On energy policy, Donald Trump is absolutely correct, at least rhetorically, about something: nuclear energy should be playing an essential role in powering the United States in the decades to come. “The long-awaited American nuclear renaissance must launch during President Trump’s administration,” wrote Secretary of Energy Chris Wright.
Unfortunately, House Republicans are on the cusp of making fateful budget decisions that could effectively hobble the ability of such power sources to scale up.
All Americans who care about energy and the climate ought to be calling their representatives to demand better treatment for nuclear energy. That should include progressives here in New York, which passed into law some of the nation’s most ambitious climate reduction goals and then proceeded to blow through deadlines and targets thanks in part to very bad, very political decisionmaking.
This is one energy-hungry nation. Power consumption is projected to reach record highs, driven by the growth of data centers, artificial intelligence, heating and transportation electrification, and increased economic activity.
Some would argue the economy needs to look hard at ways to use less energy. While we’re all for efficiency, we’re deeply wary of anyone imposing too-blunt steps to cut back on energy use — because it and economic growth are fairly inseparable.
The question is where the energy ought to come from. There are some very positive trends emerging. Fossil fuels continue to make up the bulk of U.S. energy consumption, but wind, solar, hydro and other sources are surging, especially in the oil country known as Texas (where idiotically, some Republicans are trying to undermine the growth of renewables).
The less we as a nation can rely on burning coal, oil and even natural gas and the more we can cost-effectively lean into clean energy technology, the better it’ll be for the planet.
But New York has learned the hard way as we ratchet back fossil fuel use, renewables alone won’t be enough to meet demand. Nuclear — a highly efficient, zero-emissions energy source — needs to be part of the equation.
Then-Gov. Andrew Cuomo and other liberal lawmakers, all of whom claim that climate change is a clear and present danger and who think it is essential for New York State to meet ambitious emissions reduction goals, celebrated the closure of the Indian Point nuclear power plant in 2021. That facility had been generating about a quarter of the city’s electrical power.
Soon after, as everyone and his brother predicted, downstate New York’s grid was forced to rely far more on big, bad fossil fuels — meaning, emissions from electricity went way up, not down.
New York needs to make nuclear a central part of its energy future. So does every other state across the country. Which is why the House is dead wrong in draft budget language to slash essential loan and tax credit programs that benefit nuclear energy. They’d result, say experts on both sides of the partisan divide, in “the biggest setback to U.S. energy security in a generation, with nuclear energy being “hardest hit.”
The United States of America needs to power its own future. It also needs to be wary of pumping ever more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. That means giving every reliable, low-emissions source every chance to succeed, including atomic power.