Colorado stands at a pivotal moment in its energy future. As Xcel Energy prepares to retire their massive Comanche 3 coal-fired power plant in Pueblo, the state faces critical choices about how to replace that power generation in a way that supports affordability and sustainability. A growing number of Colorado policymakers are now doing everything within their power to advance nuclear as the replacement. But nuclear is costly — both to the environment and to ratepayers.

We only need to look to the Rocky Flats Radioactive Super Fund site between Denver and Boulder to see the tragic environmental costs of nuclear. The communities I represent in northern Jefferson County are still coping with substantial radioactive plutonium exposure into the environment. Even after $7 billion was spent on clean up, much underground contamination was left in place, and measurable radioactive environmental contamination in Rocky Flats will persist for thousands of years.

Nuclear power is also very costly to ratepayers and the most recent nuclear build out in Georgia offers a cautionary tale. In 2008, Georgia Power promised, in a similar manner as pro-nuclear Colorado lawmakers, that nuclear power was the solution. Instead, the Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4 project became the most expensive power plant ever built, exceeding costs by $17 billion, totaling $36 billion for just 2,200 megawatts of added capacity. Customers were assured the reactors would bring cost savings, but instead, ratepayers saw a 24% increase in electricity bills implemented in 2024, an increase that will last for 60 years. Compounding the financial burden on ratepayers even further, Georgia Power’s reliance on natural gas led to an additional $2.5 billion in rate hikes due to price fluctuations, leaving customers paying 30% more for electricity compared to a year ago.

Stay up to speed: Sign up for daily opinion in your inbox Monday-Friday

Colorado can and should avoid these mistakes by focusing on energy efficiency, distributed energy resources, and grid-edge technologies, which are far less costly alternatives that can be deployed rapidly, rather than in a decade or longer from now like Georgia’s Vogtle reactors. Investing in energy efficiency creates jobs, reduces demand, and helps consumers lower their energy bills. Distributed energy resources such as rooftop solar, battery storage and demand response programs provide cost-effective ways for consumers to generate and manage their own electricity. These alternatives reduce dependence on centralized power plants and improve grid reliability.

The idea gas and nuclear are essential for baseload power has been disproven by states and countries successfully integrating high levels of renewables with advanced grid management. Even Texas, which saw sprawling blackouts in the middle of a 2021 winter storm, has been able to fix those grid issues utilizing an increased mix of solar, wind and battery storage. Colorado, like Texas, has abundant solar and wind resources, making it unnecessary to burden residents with the risks and costs of nuclear energy or volatile gas prices.

One of the biggest challenges to sustainable, clean energy adoption are the perverse incentives provided to monopoly utilities. Large utilities make their biggest profits by building expensive new power plants, even when they are not the most cost-effective option for consumers. The utilities are guaranteed 110% rate recovery under state law. So the more they spend, the more they make — on our backs. This is why they resist distributed energy solutions that empower consumers and reduce reliance on centralized infrastructure. Colorado must prioritize investments that benefit residents rather than increasing corporate profits. By promoting local solar, storage and efficiency programs, we can build a grid that is both affordable and resilient.

Georgia’s Plant Vogtle’s construction took 15 years — more than twice the promised timeline — while renewable energy projects can be developed quickly and at a fraction of the cost. With renewables, there are no fuel costs or waste storage concerns, making them a far more sustainable long-term solution. Xcel has the opportunity to build an energy future that is clean, reliable and cost-effective by learning from Georgia’s experience and rejecting nuclear and gas.

By focusing on renewable energy, efficiency and grid-edge innovations, Xcel can create a modern and cost-effective energy system that benefits everyone. Policymakers and regulators must ensure Colorado’s energy transition is built around affordability and reliability, not expensive, outdated technologies.

Andy Kerr of Lakewood is a former state legislator who serves District 2 on the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners.