Skip to main content

Back to Easton

A couple of weeks ago, we ran a story about the efforts of a small town to bring a nuclear plant to its area back in the seventies. It didn’t happen back then, for various reasons, and Easton, N.Y. remains now as it was then, a small farming town. So imagine my surprise:

About 50 people, including a member of [Rep. Chris Gibson's (D-N.Y.)] staff, attended last week's [town] board meeting at which the board voted to create the [nuclear] study committee. Gibson, the freshman Republican congressman from the 20th District, has made constructing a nuclear power plant in the district one of his priorities.

That district, of course, includes Easton. Most of the story is bare speculation, but I found it interesting that the echo of the past has made an impact on the present:

[Farmer George] Allen was a high school senior when the [original nuclear] plant was proposed, and remembers seeing a model of the facility at his school. Years later, after he had bought the utility land, his three kids used to swim in the old reactor pit, which is 60 feet deep and full of "crystal-clear water."

And Allen seems an ideal constituent:

"But I do think it is smart for the town to do some study of this issue," said Allen, who attended last week's Town Board meeting to speak in favor of the study committee. "There should be good information, rather than hearsay or how someone just feels about it."

Bravo, George Allen.

I have no idea whether a nuclear plant in Easton is a long shot  - no one has expressed interest in building one as far as I know – and I suspect the residual excitement over the first plant gives Easton a sort of extra enthusiasm. I find this – shall we say? – imprint on the town’s DNA uniquely intriguing. Plus, if it succeeds, Eastern New York would do nothing but benefit. I hope Easton gets its nuclear plant.

Comments

Di said…
My husbands family lives there, he grew up swimming in the river/canal up there. The area is beautiful so why not destroy it.... In light of the problems in Japan this past wkend may make many of them think differently. Think it may be time to consider options like wind power or solar. Don't have to worry about trying to get rid of contaminate from them.
Robert said…
The idea was floated by one Board member at a Town Board meeting in February 2011. By the time the Board met again in March 2011, they had a resolution written up to look into the feasibility of nuclear power and ONLY nuclear power, which they voted to pass, and they appointed the committee in April 2011. The pace at which this all happened was astounding, given that the Board sometimes takes two or three meetings to decide whether or not to trim a bush.

At no time was a public referendum held, no attempt was made to have a public forum to see how the town residents felt about any of this. The Town Board agenda is not published in advance, so the 50+ people who showed up to protest did so because they had read about the issue in the newspaper and came to the meeting to see if there would be an opportunity to voice their opinions. Their only opportunity to have a voice was during the public comments section of the general Board meeting -- and the overwhelming sentiment of the residents was NOT to proceed with the resolution, and to forget the whole idea.

The Town Board ignored requests to bring this issue to the town at any kind of structured and advertised public forum, and even refused to include looking into the feasibility of sources of renewable energy like wind and solar in the wording, and they voted in the resolution (4 in favor, one against) despite overwhelming opposition from the public.

Having a nuclear power plant in Easton is NOT ingrained in our DNA. It is being forced on us by a Town Board looking to curry favor with Mr. Gibson. In particular, Steve Mueller -- the member of the board that started this whole thing -- seems to have an agenda that he is pushing. What everyone is wondering is . . . what it is and why?

Popular posts from this blog

Missing the Point about Pennsylvania’s Nuclear Plants

A group that includes oil and gas companies in Pennsylvania released a study on Monday that argues that twenty years ago, planners underestimated the value of nuclear plants in the electricity market. According to the group, that means the state should now let the plants close.

Huh?

The question confronting the state now isn’t what the companies that owned the reactors at the time of de-regulation got or didn’t get. It’s not a question of whether they were profitable in the '80s, '90s and '00s. It’s about now. Business works by looking at the present and making projections about the future.

Is losing the nuclear plants what’s best for the state going forward?

Pennsylvania needs clean air. It needs jobs. And it needs protection against over-reliance on a single fuel source.


What the reactors need is recognition of all the value they provide. The electricity market is depressed, and if electricity is treated as a simple commodity, with no regard for its benefit to clean air o…

How Nanomaterials Can Make Nuclear Reactors Safer and More Efficient

The following is a guest post from Matt Wald, senior communications advisor at NEI. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattLWald.

From the batteries in our cell phones to the clothes on our backs, "nanomaterials" that are designed molecule by molecule are working their way into our economy and our lives. Now there’s some promising work on new materials for nuclear reactors.

Reactors are a tough environment. The sub atomic particles that sustain the chain reaction, neutrons, are great for splitting additional uranium atoms, but not all of them hit a uranium atom; some of them end up in various metal components of the reactor. The metal is usually a crystalline structure, meaning it is as orderly as a ladder or a sheet of graph paper, but the neutrons rearrange the atoms, leaving some infinitesimal voids in the structure and some areas of extra density. The components literally grow, getting longer and thicker. The phenomenon is well understood and designers compensate for it with a …

A Billion Miles Under Nuclear Energy (Updated)

And the winner is…Cassini-Huygens, in triple overtime.

The spaceship conceived in 1982 and launched fifteen years later, will crash into Saturn on September 15, after a mission of 19 years and 355 days, powered by the audacity and technical prowess of scientists and engineers from 17 different countries, and 72 pounds of plutonium.

The mission was so successful that it was extended three times; it was intended to last only until 2008.

Since April, the ship has been continuing to orbit Saturn, swinging through the 1,500-mile gap between the planet and its rings, an area not previously explored. This is a good maneuver for a spaceship nearing the end of its mission, since colliding with a rock could end things early.

Cassini will dive a little deeper and plunge toward Saturn’s surface, where it will transmit data until it burns up in the planet’s atmosphere. The radio signal will arrive here early Friday morning, Eastern time. A NASA video explains.

In the years since Cassini has launc…