RISING worries over global warming have brought renewed attention to nuclear en ergy, whose plants don’t emit the green house gases linked to global warming. But here in New York, the day-to-day environmental benefits of nuclear power are at least as important.
Fossil-fuel power plants emit “old-fashioned” pollution, too. And sulfur dioxide (SOx) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) kill people, especially the poor and the elderly.
In that light, nuclear plants like Indian Point (which powers up to 38 percent of New York City and the downstate region with negligible emissions) have never been more important. There’s no way around the fact that, if you get rid of Indian Point, the region will need to burn more fossil fuels to generate the electricity New York needs.
New York already has some of the worst air quality in the country, according to the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Gov. Spitzer cites the EPA data on his Web site, pointing out: “In New York, pollution from coal power plants shortens the lives of 1,212 citizens annually, causes 164,612 lost work days, 1,191 hospitalizations and 28,665 asthma attacks.”
Westchester and all five boroughs of New York City are in violation of EPA standards for ozone and particulate-matter pollution, which largely emanate from fossil-fuel plants.
Regarding ozone, the EPA points out, “Children and adults of all ages who are active outdoors are at risk from ozone exposure. It can affect health by: irritating the respiratory system; reducing lung function; aggravating asthma; inflaming and damaging cells that line the lungs; aggravating chronic lung diseases.”
On particulates, the EPA notes, “Numerous scientific studies have linked particle pollution exposure to a variety of problems, including: increased respiratory symptoms, such as irritation of the airways, coughing, or difficulty breathing; decreased lung functions; aggravated asthma; development of chronic bronchitis; irregular heartbeat; nonfatal heart attacks; and premature death in people with heart or lung disease.”
The nuclear-power opponents pushing to close Indian Point consistently fail to address these health issues. For too long, they have been able to get the politicians on their side – even though there is strong support in Westchester for Indian Point. A recent poll by the Manhattanville College found that, by 47 percent to 33 percent, the population favors continued operation of Indian Point.
The critics do make an environmental argument – claiming that Indian Point is bad for the Hudson. Yet the river was a sewer when the plants were built; now it’s of the most pristine waterways in the region and is a model for environmental-restoration projects. Indian Point didn’t cause the restoration – but it’s plainly been no drag on it.
And the alternative would be far worse: To replace Indian Point’s energy output, the region would need to build four to five coal- or natural-gas powered plants. That would be a major step in the wrong direction, especially for folks in poor communities where such facilities are so often sited. The effect on air quality would be bad, to put it mildly.
It’s time for the responsible policymakers to join the majority that supports the plants’ continued operation. Renewing Indian Point’s operating license is the right thing to do for the environment and the right thing to do for public health.
Norris McDonald is the president of the African American Environmentalist Association.