Fossil-Fuel Bias in Indian Point Water Permit Debate?

John Wheeler at This Week in Nuclear keeps hitting hard against New York State’s Department of Environmental Conservation:

In my further research on this topic I discovered a damming piece of evidence that proves NY State is giving preferential treatment to fossil fuels while at the same time imposing unfair regulations on neighboring nuclear energy facilities, the largest competitors to fossil fuels.

Stop by for the whole story.

Comments

Anonymous said…

Would it be possible to sue in court under the "equal protection" clause of the constitution? Treating parties differently under the law is illegal. This seems to be a clear case of that.

Jim Hopf

June 1, 2010 at 1:16 PM

Jason Ribeiro said…

The compromise screen solution that John Wheeler proposed is the best environmental solution from almost any angle. Closing the plant down will cause more fish to be harmed because more gas and other less environmentally friendly solutions would have to replace Indian Point. Building cooling towers would divert power production to thermal fossil solutions in the interim and again, create a greater thermal signature than if Indian Point were allowed to run as is. The screen solution will add a margin of improvement to the plant's already very low environmental footprint at a reasonable cost - it's a win-win for everyone to go this route.

June 4, 2010 at 1:40 AM

Marilyn Elie said…

DEC has required closed cycle cooling NOT cooling towers. Cheaper radiator style systems are commo
n in the industry. Wedge wire has not been used in fast moving rivers like the Hudson and was rejected at Oyster Creek as ineffective. It does nothing to prevent thermal pollution that is so deadly to the river Eco system.

July 18, 2010 at 11:44 PM

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

Below is from our rapid response team . Yesterday, regional anti-nuclear organizations asked federal nuclear energy regulators to launch an investigation into what it claims are “newly identified flaws” in Westinghouse’s advanced reactor design, the AP1000. During a teleconference releasing a report on the subject, participants urged the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to suspend license reviews of proposed AP1000 reactors. In its news release, even the groups making these allegations provide conflicting information on its findings. In one instance, the groups cite “dozens of corrosion holes” at reactor vessels and in another says that eight holes have been documented. In all cases, there is another containment mechanism that would provide a barrier to radiation release. Below, we examine why these claims are unwarranted and why the AP1000 design certification process should continue as designated by the NRC. Myth: In the AP1000 reactor design, the gap between the shield bu...

What Happens During a Refueling Outage?

You may have noticed over the past few weeks that a number of nuclear plants are shut down for refueling outages or are resuming operations after just returning from one. This type of routine outage usually occurs in the spring or fall when electricity demand is low so that nuclear reactors can replace about one-third of the spent fuel rods with new fuel and conduct other routine maintenance and repairs at the plant. To get a better sense of how refueling works at a nuclear energy facility, I spoke with Marcus Nichol, NEI’s senior project manager for used fuel storage and transportation, and asked him to explain the basics. Why does a nuclear plant need to replace one-third of its fuel? Nichol: The main purpose of a refueling outage is to replace older fuel that is depleted—meaning it can no longer efficiently produce energy from nuclear fission reactions—with new fuel. This “used fuel” has typically been used in the reactor for four-and-a-half to six years before it is pe...

How Much Land Does Nuclear, Wind and Solar Really Need?

Not too long ago, we reviewed a report that looked at nuclear energy (and other energy sources) as biodiversity agents. This had to do, in part, with the amount of land a facility needs to function. Nuclear energy and fossil fuel plants use relatively little, wind farms and solar arrays quite a lot of land . Based on an objective and transparent analysis of our sustainable energy choices, we have come to the evidence-based conclusion that nuclear energy is a good option for biodiversity conservation (and society in general) and that other alternatives to fossil fuels should be subjected to the same cost–benefit analyses (in terms of biodiversity and climate outcomes, as well as sociopolitical imperatives) before accepting or dismissing them. Writer Barry Brook, who collected 75 scientists to endorse his paper, is interested in land use as it impacts flora and fauna. Biodiversity concerns do not get as much play as they might – and, when they do, it annoys many when land is withdraw...

NEI Nuclear Notes

Search This Blog