The Indian Point nuclear plant is generally regarded as a clean and dependable source of energy, free of the carbon and methane emissions that are warming the Earth and producing disturbing climate changes. Running night and day, regardless of weather conditions, Indian Point supplies about 25 percent of the electricity for millions of people who live and work in the New York City metropolitan area from Staten Island north to Dutchess and Ulster counties.
Yet its 2,037 megawatts of electric power could be lost, along with grid reliability, air quality and a source of affordable energy that would be difficult to replace. There is a real danger of that happening, with consequences that could ripple far beyond New York state, unless cooler heads prevail.
Opponents of Indian Point propose replacing it with a combination of new power plants fueled with natural gas, hydropower (most likely mixed with nuclear power) transmitted from Quebec, solar and wind, and conservation. In reality, this would make New York state even more dependent on natural gas, a fuel with a history of carbon emission and price volatility, in the production of electricity. As the price of gas rises, the cost certainly would be passed through to electricity consumers.
When it comes to reliability, nuclear power has no equal. According to data compiled by the U.S. Energy Information Administration, the average capacity factor — how much of its potential power a plant actually puts out over time — of combined-cycle natural gas plants in this country is 45.6 percent. For wind power, it is 31.8 percent, and for solar, 24 percent. In contrast, between 2010 and 2012, Indian Point's two units generated electricity, on average, more than 90 percent of the time.
Since 9/11, a new element has been added to the debate over Indian Point — plant security. Some political leaders want the plant shut down because of its proximity to the densely-populated New York metropolitan area. But the fact is, nuclear plants are the most hardened and secure facilities in the U.S. infrastructure.
A panel of independent safety experts who evaluated the consequences of an aircraft strike on Indian Point concluded that "the probability of a large aircraft part striking the buildings with nuclear fuel inside and causing a significant release of radioactivity is extremely low, to the point of being non-credible." The panel determined that a striking aircraft could not penetrate and damage equipment essential to safety, Indian Point's security force is strong and plant safety to be exceptionally good.
This does not mean that we should do nothing about reducing any safety problems in the production of nuclear energy.
In fact, in the time since the panel's report was issued in 2008, Entergy Corp. has continued to invest millions of dollars in security and safety improvements at Indian Point to deal with a range of possible risks. That's the right approach — incremental steps that enhance safety and work to benefit our economy and protect the environment.
Conversely, the costs of closing Indian Point would be significant.
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has been evaluating Indian Point's license renewal application for the past five years.
Let's make sure unsubstantiated concern about safety or other issues don't derail the NRC's review.
The license for Unit 2 expires at the end of September, though the NRC extended the license while the review process continues. Unit 3's license expires in 2015.
The case for Indian Point's continued operation is overwhelming, and the danger of energy shortages and climate change shows that it is even more vital in the years ahead.