It’s abundantly clear that Gov. Healey is committed to bringing nuclear power back to Massachusetts. But is she looking out for the interests of Massachusetts voters or simply responding to pressures and influences from the Trump administration while also kowtowing to Big-Tech special interests? It’s no secret that the executive branch has succumbed to the outsized influence of tech giants racing to force-feed the American public AI datacenters regardless of their well-known negative impacts on environmental integrity, water supplies, energy costs, and overall quality of life. The hastily planned deployment of nuclear reactors to provide energy for AI datacenters is an important key to Big Tech’s strategy, as evident from Microsoft’s plan to use the Three-Mile Island nuclear facility for AI power generation.
In March 2026, all six New England governors signaled their intent to utilize existing nuclear assets while exploring new approaches such as the emerging technology of SMRs or small nuclear reactors. It’s alarming to contemplate how neatly this seems to fall in line with the Trump administration’s massive $17.5 billion fund to help utilities speed the nationwide construction of nuclear reactors. The administration is doing this while, at the same time, actively discouraging viable green energy solutions such as wind farms, solar, and renewables. Projects that were already well underway have been abruptly cancelled and, more recently, Trump announced he would pay $765 million to Invenergy simply to not develop four wind farms in a number of states including Maine and New York.
Nuclear proponents are now using the “zero carbon” tagline to bamboozle the public into thinking that nuclear energy is now safe and “green”. With this clever inversion, they’re betting on large doses of cultural amnesia about disasters such as Fukushima (still ongoing), Chernobyl (still ongoing) and Three-Mile Island. They’re also conveniently sidestepping the fact that the nuclear waste problem persistently shows no easy resolution as the decommissioned Pilgrim plant here in Massachusetts reminds us.
So is nuclear power really “green”? The Sierra Club’s website advises that it “opposes the licensing, construction and operation of new nuclear reactors utilizing the fission process, pending resolution of the significant safety problems inherent in reactor operation, disposal of spent fuels, and possible diversion of nuclear materials capable of use in weapons manufacture.” Similarly, Greenpeace says: “Nuclear power is dirty, dangerous and expensive. Say no to new nukes”. The site goes on to note that “nuclear energy has no place in a safe, clean, sustainable future. Nuclear energy is both expensive and dangerous, and just because nuclear pollution is invisible doesn’t mean it’s clean. Renewable energy is better for the environment, the economy, and doesn’t come with the risk of a nuclear meltdown.”
Fortunately, Gov. Healey’s plan to bring back nuclear power received a major setback when state senators overwhelmingly voted to oppose her plan to take the decision away from the public by ignoring a statewide referendum passed into law in 1982. This law, still on the books, requires full statewide voter approval before any nuclear plants are built in the Commonwealth. Prior to this, the House voted in lockstep with Healey to approve this misguided and patently undemocratic workaround by attempting to repeal Chapter 503 of the 1982 legislation. Equally troubling is the fact that, as reported by the Plymouth Independent, Healey’s plan was to locate nuclear plants and SMRs in urban areas. SMRs are still an emerging technology and are yet to be proven and safety tested.
The good news? Citizens are pushing back. These efforts include organizations such as The Commonwealth Coalition for Democracy and Safe Energy (CCDSE). CCDSE is a collaborative effort of more than 15 groups, including Mass. Power Forward, Sierra Club, Clamshell Alliance, Massachusetts Peace Action, Cape Downwinders, Save Our Bay Massachusetts, and Citizens Awareness Network. All of these organizations were united in opposition to the repeal of Chapter 503 and lobbied in support of the Senate’s wise decision to favor democracy and safe energy over Big-Tech cronyism.
By Tom Valovic
—
Tom Valovic is a writer/researcher and the author of “Digital Mythologies” (Rutgers University Press), a series of essays that explores emerging social and cultural issues posed by technology adoption. He served as a consultant to the former Congressional Office of Technology Assessment and is a member of CCDSE and Massachusetts for Peace Action. More information about CCDSE is available by emailing them at deb@nukebusters.org.
—
The opinions expressed in each article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organization.