6 ms·

> Since the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant shut down two years ago, Northfield has been buying its off-peak operating power straight off the grid. But as more sol

> Since the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant shut down two years ago, Northfield has been buying its off-peak operating power straight off the grid. But as more solar and wind comes online, Bakas believes the pumped storage generating station could one day run as a totally climate-friendly supplier of electricity. > "I think the goal of our facility would be to look at the opportunities to purchase purely green, renewable power and be able to supply green power to the grid," he says. So right now it's fueled by... gas and coal. They could just buy clean, green energy from up north (if lobbyists hadn't killed the project). [0] [0] https://apnews.com/article/election-2021-maine-hydropower-line-54dea1a948e9fc57a667280707cddeb7 https://apnews.com/article/election-2021-maine-hydropower-li...

ch4s3 4y ago
Or you know they could have kept Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station operating if they really cared about CO2. If all you care about is carbon, the price shouldn't matter when you need base load energy.
- seoaeu 4y ago
  > If all you care about is… It is never just one thing you care about. CO2 matters. Price matters. Safety matters. Aesthetics matters. Public relations matters. Not all matter the same amount, but none are irrelevant either. Finding a real world solution is about making the best trade offs possible. You can’t just identify the most important factor and declare that the n-1 others are irrelevant
  - ch4s3 4y ago
    > You can’t just identify the most important factor and declare that the n-1 others are irrelevant I mean, yeah obviously. I'm poking fun at them for talking a big game about climate and solar/wind while actually shifting base load energy back to coal. Nuclear is far safer per kwh and takes up less land (Aesthetics). Coal seems like they traded some cost savings and less nuclear outrage for less safety, higher CO2 out put, and the cost of looking like condescending hypocrites. But that's just like one man's opinion.
    - seoaeu 4y ago
      Just read up on that specific reactor, and yeah, what a dumb move closing it
      - ch4s3 4y ago
        Hopefully they have good scrubbers on that coal plant.
- jillesvangurp 4y ago
  Actually the price is all that matters. Nuclear is the most expensive way to produce energy. Too expensive really. Even for base load. Pumped hydro can provide a lot of spare capacity and is actually pretty common, low tech, and cheap to do in some areas. Most of existing capacity is quite old. But still delivering tens of GW of power and about 0.5 twh per year. Cost is the main reason for nuclear plants to be closed. The companies operating them have to make a profit and that's hard when your competition runs circles around you in terms of cost and undercut your pricing to the point where you are losing money. Keeping aging, expensive nuclear plants open costs a lot of money and requires continuous investments. It simply can't be done without tax payer money and a state protected monopoly on prices.
- ZeroGravitas 4y ago
  > Vermont consumes more than three times as much energy as it produces, but its total energy consumption is the smallest among the states, which contributes to Vermont having the lowest energy-related carbon dioxide emissions of any state. Sounds like they care about both carbon and money. Smart.
ZeroGravitas 4y ago
I think they already get the majority of their imported power from Canadian hydro, presumably the transmission line was just to increase that. Do you have actual stats on what the current power mix is? Looking it up, it seems they only use coal in that region during peak periods, when pumped storage won't be running, so they're probably already close to 100% clean. https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=VT#tabs-1 https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=VT#tabs-1

ch4s3 4y ago

Or you know they could have kept Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station operating if they really cared about CO2. If all you care about is carbon, the price shouldn't matter when you need base load energy.

seoaeu 4y ago
> If all you care about is… It is never just one thing you care about. CO2 matters. Price matters. Safety matters. Aesthetics matters. Public relations matters. Not all matter the same amount, but none are irrelevant either. Finding a real world solution is about making the best trade offs possible. You can’t just identify the most important factor and declare that the n-1 others are irrelevant
- ch4s3 4y ago
  > You can’t just identify the most important factor and declare that the n-1 others are irrelevant I mean, yeah obviously. I'm poking fun at them for talking a big game about climate and solar/wind while actually shifting base load energy back to coal. Nuclear is far safer per kwh and takes up less land (Aesthetics). Coal seems like they traded some cost savings and less nuclear outrage for less safety, higher CO2 out put, and the cost of looking like condescending hypocrites. But that's just like one man's opinion.
  - seoaeu 4y ago
    Just read up on that specific reactor, and yeah, what a dumb move closing it
    - ch4s3 4y ago
      Hopefully they have good scrubbers on that coal plant.
jillesvangurp 4y ago
Actually the price is all that matters. Nuclear is the most expensive way to produce energy. Too expensive really. Even for base load. Pumped hydro can provide a lot of spare capacity and is actually pretty common, low tech, and cheap to do in some areas. Most of existing capacity is quite old. But still delivering tens of GW of power and about 0.5 twh per year. Cost is the main reason for nuclear plants to be closed. The companies operating them have to make a profit and that's hard when your competition runs circles around you in terms of cost and undercut your pricing to the point where you are losing money. Keeping aging, expensive nuclear plants open costs a lot of money and requires continuous investments. It simply can't be done without tax payer money and a state protected monopoly on prices.
ZeroGravitas 4y ago
> Vermont consumes more than three times as much energy as it produces, but its total energy consumption is the smallest among the states, which contributes to Vermont having the lowest energy-related carbon dioxide emissions of any state. Sounds like they care about both carbon and money. Smart.

ZeroGravitas 4y ago

I think they already get the majority of their imported power from Canadian hydro, presumably the transmission line was just to increase that. Do you have actual stats on what the current power mix is? Looking it up, it seems they only use coal in that region during peak periods, when pumped storage won't be running, so they're probably already close to 100% clean. https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=VT#tabs-1 https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=VT#tabs-1