Energy: What it is and what Duke, First, and Xcel are doing

Nuclear Energy: North Country Residents Still Waiting for the Numbers

The North Country's Nuclear Question

Assemblyman Scott Gray's recent public forums on nuclear energy in the North Country aimed to provide facts, but left many residents with lingering questions. The core issue? People aren't necessarily against nuclear power on principle, but they need to see the math. A Jefferson Community College survey reveals that 91% of residents in the region are primarily concerned with the affordability of electricity. It's not about abstract climate goals; it's about the monthly bill.

Dulli Tengeler, recalling the Chernobyl disaster, understandably prioritizes safety. However, her secondary concern—the allocation of state funds—highlights the real tension. She'd prefer investment in renewables and conservation. But is that financially realistic? Governor Hochul argues nuclear is essential to meeting the state's renewable energy targets. (Targets that, according to the State Comptroller, New York is currently failing to meet, by the way.)

Susan Powers of Clarkson University frames the debate starkly: nuclear versus fossil fuels for baseload power. Scientists overwhelmingly agree on the dangers of fossil fuels, but the public needs more than just a climate warning. They need a cost-benefit analysis that directly addresses their financial anxieties. The survey data doesn't lie: 64% of North Country residents are worried about long-term electricity rates if a nuclear plant is built nearby.

The Economic Promises and the Skepticism

Proponents of the plant dangle the promise of local jobs. Chelle Lindahl's skepticism is palpable, and frankly, warranted. “Oh, all these jobs are going to go to local people.' Really? I just do not believe that," she said. It's not enough to say "jobs will be created." The crucial data points are: what kind of jobs, what skill sets are required, and what percentage of those jobs will genuinely go to local residents versus imported specialists? These are the numbers that need to be crunched and presented transparently.

And this is the part of the story that I find genuinely puzzling. Why aren't these numbers being presented upfront? It's not like the economic impact can't be modeled. We're talking about a multi-billion dollar infrastructure project. The potential for job creation and economic stimulus should be quantifiable, down to the nearest tenth of a percentage point. The absence of this data fuels suspicion.

The New York Power Authority is accepting proposals from communities. But what metrics are they using to evaluate these proposals? Is it purely based on logistical feasibility, or are they factoring in community impact assessments that include detailed economic projections? If the goal is to win over the North Country, the Power Authority needs to release a comprehensive, publicly accessible report outlining the projected economic benefits, job creation figures, and long-term cost implications for local residents. Nuclear energy meeting in Potsdam leaves some with more questions

Where's the ROI?

The North Country residents aren't necessarily anti-nuclear. They're pro-numbers. They're waiting for someone to show them, in concrete terms, how this project will improve their lives and not just their carbon footprint. Until that happens, the skepticism will persist.

The Data's Still Out