[ RadSafe ] Irony at Its Best a.k.a. Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant

[Steven Dapra]

Dec. 5

         May I faint!  The good gray New York Times has finally said 
something that makes sense!  Shall we stop the presses?

Steven Dapra


At 01:11 PM 12/5/07 -0800, John Jacobus wrote:
>Editorial from today's New Your Times
>
>See the last paragraph
>
>December 5, 2007
>Editorial
>
>Taking Aim at Indian Point
>
>In an extraordinary move, Gov. Eliot Spitzer and
>Attorney General Andrew Cuomo have placed themselves
>at the head of the group of federal, state and local
>officials who believe that the Indian Point nuclear
>power plant is unsafe and poorly run and should be
>closed. They should be given a chance to make their
>case.
>
>The Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which must decide
>in the next year or two whether to allow Indian Point
>to remain open after its two reactor licenses expire
>in 2013 and 2015, should grant New York’s request to
>intervene in the relicensing process. It should
>provide a full airing of the issues raised by Mr.
>Spitzer and Mr. Cuomo, which focus mostly on Indian
>Point’s vulnerability to terrorist attack, its record
>of leaks, accidents and environmental damage and its
>status as the nuclear plant with more neighbors than
>any other in the country — 20 million people within 50
>miles, in a region where mass evacuations might be all
>but impossible.
>
>This would require changing the rules of such
>hearings, which focus on the soundness of the plant
>and the ability of the utility to run it. By asking
>for a hearing, Mr. Spitzer and Mr. Cuomo have joined
>local politicians and activists in arguing that the
>9/11 attacks changed things and that the commission
>has not adequately considered the risks and
>consequences of terrorism as it reviews relicensing
>applications for the plants it oversees.
>
>We, too, believe that domestic security is of utmost
>urgency. The intense scrutiny that New York wants to
>apply to Indian Point — about 30 miles up the Hudson
>River from Manhattan — should apply to all nuclear
>plants in the country, including those whose
>spent-fuel pools are above ground and thus more
>vulnerable than Indian Point’s.
>
>This should not be misconstrued as an attack on
>nuclear power, which we strongly believe has a place
>in the nation’s energy mix. Indeed, our support for
>New York’s position comes with a major caveat: The
>state has an obligation to explain what it would do
>about the 2,000 megawatts of electricity that would be
>lost if the plant closed. Its solution must not
>compromise New York’s commitment to reducing
>greenhouse gases in the region. Replacing one
>potential menace with another — like an
>environmentally dirtier and costly natural-gas plant —
>would be a bad outcome.

[edit]