Nuclear energy an important tool in climate change fight

New York is undergoing its most important energy transition since the first Earth Day 46 years ago, and I am happy to note policymakers’ growing awareness of the importance of clean-air energy sources. Significantly, there is greater appreciation of the need to transition to a carbon-free economy. That means it is time to take another hard look at a source that supplies a majority of the state’s carbon-free electricity: nuclear energy.

Nuclear energy is already facing hard challenges in the marketplace, but now state officials are pushing to prematurely close nuclear energy facilities. Like most states, New York has a heavy lift ahead of it to meet not only clean energy goals set by the federal government, but to meet the even higher standard it has set for itself. For those reasons, it makes little sense to reduce the amount of clean energy produced in New York right now. A recent analysis of the state’s energy sources by the Clean and Safe Energy Coalition – which I co-chair – shows that nuclear energy provides 30 percent of New York state’s overall electricity and an impressive 61 percent of the state’s carbon-free electricity.

While citizens have every right to ask questions about the safety of American power plants, when they explore the issue completely, they will see that U.S. nuclear power plants are viewed by experts as some of the most secure non-military facilities in the world. U.S. nuclear plants, including the Indian Point Energy Center outside New York City that state officials have targeted for shutdown, undergo routine inspections to identify enhancements to make them even safer. The independent Nuclear Regulatory Commission spends thousands of hours on-site each year to ensure every aspect of the facility is operating in a way that is safe for both employees and citizens. The fact that we so often hear about the results of these inspections and the actions taken to improve standards is proof that they are working.

It’s possible some policymakers just simply don’t understand the consequences of shutting down these facilities. The CASEnergy Coalition’s analysis shows that if the state lost all its nuclear energy production, New York state would have a shortfall of the same amount of clean energy that it takes to power 6 million homes – about 85 percent of all the homes in the state. A 2011 study for the New York City Department of Environmental Protection found that the loss of Indian Point would lead to a substantial increase in air emissions for both New York City and New York state. The chair of New York’s Public Service Commission has gone so far as to say losing upstate New York’s nuclear facilities would be “a truly unacceptable outcome” because of the damage it would cause to clean air and the impact it would have on climate change.

All forms of energy have strengths and weaknesses, but giving up clean nuclear energy at this critical point in our fight against climate change would be a major step backward and cause an increase in dangerous air pollutants. As decisions are made about how New York grows its clean energy portfolio, it’s important to understand all the facts and to take advantage of all the clean energy tools we have in our toolbox.

Christine Todd Whitman is co-chair of the Clean and Safe Energy Coalition. She is the former U.S. Environmental Protection Agency administrator and former governor of New Jersey.