December 9th, 2016
Trump’s energy agenda, vague as it is, has been essentially to promote “clean coal,” nuclear and to deny climate change and dismantle federal climate change and “renewable” energy programs, of course with no move to eliminate subsidies for coal and nuclear. The “transition team” sent a big laundry list of questions to the Department of Energy, and it’s pretty broad. It’s also something that would be both telling and intimidating to receive. Looking at this, there’s no doubt where they’re headed.
Here’s the document — read it and see what you think… and note how many of these questions are “Can you provide…” which are easily answered with just a “Yes” or “No” and that’s the end of it!
But wait… there’s another version (similar, but different order, etc.):
I think Trump needs somebody to write his questions for him, somebody new that is. He obviously didn’t come up with this, but his staff person who did, well, if they worked for me, “YOU’RE FIRED!”
December 5th, 2016
Here we go again, the Annual Hearing for the Power Plant Siting Act.
The full Notice:
Now’s the time to dig back into the cobwebs of memory of all the dockets over the last year, and the last 20+ years, and let them know how the Power Plant Siting Act is working, and more importantly, how it’s not working.
Comments are open until January 20, 2017. To file in eDockets (highly recommended), go here, and log in. If you don’t have an account, register (it’s simple, and fast) and then file in docket 16-18.
Note something different, this year they’re going to go over pipeline projects:
Recently, I’ve been involved in a project working toward increased meaningful and effective public participation in a pipeline docket, and what’s going through my head as I attend meetings, conference calls, and read very long intense emails, is that this is exactly what we’ve been talking about at these Power Plant Siting Act hearings for TWENTY YEARS! This is exactly what we’ve been working to deal with in the Certificate of Need Minn. Ch. 7849 rulemaking for THREE YEARS! These are exactly the same issues I’ve been raising in docket after docket, gaining a remand in one, some “adjustments” in others, and even to the appellate court a couple of times — MCEA had more success in this (see the EIS decision here). And so little changes.
2006 Report to PUC – Docket 06-1733
2007 Report to PUC – Docket 07-1579
2008 Report to PUC – Docket 08-1426
2009 Report to PUC – Docket 09-1351
2010 Report to PUC – Docket 10-222
2011 Report to PUC – Docket 11-324
2012 Report to PUC – Docket 12-360
2013 Report to PUC – Docket 13-965
2014 Summary Comments– Docket 14-887
OK, folks, time to saddle up for another cattle drive! Let’s get to it!
And on December 20… sigh…
November 21st, 2016
There’s been another earthquake at Fukushima. One report says 6.8, 6.9, and another says 7.3. Aftershocks starting. Both say tsunami warnings. This is where we’ve had the worst nuclear disaster, meltdown, contamination, in history, and it’s now going to get worse.
From the Guardian, in Japanese:
- Here’s CNN’s live broadcast, no sound sometimes.
Daniel Smith reports (UPDATE – cooling equipment back online):
Cooling equipment stopped in power plant
According to NHK, cooling equipment for the spent nuclear fuel pool in the reactor No. 3 of Tepco’s Fukushima No. 2 power plant has stopped. But the water in the pool is currently enough to keep it cool, NHK reports.
The nuclear regulatory agency says that so far, the cooling water has not leaked out, and Tepco are preparing to resume operation of the cooling system within an hour or two.The water supply has stopped, however, the nuclear regulatory agency says that so far no abnormalities have been observed.
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: