Should New York pursue more nuclear power? Here are two opinions on it
This story raises questions about governance, accountability, and American values.
The “two opinions” framing on nuclear power usually treats the debate as culture war theater: one side “pro-science,” the other “fearful. ” That misses what most New Yorkers actually want, which is electricity that is reliable, affordable, and politically honest about tradeoffs. If Albany is serious about nuclear, it cannot be another glossy announcement followed by years of litigation and cost overruns.
New Republican Times Editorial Board
Joseph Romm and Isuru Seneviratne join Capital Tonight.
Original source:
Read at Spectrum News 1 | BuffaloHow We See It
New Republican Times Editorial Board
The “two opinions” framing on nuclear power usually treats the debate as culture war theater: one side “pro-science,” the other “fearful.” That misses what most New Yorkers actually want, which is electricity that is reliable, affordable, and politically honest about tradeoffs.
If Albany is serious about nuclear, it cannot be another glossy announcement followed by years of litigation and cost overruns. Conservatives are open to new reactors, life extensions, and even small modular designs, but only with transparent costs, realistic timelines, and a hard look at grid reliability when wind and solar fall short.
Energy policy should start with rule of law and public trust: predictable permitting, clear siting standards, and no sweetheart deals. A state that struggles to build housing should not pretend megaprojects happen by press conference.
The principle is simple: energy security requires competence first, ideology second.
Commentary written with AI assistance by the New Republican Times Editorial Board.