October 11th, 2016
Ameren Transmission Company (ATXI) has filed lawsuits in two Missouri counties, Adair and Marion, challenging the county decisions to reject the “Mark Twain” transmission line (isn’t there some copyright or defamation law preventing use of Samuel Clemens’ “name” that way?).
What exactly did the counties do? Well, the counties need to approve or deny the Mark Twain transmission project, a condition of the Missouri PSC permit for the project, under the terms of the permit:
The actions of the counties sounds reasonable… and Ameren’s pleadings are mostly repeated whining that they were not invited, not notified, and that County Commissioners oppose the Mark Twain transmission line. GASP! They even attended a PSC meeting and opposed the line:
Ameren’s position seems to be, “How dare they!” Ameren, it might be wise to consider who it is that these Missouri County Commissioners represent. They’re elected officials, and Ameren was not elected to office, and they Commissioners’ job is not to represent Ameren! DOH! What a concept!
Here are the pleadings filed by Ameren in Adair and Marion Counties:
Kudos to the County Commissioners for standing up! And a big thanks to attorney Paul Henry for the heads up and forwarding the primary documents — it sure helps to know the whole story!!!
October 8th, 2016
It was a long, long day. Bottom line? Based on the record, and based on acknowledgement of Xcel’s peak demand history, we can shut down Sherco 1 & 2 now without missing it, and by 2025 or so, shut down Prairie Island and not have to pay for significant rehab to keep it running.
Here is the PUC webcast:
Here is my handout, noting the 700-788MW overstatement of peak demand forecast.
With the “forecast” that much off, it’s as absurd as the CapX 2020 2.49% annual increase. Staff questioned the forecasts in the Briefing Papers, Commissioner Lange raised forecasts right off the bat, and Commissioner Schuerger claimed it was at least 300 MW off (don’t know where that 300 MW came from). These discrepancies havce been noted, and they should dig deeper, because the numbers used by Xcel do not add up. Were they lying in the SEC filings or are they lying now? Why isn’t Commerce challenging this, given admissions of the existing surplus? This forecast overstatement, plus admission of under-utilization of grid (meaning grid has been overbuilt, DOH, CapX 2020 and MVP projects are not “needed” in any sense) raises a few issues:
1) This misrepresentation is NOW equivalent to at least one coal plant, and by the end of 2030, or by the time presumed for shut down of Sherco 1 and 2, it’s much more than that.
2) This misrepresentation avoids consideration of shut down of Sherco 1 & 2 NOW, and shutdown of Prairie Island at the 2024-2026 time frame, and avoidance of $600-900 million in capital costs, or more, for Prairie Island.
3) This misrepresentation circumvents discussion of the admitted surplus now existing, even Dr. Rakow admitted to that at least twice in Thursday’s discussion. Where there is surplus, they can sell it elsewhere, and that is, after all, the purpose of CapX 2020 and MVP transmission.
Got that? We can shut down Sherco 1 & 2 now without missing it, and by 2025 or so, shut down Prairie Island and not have to pay for significant rehab to keep it running. This is not rocket science. It’s as simple as using actual peak demand as a starting point and not making up numbers as they have been doing.
September 17th, 2016
There’s a NRC meeting on Tuesday about the “License Termination Plan” coming up:
6-8 p.m. on Tuesday, September 20, 2016
La Crosse Downtown/Mississippi Riverfront
500 Front St. South, La Crosse, WI
Now think about it… why tear down what’s left of the Genoa plant? So asks George Nygaard! Shouldn’t this be a historical site?
My father worked on the conventional side of the Elk River Allis nuclear plant, a demonstration project way back when. That was decommissioned back in the early 70s and is now a garbage burner. When the demonstration project was completed, and they tried to sell it, no local utility wanted it! Good call! Genoa was another matter, and Dairyland bought it for $1. Still not a great deal, because here we are now spending millions on decommissioning. How much? See below… they’re not telling.
Here’s the NRC page, with zero links:
Where’s the info on this? Here’s the press release, does it say why are we having a meeting?
Well, it looks like it’s to discuss the “License Termination Plan” according to their notice. But what’s to comment on? Why is there no link? After much digging, FOUND IT! From the NRC’s page:
La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor, License Amendment Request for the License Termination Plan.
Accession Number: ML16200A095
Date Released: Wednesday, July 27, 2016
- ML16200A083 – La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor, License Amendment Request for the License Termination Plan. (39 page(s), 7/27/2016)
- ML16200A085 – La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor License Termination Plan – Chapter 1 – General Information, Rev 0. (19 page(s), 6/27/2016)
- ML16200A086 – La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor License Termination Plan – Chapter 2 – Site Characterization, Rev. 0. (83 page(s), 6/27/2016)
- ML16200A087 – La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor License Termination Plan – Chapter 3 – Identification Of Remaining Site Dismantlement Activities, Rev. 0. (24 page(s), 6/27/2016)
- ML16200A088 – La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor License Termination Plan – Chapter 4 – Remediation Plan, Rev. 0. (31 page(s), 6/27/2016)
- ML16200A089 – La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor License Termination Plan – Chapter 5 – Final Radiation Survey Plan, Rev. 0. (74 page(s), 6/27/2016)
- ML16200A093 – La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor License Termination Plan – Chapter 6 – Compliance With The Radiological Criteria For License Termination, Rev. 0. (114 page(s), 6/27/2016)
- ML16200A091 – La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor License Termination Plan – Chapter 8, – Supplement To The Environmental Report, Rev 0. (37 page(s), 6/27/2016)
- ML16200A090 – La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor License Termination Plan – Chapter 7, Redacted – Update Of The Site-Specific Decommissioning Costs, Rev. 0. (14 page(s), 6/27/2016)
Look at this — how do we comment on redactions?
Some other docs:
September 16th, 2016
Gas leaking in Alabama…
Here’s where to find updates from the pipeline company:
It’s a long, long pipeline:
Note the focus here in the STrib report, on price, not the mess:
But that’s how it is everywhere:
Even though admittedly the pipeline is not “fixed” as of this writing:
It’s owned by Colonial Pipeline, which is owned by ???
And it’s the BIGGEST gas pipeline?
Here’s an interesting post about Alabama natural gas pipeline explosions and permitting adventures:
September 13th, 2016
Just in (well, it came in a while ago, but I was being tortured at the U of M Dental Clinic):
YES!! Now, a quick Comment for the record, essentially a thank you note, PUC staff Briefing Papers, a Commission meeting, and Clearbrook is DONE!