A longer version of this article was published by The Center for the National Interest and it can be found here.
The U.S. Congress is largely responsible for laying the groundwork for what has now emerged as a potential American nuclear energy renaissance. This is a response to many domestic and geopolitical factors including the need for energy security and the rapidly rising demand for electricity.
So, it was timely that the Senate recently took stock of how far this process has come, with a focus on results from the Trump administration’s cluster bomb of nuclear energy executive orders (EOs) issued last May. What it learned is that there is a lot of activity generated by the EOs but little tangible new commercial result.
- No new commercial reactors are under construction or contract in the U.S.
- Next-generation small reactors are frantically pushing forward with development but there is a long way to go before any are ready for the market.
- Bottlenecks have developed in providing nuclear fuel for large and small reactors.
- Ensuring robust supply chains and developing a skilled workforce is a significant challenge.
- The inability to tame reactor construction cost overruns remains a major stumbling block to deployment at scale.
- While Russia and China race ahead with nuclear exports the U.S. lags but has gained some ground.
Reactor Restarts & Uprates: The most successful element in the rebirth of nuclear power in America is the restart of shuttered reactors and the extended life and additional power output of operating reactors.
The highlights include the Crane Restart project at Three Mile Island, that will add 835 Megawatts (MW) of energy and the restart of the Palisades reactor in Michigan, providing another 800 MW. Both will be ready in the next two years. The Duane Arnold reactor in Iowa may also be restarted which would surge another 615 MW to the grid.
The Department of Energy (DoE) projects that the restart of shuttered reactors and the power uprating of operating units will add additional 5 Gigawatts (GW) by 2029 but there are questions about whether the grid will be ready for these new connections.
New AP-1000 Fleet: The Trump executive orders sought “10 new large reactors with complete designs under construction by 2030.” The administration then ponied up $800 million for the construction of ten Westinghouse AP-1000s. But since then, little progress has been made. There is no site selection, no utility partner, and no construction or plan.
The AP-1000 is the only American reactor that is licensed, has been constructed in the U.S. and abroad, and is ready for deployment now. But the administration has become irritated with the lack of progress, and is looking at alternative technologies including the GE Hitachi ABWR and South Korea’s APR-1400. But the ABWR was built in single digit numbers in Asia and hasn’t been constructed in 20 years. And if the administration selected Korean technology for the U.S. market over Westinghouse, it likely would create a fierce political backlash.
Construction Costs: Taming reactor construction cost overruns is central to the success of the Trump nuclear strategy. Lack of a financial backstop is sidelining investment. But this issue was not addressed in the EOs, and the U.S. government is wary of assuming the primary role. One approach is provided in the Senate’s Accelerating Reliable Capacity (ARC) bill, which offers a limited government cost share, but it’s fate is uncertain.
Advanced Reactors & Fuel: Next-generation small reactors and the higher-enriched (HALEU) fuel they need for testing and ultimate operation is a top priority. The U.S. has been investing in rebuilding domestic uranium enrichment capability to produce both low-enriched fuel for large reactors and HALEU. But achieving industrial scale uranium enrichment is years away despite significant government support.
There is a plethora of small nuclear reactor technologies under development, but the headline is the deadline in the Trump executive orders for three reactors to “hit criticality before America’s 250th anniversary.” Several companies in this competition will undoubtably reach this goal, but most may only produce cold fission, which does not reach operating temperature or produce power. After the anniversary celebration considerable additional work is required to bring these new reactors to commercialization.
Regulatory Jurisdiction: Under the Trump EOs and existing law, DoE and DoD can provide oversight of reactors under development on federal land. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission approves reactors for commercial use. But the Senate learned that there are “gaps and ambiguities” between the agencies authorities that are creating jurisdictional “friction”. This is particularly a challenge if commercial-scale reactors are built on federal land to support AI data centers and defense applications, something under consideration.
Workforce: There is a pressing need to create a more robust American supply chain of materials and workers. To achieve 400 GW of nuclear energy by mid-century, “tens of thousands” of workers and a rebuilt industrial base are required. The Trump EO created remedial programs and the scaling of U.S. nuclear energy will depend on their success.
Nuclear Exports: In response to the unabated nuclear construction and exports by Russia and China, the Trump EOs call for 20 new bilateral nuclear cooperation agreements to expand the market for American nuclear exports.
In general, while the U.S. is playing catch up on nuclear exports, this is one area of the nuclear revitalization agenda that has real deals and momentum. The AP-1000 has been selected by Poland, Bulgaria, and Ukraine. If Saudi Arabia and the U.S. reach a nuclear cooperation agreement it likely would include the AP-1000. The NuScale SMR and the GE Vernona Hitachi BWRX-300 have been embraced by foreign nations including Romania, Poland, Canada, and Japan. And Holtec’s SMR-300 has cleared a critical regulatory review in the U.K.
Ken Luongo, President, Partnership for Global Security
