Oyster Creek Nuclear Plant Debacle

This is an issue that directly affects my home community and has been waged in the media and realm of public opinion for months. I've read and listened to each side of the debate and now I'm becoming increasingly disturbed by what is being put forth, especially by supposedly learned individuals.

In a recent op-ed piece in my local newspaper there was a letter written by a Dr. Letty Goodman Lutzker, Chief, Nuclear Medicine, St. Baranabas Medical Center, Livingston, NJ. In her letter, Dr. Lutzker lauded Oyster Creek and it's record. She insists that the plant's closure would mean a loss of power and thrust the local community into economic strife which would, in turn, lead to health problems due to poverty and inability to obtain proper medical care. She goes on to state that half our electricity comes from nuclear power and most of that is from Oyster Creek.

Personally, I think that Dr. Lutzker is a complete moron, but that's just my opinion.

Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station was built on the banks of the Oyster Creek leading to the Barnegat Inlet on the southern rim of Lacey (Forked River) Township in New Jersey. It has been owned by several entities and is currently run by a company called Excelon. The plant was built in 1969 and given a 40-year operating license by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). It was thought at the time that the plant would only operate for those 40 years. It was, in fact, the first commercial nuclear plant built in the United States. Most of it's designs aren't even used or relevent anymore. Excelon has requested a 20-year license extension from the NRC to operate into 2029. They point out a stellar history at the plant and the wonders of nuclear power. Of course they would. They also warn of the threats to the economy of Lacey, the rest of Ocean County and New Jersey if the plant were to close. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't that kind of sound like a threat?

In the same issue of the local paper in the editorial section, Janet Tauro wrote about NJ Governor Jon S. Corzine's unveiling of is Energy Master Plan which he hopes will increase energy independence and would address the problems with the climate by using renewable energy technologies. Noteably absent from the plan was mention of Oyster Creek. Ms. Tauro even points to similar efforts by European nations and by some of our own representatives in Congress.

To be fair, though the debate rages hot and heavy on both sides of the fence, there are pros and cons for each side.

Proponents of the plant point out the wonders and safety of nuclear power. Okay, lets start there.

A nuclear reactor is nothing more than splitting atoms to create heat to boil water which turn a turbine to create electricity. That's the dumbed-down explanation. It's true that nuclear generation produces almost no greenhouse gases, but it is a far cry from not producing harmful waste products. Oyster Creek even stores their spent fuel rods ABOVE ground and in a storage facility on the plant grounds which amounts to a tin shack. This causes significant problems in an area that has grown rapidly since the plant was built in 1969.

Nuclear power is a great source of energy and is even utilized in our modern navy. If the proposition was to build a brand spanking new, state of the art plant elsewhere in New Jersey, I think the issue would not be as problematic.

For Oyster Creek, however, it's just too old.

Despite the fact that they store potentially dangerous nuclear waste on the plant site near residents that have encroached right up the the gates of the plant, the water that is heated to steam to turn the turbines is, well, HOT. They have to dump that water back into the creek to cool it down and then bring it back into the reactor to heat up again. The problem there is that the shock of extremely hot water being injected into the aquatic environment has, on many an occasion, had a fatal effect on the native fish species. So much so that environmentalist groups are asking the state and the NRC to at the very least force Oyster Creek to install cooling towers to protect the local wildlife. Excelon won't due it because of the cost. Better to pay those fines for killing the fish.

Then there is the infamous reactor well. Shaped like an upside down light bulb and held inside the reactor assembly, it's where all the action happens. The problem is it has more holes than the swiss cheese I get at the Shop-Rite only a scant few miles from the plant. The shell is eroding and could lead to a catastrophic failure. But first we are told the reactor well is not damaged and in fact intact Then they say it is eroded but does not pose a threat. Yet.

Then there is the question of evacuation. In 1969, the NRC stated that the area and the population were such that evacuation would not be a concern should the "improbable" occur at Oyster Creek. That was close to 40 years ago! The only roadways out of the area are Rt. 9 and the Garden State Parkway. Both roadways are heavily traveled to gridlock proportions.

Last spring there was an incident in which a trucker foolishly failed to realize his truck did not have the clearance to pass under the Garden State Parkway overpass that allows traffic from Lacey Road east and west to cross the Parkway. He got stuck, effectively shutting down Lacey Road and the Parkway. Half of our so-called escape routes were gone. Rt. 9 was then effectively shut down due to the massive increase in traffic volume. Now this was due to a one shot traffic crash that was cleared and the damage repaired. What would happen if the plant did go critical?

And lets not get into the times the plant was unexpectedly shutdown through error or equipment malfunction.

Through all this, it seems that the case for shuttering the plant is the more sound option. Not only is the plant old, but it is run by a bunch of moron monkeys! And the final nail they will strike is the threat of economic downturn without the plant and the tax revenues it produces. I'm not certain this would be the case (just as I'm not sure that we even get any of the electricity produced in our own backyard). Despite this, the original license was for 40 years. You would think that the leaders of the township, county and state would have anticipated this and elected to try to bring in more rateables and businesses to off-set the potential loss of the plant. I guess that just goes to show how forward thinking our leaders really are.

Sadly, it seems no one will be satisfied unless we all end up glowing in the dark. Well, my mother always did say that I was meant to shine.