Article

It's time to revive Seabrook II - Nuclear power best addresses our needs

This is a slightly edited version of a letter sent to Gov. John Lynch by Concord residents William Klapproth, Dana Robinson, John Hardie, Sidney Schoeffler and Ellen Little.

A small group of us here at Heritage Heights Retirement Community are concerned about the problems of air pollution - acid rain, fish made unsafe to eat by mercury, haze and asthma due to ozone and especially increases in carbon dioxide concentration, which may have catastrophic global warming consequences. All of these problems come from using fossil fuels, especially coal.

There are processes that can be added to coal-fired power plants to remove some of the sulfur and mercury, and very likely those plants will soon be required by law to do so. But this will add still more to the cost of our electricity and do nothing about the seriously increasing global warming effect.

Because of the ever-increasing demand for electricity, more power plants will certainly be built. Now is the time to determine what kind they should be.

Many people would like more "sustainable" power such as wind, solar and biomass, which do not contribute to global warming. But all of these have two very serious drawbacks - they are rather more costly, and so far are on such small scale. They no doubt will grow in use, but for many years they will remain unimportant.

There is one alternative,... more [truncated due to possible copyright]  

A small group of us here at Heritage Heights Retirement Community are concerned about the problems of air pollution - acid rain, fish made unsafe to eat by mercury, haze and asthma due to ozone and especially increases in carbon dioxide concentration, which may have catastrophic global warming consequences. All of these problems come from using fossil fuels, especially coal.
 
There are processes that can be added to coal-fired power plants to remove some of the sulfur and mercury, and very likely those plants will soon be required by law to do so. But this will add still more to the cost of our electricity and do nothing about the seriously increasing global warming effect.
 
Because of the ever-increasing demand for electricity, more power plants will certainly be built. Now is the time to determine what kind they should be.
 
Many people would like more "sustainable" power such as wind, solar and biomass, which do not contribute to global warming. But all of these have two very serious drawbacks - they are rather more costly, and so far are on such small scale. They no doubt will grow in use, but for many years they will remain unimportant.
 
There is one alternative, however, that does not pollute the atmosphere, is competitive with coal in cost, is a well-developed and proven technology, produces electricity on the same scale as coal-fired plants, has a fuel source at least as plentiful as coal and does not have a smokestack spewing out tons of carbon dioxide at a rate which is 3½ times the many tons per day of coal being burned.
That alternative is nuclear power.
 
The energy bill passed last year by Congress recognizes the need for more nuclear power plants and will provide a small subsidy for the first five new ones. And the chairman of the Northeast Energy Group, an association of power companies, stated two weeks ago that New England must start building nuclear plants to meet growing demand. The alternatives are the highly polluting coal plants or the more expensive gas turbine plants.
 
The obvious best location for the next new nuclear power plant in New England is at Seabrook. It was designed to have two nuclear reactors. All the needed infrastructure is already in place, including, most remarkably, tunnels extending more than a mile offshore for the intake and discharge of the seawater needed for the steam turbines'condensers. These tunnels are sized for two reactors.
 
When Seabrook II is operating, it will mean an infusion of $2 billion in new investment into New Hampshire. This will have a significant effect on local and state tax income and employment. Yet, we were amazed to learn, Gov. Lynch does not favor promoting Seabrook II.
 
Although widespread use of coal did make the industrial age possible and still contributes to maintaining the lifestyle we enjoy (50 percent of our electricity comes from coal-fired power plants), we are now beginning to realize the extent of its detrimental effects - especially, global warming. Fortunately, during the past 50 years a new source of energy has been developed and proven on a large scale: nuclear energy, which now supplies 20 percent of our electricity. It is a proven technology, with 103 reactors operating in the United States and more than 400 worldwide.
 
Knowing what we do now, it should be easy to make the right choice. Nuclear instead of coal has many benefits and entails no sacrifices. Also, NIMBY does not apply because we already have a nuclear reactor that has been a very good neighbor.
 
Governor, you need to begin promoting Seabrook II. We're doing it now among our fellow residents here.


Source: http://www.cmonitor.com/ap...

APR 17 2006
https://www.windaction.org/posts/2225-it-s-time-to-revive-seabrook-ii-nuclear-power-best-addresses-our-needs
back to top