As a resident of the state across the river (NH), I've been following this carefully.
The context of this story is that Entergy (the company that's running Vermont Yankee) is asking a) to extend its current 30 year license (currently scheduled to expire in 2012) for another 20 years. In addition, they're asking to run the reactor at 120% of its rated power during that time
This may be a great idea. Getting more years (and maybe even more power) from an existing fixed capital asset might continue to make (relatively inexpensive) power available at no carbon cost. As another poster said, a well-regulated, safe nuclear power plant should be just fine.
But...
1) Entergy has been known to minimize the seriousness things in many of their statements. Most recently, they had told regulators several times that there were *no* underground pipes that could leak. Now... Oops. We didn't realize that those pipes existed...
2) They're trying to sell this plant to some other company. I don't understand the reason - it hasn't been stated clearly.
3) It's not at all clear where the money will come from to decommission the plant when it's closed. (Somewhere between $400-600Million...) Given that Entergy is trying to sell it, will they also pass off their decommissioning fund? (Or is there even one?)
So I would be quite comfortable with extending the license for, say, 5 years at a time, with regular, rigorous inspections, as long as there is a bond or other reliable means of paying for the decommissioning.
Otherwise, we have another example of privatizing the gain while socializing the expense...
NH Resident