Controversy rages once again in the Green Mountain State. Governor Phil Scott's 2025 proposal to redefine nuclear power as "renewable" has Vermonters choosing sides in an energy battle that's anything but clean. The plan would alter Vermont's Clean Energy Standard, which currently demands 100% renewable energy by 2035. Yeah, nuclear. The same technology that powered Vermont Yankee for 42 years until its 2014 closure.

Remember Vermont Yankee? The Vernon plant that once supplied a third of the state's electricity? Also the facility that attracted protesters like bees to honey. Vermonters have historically given nuclear the cold shoulder, citing concerns about radioactive waste, safety risks, and that pesky problem of what to do with spent fuel rods for the next few thousand years.

Nuclear power's legacy in Vermont: All the warmth of a January dip in Lake Champlain and twice as controversial.

The state's relationship with nuclear has been contentious, to say the least. Entergy, Vermont Yankee's former owner, battled the state in court over Act 160, which gave Vermont unusual authority over the plant's continued operation. The feds granted a 20-year license extension anyway. States' rights, schmates' rights.

But times change. AI technology is gobbling electricity faster than a teenager raids a refrigerator. This digital appetite has energy planners scrambling for stable, high-capacity power sources. Wind and solar are great—when the wind blows and sun shines. Nuclear runs 24/7. The environmental concerns surrounding AI's massive energy consumption have only intensified the debate over nuclear power's role in Vermont's future.

House Bill 287 proposes creating a consortium to study nuclear feasibility in Vermont. Democrats and environmental advocates aren't having it. They argue nuclear power isn't renewable. Period. Full stop.

Economic realities complicate matters. Building new nuclear facilities costs billions and takes years. Governor Shumlin once blamed Vermont Yankee for strontium-90 found in fish, showcasing the political challenges any new nuclear initiative would face. The industry consistently underestimates costs, with projects like NuScale's SMRs seeing price jumps from cost estimates skyrocketing. Meanwhile, the ghosts of Vermont Yankee's steam trap leaks and other incidents haunt public perception.

The debate fundamentally asks: Does avoiding carbon emissions outweigh nuclear's drawbacks? Vermonters must decide if their clean energy future includes splitting atoms or whether the risks remain too high. The answer isn't black and white—more like radioactive gray.