WASHINGTON – Environmental organization Riverkeeper, Inc. will argue its case over the need for cooling towers at Indian Point and other power plants before the US Supreme Court on December 2.

The case will determine whether or not the Environmental Protection Agency is authorized to compare costs with benefits in determining the “best technology available” for the cooling water intake structures of existing power plants including the Indian Point nuclear plants.

Phillip Musegaas is the Hudson River program director for Riverkeeper.

“What we are focused on here is the impact to the river and there is no doubt scientifically that the minimization of impact from utilizing cooling towers as opposed to continuing to use once through cooling, that’s a fact; that’s a 95 percent reduction,” he said.

Entergy spokesman James Steets said cooling towers at Indian Point don’t make sense. “This is a large expenditure that could actually lead to the closure of the plant,” he said. “It doesn’t make sense to require cooling towers when after 25 years of studying the river, spending $50 million on studies that have been overseen by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, we’ve been able to draw no correlation between the operation of, not just Indian Point, but the plants along the Hudson River, that include Indian Point, to Hudson River fish populations. We’ve seen no significant impact.”

Riverkeeper will argue that every day, power plants in the United States withdraw over 214 billion gallons from U.S. water bodies to cool their facilities, and kill billions of fish and aquatic creatures in the process. That is due mostly, they say, to the use of “antiquated cooling systems” known as once-through cooling.

www.midhudsonnews.com/News/November08/26/Rivkp_vs_Entergy-26Nov08.html