Long Before the 2011 earthquake and tsunami and the resulting disaster at the Fukashima plant in japan, nuclear energy had lots of opposition. Growing up in the 1970s in a college “No Nukes” was almost as common a protest chant as “Make Love, Not War.”
The Fukashima disaster has, however, prompted a renewed interest in the safety of nuclear energy, and provided ammunition for those who would like to see our own Indian Point Energy Center shut down. The arguments are stale but relentless and they rely on fear and speculation.
Late last week the Business Council of Westchester released the results of a study it commissioned to determine the economic impact of a hypothetical closing on Indian Point Energy Center. The report lays bare the arguments that the 2500 megawatts the reactors currently supply might be replaced by conservation and renewables. While some of the economic impact numbers in the report are easily determined (direct lost wages and property taxes for example) others are more complicated (the impact of unreliable power and higher electricity costs to name a couple) In these cases the reports methodologies are actually quite conservative.
The bottom line is an $11.5 billion dollar negative impact.
I wonder if the report takes into account lost legal fees paid to attorneys on both sides of the issue, or the lost donations to Riverkeeper should the issue finally be settled and the plant closed?