(The Center Square) – A virtual public meeting on the reopening of Three Mile Island held by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission drew a crowd of over 130 participants from across the commonwealth and beyond.

The time devoted to questions and comments about the newly rebranded “Christopher M. Crane Clean Energy Center” revealed a mix of those eager to add more carbon-neutral energy sources to the grid and those concerned about the potential human health and environmental consequences of nuclear power.

“I would like to point out that Three Mile Island Unit 1 was one of the most reliable and safely operated reactors when it was shuttered in 2019 due to market conditions. Thousands of direct and indirect well-paying jobs were lost, as well as the 835 megawatts of clean base load power,” said Matteo Riordan, a member of Generation Atomic, a nuclear advocacy group.

Another Generation Atomic commenter, Madison Schroeder, said, “We hope this hearing brings us closer to adding more clean energy to the grid, thousands of jobs, and establishing a regulatory precedent for similar projects across the country.”

The nation’s history with nuclear energy has been characterized by peaks and valleys, with early enthusiasm and major investments giving way to abandoned projects and overspending. Nuclear plants generate clean energy but are expensive and time-intensive to get up and running. Renewed interest buoyed by the promise of new technologies like small modular reactors has reinvigorated the industry as major energy demands from data centers grow.

OpenAI CEO Sam Altman has talked about the demand for nuclear fusion to power the artificial intelligence of the future.

Others are skeptical of both the technology and the energy source.

“There is no demand for AI. It’s being shoved down our throat,” said one commenter. “The demand is actually from the corporations and the people who hope to make a lot of money from it.”

Then, there’s the environmental impact of nuclear power. Critics say that it’s disingenuous to call the energy “clean” simply because it’s carbon neutral. They point to the risks which have borne out in major disasters like Fukushima and Chernobyl and more minor ones like that which occurred at Three Mile Island.

“There’s already 700 metric tons of radioactive nuclear waste on the site forever – or until there is a national repository, so forever – and this restart will add another 700 metric tons of waste,” said one resident.

Like most nuclear plants in the U.S., Three Mile Island’s waste is stored on-site. The island itself sits south of Harrisburg in the Susquehanna River, which empties into the Chesapeake Bay as it enters Maryland. Some are concerned about the risks posed in the flood-prone area which is vulnerable to increasing rainfall and severe weather.

Supporters are confident in the plant’s ability to mitigate those risks, including those eager to see job creation in the state.

“Obviously, there was a terrible accident in 1979, but I believe that the industry has made leaps and bounds in every way to make sure that that doesn’t happen and replicate again,” said Michael Ford, Secretary-Treasurer of the Pennsylvania Building Trades. “So I just want to make it very notable that this is the safest, most reliable form of base load generation we could possibly have.”

Several commenters pointed out the irony of holding a meeting to hear public questions on nuclear power on the anniversary of the bombing of Hiroshima, an event that demonstrated the destructive power of radiation on a massive scale. One speaker called the timing “ghoulish.”

There’s a strong push and pull about whether there are negative health effects for people living near nuclear power plants. Advocates were quick to point out that residents living near coal plants are exposed to more radiation than those living near nuclear plants.

Critics cite anecdotes of increased rates of cancer and autoimmune disorders, and they say that big corporations have a vested interest in silencing those impacted. Others, including the state, have said there is no statistically significant increase in cancers among those in the region following the Three Mile Island accident.

Still others worry about the impact of uranium mining to the environment and local communities. Much of the world’s uranium comes from mines in Canada, where advocates say the indigenous people are disproportionately affected.

“Honestly, if you look at the entire process, if you look at the uranium, the mining, the millage, and what it’s doing to the Dene people and other peoples where abandoned mines are left, this is dirty as anything,” said Sally Jane Gellert.

Eric Epstein of Three Mile Island Alert evoked the memory of coal mining in the state.

“We have the scars of coal ash. It doesn’t go away. Once it’s shut down, they’re gone, so you know, just so we’re clear here, I don’t know that we have the right to impose an environmental waste tariff on future generations.”

Yet, the organizer also asked for a shift in the conversation’s tone.

“It’s been too divisive so far. So you know the people are for it. The people are against it. They’re all our neighbors,” said Epstein. “It’s one community, so I think we need to move forward on a public policy discussion.”