takes control
of it. And maybe Entergy doesn't want to answer why American taxpayers
are already paying for the development and eventual storage of toxic
nuclear waste, a commitment of treasure that must be maintained
for thousands of years into the future, as well as footing the bill
for insuring nuclear plants in case of a serious accident (something
the free market system insurance companies have refused to do, as
it is too risky). And it surely doesn't want to explain why those
costs are not included in the PR spin when it tries to tell us that
nuclear power is a cheaper alternative to renewable energy options.
Maybe it doesn't want to explain why the fund that is supposed
to cover the costs of decommissioning is not even close to having
the necessary amount of money and why, while raking in millions
in profits, including millions for the CEO alone, Entergy doesn't
want to add the necessary money to the fund to ensure our future
safety. Maybe it doesn't want to have to explain how Entergy's declaration
of bankruptcy to get off of an economic hook in Louisiana after
hurricane Katrina shouldn't give Vermonters the wrong idea about
Entergy's commitments to Vermont.
Maybe it knows that misinformation can be sent out as a press
release, but common sense questions that are on the minds of Vermonters
would actually have to be answered, and the facts are not on Entergy's
side.
Maybe they don't want their employees to sit and listen as people
learn that sustainable, non-toxic electric generation as well as
efficiency will create more quality jobs for Vermonters and grow
the state's economy, taking advantage and getting in sync with the
ambitious energy plans of the Obama administration, as opposed to
maintaining a crumbling dinosaur that represents the very oldest
nuclear technology in our nation.
Well, the citizen forums will be held, and the facts will be aired.
It should be to Entergy's everlasting shame that rather than make
an honest case for their position, it runs from dialogue and count
sinstead on spin and back-room dealings to get its way. It is to
Vermont citizens' credit that these questions will be answered,
with or without Entergy's help. We have a stake in our own future
that Entergy does not. And we will take the health, well being and
economic security of ourselves and future generations into account
when we weigh in to advise the legislature on this vitally important
issue.
Dan DeWalt
www.replaceVT.org
|