A natural gas-fired plant would have a terrible effect on the environment. Methane is a terrible greenhouse gas. Most new natural gas in this country comes from fracked wells. Fracking releases prodigious amounts of fugitive methane. Methane causes anywhere from 30 to 70 times more damage to the ozone layer than CO2, on a per-molecule basis. Just the releases from the extraction step alone would cause more environmental damage than you'd avoid using natural gas. Just one natural gas well leak, the Aliso Canyon well (also called Porter Ranch) in California, wiped out all of the gains that state made in the last decade from using so-called "renewable" energy sources.
The most efficient combined-cycle gas turbine plants release about 400 grams of CO2 per kwhr generated. Single-cycle gas turbine plants emit about 500 grams of CO2 per kwhr. If you replaced the output of Oyster Creek with a natural gas-fired plant, you'd spew about 2 million tons of CO2 into the atmosphere every year. That is the same as adding about 350,000 cars to the roads of NJ every year. Anyone here really want to do that? No friend of the environment are you if you do.
Michael - 6 years ago
If a gas plant was built on the current Oyster Creek site, it could generate revenues for Lacey Township and tax relief for its residents. Something similar to the way it once was in Lacey before surrounding townships made a claim for emergency planning, evacuation, and Recovery in the case of a nuclear incident. In addition a gas generating plant would not have an adverse effects on the environment.
A natural gas-fired plant would have a terrible effect on the environment. Methane is a terrible greenhouse gas. Most new natural gas in this country comes from fracked wells. Fracking releases prodigious amounts of fugitive methane. Methane causes anywhere from 30 to 70 times more damage to the ozone layer than CO2, on a per-molecule basis. Just the releases from the extraction step alone would cause more environmental damage than you'd avoid using natural gas. Just one natural gas well leak, the Aliso Canyon well (also called Porter Ranch) in California, wiped out all of the gains that state made in the last decade from using so-called "renewable" energy sources.
The most efficient combined-cycle gas turbine plants release about 400 grams of CO2 per kwhr generated. Single-cycle gas turbine plants emit about 500 grams of CO2 per kwhr. If you replaced the output of Oyster Creek with a natural gas-fired plant, you'd spew about 2 million tons of CO2 into the atmosphere every year. That is the same as adding about 350,000 cars to the roads of NJ every year. Anyone here really want to do that? No friend of the environment are you if you do.
If a gas plant was built on the current Oyster Creek site, it could generate revenues for Lacey Township and tax relief for its residents. Something similar to the way it once was in Lacey before surrounding townships made a claim for emergency planning, evacuation, and Recovery in the case of a nuclear incident. In addition a gas generating plant would not have an adverse effects on the environment.