For New Jersey, wind and solar energy a better investment than nuclear power

As for nuclear, Tittel said. it’s too expensive to build, maintain, and operate. The cost of building a nuclear plant is three to four times more than wind and then you add the environmental and safety issues, he said.

“Wind and solar is a much better investment,”

Wind And Solar Energy Overshadow Nuclear At Energy Master Plan Public Hearing, Toms River Patch, By Elaine Piniat 19 Aug 11, The public, environmental advocates, and stakeholders voice their opinions on the state’s Energy Master Plan. Wind and solar energy were the focus at a public hearing on the state’s Energy Master Plan held by Sen. Bob Smith (D- District 17) and Assemblyman John McKeon (D- District 27) at the Town Hall in Toms River.
“The New Jersey shore provides an appropriate setting for a vigorous discussion on clean energy, considering it is an ideal location for harnessing renewable sources like wind and solar…New Jersey has a unique opportunity to modernize our energy blueprint for the future,” Smith said prior to the hearing……

The purpose of the hearing was for members of the public, environmental advocates, and stakeholders to voice their opinions so their ideas could be brought to the legislature.

“The Energy Master Plan affects all aspects of your life,” he said, including air quality and the cost of air condition.

Although most emphasized the importance of wind and solar, Stefanie Brand, Director of the New Jersey Division of Rate Counsel, said the state needs to balance the resource mix with energy efficiency and cost in mind.

“We can’t close Oyster Creek if they don’t replace the capacity…We can’t replace base load generation simply with solar, wind and energy efficiency,” Brand said.

The state needs a mix of resources that would moderate prices and decrease carbon emissions, she said….

Jeff Tittel, President of the New Jersey Sierra Club, looks at the Energy Master Plan …..

The 3,000 megawatts of wind generation proposed is manageable and the state is exceeding in solar, Tittel said. But he looked down upon the Energy Master Plan decreasing from 30 percent to 22.5 percent of electricity produced from renewable energy sources by 2020.

“We look at this plan overall and we see a future but we need to make a decision,” Tittel said. The state needs to make a decision between offshore or onshore oil, wind, solar, and energy efficiency, he said…..

As for nuclear, Tittel said it’s too expensive to build, maintain, and operate. The cost of building a nuclear plant is three to four times more than wind and then you add the environmental and safety issues, he said.

“Wind and solar is a much better investment,” Tittel said. “If we do replace [Oyster Creek], it should be with offshore wind and renewable energy not another fuel plant. I think we’re better off both environmentally and financially.”

Lacey Township can become a service place for offshore wind and even install solar panels on Oyster Creek once the plant closes, he said….

http://tomsriver.patch.com/articles/wind-and-solar-energy-overshadow-nuclear-at-energy-master-plan-public-hearing