Riverkeeper’s Alex Matthiessen was my radio guest once again on “High Noon” for the full hour.
And of course, we talked about the Indian Point nuclear power plant and the effort by the facility’s owner, Entergy Northeast, to secure an operating license renewal. The current license expires in 2013.
I asked Matthiessen to respond to a Dec. 19 piece written for the Washington Post by Max Schulz, a senior fellow for the Manhattan Institute. Entitled, “A Nuclear Renaissance Ignored”:http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/19/AR2007121902075.html, the article asserts that nuclear power is on the upswing in the nation with 30 new nuclear reactors on the construction drawing board.
PODCAST: Here’s a recording of the show:
Download:
Schulz writes that the nuke revival should be largely credited to liberal Democrats, who used to strongly oppose nuclear power but has softened on the issue in recent years. Indeed, he notes that the moderate Democratic Leadership Committee believes nuclear energy has tremendous potential to be an important part of the country’s energy portfolio.
Among those he counts as having made “cautious statements” more less favorable to nuclear energy are Hillary Clinton, Chris Dodd and Barack Obama.
The reason? Global warming has become a “signature issue” for the Democrats, Schulz says, adding that nuclear power right now is the only technology able to produce vast amounts of energy without creating greenhouse emissions.
Another reason is the lack (so far) of any viable replacement for nuclear power.
Schulz points out that New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer is a big exception to the Democratic change of heart. He’s called for the closing of Indian Point because of all the usual reasons proffered—not the least of which is that it is a prime target for terrorists and that any evacuation plan for such a densely populated area is unworkable.
But Schulz also says that Spitzer is in “a bind.”
He writes:
“It is one thing to espouse a general opposition to nuclear power—as many Democrats still do—but quite another to oppose an existing nuclear plant while bearng some responsibility for providing credible replacements to make up for the lost power.”
Matthiessen responded to the article and replied to other questions during the course of the show. If you missed it, the entire broadcast will soon be archived on this blog.