35-year old environmental, safe-energy group sends strongly worded letter to legislators advising rejection of corporate “wealth transfer”
CHICAGO– In a strongly worded letter to state officials warning of “no rational basis for the Exelon nuclear bailout,” a 35-year old Illinois environmental organization today urged legislators to reject the proposed bailout.
Calling it “a ‘wealth transfer’ of billions of dollars from [Illinois] ratepayers to Exelon’s shareholders,” Nuclear Energy Information Service (NEIS) stated that, “this nuclear bailout is not defensible from an environmental, jobs, business or any other rational standard,” referencing testimony and supportive documents it provided the Illinois House Energy Committee last week at a hearing on November 16th.
Recent developments in negotiations among representatives of the environmental community, Exelon and ComEd have resulted in a radically altered legislative proposal which has jettisoned some of the more controversial “deal breaker” elements of the proposal, including ComEd’s proposed “demand charge” basis for setting rates, radically changing solar net metering, and a bailout for financially distressed coal plants (many of which were slated for closure). However, the core elements that started the whole process over 2 years ago remain: the proposed Exelon bailout of money-losing nuclear reactors, and the fixing of the Illinois renewable energy portfolio standard.
“We believe that not only is Exelon not deserving of a bailout for its own business failures, but the Legislature itself has failed to do its ‘due diligence’ in the matter before taking the easy way out and letting Exelon undeservedly pick ratepayers’ pockets,” maintains NEIS director David A. Kraft.
Kraft points out that, while the legislature in 2014 approved a seven month, four-agency ‘study’ of the POTENTIAL negative effects of reactor closure on Illinois (HR1146), it failed to examine the other negative implications of approving a nuclear bailout. “When is the legislature going to approve an equally thorough examination of the detrimental effects on the renewable energy and energy efficiency community in Illinois – which currently supports ~5 times more jobs in Illinois than ALL of the Exelon reactors combined – of a multi-billion dollar nuclear bailout, a 10-year legislatively imposed rate hike?” Kraft asks. “Those 114,000 Illinois workers would like to have that question answered, too.”
Additionally, the NEIS correspondence notes six other alternatives to a nuclear bailout and major ratepayer rate hike that the legislature, and presumably Exelon, have ignored. “We infer that for legislators and Exelon, it’s simply easier to bilk ratepayers than to get Exelon to do the hard but essential business work to find ways to improve its own profitability,” the NEIS letter asserts.
The letter to state officials also corrects an often repeated fallacy that reactors once closed cannot re-open. This falsehood has often been used by Exelon representatives and state and local officials to urge quick, if imprudent, actions to bailout the nuclear plants.
“Our correspondence with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) confirms that there is no legal obstacle preventing a nuclear utility from petitioning the NRC to re-open a reactor whose operating license has been terminated,” Kraft points out. “This information may come as a startling revelation to the local and state officials who have been told otherwise,” Kraft notes.
The text of the letter, NEIS’ testimony before the Illinois House Energy Committee and supportive documents it references will be available on the NEIS website by 4 p.m. Central time, Nov. 23, 2016. Copies can be request in advance by e-mail.
NEIS concluded its remarks to state officials by stating, “if you really want renewable energy and energy efficiency to be a part of Illinois’ energy future, have the courage to vote on these issues separately from the issue of the Exelon bailout. To act otherwise is simply to capitulate to economic extortion – both bad energy policy and bad business practice.”
Exelon bill designed to bailout failing nuclear plants, transfer wealth, kill renewables, NEIS testifies
SPRINGFIELD, May 16, 2016— Nuclear Energy Information Service of Chicago testified today before the Illinois State Senate Energy and Public Utilities Committee that the new Exelon legislation amounted to a “corporate welfare bailout” designed to kill renewable energy and “transfer wealth from Illinois ratepayers to Exelon shareholders.”
Clinton nucear plant. Photo courtesy of US NRC
Speaking at a Subject Matter hearing, NEIS Director David Kraft urged legislators to reject the flawed Exelon legislation – Amendment 3 to SB.1585, the so-called “Next Generation Energy Plan” – and fix the Renewable Energy Portfolio Standard (RPS) as soon as possible, and before considering any Exelon reactor bailout schemes.
“Exelon’s obstructionism has done real harm to Illinois renewable energy,” Kraft notes. “[Exelon] now suggests that it will continue to do that harm unless its failed and anachronistic business model is ‘rewarded’ – bailed out. It is simply inappropriate and irresponsible – and dumb energy policy – to reward such self-fulfilling prophecy,” Kraft told the Committee.
The RPS program has been unable to access millions of dollars in collected money to build new renewable energy generating facilities in Illinois due to an unforeseen glitch in the original law. Exelon lobbyists have helped stall that fix for the past 4 years, while at the same time creating pro-nuclear front groups to lobby the Illinois Legislators for a financial bailout of allegedly money-losing nuclear reactors in Illinois.
The original amount Exelon suggested was $1.6 billion over five years, an amount which has been scaled back in successive versions of their hardship story, in part due to positive gains in the local energy markets. While not stated directly in the current Exelon bill, the bailout ask is now estimated to be anywhere from $100 to $150 million per year for the money losing Clinton-1 and Quad Cities 1&2 reactors. While pleading financial hardship at these reactors, Exelon’s Christopher Crane pledged to shareholders in Exelon’s 4Q report earlier this year that they would receive an annual 2.5% increase in dividends over the next three years.
“Some hardship,” observes Kraft. “These reactors are Exelon’s private assets. There is no rational justification for ratepayers – the public – to subsidize these private assets, and certainly not without getting some kind of equity for use of their money,” Kraft asserts. “If Exelon keeps the assets, let their shareholders pay for their operation,” he said.
Exelon claims that their legislation would “level the playing field for all clean energy sources to compete…” and “…recognize the zero-carbon benefits of nuclear power.”
“Why single out the low-carbon benefits for reward?” Kraft asks. “Should not RE/EE be rewarded for the facts that they not only are lower-carbon emitters than nuclear, but they eliminate the costly and risky societal burdens of radioactive waste production and disposal, and nuclear proliferation of materials, expertise, technology and ultimately nuclear weapons and terrorism. Should not these positive societal benefits be compensated for additional reward?” Kraft points out.
Kraft also criticized the Exelon threat of job and economic loss stemming from their proposed closure of Clinton and Quad Cities, noting that renewable energy and energy efficiency, sectors which the Exelon nuclear bailout could severely damage and Exelon’s obstruction of the RPS fix already has, account for 12 times the number of direct jobs statewide as would be lost at the two reactors, and as much as 25 times the total number if including indirect jobs. “If legislators are concerned about jobs across the State, they should focus on fixing the RPS,” Kraft maintained. He also recommended establishing “just transition funds” for all reactor communities which will inevitably face reactor closures when the reactor licenses expire. This suggestion has received positive response from some legislators.
https://neis.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Press-Release-NEIS.jpg450725nuclear energyhttp://neis.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/logo-300x138-new.pngnuclear energy2016-05-26 14:12:362021-01-28 21:17:25EXELON BILL IS CORPORATE WELFARE BAILOUT, NEIS CONTENDS
NRC regulators cited for “major misses,” lack of safety culture
CHICAGO—All but three of Exelon’s 11 operating reactors in Illinois are reported as having “near misses” events – events that qualify a precursors to potential meltdowns, according to both a Greenpeace Report released today, and the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) documents on which the report is based.
Greenpeace Safety Study Reports US is “Nuclear Tightrope” Walking
“As legislators and the Governor move to decide Illinois energy future and whether to bailout three of Exelon’s aging and financially failing reactors, they should well consider the potential safety risks of staying with nuclear power, and whether or not the federal regulators are doing their job to adequately protect Illinois from enormous economic and environmental harm,” warns Dave Kraft, Director of the Chicago-based Nuclear Energy Information Service (NEIS), a safe-energy advocacy and anti-nuclear environmental organization.
The Report, “Nuclear Near Misses: A Decade of Accident Precursors at U.S. Nuclear Plants,” published by Greenpeace USA today, chronicles events reported to the NRC at U.S. reactors from 2004 through 2014 that would qualify as, “near misses or accident precursors at US nuclear power plants over the past decade that risk analysts have determined are precursors to a meltdown.”
These events cover events dealing with potential and actual flooding; loss of offsite power (a contributor to the explosions and meltdowns of the three GE Mark-I containment reactors at Fukushima, Japan, in 2011); and other human-error and natural event related conditions.
As disturbing as the list of 163 reported incidents during the decade studied is, the Report’s description of the utter failure of the NRC to regulate properly is cause for even more alarm.
“NEIS has long maintained that ‘NRC’ has stood for ‘not really concerned’ when it comes to safety regulation,” notes NEIS’ Kraft. “Congressional staff and insiders – and even former NRC Commissioners — have long described NRC as an agency captive of the industry it’s supposed to be regulating. This Report DOCUMENTS using NRC’s own reports just how true this assessment is,” Kraft continues.
“If Illinois officials choose to continue down the nuclear path by bailing out Exelon’s aging reactors, they are now advised that Illinois cannot expect much from the NRC in the way of regulatory protection,” Kraft asserts.
Of the 11 operation Exelon reactors in Illinois, only Braidwood-1 and – ironically – the aging and financially-failing Quad Cities 1&2 reactors are not listed in the report for that decade.
https://neis.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Press-Release-NEIS.jpg450725nuclear energyhttp://neis.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/logo-300x138-new.pngnuclear energy2016-05-26 14:06:252021-01-28 21:17:33REPORT INDICATES MOST EXELON IL REACTORS ON LIST OF “NEAR MISSES”
The 5th anniversary of the Fukushima nuclear disaster seems an apt time to recall the advice of philosopher and essayist George Santayana, who warned: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” Regrettably, the Orwellian truth is that the history of the ongoing Fukushima nuclear disaster is not only being “forgotten;” it is being radically altered by what the late Jeff Patterson, past President of Physicians for Social Responsibility, called “nuclear industry SCUM: Secrecy, Cover-Up, and Minimization,” that nuclear industry advocates and their supporters in governments proliferate. This inevitably results in opportunities being missed, and lessons going unlearned.
In Chicago the week before the March 11th anniversary, the Japanese Consulate announced a series of memorial events relating to the disaster. Virtually all the focus was on the effects of the tsunami. Virtually nothing was mentioned about the ongoing nuclear disaster. This massive and obvious denial of the existence of what is arguably one of the largest industrial disasters in the human history recalls the same kind of reaction the Japanese government took towards the Rape of Nanking and the Korean “comfort girls.” It is hard to learn anything useful that would prevent the recurrence of future disasters when the perpetrators don’t even acknowledge the existence of the ongoing problem.
Recent headlines lend credence to Patterson’s SCUM theory. As recently as Feb 24th it was revealed [3] that both TEPCo and the Japanese government knew that reactors had melted down as early as March 12, 2011, yet both denied this until May of that year, and for years refused to admit to the extent of the damage. Reports of under-reporting radiation levels [5], worker exposures and injuries, and extent of hazard have all been trickling out over the past five years.
Japan’s responses to the disaster in light of the revelation of situations far worse than officially acknowledged have been equally Orwellian – if not outright criminal. In the five years since the disaster, the Japanese Government has: repeatedly understated or outright lied about the seriousness of the initial disaster, and the subsequent levels of pollution and contamination relating to it and the clean-up [1,2,3]; enacted “secrecy laws” that would result in the prosecution of journalists reporting negatively on the disaster and the so-called “clean-up” operations; decided that all of Japan should “share the pain” of the disaster, by spreading around to all other prefectures the millions of bags of radioactively contaminated debris [8] collected in the Fukushima area, as well as incinerating this waste in those other prefectures; deemed foods grown in the Fukushima area safe for consumption and export; minimized the emergence of a spike in thyroid-related conditions, as well as the 100+ surgeries that have taken place relating to thyroid disease [8]; refused clean-up help from the 700+ retired nuclear personnel of the Skilled Veterans Corps for Fukushima, who not only had professional expertise to offer, but who because of age were attempting to reduce exposure to younger workers of reproduction ages.
The government has totally ignored the demonstrations of hundreds of thousands of Japanese people protesting the restart of Japan’s reactors (echoing sentiments of 2/3 of the population), and calling for their replacement with renewable energy. Currently, it is in effect forcing evacuees to return to potentially contaminated areas or else lose their victim compensation. And certainly not the least – it has failed to prosecute anyone from TEPCo or the government for their contributing roles in the ongoing disaster.
It has taken five years for anyone to finally be indicted [4] for their actions/inactions relating to the disaster. While the Japanese government itself could not find any wrongdoing serious enough to indict anyone for the perpetual radioactive contamination of the Pacific Ocean and large swathes of eastern Japan, and the displacement of 160,000 people and 3,200 evacuation-related deaths, a rarely used civilian judicial panel finally did on February 29, 2016 – five years after the fact, and after repeated government inaction. Three former TEPCo officials were recently (and some news accounts point out – finally) indicted on charges of professional negligence resulting in injury and death. Perhaps the government reasoned that if Nanking was not so bad, Fukushima must simply be a misdemeanor.
TEPCo too has engaged in its own levels of obfuscation and questionable behaviors relating to the clean-up. They have lied on numerous occasions to the Japanese government, as well as the international community [2,3,4,5]; employed clean-up sub-contractors and personnel reportedly with ties to the Yakuza; provided workers little training and not much in the way of personal protection from irradiation and contamination; demonstrated no ability to stanch the flow of radioactively contaminated water from the reactors and into the Pacific Ocean, finally publicly admitting that they felt they would have to release contaminated water directly at some point. It has also reneged on mediated victim compensation payment agreements [7].
Although further removed in time and buried in the collective consciousness of a society that seems to demonstrate the recall capacity of a fruit fly, the Chornobyl disaster of 30 years ago continues to offer its own unique examples of “SCUM”. While numerous health organizations, NGOs and individual governments
Construction of the newly completed replacement sarcophagus
report deaths and health effects into the hundreds of thousands, the “official story” number of 56 radiation-related deaths is the one most conveniently used in news stories and public statements. The explosion of thyroid-related conditions and surgeries is minimized by the terse clinical observation that this is somehow acceptable, since it is “relatively easy” to provide treatment for thyroid disorders. The stories of the 800,000 liquidators receive little attention these days, and their diseases and suffering are relegated to “stress” and “nuclear phobia” – as if these would have existed absent the nuclear disaster.
High-priced, slick documentaries abound, claiming the “recovery” of wildlife in the Contaminated Zone. These often “forget” to mention that much of this alleged recovery can be attributed to the near-total absence of the apex predator – mankind. They further fail to mention the numerous studies showing the opposite is actually true when one examines in greater depth the overall health and reproductive capabilities of many of the remaining wildlife inhabitants of The Zone that aren’t good photogenic subjects for heartwarming documentaries – the insects, bacteria, fungi, plant species, etc., which make up the base of the web of life in the region.
Ignoring the rhinoceros in the living room – the current de facto civil war raging in Ukraine – the Kyiv-based Ukrainian government continues to insist that it will build an additional 13 nuclear reactors [9] on top of the 15 currently in operation in a nation on the cusp of war and self-annihilation — some of which were under threat during the hotter hostilities. Apparently, the phrase, ”loss-of-offsite-power” accident has not yet been translated into Ukrainian.
THE U.S. (LACK OF) RESPONSE POST FUKUSHIMA/CHORNOBYL
One should not get the erroneous impression that the “SCUM” phenomenon applies solely to Japan and Ukraine. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and the nuclear industry here have contributed heavily to the list of lessons-not-learned and missed opportunities to improve safety. Consider:
Going against the recommendations of its hand-picked expert analysis team making post-Fukushima “lessons-learned” recommendations, the NRC denied an emergency interveners 2.206 petition which called for safety improvements in the 24 U.S. reactors of the same design that melted down and blew up at Fukushima – four of which are in Illinois. These improvements would have added filtered vents (which were added to European and Japanese reactors after the Fukushima meltdowns) to keep radioactive materials inside the plant during meltdowns; and improvements to the emergency cooling systems for the “spent fuel pools” containing the reactor’s spent fuel. [10]
The NRC also delayed for years the implementation of several other “lessons learned” recommended by NRC staff.
After the Chornobyl disaster in 1986, regulators insisted that there were no lessons to be learned here in the U.S. because the U.S. utilities did not operate any reactors of the design type of Chornobyl, which NRC deemed inferior to U.S. designs. After the Fukushima disaster, in which three U.S.-design GE boiling water reactors widely used in the U.S. melted down and exploded, the NRC insisted that lessons were not applicable to the U.S. because the Japanese had modified these designs and operated them differently than is done in the U.S.
In December 2012 NRC whistle-blowers revealed that the NRC had been covering up the severity of accident potential from floods at U.S. reactors downstream of dams.[13]
In August 2015 the NRC rejected another recommendation emanating from the high-level task force it convened after the March 2011 Fukushima disaster which called for making Severe Accident Management Guidelines for reactor emergency response planning for Fukushima-level emergencies mandatory at nuclear reactors, stating the staff recommendation did not meet a strict cost-benefit standard. [12]
In September 2015 the NRC abruptly cancelled a cancer study [11] it had commissioned with the National Academy of Sciences to definitively determine the health impacts of living near nuclear reactors. The Academy had already done considerable work in this direction when NRC terminated the study, claiming it would not be “cost effective” to obtain this definitive answer.
Most recently seven NRC nuclear engineers felt compelled to file an emergency 2.206 safety-related petition with their superiors at NRC after uncovering a safety flaw found in 98 of 99 U.S. reactors which has existed since the reactors were built. Their concerns and recommended actions were denied two times previously by NRC officials higher in the chain of command. This forced the NRC engineers to file as “citizen petitioners” rather than as NRC employees to bypass the NRC regulatory obstruction. The condition was first identified at Exelon’s Byron Illinois nuclear station in 2012. In spite of the fact that the safety condition persists, and is of a concern level that NRC regulations require that the reactors be fixed or be shut down, NRC has taken no action to implement the fixes four years after being reported. [14]
Historically, repeated instances like these show that NRC has demonstrated a near anaphalactic-allergic response to assertive regulation of the U.S. nuclear industry – so much so that critics insist that NRC must stand for “not really concerned.” This abdication of regulatory responsibility comes to the detriment of protecting the U.S. public and the environment.
A former senior aide to the Commission bluntly observed [15] in 2012, that the “[C]ommission and that agency [NRC] were complete and total captives of the nuclear industry. One and the same.”
The one and only “lesson to be learned” from the nuclear disasters at Fukushima and Chornobyl is that – this is what you get when the regulators stop regulating. Perhaps these anniversaries suggest – or warn — it is time to do major house cleaning at the NRC, and establish a truly independent regulator that will make public health and safety its prime concern – before we’re forced to start observing more such anniversaries here in the U.S.
https://neis.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/disaster-turism-top.jpg9131460nuclear energyhttp://neis.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/logo-300x138-new.pngnuclear energy2016-03-10 23:05:342021-01-28 21:17:42FUKUSHIMA AT 5, CHORNOBYL AT 30
NEIS hosted the first training session of the newly formed Radiation Monitoring Project (RMP) in Chicago on October 30th. Nuclear researcher Lucas Hixson of Enformable Environmental Services of Michigan conducted an intensive training for 10 eager trainees on the topics of radiation and the field use of monitors.
The Chicago event was the first of what will be a series of trainings around the country sponsored by the RMP. The next trainings are tentatively slated to be held in Chicago sometime in January; and in Albuquerque in March, 2016.
Hixson led participants through an intense classroom training on radiation basics lasting nearly five hours. This was followed for the next three hours by hands-on training using the monitors provided by the Project to take readings on selected radioactive samples Hixson provided. An edited video of the training will soon be available on the RMP webpage hosted on the website of Diné No Nukes of Albuquerque, NM.
The purpose of the RMP is to professionally train a cadre of frontline community members and activists who either live in or near nuclear/radiation-related facilities; or who are affected by some radiation contamination in the use of industry-grade radiation monitors. The Project intends to compile and archive data; and act as a validity check to industry and government information concerning contamination and spills of radioactive materials. Having the participants professionally trained and equipped with industry-standard monitors enhances the validity of their findings.
The Project is a joint venture of Diné No Nukes of Albuquerque, NM; Sloths against Nuclear State of Brooklyn, NY; and NEIS of Chicago Illinois. These groups raised close to $17,000 this year to purchase 15 hand-held devices. Fundraising continues (see below) and will go to cover the costs of future trainings, and purchase additional radiation monitors.
The RMP intends to offer the use of the monitors free of charge to individuals and groups living in or near communities threatened by some form of radiation contamination. Candidates will have to submit a formal application (see below) to be considered for receiving a monitor; and will have to agree to participate in a formal training conducted by RMP. Accepted applicants will also be urged to submit their data to RMP for archiving.
While other radiation monitoring projects have been in operation for years, it seems that the RMP model is the first of its kind in the U.S. While the fundamental purpose of the Project is to protect people and communities from radiation hazards, its overarching goal is to train a constantly growing cadre of professionally trained people whose information and data cannot be disputed or dismissed as irrelevant.
After Fukushima it became abundantly clear that citizens cannot count on the information coming from government agencies and the nuclear industry as being valid and unbiased, if not outright falsified. Nor can they count on the government to do monitoring when and where it counts. The RMP intends to create a corps of citizen experts whose data and training will serve as a reality check on the usual “the public was never in any danger” pronouncements of groups like the NRC and EPA.
Individuals and organizations interested in being considered for participation in the RMP can submit an application form by e-mail.
Send the link along on Twitter and Facebook, with a little blurb about your experience at the Training. Up to 7% of your donation will go to GoFundMe fees. So….
Donors wishing to make TAX DEDUCTIBLE contributions can do so through the NEIS website at:
and selecting the Radiation Monitoring Project from the “special purpose” field.
NEIS will also accept checks by mail made out to NEIS, and marked “RadMonitoring Project” in the memo field.
The full title of the RMP is, “The Radiation Monitoring Project: Protecting Our Communities. Watching the Watchers.” You are on notice NRC; we WILL be watching from now on.
https://neis.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Radiation-and-Public-Health-Project.jpg320479nuclear energyhttp://neis.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/logo-300x138-new.pngnuclear energy2015-11-06 23:10:062021-01-28 21:17:51RADIATION MONITORING PROJECT HOLDS FIRST TRAINING
CHICAGO – Thousands of nuclear waste shipments would cross through Illinois, if Congressional plans for the country’s first nuclear waste repository in Nevada move forward. Today, Nuclear Energy Information Service, along with dozens of environmental and clean energy groups nationwide, released maps of the likely routes radioactive shipments would use. The groups want state residents to tell Congress: Yucca Mt. is not the right place; and premature transportation of high-level radioactive waste HLRW is dangerous and unnecessary.
According to the map (see attached), 7,821 shipments of highly radioactive waste fuel from scores of nuclear power plants east of the Mississippi River, including the 14 in Illinois, would pass through the state on interstates, railways and even barges, including five if Illinois’ largest cities with a total population of 3.3 million people. This is the 5th largest amount of HLRW passing through any state. Each shipment would contain several times more radioactive material than the Hiroshima bomb blast released, with 20 to 50 tons of irradiated fuel assemblies in each canister. Department of Energy studies completed in the 1990s confirmed that accidents in transporting the waste to Yucca Mountain would be a certainty, due to the large number of shipments that would be required. The shipments would also be vulnerable to attack or sabotage along the hundreds or thousands of miles that each cask would travel.
“Illinois is not ready for mass transportation of nuclear waste,” asserts David Kraft, director of the Chicago based Nuclear Energy Information Service, an Illinois nuclear power watchdog organization. “Most first responders are part-time or volunteer; some are not even trained to handle a radioactive waste accident. We have all witnessed horrible oil train derailments and explosions in recent months. An accident involving tons of nuclear waste in Chicago or Aurora could force thousands of people to evacuate their homes, schools, and businesses; and radioactively contaminate dozens of square miles,” Kraft points out.
The Illinois Department of Nuclear Safety (under IEMA) has committed to escorting every shipment of HLRW into, through and exiting Illinois. With the State’s current budget crisis, and layoffs and downsizing of State agencies and departments, that commitment must be seriously questioned at the present time. This makes unleashing thousands of shipments of HLRW on to Illinois roads and rails a potentially more dangerous proposition.
Some in Congress – including a very vocal but ill-informed Rep. John Shimkus (R.15th) of Illinois — want to force a nuclear waste dump to open in Nevada, over President Obama’s and the state’s objections as well as that of the Western Shoshone Nation. The president has defunded the proposed Yucca Mountain repository since 2010, effectively abandoning the controversial project, while Nevada has demonstrated the site is not suitable for storing nuclear waste and opposes the project. Nevada controls land and water rights the federal government would need to complete the project. To overcome that obstacle, Congress would need to enact a law overriding the state’s rights. Doing so would then open the door for the nuclear waste shipments to begin.
“Congress should support the people of Nevada and abandon Yucca Mountain,” said NEIS Board President Gail Snyder. “It is unconscionable to risk the lives of Illinois residents transporting nuclear waste through our neighborhoods and communities, just to dump it at Yucca Mountain, where we and the Dept. of Energy know it will leak anyway. We need real solutions to the nuclear waste problem, and we are never going to get them until Congress abandons Yucca Mountain. Until then, the waste can be stored more securely where it is now, without putting it on our roads and railways, traveling through our communities,” concluded Snyder.
NEIS is calling on the Illinois delegation to Congress to oppose Yucca Mountain and ensure transportation of nuclear waste occurs only when there is a scientifically proven, environmentally sound, and socially responsible long-term management plan; and an operational HLRW permanent disposal facility in place. The nuclear waste problem can never truly be resolved until nuclear power plants are permanently shut down and stop generating radioactive material. New reactors would only exacerbate the problem: more dump sites would need to be created, and the transportation of lethal radioactive waste would have to continue indefinitely.
Large-scale nuclear waste transport would also occur if, as some in Congress advocate, a “centralized interim storage” (CIS) site for HLRW were created. In that case, the waste would either have to move twice (once to the “interim” site, and then to a permanent site), thus doubling the risks; or the “interim” site would become a de facto permanent waste dump–without going through the necessary scientific characterization.
A 2012 report released from the Oak Ridge National Laboratory concluded,
“The one-site solution for stranded SNF based on minimizing the transportation distance matches the base case scenario with four and five storage sites for the most favorable ISFSI site in Illinois (47 and 44). The more cost-effective and flexible three-site ISFSI solution (Fig. 48) would move this site to northwest Illinois. Although the northwest Illinois location may not quite be optimized with respect to transportation distance for the case of stranded plant fuel, it may well fit into a national scheme for the current SNF storage issue. Therefore, establishing this general location as the initial consolidated ISFSI location would seem to have merit….
“This critical finding is encouraging considering the fact that Recommendation #3 of the Transportation and Storage Subcommittee of the BRC, as excerpted previously, gave priority to the SNF stored at the orphaned plants. ORNL’s conclusion is that, if the BRC’s said recommendation is to be implemented as the pilot project of a larger, longer-term national fuel disposition campaign, the northwestern Illinois location seems to have geographical attributes and transportation infrastructure advantages that would facilitate the entire planning, implementation and operation phases of the campaign.” (see attached file)
Siting a CIS facility in Illinois for the nation’s “orphaned” HLRW (from reactors that have already closed, such as Exelon’s Zion Station north of Chicago) would add an additional 9,000+ tons of HLRW to the 9,000+ tons that Exelon’s reactors in Illinois have already produced – all with no place to go for disposal. Experts believe this HLRW would sit in Illinois until at least 2048 at the earliest, thus making Illinois a national de facto HLRW dumpsite.
“Rep. Shimkus’ zeal for moving HLRW around prematurely could inevitably lead to Illinois becoming the de facto HLRW dump for entire nation, “ Kraft points out. “As Einstein once said, ‘Intellectuals solve problems. Geniuses prevent them.’ We could use a few more geniuses on the HLRW issue in the Illinois delegation to Congress, and Rep. Shimkus does not seem to be one,” Kraft concluded.
“The nation needs a permanent, deep geologic HLRW disposal facility. That’s a given, and we support that,” Kraft continues. “Engaging in a dangerous high-level radioactive waste shell game that unleashes 70,000+ tons of HLRW onto the nation’s crumbling road and rail infrastructure and waterways, just so the nuclear industry can continue to make more even more HLRW is irresponsible and does not solve the problem of finding the permanent disposal facility location. Neither does sending it to an inadequate hole in the ground, nor a ‘temporary’ CIS. For those reasons we and scores of other safe-energy and anti-nuclear organizations nationwide are urging citizens and municipalities to TELL their Congressional representatives to reject the ‘Fukushima Freeway’ concept of radioactive waste management,” Kraft concluded.
** NEIS was founded in 1981 to provide the public with credible information on the hazards of nuclear power, waste, and radiation; and information about the viable energy alternatives to nuclear power.
CHICAGO—Exelon Corporation was handed a stunning defeat today when the Washington, D.C. Public Services Commission (PSC) rejected Exelon’s merger bid with East Coast utility PEPCO.
The rejection denies Exelon a sorely needed new market in a regulated environment to help prop up its failing and anachronistic business model. Exelon’s nuclear fleet – the nation’s largest — has been failing in the deregulated markets it helped create in Illinois (in the late 1990s). Exelon decided to “go retro” to bolster profitability by going back into regulated markets such as PEPCO’s, where profits would be guaranteed.
The D.C. PUC cited in its unanimous rejection that the proposed Exelon/PEPCO merger was “not being in the public interest:“
From the Commission press release:
“Chairman Kane stated, “The public policy of the District is that the local electric company should focus solely on providing safe, reliable and affordable distribution service to District residences, businesses and institutions. The evidence in the record is that sale and change in control proposed in the merger would move us in the opposite direction.”
Sources close to the proceeding indicate that the Commission also viewed Exelon’s business model, and specifically its behavior in other markets like Illinois as being decidedly anti-efficiency and renewable energy, something which is “in the opposite direction” from where the D.C. PSC felt customers would benefit.
“Exelon’s overt hostility to renewables and energy efficiency, both here in Illinois with its current legislation, and in its anti-renewable lobbying efforts in Congress, has come back to bite them big time,” notes David Kraft, director of the Chicago-based Nuclear Energy Information Service, an Illinois nuclear-watchdog organization and renewable energy advocacy group.
In early 2015 Exelon lobbyists helped introduce legislation in Springfield called the “Low Carbon Portfolio Standard,” (HB3293 & SB3328) which was not acted upon during the Spring 2015 session. Critics view this legislation as clearly anti-renewable energy, more evidence of its failed and anachronistic “big box” business model, and a bailout for five money-losing Illinois nuclear reactors. Some expect that Exelon will try to sneak this legislation through the Fall veto session, or else resurrect it during the Spring of 2016.
“For the better part of two years, NEIS has been sounding the alarm with Illinois public officials and largely disinterested journalists that Exelon has been spearheading a nationwide “nuclear war” against renewable energy. Finally, someone in a position of authority and responsibility has gotten the message, saw evidence that this was ‘not being in the public interest,’ and acted to protect their constituents,” Kraft continued.
“We can only hope that Illinois legislators and Governor Rauner take a lesson from the D.C. PSC, and reject Exelon’s Illinois plans to gut renewable energy and energy efficiency in Illinois,” Kraft concludes.
Chicago, IL.—The “Radiation Monitoring Project”, a national initiative to establish monitoring of radioactivity in communities contaminated by the nuclear fuel chain, received over half its $15,000 fundraising goal in a single anonymous donation earlier this week.
The Radiation Monitoring Project is a collaboration among three organizations: Diné No Nukes (DNN) of the Southwest region, Nuclear Energy Information Service (NEIS) located in Chicago, Illinois and Sloths Against Nuclear State (SANS) based in Brooklyn, NY. These organizations represent communities across America affected by various stages of the nuclear fuel chain—such as uranium mining and milling, waste transport and storage, and nuclear reactors.
“This gift was totally unexpected,” notes Dave Kraft, director of NEIS. “It makes it very likely that we will not only reach our initial targets, but may enable us to purchase even more radiation monitors for distribution than initially planned. Whoever the donors are, we thank you, and so do the communities your gift will be protecting,” says a grateful Kraft.
Due to the lack of public monitoring of radioactivity and access to real-time data regarding radioactive contamination, the three organizations are working together to establish mechanisms to monitor radioactivity and the means to access the information online.
“As long as the American public is not aware of the radioactive pollution in their area, the more they are susceptible to adverse health effects,” states Charmaine Whiteface from Defenders of the Black Hills, an organization dealing with radioactive contamination on Lakota and Cheyenne lands.
Nationally, many communities are in dire need of this type of monitoring to protect human populations, but lack the necessary resources or technology to do much about it. Through this project, these organizations are not only addressing the need for monitoring to protect the public health and safety, but they are also providing culturally appropriate education and support for communities to protect themselves.
This first stage of the project is to raise funds to secure at least 10 radiation detectors (also known as Geiger Counters) as well as to host multiple trainings in different regions to use said devices. The group is using the platform Go Fund Me and receiving tax-deductible donations via NEIS, which received the donation this week from an anonymous donor.
In response to Fukushima, the 2013 WIPP plutonium leak in New Mexico, and in the wake of the recent May 2015 radiation leak at Indian Point nuclear reactor (less than 60 miles north of New York City), residents in urban areas are becoming alarmed to the real dangers of nuclear energy production. Just like the disasters at Chernobyl and Three Mile Island, residents of these areas will be permanently impacted by the radioactivity, health effects, economic upheaval, relocation, and the many costs never paid for by the nuclear industry itself.
Unknowingly, a huge percentage of Americans in the Western United States live everyday near radioactive waste sites contaminated from past mining. Beginning in the 1870s, uranium was discovered in Colorado and mined during the 19th century in both Colorado and Texas. The most contaminated sites were created during the Manhattan-Project or Atomic Energy Commission mining-era, largely on indigenous lands and within sources of drinking water for many indigenous peoples. In places like Churchrock, New Mexico—site of the world’s largest uranium tailings spill in 1979—both ground and surface water were contaminated. Today, the majority of these past mining areas remain un-remediated. Residents in Churchrock are still living with contamination from past mining and the 1979 spill. Such rural locations are not in the news and, in the past, did not receive the media attention that was created around Three Mile Island or Fukushima,
Arnie Gundersen of Fairwinds Energy Education – an internationally recognized nuclear issues expert, especially on the Fukushima nuclear disaster — says in support of the project: “Radiation exposure to Native Americans is one of the great untold stories of the nuclear era. These detectors will help the truth to be told.”
This project ties together the entire nuclear fuel chain by addressing the similar needs of different communities working to protect themselves and future generations by identifying contaminated sites and preventing unnecessary exposures at these places.
The project and fundraiser commenced on the anniversary of the Chernobyl disaster this year, April 26, 2015. The organizations plan to reach the goal of $15,000 by July 16, 2015 which is the anniversary of the Churchrock Spill as well as the first nuclear test explosion in 1945 at the Trinity Site in southern New Mexico.
PART 2: “NUCLEAR: IT ISN’T CLEAN, GREEN OR RENEWABLE”
CHICAGO-[NOTE: With the Illinois Legislative session scheduled to end May 31st, and the Legislature soon to vote on the future direction of Illinois energy services, NEIS is initiating a series of releases over the next few weeks designed to address some of the myths, misconceptions, and ignored aspects of the debate.]
Nuclear Illinois — Exelon’s 14 reactors circle Chicago
In a recent exchange in the Illinois Senate Energy Committee on Wednesday, May 13, Sen. Chris Nybo attempted to get Sen. Don Harmon, sponsor of the Illinois Clean Jobs Act, to describe nuclear power as clean and renewable. Sen Harmon steadfastly resisted this attempt to linguistically detoxify nuclear power.
“Nuclear power is NOT ‘clean,’ it is NOT ‘green,’ and it is NOT ‘renewable,’” Dave Kraft, director of the Chicago-based Nuclear Energy Information Service states emphatically.
“Labeling something does not make it so,” Kraft continued. “You can dress a pig in silk, marry it, and call it your spouse all you want. But one morning, you will wake up in bed to the reality of your delusion.”
Using nuclear power to generate electricity may result in less carbon entering the atmosphere. But, in the same process large amounts of radioactive materials are unnaturally concentrated, manufactured, and ultimately released into the environment by nuclear power plants, the fuel chain required to provide and manufacture the fuel, and ultimately the radioactive wastes produced.
“Radioactive wastes are NOT clean. An energy source that produces hazardous high-level radioactive wastes which must be kept out of the environment for 225,000 years at great societal cost can hardly claim to call itself ‘clean,’” Kraft asserts. “Trading more plutonium for less carbon is simply dumb energy policy, and totally unnecessary given the viable alternatives that already exist,” he concludes.
Nuclear power plants are also responsible for other kinds of radioactive pollution and contamination:
Exelon’s Illinois nuclear reactors have already generated nearly 10,000 tons of long-lived “high-level” radioactive spent-fuel wastes, the most of any state in the U.S., adding ~300 tons more each year;
Exelon’s 11 Illinois nuclear reactors generate over 98% of the radioactivity found in all of the “low-level” radioactive wastes generated in Illinois in any particular year;
Reactors are permitted by regulation to routinely discharge quantities of radioactive materials into the air and waters, provided they are below regulatory standards;
Radionuclides are “accidentally” released into the environment due to management, equipment and personnel failures. The largest “accidental” release of radioactive tritium (a radioactive form of hydrogen) in the U.S. was released by Exelon’s newest Braidwood reactors in the late 1990s. Over 6 million gallons were released, some of which found its way offsite, an incident which resulted in Exelon having to provide a new drinking water supply for the adjacent community of Godley;
Uranium mining has created over 10,000 active and abandoned mines; and resulted in the creation of over 150 million tons of radioactive mill tailings, largely piled in open-air heaps at 51 sites, mostly on Native lands. The largest release of radiation in North America occurred at Church Rock, NM, on Diné lands in 1979, when a tailings pond dam burst into the Rio Puerco River, sending radioactive contaminants 25 miles downstream and into the area’s only major source of drinking and grazing water.
“For decades nuclear proponents have been disingenuously using the phrases “clean”, “non-polluting,” and “renewable” to describe nuclear power,” Kraft points out. “Most recently this has occurred in Illinois with Exelon’s HB 3293 ‘Low-Carbon Portfolio Standard‘—an attempt to pitch its failed and money-losing reactors as essential ‘low-carbon’ sources to help the state meet the upcoming U.S. EPA Carbon Rule standards. This opportunistic use of the EPA Rule to justify a $1.6 BILLION bailout is the latest attempt of Exelon to re-write reality for corporate profit,” Kraft says.
Exelon claims its reactors are not being valued enough for their contribution of not releasing carbon into the atmosphere as fossil fuel power plants do. This re-writes history, according to Kraft:
“First, no Exelon reactor ever built in Illinois was built (and paid for by ratepayers) with the express purpose of removing carbon or fighting global warming,” Kraft points out “They were built to make money for then-ComEd and now Exelon shareholders. That they are ‘lower-carbon’ is an accidental, not intentional benefit. Other truly renewable energy sources produce NO carbon emissions, and have no fuel costs or wastes associated with their generation of electricity,” Kraft points out.
No definition of “renewable energy” used in government includes nuclear power as a “renewable” source:
WIKIPEDIA (1):
“Renewable energy is generally defined as energy that comes from resources which are naturally replenished on a human timescale such as sunlight, wind, rain, tides, waves and geothermal heat.”
U.S. DEPT. OF ENERGY DEFINITION OF RENEWABLE ENERGY (2):
“Renewable Energy: Energy derived from resources that are regenerative or for all practical purposes cannot be depleted. Types of renewable energy resources include moving water (hydro, tidal and wave power), thermal gradients in ocean water, biomass, geothermal energy, solar energy, and wind energy. Municipal solid waste (MSW) is also considered to be a renewable energy resource.”
“The Illinois Renewable Energy Portfolio Standard law also does not include nuclear power as a ‘renewable’ energy source,” Kraft points out, “and for good reason: it’s not.”
For decades the nuclear industry and its promoters at the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) have been trying to “prettify” nuclear energy as being “clean,” “non-polluting,” and “renewable. In 1998 fifteen national environmental groups filed a complaint with the Better Business Bureau’s National Advertising Division in opposition to claims made by Nuclear Energy Institute ads stating at the time, “…nuclear energy generates electricity without polluting the air or water…” was “environmentally clean” and produces electricity “without polluting the environment.”
The BBB/NAD sided with the environmental groups against these overly broad nuclear industry claims, urging the nuclear industry and NEI specifically to stop the potentially deceptive ads:
“…NAD recommends that water and air pollution claims be carefully qualified to avoid any potential for consumer confusion and that broad, unqualified claims that nuclear energy is “Environmentally Clean” or produces electricity “without polluting the environment” be discontinued.” (3)
“In spite of this very specific public rebuke by the BBB/NAD, Exelon ads under its “Nuclear Matters” campaign (4) that appeared in the New York Times from April through October of 2014 refer to nuclear power as ‘clean’ and ‘carbon-free’ and ‘emit zero air pollution’ – all claims which were criticized by BBB/NAD as “inaccurate,” “overly broad,” and “misleading,” and further noting that, “It is a fundamental principle of advertising law that a claim that is technically truthful can still be misleading.” (3, p. 20)
“It would behoove our legislators to engage in decidedly more critical thinking when evaluating the ‘technically truthful’ assertions of Exelon Corporation found in its Low-Carbon Portfolio Standard legislation,” warns Kraft. “In fact, given Exelon’s and the nuclear industry’s long and documented history of misleading people while being technically truthful about how ‘clean, green and renewable’ nuclear power is, the only rational course of action seems to be to completely reject Exelon’s bailout in the absence of proof,” he concludes.
(1) Wikipedia – definition of “renewable energy”
(2) U.S. Dept. of Energy website: definition of renewable energy
(3) Opinion rendered by the Council of Better Business Bureaus, Inc., National Advertising Division, Dec. 3, 1998, 22 pages.
(4) “Nuclear Matters” ads placed in New York Times, 4/3/14 and 10/1/14
CHICAGO-– [NOTE: With 20 days left for the Illinois Legislature to decide the future direction of Illinois energy services, NEIS is initiating a series of releases over the next three weeks designed to address some of the myths, misconceptions, and ignored aspects of the debate.]
The NEIS “Bake Sale against Exelon Bailouts! team. (l. to r.): Dave Kraft, Gail Snyder, Carol Kurz, Linda Lewison, Dennis Nelson. Jan Boudart photographer.
Three separate and distinct pieces of legislation (three in each legislative chamber for a total of six) have been submitted. Two have been submitted by industry giants Exelon (HB 3293; SB1585) and ComEd (HB 3328 Amendment 00; SB1879), and essentially recommend Illinois meet its 21st Century electric service needs with the status quo. The third (HB2607; SB1485) submitted by a loose coalition of business, environmental, institutional and community organizations and supported by Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel calls for a major push to advance the implementation of energy efficiency and renewable energy resources. The latter piece of legislation enjoys a substantial lead in legislative co-sponsor support.
The first of these issues needing more intense scrutiny deals with the notion that this is a “jobs’ issue.
“If this were really a jobs issue, this debate would have ended as soon as the Exelon bill appeared,” observes David Kraft, director of the Chicago-based Nuclear Energy Information Service. “Even for a math-challenged entity like the Illinois Legislature, which seems to display legendary incompetence in passing budgets and dealing with pension payments, the number 32,000 is still recognized as being larger than 2,300,” Kraft notes.
The Illinois Clean Jobs Act (HB2607) predicts the creation of up to 32,000 jobs annually in the energy efficiency and renewable energy (EE/RE) sectors. The Exelon legislation threatens the loss of 2,300 jobs at the 5 reactors it claims are money-losers if Exelon does not get the $1.6 billion bailout passage of its legislation would give them through a mandatory rate hike.
“If jobs is really the issue, then it is clear which legislation is superior,” Kraft concludes.
Regarding the second issue Exelon and its supporters, and some in the media, have often used the figure of 8,000 total jobs lost in Illinois should they choose to close the 5 reactors, based on what they claim are the conclusions coming from a state agency report(1) released in January.
“Not so fast here,” warns Kraft. “While the HR1146 Report did use the number of 6,931 jobs potentially lost (p. 125), on the very same page (and at numerous other points in the 170-page document), the agencies concluded that as many as 9,600 NEW jobs would be created through 2019 in the energy sectors that would make up for the closure of the nuclear plants (also: p. 145),” Kraft corrects. “DCEO in particular criticized Exelon for totally ignoring the economic benefits and job creation that would accrue to communities in the intermediate and longer term from the required decommissioning of the 5 reactors Exelon threatens to close (pp. 134, 150). And it also said that the Exelon-supportive Nuclear Energy Institute overstated its negative impacts case by as much as 10% (pp.149-150),” Kraft points out.
The HR1146 Report was not without flaws and deserved criticism, either. Mandated to provide a predetermined outcome, the State still has not evaluated the negative effects on the 21,000 direct and 97,000 total jobs in the Illinois EE/RE sectors(2) should Exelon get its $1.6 billion bailout, and some of the predictions about negative impacts on the Illinois EE/RE industries become realities.
“HR1146 was a ‘study to show,’ not a ‘study to know.’ The Legislature remains derelict in its duty by not also researching the negative impacts on the State economy and the EE/RE sectors specifically. Therefore, any decision in favor of an Exelon bailout will be made in ignorance, and without regard to nine times as many jobs as Exelon threatens to terminate,” Kraft claims.
“In short Exelon – and its supporters in the press – have ‘cherry-picked’ the negative conclusions of the HR1146 Report to suit their own need to present the most dire conclusions, while totally ignoring copious amounts of material in the same Report that provides less dire conclusions and solutions to mitigating those economic impacts,” Kraft points out.
“Both legislators and even reporters close to this issue have been stunningly ignorant of these facts, and have failed to use and report them. As a result a false and exaggerated mythology about job loss and economic chaos has been permitted to grow undeservedly,” Kraft states.
The final critical issue relating to jobs is being able to distinguish between what is a realistic potential outcome versus a disingenuous self-fulfilling prophecy. Kraft points out:
“It is EXELON that is threatening to terminate 2,300 jobs if it does not get a bailout, not the State Legislature. What has that company done proactively to minimize economic disruption to reactor communities which inevitably WILL face reactor closures? NOTHING, absolutely NOTHING!”
NEIS has pointed out to legislators that there are many ways to close a reactor (3); but, the important and operative principle is that reactors WILL close, because, unlike other large employers of company towns, they have finite operating licenses granted by federal regulators that WILL expire someday, regardless of Exelon or legislative wishes.
“You don’t start planning to fight an economic crisis when your nose is being pushed up against the fan blades. You plan in advance. This is particularly true when you’ve had 40 years advance notice that the day of reckoning will inevitably come,” Kraft says, referring to
The Byron nuclear station
the period of the initial operating licenses of U.S. reactors. Many have received 20 year extensions. Oddly, Exelon has applied for such an extension at the Byron station at great cost, even while it threatens at the same time to close the reactors.
“Prudent, intelligent elected officials would have and now should be planning in advance for the eventual closure of ALL Illinois nuclear reactors, at some time, and for some reason, in the immediate future,” Kraft asserts.
NEIS has circulated ideas for the legislature to mandate a “just transition” program for all existing reactors (applicable to other large power plants, and other large employers), which would provide funds for job retraining, and tax base protection to prevent disruption of essential public services, as was caused by then-ComEd’s unilateral decision to close the Zion reactors in 1997.
“If you wait until the crisis is upon you to act, it’s too late, and you’re subject to manipulative pressures. Like billion-dollar-plus rate hikes,” Kraft warns.
“In conclusion NEIS believes that Exelon has disingenuously used the very real and legitimate concerns over jobs loss to hold the Illinois Legislature and the affected reactor communities as ‘nuclear hostages,’ to legally extort its undeserved $1.6 billion bailout,” Kraft asserts.
“The Legislature should resist Exelon’s economic terrorism, and work for agreements that create more 21st Century jobs in the EE/RE sectors, while solving the built-in problems created by inevitable reactor closures,” he concludes.
(2) “CLEAN JOBS ILLINOIS™: An In-Depth Look at Clean Energy Employment in Illinois,” study commissioned by the Clean Energy Trust, March 2014; reported in Crain’s Chicago Business, March 20, 2014.
(3) Nuclear reactors can close for a variety of reasons. Not all are within control of either Exelon, nor the local communities:
Unexpected major accident, resulting in immediate and presumably premature closure (think: Chornobyl, Fukushima)
NRC ordered shut down (for immanent health and safety concerns; or excessive safety violations)
Exelon’s unilateral decision to close a plant on economic or other grounds (as it did at Zion, resulting in an immediate loss of about 55% of Zion’s tax base, and as it is now doing with the five reactors in Illinois it threatens to close. It IS their right to do this).
Devaluation through sale, as occurred at the Clinton reactor station, resulting in enormous loss of tax base
Eventual old-age, license expiration closure (the outcome most hoped for by the utility and community, but not guaranteed due to the above)
Additional facts worth considering:
In December 2014 the largest electric utility in Germany – E.ON Corporation – announced that it, “drop (spin off) fossil fuels and nuclear in order to focus on renewable energy, customer solutions, and distribution networks …will focus on renewables, distribution networks, and customer solutions and combine its conventional generation, global energy trading, and exploration and production businesses in a new, independent company.” ON has 33 million customers (nearly 8 times the number Exelon has), and over 60,000 employees (more than 10 times the number employed at its Illinois nuclear facilities, yet, “The spinoff will not be accompanied by a job-cutting program.”
Perhaps Exelon should hire some Germans to see how to conduct an energy transition without job loss or threats to the central government of economic collapse.
Not all large utilities believe they are entitled to raid ratepayers wallets through Springfield when they experience losses:
“But Lee Davis (at right), president of NRG’s East region, which includes Illinois, says, “We don’t have an ‘ask.’ “
He says he understands the skepticism from many within the industry: “ ‘OK, they’re here, so they’re going to demand $500 million a year to prop up something they just bought.’ Well, we’re [NRG is] not going to do that.”
Mr. Davis says NRG will lobby against providing subsidies to competitors like Exelon, since it’s investing on its own in plants many thought would close in the face of low power prices and stricter environmental standards. [SOURCE: “The one utility not asking for help from Springfield,” Crain’s Chicago Business, Sept. 27, 2014.]
future disasters when the perpetrators don’t even acknowledge the existence of the ongoing problem.
“This gift was totally unexpected,” notes Dave Kraft, director of NEIS. “It makes it very likely that we will not only reach our initial targets, but may enable us to purchase even more radiation monitors for distribution than initially planned. Whoever the donors are, we thank you, and so do the communities your gift will be protecting,” says a grateful Kraft.
