Living in the Shadow of a Nuclear Reactor
My friend and I were in the backseat of the car, humming to whatever catchy pop song was on the radio. We looked up and saw that we had arrived at our destination. The arcade, with its bold lettering and hovering four-story rope course, reflected along the Hudson River beautifully. It was part of a shopping complex next to a gas station and a grocery store. As we looked behind us, we saw the shiny landmark of the town: the Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant.
Living just minutes from the plant, a nearly 70-year-old energy center nestled in New York’s highly populated Hudson Valley, just miles from Manhattan, its presence was integrated into my life and the livelihoods of my entire town. When I first lived around Indian Point, I was in third grade and was terrified of a reactor meltdown, and so was my town — the local government has distributed pills in the case of radiation sickness and bus routes are in place for a potential evacuation. Every election cycle, the issue came up, and there was constant unease. In nearly every town council meeting a concerned resident would speak up about the power plant. The 2014 Midterm was when I first saw the effect, as a local State Senate contest became embroiled in the debate over Indian Point. “Close Indian Point” signs were planted on lawns and around businesses, with a consensus on the issue transcending politics and more local proximity to Indian Point. State officials with more leeway could get away with scrutinizing the plant, but local leaders had to save face, as the town’s economy could be upended without Indian Point’s business. This helped business remain as usual, with people going on with their lives, and just like the arcade, many businesses and houses were located within walking distance of the reactor.
Still, the plant came with benefits. The plant’s owner, Louisiana-based Entergy, provided around 32 million dollars in annual contributions to my town and the surrounding area, with 24 million dollars going towards local school boards, according to former Cortlandt Town
Supervisor Linda Puglisi. These funds were hugely helpful to the prosperity of my town, as Buchanan is one of the poorest communities in the otherwise affluent Westchester County.
It was no surprise, then, when Indian Point became the center of the debate around nuclear energy. For years, New Yorkers argued that the results of a full-down nuclear meltdown here could be catastrophic, with the Tri-State area at risk of exposure to high levels of radioactive material. Climate advocates also argued that other renewable energy projects that are in the works could suffice, such as a wind farm being constructed off the shore of Long Island in the Atlantic Ocean. These arguments swayed many, including former Governor Andrew Cuomo, who gave in to closing the plant in 2017. This decision was applauded by local politicians, such as former Republican State Senator Terrence Murphy (he was in office at the time of the closure announcement, but was voted out in 2018). However, local leaders who relied on Entergy’s funds were dismayed by the decision.
Nuclear energy is a contentious issue worldwide, with many advocates pointing to the sheer amount of clean energy it produces. In contrast, critics fear a nuclear Armageddon, with the few people not engulfed by nuclear radiation living deep underground in hazmat suits eating canned food.
One area where the rift is significant is the area around the Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant. The results of a full-down nuclear meltdown could be cataclysmic. Furthermore, some areas may be unable to be evacuated, such as Long Island, which has few connections by road or train to areas beyond New York City. Furthermore, traffic constraints would make northbound traffic a mess, with emergency officials rerouting people.
Others argued that the risk was worth the benefit. Being roughly 30 miles north of New York, the power plant provided the city with approximately 25% of its power supply. With Indian Point’s closure in 2021, New York has been forced to rely on natural gas, with a report by the New York State Independent System Operator showing that 89% of energy downstate came from natural gas and oil, up from 77% the year before when both of Indian Points nuclear reactors were running. This is the foundational argument of pro-nuclear groups, with climate scientist James Hansen spearheading the movement.
Indian Point serves as an interesting case study for the future of American nuclear energy. Foremost, the plant’s closure will result in an immediate spike in natural gas and oil without a clear renewable energy structure preemptively established. Other countries, such as Germany, are facing similar calls to shut down more nuclear energy. The U.S. may want to examine Indian Point’s closure to ensure they have alternative renewable energy sources if they pursue closures.
Evan Hunt (He/Him) ‘27 in the College of Arts & Sciences can be reached at e.m.hunt@wustl.edu.