4
Southern Ulster Times, Wednesday, September 11, 2019
Danskammer makes case for new power plant
Continued from page 1
emissions coming from the proposed
plant, according to the energy company.
The new plant will be air-cooled
rather than draw water from the Hudson
River as the old one has done for decades.
The plant will require no new roads,
pipelines or transmissions lines in the
modernization process.
Opponents of the project have stated
that the old plant only runs about 5%
of the time and the new one will run
“24/7 approximately 70% of the time:
thus producing more emissions. Hook
questioned the coupling of 24/7 with a
70% figure since 24/7 means 100% of the
time.
Amber Grant, a City of Beacon
Councilwoman, stated that another fossil
fuel burning plant is not needed in the
Hudson Valley but Hook said the New
York Independent System Operators
refute this claim. Press releases from
the NYISO, however, are not in complete
agreement with Hook’s assertion. NYISO
has stated that steps are being taken
to meet the electrical needs in the area
and that the loss of energy due to the
closing of the Indian Point Nuclear Plant
by 2021 will be made up, in part, by
three new plants that are built or are
coming online: Bayone Energy Center
(120 MW), CPV Valley Energy Center (678
MW) and Cricket Valley (1,020 MW). Hook
stressed that while the state is moving
toward renewable energy, “it is not going
to happen overnight” and a plant like the
one they are proposing is needed.
Critics state that emissions from a new
plant would be “tenfold” over the level it
is presently. Hook pointed out that even
if the plant were to run 30% to 50% of the
time, the reduction of nitrous oxide and
other particulate matter is “so great” that
overall there will be a net improvement.
She added that because today’s newer
plants are so efficient they are not the
cause of asthma and respiratory issues
and will actually offset the amount of
pollution that is emitted from other older
area plants, such as Roseton next door
and the Bowline Point power plant in
Haverstraw.
Hook defended the ‘capacity payments’
that Danskammer now receives; in 2018
it was $11 million and this year it is
$500,000, before interest and taxes. She
pointed out that these payments allow for
maintenance, salaries and for the plant to
be ready when needed.
Hook presented estimates on the
decreased levels of emissions on a per
hour basis from the proposed plant: a
95% reduction in Nitrous Oxide, 88%
reduction in CO2, 85% reduction in
Volatile Organic Compounds and a 75%
reduction in Particulate Matter.
Hook said her company is committed
to helping transition from a dependence
on fossil fuels; “absolutely, but it’s not
instantaneous and making our existing
infrastructure as efficient and as clean
as possible in the meantime is a step in
the right direction while we’re waiting
the many years it’s going to take to build
the wind and solar and then build the
transmission lines to bring that power to
downstate residents.”
Hook said building a new plant does
not lock the Hudson Valley into a fossil
fuel facility indefinitely.
“We will be there until there is a
good replacement to help the state meet
its renewable energy target and we’re
offering a much cleaner option for the
region than they’ve had there for a very
long time,” she said.
Hook said if given the chance to
explain the proposed facility people will
understand that, “we are not the big, bad
devil coming to town; we’re an existing
facility and we’re cleaning it up.” She said
after she explains the project, people say,
“this makes sense, why wouldn’t we have
this here, why wouldn’t we support this.”
Hook said once the Public Service
Commission determines Danskammer’s
application complete “and no longer
deficient in any areas” there is a year
of review that will take place before a
decision is made on their proposal.
“There are many experts reviewing
our application on the state level. If we
aren’t needed and don’t fit the state’s
energy objectives, then we won’t get
permitted and won’t get built. They
will make their decision based on their
obligation to provide reliable energy
to the residents and businesses of New
York,” she said.
Todd Diorio, of Local 17 and President
of the Hudson Valley Building and
Construction Trades Council, said, “the
building trades are 100% behind the
Danskammer Power Plant.” He said from
the very beginning Danskammer has
made a commitment to use local union
labor to build the plant that will create
300 to 500 construction jobs.
Diorio said he has met with nearly 50
elected officials, with Scenic Hudson and
Food and River Watch about the proposed
plant, which he feels is far better than the
old existing plant.
“We’ve been just about everywhere
because what’s happening out there right
now is that misinformation being put out
by some of these groups. I and my kids
live in this town (Marlborough) and if I
really thought it was harmful I wouldn’t
put jobs over my family’s health,” he
said.
Diorio said people may not realize
what will happen once Indian Point closes
down in a few years.
“We need a way to still get electric to
our homes, once way or another and heat
our houses,” he said. “Not a lot of people
believe the goals set by the Governor for
2030, 2040 and 2050 are really going to
happen and we still need the megawatts
to power the area. We’re not going to get
that with wind, we’re not going to get
that with solar in the time period the
Governor wants to get to.”
Diorio said if a new plant is not built,
the old plant will run perhaps 50% to 60%
of the time.
“Do the math on the carbon emissions
that’s going to happen; it’s not a good
thing,” he said. “Right now, I believe
this (proposed) plant serves the need till
we get to that point where we can rely
fully on renewables. If you could tell
me tomorrow you were going to build
solar plants and there was going to be a
big wind project (so) we wouldn’t need
this power plant, I would say I get it we
have a way and we don’t need fossil fuels
anymore.”
Gil Piaquadio, is Supervisor of the
Town of Newburgh where the plant is
located, supports the project. He said
approval of a plant of this size and
capacity is done by the Public Service
Commission and not by his Town Board.
“We really have no vote on it but of
course you could always come out with a
resolution one way or another opposing
it, but I chose not to because I want to see
a more efficient plant go in rather than an
old one run more often,” he said. “I don’t
think anyone on my board has come out
against it.”