Skip to main content

The Nuclear Plant that Wasn’t

NEIAd-20pct.FINAL.Feb2011 Here’s an interesting story about a nuclear plant that didn’t get built in Easton NY in the late sixties (as the name implies, Easton is in far east New York state near the Vermont border):

Town Supervisor John Rymph was [in Easton in 1967, when the plant was announced], and said that he remembered being excited and looking forward to, as many residents did, the plant and the changes it would bring. A comprehensive plan and the town's planning board both sprouted in the aftermath of news of the nuclear facility planned for Grandma Moses' birthplace.

The local paper was excited, too:

An editorial in the now defunct Cambridge-based Washington County Post proclaimed in March that "the atomic age had arrived on the local scene," but continued on to say that the "communities to be affected are far from being ready to meet the challenge."

From this distance, we can’t really know what the Post saw as its community not being ready, as it certainly got itself ready for an economic bonanza:

The Greenwich Journal wrote then that despite the road blocks, the feeling locally for many up to that point was that the project would continue. The town of Easton, Washington County, and Stillwater Central School District were all poised for large tax revenues upon completion of the plant.

And that would happen, in part, because of the jobs the plant would bring with it.

But:

The Hudson River commission's qualms were shared by some locals, the state Historic Trust, and ultimately the National Advisory Commission for Historic Preservation. By mid-1968, the plant seemed in doubt, with an Aug. 8 Greenwich Journal headline proclaiming "Easton Likely to Lose Niagara Mohawk Plant."

And that’s what happened. Reporter Zeke Wright sounds a somewhat plangent note:

Today, the town of Easton's Website boasts of more than 30 farms, making it the "most agricultural town in the region."

So the town is as the town was. Wright is correct in not going beyond the facts – plenty of power plants are sited in rural areas that maintain their character – but still, the feeling of a lost possibility is very strong.

The Web site he refers to may be this one for the Easton Library. Easton has about 2500 people.

It’s a terrific peek into atomic history. Do read the whole thing.

---

As you might expect, NEI advertises the benefits of nuclear energy outside just its web site. The main goal is to reach policymakers, but a fair amount of advertising is also done in national newspapers, such as the Washington Post, and in both print and on-line editions. There are also TV and radio spots broadcast largely during pubic affairs programming.

This is a good way to bring out nuclear energy’s virtues to the general public and to a targeted audience that can build public policy.

It is nice to be able to share the effort with anyone interested. I’ve included the print ad above (click for larger) and you can take a look at the radio, TV and print ads here.

Comments

Anonymous said…
It's kind of sad, but after reading the article, I kind of wondered. . . did the Niagara Mohawk Corporation start to, perhaps, bite off more than it could chew, and realized that as they started to get into the process, deciding it best to cancel the project before they got too deeply indebted?

I guess what I'm saying is, perhaps the various concerns raised by the different agencies and parties that this article views as blocking the plant, were legitimate concerns, and could have perhaps been worked through, but Niagara Mohawk didn't have the patience and funding to build the plant the "right way". Better to not do the job, than to do the job wrong, no?

I wonder if a larger, better funded company might have been able to succeed where N-M was not?
Anonymous said…
The site lies atLat: 42.97, Lon:-73.62, across the river from the Saratoga National Battlefield.

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…