Resources

Articles featuring Nuclear New York

  • Is Nuclear Power the Missing Piece of our Climate Change Puzzle? (Daniel Van Boom – Jul 2021)
    • “A thought experiment, proposed with a grin by Dietmar Detering, a German entrepreneur living in New York: ‘What would the climate debate look like if all we had were fossil fuels and renewables, and suddenly someone said, ‘I invented something, it’s called nuclear energy.” ‘I’m sure we’d develop the hell out of it,’ he said, before sighing. ‘We’re looking at a different world right now.” Detering thinks nuclear energy could be the key to solving the climate crisis. A former member of Germany’s Green Party, Detering now spends his spare time as co-chair of the Nuclear New York advocacy group. He’s part of a wave of environmentalists campaigning for more nuclear energy. Though the word evokes images of landscapes pulverized by atomic calamity — Hiroshima, Chernobyl, Fukushima — proponents like Detering and his colleague Eric Dawson point out that nuclear power produces huge amounts of electricity while emitting next to no carbon.”
    • “‘Any energy policy has pros and cons, and we feel, after putting a lot of scrutiny on it, that the pros outweigh the cons of nuclear energy,’ said Dawson, a grassroots campaigner at Nuclear New York.”
    • “‘Norway, Iceland, New Zealand, countries like these all have a naturally high supply for hydroelectricity, so I’m not promoting nuclear there,’ says Dawson, the campaigner from Nuclear New York. ‘If [renewables] work, and they provide first-world quality of life, great! But most countries are not able to do that.'”
    • “Nuclear critics argue that this rise is temporary, and that expanding wind power will eventually replace Indian Point’s output. Nuclear New York’s Detering rejects this logic. ‘People say, ‘Well, we’re replacing nuclear with wind and solar,’ said Detering. ‘But I think that is looking at this backwards. We want to displace fossil fuels.'”
    • “For them it’s not a matter of looking for the perfect energy source, but of comparing alternatives. ‘Nuclear energy is not fairydust,’ says Detering. ‘There’s waste and there’s a risk of something going wrong. Comparing it to something that’s real, these are small issues.’ For his part, Dawson says he won’t advocate for nuclear power if a better alternative emerges. ‘But today, I think this is the most reliable, efficient, scalable, carbon-free technology we have,’ he said. ‘So let’s do something that works today.'”
  • Indian Point is Shutting Down. That Means More Fossil Fuel. (Patrick McGeehan – Apr 2021)
    • “‘It’s topsy-turvy,’ said Isuru Seneviratne, a clean-energy investor who is a member of the steering committee of Nuclear New York, which has lobbied to keep Indian Point running. The pronuclear group calculated that each of Indian Point’s reactors had been producing more power than all of the wind turbines and solar panels in the state combined.”
    • Mr. Seneviratne said it was inevitable that New York City would draw even more power this year from gas-fired generators after Indian Point closes. On the hottest summer days, when millions of air-conditioners are turned on, gas-burning plants would need to increase their output by as much as one-third, spewing tons of additional carbon dioxide into the air, Nuclear New York had concluded.”

Reports on Indian Point

  • Setting the Record Straight on Indian Point (February 2021) Losing New York’s largest source of carbon-free energy, Indian Point, hurts climate and community protection. A brief posted by Physicians, Scientists, and Engineers has led many to believe that renewables and energy efficiency are rapidly replacing nuclear. Co-authored by Dr James Hansen and Meredith Angwin, Setting the Record Straight critiques this misconception, discusses errors and oversights of the brief, and details the challenges associated with designing systems capable of meeting energy needs in the real world.
  • Letter to NYS Climate Action Council Regarding the Importance of Nuclear Power to CLCPA Goals, (June 2020)
  • A Critique of the PSE Brief on Indian Point This is a critical moment for the environmental movement in New York. Replacing IP with gas would greatly diminish or even destroy any hope of obtaining a low carbon future in New York. Regardless of one’s position on Indian Point, the key issue is whether or not Indian Point will be replaced by gas. This critique should serve as an invitation to PSE and others to address the issue of “How do we get New York to start to phase out gas?” (Herschel Specter – May 2020)
  • EE plus RE Cannot Replace Indian Point Every nuclear plant in the United States that has recently closed has been replaced by fossil fuels; none by energy efficiency and none by renewable energy. Indian Point 2 (IP2) is scheduled to close on April 30, 2020 and Indian Point 3 (IP3) a year later. They will be replaced by gas, unless NY State reverses its policies. (Herschel Specter – April 2020)
  • A Reliability Analysis For Riverkeeper The two nuclear units at Indian Point are scheduled to permanently close in April 30, 2020 and exactly one year later. In 2018 this facility produced 16.3 TWh of electricity, equal to 25% of NYC and Westchester demand. Where will the electricity to replace these highly productive, greenhouse gas free, power plants come from? (Herschel Specter – Jun 2019)
  • Environmental Justice Issues After Indian Point Closes Closing Indian Point may force NY State/Con-Ed to increase the use of existing “peaker” plants and other fossil fueled power plants, located in Environmental Justice Areas in New York City. There plants would significantly increase the release of greenhouse gases, add to the city’s air pollution, and may cause serious health effects. (Herschel Specter – Sep 2019)
  • Replacing Indian Point (Herschel Specter – Jul 2019) To truly replace Indian Point, any replacement scheme must also be (1) carbon-free, (2) highly reliable, and (3) productive enough to match its output. As New Yorkers demand action on the existential threat of climate change, while keeping them economically vital, this report calls for a rethinking of how to proceed.
  • The Best Emergency Plan for Indian Point, Rev. 2 (Herschel Specter – Nov 2019)
  • A recent comprehensive report from the Citizens Budget Commission, an influential think tank, found that the projected expansion of solar and wind was “likely infeasible” Getting Greener: Cost-Effective Options for Achieving New York State’s Greenhouse Gas Goals. Citizens’ Budget Commission. (December 2019)
  • Charles River Associates was retained by the New York City Department of Environmental Protection to analyze the economic, reliability, and environmental effects of the proposed retirement of the Indian Point Energy Center, a nuclear power plant in Westchester County, New York. This analysis helped the City of New York and other key energy stakeholders understand the implications of IPEC’s potential retirement. (August 2011)
  • NYS Department of Environmental Conservation finds “no reasonable basis to perform a [State Environmental Quality Review Act] analysis comparing the impacts of Indian Point operating past the early retirement dates.” (2017)
  • Gov Cuomo promised “Replacement Power Will Be In Place That Adds No New Carbon Emissions” (January 2017)
  • The Indian Point Closure Agreement in its entirety (January 2017)
  • Balancing the Facts on Tritium Levels at Indian Point (Ethan Bodnaruk – 2016)

Articles

Filings on Regulatory Proceedings

Government Reports

Videos

Petitions