Thank you to columnist Johanna Neumann for calling out the importance of keeping in place a state law that provides critical safeguards on new nuclear power development and gives voters the right to approve or disapprove of using it (“The key elements of Massachusetts’ energy bill,” Sept. 18). The move by Gov. Maura Healey and some legislators to repeal this law would mean that we will lose our right to vote on our energy future and force us ratepayers to pay for an untested new twist on an old and dangerous technology (small modular reactors).
Currently, a conference committee of three senators and three representatives is reconciling two very different energy bills passed by the House and Senate. All the committee members live in the far eastern part of the state. They are not accountable to people who know what it’s been like to live near nuclear reactors at Yankee Rowe and Vermont Yankee here in western Massachusetts, or at Pilgrim Nuclear south of Boston.
One difference in the two energy bills is a single sentence that reads “Chapter 503 of the Acts of 1982 is hereby repealed.” The House included this in its bill, and the Senate did not. Chapter 503 provides reasonable safeguards for any new fission reactors in Massachusetts (not to be confused with fusion). These include that the Legislature must certify that there is a permanent repository for radioactive waste and that there are evacuation plans in place, and that nuclear power is the optimal choice among all available sources. After this, there would be a statewide vote to see if voters approve of building new nuclear reactors.
In a letter the governor wrote as an introduction to her proposed energy bill, she touted small modular reactors (SMRs) to “improve reliability, stabilize prices, and decarbonize the region’s power grid.” The problem is that SMRs are an emerging technology whose economic and commercial viability has not been demonstrated and which are at least 10 years out from that threshold. Indeed, several pilot projects have failed, and Canada just cancelled their SMR program.
Before we are asked to commit to using SMRs in Massachusetts, it is the nuclear industry’s responsibility to show us — not promise us — that SMRs can be built safely, on schedule, at commercially competitive costs, with responsible waste management and without imposing unreasonable financial risks on ratepayers. The governor’s faith in SMRs is premature at best.
Oh, and by the way, there is no safe repository for all the high-level radioactive waste (HLRW). Right now, there are six “interim” HLRW dumps at reactor sites in or near Massachusetts. They contain an unfathomably large amount of radioactivity that is poisonous for thousands of years and is sitting in steel-and-concrete casks that are otherwise unsecured and out in the open. These are pre-deployed dirty bombs. Let’s solve this problem before we make more waste with SMRs!
Oh, and by the way, under the Trump administration, the federal agencies tasked with keeping the public safe from radioactive contamination are being clawed apart as senior staff is let go, regulatory oversight is eviscerated, and radiation exposure limits for workers and the public are raised. In this deteriorating regulatory climate, we need the standards and safeguards embodied in Chapter 503 more than ever.
There are better choices than nuclear. There is much evidence that SMRs will provide electricity at a higher cost than clean energy alternatives such as solar, wind, storage, efficiency, and geothermal that are already available, scalable, sustainable, and cost-competitive (Lazard 2026 Levelized Cost of Energy). We need to address climate change NOW. These more sustainable energy sources are a better investment for the commonwealth and the climate.
Recently, Gov. Healey called for guardrails on AI, but with nuclear power, she wants to get rid of them. What’s that all about? The difference is that people are making a big deal about data centers, and the governor is up for reelection and wants to appease them. There is also a growing group of people making a big deal about efforts to repeal Chapter 503, and it was strong enough to influence the Senate not to include repeal in their energy bill.
Please help make it more of a big deal! For further information about Chapter 503 and how to contact the members of the conference committee and your legislators, go to the CAN Alert on the Citizens Awareness Network website, www.nukebusters.org.
Ann Darling is a member of Citizens Awareness Network and the Commonwealth Coalition for Democracy and Safe Energy. She lives in Easthampton.