Keith Schue alerted me to his piece for the Empire Report titled New York Needs Nuclear, a Balanced Approach to Clean Energy. I am always happy to publish pragmatic discussions of New York energy policy so I am re-publishing his article in this post.
Keith Schue is an electrical engineer and technical adviser on energy policy. Schue has been engaged in New York energy policy since 2010 and currently volunteers as a technical advisor for several organizations, including New York Energy & Climate Advocates. Before moving to New York, he was employed with the Florida chapter of The Nature Conservancy. He recently co-authored a commentary in the Albany Times Union with climate scientist James Hansen, making a persuasive case for using nuclear in the future.
Overview
The Climate Leadership & Community Protection Act (Climate Act) established a New York “Net Zero” target (85% reduction in GHG emissions and 15% offset of emissions) by 2050. It includes an interim 2030 GHG reduction target of 40%. Two targets address the electric sector: 70% of the electricity must come from renewable energy by 2030 and a requirement that all electricity generated be “zero-emissions” resources by 2040. The Climate Action Council (CAC) was responsible for preparing the Scoping Plan that outlined how to “achieve the State’s bold clean energy and climate agenda.” The Integration Analysis prepared by the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) and its consultants quantifies the impact of the electrification strategies. That material was used to develop the Draft Scoping Plan outline of strategies. After a year-long review, the Scoping Plan was finalized at the end of 2022. Since then, the State has been trying to implement the Scoping Plan recommendations through regulations, proceedings, and legislation.
I recently published Schue’s summary of draft documents that covered three of these implementation initiatives. In this article he references the New York Power Authority (NYPA) Draft Renewables Plan. He noted that the Build Public Renewables Act adopted last year now forces NYPA to try installing solar, wind, and batteries even faster than the private sector is already doing with subsidies. He suggested that comments on the NYPA renewables plan should say:
Achieving carbon-free electricity requires firm reliable power. Therefore, throwing more public money and resources at intermittent generation not only jeopardizes reliability and affordability, but also ensures that NY will remain dependent on fossil fuels. Instead of focusing on solar panels and wind turbines that the private sector can install on its own, NYPA should do what it has historically done best by working on reliable public projects for the common good, like nuclear energy, hydropower, and utility infrastructure.
In the following section I present Schue’s article that first appeared in Empire Report in its entirety.
New York Needs Nuclear, a Balanced Approach to Clean Energy
Global warming is real, as is the urgency for action to address it. However, New York will only make good on its promise of tackling the climate crisis if it pursues solutions that work in the real world.
Unfortunately, the strategic plan recently drafted by the New York Power Authority (NYPA) falls short of what’s needed—not because it fails to install enough solar panels, wind turbines and batteries, but because that is all it proposes to do.
For decades, NYPA has spearheaded vital energy projects that serve the public good. From the construction of large hydroelectric plants to positioning New York as a leader in nuclear power, the authority has consistently delivered electricity that is reliable, clean, and affordable to communities and business upstate. Indeed, NYPA is the reason why New Yorks’ upstate grid is already 90% carbon-free.
Yet, instead of building upon that impressive legacy, the plan currently proposed threatens grid stability by marginalizing firm resources and focusing on those that are fragile, intermittent, and incredibly land-intensive. It is an approach that jeopardizes greenhouse gas reduction, perpetuating dependence on fossil fuels while making electricity less reliable and more expensive.
It is also an approach that reflects outdated politics of the past.
Today, there is overwhelming consensus among engineers, industry leaders, the business community, and labor unions that a diverse mix of resources—including advanced nuclear power—will be essential to decarbonize while providing ample energy for a growing economy and workforce. Even Governor Hochul emphasized this reality at her recent Future Energy Economy Summit in Syracuse. Micron’s semiconductor manufacturing operations alone are expected to surpass the electricity demand of Vermont and New Hampshire combined. However, in addition to accommodating unprecedented growth, a zero-emission grid must be robust. Dispatchable Emission-Free Resources (DEFRs) capable of serving demand when renewables cannot are essential. Moreover, DEFRs that operate a lot more than 2% of the time will be needed in the real world to avoid retaining large amounts of fossil fuel capacity. Batteries and hydrogen simply won’t suffice.
Rather than focusing on sprawling intermittent sources that cannot go the distance, the state should pursue compact solutions that will. NYPA should leverage its technical and financial expertise to support the Governor’s vision of integrating flexible advanced nuclear into New York’s grid. There are communities eager to embrace it. Where possible, responsible hydropower expansion can also be explored, like collaborating with the Green Island Power Authority to increase generation capacity on the Hudson River. Infrastructure improvements should be pursued as well, but in a manner that respects communities.
One thing is certain: New York’s energy strategy must change. Communities are under attack from the Office of Renewable Energy Siting, businesses are questioning whether they can survive in the state, industry is asking whether there will be energy to expand, and skilled labor is wondering if the only jobs left for them will be unpacking solar panels from China.
A successful strategy will require compromise. With a balanced expansion of solar, wind, and firm nuclear power, the state can meet its energy goals. However, NYPA’s leadership in needed more than ever to forge pragmatic solutions that work. The future of New York hinges on its ability to adapt and champion a diverse, reliable, and sustainable energy portfolio. NYPA should be a guiding force in that critical transition.
Commentary
I was happy to re-publish Keith’s article because I agree with him that nuclear power is necessary and that NYPA should be considering it along with solar and wind in the Draft Renewables Plan. I have one minor point of emphasis difference because I think balanced expansion with wind and solar development is a dead end. I have come to the conclusion that reliance on those resources will do more harm than good because of reliability and affordability risks. Importantly, consider that the State agencies responsible for a reliable energy system agree that a wind, solar, and energy storage system needs a new dispatchable emissions free resource (DEFR) to account for low resource availability during periods of extended light wind and cloudiness. At some point, New York must do a feasibility analysis to determine which DEFR technologies should be used in New York. I believe that analysis will find that the only viable candidate for DEFR is nuclear power. That means that a wind and solar energy system must include nuclear power as the DEFR backup technology. However, economics suggest nuclear resources should be used as much as possible instead of as a backup. Using nuclear as the backbone of the electric system eliminates the need for the massive wind, solar and energy development proposed and addresses my concerns about reliability and affordability.
Pragmatic Environmentalist of New York 