-
-
New York state says Indian Point nuclear plant killing too many fish
The huge numbers of fish sucked to their death by the cooling system at the Indian Point nuclear plant prove that the system harms the Hudson River environment, a New York state official has ruled.
The finding by J. Jared Snyder, assistant commissioner of the Department of Environmental Conservation, is a victory for plant critics who claim that up to 1.2 billion fish and eggs are killed each year as the plant continuously draws in river water for use as a coolant.
"For decades, Indian Point has maintained that its cooling systems have no impact on Hudson River fish," said Robert Goldstein, general counsel to the environmental group Riverkeeper. "At long last, the DEC has pout an end to this fiction."
Snyder said that even the lowest estimate of fish deaths _ 900,000 annually _ "represents excessive fish kills" and establishes an adverse environmental impact.
The ruling, issued this month, means the plant's owner, Entergy Nuclear, may no longer raise the environmental-impact issue as it battles the state's order to build costly towers that recycle cooling water and make big river intakes unnecessary. Entergy had argued that the river's adult fish populations have been stable.
The towers, known as closed-cycle cooling, could cost Entergy more than $1.6 billion.
^^^^^^^
But of course, Entergy will fight building the towers. They don't really care about the environment, just profit. Good ruling. The huge numbers of fish sucked to their death by the cooling system at the Indian Point nuclear plant prove that the system harms the... more -
Nuclear energy heats up U.S. Presidential race
John McCain embraces it. Barack Obama wants to address its flaws. Hillary Clinton is cautious but not opposed.
Nuclear power -- controversial in the United States and throughout much of the world -- is on the agenda of all three US presidential candidates as they seek to diversify the country's energy mix and reduce dependence on foreign oil.
Interviews with top policy advisers to the three White House hopefuls reveal a varied approach to the technology that some observers see as a necessary answer to fighting climate change and others view as expensive and dangerous.
McCain, a Republican senator from Arizona who has wrapped up his party's nomination, is by far the most enthusiastic about the carbon-free fuel source, regularly calling for more nuclear power plants at campaign stops throughout the nation.
"I believe we are not going to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and become energy independent ... unless we use nuclear power and use it in great abundance," he said in North Carolina on Monday.
McCain adviser Douglas Holtz-Eakin said nuclear power faced an "uneven playing field" from years of political opposition.
"Sen. McCain would eliminate the political obstacles that hinder nuclear power, allow it to compete more effectively, and likely increase its share of the US energy portfolio," he said.
Nuclear energy accounts for about 20 percent of US electricity supply, a figure that could rise if regulations on carbon dioxide emissions are imposed, making greenhouse gas emission-free nuclear plants more attractive.
There are 104 operating nuclear reactors nationwide.
Obama, an Illinois senator and the front-runner for the Democratic nomination, shares McCain's belief that nuclear energy is part of the solution to climate change.
But he opposes new federal subsidies and would work to address concerns about safety and waste storage, senior adviser Jason Grumet said.
"Because of the fact that climate change is a species-challenging dilemma, we don't have the luxury to do anything but try to solve those real problems," associated with nuclear technology, he said.
Clinton, a New York senator, prefers using renewable fuels to fight climate change because of nuclear energy's risks.
"Hillary has real concerns about nuclear power because of the issues around safety, waste disposal and proliferation," policy director Neera Tandem said.
"She opposes new subsidies for nuclear power, but would continue research focused on lowering costs and improving safety." John McCain embraces it. Barack Obama wants to address its flaws. Hillary Clinton is cautious but not opposed. ... more -
Nuclear Energy Lobby In U.S. Using Climate Change for Profit
After a hiatus of nearly three decades, nuclear energy is booming. Seventeen power companies in the U.S. are making plans to build more than 30 nuclear plants.
One important factor in the resurgence: new federal and state laws that help utilities pay for nuclear plants that, if completed, would be among the most expensive projects ever built in the country.
One state where nuclear power is making a comeback is Florida. At a meeting last week in Tallahassee, Florida's Public Service Commission voted to approve the state's first new nuclear plants in decades.
Commission member Nathan Skop hailed the decision. "Simply put, nuclear power is a strategic investment for the state of Florida and our national security—to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and to protect our environment," he said. After a hiatus of nearly three decades, nuclear energy is booming. Seventeen power companies in the U.S. are making plans to build mor... more
-
related topics
Entergy
Contributors (18)
Entergy
