One story looked at how area homeowners are tackling rising energy costs head-on.
Litz commented that the only true “win-win option” is to incorporate energy-efficiency technology into buildings.
“The only option that has no impact or a positive impact is energy efficiency, where you can make it so that you need less power and you don’t have to pay for the extra plant,” he said.
Another story looked at water-quality hearings being held between the Indian Point nuclear power plant’s operator and the state Department of Environmental Conservation.
According to the article: “The hearings, which began Oct. 14, have pitted Entergy Corp. against the DEC, which in April 2010 rejected the company’s application to renew its Section 401 Water Quality Certificate that allows Indian Point to use water from the Hudson River in the operation of its two nuclear power generators.” The hearings are expected to run through February 2012.
The article quotes several independent analysts and industry representatives, who conclude that it would be impossible to meet the statewide energy demand if energy production of Indian Point’s magnitude was removed from the grid without new sources of power generation in place.
“Those out there that suggest that retiring Indian Point can be done without considering any replacement, they’re not being reasonable,” said Litz.
Litz’s conclusions mirrored those reached in an August report released by Charles River Associates in Boston, which stated, among other things, that unless new generation or transmission capacity was in place, “the retirement of IP3 in 2015 would cause the grid to fall short of minimum resource adequacy standards by the summer of 2016.”