BELCHERTOWN — Nuclear energy is often presented as one piece of an “all-of-the-above” strategy for addressing climate change.

But at a book talk Tuesday night at the Clapp Memorial Library in Belchertown, author Linda Pentz Gunter argued that nuclear energy is too expensive, too time consuming and altogether too risky to be an effective part of the climate solution.

“The ‘all of the above’ scenario doesn’t actually work because when you prioritize nuclear, it squeezes renewables out,” Pentz Gunter said at the event, which drew nearly 30 people, including many anti-nuclear activists.

The discussion was moderated by Sharon Tracy, a longtime energy and anti-nuclear organizer.

Pentz Gunter is founder and executive director of the United States-based energy nonprofit Beyond Nuclear, which advocates for a world free from nuclear power and nuclear weapons. A former journalist with Reuters, she currently writes for the Morning Star (UK) and Ralph Nader’s Capitol Hill Citizen.

Her book, “No to Nuclear: Why Nuclear Power Destroys Lives, Derails Climate Progress and Provokes War,” was published in March. It makes the case for 10 reasons to reject nuclear power, including its cost, construction time, safety risks, radioactive waste and reliability.

Nuclear energy is a low-emissions energy source that can serve as an alternative to coal-, oil- or gas-fired power plants. Nuclear plants generate electricity through nuclear fission, in which the nuclei of atoms — typically from mined and processed uranium — are split, releasing energy that is converted into electricity. The World Nuclear Association estimates that nuclear power currently provides about 9% of the world’s electricity.

The process for generating nuclear energy is complex, from mining and enriching uranium, to a controlled chain reaction inside the reactor, intense heat and power generation, and waste disposal.

“All along that story,” said Pentz Gunter, “are people who take the suffering, and they’re often communities of color, Indigenous communities and low-income communities where there’s the least resistance to fight back.”

“I really wanted to write [the book] from the human perspective, because that’s the piece that’s usually missing from the discussion about nuclear power,” she said.

Nuclear’s future

Pentz Gunter’s appearance in Belchertown comes as Massachusetts is considering taking on a greater role in advancing nuclear technology. Gov. Maura Healey’s administration is preparing to host a regional summit on Sept. 30 to explore the role of advanced nuclear fusion and energy in New England’s energy future, particularly its potential to increase energy supply and lower electricity costs.

While supporters of nuclear energy promote it as a climate change solution, pointing to its low emissions and potential role in meeting rising energy demand, Pentz Gunter and other attendees at the talk argued that the resources, costs and time associated with nuclear power make it an ineffective tool for addressing climate change.

“We are out of time. That’s precisely why you shouldn’t wait for the most expensive and slowest possible way to generate electricity,” Pentz Gunter said.

One attendee at the event, Montague resident Sam Lovejoy, put his perspective simply: “If you want to understand what’s going on, the governor isn’t going to be in office — and if she ran for senator and won, she still wouldn’t be in office — before the small nuclear reactors actually happen.”

The discussion also focused on the growing interest in small modular reactors, advanced nuclear fission plants that supporters say could make nuclear faster and less expensive.

Moderator Tracy posed the question, “How can we encourage politicians who have unfortunately fallen prey to the myth — and the progressives as well as Republicans are both in the same boat — that small modular reactors are wonderful things?”

Pentz Gunter attributed politicians’ support for the technology to financial interests: “I think they’ve fallen prey to money. That to me is the corrupting force in this country.”

Both Tracy and Pentz Gunter praised Sen. Ed Markey for remaining a firm ally in opposing nuclear power.

“At a Senate meeting in late 2020,” Pentz Gunter read from her book, “he reminded his colleagues how, in that year alone, the U.S. had added more than 33,000 new megawatts of wind and solar. How many new megawatts of nuclear have we added? None.”

Environmental, health concerns

Pentz Gunter also argued that nuclear energy comes with environmental risks, specifically impacts on marine wildlife.

“We can have oil spills, we can pour chemicals, plastics and nuclear waste,” she said. “There’s a big section in the book about animals. … As I say, [animals] never needed to turn the light on, so why should they have to take on nuclear waste?”

Pentz Gunter also pointed to health risks associated with radiation exposure, particularly for pregnant women and young children.

For many attendees in the room, those concerns were connected to memories of nuclear expansion during the 1970s and 1980s, along with major accidents like the 1986 Chernobyl disaster.

Amherst resident Josna Rege has been involved with the anti-nuclear movement since the mid-1970s.

“I worked on it nonstop until about 1984,” she said, adding that nuclear power came to a standstill from then on in the U.S. “Now a generation later, we’re feeling the need to start making the arguments all over again because the nuclear industry is coming up with the same lies.”

Rege said health effects of low-level radiation were among her largest concerns when she became involved in the movement. Shortly after her son was born, the Chernobyl disaster occurred.

“They told us when the radioactive cloud from Chernobyl was coming over western Mass, and we gave our children iodine pills so that the radioactive iodine would not be uptaken by the thyroid. It was very scary,” she said.

Reaching progressives

Much of the evening’s conversation centered on how opponents of nuclear power can reach progressives who support it as part of the “all-of-the-above” energy strategy.

“I’m encountering a lot of progressives who work in environmental issues, who are involved with solar projects, who are saying the ‘all-of-the-above’ mantra… How do you address the progressives that should be on this side of the fight?” asked one attendee.

Pentz Gunter argued that investing in nuclear energy could divert resources from renewable energy while leaving the country dependent on fossil fuels during the long development process.

“We’re supposed to wait 10, 15, 20 years for maybe one of two of these micro reactors,” Pentz Gunter said. “While we’re waiting for nuclear, what are we using? Fossil fuels. So that means that actually choosing nuclear makes climate change worse.”

For Pentz Gunter, the solution lies in educating communities and building grassroots support.

“I don’t have a lot of hope about changing the minds of politicians directly. … The answer is a grassroots‑up movement to push them to the right place,” Pentz Gunter said.

“And everything is connected, so you have to center justice first and foremost,” she said. “You’re all engaged in all the fights that matter, and justice is the truth in all those struggles.”