Skip to main content

If not Indian Point, then What?



On Tuesday, Rod Adams posted an analysis of a letter to the editor about replacing Indian Point with a natural gas-fired power plant. Rod walks through the calculation of the amount and cost of the gas needed to fuel that alternative. The numbers are huge - by Rod's estimate the fuel costs alone would exceed $550 million per year. Check it out at this link and kudos to Rod.


Note: For more information, also see David Bradish's 2008 post at this link.

Comments

Sterling Archer said…
The cost doesn't matter! Since New York went to Obama in the electoral college, he can be depended upon to sell T-bills to the Chinese and pay for the natural gas that way, so that New Yorkers don't have to pay for it. Price is no object!
Anonymous said…
What does Obama have to do with this thread? Has he ever utterred a word opposing Indian Point? There are plenty of teabagger web sites to post this stuff. Stick to the subject.
SteveK9 said…
Anonymous: Thanks, could not have said it better.

It may take something like having Exelon close down Oyster Creek and then people watching the electric bills jump to combat this idiocy --- trouble is, it will take a long time for the lesson to sink in.
Anonymous said…
The struggle to increase gas capacity in the northeast is an even bigger struggle than the nuclear/antinuclear struggle.


Upshot: There is not now, nor will there be in the immediate future, any excess gas capacity to replace IPEC's generation.


It took over 12 years to install the vastly reduced Millennium pipeline, and there are no plans for any new pipes.


Therefore any talk about replacing IPEC with gas, is purest naive nonsense.


We need not compute anything, to put the lie to Matthiessen's pipe dream.
Anonymous said…
The National Academy of Sciences studied the question of replacing Indian Point back in 2006.

http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=11666&page=R1

Their conclusion?

"While the committee is optimistic that technical solutions do exist for the replacement of Indian Point, it is considerably less confident that the necessary political, regulatory, financial, and institutional mechanisms are in place to facilitate the timely implementation of these replacement options. The importance of this issue cannot be overstated in developing options for maintaining a reliable electric energy supply for the New York City metropolitan area."

In other words, New York City is in deep do-do (e.g., blackouts) without Indian Point.
DocForesight said…
For as offensive as it is to blaming Obama in this, can we agree that it is equally offensive to use the "teabagger" or "denier" smear?

The fact is, eliminating IP would cause intense hardship on New Yorkers and provide nothing in environmental benefit - in fact, it would inflict more harm. Can we stick to the facts and recognize our real adversary - anti-nukes - and not merely our political ones?
Anonymous said…
Wasn't there also some move to ban docking of LNG carriers in Northeast ports? So you can't pipe it, you can't ship it, how are you even going to transport the fuel to a generating site, much less build the darn thing and it's millions of tons of CO2 emissions.
Anonymous said…
There are plenty of teabagger web sites to post this stuff.

"Teabgger" is it? Since when did NEI Nuclear Notes become a porn blog? We don't need that kind of Democratic Underground-style filthy language here. Stick to the subject? How about starting with not using gutter language?
Anonymous said…
To our anonymous moral overseer:

The term also has non-obscene definitions. Some of the Tea Party groups have referred to themselves using this term.

http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2009/04/15/snapshots-of-teabaggers

Your choosing to default to the obscene definition is not my fault or concern. Do you also complain on the ESPN web site every time they mention balls?
Anonymous said…
"Can we stick to the facts and recognize our real adversary - anti-nukes - and not merely our political ones?"

This is hilarious coming from DocForesight, as this is perhaps the only thread on this blog he's commented on that he HASN'T tried to turn into an anti-Obama discussion.
Anonymous said…
I withdraw above comment, was confusing DF with someone else. My apologies Doc. There's a lot of (off-topic) Obama-bashing on this blog, and sometimes it's hard to keep track of who said what.
Anonymous said…
The term also has non-obscene definitions.

Oh, stop it. Just stop it. Don't try to make jerks out of us. We knew what you meant, and you did, too. So just stop it.

If you wanted to refer to the anti-tax increase, anti-big government, anti-government takeover protesters, there were other terms you could have used. But you chose a term that had the most obscene connotations. Like I said, we don't need that DU-style filth here.
DocForesight said…
@Anon (#?) -- Apology accepted. I try diligently to leave comments that are substantive, occasionally humorous - even though it takes some effort.

We can "thank" people like Rachel Maddow for the spread of the "teabagger" smear. The Tea Party Patriots could hardly be convicted of conjuring that moniker to their movement. And I'd be willing to bet that a high percentage of them are strong proponents of nuclear power plants.

Popular posts from this blog

Making Clouds for a Living

Donell Banks works at Southern Nuclear’s Plant Vogtle units 3 and 4 as a shift supervisor in Operations, but is in the process of transitioning to his newly appointed role as the daily work controls manager. He has been in the nuclear energy industry for about 11 years.

I love what I do because I have the unique opportunity to help shape the direction and influence the culture for the future of nuclear power in the United States. Every single day presents a new challenge, but I wouldn't have it any other way. As a shift supervisor, I was primarily responsible for managing the development of procedures and programs to support operation of the first new nuclear units in the United States in more than 30 years. As the daily work controls manager, I will be responsible for oversight of the execution and scheduling of daily work to ensure organizational readiness to operate the new units.

I envision a nuclear energy industry that leverages the technology of today to improve efficiency…

Nuclear: Energy for All Political Seasons

The electoral college will soon confirm a surprise election result, Donald Trump. However, in the electricity world, there are fewer surprises – physics and economics will continue to apply, and Republicans and Democrats are going to find a lot to like about nuclear energy over the next four years.

In a Trump administration, the carbon conversation is going to be less prominent. But the nuclear value proposition is still there. We bring steady jobs to rural areas, including in the Rust Belt, which put Donald Trump in office. Nuclear plants keep the surrounding communities vibrant.

We hold down electricity costs for the whole economy. We provide energy diversity, reducing the risk of disruption. We are a critical part of America’s industrial infrastructure, and the importance of infrastructure is something that President-Elect Trump has stressed.

One of our infrastructure challenges is natural gas pipelines, which have gotten more congested as extremely low gas prices have pulled m…

Innovation Fuels the Nuclear Legacy: Southern Nuclear Employees Share Their Stories

Blake Bolt and Sharimar Colon are excited about nuclear energy. Each works at Southern Nuclear Co. and sees firsthand how their ingenuity powers the nation’s largest supply of clean energy. For Powered by Our People, they shared their stories of advocacy, innovation in the workplace and efforts to promote efficiency. Their passion for nuclear energy casts a bright future for the industry.

Blake Bolt has worked in the nuclear industry for six years and is currently the work week manager at Hatch Nuclear Plant in Georgia. He takes pride in an industry he might one day pass on to his children.

What is your job and why do you enjoy doing it?
As a Work Week Manager at Plant Hatch, my primary responsibility is to ensure nuclear safety and manage the risk associated with work by planning, scheduling, preparing and executing work to maximize the availability and reliability of station equipment and systems. I love my job because it enables me to work directly with every department on the plant…