 |
| Fitzpatrick plant |
New York State has proposed a Clean Energy Standard which would support not just renewables, but ALL clean energy, including nuclear power. Implementing this standard would keep the upstate nuclear plants operating.
The comment period on the standard was supposed to close tomorrow. But, the comment period has been extended until Friday July 22. Here's where to comment.
http://documents.dps.ny.gov/public/Comments/PublicComments.aspx?MatterCaseNo=15-E-0302
What is the Clean Energy Standard?
It's a proposal to support all clean energy power plants: both renewable and nuclear. Here's the staff proposal under current review:
https://www.scribd.com/document/317819837/PSC-staff-proposal#from_embed
And here's one of many newspaper articles on the subject:
http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2016/07/nuke_subsidies_ny_extends_comment_period_but_aims_at_aug_1_decision.html
Michael Shellenberger has an excellent article on the subject: http://www.environmentalprogress.org/big-news/2016/7/13/in-wake-of-deal-to-save-fitzpatrick-james-hansen-other-scientists-environmentalists-urge-new-york-to-protect-nuclear-plants
Please comment and post about it and send links to your friends in New York State!
It is also worthwhile to comment on some of the newspaper articles, but the main thing is: comment to the New York Department of Public Service. (This is the same link as the first link. I'm just trying to make it VERY easy to get to the place where you can comment to the New York Department of Public Service.)
The comment extension
Ummm....the people who asked for the comment period to be extended are NOT friends of nuclear energy. You can bet that they are getting their act together for a major blitz next week.
Send in your pro-nuclear comments!
------
Examples and ideas for comments
The Environmental Progress organization has good information and example comments on this Google Drive.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rp5WnQ2s3BwFYohdJr9Zud2ipLoV6vrHZO4f7TMNYlI/mobilebasic
My own comment is below:
Nuclear is the largest source of zero-emissions energy in New York State. If we are serious about lowering (or holding steady) on carbon dioxide, we must keep the nuclear plants running. I live in Vermont, and when Vermont Yankee closed, the carbon emissions on the New England grid rose by 5 to 7% by various calculations. The 7% is from Utility Dive magazine, an industry publication. It is based on numbers from the New England grid operator. http://www.utilitydive.com/news/iso-ne-emissions-rose-after-vermont-yankee-nuclear-facility-closed/414404/
All existing zero-emission sources need support! If people pick and choose: ooh, I don't like nuclear or ooh, I don't like hydro or ooh, wind turbines are terrible, then these existing zero emission sources WILL be closed. And they WILL be replaced by fossil. It is as simple as that, really.
I am in favor of nuclear for the future, but if someone doesn't like to build more nuclear, that is about policy for the future. For right now: Keep and Support the Existing Zero Emissions Sources that we have! Close Fossil First!
Renewables are heavily supported for their zero-emissions qualities, and nuclear deserves some similar support.
Please move forward on the Clean Energy Standard to protect our zero-emission sources.
1 comment:
Sometimes you don't know what you had until it's gone. When Vermont Yankee closed,Canadian owned company bought utilities. Now, Gaz Metro, Canadian power threatening rare trees and flowers in Monkton,Vermont digging a $154 million pipeline to serve 3000 customers. Wind, solar an ugly eyesore. Wind vibrating pollution not acknowledged by Gaz. On and on. Consequences of closing a power plant.
Post a Comment