New York lawmakers and environmentalists are working to prevent radioactive wastewater from being dumped into the Hudson River. As part of the decommissioning of the Indian Point Energy Center, the facility's owner Holtec International is considering dumping treated but radioactive waste into the river. More than $1 billion was spent cleaning up pollution in the river with 200 miles of it still classified as a Superfund site by the Environmental Protection Agency.

Ellen Weininger, director of education and outreach, Grassroots Environmental Education, said impacts this dumping have on communities connected to the Hudson.

"There's concerns about potential health effects of this radioactive material, not only on public health but on the ecosystem of the Hudson River. Of course the economy, up and down the Hudson, is of great concern and at risk," she said.

She added several towns in the region use the Hudson as their source of drinking water, which can lead to massive health risks. Anyone who wants to provide public comments on this can do so at a special meeting of the Indian Point Decommissioning Board. People can register to comment online or by phone at 1-800-342-3330.

Initially, Holtec planned to dump the wastewater in August, but moved its timeline up to the first week of May. Then, following public outcry, the plan has been halted for the time being.

George Latimer, George Latimer, Westchester County Executive, said there are alternative removal methods Holtec can consider.

"You could maintain it. You don't move it off site. You somehow better contain it, putting some topping or roof over it, and then you have to have a mechanism to keep it cool," he explained. "And, it would still be radioactive, and it would still be present on the property, but in theory, if you do that properly, then it won't leach out and get into the groundwater."

In early March, the Westchester County Board of Legislators passed legislation opposing Holtec's dumping plan. Along with Latimer, the county executives from Rockland, Putnam, Orange, Dutchess and Ulster counties have condemned Holtec's plan to pause dumping, but not halt it entirely.

In the state Legislature, a bill to ban radioactive waste has been introduced. The bill would fine violators $25,000 per day if caught dumping radiological agents into New York State waters. Second violation fines would increase to $50,000 a day.

State Sen. Pete Harckham, D-Peekskill, the bill's sponsor, said this bill is necessary.

"We've got to get away from this industrial-age mentality of locating polluting industries next to water bodies just because they're an expedient way to discharge industrial waste," he said.

He added there has been an outpouring of support for this bill. Since Holtec has paused the dumping, Harckham is hoping to negotiate in good faith. The bill won't be passed right away if Holtec decides not to dump the wastewater, he said. The bill is under review in the state Senate's Environmental Conservation Committee.

Xcel Energy says its latest proposal before the Public Utilities Commission will help Colorado reach it's clean energy goals - by adding more wind and solar power, more energy storage, and a new biomass facility.

But critics are crying foul over plans to construct three new gas-fired power plants, one near Alamosa and two near Longmont.

Ean Tafoya, director with GreenLatinos Colorado, said he is urging the commission to reject the plan to protect disproportionately impacted communities.

"These are the people who are defined under the state's Environmental Justice Act," said Tafoya. "Linguisitally isolated, low-income, the people who are living around these plants that are definitely disproportionately impacted, those are predominantly Latinos."

Xcel claims the new gas plants are needed to ensure grid reliability, and says its proposal will remove 740 megawatts of gas power in part by retiring contracts and some of its 14 existing gas plants.

Alternative plans that add more renewables could save customers $29 million compared to Xcel's proposal in the first year alone, according to a new study.

The PUC is expected to make a decision by year's end.

Leading global scientists have long warned that burning fossil fuels must end to avoid catastrophic impacts of climate change.

Methane, the primary component of natural gas, is over 85 times more potent at trapping heat in the atmosphere than coal-fired climate pollution.

Tafoya said he opposes Xcel's plan to use ratepayer money to build new fossil fuel infrastructure.

"To invest hundreds of millions of dollars to build new plants," said Tafoya, "to me is a boondoggle that is about us investing in their technology, while they profit and send money to Wall Street."

Tafoya said he also worries that ratepayers will be on the hook for the cost of new gas plants long after they become stranded assets. He added that natural gas is not a safe source of energy.

"We know that when people use it in their households, that it causes the indoor ambient air to be as bad as it could be if you were standing next to a roadway," said Tafoya. "So these fuels when they burn and when you withdraw them from the ground, they all leave toxic legacy."




get more stories like this via email

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission approved a plan extending a natural-gas pipeline in Virginia. The Virginia Reliability Plan and Transcot's CEC project calls for compressor stations and a natural-gas pipeline extension in communities already harmed by these impacts such as Petersburg.

The city ranked as the least healthy according to the University of Wisconsin's County Health Rankings and Roadmaps.

Tim Cywinski, communications director with the Sierra Club's Virginia Chapter, said projects like this undermine the state's climate progress.

"Whether it's a natural-gas pipeline that's doubling the size and diameter or a proposal to build a 'peaker plant' in Chesterfield, Virginia," he said. "All of these go against Virginia's goals, specifically since we're the last stronghold in the South that has any kind of climate commitment."

He said the state can't reach its climate goals and uphold environmental justice if projects like the VRP continue to be approved.

The project's Environmental Impact Statement is explicit on the determinants this project poses, but, Cywinski said Petersburg is a "sacrifice zone." This is an area where fossil-fuel companies already have an approved project and go there for a new project since the area's already facing environmental impacts.

Feedback to the project has been particularly negative. Numerous community and environmental groups voiced their opposition, and Cywinski said policymakers need to understand the importance in plans like this not being implemented.

"It's not unreasonable for us to expect our decision makers to implement a policy where protecting people from pollution is the floor -- not some negotiation up to the ceiling, the floor," he continued. "And, I think people, as the climate issue becomes more apparent, as people see more of the impacts of pollution, that this type of opposition is becoming more and more regular."

While some could get the misconception Virginia is pulling away from its climate goals, Cywinski said the opposite is true. He feels Gov. Glenn Youngkin and some legislators are working to blunt the state's climate goals.

In a new report, a coalition of New York environmental groups said dredging the Hudson River of toxic chemicals has failed.

The report by Friends of a Clean Hudson River showed PCB chemical levels are higher than anticipated. The Environmental Protection Agency dredged the river between 2009 and 2015 for 30 years worth of chemicals General Electric dumped into it.

Ned Sullivan, president of Scenic Hudson, said while dredging is typically an effective way to clean pollutants out of a river, the EPA's effort was ineffective.

"The problem is that EPA struck a deal with GE that was too much in favor of the polluter," Sullivan contended. "They didn't require GE to clean up enough contamination."

Other federal agencies noted this. A 2015 report found GE did not do enough dredging, and the EPA did not force the company to do more.

Sullivan argued the first step to true remediation is having the EPA admit the finding was correct, and prepare for more extensive dredging.

Some 200 miles of the Hudson River are considered a Superfund site due to the high amount of contamination, and 40 miles of the Upper Hudson are GE's responsibility. Friends of a Clean Hudson River's assessment contended current sediment recovery rates are unlikely to allow fish to recover naturally.

Sullivan noted the effects it would have.

"PCBs are a forever chemical, they don't naturally break down in the environment," Sullivan stressed. "And as you move up the food chain to other wildlife that consumes fish, as well as humans, the PCBs become more and more concentrated at every level in the food chain."

The EPA has warned against eating fish caught in the river between Troy and Hudson Falls, but people still do.

Sullivan emphasized PCBs are here to stay unless more is done. He said other parts of the river also need to be monitored, since they are just as toxic as the dredged area.

"We've called on EPA to require a formal investigation of the Lower Hudson, 160 miles below the Troy Dam, where no remediation has been done," Sullivan pointed out. "We know there is additional contamination because the fish in that Lower Hudson remain unsafe to eat."

GE implemented two of three sediment collection programs this year. A third program, which includes deeper sediment sample collection, starts in 2024.


get more stories like this via email