Core issues
I’d like to comment on Will Martin’s letter about Surry, and also about North Anna [“Virginia’s other nukes,” Mailbag, March 8]. His understanding is that nuclear plants were supposed to operate for about 30 years and then be decommissioned. The official number was 40 years, and at around 30 years the operator could apply for a license renewal for up to 20 additional years. We now have sufficient operating experience that with proper supervision, maintenance and upgrading, a nuclear plant can run safely and reliably for 60 years. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission recently granted a 30-year license extension to North Anna and Surry.
A few nuclear plants have already been shut down and decommissioned. Some were low power and/or unique types that became uneconomic to keep in operation and upgrade to modern standards. Massachusetts’ Yankee Rowe, a small reactor, is one example. Millstone 1, actually in Connecticut near New London and not on Long Island, is an example of a utility unwilling to pay the cost of an upgrade. However, Millstone 2 and 3 are running and are now in the license renewal process. Some plants, like Rancho Seco in California, were shut down for political reasons, although the two reasons given at the time were economics and that the power was not needed. I bet that some Californians, who are now paying a high price for electricity after sitting out roaming blackouts, are regretting that decision.
The decommissioning cost is already included in the current rates for nuclear power. The same is true for the disposal of used nuclear fuel. Utilities do not operate plants until they fail, because the plants are subject to continuous supervision by the NRC. Decommissioning means total removal of the entire structure and components. Radioactive material is shipped to a licensed disposal site. The land is returned to general use. As an example, the University of Virginia research reactor has already been decommissioned and the building is now occupied by other University personnel. More information on license renewal and decommissioning is available through the NRC website, www.nrc.gov.
Finally, North Anna was originally intended to have four units, and in fact construction had already started on the final two units when Three Mile Island happened. The general uncertainty at that time led to canceling those plants. But the site is still capable of handling two new units, if and when they are needed.
Roger A. Rydin
Charlottesville
What cost nukes?
In the event of increased dependence on power generated by nuclear technology, there exists an undeniable increased risk of a nuclear accident occurring in Virginia. To address this concern, pro-nuclear advocate Sama Bilbao y Leon would reassure us that “All in all, nuclear power plants provide a total of $10 billion in insurance coverage to compensate the public in the unlikely event of a nuclear accident” [“Nuclear fission,” Mailbag, March 15].
If a Chernobyl-like event were to occur in Central Virginia, who would bear the brunt of the disaster? The suggestion that the nuclear industry can buy its way out of such a severe situation with a vast sum of cash to “compensate the public” (even if made available immediately) is absurd. In addition, the suggestion that a dollar compensatory figure can be applied to a situation where Virginia residents may have to relocate, losing much of what they own in the process, is rather arrogant and insulting. I do not believe that it is scare mongering to point out that it is the residents of Virginia who alone will bear such risks. And I have no doubt that ordinary Virginians will be paying a cost both in dollars and increased public heath risks for the “privilege” of doing so.
The pro-nuclear advocates would have us believe that nuclear power is relatively inexpensive. In this regard, previous letter-writer Will Martin makes the excellent point that in order to count the real cost of nuclear power one has to consider the entire nuclear power generation life cycle. I would argue that the real cost of transporting/permanently disposing of extremely hazardous nuclear waste cannot be known accurately. For example, the cost of cleanup of a single serious transportation or storage accident would dwarf any “savings” made up to that point in the process. The lingering waste disposal problem has yet to be addressed in any acceptable way by the nuclear industry.
At a time in this country when—astonishingly—the Bush Administration continues to experience minimal opposition to any of a range of outrageous policies, it is my belief that the neoconservatives are taking the opportunity to foist upon us an energy policy, featuring nuclear power, which is totally undemocratic in nature. When it comes down to a question of trust in the integrity and responsibility of authorities such as the current U.S. government—or indeed, Dominion Virginia Power—we, the people of Virginia, would surely do well to remain at our most cynical.
Rob Pates
Charlottesville
Power struggle
In the C-VILLE debate over nuclear power, the pro-nuclear argument seems to have been made principally by members of North American-Young Generation in Nuclear. According to the NA-YGN website, this organization consists of young professionals employed in the nuclear industry: “individuals age 35 and under working throughout the fields of nuclear science and technology.” While Vice President Lisa Shell likes to characterize the group as a “pro-nuclear grassroots organization” [“Talking ‘bout my Generation,” Mailbag, March 8], I would like to pose the following question: Is it reasonable for groups whose members have vested their careers in the nationwide acceptance and growth of the nuclear industry to direct or dominate the debate on the expansion of nuclear power in Virginia? I believe not.
With regard to the issue of environmental pollution, Michael Stuart, another NA-YGN member and Dominion employee, berated environmentalists over their lack of outrage regarding emissions of “hundreds of millions of metric tons of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, and carbon dioxide” [“Waste not, want not,” Mailbag, March 8]. Is he aware that in the recently ended General Assembly session the power companies handily defeated H.B. 2742, the Virginia Clean Smokestacks Act, which would have required the dirtiest Virginia coal-fired power plants to install modern equipment to reduce nitrogen oxide, sulfur dioxide and mercury pollution? Technology is currently available to eliminate up to 90 percent of these pollutants. Is Mr. Stuart outraged over Dominion’s participation in the defeat of this bill? Did he lobby Assembly members for passage of the bill?
While nuclear plants do not emit greenhouse gases during operation, there is plenty of pollution associated with mining, milling, manufacture of nuclear fuel rods. Unlike Mr. Stuart, we remain unconvinced that promotion of nuclear power, with its attendant radiation and public health risks, achieves clean energy goals in any permanent way.
To focus on nuclear power represents a waste of valuable national time which could be spent using our national brainpower and scientific resources to work out ways of solving global energy needs by developing conservation technologies and renewable alternatives. A challenge, indeed. However, if the members of NA-YGN were able for one moment to think beyond their own career aspirations—would they disagree with the suggestion that that this country is equal to that task?
Elena Day
Charlottesville
Testing, testing, 1,2,3
Recently, the C-VILLE ran a phoned-in rant critical of the Albemarle County Public Schools [The Rant, March 1]. The author of the rant found fault with the School Board for increasing time in language arts and math for standard and remedial students at the cost of time spent by all students in electives—specifically in band. Several parents and students from Henley Middle School echoed this complaint at the March 7 School Board meeting. Most speakers portrayed the division’s decision to increase instructional time in language arts and math as an unnecessary gambit to raise already adequate SOL test scores.
However, the issue at hand is not the raising of test scores for test scores’ sake. Rather, the schedule change will help core teachers close the achievement gap for at-risk students, who at my school, Henley, are statistically more likely to be African-American and/or poor than not. For these students, failing test scores on the SOL or any other standardized measure represent more significant problems: illiteracy and disengagement with school. At-risk students don’t fail the SOL just because of content; they fail because they can’t read the tests or aren’t motivated enough to try to pass.
Indeed, failing test scores helped these students build up reluctance to engage with school; failing test scores helped them view teachers as enemies; failing test scores helped them decide how little they should try in school to avoid putting forth any personal effort a teacher could betray with a red pen and the dark flourish of an F.
Imagine what passing test scores will do for them. Imagine that a student passing the SOL passes tests in core classes and electives—and thereby passes his or her classes. Imagine that a student experiencing success thanks to the relationships, relevance and rigor built with increased instructional time comes back to us, engages with school, views teachers as role models and engages with learning for life. Imagine that this student enters upper-level classes throughout middle and high school, further enriching the discourse at our highest levels of public, secondary education.
This schedule change is not about raising test scores; it’s about closing achievement gaps and reconnecting kids with learning. While its mathematical outputs will be higher test scores and shrinking achievement gaps, its human outcome will involve at-risk students contributing to learning in all classes and enjoying learning for life.
Chad Sansing
7th Grade English Teacher
Henley Middle School
Taken for granted
I’d like to clarify statements made by Antoinette W. Roades in a recent letter’s column [“Green acres,” Mailbag, March 15]. She stated that Piedmont Housing Alliance received $6.23 million from the Virginia Housing Development Authority, and seemed to consider it an issue that the City had provided PHA some assistance, given this other funding.
PHA did not receive funds from VHDA. While that would be a wonderful boon to our area’s low- and moderate-income homebuyers, and would greatly assist a huge number of clients, it is not accurate. What they received was an allocation (which is permission to utilize $6.23 million of VHDA’s funds at rates below VHDA’s standard rates) to assist first-time homebuyers in our high-cost housing market. The funds are lent by VHDA to homebuyers, and any funds not lent to borrowers by VHDA within a specified time limit will go unused. There was no gift or grant to PHA, though they are working hard to get the VHDA funds distributed.
PHA has been extremely active in raising funds and securing housing units in order to make housing affordable for renters, homebuyers and special-needs clients, and they provide a valuable service while operating on tight margins. There is a lot of administrative work involved in getting this allowance, and the availability of the funds should be (and has been) well publicized so that area homebuyers can take advantage of the reduced interest rate. However, to suggest PHA received a multi-million dollar windfall is misleading. I am sure it was a misunderstanding.
There are many local citizens working hard and contributing time and money (the alliance between PHA and the members of the Charlottesville Area Association of Realtors in creating the Workforce Housing Fund is a great example) to address the shortage of affordable housing in our area. Thanks for keeping these issues in the public forum.
Catherine Potter
Charlottesville
Flaking out
As a former resident of Charlottesville, I was surprised how expensive it is for the City to maintain the roads at an acceptable level of safety [“The hundred-grand snow job,” The Week, March 8]. But two questions remain: Are the City and the County managing their budgets efficiently? Are the roads cleaned up fast enough in situations where the snow comes down unexpectedly? In other words, is the system working at its most efficient level? Kudos to C-VILLE for a well-researched and well-written article—Charlottesville residents should use this as a first step in holding the City and County accountable.
Alejandro Queral
Washington, D.C.
Lucky star
This is in regards to the February 8 feature story, “25 tips to improve your love life,” and concerning one of the article’s contributors, Lucky Supremo, the reigning Miss Club 216. I am a religious reader of your newspaper, and the feature story is my favorite segment.
Two weeks ago, my husband and I traveled to Ontario, Canada, to visit my grandfather on his 90th birthday. We had planned on staying over for the weekend to shop and do some bar hopping; well, we did. And, of all the nightclubs we visited (a total of four), one stood out as the most exciting and the most memorable. This nightclub had female “illusion” entertainers performing and one named Lucky Supremo from Charlottesville, Virginia, USA was announced as the next performer.
There she was, a towering and magnificent figure dressed in a medieval ballroom gown and wearing shimmering jewelry and accessories to match. As she majestically emerged, the theme song from Madonna’s Evita started to play. Lucky wore a honey-blond-slicked-back hairdo, which clearly confirmed she was playing the role of Evita. She was simply divine. I, like hundreds of others, felt like we were in an auditorium watching a live opera singer singing the “Don’t cry for me, Argentina” anthem on stage; I had no problem in suspending my disbelief that night.
Once Lucky ended her number, the man handed her a huge bouquet of fresh flowers and she was loudly applauded off the stage. My husband and I intended to go backstage to congratulate Lucky for her performance, but the club bouncers denied any visitations.
A few days later back in the States, I was going through past C-VILLE issues, and soon came upon one that had the name Lucky Supremo written in the “25 tips” feature story. I quickly showed my husband the article, and we were totally convinced that it was the same Lucky Supremo we had both seen perform as Evita at the huge nightclub in Canada. She was just so entertaining and the Canadian crowd just loved her, and their positive reactions toward Lucky made my husband and I, in a way, very proud.
It is great to know that RuPaul-like celebrities like Lucky, Miss Club 216, is an ambassador of the arts, representing not just the United States, but also representing our increasingly more diverse city of Charlottesville, overseas.
Cassandra Hemings
Charlottesville
Grape expectations
Oenology is the study of wines. And, strictly speaking, an oenologist is a winemaker, not simply a “wine connoisseur” [“How to: Become a wine snob,” The Week, March 8]. Many European and some American universities (the University of California at Davis comes to mind) offer degrees, including Ph.Ds, in oenology. Of course, someone who has learned the winemaking trade on the job may well be considered an oenologist, and there are many amateur oenologists who make their own wine at home. But, anyone can claim to be a wine connoisseur, just as your article suggests.
David Miller
Stoney Creek
Corrections and clarifications
In last week’s Get Out Now section we printed the two different dates for Toots & the Maytals’ show at Starr Hill’s. The show actually occurred on Friday, March 18. Sorry for any confusion this may have caused to reggae fans.
In last week’s installment of the War on Cities series [“A broken social contract”], we claimed that State funding for the Comprehensive Services Act (CSA) has been “drastically” cut. In fact, the State cut $6,000 from CSA’s local administrative budget, the money it gives the City and County to help administer about $12 million in service funds. Governor Mark Warner is likely to restore that money, but the fact remains that State CSA funding does not come close to meeting the growing local need for foster care and youth-oriented social services.
Also, in the same article, we gave the City’s Social Service director an extra “z.” His name, spelled correctly, is Buz Cox.