Support for nuclear energy is gaining traction in the New Jersey legislature, as key lawmakers signal their readiness to take a more active role in shaping the state’s long-term energy policy.
Assemblyman Christian Barranco welcomed recent comments from Senate President Nick Scutari and Assembly Speaker Craig Coughlin, who both indicated a willingness to involve the legislature more deeply in developing a comprehensive energy strategy.
Public Service Enterprise Group threatened to close its three nuclear units in South Jersey before lawmakers approved a lucrative annual $300 million ratepayer subsidy in 2018.
At the annual New Jersey Utilities Association (NJUA) conference on May 29, Scutari and Coughlin’s statements were seen as a move towards bipartisan cooperation on energy issues. “Their remarks are encouraging and should receive bipartisan support,” said Barranco, who has a background in electric energy generation and is a member of IBEW Local 102.
Barranco criticized current energy policies driven by climate crisis politics rather than practical and economic realities. He argued that setting unrealistic electrification goals is politically motivated rather than grounded in feasibility.
“You can create a policy that says everything in people’s homes or businesses must be electrified by some arbitrary date, but that’s not a realistic policy – it’s a political statement,” he said.
Nuclear energy, which currently produces about 40% of New Jersey’s power and 85% of its carbon-free electricity, has been subsidized by state legislation since 2019.
This subsidy, costing up to $300 million annually, is designed to keep the state’s three nuclear power plants operational. PSEG, the owner of these plants, is seeking to retain the subsidy while also exploring federal tax credits from the Inflation Reduction Act to offset the costs.
Barranco emphasized the reliability and long-term viability of nuclear power compared to other renewable sources like offshore wind. He pointed out that nuclear power already constitutes nearly 50% of New Jersey’s electrical consumption and questioned the feasibility of replacing it with wind energy.
“There is not a country in the world where offshore wind has been a majority contributor to energy production. Why does the administration think that will happen in New Jersey?” asked Barranco.
Scutari and Coughlin echoed these sentiments at the NJUA conference, highlighting the need to balance new technologies with existing infrastructure.
“We’re not just going to throw out everything we’ve known for hundreds of years,” said Scutari, emphasizing the importance of a measured approach to integrating renewable energy sources without compromising the state’s economic stability.
The legislature’s approach contrasts with Governor Phil Murphy’s aggressive renewable energy policies, which have largely bypassed legislative scrutiny through executive orders.
Barranco and other lawmakers argue for a more pragmatic energy policy that considers the state’s increasing electricity demands and the costs involved.
Emphasizing the importance of flexibility and realism in achieving New Jersey’s energy goals, both Scutari and Coughlin claim they support exploring all clean energy options, including nuclear.
“The goals and plans are just that — goals and plans,” said Coughlin. “But, like most things in life, there’s not going to be a direct path to all these things.”
Nuclear power is considered a clean energy source because it generates electricity without producing greenhouse gas emissions during operation. Unlike fossil fuels, nuclear power plants do not emit carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide, or nitrogen oxides, which contribute to air pollution and climate change. This makes nuclear energy an important component of strategies aimed at reducing carbon emissions and mitigating climate change.
The inclusion of nuclear power in clean energy portfolios is often debated, but its ability to provide a stable, reliable, and large-scale supply of carbon-free electricity makes it a critical option for many policymakers and energy experts seeking to transition away from fossil fuels while maintaining energy reliability and security.
For 40 years, Friends of the Earth has been a leading voice in the U.S. opposing nuclear reactors.
“One of many issues with the dirty nuclear industry is that it is too expensive to solve climate change,” said Sarah Lutz, of Friends of the Earth, who argued that officials must “fully consider cheaper and cleaner energy alternatives before tying taxpayers to failing reactors” in response to a $6 billion taxpayer bailout to prop up the nuclear industry.
Nuclear advocates claim that economic factors have led to the early closures of 13 commercial atomic power reactors across the United States in the last decade but environmentalists and other critics argue that extending the life of outdated facilities only invites a greater risk of accidents like the Fukushima nuclear disaster (2011), the Chernobyl disaster (1986), the Three Mile Island accident (1979), and the SL-1 accident (1961).
Barranco said that nuclear power remains the cornerstone of New Jersey’s future energy strategy, advocating for its expansion and integration alongside other renewable sources.
“Energy demands are going up, not down. If we want to retain and attract business, we must have reliable sources of energy that are affordable. The only source to meet that demand outside of fossil fuels is nuclear,” Barranco said.
As New Jersey continues to navigate its energy future, the growing legislative support for nuclear power indicates a potential shift towards a controversial energy policy.