Write a commentAssemblyman Will Barclay’s latest Op‑Ed on Indian Point isn’t an argument…it’s an election‑year performance.
His claim that New York City “lost 25% of its power” when the plant closed is not supported by NYISO or state regulatory data. Indian Point supplied 10–12% of statewide electricity before retirement, according to the New York Independent System Operator (NYISO) . The oft‑repeated “25%” figure refers only to downstate nuclear generation, not New York City’s total electrical load. Presenting it as “NYC lost a quarter of its power” is political storytelling, not energy policy.
The shutdown was not a surprise. It was negotiated in 2017 and scheduled years in advance. NYISO, the Public Service Commission (PSC), and Con Edison all conducted reliability analyses and identified replacement resources long before the final unit shut down in April 2021. Gov. Hochul’s recent comments about grid strain reflect today’s explosive demand growth driven by data centers, electrification, and AI‑related load increases, not a failure to plan for the 2021 closure. NYISO’s 2024–2025 planning documents show statewide demand rising 1.8% annually, with data centers as a major driver .
Yes, fossil fuel use increased after Indian Point closed — that is documented. In early 2022, 89% of downstate electricity came from fossil generation, according to independent analysis of NYISO data . But blaming that entirely on the retirement of one plant ignores the real causes: delayed offshore wind projects, transmission bottlenecks, and massive new industrial loads that did not exist when the closure agreement was signed. Demand is rising faster than clean energy infrastructure can be built. That is a modern challenge, not proof that we should resurrect a decommissioned nuclear plant.
And let’s be blunt: reopening Indian Point is not possible. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has terminated the operating licenses, the reactor fuel has been removed, and the site is undergoing dismantlement under Holtec’s decommissioning plan. NRC regulations make restarting a decommissioned plant functionally impossible without rebuilding it from scratch…a conclusion echoed by independent nuclear policy analysts and regulatory filings . Pretending otherwise is political fantasy.
What makes Barclay’s argument even more transparent is its timing. In an election year — and in the twilight of his own political career — this misguided finger pointing reads less like serious policy and more like one last chance to sing his tired swan song on the way to retirement. Instead of confronting the real causes of grid strain, he’s recycling talking points about a plant that no longer exists.
Meanwhile, New York is already adding firm, clean power. The Champlain Hudson Power Express (CHPE) will deliver 1,250 MW of hydropower directly into New York City, a figure confirmed by project documentation and state regulatory filings . Offshore wind projects continue advancing through revised contracts, and battery storage and transmission upgrades are underway across the state. These are real solutions, not nostalgia for a shuttered facility.
Barclay’s op‑ed is not about energy. It’s about politics. New York doesn’t need retroactive outrage. It needs modern planning, modern infrastructure, and leaders willing to deal with the actual challenges in front of us — not the ones they find convenient during campaign season.
Indivisible Oswego County
