View Story | 49 comments
Comments: Expand Shrink Hide (Always) | Indented Flat (Always)
All they have is the very mistaken belief, similiar in fact to yours, that IPNNP is a "disaster" which, in fact, it is not. But the real point is that if you get your way, there will be more deadly pollution right now from the two Mirant plants across the river which burn OIL and COAL.
Your priority seems to be over the fact that Indian Point "may" be a disaster when the facts are that the fossil plants are killing people NOW. I don't get your priorities.
The Dems (ore Republicans for that matter) have no plant to resolve this constridiction. End Indian Point, increase death from fossil. Your choice.
David Walters
by davidwalters on Tue Dec 04, 2007 at 07:34:51 PM PDT
[ Parent ]
How old is it now?
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves. - William Pitt
by Phoenix Rising on Tue Dec 04, 2007 at 07:36:56 PM PDT
in 1976. Both are rated for 40 years. Since almost all NPPs in the US were "over built", the actual life of these plants is probably at least 60 years which is why the NRC has generally allowed the 20 year increase in life.
Newer III and III+ generation plants that they are planning on building in the US all have 60 year lifespans with expectation they may go to 80 or 100 years of actual operation.
by davidwalters on Tue Dec 04, 2007 at 08:01:57 PM PDT
They were actually built in the early 70's to last longer than 40 years (the original license length) and certain practices were instituted in the 80's to allow the plants to last at least an additional 20 years. Most plants of the IP2 and 3 type have had their licenses extended another 20 years. IP has held off this process for awhile (probably) because of the anti-nuke climate in NY.
by nuketeacher on Tue Dec 04, 2007 at 08:04:39 PM PDT
wide narrow
View Story | 49 comments