Letters to the editor can be submitted by sending an email to tuletters@timesunion.com or completing this form. See our guidelines on letters.

By directing the New York Power Authority to build a gigawatt or more of advanced nuclear capacity, Gov. Kathy Hochul has shown leadership rarely seen in the political world. Despite expected criticism from anti-nuclear ideologues in her own party, she did what was right for New York, with determination and vision.

Building a nuclear power plant does not happen overnight, nor should it. It requires responsible planning. But that planning must start now if New York hopes to achieve its deep decarbonization goals while ensuring that people, businesses, and industry have the reliable, abundant energy essential for a prosperous future. NYPA built our giant hydro facilities, operated nuclear plants, and still delivers some of the state’s cheapest electricity. By asking the authority to lead again on nuclear, the governor is harnessing public power to make prudent investments for long-term success.

As for the environmentalists who cheered while fossil fuels replaced downstate nuclear power, it is time to be honest: They are not speaking for Mother Earth. Nuclear is not only zero-emission, it is the greenest form of energy on the planet. It doesn’t devour farmland, bulldoze forests, or fragment habitat. It doesn’t rely on excessive mining of materials. And, unlike fossil fuels, it doesn’t pollute the lungs of children in urban neighborhoods.

In supporting nuclear, Hochul said what plant operators, unions and communities hosting reactors have known for years: that nuclear power is reliable and safe, delivering family-sustaining jobs and ample energy vital for modern society.

The writer is an electrical engineer, environmental advocate, and volunteer with the non-profit organization Nuclear New York.

Published Aug. 4, 2025

In your July 2 editorial ("A powerful move on nuclear power"), I was surprised to see the Times Union take the drastic step of supporting Gov. Kathy Hochul's "embrace of nuclear power."

What is missing is public input into the process of taking this step into the unknown -- "unknown" because very little has changed since Three Mile Island except other nuclear power incidents such as Chernobyl. There is still no national site for "safe" disposal of nuclear waste -- particularly the fuel rods that are stored on site at even decommissioned nuclear plants such as Indian Point near Peekskill.

Perhaps the attraction of generating power with no carbon emissions is an excuse to veer beyond the facts into fantasy.

Cost is another issue: Could we forget about the debacle surrounding the Shoreham "never-to-be" nuclear reactor on Long Island -- $6 billion for a plant that never opened as a nuclear facility? Did anyone check with the folks around West Valley, Cattaraugus County, to see if the attempt to recycle the nuclear waste sent and stored there worked? They might inform us of warnings that leaked radioactive waste may be slowly working its way........

© Times Union