What is Our River Worth?

On September 29, 2025, a federal judge ruled in favor of dumping over 45,000 gallons of radioactive wastewater into the Hudson River. Yes, you read that right: radioactive waste directly into the Hudson, the river that flows outside of Stuyvesant’s windows and past millions of our homes. 

Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant, located just 30 miles upriver from midtown Manhattan, closed in 2021. After its closure, Holtec International—the nuclear technology company from New Jersey that purchased the power plant after its decomission—inherited a large problem: at least 45,000 gallons of tritium-riddled nuclear waste that had accumulated from over 60 years of activity. For reference, that’s enough to fill almost 1,250 average bathtubs. Except, instead of draining it into a sewer system, Holtec wants to drain it straight into the water supply of approximately eight million people. 

This waste disposal method has sparked a long-running legal debate, which began in 2023 when Governor Kathy Hochul signed the “Save the Hudson Act” into law. This was legislation specifically designed to block Holtec from using the Hudson River as a disposal site. The company sued, arguing that the state had exceeded its authority. They claimed that only the federal government has the power to regulate the discharge of nuclear waste. In reality, the federal government should not have more power than a state trying to protect its own waterway, but nevertheless, it was settled in favor of Holtec. 

The controversy is centered around Holtec’s plan to release nuclear waste from Indian Point into the Hudson River. This waste contains tritium, a radioactive isotope of hydrogen. Holtec and federal regulators insisted that the discharge would be within federal safety standards, but that is a falsely comforting phrase. Federal standards for tritium in drinking water were set more than a decade ago and have not been meaningfully updated despite growing scientific concern. Experts are uncertain that the exposure risk has been studied enough to ensure safety for citizens. Environmentalists also stress that there are uncertainties around long-term food-web effects and chronic exposure to small amounts of the substances. In other words, we’re not sure what exactly happens when communities have long-term exposure to low levels of tritium or how it accumulates as it moves up the food chain from algae to fish to people. For instance,In fact, radioactivity and ingestion of radioactive materials in water sources have already been directly associated with respiratory, bladder, breast, testicular, bone, and prostate cancers.  

Supporters of the release often bring up the Hudson River’s ability to dilute the discharge. Yes, the sheer volume of the river serves as a dilution factor, which arguably drops the level of tritium concentration, but the Hudson is already burdened by high concentrations of other contaminants, such as polychlorinated biphenyls. While regulations assess single isolated contaminants like tritium, it’s essential to understand the cumulative impact of adding another toxic material to an already polluted ecosystem. 

Dumping the radioactive waste into the Hudson is by far the cheapest option for disposal and holds only the benefit of maximizing private profit. But this corporate convenience is not a justification for putting the public at risk. 

There are countless alternatives to disposing of these materials in the Hudson, which Holtec has chosen to ignore. For example, the wastewater can be stored in tanks on-site until the tritium has decayed, which would reduce its radioactivity, and then be discharged. Holtec argues that maintaining storage tanks and preventing leaks is expensive, but it would be a sliver of their estimated $2.4 billion decommissioning trust funds paid for partially by New York state taxpayers—the very ones whose river is being put at risk. Holtec even received a federal license to build and operate a storage facility in New Mexico in May 2023, which would have allowed Holtec to store 500 sealed canisters holding spent nuclear fuel for 40 years. They did not follow up on this ready-made opportunity. 

Another proven alternative is transporting the waste off-site to licensed disposal facilities. Between 2021 and 2023, the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant successfully shipped its tritium-contaminated wastewater to Texas, where it was solidified with clay-like material and buried. Approximately two million gallons from Vermont Yankee were also approved for disposal at US Ecology Idaho INC’s facility. This tried-and-true method has not even been considered because it costs Holtec more than using the Hudson as a free disposal site. 

Additionally, there is the option of reopening and modernizing the power plant. Modernizing the plant would entail replacing older systems and employing more efficient reactor designs to extend its lifespan. By refitting the power plant, Holtec could potentially reprocess some of the spent nuclear fuel. The waste could be transformed into an asset or at least a contained resource, rather than an immediate liability. Recommissioning the plant would also lower electricity prices and support the economy of Buchanan, a small village built around the plant, which has been struggling since its shutdown. When the plant closed down, Buchanan lost a third of the nearby Henry Hudson School District’s $10 million budget. Reopening the plant could boost and restabilize Buchanan’s economy. 

The Hudson has taken enough. Our river has already been the target of decades of pollution, including other corporate chemical releases such as alleged quantities of lead chromate, painting, cleaning, and soldering chemicals dumped by General Motors during the mid-1900s. This pollution doesn’t even account for extensive urban runoff, which includes common city pollutants such as gasoline, motor oil, animal waste, trash, debris, and sediment. Even 50 years later, cleanup is ongoing.

Luckily, on October 9, 2025, Attorney General Letitia James announced her plans to appeal the court ruling with support from Governor Kathy Hochul. If this appeal succeeds, it would uphold the “Save the Hudson” act, permanently blocking Holtec from using the Hudson as a disposal site and setting a precedent for state environmental protections. If it fails, the Hudson will be opened for business, victim to Holtec’s experienced and extensive legal team and used as their cheapest disposal option, with a devastating long-term impact on public health. 

Our own school stands right on the edge of the Hudson River, the same waterway now threatened by this decision. This is not an abstract debate far away from home; this is current, real, and very near. The Hudson is used by our own Stuyvesant Rowing Club, along with recreational fishermen and countless neighbors who walk or jog the waterfront. Holtec’s action is a threat to a major public resource, undermining decades of progress to clean up the polluted river and risking the health of those who rely on its fish and waters. 

Organizations such as Riverkeeper have successfully encouraged civilians to contact elected officials, which contributed significantly to Letitia James’s appeal. However, we must continue to pressure our leaders to defend the Hudson. One way for students to do so is to contact our Attorney General through Riverkeeper’s website to remind lawmakers to fight this ruling and protect civilian rights. 

We have spent generations trying to restore the Hudson against environmental threats, and now is certainly not the time to allow a company to reverse these efforts. The Hudson does not belong to Holtec International; it belongs to us. It must not become a disgraceful dumping ground for corporate convenience. Unless we act now to support this appeal and protect the health and safety of our communities, the Hudson will become a constant reminder that corporate profit has been deemed more important than public safety.