Companies are coming to Texas to develop a new generation of nuclear reactors
The West Texas city of Abilene is better known for country music and rodeos than advanced nuclear physics. But that's where scientists are entering the final stretch of a race to boot up the next generation of American atomic energy.
Amid a flurry of nuclear startups around the country, Abilene-based Natura Resources is one of just two companies with permits from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to construct a so-called 'advanced' reactor. It will build its small, one megawatt molten salt reactor beneath a newly-completed laboratory at Abilene Christian University, in an underground trench 25 feet deep and 80 feet long, covered by a concrete lid and serviced by a 40-ton construction crane.
The other company, California-based Kairos Power, is building its 35 megawatt test reactor in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, the 80-year capital of American nuclear power science. Both target completion in 2027 and hope to usher in a new chapter of the energy age.
'A company and school no one has heard of has gotten to the forefront of advanced nuclear,' said Rusty Towell, a nuclear physicist at Abilene Christian University and lead developer of Natura's reactor. 'This is going to bless the world.'
The U.S. Department of Energy has been working for years to resuscitate the American nuclear sector, advancing the development of new reactors to meet the enormous incoming electrical demands of big new industrial facilities, from data centers and Bitcoin mines to chemical plants and desalination facilities.
Leaders in Texas, the nation's largest energy producer and consumer, have declared intentions to court the growing nuclear sector and settle it in state. The project at Abilene Christian University is just one of several early advanced reactor deployments already planned here.
Dow Chemical plans to place small reactors made by X-energy at its Seadrift complex on the Gulf Coast. Last month, Natura announced plans to power oilfield infrastructure in the Permian Basin. And in February, Texas A&M University announced that four companies, including Natura and Kairos, would build small, 250 megawatt commercial-scale reactors at a massive new 'proving grounds' near its campus in College Station.
'We need energy in Texas, we need a lot of it and we need it fast,' said state Sen. Charles Perry, chair of the Senate Committee on Water, Agriculture and Rural Affairs. 'The companies that are coming here are going to need a different type of energy long term.'
During this year's biennial legislative session, state lawmakers are hoping to make billions of dollars of public financing available for new nuclear projects, and to pass other bills in support of the sector.
'If we do what we're asked to do from industry groups out here, if we do what we think we should do and we know we should do, we could actually put a stake in the ground that Texas is the proving ground for these energies,' Perry said, speaking this month in the state Capitol at a nuclear power forum hosted by PowerHouse Texas, a nonprofit that promotes energy innovation.
But, he added, 'Texas is going to have to decide: At what level of risk is it prudent for taxpayer dollars to be risked?'
The first new reactors might be commercially ready within five years, he said; most are 10 to 20 years away.
Dozens of proposed new reactor designs promise improved efficiency and safety over traditional models with less hazardous waste. While existing nuclear reactors use cooling systems filled with water, so-called 'advanced' reactor designs use alternatives like molten salt or metal. It enables them, in theory, to operate at a higher temperature and lower pressure, increasing the energy output while decreasing the risks of leaks or explosions.
Before it can be built, each design is extensively reviewed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in a yearslong process to ensure they meet safety requirements.
'We understand how much work we're facing and getting that done means finding every appropriate efficiency in our reviews,' said Scott Burnell, public affairs officer for the NRC.
The commission is also reviewing a permit application by Washington-based TerraPower, founded by Bill Gates in 2006, to build a full commercial nuclear power plant in Wyoming. It expects to receive a construction permit application for the X-energy reactor at Dow in Texas this year, Burnell said.
After construction, the companies will require a separate permit to operate their projects. None have sought an operating license for an advanced nuclear reactor, but Natura plans to file its application this year.
For Towell, an Abilene native and the son of two ACU faculty members, this moment was a decade in the making. In 2015 he founded the NEXT Lab at ACU for advanced nuclear testing, got a $3 million donation from a wealthy West Texas oilman in 2017, entered into partnership with the Energy Department in 2019 and formed the company Natura in 2020. Construction finished in 2023 on NEXT's shimmering new facility. And in 2024, the NRC issued a permit to build the first advanced reactor at an American university.
Towell, a former instructor at the U.S. Naval Nuclear Power School, said these new projects represent the first major advancement in American nuclear power technology in 70 years. While layers and layers of safety systems have been added, the basic reactor design has remained unchanged.
It uses a cooling system of circulating water to avoid overheating, melting down and releasing its radioactive contents into the atmosphere. The system operates at extremely high pressure to keep the water in liquid state far above its boiling point. If circulation stops due to power loss or malfunction, a buildup of pressure can cause an explosion, as it did at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant in Japan in 2011.
In contrast, new 'advanced' reactor designs use alternatives to water for cooling, like liquid metal or special gases.
Natura's design, like many others, uses molten salt. It's not table salt but fluoride salt, a corrosive, crystalline substance that melts around 750 degrees Fahrenheit and remains liquid until 2,600 degrees under regular pressure.
As a result, the reactor can operate at extremely high temperatures without high pressure. If the system ruptures, it won't jettison a plume of steam, but instead leak a molten sludge that hardens in place.
'It doesn't poof into the air and drift around the world,' Towell said. 'It drips down to a catch pan and freezes to a solid.'
Rather than solid fuel rods, Natura's design also uses a liquid uranium fuel that is dissolved into the molten coolant. According to Towell, a former research fellow at Los Alamos National Laboratory, that decreases the amount of radioactive waste produced by the reactor and makes it easier to recycle.
The Kairos reactor design uses molten salt coolant with hundreds of thousands of uranium fuel 'pebbles,' while the X-energy design uses fuel pebbles with a gas coolant.
Critically, many new reactor designs are also small and modular. Instead of massive, custom construction projects, they are meant to be built in factories with assembly line efficiency and then shipped out on truck trailers and installed on site. That will allow large industrial facilities or data centers to operate their own power sources independent from public electrical grids.
Natura president Doug Robison, a retired oil company executive who worked 13 years as an ExxonMobil landman, said small reactors could run oilfield infrastructure in the Permian Basin, from pumpjacks to compressor stations.
'By powering the oil and gas industry, which uses a tremendous amount of power for their operations, we're helping alleviate the grid pressure,' he said.
He also wants to power new treatment plants for the enormous quantities of wastewater produced each day in the Permian Basin. In January, Natura announced a partnership with the state-funded Texas Produced Water Consortium at Texas Tech University aimed at using small reactors to purify oilfield wastewater, most of which is currently pumped underground for disposal.
The new reactor projects fit into plans by state leaders to establish Texas as a global leader of advanced nuclear reactor technology. In 2023, Gov. Greg Abbott directed the state's Public Utility Commission to study the question and produce a report.
'Texas is well-positioned to lead the country in the development of ANRs,' said the 78-page report, issued late last year. 'Texas can lead by cutting red tape and establishing incentives to accelerate advanced nuclear deployment, overcome regulator hurdles and attract investment.'
The report made several recommendations, and state lawmakers this year have already filed bills to enact several of them, including the creation of a Texas Advanced Nuclear Authority and a nuclear permitting officer. Most significantly, the report also recommended two new public funds to support nuclear energy deployment, including one modeled after the Texas Energy Fund, which was created in 2023 and made $5 billion in financing available for new gas power plants.
'When I talk to folks, it always gets back to the funding,' said Thomas Gleeson, chair of the Public Utility Commission, during the PowerHouse forum. 'All of those issues are somewhat ancillary to: How are we going to fund this?'
Gleeson said developers will expect the state to put up at least $100 million per project through public-private partnerships in order to help reduce financial risk.
'Given the load growth in this state that we're projecting, if you want clean air and you want a reliable grid, you have to be in favor of nuclear,' he said.
Critics of the plan oppose the use of public money on private projects and worry about safety.
'We don't use tax dollars to fund a bunch of experimental and pie-in-the-sky designs that should be the responsibility of private industry,' said John Umphress, a retired Austin Energy program specialist who is evaluating the nuclear efforts on contract for the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen. 'Nobody has really penciled out the cost because there's still a lot of proof of concept that's going to have to be pursued before these things get built.'
Umphress raised concerns over materials in development to withstand the astronomical temperatures and extremely corrosive qualities of molten salt coolants.
He also noted that the U.S. still lacks a permanent repository for nuclear waste following decades of unsuccessful efforts. Most waste today is stored on site in specialized interim facilities at nuclear power plants, which wouldn't be possible if small reactors were deployed to individual industrial projects.
'That's the big issue that we still haven't solved, but it's not stopping some of these developers from pushing forward with their designs,' he said. 'They're hoping the federal government will take ownership of the waste and be responsible for its storage and disposal.'
During the PowerHouse forum, officials expressed hope that the private sector would develop a solution after new reactor projects create demand for waste disposal.
Those reactor projects are still many years away. So far, the NRC has only authorized advanced reactor construction for university research. Next it will issue permits for larger commercial reactors before they can be deployed.
Perhaps the largest early deployment of commercial advanced reactors is set to take place at Texas A&M University. In February, the school announced that four companies had committed to install their commercial reactor designs at a new 2,400-acre 'Energy Proving Ground' near its College Station campus.
The site is an old Army air base, currently home to vehicle crash test facilities and an advanced warfare development complex.
The university will build infrastructure there and help streamline permitting for the reactor projects, said Joe Elabd, vice chancellor for research at the Texas A&M System. The university is requesting $200 million in state appropriations to help develop the site, he said.
'We're providing a little bit more of a plug-and-play site for these companies, as opposed to them going to a true greenfield and having to do everything for themselves,' he said.
Reactors on the site will be connected to Texas' electrical girdle, Elabd said.
A&M began seeking proposals from companies to build at the site last August, and a panel of university experts selected the four finalists, which include Natura and Kairos.
A Kairos spokesperson, Christopher Ortiz, said the company is building a manufacturing facility in Albuquerque, New Mexico, which will produce the reactors deployed to Texas A&M. He said the company is currently working to identify sites for future commercial reactors, evaluating factors like workforce availability, existing infrastructure and community support.
'The Texas A&M site presents a unique opportunity to site multiple commercial power plants in one location, which makes it particularly attractive,' he said.
The site will also include Terrestrial Energy, a Canadian company. And it will include Aalo Atomics, a 2-year-old investor-funded startup that is currently building a 40,000-square-foot reactor factory in Austin, which it plans to unveil in April.
More than modular reactors, Aalo plans to produce entire modular power plants, called Aalo Pods, including several reactors, a turbine and a generator, which are designed to be installed at data centers.
'It's made in the factory, shipped to the site and assembled like LEGOs,' said Aalo CEO Matt Loszak.
He estimated five to 10 years for deployment at the A&M site but said that depended on continued financial support from investors. Aalo is developing its reactor design at the Department of Energy's Idaho National Laboratory, a 70-year-old national nuclear research center.
But Loszak, a former software engineer from Canada, decided to locate his factory in Texas, he said, to be close to massive incoming energy demands and to take advantage of the state's business-friendly approach to regulation.
'Politicians here are really pro-nuclear, they want to see nuclear get built, and that's not the case in other places across the country,' he said. 'From a regulatory and permitting perspective, it's a great place to build stuff.'
Disclosure: Dow Chemical, Exxon Mobil Corporation, Texas A&M University and Texas Tech University have been financial supporters of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune's journalism. Find a complete list of them here.
We can't wait to welcome you to the 15th annual Texas Tribune Festival, Texas' breakout ideas and politics event happening Nov. 13–15 in downtown Austin. Step inside the conversations shaping the future of education, the economy, health care, energy, technology, public safety, culture, the arts and so much more.
Hear from our CEO, Sonal Shah, on TribFest 2025.
TribFest 2025 is presented by JPMorganChase.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
41 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Unpacking rumor that Trump is sending out $5K stimulus checks
According to a rumor that spread online in late May and early June 2025, U.S. President Donald Trump would be sending out $5,000 "stimulus" checks to Americans after his administration uncovered billions of dollars in "wasted money." The viral rumor likely stems from an investment firm CEO's proposal to send some taxpayers so-called "DOGE Dividend" checks. The original proposal for $5,000 checks was based on the assumption that DOGE would achieve $2 trillion in total savings, which is highly unlikely. Trump has previously floated the idea of a "DOGE Dividend," but there was no proof at the time of this writing that he would send $5,000 checks to Americans. Snopes reached out to the White House for clarity but has not received a response. In late May and early June 2025, a rumor on TikTok (archived) claimed that U.S. President Donald Trump was reportedly sending out $5,000 "stimulus" checks to Americans after his administration uncovered $50 billion in "wasted money." "Trump is going to be sending out five grand to everybody and this is because they uncovered $50 billion … of just wasted money," the TikTok video's narrator said. @todaynews919 #fyp #foryou #new #news ♬ original sound - todaynews919 The video's narrator later said the cost-cutting Department of Government Efficiency initiative allegedly proposed sending money it had "recovered" to the American people. The initiative, spearheaded by tech billionaire Elon Musk before his departure, works to slash government spending through layoffs and cuts to various federal programs. Though Trump has previously floated the idea of a "DOGE Dividend," there was no proof at the time of this writing that he would send $5,000 checks to Americans. Snopes reached out to the White House to ask if the president has any plans to send such checks and is awaiting a response. Since we were not able to definitively prove or disprove this rumor, we have not put a rating on this claim. The viral rumor likely stems from a proposal to send some taxpayers "DOGE Dividend" checks. Trump previously said he would consider such a plan, but his administration has not confirmed that it's sending any checks. The idea for DOGE Dividend checks was originally proposed by James Fishback, the founder and CEO of the investment firm Azoria Partners, in an X post (archived) shared on Feb. 18, 2025: Fishback's post also included a more in-depth proposal based on the assumption that DOGE would achieve $2 trillion in total savings. He suggested that the federal government take 20% of DOGE's presumed savings, or about $400 billion, and return it to approximately 79 million taxpaying households in the form of $5,000 tax refund checks called the DOGE Dividend. Under Fishback's plan, the government would send checks only to "households that will be net payers of federal income tax," meaning those that pay more money in taxes than they get back in tax credits or refunds. That means American households that do not owe federal income tax would not qualify for the proposed payments. In 2025, an estimated 40% of U.S. households will pay no federal individual income tax, according to the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center. Most of these households have lower incomes, with about 70% earning less than $75,000 and about 45% earning less than $40,000, the Tax Policy Center estimates. On the same day that Fishback shared his proposal for the $5,000 checks, Musk replied (archived), "Will check with the president." Trump quickly acknowledged the idea as he delivered remarks during a Saudi investors conference in Miami on Feb. 19, 2025. "There's even under consideration a new concept where we give 20% of the DOGE savings to American citizens and 20% goes to paying down debt, because the numbers are incredible, Elon," Trump said at the conference. A reporter also asked Trump about the plan as he flew back to Washington, D.C., aboard Air Force One that day. He said: I love it. A 20% dividend, so to speak, for the money that we're saving by going after the waste and fraud and abuse and all the other things that are happening, I think it's a great idea. The dividend checks would also give taxpayers "an incentive … to go out and report things to use when we can save money," Trump added. Several weeks later, Fishback spoke further about his proposal during a March 2025 podcast appearance. He said if DOGE didn't hit the $2 trillion in projected savings, the amount of money in the dividend checks should be adjusted. "This plan is not predestined to the $5,000 number. If the savings come in above or below that, the check will be reflected accordingly," Fishback said. "So again, if the savings are $1 trillion — which I think is awfully low — the check goes from $5,000 to $2,500." At a town hall in Wisconsin on March 30, 2025, Musk fielded questions about the proposal, ultimately putting the responsibility of approving tax refund checks on Congress and Trump. "It's somewhat up to the Congress and maybe the president … as to whether specific checks are cut," Musk said in response. A search of did not return any results for legislation proposing "DOGE Dividend" tax refund checks. Snopes also could not find any record of Trump sharing additional details about a plan for such checks since February 2025, and we are still awaiting a response from the White House. It's still unclear how much money DOGE might ultimately save. Musk said in October 2024 that he expected to cut "at least $2 trillion" but he later lowered that estimate to $1 trillion. However, both of those estimates were "wildly unrealistic," PolitiFact reported in June 2025. As of June 6, 2025, DOGE's online "wall of receipts" touted an estimated $180 billion in cuts, but analyses by PolitiFact (here and here) and The New York Times found that the online ledger was riddled with errors. X. Accessed 6 June 2025. "Who Will Pay No Federal Individual Income Tax in 2025?" Tax Policy Center, 4 June 2025, Accessed 6 June 2025. X. Accessed 6 June 2025. Palm Beach Post. "Full Donald Trump Speech at Miami FII Investment Summit Hosted by Saudi Public Investment Fund." YouTube, 19 Feb. 2025, Accessed 6 June 2025. 2025, Accessed 6 June 2025. David Lin. "Will You Get a $5,000 Check? "Doge Dividend" Explained | James Fishback." YouTube, 12 Mar. 2025, Accessed 6 June 2025. FOX 9 Minneapolis-St. Paul. "LIVE | Elon Musk Holds Town Hall in Wisconsin." YouTube, 30 Mar. 2025, Accessed 6 June 2025. "Legislative Search Results." 2025, Accessed 6 June 2025. WFAA. "Elon Musk Full Speech at Trump Rally in Madison Square Garden (Oct. 27, 2024)." YouTube, 27 Oct. 2024, Accessed 15 Nov. 2024. X. Accessed 6 June 2025. Clarke, Amelia. "Yes, Musk Said He'd Ask Trump about $5K Checks for US Taxpayers Funded by DOGE Savings." Snopes, 21 Feb. 2025, Czopek, Madison, and Amy Sherman. "Trump and Musk Public Bickering Raises More DOGE Uncertainty." @Politifact, 5 June 2025, Accessed 6 June 2025. DOGE. "DOGE: Department of Government Efficiency." DOGE: Department of Government Efficiency, 2025, Accessed 6 June 2025. McCullough, Caleb. "Where Do DOGE's Reported Savings Come From?" @Politifact, 21 Feb. 2025, Fahrenthold, David A, and Jeremy Singer-Vine. "DOGE Is Far Short of Its Goal, and Still Overstating Its Progress." The New York Times, 13 Apr. 2025, Accessed 6 June 2025.


CNN
an hour ago
- CNN
New tech reveals never-before-seen details in solar corona
A breakthrough in adaptive optics technology captured the clearest images to date of the sun's corona. The incredible resolution of the new images could provide new insights on some of the mysteries surrounding our star.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
How Much the Average Homeowner Has in Savings vs. the Average Renter
Housing is the largest expense for the average American consumer. The more people have to spend on housing, the less money they have available to invest, save, or spend in other categories. But does owning your home instead of renting affect how much you have in your savings account? And is it the best financial decision for you right now? Check Out: Try This: The Federal Reserve's most recent Survey of Consumer Finances suggests the answer is yes. Here's how the average renter's savings compares to those of the average homeowner. The Survey of Consumer Finances data goes back to 1989, and since then, homeowners have always had more in savings than renters, on average. However, the gap between homeowners' and renters' savings has been growing. For example, in 1995, on average, homeowners had around twice as much saved as renters. Now, homeowners have five times more in savings than the average renter. Up Next: The most recent national data estimates that the average renter had $16,930 in savings. That includes all money in savings, checking, emergency funds and money market accounts. Though rent amounts will vary greatly depending on your location and size of your space, the current national average rent in the United States ranges from about $1,625 to $2,100 per month, which is a 1.1% increase compared to last year. By comparison, the average homeowner had $85,430 in savings, which is nearly $70,000 more than the average renter. That's a big difference when it comes to what you're able to allocate for emergency savings and retirement accounts. However, buying a home is not an option for the average savings, as the national average house price in the U.S. for Q1 2025 is $503,800, whereas the median sales price in the same period was $416,900, Perhaps counterintuitively, renting is often less expensive than owning a home. In the largest 50 metropolitan areas in the U.S., the median cost of renting is currently $1,398. This figure has been trending modestly downward since the second half of 2022, and represents the middle ground, with half of rents being higher and half lower, so it is quite subject to fluctuations. The median home price is currently $416,900, and the average mortgage rate is 6.97%, per the Fed. With a 20% down payment and a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage, your monthly mortgage payment likely ranges from $2,167 to $2,715, excluding taxes and insurance. High interest rates are likely driving most of the higher costs of homeownership. If mortgage rates go down as expected, monthly mortgage payments will decrease. However, despite the higher costs, homeowners still save more than renters. So why is there such a big difference between how much renters save and how much homeowners do? One explanation is that rental prices continually increase while the cost of owning a home stays relatively stable after the purchase. Say you buy a new home with a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage. Your monthly housing costs will be stable for the 30 years of the loan. After you've paid off your mortgage, you'll have to pay only taxes, insurance and maintenance. Unexpected maintenance costs, such as roof damage or broken pipes, can eat into a homeowner's savings, whereas renters don't have to pay for these costs out of pocket since they're the landlord's responsibility. However, renters do have to cover rising rental rates nearly every year. Since 2019, rent prices have increased by around 19% nationwide. Rising rent prices can take up larger and larger chunks of renters' budgets. As their housing costs increase, they have less money to put toward savings and other financial goals. By comparison, homeowners have more of their income to put into savings after paying off their mortgages. The bottom line is that if you're a renter hoping to put more in your bank account, you should try these money-saving strategies: Pay off debt with high interest rates: High-interest debt can prevent you from building your savings. Start by paying off any loans with high interest rates, like credit card debt. Live with a roommate: Splitting your housing costs with a roommate will give you extra money each month to put toward savings. Renegotiate with your landlord: When your lease is up and it's time to sign a new one, negotiate your monthly payment. If your landlord charges more than the market rate, it may be worth moving to a more affordable home. Finally, remember to put at least some of your savings into a high-yield savings account so you can grow your money. Caitlyn Moorhead contributed to the reporting for this article. More From GOBankingRates Mark Cuban Warns of 'Red Rural Recession' -- 4 States That Could Get Hit Hard How Much Money Is Needed To Be Considered Middle Class in Every State? 10 Unreliable SUVs To Stay Away From Buying This article originally appeared on How Much the Average Homeowner Has in Savings vs. the Average Renter Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data