ABOUT ME

  • This blog is maintained by Stephen Filler, a New York-based attorney with expertise in business law, contracts, intellectual property and litigation. He represents a wide variety of businesses, technology, media companies and individuals. He also provides legal and consulting services to sustainable, environmental and renewable energy businesses, non-profit organizations and trade organizations. He is on the board of the New York Solar Energy Industries Association and Secretary of the Hudson River Sloop Clearwater. His business website is www.nylawline.com.

    The Green Counsel consulting website is www.greencounsel.com.

Sustainability Ring

  • Sustainability Web Ring 
control panel
Blog powered by TypePad

New Report Says Replacing Indian Point's Nuclear Power is Feasible

A National Academy of Sciences Report released yesterday indicated that there are no insurmountable technological obstacles to closing the Indian Point nuclear reactors in Westchester County, New York, although there are difficult political, regulatory, financial and institutional issues that have to be overcome to compensate for the loss of Indian Point's 2,000 megawatts of power.

Homepagelogo
Congresswoman Nita Lowey found the report very encouraging. She stated, "To me, the bottom line is, where there's a will there's a way [to close the plant]." Lowey said that the report shows that Indian Point is not necessary for meeting future power needs, despite estimations of a growing need for electricity. "A combination of strategies can replace the power produced by the plants and meet the state's growing need for electricity."

As the report points out, one of the best ways to save energy is through energy efficiency measures. Even the U.S. Secretary of Energy Samuel Bodman last year indicated that U.S. homes waste about 30% of their energy because of things such as inefficient lighting and appliances, and poor insulation.

The two Indian Point plants will close unless they are relicensed by 2013 and 2015, which provides plenty of time to overcome the political, financial, regulatory and institutional issues.

Interestingly, the headline writers for the two major regional papers spun the report very differently. The headline in the June 7 Journal News, the local Gannett paper, stated: "Scientists Say Indian Point Power Replaceable." By contrast, The New York Times, in its morning June 7 newspaper stated: "U.S. Science Panel Sees Big Problems if Indian Point Reactors Are Closed." But even The Times seemed to waffle, since an earlier headline in the June 6 web edition stated: "N.Y. Grid Could Stand to Lose Reactors, Panel Says."

The National Academy of Sciences report is available for download. Its headline reads "Replacing Indian Point Nuclear Energy Feasible."

Blogs Against the Empire

Call me paranoid.

After September 11, I became active in the efforts to close the two Indian Point nuclear reactors in Westchester County, NY. Having seen the impossible two blocks from my office in lower Manhattan, Indian20point_6 I imagined the unthinkable at the plant, near my home, just 40 miles from Ground Zero in the most densely populated region of the country (20 million people within 50-mile radius of the plant).

Others were paranoid too, realistic even. The Indian Point Safe Energy Coalition (IPSEC), a coalition of more than 70 groups, formed to close the plant and promote safe and renewable energy. In his State of the Union address in January 2002, President Bush said that diagrams of U.S. nuclear plants had been found with terrorists in Afganistan. IPSEC rallied support from citizens and officials in the Hudson Valley, NYC, Connecticut, and New Jersey; 52 municipalities, 13 community boards, and over 400 public officials (including 11 members of Congress), have called for the closure of Indian Point. A report commissioned by NY State in 2002 and conducted by former FEMA head James Lee Witt and Associates concluded that the Evacution Plan's "system and capabilities . . .are not adequate to . . .protect the people from an unacceptable dose of radiation in the event of a release from Indian Point." Hardly a suprise to anyone who's tried to escape from Westchester during rush hour, even without a radiation release.

Entergy, the owners of the plant, felt threatened. Their income -- reportedly $2.3 million per day -- was at risk. What do large corporations do when their core business is at risk from political and public pressure? They turn on the public relations machine, and Entergy has used all the tricks. They:
Entergy06_sky_7

1) Hired PR powerhouse Burson-Marstellar, best known for defending Union Carbide after Bhopal, as well as human rights violations by totalitarian regimes around the world;
2)Spent millions on campaign contributions and lobbying (see this report by Common Cause and this article,"Radioactive Money 2005," by Daniel Wolff);
3) Hired 9/11 hero Rudy Giuliani as a security consultant even though he had no expertise in nuclear reactor security;
4) Sponsored forums, contributed to various charities, and began massive advertising campaign including NY Yankees radio targeting general public -- even though consumers do not buy directly from Entergy;
5) Created a phony "grass roots" campaign using a front group that was targeted at black, hispanic and low-income communities;
6) Removed "nuclear" from the plant's name and began calling it the "Indian Point Energy Center" (not suprising from an industry that calls nuclear power "clean" even though it creates perhaps the most toxic waste on the planet); and
7) Claimed the plant was "safe" even though it has been plagued with safety issues since it went online in the 70's, and it currently has radioactive leaks from unknown sources.
(For more details on Entergy's public relations efforts on Indian Point, see this excellent article by Riverkeeper's Lisa Rainwater van Suntum)

* * *

So last week, I blogged a story about a new solar panels on Town Hall and a Green Energy Fair in the Town of Greenburgh, where I live. The Town and people of Greenburgh have been extremely supportive of the efforts to close the plant. I posted the story also last Tuesday to the several listservs for people interested in closing the nuclear plant (which apparently have some Entergy molelurkers). On Wednesday, I looked at my web tracking software and I noticed a curious notation:

"(Entergy Corporation)
Arkansas, Russellville, United States, 0 returning visits
10th May 2006 09:58:37 AM nylawline.typepad.com/greencounsel/
[Arriving From:] www.alltheweb.com/search?advanced=1&cat=web&jsact=&_stype=norm&type=phrase&q=stephen filler&itag=crv&_b_query=&l=en&ics=utf-8&cs=utf8&wf%5Bn%5D

Hmmm, apparently someone from an Entergy Corporation office in Arkansas (their headquaters are there) had used my name as search parameters from the "Alltheweb.com" search engine.

I also had sent my post about the Greenburgh Energy Fair as a letter to the editor to the Journal News, the local Gannett paper that has devoted a large amount of coverage, editorials, and letters on Indian Point over the years. I was told that on Thursday my letter would run, and so it did. The Journal News posts letters on line, and when I found mine, in small print on the left part of the screen, I smiled. But then I saw it, the large lumbering animated gif to right (you can see it to the right and above, on this page right now) drawing it's attention away from my words, just telling me, assuring me, italically insisting how safe I feel (if you visit the site, you may have to "refresh" a few times to see it, the ads alternate).

Coincidence? Well, I don't think Entergy targeted my specific letter to the editor, but they know that the letters to the editor section has had dozens, maybe hundreds, of letters from people who want the plant closed. Clearly Entergy is placing their ads in places that might negate the sentiment of the writers.

So how about it, now that you know more, do you feel safer? Or is really time to renew the xanax prescription?

202billboard_2

IPSEC is gathering forces to stop Entergy’s anticipated bid to re-license Indian Point for an additional 20 years. To contribute, write letters, or join the efforts, go here.

Greenwashing Your Ford Mustang?

Several days ago, I questioned whether "offsets" really "offset" greenhouse gas emissions (see "Offset My Ass").  Today, Ford Motor Company  announced it is doing a deal with Terrapass to market offsets to Ford, Lincoln and Mercury owners.
http://today.reuters.com/business/newsarticle.aspx?type=basicIndustries&storyID=nN26296006&imageid=&cap. Ford isn't  buying offsets themselves, they're just marketing offsets to their customers.

Hello?  Ford is helping to burn the world with its core products and they're marketing offsets???  Can you say "hybrid"? Can you say "Fuel Efficiency"? Can you say (let's go on a limb here, I know you guys at Ford are smart) "80 MPG"? 

At least we're going to heaven.

Sicking the IRS on Greenpeace

Anyone who's taken on corporate interests in an environmental battle knows that the corporate arsenal includes litigation, advertising, public relations, "non-profit" front groups, disinformation and lobbying, among other strategies.  ExxonMobil combined tactics, with a front-group/lobbying one-two punch, in an effort to challenge Greenpeace's tax exempt status.

The Wall Street Journal reports that a non-profit "watchdog" group known as Public Interest Watch (PIW) successfully lobbied for an IRS tax audit of Greenpeace.  PIW's tax filing from August 2003 to July 2004 states that $120k of $124k of income came from ExxonMobil and, according to Greenpeace, the IRS acknowledged that their investigation arose from PIW's complaint.  Greenpeace was notified in March that it retained its tax exempt status, but the three month audit procedure surely cut into Greenpeace's other work.

Source: http://www.prwatch.org/node/4619

Subscribe

  • Subscribe to GreenCounsel feed:
  • Recieve GreenCounsel posts by email:
    Enter your Email


    Powered by FeedBlitz



Recent Posts

  • Headlines from the Green Blogosphere
    Provided by First Sustainable
    Add this box to your site
    Add your feed to this box



Copyright Information

Bottom of Page