Gov. Kathy Hochul’s embrace of nuclear energy marks one of the most seismic shifts in New York’s long and tortured history with atomic power. After decades of bowing to political expediency and environmental activism, the Democrats are finally confronting reality: windmills and solar panels alone cannot keep the lights on in the Empire State.
Hochul’s nuclear workforce roundtable in Manhattan last week—bringing together labor, academia, and energy leaders—was more than just a photo op. It was an admission that New York’s so-called “green new deal” is unraveling under the weight of physics and economics.
The wind doesn’t always blow, the sun doesn’t always shine, and massive offshore projects are years behind schedule and billions over budget. In the meantime, electricity demand is skyrocketing, driven by electrification mandates, a resurgence in manufacturing, and the insatiable appetite of artificial intelligence.
The irony is painful. New York could have had the capacity to meet this challenge. The Shoreham Nuclear Plant, shuttered before it powered a single home, stands as a $23.56 billion monument to atomic opposition. Indian Point, closed in 2021 by Gov. Andrew Cuomo, was a fully functional plant that supplied a quarter of New York City’s power—scrapped under pressure from environmental groups and politicians eager to score points with activists. What replaced it? More fossil fuels. Carbon emissions rose, electricity prices climbed, and grid reliability worsened.
With the wolf at the door, Hochul is forced to do what her predecessors refused: put nuclear back at the center of the conversation. Her directive to the New York Power Authority to develop at least one new gigawatt-scale atomic facility is the first serious step in decades toward energy abundance rather than energy austerity.
The governor’s rhetoric at the roundtable was telling: “New York must embrace an energy policy of abundance that centers on energy independence and supply chain security,” she stated. Those words could have been spoken in the 1980s or the 2000s, when critics warned of the exact shortages we now face. They were ignored then. Can New York afford to ignore them now?
The politics will not be easy. Environmental groups will make the same arguments about safety and waste that killed Shoreham and Indian Point. NIMBY forces will protest siting and transmission lines. And yet the stakes are different today. The state’s entire climate agenda depends on reliable baseload power. Without nuclear, the vision of a carbon-free grid collapses under its own contradictions.
Hochul’s nuclear promise is as much about jobs as it is about megawatts. Union leaders see the writing on the wall: nuclear projects mean thousands of high-paying, long-term careers. The construction trades and universities are already preparing to train a new workforce. If framed correctly, nuclear could become an energy solution and an economic renaissance for upstate communities battered by decades of industrial decline.
But let’s not kid ourselves: building nuclear plants won’t be easy. Even with the support of President Trump and an EPA administrator in Lee Zeldin who refuses to make the “false choice” between environmental protection and economic growth, it’s going to take a lot of money and years to get a plant online—way after the Democrat deadline to eliminate fossil fuels.
With the prospect of rolling blackouts and economic paralysis not so far in the distant future, an astounding irony remains: the Empire State sits on a Saudi Arabia-sized supply of clean-burning natural gas that politicians such as Kathy Hochul refuse to touch. Simply tapping this resource while the state sorts out its energy future would lift the economic prospects of every New Yorker.