« She was coming on to me! | Main | Happy New Year »

December 10, 2006

Comments

ren

What construction bond has Mr. Hall proposed? Certainly a lower Hudson without viable electrical power will be ungovernable, and possibly unsurvivable, should a cold winter ensue. Please do not rattle on about conserving. I suggest to you, and to your Mr. Hall, that closing the major local power source, may be ethically coupled with other unconsidered environmental injustices, that will loom large, once the reality has settled in. I will count it to be on your head, and upon his head, the first time a campesino family is consumed by a kerosene fire, stemming from unavailable Indian Point power. Do not say I did not alert you early on. I did, right here, right now.

As we go along, I intend to maintain this voice of Environmental Justice, because you and Hall are not yet aware that your personal belief modes are filled with injustice for many, and a preference agenda for the few.

I know you do not see yourselves that way, .....That myopia is a major irony .
I , however, do see you that way, I am in the right, and my ethics will not let me stay silent.

By the way, a statement by a prospective office holder is NOT an accomplishment. It is a worthless sound byte. It provides NO heating for the poor, the old, and the unconnected.
(Indian Point does.)

Have a nice day.

b tween

Why should entergy get a pass on safety?
There's no arguing that Indian Point currently plays an importan role in keeping the lights on around here, but at what cost?
Entergy has absolutely no interest or motivation to literally clean up their act. Clearly they need one. Threatening to close the facility will force them to either abandon it, or upgrade it to a level that doesn't pose a threat to the the 30million people who live in its kill zone.
And I understand your point about kerosene fires, and if it comes to that, then I'll answer for it.
Will you answer to the parents of the children who come down with exotic juvenile cancers because of the unnatural poisons that are leaching into their groundwater and air?

I think you'll be a lot busier than me a lot sooner.

ren

I have to say, you always address issues, and are not a simple blogbanger, I appreciate the lucid conversation.

That said, we might distinguish between alleged, remotely potential and/or mythical cancers and documented cancer cases, before rising to defend the children.

I assert, and you might research this, that your notion of danger connected with Indian Point has more of a basis in movement advertising claims, than in reality.

Many would agree with me on this. Since I live within a mile of the plant, I will indeed answer to my own family about longterm health concerns. My research puts those concerns orders of magnitude lower than the Riverkeeper movie had them. Sorry. I looked it up, I spent about two years studying it, and that's what I found.

As far as John Hall's statements, please allow me to take the gloves off now.

You really ought to learn the difference between action, which is a constructive thing, and self serving statements, which are simple calls for popularity. It's great for those with similar views, to put those views out, and thus discover who their like-thinking counterparts are. That's popularity. It's also an activity very familiar to the young, who mainly join in clubs, teams, and political parties on the basis of similar likes & dislikes. If the entire world completely expressed its likes and dislikes, and every single person found a group in which they absolutely belonged, please note that not a single bridge, tunnel, airport, or power plant would get built by this process. Nada. The world after such a coming together is exactly the same world it was before the coming together. All you did was find some friends.

On the other hand, those hated conglomerations of waste-producing, money-seeking, forest-cutting, heartless industrial and financial cliques-known as corporations- whom all you and your friends love to hate, are pumping out new homes, new automobiles, new clothing, new furniture, new buildings, new PC's and commo devices, new entertainments, new art, and new horizons for us all, and getting (aside from the money) , nothing for it but villification.

I don't know if you see this structural standoff as clearly as I do, but what I see here is an analog of a human family dispute.Those who construct the world in which the family resides, are so intent on working, saving, being conservative, and making all the needs get met, that they are a bit rigid, a bit unlikeable, sort of like parents, or more particularly, like a husband or father, providing everything, and getting laughed at for doing it, by his irresponsible kids.

Those who live just to like each other, who live to dream of wonderful, beautiful, better, and more uplifting future happenings, where everybody in the world comes together at last, are like dependent children, freed by their non-constructive status to carp about the wrongs of the world, but never challenging themselves to do anything about it, because to do so, they would have to become the other persona, the villified constructive persona, the one who compromises with other possibly evil people, so that concrete results can come out for the entire community.

The reason you are confused, is you don't clearly distinguish popularity statements, which do nothing, from action, which does everything.Once you begin to make the distinction, you will learn that actions can't be done rashly. You can't gore everybody's oxen, just to make things like you'd want them to be. All stakeholders will jump up and object, unless you consult them first. Once you consult them, you'll find a varied set of priorities so mind-numbing that resolving them all will seem almost impossible.You will be forced into quid pro quo trades, giving something to get something, and at that point you will not notice it, but the corruption that you decried in your opposite political party, will now be your corruption. It never has been otherwise, and so its a good scientific conclusion on fact, to say that it cannot ever be otherwise.

So--- if any person is truly bent on closing Indian Point, their first action would not be to say so. Their first action would be to head off the other stakeholder objections, by proposing concrete, viable alternate energy plants, negotiating away all the NIMBY arguments against their construction, and pushing the bond issues to build them. Next that person would make sure the financing resulting from all the construction does not result in horrific taxation levels, to ensure that he does not kill his own region in the process of trying to save it. Next, with extra energy being produced by newly installed alternate means, and taxes lowered enough to keep the area vital, he would not face a strong Indian Point, with a very tangible argument for its own existence. No, instead , because of his preparatory actions, he would face an Indian Point ready to go offline, because he had negotiated into existence, all the needed ameliorations, so that the beast he hates could be put to sleep.

Funny, though..... I don't see any of those actions.
All I hear is words. The popularity contest continues unabated.
So please get me the list of the power plants John Hall will be building in New York State.
Also, provide me with the list of lobbyists, whom John will be assigning to wrangle away local NIMBY complaints against his list of powerplants. Then I'll need the list of competent investment corporations willing to risk taking on his new power plant construction jobs.
Without these lists, his statements about the issue are simple bogus posturing.

A reality-politician does not attack other responsible agencies (like NRC), and then expect the entire agency to view their last ten years of responsible worklife to have been mistaken, or negligent. The NRC people are engaged in tough issue-solving careers, and they see only the law that shaped their policies until now, and the tough victories they've won. So harping on NRC to behave in some new manner, outside their legal mandate, is total bullshit, pure grandstanding.

A reality-politician who wanted such systemic changes, would find a consensus in congress, a critical mass of congresspeople agreeing with his notion, and with the notion of falling in line behind a freshman congressman. This is not a straightforward matter to accomplish.He would then have his staff present that action caucus with an expertly written bill, encompassing the desired changes. The bill would need to be conversant with current & past NRC realities, or it would blow the gig on inexpert inappropriate errors and lacunae, and be rejected in committee. If expertly enough written, the bill might survive its first committee exposures, but then John Hall would need to horse-trade the thing onto the floor for a vote. (He would have to go corrupt, to get his bill out.) Once the powerful committee bosses saw he was "playing ball" they would exact their pound of flesh, and John would be seen voting for pork barrel issues for the floor boss, and no longer posturing as a local upstate New York virgin hero. And that's just to get started. All the other congresspeople, some with long term connections unknown to Hall, would act according to whatever pound of flesh had been exacted from them, in their initiation period. The bill might therefore easily be voted down. The process is so long, that Hall should have started weeks ago, if he was really going to accomplish anything. Has he? Oh I forgot, he was just an ex-musician back then.

So give me the list of the expert researchers on John Hall's staff who are interfacing with NRC , to learn their current legal realities, so as to write the first drafts of the needed legislation.
Without that list, Mr. Hall's statements are simple posturing.

In the end, life requires more than simply extending the popularity contest forever.
The election is over, for Christ's sake!

b tween

Ren, you always make pithy points, but in this case you've bypassed the original, and in my mind most important issue: why should entergy get a pass?

They have an obligation to operate a safe facility in a densely populated area. Entergy is a company that has reported >5 billion dollars in profits annually over the last 3 years so there's no good excuse for them to avoid this responsibility. Everyone who's not on their payroll considers Indian Point a dangerous, unsecured facility.
And consider that during periods when Indian Point has had to go offline for repairs or maintenance, the region has imported electricity from upstate, Canada and the midwest without too great an impact.
So Indian Point being offline for some time while the project of repairing and securing it is undertaken is something the region should suffer in the name of long term safety and energy security.

I've said it before, much to the dismay of my fellow travelers, that I think nuclear is the only real option we have to address a climate crisis. We are energy pigs in America, even if we did undertake a real conservation program, it would matter little in the grand scheme, and we would still need to find ways to spin turbines - even to power our electric cars.
I believe the next generation of reactors should be pebble bed, not core-reactors, and that rather than fund drilling and exploration for the likes of Exxon-Mobil, we should spend the money on researching ways to reuse or dispose of spent nuke fuels.

I always get a good laugh from your portraits of life in Washington. Let's face it, bogus posturing is how you get things done. Al D'Amato proved over and over again that a soundbite could move mountains of public opinion, the simpler the better. So, Hall's simply uttering those words makes them part of the political discourse, and his "star power" gives traction to the idea.
So we'll see. He doesn't have a staff yet, so I doubt he has anyone negotiating with the NRC... yet.

ren

Mr.Hall dismayed many this week by stating: "I'm everybody's representative now", meaning, I would imagine, that the wish-dreams of the various little agendas that elected him may not be 100% assured, or even high on his eventual priority list.

It amazes me how you can say with a straight face: "Everyone who's not on their payroll considers Indian Point a dangerous, unsecured facility."

When did you take this universal poll? Do you really mean EVERYONE? Don't mind my small sarcasm, you left yourself wide open for it, by making an assumption that many in small contrarian circles make--it seems to them that the "fact" of danger from Indian Point has been established somehow.

It has not.

That may seem to you like some pronuke propaganda bite, but it is not.

It is fact.

Indian Point is far, far less dangerous than 1000 other aspects of modern life. Just read the decal on the gas pump next time you fill up-- it warns of cancer, blindness, emphysema, and all in a substance you are physically handling, smelling, wiping on your clothes, and riding down the road sitting on top of, at 80 MPH. You accept the danger, because you like to drive. 40,000 people per year die from making this choice. That's life. That's modern life.(By the way.....Zero people ever, have died from Indian Point.)

Three hikers are dying as we speak on Mount Hood, from accepting the danger inherent in their hiking sport. Which is more to be feared? Indian Point being run by 1205 experts under strict supervision & stringent procedural control, or going off up Mount Hood with no heavy clothes or extra food?

Are we to ban hiking, then?

If we wish to talk about a mythical "EVERYONE", we might start with Entergy's 20 million person customer base. They pay millions for Entergy's product---why?--- because they WANT it , & they NEED it, the depend on it, and they don't want to die of coal-induced lung cancer, or of shivering cold in a January brownout.

So they strike a deal with Entergy, somewhat along these lines: "You go ahead and handle the rough stuff, and we won't bother you while you do it."

It implies trust. In fact it PROVES the trust that 20,000,000 people have, to go ahead & send in that $100 check each month, without any qualms.

Yes, Riverkeeper's 22 employees, and 6000-name mailing list have convinced 400 politicians to declare against the majority's deal, but that still makes the plebiscite come in at approximately 6422 against Indian Point, and 20,000,000 for Indian Point.

That's what I think "Everybody" thinks about Indian Point.

And John Hall said it straight up on Tuesday:
"I'm EVERYBODY'S representative".

Live with it.

Bobby

How about "Dance with me" or "Still the One." That's more tunes than Hillary Clinton has written.

The comments to this entry are closed.