"Entergy's Power Struggle"

In his March 15th article entitled "Entergy's Power Struggle" (which appeared in The Street's "Real Money"), Glenn Williams -- despite a clear pro-nuclear industry bias -- lays bare the many challenges faced by Entergy at multiple atomic reactors operating in multiple states. In fact, Williams concludes "Entergy faces every challenge imaginable. Simultaneously, it faces outdated federal regulations, hostile states and declining power markets." 

For example, the Palisades atomic reactor's impending violation, in 2017, of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) already-weakened reactor pressure vessel (RPV) embrittlement/pressurized thermal shock (PTS) safety regulations, could force the plant's permanent shutdown. Williams portrays NRC as to blame, that its regulations are outdated and obsolete in the face of new technical understandings. He goes so far as to imply that "there is no [safety] issue at all." Palisades watchdogs would hotly contest that claim. For, as Hiromitsu Ino has written in the very introduction to his Citizens Nuclear Information Center-Tokyo newsletter article on pressurized thermal shock risks in pressurized water reactors, "Destruction of a reactor pressure vessel due to neutron irradiation embrittlement should be called an extreme severe accident. If the pressure vessel breaks, there is almost no way of preventing a runaway chain reaction. Such extreme damage must be avoided at all costs."

On Feb. 29, 2012, environmental watchdogs forced NRC to admit, at a public meeting nearby the reactor, that Palisades has the worst embrittled reactor pressure vessel in the U.S., an admission NRC repeated on its March 19 Webinar about Palisades RPV embrittlement.

However, Williams points out, Entergy could simply pay NRC the needed funds to carry out yet another rollback of the regulations, in order to allow Palisades to continue operating till 2031 -- the end of its NRC rubber-stamped 20-year license extension. Williams also points out that such a regulatory rollback would also help out other pressurized water reactors that are beginning to bump up against NRC's PTS safety regulation limit -- so the rest of the nuclear power industry could be looked to, to help foot the bill for NRC's regulatory rollback work.

Williams goes on to describe Entergy's struggles with the States of Vermont, New York, and Massachusetts, at Vermont Yankee, Indian Point, and Pilgrim, respectively. Williams seems baffled as to why states would feel "hostility" towards Entergy, and would strive to shutown its atomic reactors within their borders. He needn't have looked far for answers: Entergy officials lied to State of Vermont officials under oath about underground pipes leaking radioactivity into soil, groundwater, and the Connecticut River. As Richard Watts documented in his book Public Meltdown: The Story of Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant, Vermont Yankee went from being considered a valued asset to a pariah almost overnight, due to Entergy's "rogue corporation" behavior.

And Indian Point must be ranked as one of the top homeland security vulnerabilities in the entire country, located so close to New York City (21 million people live within 50 miles), and eyed by Al Qaeda before the 9/11 attacks as a potential future target. As Ed Lyman at UCS documented in 2004, a successful terrorist attack at Indian Point could cause 44,000 acute radiation poisoning deaths, as well as 518,000 latent cancer fatalities, just within a 50 mile radius. It could also cause $1 to $2 trillion in property damage, just within a 100 mile radius.

Although he complains about "the state rigged...deal to favor wind at the expense of nuclear," Williams did admit that Cape Wind was likely to outcompete Entergy's Pilgrim atomic reactor in Massachusetts in the near future. Williams failed to mention, however, the half century of subsidies provided by ratepayers and taxpayers to the nuclear power industry, as documented by the Union of Concerned Scientists in 2011.

Williams seems to applaud Entergy's belligerence toward the state governments (not to mention the populations) which host its reactors, writing "When it comes to its merchant fleet, Entergy has a history of aggressiveness." After describing the ongoing struggles between Entergy and Vermont and New York, Williams writes "Like the Vermont case, Entergy refuses to roll over for New York."

As if any more evidence were needed to document Entergy's "aggressiveness," The Courthouse News Service has reported on Entergy's latest legal attack on New York State, in an article entitled "Entergy Tells New York to Butt Out of Nuke Plant." Entergy has retained multiple law firms to argue its numerous legal battles in both federal and state courts, as well as state regulatory agency administration courts, in both New York and Vermont.

Entergy Nuclear's ironic slogan is "The Power of People." Entergy Nuclear may get to know what "The Power of People" is all about, in States like Massachusetts, Michigan, New York, and Vermont, as chronicled in this week's Beyond Nuclear "Entergy Watch" update!