Last week, the big policy announcement was one made by Governor Hochul. The governor directed the New York Power Authority to develop one or more nuclear power plants with enough capacity to supply electricity to roughly 1 million households.
The rationale for this action is that New York needs more electricity-generating capacity to meet growing demands and to comply with the state’s climate laws.
But going all in on “new” nuclear raises its own concerns.
The historical reality of nuclear power has been that it is polluting, dangerous, a security risk, and enormously expensive, both as a complicated technology that requires significant safety features, as well as one plagued by construction cost overruns. Supporters of the use of nuclear power acknowledge the risks but argue that those risks are worth it due to the worsening climate catastrophe.
A review of the experiences in New York underscores the concerns about a headlong rush into the nuclear industry’s embrace.
New York, and the nation, was first sold on nuclear power as a new way to generate electricity that was said to be “too cheap to meter.” Former New York Governor Nelson Rockefeller was a champion at that time. But his speedy, all-in embrace ignored one key problem – where will the wastes go? Rockefeller’s response was to push for storage in West Valley New York. That decision led to an environmental disaster – the inadequate disposal resulted in “spreading radioactivity into Cattaraugus Creek … from which the [City] of Buffalo obtains its drinking water.”
More recently New Yorkers were asked to foot the bill to keep ancient nuclear power plants running. That idea was advanced by another New York Governor, Andrew Cuomo. The former governor proposed that ratepayers underwrite a multi-billion-dollar bail-out of nuclear power plants that were so old that they were constructed during the Vietnam War era.
At that time, the public was told by the Cuomo Administration that the costs would be around $3 billion over the course of a dozen years. Outside reviewers estimated that by the time the bailout was complete in 2029, the costs would be around $7.6 billion.
According to state documents, the bailout has cost over $4 billion as of April of this year and there are still four years to go! All of that money comes from ratepayers’ pockets.
Now the pitch is from current New York Governor Kathy Hochul.
This time New Yorkers deserve answers before the first shovel digs into the ground. It was the failure to involve the public that led to unnecessary costs and debate over the former Cuomo Administration’s bailout of the existing nuclear power plants located in upstate New York. Indeed, that approach should be viewed as the opposite of how the Hochul Administration should go about things this time.
The public should expect that Governor Hochul will deliver a full independent public vetting of her latest nuclear power plan. That also means allowing the entire state to be part of the discussion, examining the expected costs (including the industry’s history of cost overruns), examining the waste storage requirements (on-site forever?), and examining the full cost impacts both directly and indirectly, such as what New York Power Authority projects will be scrapped in order to fund the building of a new nuclear power facility. The fact that the governor is eyeing new, untested approaches to nuclear power underscores the need for a full, transparent process.
In the 1960s, New Yorkers were told all would be well. It ended in an environmental disaster. In the early 2000s, New Yorkers were all told all would be well. It ended in multi-billion-dollar add-ons to our electric bills.
New Yorkers are now being told, all will be well. Let’s not get fooled a third time.