Last week, Governor Kathy Hochul made a significant policy announcement regarding New York’s energy future. The governor directed the New York Power Authority to explore the development of one or more nuclear power plants capable of supplying electricity to approximately one million households.
This initiative is rooted in the belief that New York requires more electricity-generating capacity to meet increasing demands as well as to comply with the state’s climate laws.
However, the decision to prioritize new nuclear power raises several concerns that cannot be overlooked.
Historically, nuclear power has faced criticism for being polluting, dangerous, a security risk, and exhibiting extreme financial burdens due to costly technology and frequent construction overruns. Proponents of nuclear energy acknowledge these risks but justify them by citing the urgent need to address climate change.
New York’s past experiences with nuclear power highlight the potential pitfalls of a hasty embrace of this energy source.
In the early days of nuclear energy, it was marketed to the public as a miraculous solution that would generate electricity at a cost that was “too cheap to meter.”
Former Governor Nelson Rockefeller was a key advocate of this idea; however, his aggressive push failed to address a critical problem: the management of nuclear waste.
Rockefeller proposed using West Valley, New York, for waste storage, leading to significant environmental consequences. Notably, inadequate disposal practices resulted in the contamination of Cattaraugus Creek, which provided drinking water for Buffalo residents.
In a more recent episode, New Yorkers were compelled to subsidize the maintenance of aging nuclear power plants.
Former Governor Andrew Cuomo introduced a controversial proposal that required ratepayers to finance a multi-billion-dollar bailout for power plants that have been operational since the Vietnam War era.
Initially, Cuomo’s administration estimated the total cost of this bailout would be around $3 billion over twelve years.
However, independent assessments indicated that the ultimate cost could balloon to approximately $7.6 billion by the expected completion in 2029.
As of April of this year, state documents reveal that this bailout has already cost over $4 billion, with four years still remaining on the timeline.
All expenses related to this endeavor ultimately come from the pockets of New York ratepayers.
Now, Governor Hochul is making a new pitch to the state regarding nuclear power.
It is essential that New Yorkers receive comprehensive answers before any construction begins.
The previous administration’s failure to engage the public led to unnecessary debates and financial consequences over the nuclear power plants in upstate New York.
The Hochul Administration should approach nuclear energy development with a different mindset, emphasizing transparency and public interaction.
New Yorkers deserve a thorough and independent public vetting of the proposed nuclear power plans.
This process should involve an open discussion about anticipated costs, including historical cost overruns associated with the nuclear industry, as well as concerns over waste storage.
Questions regarding whether waste will remain on-site indefinitely must also be addressed.
Furthermore, it is crucial to examine the overall financial impacts, including which current New York Power Authority projects may have to be sacrificed to fund new nuclear facilities.
As Governor Hochul looks towards potentially untested nuclear power approaches, a comprehensive and transparent process is paramount.
In the 1960s, the promise of nuclear power led to the devastating West Valley environmental disaster.
In the early 2000s, assurances of a financially manageable nuclear bailout resulted in billions of additional charges on electric bills.
Now, as New Yorkers hear assurances once again, it is critical that they remain vigilant to avoid being misled a third time.
image source from：wamc
