Maryland environmental groups are fighting a legislative push for gas-fired power plants while still split over nuclear energy’s role in the state’s clean energy future.
Aman Azhar reports for Inside Climate News.
In short:
- A legislative package backed by Maryland’s top lawmakers includes gas-fired and nuclear energy as solutions to projected electricity shortages, sparking opposition from environmental advocates.
- The regional grid operator, PJM, is blamed for years of poor planning, with critics arguing it prioritizes fossil fuels over renewable energy projects that remain stalled.
- Some environmental groups support maintaining Maryland’s existing nuclear power, but others argue new nuclear projects are too costly and slow to be a viable climate solution.
Key quote:
“Ratepayers in Georgia saw their bills increase nearly 25 percent to pay for nuclear reactors that took 18 years and $37 billion to complete.”
— Tim Judson, Nuclear Information and Resource Service
Why this matters:
Maryland’s energy debate reflects broader national tensions over balancing grid reliability with climate commitments. Gas-fired plants emit greenhouse gases, and while nuclear energy is carbon-free, it carries high costs and long development timelines. Meanwhile, renewable projects face bureaucratic delays. The outcome of Maryland’s energy decisions could set a precedent for other states grappling with similar challenges.
Read more: Maryland lawmakers push for new energy projects to curb rising costs
