The Dilemmas of Power

The U.S. has an insatiable appetite for electricity. By 1979, the nation's utilities must increase their generating capacity from 300 million kilowatts to more than one billion. They must build at least 250 large new power plants. Meanwhile, they confront rising revulsion against the pollution caused by such plants. Says Lee White, the outgoing chairman of the Federal Power Commission: "The major problem that the industry faces is the sharply increased concern of the U.S. over environmental considerations."

No man is more agonizingly aware of this than Charles Franklin Luce, chairman of New York City's Consolidated Edison, the world's biggest electric utility. Before coming to Con Ed. Luce dealt with environmental problems as Under Secretary of the Interior. An ardent outdoorsman, he now finds himself cast as a villain by New Yorkers, who have long regarded Con Edison as a blatant polluter. Last week they were incensed over Con Ed's request for a 14% rate increase, its second in three years. Con Ed is in financial trouble, much of it aggravated by a longstanding inefficiency that discourages investors. At the same time, like every other U.S. utility, Con Ed is buffeted between uncoordinated regulatory bodies and proliferating conservation groups.

Four years ago, a massive power failure plunged the Northeast into stygian blackness. Last month disaster loomed again when the million-kilowatt generator at Con Ed's Ravenswood plant short-circuited. Since two smaller generators were temporarily out of order, New York suffered a "brownout" that dimmed lights and made air conditioners wheeze. Last week Luce sighed with relief when "Big Allis" (named for the Allis-Chalmers generator) came back on the line. But relief can only be temporary for Con Ed. It must currently generate 7,350,000 kw. at peak load, and 10.9 million within a decade. Even when it buys power from other utilities, Con Ed can maintain a reserve capacity of only 21%--too slim for the peak demands of New York. Worse, Con Ed is balked in its plans for future needs.

Foes and Factions. Seven years ago, Con Ed predicted this summer's demands, but one setback after another thwarted the company's ability to meet them. The fact that Con Edison was shortsighted and sometimes secretive did not help its planning. Its "keystone" for avoiding another blackout was a 2,000,000 kw. pump-storage plant on Storm King Mountain. By 1967, the plant was supposed to pump water from the Hudson River to a huge reservoir atop the mountain, then release it downhill to run hydroelectric generators during peak periods. Groups opposing the project because it would deface the scenic river gorge won a court delay. Since 1965, Con Ed has tried to appease such critics by investing $15 million in plans to bury the Storm King powerhouse and create a park along the river front. Now New York City is also protesting that the project threatens its underground water aqueduct. Even with a go-ahead, Storm King could not be built before 1976.

In addition, Con Ed planned to boost its generating capacity with nuclear plants along the Hudson at Indian Point and Montrose. These units were to take the load off city coal-and oil-burning plants. The utility relied on support from Storm King opponents, who had argued that Con Ed should rely on nuclear power, and from city clean-air advocates. One plant was built at Indian Point, but then antinuclear critics argued that the damage to marine life from thermal pollution--excessive volumes of hot water discharged by nuclear plants--was far worse than the smog caused by smoke-belching power plants that use fossil fuels (oil and coal). They also voiced fears about possible harmful radiation effects.

While construction problems set back a second nuclear plant at Indian Point for two years, opponents opened fire on a third Indian Point plant, delaying it until at least 1973. Meantime, the Hudson River Fishermen's Association and the Kolping Society (a Roman Catholic lay group) forced Con Ed to abandon the Montrose nuclear plant. Now the company has negotiated deals for two oil-fired plants--and irked clean-air crusaders by announcing plans for more fossil-fuel power in New York City.

Pros and Cons. To some degree, every utility in the country shares Con Ed's dilemma. Says P. G. & E. Chairman Robert Gerdes: What lies ahead for the utilities? There may be ways to eliminate steam turbines and reduce pollution, such as magnetohydrodynamic power generation (direct conversion of certain gases to electricity) but such methods are far off. It is hard to choose between the pros and cons of current methods. Fossil fuels now produce 85% of the nation's electricity, but they also produce 50% of the country's sulphur-oxide emissions, 25% of its particulates and 25% of its nitrogen-oxide releases. Even cleaner fossil fuels and combustion controls bring a new problem. As the burning gets cleaner, great amounts of nitrogen oxide and carbon dioxide are released. The former endangers health, and many ecologists say that increased carbon dioxide threatens the earth's oxygen cycle.

New federal and state laws may soon regulate thermal pollution and make nuclear plants more acceptable. Yet many scientists fear the long-term effects of radiation as well as the site dangers of bigger nuclear units. While aggressively promoting atomic energy, which may provide more than 40% of the nation's power by 1990, the Atomic Energy Commission has been unconvincing and often smug in replying to criticism.

Lee White, the retired FPC chairman, maintains that "existing procedures for reconciling the need for new facilities and environmental protection are inadequate." Pending in Congress are various proposals that would create a legal framework by which federal and state regulatory agencies, regional and local planning bodies and environmental protection groups would consult with the utilities during the earliest planning stages.

Con Ed's Luce agrees that new mechanisms are sorely needed to allow firm long-range planning. "Our best hope," he said in an interview last week, "is to get more public understanding of the growing demands for power and of the fact that any plant we build will have some impact on the environment."

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.