New Zoom link for Oct 11 Festival of Hope, Two to be Sentenced Oct 15, Four Others Continued Until Nov 12 & 13
New Zoom link for Oct 11 Festival of Hope, Two to be Sentenced Oct 15, Four Others Continued Until Nov 12 & 13 Bill Ofenloch, October 9, 2020/, Kings Bay Plowshares 7, Father Steve Kelly and Patrick O’Neill are scheduled to be sentenced in Brunswick, GA on October 15 & 16 in the early afternoon. It is expected that the two will be combined on October 15. The remaining four defendants, Carmen Trotta, Martha Hennessy, Mark Colville, and Clare Grady, were granted continuances yesterday by Judge Wood to Nov. 12 & 13 because of COVID-19.The defendants ask, “In the interest of public safety, and out of love for our supporters during this Covid 19 pandemic, the seven Kings Bay Plowshares members request that no one come to Brunswick for the sentencing hearings scheduled for Oct. 15-16. We do, however, encourage you all to join the Oct. 11 pre-sentencing Zoom meeting. Thank you all for your love and support, which sustains us.”
There is expected to be an audio link from the court to listen to the proceedings as was done with Liz McAlister in June. The call-in number and times will be posted on the website when we get them.
A virtual Festival of Hope is planned for Sunday, October 11, at 5pm EDT prior to the sentencing of Fr. Steve Kelly and Patrick O’Neill. It will now be hosted on the Code Pink Zoom channel. It will also be on the Code Pink YouTube channel and on the KBP Facebook page. Patrick and several of the defendants will appear. Fr. Steve Kelly will send a message from jail. Marcia Timmel, Susan Crane and Steve Baggarly, plowshares activists, will speak. There will also be a slideshow and music and a blessing.
The new Zoom link:
Climate misinformation advertisements on Facebook, seen by millions
Climate denial ads on Facebook seen by millions, report finds
The ads included calling climate change a hoax and were paid for by conservative US groups, Guardian, Damian Carrington 9 Oct 20, Adverts on Facebook denying the reality of the climate crisis or the need for action were viewed at least 8 million times in the US in the first half of 2020, a thinktank has found.The 51 climate disinformation ads identified included ones stating that climate change is a hoax and that fossil fuels are not an existential threat. The ads were paid for by conservative groups whose sources of funding are opaque, according to a report by InfluenceMap.
Last month Facebook said it was “committed to tackling climate misinformation” as it announced a climate science information centre. It said: “Climate change is real. The science is unambiguous and the need to act grows more urgent by the day.”Facebook uses factcheckers and bans false advertising but also says this process “is not meant to interfere with individual expression, opinions and debate”. Some of the ads were still running on 1 October. The ads cost just $42,000 to run and appear to be highly targeted, with men over the age of 55 in rural US states most likely to see them.
Warren and other senators wrote to Facebook in July calling on it to close the loopholes.
Citizens express opposition to dangerous increased plutonium pit production

The Pentagon has stated it needs annual production of 80 plutonium pits, the triggers for nuclear weapons. T The DOE has approved its Supplement Analyses for four possible ways to execute thisapproved its Supplement Analyses for four possible ways to execute this.
At LANL, DOE proposes upgrades to both LANL’s Plutonium Facility and the Radiological Laboratory Utility and Office Building which is part of the Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Replacement (CMRR) Project.
Despite a mission that has been re-directed and an expansion involving about $15 billion in upgrades for two major buildings and related infrastructure, DOE has decided not to undertake a new Site-Wide Environmental Impact Statement (SWEIS) for LANL. https://www.energy.gov/nepa/downloads/doeeis-0380-sa-06-final-supplement-analysis and https://www.energy.gov/nepa/downloads/doeeis-0380-amended-record-decision Neither our congressional delegation nor our Governor has voiced disapproval of bypassing the SWEIS.
On Wednesday afternoon, October 7th, a citizens’ hearing was held outside the New Mexico State Capitol Building. Testimony was taken about DOE’s dramatic expansion plans for LANL that involve an installation of the size and importance and with the attendant dangers of the closed nuclear weapons plant at Rocky Flats, Colorado. The event, which provided a place for dozens of citizens to express their opposition to DOE’s plans in Northern New Mexico, was sponsored by the Los Alamos Study Group. http://www.lasg.org/
The DOE proposals are too broad and too expensive to go forward without an SWEIS with public review and comment opportunities.
Every day, new information is released about the increased hazards at LANL. This week the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board issued a new report about the inconsistent and inappropriate consideration of potential energetic chemical reactions, or explosions, involving transuranic waste stored at LANL. The Board conducted an analysis of transuranic, or plutonium-contaminated, wastes stored at the Plutonium Facility, the old Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Facility, the Transuranic Waste Facility, and Area G and the potential for explosions. It found that LANL has not fully analyzed for possible explosions involving transuranic waste stored at these facilities that would result in high exposures to workers and the public. https://www.dnfsb.gov/documents/reports/technical-reports/potential-energetic-chemical-reaction-events-involving
The Board asked DOE to respond within 120 days.
Utah congressman takes action to stop future nuclear weapons testing in U.S.
|
Utah congressman takes action to stop future nuclear weapons testing in U.S. The Daily Universe, By Kaela Cleary, October 9, 2020 With all of the chaos surrounding the U.S. presidential election, word of the Trump administration and Senate Republicans creating legislation to prepare to resume nuclear weapons testing at the Nevada Test Site hasn’t received much public attention.
|
|
USA trying to beat China, in marketing nuclear reactors to Romania
Romania, U.S. to sign cooperation agreements over nuclear reactors, By Reuters Staff, 9 Oct 20, BUCHAREST (Reuters) – Romania’s economy ministry will sign cooperation and financing agreements with the United States
Trump’s COVID infection shows why it’s time to retire the nuclear football
Trump’s COVID infection shows why it’s time to retire the nuclear football, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists , By Tom Z. Collina, October 6, 2020 President John Kennedy took powerful pain medications. President Richard Nixon was a heavy drinker. President Ronald Reagan had dementia. And now President Donald Trump has the coronavirus. These conditions can significantly impair one’s ability to think clearly. And yet, as president, each had—or, in Trump’s case, still has–the unilateral authority to launch US nuclear weapons within minutes.
President Trump is followed 24/7 by a military aide that carries the “football,” the briefcase that holds all he would need to order the immediate launch of up to 1,000 nuclear weapons, more than enough megatonnage to blow the world back into the stone age. He does not need the approval of Congress or the secretary of defense. Shockingly, there are no checks and balances on this ultimate executive power.
President Trump took the nuclear football with him to Walter Reed Medical Center, where he received treatment for COVID-19. According to Trump’s doctor, the president’s blood oxygen levels had dipped. And this, according to independent health experts, can impair decision-making ability. He is taking dexamethasone, which can cause mood swings and “frank psychotic manifestations.” Yet as far as we know, at no point did the president transfer his powers to the vice president, as allowed under the 25th Amendment.
To state the obvious, we should not entrust nuclear launch authority to someone who is not fully lucid. (Reagan transferred authority temporarily before planned surgery, as did President George W. Bush before a medical procedure that required his sedation.) A nuclear crisis can happen at any time, including at the worst possible time. If such a crisis takes place when a president’s thinking is compromised for any reason, the results could be catastrophic. ……..
If the president or his advisors have reason to believe that Trump’s thinking may be compromised, nuclear launch authority should be transferred to the vice president, Mike Pence. If Pence also gets COVID, the football could then be passed to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, President Pro Tempore of the Senate Chuck Grassley, and the secretaries of State, Treasury and Defense, in that order.
But kicking the football down the line does not solve the problem—and in fact shows why the system is broken. Does anyone really believe that the president pro tem of the Senate or the Treasury Secretary has spent much time preparing for nuclear war? And even if they had prepared, the central dilemma remains: All humans are imperfect, and we should not trust the fate of the world to any one person.
The whole concept of giving the president unilateral nuclear authority is built on the false assumption that Russia might launch a surprise first strike. In fact, Russia has never seriously considered a first strike against the United States for a simple reason: It would be national suicide. Both sides have to assume that an attack would provoke an unacceptable nuclear retaliation. Both nations, and much of the rest of the globe, would be obliterated. Starting such a war would be insanity………
It is time to retire the nuclear football. The only thing standing between us and nuclear holocaust is one man with COVID on heavy meds. That is the plan? Ending sole authority is better than entrusting it to any individual. In a vibrant democracy, no one person should have the unchecked power to destroy the world. https://thebulletin.org/2020/10/trumps-covid-infection-shows-why-its-time-to-retire-the-nuclear-football/
The very costly effort of trying to resuscitate the dying nuclear industry
Nuclear Energy — The High Cost Of A Dying Industry, Clean Technica, October 6th, 2020 by Johnna Crider
Nuclear energy has had a seriously rough year. In an article by OilPrice.com, the author asked a question: “Why is nuclear energy so expensive?” One answer, besides the obvious 2020 curse that was activated when Egyptian authorities opened up 30 ancient wooden coffins in 2019, is that other sources have just gotten much cheaper while nuclear hasn’t……….
As we know, in 2020, the coronavirus pandemic shut down US energy demand, and this added nuclear energy to a long list of energy industries that are begging for taxpayer money — well, in the case of nuclear, even more taxpayer money. And the Trump administration came through for this dying and expensive industry. Back in June, the Department of Energy announced that it would award more than $65 million in nuclear energy research. This would cross-cut technology development, facility access, and infrastructure awards.
PowerTechnology reported that these awards would be for these departments’ nuclear energy programs:
- The Nuclear Energy University Programme
- Nuclear Energy Enabling Technologies
- Nuclear Science User Facilities.
That $65 million will also be poured into 93 advanced nuclear technology projects in 28 states. And the Office of Nuclear Energy, which is part of the US Department of Energy (DOE), has spent more than $800 million on research since 2009. OilPrice noted that the $65 million would probably be “too little, too late for domestic nuclear energy.” CleanTechnica‘s perspective is that nuclear has been long dead and we’re just waiting for the green leaves of the tree (existing power plans) to turn brown (close down). New nuclear is financially hopeless, many times more expensive than renewable energy options even with energy storage costs included.
Global State Of Nuclear Energy
Antony Froggat, who co-authored the report and is a Senior Research Fellow at Chatham House in London, said, “At the same time, COVID-19 puts additional stress on the sector. In economic terms, renewables continue to pull away from nuclear power, over the past decade the cost estimates for utility-scale solar dropped by 89 percent, wind by 70 percent, while nuclear increased by 26 percent.”
Also in the US, force-on-force exercises were suspended. These are simulated terrorist attacks on nuclear power plants that use a mock adversary force to replicate design basis threat characteristics during an attack. These are supposed to help assess and improve readiness in case of an actual terrorist attack on a nuclear reactor.
In Russia and Sweden, control room staff were made to isolate in housing that was located onsite. They lived at their jobs. In Russia, one national operation reported weekly on infections among the nuclear staff. In July, there were a total of 4,500 cases.
Technology Costs
The report compared the costs of solar, onshore wind, and nuclear. The report looked at analyses for the US conducted by Lazard at the end of 2019, which advises on financial matters while managing investment portfolios. This is what they found out in a nutshell:
- Solar PV (crystalline, utility-scale) averaged $40/MWh, compared to $65/MWh in 2015.
- Onshore wind was $41/MWh, compared to $55/MWh in 2015.
- Nuclear is $155/MWh, compared to $117/MWh in 2015.
The report points out that over the past 5 years, the annual Levelized Cost of Energy (LCOE) for nuclear has risen by over 50%. In stark contrast, renewables have become the most inexpensive of any type of power generation. “What is remarkable about these trends is that the costs of renewables continue to fall due to incremental manufacturing and installation improvements, while nuclear, despite over half a century of industrial experience, continue to see costs rising. Nuclear power is now the most expensive form of generation, except for gas peaking plants.”
The report also states that even though Trump’s White House supports nuclear power and coal, both have not thrived at all under his presidency. This is due, the report says, to renewables being cheaper and basic economics. Lazard also assessed that the costs of renewables continue to fall. You can learn more about the nuclear report here.
Whether it’s the curse of 2020 or humans are slowly evolving, we are phasing out of the old and phasing in the new. In the case of energy, it’s renewables, which will benefit not only our planet but the health and well-being of people all across the globe. For now, though, it seems that taxpayers will continue footing nuclear’s expensive high maintenance bills. https://cleantechnica.com/2020/10/06/nuclear-energy-the-high-cost-of-a-dying-industry/
Too much power to USA president, to control nuclear war strategy: what if he is ill?
Why The President Is The Weakest Link In U.S. Nuclear Strategy, Forbes, Loren Thompson 7 Oct 20 President Trump’s hospitalization after testing positive for Covid-19 is one of many instances in which the performance of the nation’s chief executive has been impaired by medical issues.
Eisenhower had a massive heart attack in 1955. His successor, John F. Kennedy, was afflicted by Addison’s disease and various other maladies that required heavy use of painkillers. Kennedy’s successor, Lyndon Johnson, was hospitalized during the Hong Kong flu pandemic of 1968.
Other presidents have seen their performance compromised by psychological issues.
Richard Nixon became clinically depressed during the Watergate controversy and took to drinking heavily. Ronald Reagan may have exhibited early symptoms of Alzheimer’s disease during the closing years of his presidency.
Such frailties have long been a part of the human condition, but the advent of nuclear weapons raised alarming possibilities about where presidential disability might lead. You see, the president has unilateral authority to launch nuclear weapons, and that power is one of the few places in the federal system where no checks and balances exist.
Thus, the prosect that a president might be physically or mentally impaired is alarming………
Mr. Trump’s recent hospitalization highlights some of the things that might go wrong. A report released this week by the Northwestern Medicine healthcare system found that a third of the patients hospitalized for Covid-19 in the system’s Chicago-area facilities developed altered mental states, including confusion and delirium.
In addition, President Trump’s doctors administered a heavy regimen of drugs aimed at mitigating the health consequences of his infection. Unfortunately, one of those drugs was a steroid, and steroids are known to cause psychological symptoms in some patients such as anxiety, agitation and mood swings.
When you consider the awesome nuclear authorities vested in the president, it is unsettling to contemplate how impaired judgment or medical disability might impact decision-making in a crisis……… https://www.forbes.com/sites/lorenthompson/2020/10/07/why-the-president-is-the-weakest-link-in-us-nuclear-strategy/#7f5796d76aee
Pressure on U.S. Congress to reinstate research on links between nuclear stations and cancer
Activists push Congress to revive probe into links between nuclear plants and cancer
Nuclear Regulatory Commission killed study in 2015 after spending five years and $1.5 million on the effort, Orange County Register, By TERI SFORZA | tsforza@scng.com | October 5, 2020 Scientists and activists were stunned back in 2015 when the Nuclear Regulatory Commission pulled the plug on what was designed to be the best study of cancer near nuclear power plants ever done.
Last week, a petition with some 1,200 signatures demanding that the study resume went to members of Congress representing Southern and Central California.
“This is a scientific endeavor which will improve our understanding of cancer, the leading cause of death in California,” the petition states. “It is especially important for women, children, and the human fetus who are much more vulnerable to the biological effects of harmful ionizing radiation.”
No one knows threat
The retired San Onofre and Diablo nuclear power plants, both shut down in 2013, have been discharging low-level radioactivity into the ocean and atmosphere for decades, the petition continues, and no one knows for sure whether that poses a threat to nearby residents………
More modern studies in Europe have found that children living within 3 miles of nuclear power plants had double the risk of developing acute leukemia as those living farther away, with the peak impact on children ages 2-4.
Bart Ziegler, president of the Samuel Lawrence Foundation, said the inquiry is long overdue and must begin right away. https://www.ocregister.com/2020/10/05/activists-push-congress-to-revive-probe-into-links-between-nuclear-plants-and-cancer/
U.S. Dept of Energy report shows danger of radioactive wastes leaking from Hanford’s old decayed tanks
Report: Hanford unprepared for potential nuclear waste leak, by Associated Press, Wednesday, October 7th 2020 TRI-CITIES, Wash. (AP) — A report by the Department of Energy has shown that the Hanford nuclear reservation could face immediate issues as double-shell tanks holding high-level radioactive waste deteriorate.
An inspector general audit report released Monday said that the underground tanks at the Hanford site are planned to store waste until at least 2047, posing a threat if the deteriorating tanks fail, the Tri-City Herald reported.
The site produced plutonium for nuclear weapons during the Cold War and World War II, leaving 56 million gallons of radioactive waste in underground tanks until it can be treated for disposal.
A major leak could potentially reach groundwater. https://komonews.com/news/local/report-hanford-unprepared-for-potential-nuclear-waste-leak
Speeded up decommissioning of Crystal River nuclear reactor – some concerns about this
Duke nuclear plant demolition timeline cut from half-century to 7 years, By KEVIN SPEAR, ORLANDO SENTINEL |OCT 07, 2020 Duke Energy is poised to begin demolition of its shuttered nuclear plant, with a timeline reduced from nearly six decades to seven years because of a drop in costs.
Duke’s 890-megawatt reactor near Crystal River at the Gulf of Mexico has been out of commission since 2009, when a construction accident crippled the containment building. In 2015, facing a projected demolition cost of more than $1 billion, Duke was prepared to let the plant remain for 60 years before removing it.
But with the aging of nuclear power around the world and competitive advances in demolition technology, Duke is proceeding with a fixed contract of $540 million to remove the plant. That cost is to be covered by a trust fund of $717 million already paid for by the utility’s customers.
A newly formed company, Accelerated Decommissioning Partners, has begun engineering designs for demolition and is about to remove structures and infrastructure outside of the reactor building.
Accelerated Decommissioning Partners is a joint venture that includes NorthStar Group Services, which describes itself as the world’s largest demolition company, with services ranging from hurricane cleanup to asbestos removal, and is currently taking down the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station.
The other partner is Orano USA, a supplier of nuclear materials and services. In 2018, the company transferred the Crystal River plant’s used nuclear fuel from a storage pool to containment within dry casks that are now stored in concrete bunkers at the plant site. There is no designated disposal facility in the U.S. for used fuel, and the dry casks could remain at Duke’s Crystal River site for years or decades………
In 2009, a major effort to extend the life of the the reactor damaged the reactor-containment building’s 3-foot-thick wall. After botched repair attempts, the plant was declared economically beyond repair.
The additional cost that customers had to absorb for the attempted upgrade and trying to fix the containment building was an estimated $1.7 billion, according to the Florida Office of Public Counsel, a legislatively created agency that serves as an advocate for utility customers.
Other lost nuclear costs would arise from Duke’s move to build a $22 billion plant in Levy County. That initiative was announced in 2006 but abandoned within a decade, resulting in costs that customers had to absorb of more than $870 million .
Charles Rehwinkel of the Office of Public Counsel said Duke’s contract with Accelerated Decommissioning Partners should have included better protections in case of demolition or financial problems.
“We remained concerned that this process, which is fairly new, could have a problem down the road,” Rehwinkel said. “The problems we would be concerned about would be cost overruns and if they get part way through the process in an area where there is still contaminated metal components and there is a bankruptcy or some halt that leaves them in the position of Duke having to get somebody else to come in.”
Edward Lyman, director of nuclear power safety at the Union of Concerned Scientists, said there isn’t much track record yet for the kind of accelerated decommissioning and demolition being performed at Duke’s plant.
But his initial concern is that Duke’s fixed-price contract with the joint venture leaves little flexibility for dealing with unexpected challenges.
“They are going to have a strong incentive to minimize cost and that could potentially come at the cost of safety,” Lyman said……..
The most challenging work will involve the reactor vessel, a cylindrical assembly the size of a semitruck, with steel walls at least 5 inches thick.
Roberts said crews will cut the vessel into pieces while submerged underwater, which blocks radiation.
Cuts will be done with robots and other remotely controlled machines with a variety of band saws, diamond-wire saws and high pressure water jets with abrasive ingredients. Cutting will be according to specific sizes, shapes and weights.
While still underwater, pieces will be inserted into canisters, which, in turn, will be inserted into steel casks for shipment “more than likely by rail” to a disposal site in west Texas, Roberts said…… https://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/environment/os-ne-duke-nuclear-plant-demolition-20201007-oa4bvubxanevnof2dzyzyshg2a-story.html
USA ‘s Environment and climate cases face a bleak future with a Republican dominated Supreme Court
HOW WILL CLIMATE AND ENVIRONMENTAL CASES FARE ON A 6-3 CONSERVATIVE SUPREME COURT? THE ALLEGHENY FRONT, REID FRAZIER, OCTOBER 2, 2020
It appears that President Trump has enough votes in the Senate to confirm Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett before Election Day. That means the court’s balance would tip from a 5 to 4 advantage for conservatives to 6 to 3. What would this majority mean for the environment?
For our podcast, Trump on Earth, Reid Frazier examines what the loss of RBG could mean for the environment with Ellen Gilmer, senior legal reporter for Bloomberg Law.
But first, we take a look back at Ginsburg’s environmental legacy with Pam King and Jeremy Jacobs, reporters for E&E News who wrote in a recent article, “The passing of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg could shake the foundation of America’s bedrock environmental laws, leaving a chasm on the bench where once sat an environmental champion.” (Read the transcript to that interview HERE.)
(The interviews were conducted before Amy Coney Barrett was nominated to fill Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s seat on the Supreme Court.)
Listen to the full episode or read the transcript below:
Texas Governor Greg Abbott opposes 2 plans for nuclear waste dumping
|
Texas Governor Urges Trump To Oppose Nuclear Waste Plans, Texas Standard, 5 Oct 20, “It’s an unusual thing for environmentalists and oil companies to be on the same page, and we are on this issue,” says an Austin-based environmental advocate.
From Courthouse News Service: Texas Governor Greg Abbott has come out against two rival plans to ship highly radioactive waste from the nation’s nuclear power plants to sites on the Texas-New Mexico border, saying either plan would be unsafe and would threaten the region’s sprawling Permian Basin oilfield……. The nuclear waste plans have for years drawn the ire of advocacy groups who worry about a range of possible environmental and safety threats, but oil and gas interests have become increasingly involved in the fight as well. A coalition of oil companies and West Texas landowners called Protect the Basin was launched in 2018 to oppose the plans and has more recently stepped up its outreach. One of the coalition members, a ranching and oil company tied to one of the nation’s richest families, has been involved in fighting the issue all the way up to the D.C. Circuit. “It’s an unusual thing for environmentalists and oil companies to be on the same page, and we are on this issue,” said Karen Hadden, an environmental advocate who leads the Austin-based Sustainable Energy and Economic Development Coalition. In his letter Wednesday, Abbott urged Trump to also oppose the waste plans, echoing a call from Democratic New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham, who wrote to the president over the summer. For years, two companies have been competing for a federal license that would allow them to take in shipments of “high-level” radioactive waste from all over the country, mostly in the form of used-up nuclear fuel from power plants. Congress and the federal government have been wrangling for decades over how and where to dispose of the nation’s growing stockpile of high-level waste, but a clear path forward has never emerged. The Trump administration once flirted with the idea of reviving a long-stalled plan to dispose of the waste at Nevada’s Yucca Mountain, but the president seemed to backtrack on that idea in February. On the New Mexico side, Holtec International wants to build a new facility to house the waste, while a company called Interim Storage Partners plans to bring the waste to an existing facility on the Texas side that has stored less-radioactive types of waste for years. Federal environmental reviews have given both plans the initial thumbs-up, though neither has received a final license to move forward. Neither company immediately responded to a request for comment on Abbott’s letter. The White House also did not immediately respond. In the letter, Abbott suggested that neither of the proposed sites would be a suitable choice for storing the waste. “The proposed sites in Texas and New Mexico do not provide the deep geologic isolation required for permanent storage in order to minimize the risks of accidents, terrorism, or sabotage, which could disrupt the country’s energy supply with catastrophic effects on the American economy,” he said. Abbott has previously voiced displeasure at the general idea of bringing more radioactive types of nuclear waste to Texas, though he hadn’t until Wednesday specifically opposed the two high-level waste plans. Last year, the governor wrote on Twitter that he wouldn’t let Texas become “the radioactive waste dumping ground of America.” Abbott’s letter comes as the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission considers public comments on its initial reviews of both the Texas and New Mexico plans, and as opponents continue to fight the issue in federal appeals courts. There is no set timeline for when the commission might make a final decision on either plan. “We will continue to fight and be very vocal,” said Hadden, the environmental advocate. “It’s great that the governor came out against the projects…but that doesn’t mean that this is over.” https://www.texasstandard.org/stories/texas-governor-urges-trump-to-oppose-nuclear-waste-plans/ |
|
Ohio nuclear reactors expect tax-payer subsidy, they’re making a profit anyway !
Nuclear plants at center of Ohio subsidy fight operating above wholesale prices, S and P Global,Darren Sweeney, Gaurang Dholakia 5 Oct 20,
As the owner of two Ohio nuclear plants is pressed to open its books on the profitability of the units, the timing of subsidies at the center of a federal criminal investigation may be a larger issue.
An S&P Global Market Intelligence analysis shows Energy Harbor Corp.’s 908-MW Davis-Besse and 1,268-MW Perry nuclear plants, both in northern Ohio, have operating costs higher than wholesale electricity prices. A mid-2019 analysis showed the plants with operating costs running below wholesale electricity prices.
The most recent analysis shows wholesale prices in the PJM Interconnection rising through the end of 2020 and into 2021, which is when Ohio’s clean air credit for nuclear plants kicks in.
House Bill 6, which establishes a $9/MWh credit for clean air resources, provides $150 million in annual financial support for the Davis-Besse and Perry nuclear units beginning Jan. 1, 2021, through Dec. 31, 2027…………
Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost has reportedly told state lawmakers to bring Energy Harbor and FirstEnergy Corp. officials before legislative committees to disclose whether the nuclear plants need the subsidies.
In addition, Yost on Sept. 23 filed a civil lawsuit to halt the collection of ratepayer-backed subsidies for the state’s nuclear plants.
The lawsuit and legislative hearings come after federal prosecutors in July filed bribery charges against former Ohio House Speaker Larry Householder and four associates. They have been indicted and accused of using “more than $59 million” through a “slush fund” to steer H.B. 6 through the Ohio Legislature. An affidavit filed by an FBI special agent implies that FirstEnergy and affiliated entities, though not mentioned by name, wired funds through a 501(c)(4) nonprofit group called Generation Now to support H.B. 6 and combat a statewide referendum to repeal the law.
Former FirstEnergy subsidiary FirstEnergy Solutions Corp. emerged from bankruptcy in late February as Energy Harbor. https://www.spglobal.com/marketintelligence/en/news-insights/latest-news-headlines/nuclear-plants-at-center-of-ohio-subsidy-fight-operating-above-wholesale-prices-60569193
Ohio’s nuclear bailout law caused dissent and trouble for renewables industries

Revival of renewables sought in debate over nuclear bailout, imaohio.com, By Jim Provance – The (Toledo) Blade, 4 Oct 20, COLUMBUS — EDP Renewables North America, the world’s fourth-largest wind developer, invested more than $700 million into projects in Paulding and Hardin counties when Ohio first rolled out the red carpet.
But more recent signals from the state — including last year’s passage of the $1 billion bailout of two nuclear plants — have convinced the company to look elsewhere for its future investments.
“HB 6 created a false dichotomy — that Ohio must sacrifice a clean-energy future at the expense of its energy past,” Erin Bowser, EDP’s director of project management, on Wednesday told a House of Representatives select committee now considering repealing House Bill 6.
“But rather than pit technologies against each other, we encourage the state to leverage the strengths of each and maximize the contributions that can come from various energy sectors,” she said.
Most of the effects of the law at the heart of a $60 million Statehouse bribery scandal are set to take effect Jan. 1. The law generally creates or expands consumer-fueled subsidies for legacy nuclear and coal-fired power plants in Ohio and offsets those costs by rolling back and eliminating existing surcharges designed to create markets for renewable sources like wind and solar and reduce energy consumption overall.
House Bill 6 — and stricter property-line setback requirements separately enacted several years ago — have rolled up that red carpet first extended in 2008, Bowser said.
The House Select Committee on Energy Policy and Oversight, chaired by state Rep. Jim Hoops, R-Napoleon, whose district includes Putnam County, is considering two bills — separately introduced by Republicans and Democrats — that would outright repeal House Bill 6.
But the committee is also considering whether to replace the law, which has many moving parts that go well beyond the $1 billion, seven-year bailout of the Davis-Besse nuclear power plant near Oak Harbor and its sister Perry plant east of Cleveland.
The law also contains expanded customer subsidies through 2030 for two 1950s-era, coal-fired power plants in southern Ohio and across the border in Indiana that are owned by a consortium of utilities. American Electric Power holds the biggest share.
It also holds $20 million a year for five specific utility-scale solar projects in Hardin County and southern Ohio
The latter provision has caused a split within the Utility Scale Solar Energy Coalition of Ohio, an 18-member trade association for developers, manufacturers, and industry leaders.
“Some of our members benefited from the solar language in current law while others took a loss with the reduction in (the renewable power mandates),” said Jason Rafield, the group’s executive director. “Our members would support a return to the previous (renewable standards) because it’s good for the industry.”
But the projects that have received or been promised a piece of the $20 million solar pie under House Bill 6 don’t want to see that disappear.
Former Ohio House Speaker Larry Householder, R-Glenford, and four of his allies face federal racketeering charges for allegedly using a non-profit corporation to launder some $60 million in “dark money” from FirstEnergy Corp. and related entities.
The money was used to help elect state representatives loyal to Householder, who then helped to elect him speaker in 2019. The new speaker then used his power to push through the law that would provide $150 million a year to support the two nuclear plants owned by a former FirstEnergy subsidiary now called Energy Harbor.
Once it became law, the funding scheme allegedly continued to fight successfully an effort to ask voters to repeal the law on this fall’s ballot. All of the defendants have been accused of diverting some of the money for their personal use……… https://www.limaohio.com/news/430030/revival-of-renewables-sought-in-debate-over-nuclear-bailout
-
Archives
- September 2026 (257)
- August 2026 (330)
- July 2026 (355)
- June 2026 (287)
- May 2026 (306)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (267)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (375)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS








