facebook twitter subscribe

Donate to SolveClimate News

Has Time Run Out to Replace Indian Point's Nuclear Power?

There are 'very limited options' for new sources of generation before Indian Point 2's operating license expires in 2013, says state offical

By Alice Kenny, SolveClimate News

Jul 8, 2011
Indian Point nuclear plant

Editor's Note: In this three-part series, SolveClimate News examines the feasibility of closing the Indian Point nuclear facility in Buchanan, N.Y. The plant, now up for relicensing, faces demands for a shutdown by Gov. Andrew Cuomo and many environmental groups. This is part two. (Read part one.)

Renewed backlash against New York's Indian Point nuclear plant in the wake of Japan's disaster has forced politicians and energy experts in the state to again confront tough questions about how to permanently replace the facility's electricity.

Now, with the plant up for relicensing, some observers warn that time may have run out for a well-managed and gradual shutdown of the complex, located just 24 miles from America's most populous city.

The 40-year licenses for Indian Point's working reactors, units 2 and 3, are set to expire in 2013 and 2015. The plant's owner, Entergy Corp., is awaiting final word from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission on its applications for 20-year renewals.

The complex fills a significant portion of the downstate area's energy needs, generating about 2,160 megawatts of clean-burning electricity — enough to power 3.2 million households or 25 percent of New York City and Westchester County's combined electrical needs. 

Three options to replace Indian Point stand out. One, local fossil fuel sources such as natural gas could generate more electricity. Two, excess hydroelectric power or wind power generated upstate or in Canada could be transported downstate. And three, consumers could drastically cut their electricity use.

All appear relatively simple and, together, offer promise. But closer inspection shows there is a great deal of complexity involved.

Switching to replacement power generation in New York City, for instance, would be costlier and dirtier than nuclear power at a time of economic distress for the nation, and when top climate experts agree that carbon emissions must be reduced.

And, while New York's excess energy flow would be enough to generate two Indian Point's worth of electricity, current transmission wires are insufficient to carry the megawatts downstate.

"There are no easy answers," said Lindsay Audin, president of Energywiz, a Croton on Hudson, N.Y.-based energy consulting firm, at a recent meeting convened near Indian Point to brainstorm ways to shutter the plant.

Is it Too Late to Prevent a Power Disruption?

For at least one month a year, New York City gets no power from one of the two Indian Point reactors when they are taken offline for routine maintenance.

Some say this is evidence that the city already has substitute power for Indian Point for the long term — although many experts dispute this. Further, various studies commissioned to examine how to replace Indian Point's power permanently suggest that preparations should have begun years ago. 

Most significant among these was the 104–page report commissioned by the Department of Energy at the request of Congress in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, and published by the National Academies in 2006.

The study, "Alternatives to the Indian Point Energy Center for Meeting New York Electric Power Needs," cost over $1 million and took more than a year to complete. It included input from dozens of scientists, politicians and environmentalists, along with professionals from Indian Point, Con Edison and General Electric.  

The report's main conclusion was that if "sufficient resources were added," then "Indian Point units could be retired at the end of their current operating licenses [2013 and 2015] without causing a major disruption of power capacity."

Comments

Indian Point

Nuclear is the cleanest and safest option there is if New Yorkers want electricity. Going without electricity would be the most dangerous option. Under Business As Usual, Global Warming [burning fossil fuels] will cause agriculture to collapse some time between 2050 and 2055. If agriculture collapses, so does civilization, and that would kill everybody in New York City. The only way out is nuclear power.

 

Natural gas or coal would INCREASE the radiation New Yorkers receive. Coal would increase the radiation 100 to 400 times over nuclear. Coal is only 10% of NATURAL BACKGROUND RADIATION. Natural gas contains RADON, the radioactive gas. See: http://www.ornl.gov/ORNLReview/rev26-34/text/

Coal also gives you arsenic and lead besides uranium and thorium.

 

Chernobyl gave the area nearby itself as much radiation as a coal fired power plant would in 7 years and 5 months. People still live there. They are operating the remaining 3 reactors. That news magazine is telling lies, like that people don't live there. They do.

 

The Fukushima reactor has not allowed out as much radiation in the worst spot right next to the containment vessel as the NATURAL BACKGROUND RADIATION in most places on the surface of the Earth, averaged over a year. Any radiation under 10 rems is not harmful. The problem is lack of knowledge and irrational fear on the part of the Japanese people and officials. The containment vessel worked.

 

The reactor at Indian Point should be given a major overhaul and retrofit [upgrade] and a new 40 year license. The same containment vessel should be re-used after inspection. The best plan would be to upgrade to Generation 4, but going up a half generation would be good enough and easier.   Spent nuclear fuel should be recycled.

Solar and wind: See: http://bravenewclimate.com/2011/07/03/lacklustre-colorado-solar/

which leads to:

http://www.xcelenergy.com/staticfiles/xe/Corporate/Environment/09A-015E%...

 http://bravenewclimate.com/2009/08/31/solar-thermal-questions/

 http://wgsi.org/files/event_attachments//Plenary%20PowerPoint%20-%20Jay%20Apt%20(2011-06-06)_0.pdfCharacteristics of Wind and Solar Power by Jay AptTepper School of Business and Department of Engineering & Public Policy Carnegie Mellon University

http://wpweb2.tepper.cmu.edu/ceic/PDFS/CEIC_07_05_lvu.pdf

"The Character of Power Output from Utility-Scale Photovoltaic Systems" Carnegie Mellon Electricity Industry Center Working Paper CEIC-07-05 www.cmu.edu/electricity

 etc. All of which say: Wind and solar do not work as far as the electric generating companies are concerned. Wind is often off-line because of lack of wind for months at a time. Solar is intermittent on the time scale of 10 seconds in the Arizona desert. Spreading solar over 280 kilometers does no good. Wind and solar will not work until we have a superconductor that does not need cooling. With such a superconductor, wind and solar could be spread out over the entire planet. There are certain isolated and small places where wind mostly works, but they cannot supply New York City.

 Gov. Andrew Cuomo is a fool. However, "could you have replacement power for Indian Point?" he asked. "NO."

 

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <p> <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <img> <h1> <h2> <h3> <ul> <li> <ol> <b> <i> <p> <br>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Youtube and google video links are automatically converted into embedded videos.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Images can be added to this post.

More information about formatting options