BY JEFF CHUDZINSKINorth Country This Week

MASSENA -- Nuclear-Free North Country launched a campaign in Massena on July 1, announcing opposition to Governor Kathy Hochul's plan to bring five gigawatts of nuclear power to upstate New York.

The group announced the campaign in a press release before holding an event in front of town hall but not everyone feels quite the same in Massena. 

Massena has been cited as a potential location for a nuclear facility as state lawmakers work with the New York Power Authority, which was designated as the lead agency by Hochul last year. 

Shortly thereafter, Assemblyman Scott Gray hosted a handful of public forums to educate the public about the pros and cons of nuclear power, including at Clarkson University last October. 

Panelists included Keith Schue from Nuclear NY, Isuru Seneviratne from LucidCatalyst, Carl Prez from Exodys Energy, Youssef Ballout of Kadmos Energy and Greg Lancette with UA 81.

As part of the presentation, panelists also fielded questions for over an hour from many audience members. 

The panelists stayed after the event to continue to answer all questions presented to them. 

The possibility of a nuclear facility being based in St. Lawrence County was also met with enthusiasm by numerous local communities, including Brasher, Louisville, Massena and Norfolk, among others. 

A number of boards passed resolutions in support of such a project, including the town and village boards in Massena, among others. 

County legislators also passed a similar resolution shortly after the town and village boards took action, with many legislators saying the project could be an “economic godsend” for the North Country.

Village officials push back

Village of Massena officials pushed back on the anti-nuclear stance in a release sent to North Country This Week by Mayor Greg Paquin. 

Paquin, along with Deputy Mayor Chad Simpson and Trustees David Broadbent and Ken McGowan, all attended Gray’s Nuclear 101 forums last year. 

Paquin said the future of Massena and the choices that impact the community should rest solely with the town and village of Massena, not individuals living in other communities. 

"The Village Board does not share the views of the Non-Nuclear Northcountry group.  The Village Board wishes to see this process move forward as it is possibly a transformational opportunity for our community.  People from outside the Massena Community seem to want to tell us what we should do with our future.  That decision should lay with the people of the Massena Community and not outside groups from other communities," Paquin said. 

He cited economic possibilities for Massena as a motivating factor, while also pointing to a disparity in jobs between Massena and outside communities. 

"The people of Potsdam and Canton each have two colleges to boost their local economy, Awkwesasne a thriving Casino, and we here in Massena are very happy for each community.  However, over the last decade or two Massena has lost GM, Reynolds, Air Products, and other businesses that were, or could have been the backbone of our resurgence.  Let us map our own future.  If the residents of Massena decide down the road that a Micro Nuclear facility is not for us, then so be it.  But it should be this community that decides and nobody else," he said. 

Paquin said the community has faced many challenges after proposed projects failed to materialize in recent years as well. Others have been stalled at the state level. 

"We have had few chances for projects that could change this region and community.  The Rooftop Highway, which had and still has met resistance, a small power dam along the Grasse River which was shot down by the DEC and other environmentalist groups, and now another chance with a Nuclear Facility that could attract major businesses and industry," he said. 

Paquin commented that the "status quo no longer works here." 

"The status quo no longer is working here, and we need to explore new paths to change our future.  One thing I tend to notice about those who support the status quo, is they can afford to do so.  We have been given an opportunity and we need to take advantage of this to the fullest," he said. 

“Costs, Risks and Alternatives”

The group says the "costs, risks and alternatives" will speak for themselves, in their press release. 

"We in the North Country have a history of major energy projects being imposed on us without informed public discussion. The Campaign for a Nuclear-Free North Country will make sure this does not happen in the case of nuclear power," they wrote. 

"I grew up in Massena and I've seen the environmental and economic decay. It’s time we come together to create economies that provide workers long-term, dignified, sustainable jobs. We don’t need nuclear power, especially not for dirty data centers. The risk is too great. We don't want industry taking advantage of and degrading the health of the North Country." Massena resident McKay Burley said in the release. 

The group says they oppose nuclear energy because of the overall cost and what they claim will be "huge government subsidies that will come out of our pockets." 

"Expect electricity rates to go up, not down," they wrote.

Waste removal questioned

They claim nuclear power is "too toxic" as well. 

"With no solution for permanent disposal, high-level radioactive waste will remain on reactor sites, potentially for tens of thousands of years," they wrote. 

Carl Perez of Exodys Energy also addressed similar questions regarding the removal of spent nuclear fuel during the event at Clarkson last year.  

In the case of a nuclear facility, Perez said the spent fuel many times "is about the size of a gummy bear," which compared to a fossil fuel facility is significantly less. 

"If you took all of the nuclear waste produced in the United States each year, you would fill one Walmart. Compare that to fossil fuels, those facilities produce the same amount each day," Perez said. 

The handling of the byproduct is a specialty of Exodys Energy, Perez said. 

He said storage sites are utilized in many cases, with transport devices playing a critical role in safety. 

"They have gone through extensive testing and have been hit with trains, with missiles, everything you can possibly imagine. They have made sure that they will not fail when we transport it," Perez said. 

Group questions dangers of Massena location

The group also cites that "nuclear power is too dangerous,” in their press release. 

"A recent Harvard study found elevated cancer rates within a 19-mile radius of existing nuclear power plants. Massena sits on an earthquake fault, increasing the risk of a catastrophic nuclear accident," they wrote. 

At the Nuclear 101 Forum hosted at Clarkson University last October, Dr. Youssef Ballout of Kadmos Energy addressed such concerns. 

Dr. Ballout said many safety concerns, such as reactor meltdowns and impacts from natural disasters have been mitigated by the design and technology used in modern nuclear facilities. 

"With a small modular reactor (SMR), you dig a hole in the ground several feet down and encase the reactor in several feet of concrete and steel. It is also completely covered with a berm and other materials over top of it," he said. 

That design mitigates the impact of any seismic activity and encapsulates the reactor to ensure overall safety. 

Implementation timeline, subsidies in question

Bringing the reactors online is also a time consuming task, the campaign said. 

With the state’s power grid already at critical levels, lawmakers have pushed to bring renewable energy projects to the forefront. 

The campaign said renewables bring more power to the grid faster. 

"Reactors take a long time to build and the climate crisis requires emissions reductions now," they said.

The group say they will advocate for renewable energy, saying solar and wind "are the cheapest energy sources, commercially viable without government subsidies." 

But solar arrays are subsidized by the government, including through the issuance of 30-year PILOT programs, as has been the norm in St. Lawrence County through the Industrial Development Agency. 

Up to 70% of total costs related to commercial solar installation can be covered through federal and state programs, as well as utility company subsidies through organizations like NYSERDA and NY Solar. 

The campaign also claims renewables "support many times more jobs than nuclear," are "safe" and "do not pollute air and water." 

In the case of most solar arrays in St. Lawrence County, developers say the projects will bring 400 to 800 "full-time permanent positions" during the construction phase, which typically last 12-24 months, depending on array size. 

But once complete, those arrays are typically overseen by a small group of employees, with most projects stating only two to five full-time jobs would be created once arrays come online. 

According to UA 81 union leader Greg Lancette, nuclear projects could potentially yield 8,000 union jobs during the construction phase, with 1,200 full-time union jobs likely once a facility is fully operational. 

During the Clarkson forum, Lancette said he had worked on a number of projects in his 30-year career as a union pipe fitter. 

In one such instance, Lancette said a 10-year project created "almost 10,000 construction jobs," noting that one complication did add more jobs than originally intended. 

When asked about the potential for job creation in the North Country, Lancette said a nuclear facility could bring "in excess of 7,000 construction jobs, maybe more." 

"It's scalable based on the technology and size of the plant. If it is a full-scale plant, it could be over 8,000 jobs potentially," he said. 

Battery systems a bonus but safety concerns not addressed

The group also states the renewable sources can "be deployed much faster than nuclear" and include battery storage, with "efficiency improvements and grid modernization" ensuring the energy forms can "meet all our future energy needs."

But battery systems have had their flaws as well, with a number of battery facilities burning uncontrollably throughout the North Country, including in Chaumont and Pamelia. 

In the case of Chaumont, four large lithium-ion battery storage trailers caught fire at a solar farm on CR 179, triggering a shelter-in-place order due to toxic smoke. 

Fire officials said they were forced to let the fire burn itself out over the course of a week as toxic smoke and fumes continued to blanket a large area around the site.

The question of equipping fire departments with the proper equipment to combat such fires has been raised many times in Massena, with Town Code Enforcement Officer and State Fire trainer Pat O'Brien saying the fires would require all new equipment and training. 

"We can't fight a lithium-ion battery fire the same way we'd fight a structure fire. The same could be said of a fire at a nuclear facility as well. That's why, in many cases downstate, the nuclear sites have their own fire crews on scene as well. In the case of batteries, you have to essentially smother the blaze with a chemical retardant foam. We're not set up for that yet," he previously told the town board when asked about the inherent risks. 

Nuclear-Free New York said they stand with tribal leaders who have opposed such projects. 

"In January, The Saint Regis Mohawk Tribal Council and the Mohawk Council of Akwesasne issued a joint statement indicating they would not support development of a nuclear power plant near Akwesasne without community support from their members and residents," they wrote. 

State officials said they intended to have an open dialogue with tribal leaders and members to ensure all parties were in agreement on the final outcome, whether that be a nuclear facility located in or around Massena or not.