Editing Nuclear power (section)

== Safety ==
{{See also|Nuclear safety and security|Nuclear reactor safety system}}
[[File:Energy Production Death Rates per TWh.png|thumb|upright=1.5|Death rates per unit of electricity production for different energy sources]]
Nuclear power plants have three unique characteristics that affect their safety, as compared to other power plants. Firstly, intensely [[radioactive material]]s are present in a nuclear reactor. Their release to the environment could be hazardous. Secondly, the [[fission product]]s, which make up most of the intensely radioactive substances in the reactor, continue to generate a significant amount of [[decay heat]] even after the fission [[Nuclear chain reaction|chain reaction]] has stopped. If the heat cannot be removed from the reactor, the fuel rods may overheat and release radioactive materials. Thirdly, a [[criticality accident]] (a rapid increase of the reactor power) is possible in certain reactor designs if the chain reaction cannot be controlled. These three characteristics have to be taken into account when designing nuclear reactors.<ref name="IAEAsafety">{{Cite web |last=Deitrich |first=L. W. |title=Basic principles of nuclear safety |url=https://ansn.iaea.org/ansn.org/Common/Documents/apmd/asia251p4.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181119011032/https://ansn.iaea.org/ansn.org/Common/Documents/apmd/asia251p4.pdf |archive-date=2018-11-19 |access-date=2018-11-18 |publisher=International Atomic Energy Agency}}</ref>

All modern reactors are designed so that an uncontrolled increase of the reactor power is prevented by natural feedback mechanisms, a concept known as negative [[void coefficient]] of reactivity. If the temperature or the amount of steam in the reactor increases, the fission rate inherently decreases. The chain reaction can also be manually stopped by inserting [[control rod]]s into the reactor core. [[Emergency core cooling system]]s (ECCS) can remove the decay heat from the reactor if normal cooling systems fail.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/basic-ref/glossary/emergency-core-cooling-systems-eccs.html|title=Emergency core cooling systems (ECCS)|date=2018-07-06|publisher=United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission|access-date=2018-12-10|archive-date=2021-04-29|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210429133036/https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/basic-ref/glossary/emergency-core-cooling-systems-eccs.html|url-status=live}}</ref> If the ECCS fails, multiple physical barriers limit the release of radioactive materials to the environment even in the case of an accident. The last physical barrier is the large [[containment building]].<ref name="IAEAsafety" />

With a death rate of 0.03 per [[TWh]], nuclear power is the second safest energy source per unit of energy generated, after solar power, in terms of mortality when the historical track-record is considered.<ref>{{Cite web|title=What are the safest and cleanest sources of energy?|url=https://ourworldindata.org/safest-sources-of-energy|website=Our World in Data|date=10 February 2020 |access-date=2023-11-15|archive-date=2020-11-29|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201129205209/https://ourworldindata.org/safest-sources-of-energy|url-status=live |last1=Ritchie |first1=Hannah }}</ref> Energy produced by coal, petroleum, natural gas and [[hydropower]] has caused more deaths per unit of energy generated due to [[air pollution]] and [[energy accidents]]. This is found when comparing the immediate deaths from other energy sources to both the immediate and the latent, or predicted, indirect cancer deaths from nuclear energy accidents.<ref name="without the hot air">{{cite web |url= http://www.inference.phy.cam.ac.uk/withouthotair/c24/page_168.shtml |title= Dr. MacKay ''Sustainable Energy without the hot air'' |website= Data from studies by the [[Paul Scherrer Institute]] including non EU data |page= 168 |access-date= 2012-09-15 |archive-date= 2012-09-02 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20120902001529/http://www.inference.phy.cam.ac.uk/withouthotair/c24/page_168.shtml |url-status= live }}</ref><ref name="theage2006">{{cite news |author=Nicholson |first=Brendan |date=2006-06-05 |title=Nuclear power 'cheaper, safer' than coal and gas |url=http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/nuclear-power-cheaper-safer-than-coal-and-gas/2006/06/04/1149359609052.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080208123433/http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/nuclear-power-cheaper-safer-than-coal-and-gas/2006/06/04/1149359609052.html |archive-date=2008-02-08 |access-date=2008-01-18 |newspaper=[[The Age]] |location=Melbourne}}</ref> When the direct and indirect fatalities (including fatalities resulting from the mining and air pollution) from nuclear power and fossil fuels are compared,<ref name="MarkandyaWilkinson2007">{{cite journal | doi = 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61253-7 | last1 = Markandya | first1 = A. | last2 = Wilkinson | first2 = P. | title = Electricity generation and health | journal = Lancet | volume = 370 | issue = 9591 | pages = 979–990 | year = 2007 | pmid = 17876910| s2cid = 25504602 |quote=Nuclear power has lower electricity related health risks than Coal, Oil, & gas. ...the health burdens are appreciably smaller for generation from natural gas, and lower still for nuclear power. This study includes the latent or indirect fatalities, for example those caused by the inhalation of fossil fuel created particulate matter, smog induced cardiopulmonary events, black lung etc. in its comparison.}}</ref> the use of nuclear power has been calculated to have prevented about 1.84 million deaths from air pollution between 1971 and 2009, by reducing the proportion of energy that would otherwise have been generated by fossil fuels.<ref name="autogenerated1">{{cite web |url=http://cen.acs.org/articles/91/web/2013/04/Nuclear-Power-Prevents-Deaths-Causes.html |title=Nuclear Power Prevents More Deaths Than It Causes &#124; Chemical & Engineering News |publisher=Cen.acs.org |access-date=2014-01-24 |archive-date=2014-03-01 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140301145251/http://cen.acs.org/articles/91/web/2013/04/Nuclear-Power-Prevents-Deaths-Causes.html |url-status=live }}</ref><ref name="Kharecha Pushker A 2013 4889–4895">{{cite journal | last1=Kharecha | first1=Pushker A. | last2=Hansen | first2=James E. |title=Prevented Mortality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Historical and Projected Nuclear Power |doi=10.1021/es3051197 |pmid=23495839 |bibcode = 2013EnST...47.4889K |volume=47 |issue=9 |journal=Environmental Science & Technology |pages=4889–4895 |year=2013 |doi-access=free |hdl=2060/20140017100 |hdl-access=free }}</ref> Following the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster, it has been estimated that if Japan had never adopted nuclear power, accidents and pollution from coal or gas plants would have caused more lost years of life.<ref>{{cite journal |author=Normile |first=Dennis |date=2012-07-27 |title=Is Nuclear Power Good for You? |url=http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2012/07/is-nuclear-power-good-for-you.html |journal=Science |volume=337 |issue=6093 |page=395 |doi=10.1126/science.337.6093.395-b |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130301082701/http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2012/07/is-nuclear-power-good-for-you.html |archive-date=2013-03-01}}</ref>

Serious impacts of nuclear accidents are often not directly attributable to radiation exposure, but rather social and psychological effects. Evacuation and long-term displacement of affected populations created problems for many people, especially the elderly and hospital patients.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Hasegawa |first1=Arifumi |last2=Tanigawa |first2=Koichi |last3=Ohtsuru |first3=Akira |last4=Yabe |first4=Hirooki |last5=Maeda |first5=Masaharu |last6=Shigemura |first6=Jun |last7=Ohira |first7=Tetsuya |last8=Tominaga |first8=Takako |last9=Akashi |first9=Makoto |last10=Hirohashi |first10=Nobuyuki |last11=Ishikawa |first11=Tetsuo |last12=Kamiya |first12=Kenji |last13=Shibuya |first13=Kenji |last14=Yamashita |first14=Shunichi |last15=Chhem |first15=Rethy K |title=Health effects of radiation and other health problems in the aftermath of nuclear accidents, with an emphasis on Fukushima |journal=The Lancet |date=August 2015 |volume=386 |issue=9992 |pages=479–488 |doi=10.1016/S0140-6736(15)61106-0 |pmid=26251393 |s2cid=19289052 |url=http://ir.fmu.ac.jp/dspace/bitstream/123456789/1575/1/Lancet_386_p479.pdf |access-date=2021-08-05 |archive-date=2021-08-28 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210828051002/https://ir.fmu.ac.jp/dspace/bitstream/123456789/1575/1/Lancet_386_p479.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref> Forced evacuation from a nuclear accident may lead to social isolation, anxiety, depression, psychosomatic medical problems, reckless behavior, and suicide. A comprehensive 2005 study on the aftermath of the Chernobyl disaster concluded that the mental health impact is the largest public health problem caused by the accident.<ref name="riv12">{{cite news |author=Revkin |first=Andrew C. |author-link=Andrew C. Revkin |date=2012-03-10 |title=Nuclear Risk and Fear, from Hiroshima to Fukushima |url=http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/10/nuclear-risk-and-fear-from-hiroshima-to-fukushima/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150905200055/http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/10/nuclear-risk-and-fear-from-hiroshima-to-fukushima/ |archive-date=2015-09-05 |access-date=2013-07-08 |newspaper=The New York Times}}</ref> [[Frank N. von Hippel]], an American scientist, commented that a disproportionate fear of ionizing radiation ([[radiophobia]]) could have long-term psychological effects on the population of contaminated areas following the Fukushima disaster.<ref name="Frank N. von Hippel 27–36">{{cite journal |author=von Hippel |first=Frank N. |date=September–October 2011 |title=The radiological and psychological consequences of the Fukushima Daiichi accident |url=http://bos.sagepub.com/content/67/5/27.full |url-status=live |journal=Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists |volume=67 |issue=5 |pages=27–36 |bibcode=2011BuAtS..67e..27V |doi=10.1177/0096340211421588 |s2cid=218769799 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120113090511/http://bos.sagepub.com/content/67/5/27.full |archive-date=2012-01-13 |access-date=2013-07-08}}</ref>

=== Accidents ===
[[File:Fukushima I by Digital Globe crop.jpg|thumb|upright=1.2|Following the 2011 [[Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster]], the world's worst [[nuclear accident]] since 1986, 50,000 households were displaced after [[radiation]] leaked into the air, soil and sea.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Yamazaki |first1=Tomoko |last2=Ozasa |first2=Shunichi |name-list-style=amp |date=2011-06-27 |title=Fukushima Retiree Leads Anti-Nuclear Shareholders at Tepco Annual Meeting |url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-06-26/fukushima-retiree-to-lead-anti-nuclear-motion.html |work=Bloomberg}}</ref> Radiation checks led to bans of some shipments of vegetables and fish.<ref>{{cite news |author=Saito |first=Mari |date=2011-05-07 |title=Japan anti-nuclear protesters rally after PM call to close plant |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-japan-nuclear-idUSTRE74610J20110507 |work=Reuters}}</ref>]]
[[File:Decay heat illustration2.PNG|thumb|upright=1.2|Reactor [[decay heat]] as a fraction of full power after the reactor shutdown, using two different correlations. To remove the decay heat, reactors need cooling after the shutdown of the fission reactions. A loss of the ability to remove decay heat caused the [[Fukushima accident]].]]
{{See also|Energy accidents|Nuclear and radiation accidents and incidents|Lists of nuclear disasters and radioactive incidents}}

Some serious [[nuclear and radiation accidents by death toll|nuclear and radiation accidents]] have occurred. The severity of nuclear accidents is generally classified using the [[International Nuclear Event Scale]] (INES) introduced by the [[International Atomic Energy Agency]] (IAEA). The scale ranks anomalous events or accidents on a scale from 0 (a deviation from normal operation that poses no safety risk) to 7 (a major accident with widespread effects). There have been three accidents of level 5 or higher in the civilian nuclear power industry, two of which, the [[Chernobyl accident]] and the [[Fukushima accident]], are ranked at level 7.

The first major nuclear accidents were the [[Kyshtym disaster]] in the Soviet Union and the [[Windscale fire]] in the United Kingdom, both in 1957. The first major accident at a nuclear reactor in the USA occurred in 1961 at the [[SL-1]], a [[U.S. Army]] experimental nuclear power reactor at the [[Idaho National Laboratory]]. An uncontrolled chain reaction resulted in a [[steam explosion]] which killed the three crew members and caused a [[nuclear meltdown|meltdown]].<ref name=ido19313>''[http://www.id.doe.gov/foia/PDF/IDO-19313.pdf IDO-19313: Additional Analysis of the SL-1 Excursion]'' {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110927065809/http://www.id.doe.gov/foia/PDF/IDO-19313.pdf |date=2011-09-27 }} ''Final Report of Progress July through October 1962'', November 21, 1962, Flight Propulsion Laboratory Department, General Electric Company, Idaho Falls, Idaho, U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Division of Technical Information.</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=McKeown |first=William |title=Idaho Falls: The Untold Story of America's First Nuclear Accident |publisher=ECW Press |year=2003 |isbn=978-1-55022-562-4 |location=Toronto, Canada |language=en}}</ref> Another serious accident happened in 1968, when one of the two [[liquid-metal-cooled reactor]]s on board the {{ship|Soviet submarine|K-27}} underwent a [[fuel element failure]], with the emission of gaseous [[fission product]]s into the surrounding air, resulting in 9 crew fatalities and 83 injuries.<ref name=johnston2007>{{cite web |url=http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/nuclear/radevents/radevents1.html |title=Deadliest radiation accidents and other events causing radiation casualties |author=Johnston, Robert |date=2007-09-23 |publisher=Database of Radiological Incidents and Related Events |access-date=2011-03-14 |archive-date=2007-10-23 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071023104305/http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/nuclear/radevents/radevents1.html |url-status=live }}</ref>

The Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accident was caused by the [[2011 Tohoku earthquake and tsunami]]. The accident has not caused any radiation-related deaths but resulted in radioactive contamination of surrounding areas. The difficult [[Fukushima disaster cleanup|cleanup operation]] is expected to cost tens of billions of dollars over 40 or more years.<ref name="Richard Schiffman">{{cite news |author=Schiffman |first=Richard |date=2013-03-12 |title=Two years on, America hasn't learned lessons of Fukushima nuclear disaster |url=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/mar/12/fukushima-nuclear-accident-lessons-for-us |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170202143654/https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/mar/12/fukushima-nuclear-accident-lessons-for-us |archive-date=2017-02-02 |access-date=2016-12-12 |work=The Guardian |location=London, England}}</ref><ref name="Martin Fackler">{{cite news |author=Fackler |first=Martin |date=2011-06-01 |title=Report Finds Japan Underestimated Tsunami Danger |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/02/world/asia/02japan.html?_r=1&ref=world |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170205043423/http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/02/world/asia/02japan.html?_r=1&ref=world |archive-date=2017-02-05 |access-date=2017-02-25 |newspaper=The New York Times}}</ref> The [[Three Mile Island accident]] in 1979 was a smaller scale accident, rated at INES level 5. There were no direct or indirect deaths caused by the accident.<ref name="timenuke">{{cite magazine|url=http://www.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29307,1887705,00.html|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090328130544/http://www.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29307,1887705,00.html|archive-date=March 28, 2009|title=The Worst Nuclear Disasters|date=2009-03-25|access-date=2013-06-22|magazine=[[Time (magazine)|Time]]|url-status=dead}}</ref>

The impact of nuclear accidents is controversial. According to [[Benjamin K. Sovacool]], fission [[energy accidents]] ranked first among energy sources in terms of their total economic cost, accounting for 41% of all property damage attributed to energy accidents.<ref>{{Cite journal | last1 = Sovacool | first1 = B.K. | title = The costs of failure: A preliminary assessment of major energy accidents, 1907–2007 | doi = 10.1016/j.enpol.2008.01.040 | journal = Energy Policy | volume = 36 | issue = 5 | pages = 1802–1820 | year = 2008 | bibcode = 2008EnPol..36.1802S }}</ref> Another analysis found that coal, oil, [[liquid petroleum gas]] and hydroelectric accidents (primarily due to the [[Banqiao Dam disaster]]) have resulted in greater economic impacts than nuclear power accidents.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Burgherr |first1=Peter |last2=Hirschberg |first2=Stefan |title=A Comparative Analysis of Accident Risks in Fossil, Hydro, and Nuclear Energy Chains |journal=Human and Ecological Risk Assessment |date=10 October 2008 |volume=14 |issue=5 |pages=947–973 |doi=10.1080/10807030802387556 |bibcode=2008HERA...14..947B |s2cid=110522982 }}</ref> The study compares latent cancer deaths attributable to nuclear power with immediate deaths from other energy sources per unit of energy generated, and does not include fossil fuel related cancer and other indirect deaths created by the use of fossil fuel consumption in its "severe accident" (an accident with more than five fatalities) classification. The Chernobyl accident in 1986 caused approximately 50 deaths from direct and indirect effects, and some temporary serious injuries from [[acute radiation syndrome]].<ref name=WHO2012>{{cite web|date=23 April 2011|title=Chernobyl at 25th anniversary – Frequently Asked Questions|publisher=World Health Organisation|access-date=14 April 2012|url=https://www.who.int/ionizing_radiation/chernobyl/20110423_FAQs_Chernobyl.pdf|archive-date=17 April 2012|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120417011209/http://www.who.int/ionizing_radiation/chernobyl/20110423_FAQs_Chernobyl.pdf|url-status=live}}</ref> The future predicted mortality from increases in cancer rates is estimated at 4000 in the decades to come.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Magazines/Bulletin/Bull383/boxp6.html |title=Assessing the Chernobyl Consequences |website=International Atomic Energy Agency |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130830073635/http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Magazines/Bulletin/Bull383/boxp6.html |archive-date=30 August 2013 |df=dmy-all}}</ref><ref name=UNSCEAR_2008_D>{{cite web |url=http://www.unscear.org/docs/reports/2008/11-80076_Report_2008_Annex_D.pdf |title=UNSCEAR 2008 Report to the General Assembly, Annex D |website=United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation |year=2008 |access-date=2018-12-15 |archive-date=2011-08-04 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110804232629/http://www.unscear.org/docs/reports/2008/11-80076_Report_2008_Annex_D.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.unscear.org/docs/reports/2008/09-86753_Report_2008_GA_Report_corr2.pdf |title=UNSCEAR 2008 Report to the General Assembly |website=United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation |year=2008 |access-date=2012-05-17 |archive-date=2019-01-05 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190105222241/http://www.unscear.org/docs/reports/2008/09-86753_Report_2008_GA_Report_corr2.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref> However, the costs have been large and are increasing.

Nuclear power works under an [[insurance]] framework that limits or structures accident liabilities in accordance with national and international conventions.<ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Conventions/liability.html | title=Publications: Vienna Convention on Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage | date=27 August 2014 | publisher=[[International Atomic Energy Agency]] | access-date=8 September 2016 | archive-date=3 March 2016 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160303170113/http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Conventions/liability.html | url-status=live }}</ref> It is often argued that this potential shortfall in liability represents an external cost not included in the cost of nuclear electricity. This cost is small, amounting to about 0.1% of the [[levelized cost of electricity]], according to a study by the [[Congressional Budget Office]] in the United States.<ref>{{cite web|url= http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/05-02-nuclear.pdf|title= Nuclear Power's Role in Generating Electricity|publisher= [[Congressional Budget Office]]|date= May 2008|access-date= 2016-09-08|archive-date= 2014-11-29|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20141129011143/http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/05-02-nuclear.pdf|url-status= live}}</ref> These beyond-regular insurance costs for worst-case scenarios are not unique to nuclear power. [[Hydroelectric power]] plants are similarly not fully insured against a catastrophic event such as [[dam failure]]s. For example, the failure of the [[Banqiao Dam]] caused the death of an estimated 30,000 to 200,000 people, and 11 million people lost their homes. As private insurers base dam insurance premiums on limited scenarios, major disaster insurance in this sector is likewise provided by the state.<ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.damsafety.org/media/Documents/FEMA/AvailabilityOfDamInsurance.pdf | title=Availability of Dam Insurance | date=1999 | access-date=2016-09-08 | archive-date=2016-01-08 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160108185336/http://www.damsafety.org/media/documents/fema/availabilityofdaminsurance.pdf | url-status=dead }}</ref>

=== Attacks and sabotage ===
{{Main|Vulnerability of nuclear plants to attack|Nuclear terrorism|Nuclear safety in the United States}}
Terrorists could target [[nuclear power plant]]s in an attempt to release [[radioactive contamination]] into the community. The United States 9/11 Commission has said that nuclear power plants were potential targets originally considered for the [[September 11, 2001 attacks]]. An attack on a reactor's [[spent fuel pool]] could also be serious, as these pools are less protected than the reactor core. The release of radioactivity could lead to thousands of near-term deaths and greater numbers of long-term fatalities.<ref name="fas12">{{cite web |last1=Ferguson |first1=Charles D. |last2=Settle |first2=Frank A. |name-list-style=amp |year=2012 |title=The Future of Nuclear Power in the United States |url=https://fas.org/pubs/_docs/Nuclear_Energy_Report-lowres.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170525170528/https://fas.org/pubs/_docs/Nuclear_Energy_Report-lowres.pdf |archive-date=2017-05-25 |access-date=2016-07-07 |website=Federation of American Scientists}}</ref>

In the United States, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission carries out "Force on Force" (FOF) exercises at all nuclear power plant sites at least once every three years.<ref name=fas12 /> In the United States, plants are surrounded by a double row of tall fences which are electronically monitored. The plant grounds are patrolled by a sizeable force of armed guards.<ref>{{cite web |title=Nuclear Security – Five Years After 9/11 |url=https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/security-enhancements.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070715045132/http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/security-enhancements.html |archive-date=15 July 2007 |access-date=23 July 2007 |publisher=U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission}}</ref>

Insider sabotage is also a threat because insiders can observe and work around security measures. Successful insider crimes depended on the perpetrators' observation and knowledge of security vulnerabilities.<ref>{{cite web |author=Bunn |first1=Matthew |author-link=Matthew Bunn |last2=Sagan |first2=Scott |author2-link=Scott Sagan |name-list-style=amp |date=2014 |title=A Worst Practices Guide to Insider Threats: Lessons from Past Mistakes |url=https://www.amacad.org/content/publications/pubContent.aspx?d=1427 |publisher=The American Academy of Arts & Sciences}}</ref> A fire caused 5–10 million dollars worth of damage to New York's [[Indian Point Energy Center]] in 1971.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/1971/11/14/archives/damage-is-put-at-millions-in-blaze-at-con-ed-plant-con-ed-damage.html|title=Damage Is Put at Millions In Blaze at Con Ed Plant|last=McFadden|first=Robert D.|date=1971-11-14|work=The New York Times|access-date=2020-01-15|language=en-US|issn=0362-4331|archive-date=2020-01-15|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200115181457/https://www.nytimes.com/1971/11/14/archives/damage-is-put-at-millions-in-blaze-at-con-ed-plant-con-ed-damage.html|url-status=live}}</ref> The arsonist was a plant maintenance worker.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/1972/01/30/archives/mechanic-seized-in-indian-pt-fire-con-ed-employe-accused-of-arson.html|title=Mechanic Seized in Indian Pt. Fire|last=Knight|first=Michael|date=1972-01-30|work=The New York Times|access-date=2020-01-15|language=en-US|issn=0362-4331|archive-date=2020-01-15|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200115181500/https://www.nytimes.com/1972/01/30/archives/mechanic-seized-in-indian-pt-fire-con-ed-employe-accused-of-arson.html|url-status=live}}</ref>