Before I post about last night's excellent talk by Jeffrey Carr at the Franklin County Chamber of Commerce mixer, I wanted to revisit Vermont Yankee and the economic report that Jeff and Thomas Kavet put together earlier this year.  The way I read it is that two of the presented scenarios are really good from the economic perspective, both in terms of employment and energy bills: the Green option and the Hybrid option.

The Green option assumes VY is shut down and:

Provides, on average, comparable employment levels relative to the VY Relicense scenario during the first decade of the analytic period and then rapidly outpaces the VY Relicense scenario over the final 17 years. Annual employment differentials relative to the VY Relicense case exceed 2,600 jobs by the end of the forecast horizon in 2040.

Retail power bills in the Green scenario are generally higher than most other scenarios in the initial 5+ years, but are substantially lower in the out years…[Through] 2023, beneficial power bill impacts will eventually result in more than 1,000 jobs per year by 2040.

The Hybrid assumes relicensing and aggressive investment in renewables:

Relicensing VY and adopting aggressive renewable energy policies yields the largest average positive employment and other economic impacts, with immediate job gains, no job losses and lower longer term power bills.

By the end of the forecast period in 2040, this scenario results in more than 2,600 jobs per year and nearly $400 million in Gross State Product per year (in 2012 dollars) than the VY Relicense case.

The best option for people concerned solely about safety and environmental impacts actually still is a net economic positive solution.  Given concerns about unemployment in the short term during our current slump, the Hybrid approach shows that we still need to invest in sustainable energy if we're to get the biggest bang for our buck.

From where I sit, the Green scenario is the first best, as it addresses job and cost concerns while also continuing with the planned decommission.  However, that might still be politically untenable.

The Hybrid scenario I think would qualify as a second best approach because it keeps VY open, contrary to the pro-shutdown folks, and requires money to be spent on renewables, which seems contrary to what most pro-nuke people like.  Does that, then, make this the most likely to work?

Is there a potential third best option?  I honestly don't know what all is entailed with recommission in terms of the NRC, economic models, etc, but is it possible to grant VY a shorter license?  Like 7-10 years?  I need to research that but just don't have time right now, so maybe somebody could help me out.

I'd be willing to consider that compromise.  While I still question the plant's safety, I'm not so sure it's an immediate danger (given any contamination has already hit the ground water, another 3 Mile Island or Chernobyl is unlikely), so maybe continued operation for an additional brief period could help us transition better to a post-Yankee, renewable regime without overly deleterious health risks.

I hope people can back away from their rhetoric and ideology a bit to consider non-binary solutions to a complex issue.

todd

(x-posted at Todd for Vermont House)