Should Indian Point Nuclear Plant in New York State Be Shut Down Due to Earthquake Risk?

Julia Bodeeb
Opinions are very heated on the topic of nuclear energy. The Indian Point nuclear plant near Manhattan has long been contested. It was built in 1962. This nuclear plant supplies some of the electricity used in Westchester County, NY and New York City. Is it still a safe plant or does its age place it at higher risk for a nuclear disaster during normal operation or due to an earthquake?

Some people want all nuclear plants shut down. Others think nuclear power is a safe way to generate electricity. After the earthquake, tsunami and nuclear plant problems in Japan, there are many questions about if it is safe to have a nuclear plant in any earthquake prone area of the United States. Are the emergency safety plans strong enough to ensure safety after an earthquake near Indian Point?

17 Million Residents within 50 Miles of Indian Point

The two nuclear reactors at the Indian Point plant are located in Buchanan, New York on the Hudson River. About 17 million people live in a 50-mile radius near this nuclear plant. If a crisis occurred at Indian Point, would evacuation routes become impassable due to over crowding or road damage from the earthquake?

If a nuclear meltdown occurred at Indian Point, thousands of people who live close to the nuclear plant could die quickly after acute radiation sickness. Later, as years and decades passed, hundreds of thousands of people would be at higher risk of cancer due to radiation exposure. Is it worth the risk of loss of life to keep Indian Point open?

Earthquake Risk

Governor Cuomo of New York State has stated that the Indian Point nuclear plant is a "Catastrophe waiting to happen, " notes the Christian Science Monitor. The plant is near the Ramapo Fault line in the earth. Thus the area has a higher than average risk for an earthquake. The fault line had not yet been identified at the time the Indian Point nuclear plant was built. The ability of scientists to identify potential earthquake zones has advanced rapidly since the 1962 when Indian Point was built.

The environmental organization named Riverkeeper has alerted nuclear regulators with the government that the geographical area near the Indian Point plant experienced earthquakes of about a 5.2 magnitude in 1737 and 1884. The company that owns the plant has announced it was built to be able to handle a 6.0 earthquake. However, earthquakes may have varying magnitudes in a certain region and a future earthquake near Indian Point could have a magnitude above 6.0.

Violation of Clean Water Act

The Indian Point nuclear plant is about 35 miles away from Manhattan. It uses water from the Hudson River to keep the nuclear reactors cool. In 2010, the state of New York declared that the outdated technology used to keep the nuclear reactors cool is in violation of the Clean Water Act, notes the New York Times.

New York State declared that the Indian Point Plant damages the environment by contaminating the water of the Hudson River, killing fish and using excessive amounts of river water. Thus Entergy Corporation, which owns the Indian River plant, will have to build cooling towers that could cost over a billion dollars or shut down Indian Point. To renew the license for the nuclear plant, the Entergy Corporation would have to fix existing problems with the cooling systems.

The state of New York also announced that the Hudson River has been polluted with radioactive waste from the Indian Point plant. The two remaining nuclear reactors at Indian Point, numbers 2 and 3, use a total of 2.5 billion gallons of water a day from the Hudson River. When all that water is returned to the Hudson it is overheated and thus impacts the ecological system of the river.

Could a Radiation Leak at Indian Point Impact New York City?

Is New York City prepared to handle a nuclear disaster that would have radiation floating over the city? Manhattan certainly was not well equipped to handle the attacks on 9/11. There was a failure in the official communication system for emergency workers.

A nuclear meltdown at Indian Point could contaminate Manhattan, including permanent evacuation of the Wall Street area, notes Newsweek. There would be an enormous financial loss if the stock market shut down due to a nuclear emergency. If the buildings in the Wall Street area were no longer habitable and the stock market had to be relocated, that would cause a lot of chaos in the market. Market chaos is never good for America's financial stability. A nuclear meltdown that impacted the financial sector location in Manhattan could trigger a financial meltdown too.

Will Nuclear Power Continue or Change Ahead?

Electricity is crucial to our society. We use it constantly. It is hard to imagine life without electricity. Our society also wastes a lot of electricity. Do we really need huge neon lights on company buildings that often stay on around the clock?

The need for energy is expected to keep increasing in the United States. Will nuclear plants continue to supply electricity or will methods like solar power and wind power start to become more mainstream energy sources? As time passes and the Japan nuclear problems are analyzed, the information learned will help the world determine if it is safe to have nuclear plants in an earthquake zone.

Published by Julia Bodeeb

Winner, Pulitzer Center Global Issues contest (Washington, DC), semi-finalist: The Nation's poetry contest. Published in newspapers, magazines and many online websites. Sold jokes to a major comic. Over a...  View profile

12 Comments

Post a Comment
  • Claire Luna-Pinsker3/28/2011

    Don't know the answer, but just know there's no definitive aspect of safety at any nuclear plant, mistakes happen, natural and man-made.

  • Sivaramakrishnan Ananthanarayanan3/28/2011

    There is definitely a clear risk involved as clearly enunciated in your well researched report, Julia. With so much of population living in the vicinity, it seems not worth the risk at all. But how to generate the power we need? Obviously, the will is lacking to get cracking on life and death issues. We prefer to put out the fire! Renewables are the hope - siva

  • Delicia Powers3/27/2011

    Thanks Julia for this report!

  • LG Crabtree3/27/2011

    I've wondered the same thing about nuclear plants in Tennessee. Our fault isn't active yet..

  • Sandy James3/26/2011

    There's pros and cons to everything but I do think we need to look for other alternatives.

  • Michele Starkey3/26/2011

    There is a risk with everything these days - just look at what they are doing here in the Hudson Valley (Delaware Valley) with the hydrofracking (hydrolic fracturing) to mine the natural gas. If it doesn't blow us up, it may pollute our entire watersheds. cheers

  • Jesse Schmitt3/26/2011

    um, no. don't shut it down. if you do costs will just go through the roof for those 17 million 50 mile radius people. and it will trickle down to everywhere

  • Kathy Minicozzi3/25/2011

    Shut the damn thing down! And check NOW to make sure that any nuclear plants in operation are as safe as possible.

  • Laura Cone3/25/2011

    nice work

  • Donna Cavanagh3/25/2011

    I saw a tweet yesterday: If you want to make sure a nuclear plant is safe, put it next door to a congressman's house. I don't know at this point if it's safe. I think it's time, as Patti says, that we look for alternative means with wind and water power and make them our primary sources of energy.

Displaying Comments
Next »

To comment, please sign in to your Yahoo! account, or sign up for a new account.