August 23, 2016
by Linda DeStefano
August 1 was a momentous day for energy activists. Some of us were in Albany to witness the vote on the Clean Energy Standard by the Public Service Commission (PSC). I accompanied two smart, creative and very hard-working staffers of Alliance for a Green Economy (AGREE), Jessica Azulay and Andra Leimanis. We joined other environmentalists to make our support visible for renewables and against nuclear. We held signs made by Andra that said, “We’re reaching for renewables. Don’t chain us to dirty nuclear” and a pie graph that said, “Comments: 15,000 support renewables and not nuclear; 3,600 want nuclear.” An adjoining pie graph, titled “Funding,” showed about one-third going to renewables and two-thirds going to nuclear subsidies. We also held beautiful banners made by Catherine Skopic, member of the Atlantic Chapter and other organizations. One activist was gutsy enough to chant that methane and uranium should both be left in the ground.
As expected, the PSC commissioners voted unanimously to subsidize the Ginna, FitzPatrick and Nine Mile Point nuclear power plants. Here are excerpts from a media release from AGREE:
“The New York State Public Service Commission today (Aug. 1) approved the Clean Energy Standard policy that puts into place a popularly supported requirement that utilities must buy increasing amounts of renewable energy, until the State meets its goal of 50% renewable energy by 2030. The proposal also includes an unpopular subsidy for economically struggling upstate nuclear power plants, the projected cost of which suddenly ballooned to almost $8 billion just three weeks . . . before the vote. Jessica Azulay, Program Director with Alliance for a Green Economy, said: ‘Nuclear energy is not clean and it has no place in a Clean Energy Standard. We praise the Governor and the Commissioners for supporting renewable energy, but the nuclear subsidies are a mistake and a misuse of public money. These plants that will be kept open with this bailout are some of the oldest in the nation. They are dangerous and they should be shut down as soon as possible’.
“The nuclear subsidy plan provides a guarantee of $56 per megawatt hour to nuclear operators, a cost that will rise every two years to $68 by 2027. By comparison, wind can be purchased in the Northeast for $44 per megawatt hour and energy efficiency costs only $25–$40 per megawatt hour.
“This means that instead of the $20 billion that consumers will now spend on buying power from and subsidizing the upstate nuclear plants, they could have purchased the same amount of energy from wind turbines for over 30% less money. Better yet, they could have invested in energy efficiency to eliminate the electricity demand supplied by nuclear plants for nearly half as much money.
“The PSC based the subsidy rates on estimates of the social impacts of greenhouse emissions, but did not adjust for cost of the extensive negative impacts of nuclear power and radioactive waste, many of which New Yorkers could have to bear. [The] decision also reversed a long-standing state policy that nuclear power reactors were not eligible for clean energy subsidies.
“The Chairwoman of the PSC told the crowd that she would like to see a ‘green energy product’, which would allow energy consumers to choose local, new renewables rather than nuclear. But the accompanying order from the Public Service Commission is vague on the details, does not mandate this action, and does not state explicitly that New Yorkers buying 100% renewables would be exempt from paying nuclear subsidies.”
The Sierra Club and AGREE are both working to insure that if consumers choose to purchase a 100% New York Green Energy option, that their obligation to contribute to the nuclear zero emissions credit (ZEC) is canceled and also not transferred to other consumers.