Harrisburg, Pa. – With the promise of a newer and more cheaper nuclear energy on the horizon, the US states compensate to position themselves to build and supply the next generation of the industry as the policy formulators consider expanding subsidies and pave the regulatory obstacles.
Advanced reactor designs of competing companies are filling the regulatory pipe of the federal government as the industry promotes them as a reliable and friendly form for the climate of gathering Electricity demands of technological giants Desperate to feed their rapid artificial intelligence platforms.
The reactors could already be operational in 2030, giving the states a short clue to display the red carpet, and face a persistent public skepticism about safety and the growing competence of renewable energies such as wind and solar energy. Even so, the reactors have a high -level federal support, and public services throughout the United States are working to incorporate the energy source in their wallets.
Last year, 25 states approved legislation to support advanced nuclear energy and this year legislators have introduced more than 200 bills that support nuclear energy, Marc Nichol said of the Nuclear Energy Institute, a commercial association whose members include owners of energy plants, universities and unions.
“We have seen states taking measures at increasing levels in recent years,” Nichol said in an interview.
The smallest reactors are, in theory, faster to build and easier to besiege than conventional reactors. They could be built from standard pieces and are promoted as flexible enough to demolish for a single client, such as a data center or an industrial complex.
Advanced reactors, called small modular reactors and micro -reactors, produce a fraction of energy produced by conventional nuclear reactors built worldwide during the last 50 years. Where conventional reactors produce 800 to 1,000 megawatts, or enough to feed approximately half a million homes, modular reactors produce 300 megawatts or less and micro -reactors do not produce more than 20 megawatts.
Amazon and Google technological giants are Invest in nuclear reactors To obtain the power they need, since the states compete with Big Tech, and with each other, in a Electricity race.
For some state officials, nuclear is a source of carbon -free electricity that helps them meet the decreases of greenhouse gases. Others see it as a source of energy always on to replace an accelerated wave of electric power plants.
Last month, the governor of Tennessee, proposed more than $ 90 million last month to help subsidize a project of the Tennessee Valley authority to install several small reactors, boost research and attract nuclear technology companies.
For a long time, a proponent of the TVA nuclear project, Lee also launched the Tennessee Nuclear Energy Fund in 2023, designed to attract a supply chain, including a multimillionaire Uranium enrichment plant announced as the largest industrial investment of the State.
In Utah, where Governor Spencer Cox announced “Operation Gigawatt” to double the generation of state electricity in a decade, the Republican wants to spend $ 20 million to prepare nuclear sites. The president of the state Senate, J. Stuart Adams, told colleagues when he opened the 2025 session of the Chamber that Utah needs to be the “nuclear center of the nation.”
The Governor of Texas, Greg Abbott, declared that his state is “ready to be number 1 in advanced nuclear energy”, since Texas legislators consider billions in nuclear energy incentives.
Michigan legislators are considering millions of dollars in incentives to develop and use the reactors, as well as train a workforce of the nuclear industry.
A state, Indiana legislators approved the legislation this month to allow public service companies to seek reimbursement for the cost of building a modular reactor, undo a prohibition of decades designed to protect taxpayers from infant energy projects, inefficient or worse, worse and worse.
In Arizona, legislators are considering a bill backed by public services to relax environmental regulations if a public services company builds a reactor at the site of a large industrial energy user or a electric power plant withdrawn.
Even so, the devices face an uncertain future.
There are no modular reactors that operate in the US Finished in 2023Despite obtaining federal help.
The US Department of Energy. UU. Last year, under the then President Joe Biden, he estimated that the United States will need 200 additional gigawatts of new nuclear capacity to maintain the rhythm of future energy demands and reach the net emissions of zero of greenhouse gases heating by 2050 to avoid the worst effects of climate change.
Currently, the United States has just under 100 gigawatts of nuclear energy operation. More than 30 advanced nuclear projects are being considered or planned to be in operation in the early 2030s, Nichol del Nei said, but that would supply only a fraction of the objective of 200 gigawatts.
The work to produce a modular reactor has generated billions of dollars in federal subsidies, loan guarantees and more recently fiscal credits signed by Biden.
Those have been critical for the nuclear industry, which expects them to survive under president Donald Trumpwhose administration considers a supporter.
The United States remains without a long -term solution to store radioactive waste, safety regulators are under pressure from the congress to approve designs and there are serious questions about industry statements that smaller reactors are efficient, safe and reliable, said Edwin Lyman, director of nuclear safety at the Union of Incertured Scientists.
In addition, Lyman said: “The probability that they will be displayable and instantly 100% reliable from the beginning of the door is not consistent with the history of nuclear energy development. Therefore, it is a much more risky bet.”
Nuclear also has competence for renewable energies.
Brendan Kochunas, assistant professor of nuclear engineering at the University of Michigan, said that advanced reactors can have a short window to succeed, given the regulatory scrutiny they suffer and advances in energy storage technologies to make wind and solar energy more reliable.
These storage technologies could develop faster, reduce the cost of renewable energy and, ultimately, make more economic sense than Kochunas said.
The supply chain for construction reactors is another question.
The United States lacks a high quality concrete and steel manufacturing design skills necessary to make a nuclear energy plant, Kochunas said.
That introduces the perspective of higher costs and longer deadlines, he said. While foreign suppliers could help, there is also the fuel to consider.
Kathryn Huff, a former official of the Department of Energy who is now an associated professor at the University of Illinois Urbano-Champaign, said that the enrichment capacity of uranium in the United States and among his allies must grow to support the production of reactors.
The first type reactors of their type need to approach their target dates, Huff said: “So that anyone has faith that a second or third or fourth must be built.”
___
Follow Marc Levy in X at: https://x.com/timelywriter.
