Content deleted Content added
Reverted unexplained edits. |
|||
| (25 intermediate revisions by 18 users not shown) | |||
Line 41:
}}
'''Indian Point Energy Center''' ('''I.P.E.C.''') is a now defunct three-unit [[nuclear power plant
The original 40-year operating licenses for Units 2 and 3 expired in September 2013 and December 2015, respectively. Entergy had applied for license extensions and the [[Nuclear Regulatory Commission]] (NRC) was moving toward granting a twenty-year extension for each reactor. However, due to a number of factors including sustained low wholesale energy prices that reduced revenues, as well as pressure from local
As a result of the permanent shutdown of the plant, three new greenhouse gas generating [[Gas-fired power plant|natural-gas fired power plants]] were built: [[Bayonne Energy Center]], [[CPV Valley Energy Center]], and [[
Unit 3 currently holds the world record for the longest uninterrupted operating period for a light water commercial power reactor. This record is 753 days of continuous operation, and was set on April 30, 2021 for the operating cycle beginning on April 9, 2019. Unit 3 operated at or near full output capacity for the entire length of the cycle.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Indian-Point-celebrates-record-run-as-closure-appr|title=Indian Point celebrates record run as closure approaches|date=2021-04-29|access-date=2021-05-08}}</ref> This record was previously held by Exelon's [[LaSalle County Nuclear Generating Station|LaSalle Unit 1]] with a record of 739 continuous days, set in 2006.
==
=== Reactors ===
=== History and design ===▼
▲The reactors are built on land that originally housed the [[Indian Point Amusement Park]], but was acquired by Consolidated Edison (ConEdison) on October 14, 1954.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://fultonhistory.com/highlighter/highlight-for-xml?altUrl=https%3A%2F%2Frp.liu233w.com%3A443%2Fhttp%2Ffultonhistory.com%2FNewspaper%252018%2FHastings%2520NY%2520Hastings%2520on%2520the%2520Hudson%2520News%2FHastings%2520NY%2520Hastings%2520on%2520the%2520Hudson%2520News%25201954%2FHastings%2520NY%2520Hastings%2520on%2520the%2520Hudson%2520News%25201954%2520-%25200538.pdf&xml=https%3A%2F%2Frp.liu233w.com%3A443%2Fhttp%2Ffultonhistory.com%2FdtSearch%2Fdtisapi6.dll%3Fcmd%3Dgetpdfhits%26u%3D53efce85%26DocId%3D2351797%26Index%3DZ%253a%255cIndex%2520I%252dE%252dV%26HitCount%3D6%26hits%3D2ed%2B2ee%2B2ef%2B2f0%2B2f1%2B2f2%2B%26SearchForm%3D%252fFulton%255fNew%255fform%252ehtml%26.pdf&openFirstHlPage=false|title=Con Ed Acquire Indian Point|date=October 14, 1954|work=The Hastings News|access-date=July 31, 2016|via=[[Fultonhistory.com]]}}</ref> Indian Point 1, built by ConEdison, was a 275-megawatt Babcock & Wilcox supplied <ref>[https://www.babcock.com/about/history History<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref> [[pressurized water reactor]] that was issued an operating license on March 26, 1962 and began operations on September 16, 1962.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.eia.gov/nuclear/state/2008/newyork/ |title=New York Nuclear Plants |publisher=Energy Information Administration |date=May 18, 2015}}</ref> The first core used a [[thorium]]-based fuel with stainless steel cladding, but this fuel did not live up to expectations for core life.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.americanscientist.org/article/thorium-fuel-for-nuclear-energy |title=Thorium Fuel for Nuclear Energy |publisher=American Scientist |date=September 2003 |access-date=March 21, 2023}}</ref> The thorium-based core shutdown in October 1965.<ref>{{cite news |title=Indian Readied for New Uranium |work=Mount Vernon Argus |location=White Plains, New York |date=March 16, 1966 |page=17 |url=https://www.newspapers.com/clip/121388402/indian-readied-for-new-uranium/ |access-date=March 21, 2023}}</ref> The plant was operated with [[uranium dioxide]] fuel for the remainder of its life. The reactor was shut down on October 31, 1974, because the emergency core cooling system did not meet regulatory requirements. All spent fuel was removed from the reactor vessel by January 1976, but the reactor still stands.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.insc.anl.gov/cgi-bin/sql_interface?view=country_status&qvar=name&qval=24 |title=Status of Nuclear Energy in the United States |publisher=Argonne National Laboratories |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110316134445/http://www.insc.anl.gov/cgi-bin/sql_interface?view=country_status&qvar=name&qval=24 |archive-date=March 16, 2011 }}</ref> The licensee, Entergy, plans to decommission Unit 1 when Unit 2 is decommissioned.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.nrc.gov/info-finder/decommissioning/power-reactor/indian-point-unit-1.html |title=Indian Point 1 |publisher=Nuclear Regulatory Commission}}</ref>
▲The two additional reactors, Indian Point 2 and 3, are four-loop [[Westinghouse Electric Company|Westinghouse]] pressurized water reactors both of similar design. Units 2 and 3 were completed in 1974 and 1976, respectively. Unit 2 had a gross generating capacity of 1,032 MWe, and Unit 3 had a gross generating capacity of 1,051 MWe. Both reactors used uranium dioxide fuel of no more than 4.8% [[Uranium-235|U-235]] enrichment. The reactors at Indian Point are protected by containment domes made of steel-reinforced concrete that is {{convert|40|in|m}} thick, with a carbon steel liner.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.safesecurevital.com/about-us/technical-overview.html |title=Indian Point Energy Center Factsheet |publisher=Entergy |access-date=May 19, 2015 |archive-date=May 20, 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150520234441/http://www.safesecurevital.com/about-us/technical-overview.html |url-status=dead }}</ref>
=== Nuclear capacity in New York state===
Line 61 ⟶ 60:
=== Refueling ===
Units 2 and 3 were each refueled on a two-year cycle. At the end of each fuel cycle, one unit was brought offline for refueling and maintenance activities. On March 2, 2015, Indian Point 3 was taken offline for 23 days to perform its refueling operations. Entergy invested $50,000,000 in the refueling and other related projects for Unit 3, of which $30,000,000 went to employee salaries. The unit was brought back online on March 25, 2015.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.safesecurevital.com/entergy-s-indian-point-nuclear-power-plant-unit-shuts-down-for-50-million-planned-refueling-bringing-in-1-000-additional-workers-after-two-year-run-of-high-reliability-and-safety/|title=Entergy's Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant Unit Shuts Down for $50 Million Planned Refueling, Bringing in 1,000 Additional Workers After Two-Year Run of High Reliability and Safety|date=March 2015|publisher=Entergy|access-date=March 23, 2015|archive-date=September 24, 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150924093442/http://www.safesecurevital.com/entergy-s-indian-point-nuclear-power-plant-unit-shuts-down-for-50-million-planned-refueling-bringing-in-1-000-additional-workers-after-two-year-run-of-high-reliability-and-safety/|url-status=dead}}</ref>
== Effects ==▼
=== Economic impact ===
A June 2015 report by a [[Advocacy group|lobby group]] called [[Nuclear Energy Institute]] found that the operation of Indian Point generates $1.3 billion of annual economic output in local counties, $1.6 billion statewide, and $2.5 billion across the United States. In 2014, Entergy paid $30,000,000 in state and local property taxes. The total tax revenue (direct and secondary) was nearly $340,000,000 to local, state, and federal governments.<ref name=nei2015/> According to the Village of Buchanan budget for 2016–2017, a [[payment in lieu of taxes]] in the amount of 2.62 million dollars was received in 2015–2016, and was projected to be 2.62 million dollars in 2016–2017 – the majority of which can be assumed to come from the Indian Point Energy Center.<ref>{{cite web|title=Village of Buchanan Website|url=http://www.villageofbuchanan.com/VillageDocuments/Village_Budget_2016-2017.pdf|page=22|access-date=October 31, 2018|archive-date=November 1, 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181101015422/http://www.villageofbuchanan.com/VillageDocuments/Village_Budget_2016-2017.pdf|url-status=dead}}</ref>
Line 72 ⟶ 68:
Indian Point directly employed about 1,000 full-time workers. This employment created another 2,800 jobs in the five-county region, and 1,600 in other industries in New York, for a total of 5,400 in-state jobs. Additionally, another 5,300 indirect jobs were created out of state, creating a sum total of 10,700 jobs throughout the United States.<ref name=nei2015/>
Closure of the plant
The reactors were built on land that originally housed the [[Indian Point Amusement Park]], which was acquired by Consolidated Edison (ConEdison) on October 14, 1954.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://fultonhistory.com/highlighter/highlight-for-xml?altUrl=https%3A%2F%2Frp.liu233w.com%3A443%2Fhttp%2Ffultonhistory.com%2FNewspaper%252018%2FHastings%2520NY%2520Hastings%2520on%2520the%2520Hudson%2520News%2FHastings%2520NY%2520Hastings%2520on%2520the%2520Hudson%2520News%25201954%2FHastings%2520NY%2520Hastings%2520on%2520the%2520Hudson%2520News%25201954%2520-%25200538.pdf&xml=https%3A%2F%2Frp.liu233w.com%3A443%2Fhttp%2Ffultonhistory.com%2FdtSearch%2Fdtisapi6.dll%3Fcmd%3Dgetpdfhits%26u%3D53efce85%26DocId%3D2351797%26Index%3DZ%253a%255cIndex%2520I%252dE%252dV%26HitCount%3D6%26hits%3D2ed%2B2ee%2B2ef%2B2f0%2B2f1%2B2f2%2B%26SearchForm%3D%252fFulton%255fNew%255fform%252ehtml%26.pdf&openFirstHlPage=false|title=Con Ed Acquire Indian Point|date=October 14, 1954|work=The Hastings News|access-date=July 31, 2016|via=[[Fultonhistory.com]]}}</ref>
=== Environmental concerns ===
Environmentalists have expressed concern about increased carbon emissions with the deactivation of Indian Point (generating electricity with nuclear energy creates no carbon emissions). A study undertaken by Environmental Progress found that closure of the plant would cause power emissions to jump 29% in New York, equivalent to the emissions from 1.4 million additional cars on New York roads.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Shellenberger |first1=Michael |title=New York |url=http://environmentalprogress.org/new-york/ |website=Environmental Progress |access-date=February 22, 2020 |archive-date=February 22, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200222224926/http://environmentalprogress.org/new-york/ |url-status=dead }}</ref>▼
In February 2016, New York State Governor Andrew Cuomo called for a full investigation of the plant's operations by state environment and public health officials.<ref name="tritium">http://www.governor.ny.gov: [https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/statement-governor-andrew-m-cuomo-regarding-indian-point-nuclear-facility Statement from Governor Andrew M. Cuomo Regarding Indian Point Nuclear Facility] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160207113505/https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/statement-governor-andrew-m-cuomo-regarding-indian-point-nuclear-facility |date=February 7, 2016 }}</ref>
▲Some environmental groups have expressed concerns about the operation of Indian Point, including radiation pollution and endangerment of wildlife, but whether Indian Point has ever posed a significant danger to wildlife or the public remains controversial. Though anti-nuclear group Riverkeeper notes "Radioactive leakage from the plant containing several radioactive isotopes, such as strontium-90, cesium-137, cobalt-60, nickel-63 and tritium, a rarely-occurring isotope of hydrogen, has flowed into groundwater that eventually enters the Hudson River in the past,<ref>{{Cite web|title=Radiological Leaks at Indian Point|publisher=Riverkeeper.org|url=https://www.riverkeeper.org/campaigns/stop-polluters/indian-point/radioactive-waste/radiological-leaks-at-indian-point/}}</ref> there is no evidence radiation from the plant has ever posed a significant hazard to local residents or wildlife. In the last year{{When|date=October 2019}}, nine tritium leaks have occurred; however, even at their highest levels the leaks have never exceeded one-tenth of 1% of U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission limits.
▲
▲In February 2016, New York State Governor Andrew Cuomo called for a full investigation by state environment<ref name="tritium">http://www.governor.ny.gov: [https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/statement-governor-andrew-m-cuomo-regarding-indian-point-nuclear-facility Statement from Governor Andrew M. Cuomo Regarding Indian Point Nuclear Facility] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160207113505/https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/statement-governor-andrew-m-cuomo-regarding-indian-point-nuclear-facility |date=February 7, 2016 }}</ref> and health officials and partnered with organizations like Sierra Club, Riverkeeper, Hudson River Sloop Clearwater, Indian Point Safe Energy Coalition, Scenic Hudson, and Physicians for Social Responsibility in seeking the permanent closure of the plant.{{Citation needed|date=February 2020}} However, Cuomo's motivation for closing the plant was called into question after it was revealed that two top former aides, under federal prosecution for influence-peddling, had lobbied on behalf of natural gas company Competitive Power Ventures (CPV) to kill Indian Point. In his indictment, US attorney Preet Bharara wrote "the importance of the plant [CPV's proposed Valley Energy Center, a plant powered by natural gas] to the State depended at least in part, on whether [Indian Point] was going to be shut down."<ref>{{cite web |last1=Shellenberger |first1=Michael |title=Working for Natural Gas Interests, Former Cuomo Aides Lobbied to Kill Indian Point Nuclear Plant |url=http://environmentalprogress.org/big-news/2017/1/6/natural-gas-promotor-at-center-of-new-york-corruption-scandal-pushed-to-close-indian-point-nuclear-plant |website=Environmental Progress |access-date=February 22, 2020}}</ref>
=== Recertification and calls for closure ===▼
Units 2 and 3 were both originally licensed by the NRC for 40 years of operation
Efforts to shut down Indian Point were led by the non-profit environmental group [[Riverkeeper]].<ref name=":0"/> Riverkeeper argued that the power plant killed fish by taking in river water for cooling<ref name=":0" /> and that the power plant could cause "apocalyptic damage" if attacked by terrorists.<ref>{{Cite news|last=Wald|first=Matthew L.|date=2004-09-08|title=Group Says Terror Attack on Indian Point Would Be Apocalyptic|language=en-US|work=The New York Times|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/08/nyregion/group-says-terror-attack-on-indian-point-would-be-apocalyptic.html|access-date=2022-02-09|issn=0362-4331}}</ref> In 2004, Indian Point was the subject of a documentary, ''Indian Point: Imagining the Unimaginable'', directed by filmmaker [[Rory Kennedy]] and starring Riverkeeper lawyer [[Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.]]<ref>''[https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0426493/ Indian Point: Imagining the Unimaginable] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170209163305/http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0426493/ |date=February 9, 2017}}'', (TV movie 2004). IMDb.{{Unreliable source?|date=June 2023}}</ref> On September 23, 2007, the [[anti-nuclear]] group Friends United for Sustainable Energy (FUSE) filed legal papers with the NRC opposing the relicensing of Unit 2. The group contended that the NRC improperly held Indian Point to less stringent design requirements. The NRC responded that the newer requirements were put in place after the plant was complete.<ref name=fuse>{{cite news |last=Wald |first=Matthew L. |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/24/nyregion/24nuke.html?ref=nyregion |url-access=subscription |title=Indian Point Faces New Challenge From Opponents |date=September 24, 2007 |newspaper=The New York Times |access-date=April 3, 2010}}</ref>
▲Indian Point utilizes water from the nearby Hudson River for cooling. Despite the use of [[fish screen]]s, the cooling system kills over a billion fish eggs and larvae annually.<ref>{{cite news |last=McGeehan |first=Patrick |date=May 12, 2015 |title=Fire Prompts Renewed Calls to Close the Indian Point Nuclear Plant |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/13/nyregion/fire-prompts-renewed-calls-to-close-the-indian-point-nuclear-plant.html |url-access=subscription |newspaper=New York Times}}</ref> According to one NRC report from 2010, as few as 38% of [[alewives]] survive the screens.<ref name="green.blogs.nytimes.com">{{cite web|last1=Wald|first1=Matthew L.|title=A Detailed Look at Indian Point's Environmental Effects|url=http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/12/13/a-detailed-look-at-indian-points-environmental-effects/?_r=0|website=[[The New York Times]]|access-date=September 19, 2015}}</ref> On September 14, 2015, a state hearing began in regards to the deaths of fish in the river, and possibly implementing a deactivation period from May to August. An Indian Point spokesman stated that such a period would be unnecessary, as Indian Point "is fully protective of life in the Hudson River and $75 million has been spent over the last 30 years on scientific studies demonstrating that the plant has no harmful impact to adult fish." The hearings lasted three weeks.<ref name="ReferenceB">{{cite web|last1=Garcia|first1=Ernie|title=Indian Point fish kill hearings begin, last for 3 weeks|url=http://www.lohud.com/story/news/2015/09/14/indian-point-fish-kill/72249656/|website=lohud.com|access-date=September 19, 2015}}</ref> Concerns were also raised over the alternate proposal to building new cooling towers, which would cut down forest land that is suspected to be used as breeding ground by muskrat and mink. At the time of the report, no minks or muskrats were spotted there.<ref name="green.blogs.nytimes.com"/>
On December 1, 2007, [[Westchester County]] Executive [[Andrew J. Spano]], [[New York Attorney General]] Andrew Cuomo, and [[New York Governor]] [[Eliot Spitzer]] called a press conference with the participation of environmental advocacy groups [[Hudson River Sloop Clearwater|Clearwater]] and Riverkeeper to announce their united opposition to the re-licensing of Indian Point
Advocates in favor of recertifying Indian Point included former New York City mayors [[Michael Bloomberg]] and [[Rudolph W. Giuliani]]. Bloomberg said that "Indian Point is critical to the city's economic viability".<ref>{{cite news |last=Hennelly |first=Bob |title=Bloomberg Backs Indian Point Nuclear Plant |date=March 18, 2011 |url=http://www.wnyc.org/articles/its-free-country/2011/mar/18/bloomberg-backs-indian-point-nuclear-plant/ |access-date=March 26, 2011 |archive-date=March 21, 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110321104735/http://www.wnyc.org/articles/its-free-country/2011/mar/18/bloomberg-backs-indian-point-nuclear-plant/ |url-status=dead }}</ref> The [[New York energy law#NYISO|New York Independent System Operator]] maintains that in the absence of Indian Point, grid voltages would degrade, which would limit the ability to transfer power from upstate New York resources through the Hudson Valley to New York City.<ref>{{cite news |last=Casey |first=Tom |title=NYISO: Indian Point closure could stress outstate's electrical system |publisher=The Legislative Gazette |date=May 2, 2011 |url=http://www.legislativegazette.com/Articles-c-2011-05-02-76942.113122-NYISO-Indian-Point-closure-could-stress-outstates-electrical-system.html |access-date=June 9, 2015}}</ref>▼
New York State Governor Andrew Cuomo continued to call for closure of Indian Point.<ref>{{cite news |last=Tomassini |first=Jason |title=Morning Buzz: Cuomo Again Aims at Indian Point |newspaper=The New York Times |date= March 23, 2011 |url=http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/03/23/morning-buzz-cuomo-again-aims-at-indian-point/}}</ref> In late June 2011, a Cuomo advisor met with Entergy executives and directly informed them for the first time of the Governor's intention to close the plant, while the legislature approved a bill to streamline the process of siting replacement plants.<ref>{{cite news |last=Hakim |first=Danny |title=Cuomo Takes Tough Stance on two Reactors |newspaper=The New York Times |date=June 28, 2011 |pages=A1 |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/29/nyregion/cuomo-emphasizes-aim-to-close-indian-point-plant.html |url-access=subscription}}</ref>▼
Nuclear energy industry figures and analysts responded to Cuomo's initiative by questioning whether replacement electrical plants could be certified and built rapidly enough to replace Indian Point, given New York state's "cumbersome regulation process", and also noted that replacement power from out of state sources will be hard to obtain because New York has weak ties to generation capacity in other states.{{Citation needed|date=April 2015}} They said that possible consequences of closure will be a sharp increase in the cost of electricity for downstate users and even "rotating black-outs".<ref>{{cite news |last=Wald |first=Matthew L. |title=News Analysis: If Indian Point Closes, Plenty of Challenges |newspaper=The New York Times |date=July 13, 2011 |pages=A21 |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/14/nyregion/closing-indian-point-plant-has-risks-experts-warn.html}}</ref>▼
Several members of the House of Representatives representing districts near the plant have also opposed recertification, including Democrats [[Nita Lowey]], [[Maurice Hinchey]], and [[Eliot Engel]] and then-Republican member [[Sue Kelly]].<ref>{{cite web |title=Lowey Urges FEMA To Reject Recertification of Indian Point Evacuation Plans |date=January 27, 2006 |url=http://lowey.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=18&parentid=17§iontree=17,18&itemid=246 |access-date=March 26, 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110407061356/http://lowey.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=18&parentid=17§iontree=17,18&itemid=246 |archive-date=April 7, 2011 |url-status=dead }}</ref>▼
In November 2016 the [[New York Court of Appeals]] ruled that the application to renew the NRC operating licenses must be reviewed against the state's [[coastal management]] program, which the [[New York State Department of State]] had already decided was inconsistent with coastal management requirements. Entergy had filed a lawsuit regarding the validity of Department of State's decision.<ref name=wnn-20161123>{{cite news |url=http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS-Court-rules-against-Entergy-on-Indian-Point-licence-renewal-2311167.html |title=Court rules against Entergy on Indian Point license renewal |publisher=World Nuclear News |date=November 23, 2016 |access-date=November 26, 2016}}</ref>▼
Indian Point Energy Center was given a heightened amount of scrutiny and was regulated more heavily than various other power plants in the state of New York (i.e., by the NRC in addition to FERC, the NYSPSC, the NYISO, the NYSDEC, and the EPA). On a forced outage basis – incidents related to equipment failure that force a plant stoppage – it provides a much more reliable operating history than most other power plants in New York.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.nyiso.com/public/webdocs/markets_operations/services/planning/Documents_and_Resources/Planning_Data_and_Reference_Docs/Data_and_Reference_Docs/2018-Load-Capacity-Data-Report-Gold-Book.pdf|title=NYISO link to GoldBook pdf|access-date=October 31, 2018|archive-date=November 1, 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181101015712/http://www.nyiso.com/public/webdocs/markets_operations/services/planning/Documents_and_Resources/Planning_Data_and_Reference_Docs/Data_and_Reference_Docs/2018-Load-Capacity-Data-Report-Gold-Book.pdf|url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.nyiso.com/public/markets_operations/services/planning/documents/index.jsp|title=NYISO link to its planning docs|access-date=October 31, 2018|archive-date=October 28, 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181028235819/http://www.nyiso.com/public/markets_operations/services/planning/documents/index.jsp|url-status=dead}}</ref> Beginning at the end of 2015, Governor Cuomo began to ramp up political action against the Indian Point facility, opening an investigation with the state [[New York State Public Service Commission|public utility commission]], the [[New York State Department of Health|department of health]], and the [[New York State Department of Environmental Conservation|department of environmental conservation]].<ref name="documents.dps.ny.gov">{{cite web|url=http://documents.dps.ny.gov/public/Common/ViewDoc.aspx?DocRefId={417AB83B-D7F2-4291-BA1A-3EAB933697F7}|title=NYSPSC investigation notice to Entergy|date=December 22, 2015|access-date=October 31, 2018}}</ref><ref name="ReferenceC">[[New York State Public Service Commission]] DMM case no. 15-02730</ref><ref name="NYSPSC DMM case no. 17-00994">NYSPSC DMM case no. 17-00994</ref><ref name="ReferenceB"/><ref name="SCOTT WALDMAN">{{cite web|url=https://www.politico.com/states/new-york/albany/story/2014/07/the-coming-battle-over-an-unprecedented-indian-point-shutdown-014451|title=The coming battle over an 'unprecedented' Indian Point shutdown|author=SCOTT WALDMAN|date=July 21, 2014|publisher=Politico|access-date=November 13, 2018}}</ref><ref name="The Daily Freeman">{{cite web|url=https://www.dailyfreeman.com/news/critics-decry-radioactive-leak-at-indian-point-nuclear-plant/article_b12b6b12-94d3-5276-910e-460e4ff65e16.html|title=Critics decry radioactive leak at Indian Point nuclear plant|date=February 11, 2016|publisher=The Daily Freeman|access-date=November 13, 2018}}</ref> To put the public service commission investigation in perspective: most electric outage investigations conducted by the commission are in response to outages with a known number of affected retail electric customers.<ref name="NYSPSC DMM Website">{{cite web|url=http://documents.dps.ny.gov/public/Common/AdvanceSearch.aspx|title=NYSPSC DMM Website|access-date=November 13, 2018}}</ref> By November 17, 2017, the NYISO accepted Indian Point's retirement notice.<ref name=autogenerated1>{{cite web|url=https://www.nyiso.com/public/webdocs/media_room/press_releases/2017/Child-Indian-Point-Energy-Center-Retirement-Analysis/Indian_Point_Generator_Deactivation_Assessment_2017-12-13.pdf|title=Dec 13, 2017 NYISO Retirement Analysis|access-date=October 31, 2018|archive-date=November 1, 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181101015626/https://www.nyiso.com/public/webdocs/media_room/press_releases/2017/Child-Indian-Point-Energy-Center-Retirement-Analysis/Indian_Point_Generator_Deactivation_Assessment_2017-12-13.pdf|url-status=dead}}</ref>
In 1997, Indian Point Unit 3 was removed from the NRC's list of plants that receive increased attention from the regulator. An engineer for the NRC noted that the plant had been experiencing increasingly fewer problems during inspections.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1997/06/26/nyregion/indian-point-nuclear-plant-removed-from-list-of-worst-in-nation.html |title=Indian Point Nuclear Plant Removed From List of Worst in Nation |newspaper=The New York Times |date=June 26, 1997}}</ref> On March 10, 2009 the Indian Point Power Plant was awarded the fifth consecutive top safety rating for annual operations by the Federal regulators. According to the Hudson Valley ''Journal News'', the plant had shown substantial improvement in its safety culture in the previous two years.<ref>{{cite news |last=Clary |first=Greg |title=Indian Point gets fifth consecutive top safety rating for annual operations |newspaper=The Journal News |date=May 11, 2009 |url=http://www.lohud.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2009903110353 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090402134015/http://www.lohud.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2009903110353 |archive-date=April 2, 2009 |url-status = dead|access-date=March 26, 2011}}</ref> A 2003 report commissioned by then-Governor [[George Pataki]] concluded that the "current radiological response system and capabilities are not adequate to...protect the people from an unacceptable dose of radiation in the event of a release from Indian Point".<ref name="nytimes.com">{{cite news |last=Applebome |first=Peter |title=Fukushima, Indian Point and Fantasy |newspaper=The New York Times |date=March 20, 2011 |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/21/nyregion/21towns.html |access-date=March 26, 2011 |url-access=subscription}}</ref> More recently, in December 2012 Entergy commissioned a 400-page report on the estimates of evacuation times. This report, performed by emergency planning company KLD Engineering, concluded that the existing traffic management plans provided by Orange, Putnam, Rockland, and Westchester Counties are adequate and require no changes.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1302/ML13023A025.pdf |title=KLD Report Indian Point Energy Center Development of Evacuation Time Estimates |date=December 2012}}</ref> According to one list that ranks U.S. nuclear power plants by their likelihood of having a major natural disaster related incident, Indian Point is the most likely to be hit by a natural disaster, mainly an earthquake.<ref>{{cite news|last1=Merrefield|first1=Clark|last2=Streib|first2=Lauren|last3=Yarrett|first3=Ian|title=Most Vulnerable U.S. Nuclear Plants|url=http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/03/16/nuclear-power-plants-ranking-americas-most-vulnerable.html|newspaper=The Daily Beast|date=March 16, 2011 |access-date=September 12, 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|last1=Breyer|first1=Melissa|title=10 Riskiest Nuclear Power Plants in America|url=https://www.care2.com/greenliving/10-riskiest-nuclear-power-plants-in-america.html/11|website=care2.com|access-date=September 12, 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160915011411/https://www.care2.com/greenliving/10-riskiest-nuclear-power-plants-in-america.html/11|archive-date=September 15, 2016|url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|last1=Koberstein|first1=Paul|title=Part 9:The Most Dangerous Nuclear Power Plants in America|url=http://times.org/2013/12/18/dangerous-nuclear-power-plants-america/|website=times.org|access-date=September 12, 2015|archive-date=September 18, 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150918081121/http://times.org/2013/12/18/dangerous-nuclear-power-plants-america/|url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|last1=Dedman|first1=Bill|title=What are the odds? US nuke plants ranked by quake risk|url=https://www.nbcnews.com/id/
=== Incidents ===
*In 1973, five months after Indian Point 2 opened, the plant was shut down when engineers discovered buckling in the steel liner of the concrete dome in which the nuclear reactor is housed.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/07/nyregion/con-edison-sells-indian-point-2-its-last-major-electricity-plant.html |title=Con Edison Sells Indian Point 2, Its Last Major Electricity Plant |newspaper=The New York Times |date=September 7, 2001|last1=Archibold |first1=Randal C. }}</ref>
*On October 17, 1980,<ref>{{cite news |url-access=subscription|title=Leaking Pipe Repaired At Indian Point 2 Plant |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1980/10/23/archives/leaking-pipe-repaired-at-indian-point-2-plant.html?sq=indian+point+nuclear&scp=74&st=p |access-date=November 29, 2011 |newspaper=New York Times |date=October 23, 1980}}</ref> {{convert|100,000|USgal|m3}} of Hudson River water leaked into the Indian Point 2 containment building from a fan cooling unit, undetected by a safety device designed to detect hot water. The flooding, covering the first {{convert|9|ft|m}} of the reactor vessel, was discovered when technicians entered the building. Two pumps that should have removed the water were found to be inoperative. The NRC proposed a $2,100,000 fine for the incident.
*
*In 2005, Entergy workers while digging discovered a small leak in a spent fuel pool. Water containing [[tritium]] and [[strontium-90]] was leaking through a crack in the pool building and then finding its way into the nearby Hudson River. Workers were able to keep the spent fuel rods safely covered despite the leak.<ref name="lohud.com">{{cite news |title=Indian Point had a smaller leak in the past |newspaper=The Journal News |date=March 27, 2011 |url=http://www.lohud.com/article/20110327/NEWS02/103270363/0/SPORTS02/Indian-Point-had-small-leak-past?odyssey=nav%7Chead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150427130159/http://www.lohud.com/article/20110327/NEWS02/103270363/0/SPORTS02/Indian-Point-had-small-leak-past?odyssey=nav%7Chead |archive-date=April 27, 2015 |url-status=dead}}</ref> On March 22, 2006 ''[[The New York Times]]'' also reported finding radioactive [[nickel-63]] and strontium in groundwater on site.<ref>{{cite news |last=Wald |first=Matthew L. |title=More Contaminants Discovered in Water at Indian Point Plant |newspaper=The New York Times |date=March 22, 2006|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/22/nyregion/22nuke.html?_r=1&fta=y}}</ref>
*In 2007, a [[transformer]] at Unit 3 caught fire, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission raised its level of inspections because the plant had experienced many unplanned shut-downs. According to an article appearing in ''The New York Times'' in 2012, Indian Point "has a history of transformer problems".<ref name=my1212>{{cite news |last=Wald |first=Matthew L. |title=$1.2 Million Fine for Indian Point Fire |newspaper=The New York Times |date=March 27, 2012 |url=http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/27/1-2-million-fine-for-indian-point-fire/}}</ref>
Line 118 ⟶ 130:
In 2008, researchers from [[Columbia University]]'s [[Lamont–Doherty Earth Observatory]] located a previously unknown active [[seismic zone]] running from [[Stamford, Connecticut]], to the [[Hudson Valley]] city of Peekskill, New York—the intersection of the Stamford-Peekskill line with the well-known [[Ramapo Fault]]—which passes less than a mile north of Indian Point.<ref>{{cite web|last1=Sykes|first1=Lynn|date=August 21, 2008|title=Earthquakes May Endanger New York More Than Thought, Says Study|url=http://www.earth.columbia.edu/articles/view/2235|website=Earth Institute|publisher=Columbia University|access-date=July 1, 2015}}</ref> The Ramapo Fault is the longest fault in the northeast, but scientists dispute how active this roughly two-hundred-million-year-old fault is. Many earthquakes in the state's varied seismic history are believed to have occurred on or near it. The fault line is visible at ground level and likely extends as deep as nine miles below the surface.<ref>{{cite news |last= Guglielmo |first= Wayne J. |title=Living on the Fault Line |newspaper=New Jersey Monthly |date=June 15, 2010 |url=http://njmonthly.com/articles/lifestyle/living-on-the-fault-line.html |access-date=June 9, 2015}}</ref>
According to a company spokesman, Indian Point was built to withstand an earthquake of 6.1 on the [[Richter magnitude scale|Richter scale]].<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN2251151220080822 |work=Reuters |title=NY nuclear plant likely a quake risk: study |first=Timothy |last=Gardner |date=August 22, 2008}}</ref> Entergy executives have also noted that "Indian Point had been designed to withstand an earthquake much stronger than any on record in the region, though not one as powerful as the quake that rocked Japan.", in comparison to the 2011 Fukushima Daiichi incident
According to an August 2010 Nuclear Regulatory Commission study, the NRC's estimate of the risk each year of an earthquake intense enough to cause core damage to the reactor at Indian Point was 1 in 30,303 for Unit 2 and 1 in 10,000 for Unit 3. [[Msnbc.com]] reported based on the NRC data that "Indian Point nuclear reactor No. 3 has the highest risk of earthquake damage in the country, according to new NRC risk estimates provided to msnbc.com." According to the report, the reason is that plants in known earthquake zones like California were designed to be more quake-resistant than those in less affected areas like New York.<ref>{{cite news |last=Dedman |first=Bill |title=What are the odds? US nuke plants ranked by quake risk |publisher=NBC News |date=March 17, 2011 |url=https://www.nbcnews.com/id/
In July 2013, Entergy engineers reassessed the risk of seismic damage to Unit 3 and submitted their findings in a report to the NRC. It was found that risk leading to reactor core damage is 1 in 106,000 reactor years using [[United States Geological Survey|U.S. Geological Survey]] data; and 1 in 141,000 reactor years using [[Electric Power Research Institute]] data. Unit 3's previous owner, the [[New York Power Authority]], had conducted a more limited analysis in the 1990s than Unit 2's previous owner, Con Edison, leading to the impression that Unit 3 had fewer seismic protections than Unit 2. Neither submission of data from the previous owners was incorrect.<ref>{{cite news |last=Dunne |first=Allison |title=Entergy Reassesses Earthquake Risk For Indian Point Three |newspaper=WMAC Northeast Public Radio |date=July 17, 2013 |url=http://wamc.org/post/entergy-reassesses-earthquake-risk-indian-point-three |access-date=July 31, 2013 |archive-date=November 8, 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131108061746/http://wamc.org/post/entergy-reassesses-earthquake-risk-indian-point-three |url-status=dead }}</ref>
Line 129 ⟶ 141:
The [[Nuclear Regulatory Commission]] defines two emergency planning zones around nuclear power plants: a plume exposure pathway zone with a radius of {{convert|10|mi}}, concerned primarily with exposure to, and inhalation of, airborne radioactive contamination, and an ingestion pathway zone of about {{convert|50|mi}}, concerned primarily with ingestion of food and liquid contaminated by radioactivity.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/emerg-plan-prep-nuc-power-bg.html |title=NRC: Backgrounder on Emergency Preparedness for Nuclear Power Plants |access-date=March 14, 2012 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20061002131207/http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/emerg-plan-prep-nuc-power-bg.html |archive-date=October 2, 2006 }}</ref>
According to an analysis of [[United States Census|U.S. Census]] data for [[MSNBC]], the 2010 U.S. population within {{convert|10|mi}} of Indian Point was 272,539, an increase of 17.6% during the previous ten years. The 2010 U.S. population within {{convert|50|mi}} was 17,220,895, an increase of 5.1% since 2000. Cities within 50 miles include New York (41 miles to city center); [[Bridgeport, Connecticut|Bridgeport, Conn.]] (40 miles); [[Newark, New Jersey|Newark, N.J.]] (39 miles); and [[Stamford, Connecticut|Stamford, Conn.]] (24 miles).<ref>{{cite news |last=Dedman |first=Bill |title=Nuclear neighbors: Population rises near US reactors |publisher=NBC News |date=April 14, 2011 |url=https://www.nbcnews.com/id/
In the wake of the [[Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster|2011 Fukushima incident]] in Japan, the [[State Department]] recommended that any Americans in Japan stay beyond fifty miles from the area.{{citation needed|date=December 2013}} Columnist Peter Applebome, writing in ''[[The New York Times]]'', noted that such an area around Indian Point would include "almost all of New York City except for [[Staten Island]]; almost all of [[Nassau County, New York|Nassau County]] and much of [[Suffolk County, New York|Suffolk County]]; all of [[Bergen County, New Jersey|Bergen County]]; all of [[Fairfield County, Connecticut|Fairfield County]]". He quotes [[Purdue University]] professor Daniel Aldrich as saying, "Many scholars have already argued that any evacuation plans shouldn't be called plans, but rather "fantasy documents"".<ref name="nytimes.com"/>
Line 143 ⟶ 155:
According to ''The New York Times'', fuel stored in dry casks is less vulnerable to terrorist attack than fuel in the storage pools.<ref name=DryCask/>
==Closure==▼
▲== Recertification ==
At the end of 2015, Governor Cuomo began to ramp up political action against Indian Point, opening investigations with the state public utility commission, the department of health, and the department of environmental conservation.<ref name="documents.dps.ny.gov"/><ref name="ReferenceC"/><ref name="NYSPSC DMM case no. 17-00994"/><ref name="ReferenceB"/><ref name="SCOTT WALDMAN"/><ref name="The Daily Freeman"/> To put the public service commission investigation in perspective, most electric outage investigations conducted by the commission are in response to outages with a known number of affected retail electric customers.<ref name="NYSPSC DMM Website"/> By November 17, 2017, the NYISO accepted Indian Point's retirement notice.<ref name=autogenerated1 /> In January 2017, the governor's office announced a phased closure of Indian Point by 2020 (Unit 2) and 2021 (Unit 3).<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/governor-cuomo-announces-10th-proposal-2017-state-state-closure-indian-point-nuclear-power|title=Governor Cuomo Announces 10th Proposal of the 2017 State of the State: Closure of the Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant by 2021|work=Governor Andrew M. Cuomo|date=January 9, 2017|access-date=January 14, 2017|archive-date=March 30, 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190330193645/https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/governor-cuomo-announces-10th-proposal-2017-state-state-closure-indian-point-nuclear-power|url-status=dead}}</ref>▼
▲Units 2 and 3 were both originally licensed by the NRC for 40 years of operation. The NRC limits commercial power reactor licenses to an initial 40 years, but also permits such licenses to be renewed. This original 40-year term for reactor licenses was based on economic and antitrust considerations, not on limitations of nuclear technology. Due to this selected period, however, some structures and components may have been engineered on the basis of an expected 40-year service life.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/renewal/overview.html |publisher=NRC |title=Reactor License Renewal Overview}}</ref> The original federal license for Unit 2 was due to expire on September 28, 2013,<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.nrc.gov/info-finder/reactor/ip2.html |title=Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit 2 |publisher=NRC}}</ref><ref name="NRC license renewal">{{cite web|url=https://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/renewal/applications/indian-point.html#timely-renewal|title=NRC: Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 2 and 3 - License Renewal Application|access-date=July 31, 2016}}</ref> and the license for Unit 3 was due to expire in December 2015.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.nrc.gov/info-finder/reactor/ip3.html |title=Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit 3 |publisher=NRC}}</ref> On April 30, 2007, Entergy submitted an application for a 20-year renewal of the licenses for both units. On May 2, 2007, the NRC announced that this application is available for public review.<ref>{{cite press release |title=LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION FOR INDIAN POINT NUCLEAR PLANT AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION |publisher=NRC |date=May 2, 2007 |url=http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML0712/ML071220287.pdf}}</ref> Because the owner submitted license renewal applications at least five years prior to the original expiration date, the units were allowed to continue operation past this date while the NRC considered the renewal application.
Unit 2 shut down in April 2020 and Unit 3 shut down in April 2021.<ref>{{Cite news| issn = 0362-4331| last = McGeehan| first = Patrick| title = Cuomo Confirms Deal to Close Indian Point Nuclear Plant| work = The New York Times| access-date = September 15, 2018| date = December 22, 2017| url = https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/09/nyregion/cuomo-indian-point-nuclear-plant.html}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web| last=Johnson| first=Slade| title=New York's Indian Point nuclear power plant closes after 59 years of operation| url=https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=47776| publisher=Energy Information Administration (EIA)| date=April 30, 2021| access-date=May 1, 2021}}</ref> [[Holtec]] will be purchasing the plant from Entergy and dismantling it.<ref name="NYT_1" /> A report by the New York Building Congress, a construction [[Trade association|industry association]], has said that NYC will need additional natural [[gas pipeline]]s to accommodate the city's increasing [[demand]] for energy.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web| title = Industry group: City needs more gas pipelines to offset Indian Point closure| work = Crain's New York Business| access-date = September 15, 2018| date = July 24, 2017 | last = Bredderman | first = Will | url = http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20170725/NEWS/170729935/industry-group-city-needs-more-gas-pipelines-to-offset-indian-point-closure}}</ref> Holtec faced criticism from the community for its plan to discharge wastewater from Indian Point into the [[Hudson River]].<ref>{{Cite web |last=Lee |first=Lindsay |date=2023-04-17 |title=Holtec Halts Plans for Radioactive Discharge at Indian Point |url=https://www.theyonkersledger.com/news/holtec-halts-plans-for-radioactive-discharge-at-indian-point/3188/ |access-date=2023-11-26 |website=The Yonkers Ledger |language=en-US}}</ref> Legislation then passed in the NY State Senate and Assembly to prevent any discharge into the Hudson River.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2023-05-15 |title=Senate Bill S6893 |url=https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2023/S6893 |website=nysenate.gov}}</ref>▼
▲On December 1, 2007, [[Westchester County]] Executive [[Andrew J. Spano]], [[New York Attorney General]] Andrew Cuomo, and [[New York Governor]] [[Eliot Spitzer]] called a press conference with the participation of environmental advocacy groups [[Hudson River Sloop Clearwater|Clearwater]] and Riverkeeper to announce their united opposition to the re-licensing of Indian Point. The [[New York State Department of Environmental Conservation]] and the Office of the Attorney General requested a hearing as part of the process put forth by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.{{Citation needed |date=April 2015}} In September 2007, ''[[The New York Times]]'' reported on the rigorous legal opposition Entergy faced in its request for a 20-year licensing extension for Unit 2.<ref name=fuse/>
▲A water quality certificate is a prerequisite for a twenty-year renewal by the NRC.{{Citation needed |date=March 2011}} On April 3, 2010, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation ruled that Indian Point violates the federal [[Clean Water Act]],<ref>{{cite news |last=Halbfinger |first=David M. |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/04/nyregion/04indian.html?src=me |url-access=subscription |title=Water Permit Denied for Indian Point |newspaper=The New York Times |date=April 3, 2010 |access-date=April 3, 2010}}</ref> because "the power plant's water-intake system kills nearly a billion aquatic organisms a year, including the shortnose sturgeon, an endangered species."{{Citation needed |date=June 2015}} The state had demanded that Entergy construct new closed-cycle cooling towers at a cost of over $1 billion, a decision that would have effectively closed the plant for nearly a year during construction of the towers. Regulators denied Entergy's request to install [[fish screen]]s that they said would improve fish mortality more than new cooling towers. [[Anti-nuclear]] groups and environmentalists have in the past tried to close the plant,{{citation needed|date=May 2015}} which is in a more densely populated area than any of the 66 other nuclear plant sites in the US.{{Citation needed|date=July 2013}} Opposition to the plant{{From whom?|date=May 2015}} increased after the September 2001 terror attacks,{{citation needed|date=May 2015}} when one of the hijacked jets flew close to the plant on its way to the World Trade Center.{{Citation needed|date=April 2015}} Public worries also increased after the 2011 Japanese Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster and after a report highlighting the Indian Point plant's proximity to the [[Ramapo Fault]].{{Citation needed|date=April 2015}}
▲Advocates of recertifying Indian Point included former New York City mayors [[Michael Bloomberg]] and [[Rudolph W. Giuliani]]. Bloomberg said that "Indian Point is critical to the city's economic viability".<ref>{{cite news |last=Hennelly |first=Bob |title=Bloomberg Backs Indian Point Nuclear Plant |date=March 18, 2011 |url=http://www.wnyc.org/articles/its-free-country/2011/mar/18/bloomberg-backs-indian-point-nuclear-plant/ |access-date=March 26, 2011 |archive-date=March 21, 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110321104735/http://www.wnyc.org/articles/its-free-country/2011/mar/18/bloomberg-backs-indian-point-nuclear-plant/ |url-status=dead }}</ref> The [[New York energy law#NYISO|New York Independent System Operator]] maintains that in the absence of Indian Point, grid voltages would degrade, which would limit the ability to transfer power from upstate New York resources through the Hudson Valley to New York City.<ref>{{cite news |last=Casey |first=Tom |title=NYISO: Indian Point closure could stress outstate's electrical system |publisher=The Legislative Gazette |date=May 2, 2011 |url=http://www.legislativegazette.com/Articles-c-2011-05-02-76942.113122-NYISO-Indian-Point-closure-could-stress-outstates-electrical-system.html |access-date=June 9, 2015}}</ref>
▲New York State Governor Andrew Cuomo continued to call for closure of Indian Point.<ref>{{cite news |last=Tomassini |first=Jason |title=Morning Buzz: Cuomo Again Aims at Indian Point |newspaper=The New York Times |date= March 23, 2011 |url=http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/03/23/morning-buzz-cuomo-again-aims-at-indian-point/}}</ref> In late June 2011, a Cuomo advisor met with Entergy executives and directly informed them for the first time of the Governor's intention to close the plant, while the legislature approved a bill to streamline the process of siting replacement plants.<ref>{{cite news |last=Hakim |first=Danny |title=Cuomo Takes Tough Stance on two Reactors |newspaper=The New York Times |date=June 28, 2011 |pages=A1 |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/29/nyregion/cuomo-emphasizes-aim-to-close-indian-point-plant.html |url-access=subscription}}</ref>
▲Nuclear energy industry figures and analysts responded to Cuomo's initiative by questioning whether replacement electrical plants could be certified and built rapidly enough to replace Indian Point, given New York state's "cumbersome regulation process", and also noted that replacement power from out of state sources will be hard to obtain because New York has weak ties to generation capacity in other states.{{Citation needed|date=April 2015}} They said that possible consequences of closure will be a sharp increase in the cost of electricity for downstate users and even "rotating black-outs".<ref>{{cite news |last=Wald |first=Matthew L. |title=News Analysis: If Indian Point Closes, Plenty of Challenges |newspaper=The New York Times |date=July 13, 2011 |pages=A21 |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/14/nyregion/closing-indian-point-plant-has-risks-experts-warn.html}}</ref>
▲Several members of the House of Representatives representing districts near the plant have also opposed recertification, including Democrats [[Nita Lowey]], [[Maurice Hinchey]], and [[Eliot Engel]] and then-Republican member [[Sue Kelly]].<ref>{{cite web |title=Lowey Urges FEMA To Reject Recertification of Indian Point Evacuation Plans |date=January 27, 2006 |url=http://lowey.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=18&parentid=17§iontree=17,18&itemid=246 |access-date=March 26, 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110407061356/http://lowey.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=18&parentid=17§iontree=17,18&itemid=246 |archive-date=April 7, 2011 |url-status=dead }}</ref>
▲In November 2016 the [[New York Court of Appeals]] ruled that the application to renew the NRC operating licenses must be reviewed against the state's [[coastal management]] program, which the [[New York State Department of State]] had already decided was inconsistent with coastal management requirements. Entergy had filed a lawsuit regarding the validity of Department of State's decision.<ref name=wnn-20161123>{{cite news |url=http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS-Court-rules-against-Entergy-on-Indian-Point-licence-renewal-2311167.html |title=Court rules against Entergy on Indian Point license renewal |publisher=World Nuclear News |date=November 23, 2016 |access-date=November 26, 2016}}</ref>
▲==Closure==
▲At the end of 2015, Governor Cuomo began to ramp up political action against Indian Point, opening investigations with the state public utility commission, the department of health, and the department of environmental conservation.<ref name="documents.dps.ny.gov"/><ref name="ReferenceC"/><ref name="NYSPSC DMM case no. 17-00994"/><ref name="ReferenceB"/><ref name="SCOTT WALDMAN"/><ref name="The Daily Freeman"/> To put the public service commission investigation in perspective, most electric outage investigations conducted by the commission are in response to outages with a known number of affected retail electric customers.<ref name="NYSPSC DMM Website"/> By November 17, 2017, the NYISO accepted Indian Point's retirement notice.<ref name=autogenerated1 />
===Proposals for alternate energy sources===
, and a 650MW natural gas plant located in [[Wawayanda, New York]].<ref>{{cite web | date=January 6, 2017 |url=http://environmentalprogress.org/big-news/2017/1/6/natural-gas-promotor-at-center-of-new-york-corruption-scandal-pushed-to-close-indian-point-nuclear-plant | title=Working for Natural Gas Interests, Former Cuomo Aides Lobbied to Kill Indian Point Nuclear Plant | website=Environmental Progress | access-date = December 3, 2017}}</ref> There was also a 1,000 MW merchant HVDC transmission line proposed in 2013 to the public service commission that would have interconnected at [[Athens, New York]] and Buchanan, New York; however, this project was indefinitely stalled when its proposed southern converter station site was bought by the [[Cortlandt, New York|Town of Cortlandt]] in a land auction administered by Con Edison.<ref>NYSPSC DMM Case No. 13-T-0292</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://documents.dps.ny.gov/public/Common/ViewDoc.aspx?DocRefId={75D8E209-2A79-4B53-97F7-07CC36DEEA6A}|title=WPP Letter to ALJ asking for suspension of schedule|date=October 29, 2014|access-date=November 13, 2018}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://westpointproject.com/|title=WPP Website|access-date=November 13, 2018}}</ref> As of October 1, 2018, the 650 MW plant built in Wawayanda, New York, by CPV Valley, is operating commercially.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.cpv.com/news/2018/10/competitive-power-ventures-achieves-commercial-operation-at-680mw-cpv-valley-energy-center-new-york/|title=CPV Achieves Commercial Operation at 680MW CPV Valley Energy Center New York|date=October 1, 2018|access-date=October 31, 2018|archive-date=November 1, 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181101015503/http://www.cpv.com/news/2018/10/competitive-power-ventures-achieves-commercial-operation-at-680mw-cpv-valley-energy-center-new-york/|url-status=dead}}</ref> The CPV Valley plant has been associated with Governor Cuomo's close aid,
===Aftermath===
▲Unit 2 shut down in April 2020 and Unit 3 shut down in April 2021.<ref>{{Cite news| issn = 0362-4331| last = McGeehan| first = Patrick| title = Cuomo Confirms Deal to Close Indian Point Nuclear Plant| work = The New York Times| access-date = September 15, 2018| date = December 22, 2017| url = https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/09/nyregion/cuomo-indian-point-nuclear-plant.html}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web| last=Johnson| first=Slade| title=New York's Indian Point nuclear power plant closes after 59 years of operation| url=https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=47776| publisher=Energy Information Administration (EIA)| date=April 30, 2021| access-date=May 1, 2021}}</ref> [[Holtec]] will be purchasing the plant from Entergy and dismantling it.<ref name="NYT_1" /> A report by the New York Building Congress, a construction [[Trade association|industry association]], has said that NYC will need additional natural [[gas pipeline]]s to accommodate the city's increasing [[demand]] for energy.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web| title = Industry group: City needs more gas pipelines to offset Indian Point closure| work = Crain's New York Business| access-date = September 15, 2018| date = July 24, 2017 | last = Bredderman | first = Will | url = http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20170725/NEWS/170729935/industry-group-city-needs-more-gas-pipelines-to-offset-indian-point-closure}}</ref> Holtec faced criticism from the community for its plan to discharge wastewater from Indian Point into the [[Hudson River]].<ref>{{Cite web |last=Lee |first=Lindsay |date=2023-04-17 |title=Holtec Halts Plans for Radioactive Discharge at Indian Point |url=https://www.theyonkersledger.com/news/holtec-halts-plans-for-radioactive-discharge-at-indian-point/3188/ |access-date=2023-11-26 |website=The Yonkers Ledger |language=en-US}}</ref>
The generation capacity lost by closure of the Indian Point plant was largely replaced by fossil gas,<ref name="EIA_1" /><ref name="NYT_1" /><ref name=":0" /> substantially increasing carbon emissions.<ref name=":1" /> In the first full month after closure, carbon emissions from in-state generation in New York rose 35 percent, and the state's natural gas generation jumped from 35 percent to 39 percent.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.city-journal.org/article/the-tragedy-of-indian-point |title=The Tragedy of Indian Point |author1=Booth, Lea |author2=Tarry Hughes, Cameron |work=[[City Journal]] |date=May 19, 2023 |access-date=May 19, 2024}}</ref>
==In popular culture==
Line 192 ⟶ 189:
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20060427200435/http://www.safesecurevital.org/ Entergy: "Indian Point Energy Center: Safe. Secure. Vital."]
* [http://www.riverkeeper.org/campaign.php/indian_point Riverkeeper.org: "Indian Point"]
* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1sWqmPyoYxw Operational Experience, Indian Point], a 1964 film summarizing the experience with Indian Point Unit 1
{{U.S. Nuclear Plants|state=expanded}}
| |||