NRC cools it on issuing new license for Indian Point Nuclear Facility
Posted by Debbie Kwiatoski
on 2008-09-03 17:10:49 |  Print Article |  Email to a Friend
After months of taking testimony from the Hudson Riverkeeper and grassroots community groups all over the valley, the NRC has finally realized something that has actually been more or less "common knowledge" here in the Hudson Valley for years: The Indian Point Nuclear Plant has issues.
Now, by "issues,’ I don’t mean the usual "Nuclear Power is Bad" argument…frankly, the jury is still out on that one. Handling the potential of safe nuclear power may well be one of our most viable options for moving America (and the world) from non-renewable, expensive, and earth-killing carbon options towards a greener, energy independent planet.
No foolin’! Without putting energy from nuclear options into the energy mix, all the solar, wind, geo-thermal and bio-diesel technologies we currently know about don’t get us anywhere near we need to be regarding having enough affordable energy around to power our modern world. And, as important as conservation technologies and everyday behavior is, adding that chip doesn’t get us there either.
So, what has finally gotten the NRC to take a second look at Indian Point’s re-licensing application that would allow it to operate as it is into 2030? Three things that a lot of very smart and very concerned and very involved people have been pointing out for years…for years…
- The plant sits on the intersection of earthquake fault lines.
- The plant has a long, checkered history or security lapses and has yet to figure out a realistic evacuation plan for, like, half of the valley, if the worst ever happens.
- In a post 9/11 world, the fact that the plant sits on the banks of the Hudson River just a short trip from New York City raises all sorts of basic security issues.
The NRC’s most recent missive to the media put it a little more delicately…they want until August, 2010 to complete their review and to produce their reports that take these three big issues into account. But, at least there may be some hope that the feds are listening ….
Now, Entergy, Indian Point’s owner, happens to have a good track record in other places and many countries (France comes to mind) already get the majority of their power from nuclear technology. So, let’s not pull the plug on using this technology just yet. Since the 1960s, when the first plants went online, we have only had one actual accident (Three Mile Island) and though there is still some controversy over that event, most scientists do still agree that no one actually died from the event. So, let’s not throw the baby out with the (boiling) bath water just yet…but let’s all make sure that the NRC really does think about what it’s doing and keeps everyone’s best interests at the heart of their ultimate decision.
 | Print Article | Email to a Friend
Central Hudson Rate Increase – What Gives?
Posted by Debbie Kwiatoski
on 2008-08-28 13:00:26 | Print Article | Email to a Friend
Two press releases popped into my mailbox this week that got me thinking about how utility company set their rates. First, I got a release from Central Hudson, explaining that they have filed with the Public Service Commission for a rate increase beginning in June, 2009. The second was from the PSC proudly announcing that they have fast tracked millions of dollars in financial incentives for utility companies to help consumers learn to conserve energy.
Strange…the Central Hudson release seemed to be saying that they needed a rate increase partly because customers weren’t using as much energy….yet here was the PSC giving them about a million dollars to help us use even less.
What gives?
Smelling a good story, I called John Maserjian over at Central Hudson to get to the bottom of it. John is one of the company’s designated spokespeople and a pretty straight shooter. It was a good place to start.
Central Hudson, as many folks know by now, no longer actually produces any of the energy it delivers to peoples’ homes and businesses. It only owns and maintains the infrastructure to get it there. That delivery charge comprises about one third of the total bill you get from Central Hudson. The other two thirds is for the natural gas and electricity you buy.
Even though all those gas pipes, strung wire, poles and transformers have been up for generations, they require maintenance year ‘round, John explained. Costs to the utilities to buy copper wire, plastic, steel, anything they need to string new wire, lay new pipelines and keep the system functioning have more than doubled since their last rate increase in 2007. The fuel use to power all those trucks and cars they use has also soared so far off budget predictions that – like everyone else - they are also having trouble paying to run their vehicles.
OK, so far, it was looking like we could blame the inflation bubble for the proposed increases that, by the way, are estimated to cost each household another $3.50 per month.
Then, he threw me a curve. Maserjian explained that Central Hudson also use a pretty complicated formula for calculating what each household is going to pay for its delivery services based on three main things:
· The total cost is to maintain the system
· The number of households and businesses in the system
· The relative amount of energy that is used (by household or business)
So, said John, the need to increase rates has come about, not just because their operations costs ar eout of sight – but because energy use is actually down a bit.
So, you might ask…as I did…why is the PSC allocating millions of dollars to push conservation programs and why is it in anyone’s interest to cut their energy use…if it’s just going to result in higher delivery prices?
Well, global warming, the end of carbon-based fuel and all that other stuff aside, it seems that the more folks are able to conserve and the more they are able to take advantage of some good programs all the utilities are pushing now, the lower their bills actually will be. In other words, the lines of customer use and delivery cost needs do cross fairly early in the graph and (with conservation and increased efficiency) peoples’ bills could go down, even as their delivery costs are going up.
What can you do to successfully conserve – and what programs are out there? Go to www.centralhudson.com and then click on the “energy answers” button on the left side of the home page to read some excellent information on saving energy and saving money, even if your delivery rates are about to go up.
| Print Article | Email to a Friend
A Four Day Work Week
Posted by Debbie Kwiatoski
on 2008-08-28 11:06:48 | Print Article | Email to a Friend
Work just four days a week –and still earn a full-time paycheck? As summer winds down into fall, and Labor Day passes, the idea may hold some appeal - not just in terms of having the ability to redistribute some free time, but by saving a bit of money in weekly commuting costs that may soon be needed to be spent just staying warm this winter. The concept behind the movement…and it is slowly becoming a kind of movement…is for employees to work just two extra hours a day for four days, making up a normal eight hour shift and then take one weekday off to compensate for the shift in hours. For many companies, that can mean having the ability to be open longer hours every day, say 8:00 am – 6:00 pm, without hiring any more people or incurring any overtimes costs. For employees, it can mean a four day work week. For the environment and municipal infrastructure, it could mean less gas expended and fewer rush hour traffic jams (which is a good thing on so many fronts….). The idea of alternative work arrangements isn’t all that new. In this country, it first surfaced during the 1970’s gas crises and sputtered around as something to talk about over the water cooler into the 80s and 90s, as the Internet and cell phones really came into force and the idea that many jobs could be done as easily and efficiently from home as they could be from a set office location. Several corporations, such as IBM, soon realized that not making all employees come into work every day also meant that they could save a lot of money on simple things like office space and utility bills. Many workers went from having set offices or cubicles to having a key to non-designated work areas to use on those occasions when they were actually in the building. Some smaller companies realized that having a set office location wasn’t even all that necessary, as employees all just worked out of their home offices and “networked” together when they needed to. Some would go so far to observe that the rise of Starbucks and other comfortable coffeehouse environment keyed right into this need to have a place to meet professionally – without actually owning a conference room. Developers even began to realize the value in creating not just office sites for a given company, but shared professional spaces, where clients could “rent” by the day or even by the hour, and still have access to cutting edge IT services and facilities to meet clients in. The Age of Telecommuting was born and really beginning to flower when, BANG, gas got reasonably cheap again some of the steam to change from the old “9 to 5” mentality was lost. Too bad, we could have been a lot farther down the road now that gas hovers around the $4.00 per gallon mark. Nationally, more than 27 million people have adapted a more flexible work schedule and, again, employers are looking for ways to deal with severe commuting woes that are impacting their ability to hire and keep good workers. Whether a more flexible work schedule would work for your company isn’t an easy question to answer, as every company is a bit different. Locally, it has seemed to work best for service-oriented organizations, like the Dutchess County Regional Chamber of Commerce and a couple of town governments, who found that they could really benefit from being able to increase the hours they were open, just by shifting to a four day work week – and staggering their staff times. It also seems to work well for some manufacturers, who could keep the line open two longer hours each day and then even shut down an extra day, keeping the same output, but saving on some operational costs. But, it’s hard to say if such a scheme would work for everyone is hard to say. Child care issues would have to be worked out on a regional scale, for example, and every company’s business situation is a bit unique. Still, with energy prices unlikely to go down – and stay there – there might be no time like the present to seriously think about it.
| Print Article | Email to a Friend
|
