Latest news with #NuclearRenaissance
Forbes
04-07-2025
- Business
- Forbes
American And Chinese Energy Policies: Great Minds Think Alike
Global trends have shifted in the past few years and as I've already discussed, America will buck the international trend and set its own strategy. Recent developments in energy technologies and markets are worth exploring. Conservative With Risk It's recognized in the new administration's Department of Energy (DOE) and Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) policy goals that Energy Security is recognized as National Security. Dominance in Ai advancement and supporting 'Gold Standard Science' are just as integral to the assured prosperity of our nation, and the President doesn't intend to compromise on these standards. While the hesitancy to accept solar power has been disheartening to those concerned about climate change, the American Nuclear Renaissance for which we will all be grateful provides context. Three Mile Island Nuclear Power Plant. No one died from the incident at Three Mile Island. Clean, Exciting, But Still Emerging As the new head of the DOE has stated, the intermittency of Variable Renewable Energy (VRE) gives policy makers pause to widely adopt solar and wind. It hasn't been proven at scale as a primary source of energy production, and until the complimentary batteries and grid expansions can occur, we must be pragmatic when viewing Energy Policy. Its first goal is to provide Americans with reliable and affordable energy. Adventurism into emerging (which is to say unproven, in the eyes of some) technologies is a luxury for private investors or small-scale pilot programs, not civilization-wide transitions on a whim. I don't think I need to say this, but I feel compelled: I disagree with some of these premises and the conclusions drawn from them, but I am not being consulted on domestic energy policy by the United States government, so for now my thoughts are immaterial to this explanation of recent events. The seeming stubbornness with which fossil fuels are clung-to baffles observers. Some hypothesize that pure greed is a motivation, with policy makers having stake in, or constituents who are part of these industries. A less cynical thought could consider energy strategy. Coal and oil are Victorian and biblical-age technologies. We have moved past them: we're all about to have Nuclear. But importantly, we don't have it yet. Until the transition to clean energy can happen at scale, we will still need electricity and as observed, we can't be at the mercy of the sunshine and wind while trying to achieve Artificial General Intelligence before the Chinese. No one wants polluted air and water, but no American wants to live in a second-rate nation. Some may say that coal is outdated, while others can look at the same long history and call it tried-and-true. Hence, those who don't trust VREs can use a different set of tactics to secure energy dependence, national security, and technological dominance: expand any sort of energy production that's viable for now, while pursuing full-throttle the most promising methods of energy production that we have available for the future. This is why climate change deniers can still be some of the most ardent supporters of nuclear power; it's proven, it's scalable, and the more research that we do, we find even more efficient AND SAFE ways to go implement it. Data Centers are proliferating and draw huge amounts of electricity. Do we want to power them with ... More methane spewing gas turbines or clean nuclear power? China's Maneuvering If you were to think that this is all pessimistic and that surely all policy makers who support natural gas and coal are getting kickbacks, you'd do well to consider that China is doing something similar. The connections between technological advancement, energy security and national security are understood in China the same as in America. The need to look to the future and plan for it now, while keeping the present free of deprivation, is a duty of political leadership the world over. This might explain why China, our nearest peer-competitor, has a plan that's generally similar to ours. From first principles: Ai is the future; dominance in Ai is strategically important. Ai will need large data centers that will need lots of electricity. It's not a choice to pursue Ai as geopolitics demands it; technological dominance yields power. China sets records for both coal and clean energy. They're securing strategic coal imports at low global prices, and still building coal power plants. Of every four tons of coal burned for electricity generation, one of those is burned in China. Another way to say, 62% of their electricity still comes from coal. This provides perspective while concurrently considering that they're expanding solar power at record breaking rates. What do we see here? A similar idea to the Americans: VRE can be promising, but we aren't there yet. The point of difference is to what degree the countries will rely on solar or wind while expanding nuclear power, but the path forward looks similar. All roads lead to nuclear. Fusion, Thorium, and Small Modular Reactors Taken as a group, these are the nuclear power technologies of the future. Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) use the established fission method, but at a smaller scale which makes them more versatile than large reactors. They can be produced in an assembly line fashion and deployed wherever they're needed like individual data centers. This may sound excessive, but Amazon is currently trying to plug straight into a reactor in Pennsylvania, while their sister company X-energy builds SMRs. Jeff Bezos has been investing in nuclear fusion since 2011. The need is real and recognized by people who plan to profit from and shape the future. Amazon is one example; if I were to give an overview of the household names that are investing in nuclear power, that would be its own article. That said, Google, Sam Altman, and Rolls Royce are on the list. Microsoft is reopening Three Mile Island, as they should. Thorium was pioneered in America decades ago, but has been taken up by China to great success. They're actively getting closer to commercially viable Thorium Power; they've had a breakthrough this year with refueling that solidifies their global edge. No serious observer doubts that the future is nuclear. Everyone is working towards it differently, but everyone is working towards it. NEWPORT NEWS, Va. (Nov. 1, 2012) The Virginia-class attack submarine Minnesota (SSN 783) is under ... More construction at at Huntington Ingalls Newport News Shipbuilding. (U.S. Navy photo courtesy of Newport News Shipbuilding/Released) Critical Minerals Beyond Energy Production Everyone has been talking about critical minerals this year, and I don't need to repeat what we all know. They're critical to the energy transition and China dominates the market. Energy security is national security, and rare earths are critical for both. In yet another direct way, they're indispensable to national security; as reported by the Center for Strategic and International Studies: the F-35 fighter jet contains over 900 pounds of Rare Earth Elements (REEs). An Arleigh Burke-class DDG-51 destroyer requires approximately 5,200 pounds, while a Virginia-class submarine uses around 9,200 pounds. No matter how you look at it, critical minerals are critical, and strategic planning must recognize this. If America can't immediately secure its supply chains, then while it works to do so it will still need electricity. This brings us back to the strategic value of coal and oil. The Global Critical Minerals Outlook 2025 show's China's dominance over critical minerals. They're ... More strategically positioned. The high-level goals are similar, but the implementations are different. This comes to a matter of philosophy, with the Americans more hesitant than the Chinese to rely on variable renewable power. The common aims that the government leaders share is to ensure the prosperity of their peoples. Without getting lost in detail, the world's two largest economies agree on the goal to provide a prosperous and peaceful future to their peoples. Great minds think alike.
Yahoo
23-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Modular nuclear reactors are a terrible idea. Don't spend Texans' money on them
Salesmen of 'new advanced' nuclear reactors are overrunning the state Capitol, selling the fantasy that Texas will become the leader in building a new generation of small, cheaper reactors if we invest a lot of taxpayer money now. There are significant problems with this plan: 1. Nuclear power radiation can cause cancers, birth defects and deaths. 2. After 70 years of searching, the country still has no permanent repository for nuclear waste. 3. Many proposed reactor designs don't have containment vessels or buildings to protect people from deadly radiation. 4. Some proposed reactor designs were rejected because of economics and technical failures in the 1950s. 5. Several modular reactor proposals around the world, including one planned in Utah, have been abandoned due to cost or safety concerns. In 2023, only three were in operation — in Russia, China and India. In the early 1980s, Texans were assured that building nuclear power plants would result in lower electricity costs compared to other sources. Although the plants were constructed, that promise turned out to be false. Texas' nuclear reactors were completed years behind schedule, with costs soaring five-fold for the South Texas Project Electric Generating Station near Bay City and 11 times for the Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant, which took 19 years to complete near Fort Worth. Many Texas ratepayers still bear the burden of those cost overruns in their utility bills. In the early 2000s, the nuclear folks were back, promising cheap, non-carbon-emitting energy from additional nuclear plants. The so-called Nuclear Renaissance led with proposed reactors in Texas, but some utility customers were stuck with the bill from utilities merely considering the expansions. Today, nuclear plant salesmen are asking the state for $2 billion of your tax dollars. Legislation filed this session, House Bill 14, would provide developers of so-called advanced nuclear reactors with grants of up to $200 million in state funds, which could be used to reimburse wealthy investors. The proposed subsidized reactors are intended for industry and large data centers, not for everyday people like you and me. The bill creates a policy that prioritizes nuclear power over safe, proven and affordable technologies like wind, solar and batteries. Control over nuclear grant funding would rest with the governor, offering little assurance that it would be used to benefit Texans. Nuclear developers might be reimbursed for expenditures made years ago, receiving up to $200 million for each reactor, regardless of how limited its intended use Is. Even worse, completed reactors could receive additional tax dollars based on their electricity-generating capacity, even though the bill does not mandate their connection to the grid. To push this vision, nuclear interests have recruited large industries, the governor and major universities. Together, they designed a permitting process that would grease the skids and not protect the public's health and safety. And they plan to stick us with the bill. New modular reactors are a terrible, expensive idea that should be halted. But if new reactors are built, there must be guidelines: • All new reactors must have adequate decommissioning funds to remove and dispose of nuclear waste and clean up contamination. • Additional nuclear plants should not be permitted until a national underground permanent nuclear waste repository is in place. • Local first responders must be adequately trained, funded and equipped to respond to an accident involving nuclear reactors and radiation releases. Evacuation plans must be developed. • Containment structures should be required to isolate radioactive materials and limit radiation releases from accidents or leaks. • The Public Utility Commission of Texas should be required to conduct biannual reviews comparing the costs of advanced nuclear reactors to other types of generation and cancel grants for projects with out-of-control costs. Corporations don't build these reactors with their own money for several reasons: They cost too much, take too long, do too little and are too risky. Legislators can't get fooled again. Now that the Texas House has approved this bill, Texans should call their state senators and demand they stop the new nuclear boondoggle of HB 14 in its tracks. Tom 'Smitty' Smith is the retired director of Public Citizen's Texas office. As a consumer advocate who worked primarily before the Public Utility Commission, he's had a front-row seat to the debates about nuclear energy and ratepayer bill increases for over 40 years. This article originally appeared on Austin American-Statesman: Don't put Texans' tax dollars toward risky nuclear reactors | Opinion
Yahoo
13-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Mirion Technologies Joins Influential Nuclear Energy Organizations to Further Bolster Nuclear Initiatives
Mirion joins the Nuclear Energy Institute, enhances membership with the American Nuclear Society as a Trustees of Nuclear partner. ATLANTA, March 13, 2025--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Mirion (NYSE: MIR), a leading provider of advanced radiation safety solutions, today announced that it has joined the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) and the American Nuclear Society's (ANS) Trustees of Nuclear program. Membership in the two preeminent nuclear industry and professional organizations in the United States provides Mirion Technologies with an enhanced platform to engage with industry leaders and policymakers, as well as share industry expertise, on issues of importance to the nuclear sector. NEI is the policy organization of the nuclear energy industry in the United States, representing the interests of the industry before Congress, the administration, and state and local governments. With its NEI membership, Mirion will participate in policy discussions that shape the nuclear industry and advocate for policies that support the growth of nuclear energy for the greater good of humanity. ANS is the premier international professional organization of engineers, scientists, technologists, teachers, and healthcare providers devoted to the peaceful applications of nuclear science and technology. As part of its enhanced membership in ANS, Mirion will become an ANS Trustee of Nuclear and serve on its leadership council. "As one of the only companies uniquely present across the full span of the nuclear landscape, we have an important role to play in the Nuclear Renaissance. We are thrilled to build upon our bonds with the Nuclear Energy Institute and the American Nuclear Society," said Mirion CEO Thomas Logan. "These memberships underscore our commitment to advancing the nuclear industry and continued collaboration with leading experts and organizations. We look forward to contributing to the innovative solutions and best practices that will shape the future of nuclear energy." About Mirion Mirion (NYSE: MIR) is a global leader in radiation safety, science and medicine, empowering innovations that deliver vital protection while harnessing the transformative potential of ionizing radiation across a diversity of end markets. Focused on nuclear and safety, the Mirion Technologies group is committed to powering advancements in nuclear energy through proven radiation safety technologies and expertise. Dedicated to driving better patient outcomes, the Mirion Medical group is focused on improving quality in cancer care through its broad range of solutions that enhance the delivery and ensure safety across the medical landscape. Headquartered in Atlanta (GA – USA), Mirion employs approximately 2,800 people and operates in 12 countries. Learn more at View source version on Contacts For investor inquiries: Eric Linnir@ For media inquiries: Erin Schesnymedia@
Yahoo
09-02-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Energy experts blast failed billion-dollar DOE project as 'financial boondoggle,' 'disaster'
A major solar power plant project that was granted over a billion dollars in federal loans is on the road to closure, with energy experts blasting the project as a "boondoggle" that harmed the environment. In 2011, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) under former President Barack Obama issued $1.6 billion in loan guarantees to finance the Ivanpah Solar Power Facility, a green energy project that consists of three solar concentrating thermal power plants in California. The facility was touted by then-Secretary of Energy Ernest Moniz as an "example of how America is becoming a world leader in solar energy." But after 10 years, the federally funded plant is now on track to close. "Ivanpah is yet another failed green energy boondoggle, much like Solyndra," Jason Isaac, CEO of the American Energy Institute, an American energy advocacy group, told Fox News Digital in a statement. "Despite receiving $1.6 billion in federal loan guarantees, it never lived up to its promises, producing less electricity than expected while still relying on natural gas to stay operational." Energy Sec. Wright Issues Day-1 Orders Targeting Oil Reserves, Appliance Rules, 'Nuclear Renaissance' "Now, with its power contracts canceled, Ivanpah stands as a testament to the waste and inefficiency of government-subsidized energy schemes," Isaac said. Read On The Fox News App Ivanpah consists of three individual units, two of which were contracted by Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) in 2009 and scheduled to run until 2039. Experts Say First Week Of 'Trump Effect' Is Derailing Global Climate Movement's 'House Of Cards' In January, PG&E announced plans to cancel its agreement with Ivanpah 14 years early, determining that "ending the agreements at this time will save customers money compared to the cost of keeping them through 2039" – ultimately putting Ivanpah on notice for closure. "The Ivanpah plant was a financial boondoggle and environmental disaster," Julia Dowell of the Sierra Club, an environmental activism group, said of the power plant. "Along with killing thousands of birds and tortoises, the project's construction destroyed irreplaceable pristine desert habitat along with numerous rare plant species," Dowell said. "While the Sierra Club strongly supports innovative clean energy solutions and recognizes the urgent need to transition away from fossil fuels, Ivanpah demonstrated that not all renewable technologies are created equal." This comes after another DOE-funded green energy project, Solyndra, went bankrupt in 2011 after receiving $535 million in federal loan guarantees from the Obama administration. "Green projects have a long history of expensive taxpayer-subsidized disaster that is getting more so," Steve Milloy, senior fellow at the Energy & Environmental Legal Institute and former Trump EPA transition team member, said in a statement to Fox. Milloy suggested that further green energy failures could come from projects funded by recent Democrat-backed legislation that aims to push the green energy agenda. "Soon we will be looking at failures of larger magnitude than Green New Deal spending. No green project relying on taxpayer subsidies has ever made any economic or environmental sense," Milloy said. "It's important that President Trump stop the taxpayer bleeding by ending what he accurately calls the Green New Scam."Original article source: Energy experts blast failed billion-dollar DOE project as 'financial boondoggle,' 'disaster'
