Shut it down before it does some real damage around here.. what a joke.

I would pay more without a problem... better safe than sorry. Ask those in Fukushima.

Oh Wedge, Same old same old. You said you would pay more, are we talking wind farms??? It seems even those are getting a bad rap now days. How about Fracking?? That process too is coming up against nay sayers. No wait co-gen, but even that has opponents. So what do you propose as the alternative?? You bring up Fukushima again and again, yes it was a similar design as Pilgrim, but the story behind the story is that unlike the United States reactors, Japan did nothing to prepare for catastrophic accidents like the US reactors did. Since the early 2000's the US reactors had to deal with what is know as the "B.5.b" NRC Order. The US nukes both PWRs and BWRs all types had to come up with responses that addressed loosing large areas of the plant. Take a look at the NRC Web site and you will see. So the US nukes are NOT in the same condition as the Japanese nukes.
Wedge, when you can come up with an economically viable solution that has no negative impact, you might be more credible.
BTW I know you will crucify this posting because it is pro-nuke but keep in mind, we are all entitled to our opinion.

That's exactly right... same old same old. But too bad for you it is a fact. Nuclear is neither clean nor cheap nor safe... we will all find out now that the NRC is allowing these high level nuclear waste dumps to run long beyond their designed life. Sorry but I do know what I'm talking about but then again I don't make money from these lemons like some of you.... One bad mistake or terrorist strike in the States with one of these plants and nobody will allow them to run in their town... just like in Japan and Germany and several other countries. They are smarter than us and will lead the way to cleaner cheaper sources of energy..

Wedge, still what is your suggestion for alternative power???? Simple enough question don't you think?
Right now Japan's answer to shutting down its reactors is to build more fossil fuel plants. How can that be cleaner and cheaper????
A terrorist strike is not just limited to nuke plants, take a look at LNG ports, Chemical plants, oil refineries, all of these are just as susceptible to an attack and in some cases are easier targets. Don't loose site of that.
As in my original question to you, what would be your solution to alternative power and you can't answer close the nukes down.

SOLAR!!!!!!
a General Electric Mark I reactor like at Pilgrim station has a 690 mega watt production capacity.

Germany is one of the world's top photovoltaic (PV) installers, with a solar PV capacity as of 2011 of almost 25 gigawatts (GW). As of 31st of October 2012, there were 31.62 GW of photovoltaics connected to the electrical power network

Germany 31.62 Gigawatts of photovoltaic power.!!

Pilgrim 690 Megawatts nuclear power.!!

A gigawatt is the equivalent of 1,000 megawatts you figure it out!

Good suggestion, however I don't think Wedge would allow an "eye sore" such as a plant this large to be built in Plymouth. Interesting though.....

Not sure who MM May is but you don't have a clue do you? I have been using solar for 30 years now. Maybe one of the first to use it around here. Also one of my sons just worked on a 1.5 megawatt solar system in this state. I'm really not as bad as you make me out to be... I'm just smart enough to know how dangerous this thousand tons plus of high level nuclear waste is now and will be for generations to come. Get your head out of there will you MM?

Wedge, do you have any idea of how big one of these installations are? I am happy that your son worked on a 1.5 megawatt system, however it is no where near the size of what the previous comment alludes to.
http://jcwinnie.biz/wordpress/?p=2170
BTW I too have used solar for many years so I do know a little about what it entails.
Wedge, I get it, I know all about the waste generated by nuclear plants. I am also confident (yes I did use that word) that what Entergy (along with the rest of the nuclear industry) is doing now - building Dry Cask Storage will address some of your concerns. A news article alluded to the fact that the government is once again visiting the prospect of a centralized waste storage facility, unfortunately it will not be built until sometime after 2048. So till then the owners of nuclear power plants will have to continue to store on site.

I realize the size of these .. Entergy will take only enough high level nuclear waste out to keep the dump producing energy. That doesn't amount to a heck of a lot. It will still be way overcrowded and dangerous. We won't be happy until they get that place shut down once and for all...

As I had said before Wedge, you are entitled to your opinion.

Not just opinion... Fact.

One accident at a fossil fuel plant and you return home when the fire is out, one accident a Pilgrim and you don't return home, ever! Unless of course, you don't live in the affected area. Shut the Pilgrim nuclear dump down!

Exactly... that's what these people don't understand. Low Probability High Consequences. Ask the people in Fukushima.