<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Dicey Economics of Hosting a Nuclear Plant</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.clf.org/blog/clean-energy-climate-change/the-dicey-economics-of-hosting-a-nuclear-plant/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.clf.org/blog/clean-energy-climate-change/the-dicey-economics-of-hosting-a-nuclear-plant/</link>
	<description>For a thriving New England</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Sep 2013 23:46:02 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.6.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael Granger</title>
		<link>http://www.clf.org/blog/clean-energy-climate-change/the-dicey-economics-of-hosting-a-nuclear-plant/#comment-2738</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael Granger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Jan 2013 15:33:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.clf.org/?p=13411#comment-2738</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[When the mostly Republican legislature and the Public Service Board approved VY the first time in the 70s, it was an application from regulated monopolistic utilities, two of whom were known corporate citizens.
A major shift came with the sale changing VY to merchant status. And Entergy arguably misled the legislature and the PSB numerous times especially with its statements regarding underground piping that was leaking at the time. The legislature finally saw through them. 
Combine their litigious management style with corner cutting because of intense dividend pressure, federal failure for waste removal, ongoing legal and political vaguaries regarding that waste, a deficient decommissioning fund and failing components at an aging plant and you have a recipe for disaster, both financial and radiological. 
Ironically the federal court is faced with the same underlying dilemma the state currently faces.  How much local control do you allow with large scale power production?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When the mostly Republican legislature and the Public Service Board approved VY the first time in the 70s, it was an application from regulated monopolistic utilities, two of whom were known corporate citizens.<br />
A major shift came with the sale changing VY to merchant status. And Entergy arguably misled the legislature and the PSB numerous times especially with its statements regarding underground piping that was leaking at the time. The legislature finally saw through them.<br />
Combine their litigious management style with corner cutting because of intense dividend pressure, federal failure for waste removal, ongoing legal and political vaguaries regarding that waste, a deficient decommissioning fund and failing components at an aging plant and you have a recipe for disaster, both financial and radiological.<br />
Ironically the federal court is faced with the same underlying dilemma the state currently faces.  How much local control do you allow with large scale power production?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Page Caching using disk

 Served from: www.clf.org @ 2013-09-18 15:41:24 by W3 Total Cache --