By Craig Wilson
November 11, 2009
In an Op-Ed published on November 10, 2009 regarding the Indian Point Energy Center, Joseph Mangano crosses the line from fact to fiction. He is correct about one item – the debate over the continued operation of Indian Point is about much more than just energy, it’s also about our quality of life, economy and public health.
Specifically, Mr. Mangano states that if Indian Point is not forced to close, public health would be threatened. He combines inflammatory language with historical references to trigger horrific imagery, thus conveying incorrect and inaccurate information to your readers.
Hiroshima was the target of a nuclear bomb that requires highly purified Uranium. On the other hand, used nuclear fuel contains Uranium that is at most 5% pure, far below what is required for a nuclear bomb. Consequently, it is impossible to create a nuclear bomb out of used nuclear fuel. Therefore, the name of a city from World War II that was the intended target of a devastating bomb has no relationship, except for the purposes of sensationalism, to controlled, clean and safe energy production.
While the scenarios Mr. Mangano describes are written as though they will occur, the reality is that they can’t. For instance, the Chernobyl reactor in Russia is a completely different design than U.S. reactors which include built in safety features that totally eliminate the potential for a Chernobyl like incident. None of the 104 operating U.S. nuclear power plants have ever caused, or been linked to, anyone’s death. Statistics published by the federal government show that it is safer to work at a nuclear power plant than it is to work in the real estate or financial sector.
In generating nuclear power, Indian Point does release a minimal amount of radiation. For someone living next to a nuclear power plant, the amount of radiation they can receive in a year is equal to one ten-thousandth of a single CAT scan. Mangano’s statements indicating larger releases or an accumulation of radiation that must be released periodically are false, and cannot be trusted.
In fact, the minimal emissions from the Indian Point facility is one of the key reasons why shuttering the plant is such a poor idea. Depending on the time of year, the facility produces up to 40% of the power needed for New York City and surrounding areas. If Indian Point were closed the power necessary for the region’s schools, homes and overall economy would instead be produced through the combustion of fossil fuels. This means, at a minimum, an additional 6.9 million tons of pollutants would be released into the region’s air. Furthermore, electricity prices would increase in order to pay for the new facilities.
The 6.9 million tons of pollutants, roughly equal to 25% of New York City’s total emissions, would include a noxious mix of Nitrous Oxide, Sulfur Dioxide and Particulate Matter. Academic studies (the most recent by the National Academy of Science) find that these pollutants cause asthma, lung cancer, heart attacks and in time, premature death.
The above information is completely factual. It is not exaggerated, manipulated or presented in a manner to mislead the reader. The facts show that Indian Point greatly benefits the New York City region, by way of cleaner air and reliable, affordable electricity. It is imperative that New Yorkers support the relicensing of the facility not only for the safe and clean electricity it provides today, but also for the healthier environment it will provide future generations.
Craig Wilson is the Executive Director of Safe Healthy Affordable Reliable Energy (SHARE), a coalition of organizations committed to the supply of clean and affordable electricity.
