Older coal plants had mostly electro-mechanical control systems that are more survivable of an EMP attack than the newer digital control systems.
The older coal plants can not meet the new EPA emission standards without very expensive upgrades that make them economically impossible to operate. So the electric utilities decommission them.
And before anyone ask; decommissioning means that they have to make changes to the plants that render them impossible to ever operate again.
Pertinent quote:
The current vulnerability of our critical infrastructures can both invite and reward attack if not corrected. Correction is feasible and well within the Nation's means and resources to accomplish.That language ("reward attack") is alien to ANY documentation on terror or military doctrine. I've never heard or read it before used in this reference. I'm curious of others' thoughts on that. From my perspective, it seems almost intentionally ambiguous. However, if the intent of the twice-copied/repeated passage in the document was "attack reward", I concur with the phrasing. One of the authors must be a tech/IT geek.
Regardless, this tidbit:
Nuclear plants produce roughly 20% of the Nation’s generation and have many redundant fail-safe systems that tend to remove them from service whenever any system upset is sensed. Their safe shut down should be assured, but they will be unavailable until near the end of restoration.is now totally moot (Fukushima) and I redirect back to my comment on what happens when those affected nuclear plants cannot be shut down safely due to loss of control...
("...tend to remove them from service...")
...RIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIGHT
This is common even on the private level. I "have" to tie into sewage or face losing my home by lien and fines and sheriffs sale. Part of "tying in" means I have to destroy my perfectly good septic system that is rated at 25 years without maintenance and is only 14 years old. Mind you, my nearest neighbor is fifty yards away and across the road from me is hundreds of acres of farmland (i.e., no reason to run lines back my way; save "unions" in PA); there was NO REASON for sewage in my area outside of "control" (and that fat tap in fee of $6200.00). A couple families on my road lost their property already; I've been fighting this for nine years now (and honestly hoping for the final collapse to finally be free)