Letter to the Editor
This letter is in response to your article of November 30 calling on the Governor to keep Indian Point open. Also please note that electricity from Indian Point has not been used in NYC for the last four years when Con Ed ended its 500 MW contract with Entergy because it could get cheaper energy elsewhere. Your quotes from the NYISO are grossly inaccurate. The source you cite is their annual report which makes no mention of blackouts. New York has a surplus of power from over 700 generators. When Indian Point, Unit 3 goes off line it will not even be noticed .- as was the case with Unit 2. You would do your readers a great service to print more accurate information for them to think about.
7 John Dorsey Drive
Cortlandt Manor, NY (two miles from Indian Point)
Why Indian Point needs to go
Closing the reactors will speed action on climate change, not hamper it
By Marilyn Elie
Next spring, the last working nuclear reactor at the Indian Point Energy Center on the Hudson River, 30 miles from Manhattan, will power down. At least 20 million people in the 50-mile radius of the 40-year-old nuclear generator can sleep more soundly. Future generations will thank us for no longer producing high-level radioactive waste that will bedevil the country and our community for years to come.
But, as that April 30, 2021 Unit 3 closing date approaches, some have called for New York governor, Andrew Cuomo, to keep Indian Point open. (Unit 2 closed permanently on April 30, 2020. Unit 1 closed on October 31,1974 due to serious technical failures.)
The first thing to note is that the governor has no legal authority to either close or open a nuclear reactor. And while the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) can order a reactor closed in case of danger, it cannot order the license holder to keep a reactor running. That’s a decision taken by the reactor owner, in this case, by Entergy, which owns the Indian Point plant.
In New York’s deregulated energy market, corporations close down generators that are not making a profit — and that is exactly what Entergy has done with all six of its nuclear reactors in the northeast. The company is retreating south, where they have a monopoly and do not have to worry about competition.
The chief — and really only — argument made in favor of keeping Indian Point running is the false notion that its output will automatically be replaced by natural gas, which is of course counterproductive to addressing the urgency of climate change.
Natural gas is still cheaper than nuclear power, but it’s not actually where things are going when reactors close (see California and Nebraska, both replacing closed reactors with renewables).
In fact, according to a recent analysis by Amory Lovins, it only happens for political reasons: “Replacing a closed nuclear plant with efficiency or renewables empirically takes only 1–3 years. If owners don’t give such advance notice — a common tactic to extort subsidies by making closure more disruptive — more natural gas might temporarily be burned, but then more than offset over the following years by the carbon-free substitutes.”
In other words, gas cannot compete in the long term with the rapidly falling price of renewables. Lovins contends that the gas infrastructure that is going in all over the country will eventually be a stranded asset by 2034 and a drain on the companies that are building them. The Rocky Mountain Institute concluded in a recent report that “the role of gas as a “bridge fuel” is behind us.”
The advocates for keeping Indian Point open say they are concerned about what they see as loss of low carbon electricity that was generated at Indian Point around the clock. But it is a mistake to view nuclear as a carbon-saver.
Nuclear power is certainly not carbon-free, and arguably not even very low-carbon when looking at the entire cradle-to-grave fuel chain, essential when calculating the true carbon footprint of any fuel. For nuclear power this means from mining uranium to disposing of the high-level radioactive waste.
To that must also be added decommissioning, another high carbon-emitting phase in the nuclear fuel chain, on which a shuttered Indian Point is now embarking.
Decommissioning means cleaning up the property in a prompt, safe manner and returning it to a greenfield that can go back on the regular business tax rolls. Rapid decommissioning at Indian Point could take from 12 to 15 years or even longer but must be done safely and securely.
At Indian Point there’s another challenge: The AIM gas pipeline, which traverses the Indian Point nuclear site, presents the threat of a possible rupture and explosion which could engulf the spent fuel pool. And while the NRC must supervise anything that is radioactive during decommissioning, the agency has no authority over the pipeline.
Instead, it is Holtec, the company that is in line to do the decommissioning, that will take the lead for the rest of the work, and therein lies yet another problem. Holtec is a big international corporation based in New Jersey. The company was embroiled in a well documented bribery conviction, later lying about it under oath while seeking a $260 million tax break from the State of New Jersey. Holtec’s Canadian partner, SNC-Lavalin, has been previously barred for a decade from World Bank contracts for similar malfeasance.
Decommissioning Indian Point is a mammoth undertaking, and the fact that the company chosen to do it has a track record of fraud is worrisome. To ensure that New York State taxpayers are not stuck with a big bill when the Decommissioning Trust Fund runs out, a New York State Decommissioning Oversight Board needs to be established. Its members must represent the wide range of people in the community, with the Village of Buchanan, where the reactors are located, given a prominent seat at the table. This is the community that will suffer the most financially from the closure as they lose a significant part of their tax budget. Fortunately funds from New York State will help with the transition as will State job placement programs for workers that need them.
Other agencies such as the New York Department of Environmental Control and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will be involved in the decommissioning process. The NRC will only supervise radioactive parts of the operation. That could mean that some of the buildings may remain on the property, since they do not fall into existing decommissioning criteria. The irradiated fuel rods will remain as current law requires but will be put in dry cask storage. Entergy estimates that when all of the fuel rods are in dry casks they will take up the area of approximately two football fields.
At present, the only two destinations under consideration to take this waste are so-called interim sites in Texas and New Mexico. Both sites are facing legal challenges as the Nuclear Waste Policy Act currently prohibits the establishment of an interim nuclear dump until a permanent location is available. Holtec is hard at work trying to change the law so that the company can transport high level radioactive waste there.
Holtec claims to own the property in New Mexico but this is disputed by the Navajo who also claim ownership and sovereignty. The Governor of the State, other elected officials and community members have all come out against this proposal for a nuclear dump as was made clear in the last NRC hearing. Transporting high-level radioactive waste on our roads, rails and waterways, through villages, towns and neighborhoods, is asking for trouble. Accidents, fires or even deliberate attacks are all possibilities. Putting high level radioactive waste in what amounts to a parking lot with a vague promise to move it at some indefinite time in the future when waste casks are older and likely damaged is a recipe for disaster.
Communities around Indian Point should think very hard about this prospect. After all, sending our high-level radioactive waste to contaminate another community that does not want it is undemocratic and some would say immoral.
New York is poised to make great strides in decarbonizing the state’s economy through the recently passed Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act. People in different regions of the state are meeting now and figuring out how to meet the high goals set by this law. Community groups have been formed and are in the process of reaching out to others. Hopefully many New Yorkers will look for an opportunity to participate. This legislation will give us a roadmap to renewables and 100% clean energy. Things must change. The regular and accustomed path of business as usual using uranium and fossil fuels will not suffice if we are to hand over a livable planet to future generations.
Marilyn Elie is a member of the Indian Point Safe Energy Coalition