ALBANY, N.Y. (NEXSTAR) \u2014 The demand for electricity is increasing, and the public comment period for New York\u2019s proposed nuclear policies ended on Thursday. Meanwhile, a coalition of 36 Democratic state legislators published an open letter to New York State Governor Kathy Hochul opposing the plan.<\/p>\n
\u201cNuclear power is the most expensive form of new energy,\u201d the atomic energy detractors<\/a> wrote in the letter, which was sent on Thursday and is available to read at the bottom of this story. They argued that prioritizing and expanding atomic energy would be unrealistic\u2014as new reactors take too long to build\u2014and won\u2019t actually lower energy bills.<\/p>\n Hochul\u2019s office defended the roadmap when reached for comment on Friday. \u201cGovernor Hochul has made expanding New York\u2019s nuclear capacity a cornerstone of her all-of-the-above strategy to ensure we have enough reliable energy to keep the lights on and costs down,\u201d according to Senior Communications Advisor Ken Lovett. He said the 8.4-gigawatt plan \u201ccomplements our continuing nation-leading efforts on wind<\/a> and solar.\u201d Hochul\u2019s office also touted the state\u2019s $88.7 billion commitments to clean energy projects since 2021.<\/p>\n The New York State Energy Research and Development Authority and the Department of Public Service ended public comments for their Advanced Nuclear Policy Paper, a blueprint for the Nuclear Reliability Backbone. It\u2019s the plan the state proposed to add 8.4-gigawatts of nuclear power to the state\u2019s grid<\/a>. The Public Service Commission\u2014an arm of DPS that regulates utility rates\u2014now has to review the comments and decide how to fund nuclear development while demand keeps straining the grid<\/a>.<\/p>\n \t To prevent future blackouts, the New York Independent System Operator\u2014which runs the state grid\u2014wants to meet the demand, which comes mostly from data centers and commercial manufacturing facilities. Because private investors are hesitant to pay for expensive, first-of-their-kind nuclear projects without government backing, the state proposed public subsidies.<\/p>\n Without financial commitments from developers, the expansion will require taxpayer subsidies and higher energy bills. York State proposed in June as much as $23.9 billion in ratepayer surcharges and taxpayer money for new nuclear.<\/p>\n NYSERDA, which researches and funds green energy policies, co-wrote that options paper with DPS. In it, they argued that nuclear offers constant and reliable carbon-free energy, unlike solar or wind. Today, the state operates 3.4 gigawatts of nuclear power across three active atomic plants upstate, which accounts for about 20% of the state\u2019s electricity demand.<\/p>\n As of 2023, New Yorkers spent $73.7 billion on over 3.5 quadrillion BTUs of energy, according to a 2025 report from NYSERDA. The nuclear plan would add 5 gigawatts of reactor technology<\/a>.<\/p>\n \t At Hochul\u2019s direction<\/a>, the New York Power Authority, which operates public power plants, started seeking developers in June to build the first new gigawatt of advanced nuclear power in a decade. They committed $40 million this summer to train workers for the specialized construction and operation of future facilities.<\/p>\n Reached for comment on Friday, a NYPA representative added more context about the state\u2019s power grid. They said that its \u201chydropower assets\u2014anchored by the 2.6 GW Niagara Power Project\u2014have been the backbone of New York\u2019s grid for six decades,\u201d and that \u201cNYPA has allocated $1.2 billion to support the development of renewables in New York State over the next four years.\u201d<\/p>\n On Thursday, Democratic State Senator Liz Krueger and Democratic Assemblymember Jo Anne Simon led 34 other Democratic state lawmakers in the letter to Hochul opposing such nuclear subsidies. They want her to abandon the plan, arguing that New Yorkers can\u2019t afford to pay the difference when nuclear projects go over budget or outpace production schedules.<\/p>\n \u201cThe idea that new nuclear generation is a realistic or even a desirable option for New York is just divorced from reality,\u201d Krueger said in a press release announcing the letter. \u201cWe need new generation now, not 15 or 20 years from now, and we need to lower costs for ratepayers, not saddle them with billions of dollars of liabilities that will drive up their rates for generations.\u201d<\/p>\n \t In public comments submitted to DPS, the Alliance for a Nuclear Free New York, pointed to the last nuclear plant built in the U.S.\u2014the notorious Vogtle plant in Georgia\u2014which took 15 years to finish and dwarfed its projected budget by some $22 billion. It ultimately cost $36.8 billion and is expected to raise energy rates in Georgia by 25% for years.<\/p>\n New Yorkers can\u2019t afford to be \u201ca bottomless ATM machine for the nuclear industry,\u201d the letter read.<\/p>\n The lawmakers also pointed to the decommissioned Shoreham plant on Long Island, which cost $6 billion, never operated commercially, and left residents with decades of debt. According to their letter, that abandoned plant \u201ccost roughly 85 times its original estimate and left Long Islanders with some of the highest utility bills in the country.\u201d<\/p>\n Some Native American advocates<\/a> also opposed the Nuclear Reliability Backbone. In public comments, the Onondaga Nation raised concerns about radioactive waste poisoning local water and land.<\/p>\n \t And, \u201cNew York must go forward with renewables,\u201d argued a member of the Ramapough Munsee Lenape Nation named Owl. \u201cThe choice between nuclear power and fracking is like a choice between a crystal meth addiction and heroin.\u201d<\/p>\n The government watchdog group Reinvent Albany\u2014which argued that it had no particular position on nuclear power\u2014nonetheless noted that corporations, not everyday New Yorkers, are driving the 24% increase in demand for power by 2040 predicted by NYISO. In their public comments, Reinvent Albany pointed out that residential utility customers already pay almost three times as much for power than tech businesses and industrial manufacturing facilities.<\/p>\n In public comments submitted by the City of New York, attorneys said residents shouldn\u2019t have to foot the bill to power data centers<\/a>. Because residents of NYC cover up to 40% of the cost of the state\u2019s shared energy infrastructure, the city wants the state to prioritize building new transmission lines to bring clean power from upstate down to the five boroughs.<\/p>\n But on the other side, some labor unions, student groups, and industry leaders and advocates argued in their public comments that nuclear reactors are necessary to meet demands on New York\u2019s energy grid and climate goals enshrined in state law<\/a>. The New York State Building and Construction Trades Council claimed that a predictable pipeline of advanced nuclear projects will train workers and create thousands of jobs with \u201cmiddle-class family sustaining wages.\u201d<\/p>\n \t In their public comments, the coalition Upstate Energy Jobs made the case that the state\u2019s existing nuclear fleet supports 14,400 jobs while contributing about $38 billion into the state economy.<\/p>\n Nuclear is Clean Energy, a Cornell University student group, submitted comments urging the state to integrate more workforce training into the planning stages, warning that \u201cpreparing the people who will build and host the Backbone takes as long as building the infrastructure itself.\u201d<\/p>\n And indeed, a coalition of nuclear advocates including Nuclear New York submitted joint comments claiming that 5 more nuclear gigawatts would prevent 200,000 acres of land from being turned into solar and wind farms. They also argued that well-maintained atomic facilities \u201ccan operate 80 years or more,\u201d meaning a better long-term investment than renewables like solar panels and wind turbines that only last 20 to 30 years.<\/p>\n NYISO projected that NYC will face power shortages in the early 2030s<\/a>. To that end, the Joint Utilities\u2014a group representing the state\u2019s major power companies like National Grid and Consolidated Edison\u2014said they support nuclear development in their public comments. In July, Con Ed specifically forecasted that shortfalls in NYC would emerge in 2033, growing to represent a gap of 1,800 megawatts of power during peak usage by 2036.<\/p>\n \t The trade group Independent Power Producers of New York supports nuclear expansion, but submitted comments insisting that private developers\u2014not utility companies\u2014should own the new reactors. Keeping ownership private, they said, means developers would pay for construction delays and other overages rather than passing those costs onto consumers.<\/p>\n IPPNY warned that, because \u201ccomplete cost recovery from ratepayers\u201d is guaranteed for utilities in the current deregulated energy market, power companies have \u201clittle incentive to efficiently operate their generation assets at the lowest cost.\u201d<\/p>\n The Joint Utilities group agreed, also opposing a proposed requirement that utilities must own any new nuclear facilities. They argued that financial risks should be shared by the entities best positioned to handle them\u2014private developers and contractors\u2014rather sticking the bill to everyday ratepayers.<\/p>\n To blunt the potential financial blow on New Yorkers, industry advocates like the Nuclear Energy Institute suggested tapping into federal resources. They submitted comments to regulators advising private developers to apply for loans from the U.S. Department of Energy that would cover up to 80% of a new advanced nuclear project\u2019s construction costs. Those federal dollars could mitigate new taxes or higher rates for New Yorkers.<\/p>\n \t
\n\t\tAttorney: Lindsay Clancy case has become about jurors, not the evidence\t<\/a><\/p>\n
\n\t\tRoads flood in New Jersey, inundate some homes, as major signs of nor\u2019easter take shape\t<\/a><\/p>\n
\n\t\tTerrorists using NYC manholes \u2018a matter of when\u2019: Tracy Walder\t<\/a><\/p>\n
\n\t\tNew Jersey\u2019s lieutenant governor resigns after sexual harassment and ethics complaints\t<\/a><\/p>\n
\n\t\tSuspect in Pittsburgh doctor\u2019s fatal stabbing has lengthy arrest record\t<\/a><\/p>\n
\n\t\tEd Sheeran shows at Robert Kraft\u2019s stadium canceled due to bad weather\t<\/a><\/p>\n
\n\t\tPittsburgh doctor stabbed to death while sleeping, wife wounded\t<\/a><\/p>\n