Town Meeting Day Campaign to Shut Down VT Yankee Launches Today

Tweet

A group of prominent Vermonters today will call on fellow residents to vote on Town Meeting Day whether to relicense Vermont Yankee for another 20 years.

In March 2009, 36 Vermont towns voted to ask the legislature not to approve Vermont Yankee operation for another 20 years and to require the plant's owner, Entergy, to pay the full cost of decommissioning the plant, which could near $1 billion. The resolutions also called on the legislature to focus on finding non-nuclear sources of energy to replace Vermont Yankee, which supplies about one-third of the state's power needs.

As of now, 18 Vermont towns are organized to get this resolution on their Town Meeting Day warnings.

The group hopes today's announcement and release of the letter signed by prominent Vermonters will  inspire residents of more towns to participate, and adopt their own version of the resolution.

"Entergy is doing intensive lobbying and is expected to increase its efforts to get the legislature to pass the required resolution as we approach decision time. The only way we can counter their efforts to get the 20-year extension is if citizens in the towns are actively involved, and town meeting resolutions facilitate that," said James Marc Leas, an attorney, and one of the campaign organizers.

Other lead organizers include Dan DeWalt, a former Newfane selectman, and environmentalists Elizabeth Skarie and Crea Lintalhac.

Using the Town Meeting Day ballot to tackle controversial topics is nothing new for DeWalt. He was the founder of a popular Town Meeting Day impeachment resolution urging Congress to conduct hearings into whether then-Pres. George W. Bush should be removed from office.

Likewise, Vermonters have often used Town Meeting Day resolutions to make broader political stands on everything from the Iraq War (calling for a study on the impact deployments had on the Vermont National Guard) to a nuclear arms freeze in the 1980s.

Leas said the effort will take two approaches: First, to form groups and petition to get the resolution on the warning in as many towns as possible. Those groups would also call and write their legislators on the issue. Second, during the session, they hope to bring people to the State House to support legislators who do not support relicensure.

"This is the democratic process, and involvement by large numbers of people is key if we are to counter the $14 billion company," Leas added.

Joining Leas at a press conference today at Union Station in Burlington at 4:30 p.m. will be: Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield, co-founders of Ben and Jerry's, James Moore, VPIRG's clean energy advocate,
Phillip Baruth, UVM professor and state senate candidate, Anthony Pollina, Rep. David Zuckerman (P-Burlington), Jarred Cobb, Northeast Field Organizer, Greenpeace USA, and Phil Hoff, former Vermont Governor.

Here is a copy of the letter circulating with the petitions:

Dear fellow concerned Vermonters,

Our Vermont legislature will make a momentous decision about continued operation of Vermont Yankee sometime during the coming legislative session beginning in January. Vermont is the only state in the US whose legislature has the power to prevent further operation of an aging nuclear power plant. We want the legislature to use that power to close the plant in 2012.

Entergy Corporation has already mounted a powerful lobbying campaign. But with your help, citizens can counter those efforts and make sure that the interests of Vermonters come before those of the Entergy nuclear corporation. Grass-roots groups are working hard to ensure that the voices and concerns of Vermonters are being heard in Montpelier. Your voice is needed now to help counterbalance the well financed and relentless Entergy nuclear lobbyists.

Last year, as part of a state-wide grassroots effort to let the legislature know how Vermonters feel, 36 Vermont town meetings voted resoundingly to say forty years of Vermont Yankee are enough. The resolutions these Vermont towns passed asked the legislature not to grant approval for operation of Vermont Yankee after 2012. The resolutions also asked the legislature to hold the Entergy Corporation, which purchased Vermont Yankee in 2002, responsible to fully fund the plant's clean-up and decommissioning when the reactor closes, as the corporation pledged to do when it purchased Vermont Yankee in 2002. These Vermont towns also put on record that non-nuclear energy solutions are available for our state that make sense, are possible, and will greatly increase our safety and well being.

Town meeting votes provide a powerful way to counter Entergy Corporation’s highly paid lobbyists. In March of 2010 Vermont towns again have the chance to consider whether Vermont Yankee should get a 20 year extension. If your town has not yet voted, please consider giving a bit of your time and join with neighbors to help make your town's voice heard on this vital issue. In our small state, our voices and our town meeting votes do make a difference, and closing Vermont Yankee is a cause worth working for.

Vermont Yankee is one of the oldest still-operating nuclear power plants in the world. Its technology is not just obsolete. It is unsafe. Demonstrating its own lack of confidence, Entergy Corporation recently attempted to set up a separate limited liability corporation to shield itself from liability. Entergy Corporation is the company that allowed its subsidiary in New Orleans to go bankrupt to save its corporate money after Hurricane Katrina.

A coalition of groups is working to encourage more town meeting votes in 2010. The coalition includes the Vermont Public Interest Research Group (VPIRG), Citizens Action Network (CAN), the Vermont Yankee Decommissioning Alliance (VYDA), Nuclear Free, the Sierra Club, and Toxics Action Center. The campaign is being coordinated by Dan DeWalt, a former selectboard member from Newfane VT. If you are interested in helping put a town meeting vote on the warning in your town contact Dan at [email protected] or through http://www.replaceVY.org or by calling him at 348-7701 to see how you can get started.

Please don't let Entergy's corporate lobbyists be the only voices our state representatives hear. Thank you very much.

For a safe energy future,

Ben Cohen, co-founder of Ben and Jerry's Ice Cream Company

Jerry Greenfield, co-founder of Ben and Jerry's Ice Cream Company

David Blittersdorf, founder of NRG Systems in Hinesburg and CEO/President of Earth Turbines in Williston, founding member and past chair of Renewable Energy Vermont (REV), member of the Board of Advisors for the University of Vermont Rubenstein School of Natural Resources, the Vermont Manufacturing Extension Center (VMEC), and the Union of Concerned Scientists.

Sheila and Jeffrey Hollender, Jeffrey is Executive Chairperson of Seventh Generation, Inc.

Will Rapp, founder and former President of Gardener's Supply Company in Burlington

Melinda Moulton, co-developer of Main Street Landing in Burlington, Chair of VBSR Environmental, Energy, and Transportation Policy Team

Michael Granger, real estate broker and founder of Granger Real Estate in Newfane, Vermont

Nancy Braus, owner, Everyones' Books, Brattleboro

Margo Baldwin, President and Publisher, Chelsea Green Publishing, White River Junction, Vermont

Michael and Ellen Tenney, Brattleboro Books, Brattleboro

Spence Putnam, consultant and adjunct professor, Green Mountain College online MBA program in Sustainable Business, former Executive Director, Vermont Business for Social Responsibility, former General Manager of Danforth Pewterers in Middlebury, Vermont, and former Vice President of Operations at the Vermont Teddy Bear Company.

Beth Humstone, former Executive Director of the Vermont Forum on Sprawl (now Smart Growth Vermont), Director of U.S. Programs for the Institute for Sustainable Communities, Chair of the Board of the Vermont Housing and Conservation Trust Fund and President of the national Growth Management Leadership Alliance.

Crea and Phil Lintilhac, officers of the Lintilhac Foundation

Elizabeth Skarie, psychologist, board member of the Vermont Natural Resources Council

Elizabeth Courtney, Executive Director, Vermont Natural Resources Council

James Moore, clean energy advocate, VPIRG

Paul Burns, Executive Director, VPIRG

Todd Bailey, Executive Director, Vermont League of Conservation Voters

Jay Craven, film director and Professor of Film Studies, Marlboro College

Bess O'Brien, screen writer, film producer, and film director

Philip Baruth, novelist, commentator for Vermont Public Radio, author of the Vermont Daily Briefing, and Professor of English at the University of Vermont

Phil Hoff, former Governor of Vermont

Anthony Pollina, Progressive Party candidate for Governor, 2008

Dan Dewalt, former selectboard member, Newfane

James Marc Leas, attorney, S. Burlington

Mary Sullivan, Burlington, Vermont

Todd Lockwood, Vermont writer/photographer

Comments

[sean]

Ah, yes. A group of luminaries indeed.

By the way, Pollina's tagline is both incomplete and false. He wasn't just "Progressive Party candidate for Governor, 2008." In fact, he wasn't the Progressive Party candidate in 2008 at all. Hey, Anthony, doncha remember that part about ditching your friends in the Progressive Party midstream in 2008 and running as an Independent? His real resume is as follows:

Democratic candidate for Congress, 1986 (failed);
Progressive candidate for Governor, 2000 (failed);
Progressive candidate for Lt. Gov., 2002 (failed);
Progressive-turned-Independent candidate for Governor, 2008 (failed).

And Dewalt and Leas on your team? Come on.

And this closing line is just plain fraudulent: "Please don't let Entergy's corporate lobbyists be the only voices our state representatives hear." VPIRG is probably the single biggest lobbying group in Montpelier, with paid, professional lobbyists on their staff, and has been lobbying against VY for years. For them to suggest that VY is the only lobbying group in Montpelier on this issue is dishonest bull.

[webber]

Thanks so much to all you multimillionaires and swells, with your multiple, palatial homes and your "personal assistants," etc., for your concern for my electricity bill. When we shut down VY and replace its 4 cent/Kw power with spot-market power (produced by midwestern coal-fired plants that spew toxic air into VT) at, say, 25 cents/Kw, will you pay my electric bill? I'll be so grateful!

And while you're at it, how many of you volunteer to host, on your properties, the huge wind turbine and solar-array farms with 450-foot towers, not to mention the battery farms we'll need to store the wind and solar power for those days when the wind isn't blowing and the sun isn't shining? Thanks! Please sign up on the lines below.

I volunteer:

1. __________________________
2. __________________________
3. __________________________
4. __________________________
5. __________________________

[Doug Hoffer]

Hey Webber, please provide evidence to support your assertion that spot market power will cost $0.25 / kWh if VY shuts down. And what makes you think VY power would cost $0.04 / kWh after the current contracts run out? Interestingly, spot power is now cheaper than VY contract power, which is exactly why VY has refused to negotiate a long-term deal with VT utilities. BTW - As far as I know, the New England grid does not receive power from midwestern coal plants.

FYI: I'm not a millionaire; my home is not palatial; and I have no personal assistants. But I do pay an electric bill (just like you) and I'm convinced we can do just fine without VY.

[Jimmy]

"will call on fellow residents to vote on Town Meeting Day whether to relicense Vermont Yankee for another 20 years."

So the vote actually determines whether VY is relicensed? Just like Burlington "secured refinancing" for BT last week, right?

[webber]

"FYI: I'm not a millionaire; my home is not palatial; and I have no personal assistants. But I do pay an electric bill (just like you) and I'm convinced we can do just fine without VY."

And your name is not on the above list, right?

But since you're a wanna-be on the above list, YOU can pay my electric bill after the shutdown.

[Doug Hoffer]

Webber: Not surprisingly, you didn't answer the question (source for the assumption that VY replacement power will cost $0.25 per kWh). Question: If GMP & CVPS are buying baseload system power for well under $0.10 / kWh, why would they pay $0.25 / kWh for replacement power? And FYI, VY's power output seems like a lot in little VT, but it's a tiny portion of total available power in New England.

As for your fear about your electric bill after a VY closure, let's try this:
-- assume VY represents about 30% of your bill
-- assume your annual bill is about $1,100 or $92 per month (2007 statewide avg. was $1,003; overall residential cost / kWh was 14.11 cents)
-- thus, assuming VY currently costs about $0.05 / kWh, the VY share of your bill is about 11%
-- therefore, even if baseload replacement power is double the current VY price, that portion would represent 19% of your new bill which will increase about $10 per month

is that an issue to consider? yes; is the sky falling? hardly
moreover, you could probably save that much by making efficiency improvements in your home
or you could live in Burlington where we don't buy VY power (although system-wide baseload power includes some nuclear from other New England plants)

you complain about people hyping renewables; why not practice what you preach and stop using wildly exaggerated figures to scare people about the post-VY future?

[webber]

Why don't YOU admit that the NIMBYist culture in Vermont doesn't actually ALLOW the state to move forward with wind power?

If and when the Legislature has the cojones to: a) streamline the PSB permitting process for wind turbines, and b) outlaws individual "nuisance" suits against wind turbines on other people's or public property, and also comes up with a storage solution to the unreliability of wind and solar power, then you can talk to us about shutting down baseload power and replacing it with "renewables."

[Jimmy]

"you could probably save that much by making efficiency improvements in your home"

So you couldn't make those improvements if the rates stayed the same? Once again, your logic is impeccable

[Doug Hoffer]

nice, the old moving target ploy
I respond to your post, you ignore the facts presented and raise another issue that wasn't discussed previously

OK, for the record, I agree that NIMBYism is a problem that should be addressed; and I'm well aware that renewables are not always baseload power (but that any system needs both base & peak power sources)

now can you answer my question?

[Jimmy]

Nice, the Hoffer ploy - take a tangentially relevant statistic whose specific value isn't relevant to the point being made, and claim that someone's entire argument depends on its accuracy. Conveniently ignore the word "say," which clearly indicates that it was a hypothetical in the first place.

Whatsamatter, didn't Franco invite you to today's strategy session?

[Doug Hoffer]

tangentially relevant?!
it's the core of his argument; i.e., shut down VY and the cost will skyrocket; I responded to that with facts; I know folks like you find them annoying but that's how policy discussions are supposed to work
as for his "hypothetical", why do you think he (and others) use such absurdly inflated figures? they have one purpose, to mislead and scare people

[webber]

Even assuming your numbers are correct, and that future spot-purchase power will only cost me double to replace that portion of my power that comes from Yankee, who the hell are you to tell me not to worry about another $10 monthly increase in my electric bill? You arrogant arse.

You dismiss a 10% or so increase in my monthly electrical bill with the rhetorical flourish that "the sky is not falling." That's ironic, because you and your pathological anti-nuke fear-group are the ones who are practicing the false "sky is falling" politics with respect to Yankee.

Hoffer, why not just admit that what you and your friends are about is a single-minded, maniacal drive to shut down Yankee no matter WHAT the cost and no matter WHAT the consequences. You've committed yourself to that position and no facts, circumstances, logic, or arguments are going to change your mind. You will always come up with an argument to support your pre-determined position. If the Universal Deity herself came down from the Cosmos and told you that you're wrong about Yankee, even that wouldn't change your mind -- you'd argue with the Deity or call her a shill for "corporate interests."

How many turbines and solar arrays are slated to come on line and start producing power in 2012? And how many megawatts will they produce and what will it cost me per KwH? How much will it cost me when replacement power has to be purchased on the spot market because the wind isn't blowing and the sun isn't shining? YOU CAN'T ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS. But you still want to shut down an existing source of guaranteed, baseload power that emits no CO2 because -- well, I don't know why. I guess because of your irrational fear/hatred for nuclear power or VY.

You haven't convinced me that 2 years from now Vermont will be ready to shut down Yankee and not have major, if not disastrous, economic consequences. If every Vermont household and business suddenly incurs even no more than your supposed 10% increase in their monthly electric bill, that IS the definition of an economic disaster -- at a time when we will be just emerging from the current recession. Not to mention the fact that the decommissioning fund will not be ready in 2 years, so we Vermonters may end up footing the bill for that, too. Gee, thanks so much for your blase attitude toward my personal economy and that of my fellow working stiff Vermonters. And thanks also for your deep concern for the 500 Vermonters who are currently employed at the plant and the crisis to Windham County and Vermont when they are all suddenly laid off. You gonna put them all to work the very next day building wind turbines and solar arrays? At the same rate of pay?

In fact, not only have you not convinced me of the feasibility of suddently disconnecting Vermont from 1/3 of its power, but there isn't even a viable plan for what happens next, other than, "well, we'll figure it out and buy spot power as needed." Yet you want me to just shut up and do as I'm told and follow the wishes of your little pathological anti-nuclear, anti-corporate fear-group.

Sorry.

[Doug Hoffer]

your anger and your personal attacks are not surprising but they don't advance your argument
first, I didn't tell you not to worry about possible cost increases and certainly did not "dismiss it"; in fact, I said "it is an issue to consider"
second, the phrase "the sky is not falling" was in response to your absurd suggestion that replacement power would cost $0.25 / kWh (the clear implication being that the impact would be huge)-- and you still haven't told me where you got the figure or why you used it
third, regarding replacement power and renewables: you've been sold a bill of goods; there is ample power in New England to make up for the loss of VY without relying immediately or entirely on renewables; NE load is about 30,000 MW; NE installed capacity is well over 33,000 MW; Vermont's share of VY is 300+ MW; it's really not a big deal
fourth, according to a rep from VY (on VPR recently), the spot market price of power is LOWER than the cost of VY right now (obviously, the recession has a lot to do with this - reduced demand; but the idea that baseload power will be considerably higher than the new VY price is without basis; just another scare tactic from friends of VY)
fifth, your assertion that nuclear power is carbon free is demonstrably false; operating the plant produces no carbon but building it, mining uranium, running backup generators when the plant is down for maintenance, processing and disposing of waste, and decommissioning all have measureable carbon impacts
sixth, I hardly think concern about radioactive waste is "irrational"; you asked if I wanted a turbine in my neighborhood; you can be sure I'd rather that than a huge pile of spent uranium
seventh, you fear "major...economic consequences" if VY is shut down; I pointed out that at worst your personal cost would be about $10 per month; that's about three tenths of 1% of the average wage in VT; is it nothing? no; but it doesn't suggest a major economic problem either
and as for an economy-wide view, try this: according to the Economic Census, manufacturers spend between 0.5% and 2% of revenues for electricity; if those costs increase by 10%, it means an increase to each business of no more than 0.2% of revenues; in other words, an increase of twenty cents for every $100 of revenue; sounds absolutely cataclysmic!!
eighth, there is no reason for VT utilities to buy spot power if VY is shut down; really, they're not that stupid; they already have contingency plans in place to enter into new contracts with other wholesale providers around New England

this is an important issue that I take seriously; but it's pretty hard to have a conversation if the only information you have is from those who have a financial stake in the continuation of VY; is it a simple matter to shut down the plant? of course not; but many of us (a majority I think) believe that nuclear power should not part of our energy future and want an honest debate about alternatives; you want to repeat VY talking points, yell at me with rude language, and ascribe bad motives to anyone who disagrees with you

this isn't working

[Jimmy]

"it's pretty hard to have a conversation if the only information you have is from those who have a financial stake in the continuation of VY"

As opposed to Blittersdorf and his army of confused college students (VPIRG), who have a financial stake in the DIScontinuation of VY. Thank God a couple of guys who made good ice cream at one point and local luminaries like Baruth and Pollina have chimed in on this issue, otherwise I wouldn't know what to think.

[Doug Hoffer]

that's weak
wind energy is growing all over the world and will continue whether VY stays open or not; suggesting that Blittersdorf has a financial stake in the closure of VY is just stupid

[Jimmy]

Yeah, cracking the market wide open in your own back yard is never a big deal to businesses.

"yell at me with rude language"

Hmm, I didn't see Webber directing anything as strong as "stupid" your way, you delicate flower you.

[webber]

Jimmy's right. Recently on this blog you called Governor Douglas "stupid" and now because I push back on your anti-nuke hysteria you call me "stupid."

You're the one who's shrill and rude, Hoffer. You can't tolerate ANY pushback on your know-it-all pontifications. Whatever the subject is, you're right and anyone who dares disagree with you is "stupid."

What a jerk.

[Doug Hoffer]

gosh, two thoughtful responses
no facts or counter-facts, no analysis, no nothing
you guys are really gaining adherents to your positions
neither of you have offered any information or coherent arguments to my posts; if you do, I'll respond

and I love the classic anti-intellectual blather about being a "know-it-all"; all you have to do is present information that is relevant, can be sourced, and advances the discussion; since you can't (or won't), I must be the bad guy; and yes, I guess I am somewhat intolerant of those who purport to know something and try to influence others but cannot support their views when challenged; and I am certainly intolerant of demagoguery

oh yeah Webber, I never called you stupid; that was for Jimmy (or are the one and the same?)

this type of back & forth is why I stopped participating in the Free Press blogs; it's useless

[Jimmy]

"oh yeah Webber, I never called you stupid"

He didn't say you did, great reading comprehension skills.

Please provide citations for everything you've said here, otherwise I'll assume you're making it up. You never explained why VY shutting down wouldn't help Blittersdorf's business. You never answered several of Webber's extremely relevant questions. You haven't spoken to any specifics regarding *why* VY should be shut down, other than a crack about spent uranium in your neighborhood. And most hilariously, you don't seem to realize that "know-it-all" is a sarcastic term.

[Doug Hoffer]

oh come on Jimmy; read Webber's post again

"Recently on this blog you called Governor Douglas "stupid" and now because I push back on your anti-nuke hysteria you call me stupid."

See that? He said "you call[ed] me stupid"
talk about reading comprehension

as for citations, my sources are the DPS, ISO New England, the Economic Census, and others; if you want more, look it up yourself; you've contributed nothing to this discussion so I'm not going to do any more work for you

[Jimmy]

I wasn't asking you to do any work, if you had the citations you'd post them. Guess you're never going to answer any of those questions? Come on, draw on your deep business experience and tell me why VY's shutdown wouldn't be a huge boon for Blittersdorf's company. Tell Webber how many megawatts the existing and projected turbines and solar arrays will be generating by 2012.

"as for citations, my sources are the DPS, ISO New England, the Economic Census, and others"

That's like saying your source is the internet. If you're going to screech that someone's entire position hinges on their ability to back up a single, clearly hypothetical number, you should have had citations for everything you said ready to go. Too bad you didn't come prepared.

[Ivan Jacobs]

Vermont utilities are prepared to continue providing inexpensive electricity with or without VY.

Both GMP and CVPS have been actively putting out Requests for Proposals (RFP's) for quite some time now (with a lot of success) to replace VY's power.

(CITATION: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Vermont-Utilities-Receive-iw-14033034.html)

ISO-New England is a net-exporter of electricity: with or without VY we won't be buying power from midwestern coal facilities.

[webber]

You still haven't made the case for shutting down VY. It onbiously has to do with your irrational fear of or hatred for VY. Of course, if it were owned by the gov't, you'd probably love it.

[webbergoeatnuclearwaste]

The reason for shutting down nuclear power plants is that when they work properly, they make dangerous nuclear waste that will cost us all big time in the long run, and when they don't work properly, such as when they are run longer than they are designed for, they are simply dangerous all around... you may have heard of the hazards of radioactive materials.

The reason you get called "stupid"... well, it has to do with your disingenuous "arguments", reactionary flailing, and bad writing habits: it sure gives one the impression you are not of even average intelligence. That's why someone might think of you that way.

VY is a costly danger hanging over our heads like Damocles' sword.

[Jimmy]

"it sure gives one the impression you are not of even average intelligence."

If you wanted to question someone's intelligence by criticizing their writing, you should really have taken the time to construct a proper sentence.

BTW for those still interested, Blittersdorf's company, EarthTurbines, clearly targets Vermonters. VY's shutdown would mean reduced amortization times for his product in its primary market, and likely increased state aid to his customers that would go right into his pocket. Nah, no self-interested motivation there.

[webber]

"The reason you get called "stupid"... well, it has to do with your disingenuous "arguments", reactionary flailing, and bad writing habits: it sure gives one the impression you are not of even average intelligence. That's why someone might think of you that way."

Of course. Everyone who doesn't want to shut down VY is "stupid" and is a "bad writer." There is only one correct side to this issue. No one who disagrees with you is smart.

Way to go, douche.

[noyoueatnuclearwaste]

Ah, yes. The ol' "anyone who disagrees with me is stupid" line. A sure sign of an immature thinker.

Riddle me this, Einstein. Hundreds of millions of Europeans -- you know, the societies that you say are oh so much more advanced than America -- embrace nuclear power. Are they all stupid, too?

People can disagree on a policy issue without being stupid.

Grow up.

[noyoueatnuclearwaste]

At an Oct. 15 New Orleans town-hall meeting, President Obama said this: “We need to increase domestic energy production, employ safe nuclear energy like France, but also develop new sources of energy efficiency.”

I guess that, in addition to all those Eurpoeans, President O'Bama is "stupid," too, eh?

[Vermont Woodchuck]

How enlightening! About what I'd expect from a used curly light bulb. Little light and for the winter no useful heat.

On the subject of VY, the notables signing the resolution don't have enough wattage to toast bread. While speech is free, that also can be it's value.

The batch of you might examine what the REST of the world is doing. Japan is manufacturing and shipping small nuke plants to emerging countries so that they can get out of the Luddite age; we have Vermont trying to climb back into that womb.

If the state exports power, it is possible because of VY surplus. This tell us, we do not need the high priced subsidized small cow poot generators and local pinwheel owners selling power to the grid. Proof of this is the drop in power costs and investment losses the small suppliers now wish backstopped by taxpayers.

Why does the state contract with Hydro Quebec, which as you lovers of Gaia remember, drowned caribou, stole tribal lands from the Noble Savages, the Cree and altered nature forever! A pile of misplaced sensibilities on your part, it seems.

Tell me what the price of power will be from Hydro Qubec after VY closes.

Idiots will learn a very harsh lesson, when you have nothing with which to negotiate, you will take what ever price is offered.

Close VY and your chips are gone.

[webber]

Still waiting for all you rich "environmentalists" to volunteer to host industrial strength wind farms, solar arrays, and battery farms in your yards and neighborhoods. So far, not one of you hypocrites has signed up. Not a one. But here's another chance. Let's go.

I volunteer:

1. __________________________
2. __________________________
3. __________________________
4. __________________________
5. __________________________