Skip to main content

The Facts on Oyster Creek and New Jersey Electricity

The Asbury Park Press is calling on New Jersey Governor John Corzine to publicly declare his position on relicensing the Oyster Creek Nuclear Power Plant. What really seems to be getting the paper's goat these days is that the Governor is actually taking his time to learn all he can about the facts involved:
Five months ago, Gov. Corzine told the Press editorial board that the Oyster Creek nuclear power plant in Lacey should not be relicensed for 20 years under any circumstances because of safety concerns. Last month, he and four other top state officials toured the plant. A Corzine spokesman said the governor was impressed by its security and personnel.

Asked by a Press reporter whether Corzine's visit changed his opinion on license renewal, the spokesman responded: "Right now he is conferring with his Cabinet team to keep apprised of Oyster Creek's renewal status at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and state action within that framework." Huh? Is that a yes or a no? The public deserves a direct answer.

We hope the governor isn't waffling on his opposition to keeping the plant open. We hope he is merely gathering more information for a court fight if and when the NRC approves relicensing — something that could happen by May if Oyster Creek passes the agency's environmental and safety reviews.
Over at We Support Lee, Ruth Sponsler has been crunching the numbers, and has come up with some figures that the folks at the Asbury Park Press neglected to include in their editorial:
Let's look at Oyster Creek by itself, compared with renewable sources. Could renewables replace Oyster Creek if Oyster Creek weren't relicensed?

To get Oyster Creek's 2002 generation figure, I went to a spreadsheet linked here. That 2002 figure is 5,031,271 megawatt-hours. I divided that by New Jersey's 1,330,000 renewable megawatt-hours for 2002 and got 3.78. Thus, during 2002, in New Jersey, Oyster Creek, alone, generated 3.78 times the amount of electricity that all renewable sources in New Jersey generated during that same year. If Oyster Creek were to be shut down, the renewable generating capacity to replace it is just not there. Oyster Creek's capacity would need to be replaced by fossil fuels - likely coal or natural gas.

[...]

The anti-nuclear special interest groups usually say that they're against fossil fuels, but the arithmetic of energy and their actions against nuclear energy speak louder than their words.
Indeed.

Technorati tags: , , , , , , , ,

Comments

Robert Schwartz said…
Anti-nukes think that pols who do not duckspeak anti-nuke talking points are doubleplus ungood.
Anonymous said…
So the Governor has concerns about safety at Oyster Creek. Fair enough, he's one of the guys who would be left holding the bag if those concerns came to a head.

But how can he establish whether those concerns are real and current? The paper seems to feel that visiting the plant and talking to the operating company should not form part of this process - or indeed that the process of investigating and evaluating the concerns shouldn't take place at all.

In their world, it seems that to express any kind of concern is a permanent barrier in the way of any progress. I wonder if they use moveable type? I hear it's pretty risky technology...

Popular posts from this blog

Sneak Peek

There's an invisible force powering and propelling our way of life.
It's all around us. You can't feel it. Smell it. Or taste it.
But it's there all the same. And if you look close enough, you can see all the amazing and wondrous things it does.
It not only powers our cities and towns.
And all the high-tech things we love.
It gives us the power to invent.
To explore.
To discover.
To create advanced technologies.
This invisible force creates jobs out of thin air.
It adds billions to our economy.
It's on even when we're not.
And stays on no matter what Mother Nature throws at it.
This invisible force takes us to the outer reaches of outer space.
And to the very depths of our oceans.
It brings us together. And it makes us better.
And most importantly, it has the power to do all this in our lifetime while barely leaving a trace.
Some people might say it's kind of unbelievable.
They wonder, what is this new power that does all these extraordinary things?

A Design Team Pictures the Future of Nuclear Energy

For more than 100 years, the shape and location of human settlements has been defined in large part by energy and water. Cities grew up near natural resources like hydropower, and near water for agricultural, industrial and household use.

So what would the world look like with a new generation of small nuclear reactors that could provide abundant, clean energy for electricity, water pumping and desalination and industrial processes?

Hard to say with precision, but Third Way, the non-partisan think tank, asked the design team at the Washington, D.C. office of Gensler & Associates, an architecture and interior design firm that specializes in sustainable projects like a complex that houses the NFL’s Dallas Cowboys. The talented designers saw a blooming desert and a cozy arctic village, an old urban mill re-purposed as an energy producer, a data center that integrates solar panels on its sprawling flat roofs, a naval base and a humming transit hub.

In the converted mill, high temperat…

Seeing the Light on Nuclear Energy

If you think that there is plenty of electricity, that the air is clean enough and that nuclear power is a just one among many options for meeting human needs, then you are probably over-focused on the United States or Western Europe. Even then, you’d be wrong.

That’s the idea at the heart of a new book, “Seeing the Light: The Case for Nuclear Power in the 21st Century,” by Scott L. Montgomery, a geoscientist and energy expert, and Thomas Graham Jr., a retired ambassador and arms control expert.


Billions of people live in energy poverty, they write, and even those who don’t, those who live in places where there is always an electric outlet or a light switch handy, we need to unmake the last 200 years of energy history, and move to non-carbon sources. Energy is integral to our lives but the authors cite a World Health Organization estimate that more than 6.5 million people die each year from air pollution.  In addition, they say, the global climate is heading for ruinous instability. E…