|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
By Guy Page
Former Vermont governor Howard Dean is warning that proposals to expand nuclear power and attract large-scale data centers risk creating long-term environmental and economic problems for the state.
In a letter published April 20 by VTDigger, Dean – a Burlington resident- argued Vermont is “being sold two bad ideas on energy,” citing concerns about radioactive waste and limited job creation tied to data center development.
While governor from 1991-2003, Dean oversaw the sale of the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant, then partially owned by Vermont utilities, to Entergy in 2002.
The plant closed in 2014, following a determined effort by the Vermont Legislature to not renew its operating license. It has been largely decommissioned. Casks of spent fuel fuel are stored on the former plant site in Vernon.
In his April 20 letter, Dean pointed to the existing nuclear waste stored in southern Vermont as evidence of an unresolved problem. Expanding nuclear generation without addressing long-term storage “makes no sense,” he said, warning of potential environmental risks if containment systems fail over time.
Dean’s letter does not reference the growing interest in recycling spent fuel, AKA radioactive waste, in the energy industry and the federal government.
For example, the U.S. Department of Energy Advanced Nuclear Fuel Recycling program (May, 2025) looks to broaden domestic fuel supplies to accelerate the deployment of advanced reactors for national security and prove fundamental technological viability under DOE’s authority to faster research, development, and demonstration in nuclear material recycling technologies to reinvigorate the U.S. nuclear industry base.
Nor does Dean acknowledge the greatly reduced amount of waste generated by new, small, ‘modular’ nuclear reactors.
The former governor also criticized regional energy policy, including the role of ISO New England, which he said does not always prioritize Vermont’s renewable resources. He blamed rising electricity costs in part on broader system inefficiencies and federal policies he said have constrained renewable development.
Dean took aim at proposals to recruit large data centers to Vermont, describing them as land-intensive projects that generate relatively few permanent jobs. Drawing on examples from Loudoun County, Virginia, he said such facilities create short-term construction work but limited long-term economic benefit while placing heavy demands on energy infrastructure.
The debate comes amid growing electricity demand in New England, driven in part by electrification and the expansion of artificial intelligence technologies, which require significant computing power.
While Dean emphasized the risks of nuclear energy, some energy analysts and industry advocates argue newer approaches to managing spent fuel could change the equation. Technologies under development in the U.S. and in limited use internationally – notably in relatively energy-independent France – allow for the recycling or reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel, extracting additional energy and significantly reducing the volume and longevity of high-level waste requiring permanent storage.
Supporters say such systems could address one of nuclear power’s most persistent challenges by turning what is now considered waste into usable fuel, potentially reducing the need for long-term storage near waterways like the Connecticut River. Critics, however, note that reprocessing raises cost, regulatory, and proliferation concerns and has not been widely adopted in the United States.
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Energy, Environment








Missed, as usual, in stories like this: what are the data centers actually for? What problem do they solve? Questions always revolve around things like environmental impact or noise but not around the elephant in the room, which is WHY? Why are they needed?
Hint: It’s not to make your download speeds or AI videos better. It’s to vacuum up every data point you create–you know, like they do in totalitarian China–to build a profile on you.
John Kirkby writes:
What are data centers actually for?
A better question is: Apart from artificial intelligence, do we need data centers?
If you bank online, you need a data center.
If you shop online, you need a data center.
If you have a retirement account through your employer, you need a data center.
If you have a smartphone, you need a data center.
And finally, if you debate online with an anti-data center Bernie sanders supporter via a website like the Vermont Daily Chronicle,
Wait for it…… you need a data center
Funny how Vermonters are able to bank, shop, plan retirement, and use their phones without any big data centers in Vermont. Doubly funny you think I actually support Bernie– but that’s the low-level binary thinking so many people are sadly trapped in.
Ever heard of Palantir? Stargate? Do some research.
Here, I’ll give you an appetizer. Is Newsmax conservative enough for you?
“Trump Pick of Palantir to Surveil Americans Sparks Concern”
https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/palantir-surveil-americans/2025/05/31/id/1213075/
Thank you, Guy, for a full reporting on Gov Dean’s Digger commentary, and for bringing up some points that Dean did not. I often do not agree with Dean’s ideas, but I’m glad he said what he said, and I agree fully with him on this. While I support efforts to recycle nuclear waste, that is not yet a fully explored, functional, and tested technology, and it would be foolhardy to move ahead with plans for further nuclear expansion prior to knowing that this is a truly viable solution. And “reduced” amounts of nuclear waste is still nuclear waste. For a small state like VT, planning for further nuclear power with all the risk and expense that comes with it seems to me a misguided waste of tactical energy.
As for AI and data centers, there’s nothing that would convince me that expansion of this in Vermont (or anywhere) is a good idea. There seems to be some large hypocritical blind spots or some kind of circular thinking when a society that knows that resources such as water and electricity are limited, creates more and more intensive uses for and demands on electricity, including the need for an enormous amount of water for cooling, as all this new technology does. And for what actual NEED? We, as a society, keep literally buying a bill of goods from industries that profit handsomely from ideas that will be obsolete as soon as they are realized and the next big idea is thought up by industry. These ideas are short-sighted and dangerous in several ways, IMO.