Gas pipeline to be built next to Indian Point nuclear reactor- why haven't we heard about this?

[latebloomer]

This is getting absolutely no press, but terrifyingly, it appears to be a done deal. A fracking gas pipeline is scheduled to be built within 200 feet of the decaying Indian Point nuclear refinery, 200 miles north of NYC.


http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/30234-doing-the-unthinkable-giant-gas-pipeline-to-flank-a-new-york-nuclear-power-plant

[FSogol]

1. It is kind of hard to take an article that starts with "A very large pipeline...." seriously.

The attempt to link the explosion caused by people illegally tapping into an 1-1/2" gas pipe in New York to the potential for a pipeline rupture is equally silly. Less hyperbole and fear mongering and it could have been a decent article.

PS. There is no such thing as a fracking gas pipeline. Fracking is the process used to extract the gas from the rock. The pipeline will be used to transport natural gas, just like the gas pipes in your house.

[yellowcanine]

2. But saying "natural gas pipline" will not generate the excitement of a "fracking gas pipeline"

Just sayin. Only way to make it more fun would be to get GMO in there somehow.

[FSogol]

3. "Very large pipe" is too much technical jargon for me. Hmmm, "Very large GMO Fracking Pipe!"

[yellowcanine]

4. Sounds almost naughty when you say it like that.

[FSogol]

5. LOL. n/t

[latebloomer]

6. I am shocked at the kind of responses I have gotten to this post

No one is concerned that this might be a VERY bad idea? No one is aware that gas pipelines rupture all the time? That increased fracking has been associated with greatly increased amounts of earthquakes? That building a pipeline to go right next to an antiquated nuclear power reactor, 30 miles north of New York City, might be extremely dangerous?

I don't recognize DU anymore.

[FBaggins]

7. The responses are appropriate to the OP

The article is little more than intentional fearmongering... with more than a smattering of dishonesty by the author.

Now Paul Blanch is a nuclear proponent?

[latebloomer]

8. "Fearmongering"?

Please explain why it is "fearmongering" to be deeply worried about a gas pipeline, which frequently rupture and explode, being installed less than 200 feet from an aging nuclear reactor, which is located within a 50-mile radius of 20 million people?

[Katashi_itto]

9. Because its negative publicity

and we have very vocal group of pro nuke shills.

[latebloomer]

10. Aha! Thank you!

I suspected as much, but haven't been around DU enough lately to know the current cast of characters.

[FBaggins]

11. Yep... that's exactly what it is

Please explain why it is "fearmongering" to be deeply worried about a gas pipeline

There are already pipelines in the area. The risk to the plant is negligible. Just read the linked article with the speculative path to core damage... it's pretty laughable. The author also uses intentional deception on more than one occasion.

which frequently rupture and explode,

No they don't. Given the hundreds of thousands of miles of gas pipeline in the country, the failure rate is actually quite low. Given that this is a newer pipeline replacing an older one... the risk should actually decrease.

being installed less than 200 feet from an aging nuclear reactor

Ignoring the fact that the 3000+ feet closest to the plant will be X-70 steel (much thicker than the rest of the pipeline)... and imagining that it ruptures at the closest point... there still isn't a credible theory for how that's supposed to endanger the "aging"/"deteriorating" reactor.

Oh... and it may be 200 feet from the plant boundary, but it's closer to 500-600 feet from the closest reactor (which, of course, is protected by a heavily-reinforced concrete shell).