Date: June 6, 2006
Contacts: Patrice Pages, Media
Relations Officer
Megan Petty, Media Relations Assistant
Office of News
and Public Information
202-334-2138; e-mail <news@nas.edu>
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
IF INDIAN POINT CLOSES, OPTIONS FOR REPLACING LOST ENERGY
MUST OVERCOME INSTITUTIONAL AND FINANCIAL BARRIERS
WASHINGTON -- It is technically feasible to replace the
energy generated by New York's Indian Point nuclear power plant if it closes in
coming years, but political, regulatory, and financial hurdles would make doing
so difficult, according to a new report from the National Academies' National
Research Council.
"There are no insurmountable technical barriers to
replacing the energy lost by shutting down Indian Point, but we are less
confident that government and financial mechanisms are in place to facilitate
the timely implementation of alternatives," said Lawrence T. Papay, a consultant
in La Jolla, Calif., and member of the National Academy of Engineering who
chaired the committee that wrote the report.
The Indian Point Energy Center includes two nuclear
reactors on the banks of the Hudson River about 40 miles north of New York
City. It supplies almost one-quarter of the electricity delivered to the city
and the lower Hudson Valley. The Research Council report was requested by
Congress after concerns were raised that the plant could be the target of a
terrorist attack; one of the planes hijacked on Sept. 11, 2001, flew past it.
The report does not comment on Indian Point's vulnerability to attack or whether
it should be closed.
The committee examined options for replacing the energy
produced by Indian Point if its reactors were shut down in 2013 and 2015, when
their operating licenses expire, or if the closures took place sooner, in 2008
and 2010. If early planning and sufficient resources were dedicated to
replacing lost capacity and meeting expected increases in demand, the reactors
could be retired in 2013 and 2015 without causing a major disruption, the
committee concluded.
The shutdown would require new energy sources and reduced
demand for electricity that add up to about 5,000 megawatts -- 2,000 to replace
the lost production of Indian Point and the balance to meet projected increases
in demand and to compensate for other possible power plant closings. Shutting
down the reactors sooner, beginning in 2008, would be much more difficult, the
committee said, noting that it would take an unprecedented level of cooperation
among government leaders and agencies. An earlier closing would not allow much
time for building appropriate replacement sources of energy. If the capacity of
replacement power sources is inadequate, the reliability of the state's power
system would be threatened, possibly resulting in wide-scale power
outages.
The report emphasizes that the issues associated with the
potential shutdown of Indian Point are complex and intertwined with broader
energy issues. Even with Indian Point still operating in 2008, for example,
southeastern New York would require 500 more megawatts of new generating
capacity than is now under construction in the state. And if Indian Point were
closed, New York's current government mechanisms and regulatory policies may
limit its ability to address the consequences. Closing the plant would require
a long-term, integrated strategy that may include changes to state law and
policies, such as reauthorization of the Article X statute, which was designed
to facilitate the environmental review and siting of new power
plants.
New power plants, improvements in electricity transmission
and energy efficiency, and distributed generation could contribute to replacing
the energy lost by the closure of Indian Point, the report says. Most new power
plants are likely to be fueled with natural gas. However, the committee
expressed concern over this increasing reliance on natural gas because new
sources of the fuel, such as imported liquefied natural gas, may be required.
It noted that constructing new power plants upstate may be easier than doing so
in New York City or Westchester County, but building upstate would require
upgraded transmission capacity as well.
Electricity from new plants is almost certain to be more
costly than that from Indian Point, the committee said. However, given the
state's new regulatory structure for pricing electricity, the committee could
not accurately estimate the increase in the cost of electricity to consumers
that might result from the plant's closure. In addition, to the extent that the
reactors are replaced with plants that burn fossil fuel, emissions of carbon
dioxide will be higher, complicating efforts by New York to reduce greenhouse
gases under the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative.
The report was sponsored by the U.S. Department of
Energy. The National Research Council is the principal operating arm of the
National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering. It is a
private, nonprofit institution that provides science and technology advice under
a congressional charter. A committee roster follows.
NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL
Division on Engineering and
Physical Sciences
Board on Energy and Environmental Systems
COMMITTEE ON ALTERNATIVES TO INDIAN POINT FOR MEETING
ENERGY NEEDS
LAWRENCE T. PAPAY* (CHAIR)
Consultant, and
Senior
Vice President
Integrated Solutions Sector
Science Applications
International Corp. (retired)
La Jolla, Calif.
DANIEL E. ARVIZU
Director and Chief
Executive
National Renewable Energy Laboratory
Albuquerque,
N.M.
JAN BEYEA
Senior Scientist
Consulting in the Public
Interest, and
Consultant to the National Audubon Society
Lambertville,
N.J.
PETER BRADFORD
President
Bradford Brook Associates
Ltd.
Peru, Vt.
MARILYN A. BROWN
Interim Director
Energy Efficiency,
Reliability, and Security Program
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Oak Ridge,
Tenn.
ALEXANDER E. FARRELL
Assistant Professor
Energy and
Resources Group
University of California
Berkeley
SAMUEL M. FLEMING
Independent Consultant
Berkeley,
Calif.
GEORGE M.
HIDY
Principal
Envair/Aerochem
Placitas, N.M.
JAMES R. KATZER*
Independent Consultant, and
Manager of Strategic Planning and Program Analysis
ExxonMobil Research
and Engineering Co. (retired)
Washington, D.C.
PARKER MATHUSA
Member, Board of Directors, and
Research Scientist
New York State Energy Research and Development
Authority
Delmar
TIMOTHY MOUNT
Professor of Applied Economics and
Management
Cornell University
Ithaca, N.Y.
FRANCIS J. MURRAY JR.
Energy and Environmental
Consultant
Delmar, N.Y.
D. LOUIS PEOPLES
President and Founder
Nyack
Management Co.
Incline Village, Nev.
WILLIAM F. QUINN
President
Argos Utilities
LLC
Washington, D.C.
DAN W. REICHER
President
New Energy Capital
Corp.
Waltham, Mass.
JAMES S. THORP*
Hugh P. and Ethel C. Kelly Professor of
Electrical and Computer Engineering, and
Head, Department of Electrical and
Computer Engineering
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State
University
Blacksburg
JOHN A. TILLINGHAST*
President
Tiltec Inc.
North
Hampton, N.H.
RESEARCH COUNCIL STAFF
ALAN T. CRANE
Study Director
* Member, National Academy of Engineering
