Latest news with #Unit1
Time Magazine
3 days ago
- Business
- Time Magazine
What Happens When Big Tech Goes Nuclear?
Silicon Valley firms are advocating for the U.S. to embark on a nuclear energy renaissance. They have received support from President Donald Trump, who recently signed four executive orders which seek to quadruple domestic production of electricity from nuclear power within the next 25 years. The massive energy needs of the data centers required to run artificial intelligence (AI) operations have led Big Tech firms like Microsoft, Amazon, and Meta to buy electricity from preexisting nuclear power plants, push for reopening closed ones, and encourage the construction of new reactors. Microsoft even signed an agreement in September 2024 to restart Unit 1 reactor at Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania—the site of the worst civil nuclear accident in U.S. history when the reactor core of Unit 2 melted down in March 1979. The role of private enterprise is not new in driving technological innovation in nuclear fission. The Manhattan Project itself had companies such as Dupont, Union Carbide, Bechtel, and Westinghouse heavily involved under the guidance of the federal government. After World War II, the federal government took the lead in nurturing the U.S. nuclear energy industry. It subsidized and regulated nuclear energy in an attempt to promote this new source of electricity to utility providers while also reducing the public health risks from accidents. The Trump Administration's executive orders on nuclear energy gut regulation in the name of efficiency and cost-cuts. But if the history of nuclear energy's emergence and expansion offers us any lessons on this, it's that the federal government has been pivotal for nuclear energy's growth, reliability, and safety. Read More: Nuclear Power Is the Only Solution For almost a decade after the U.S. dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945, the federal government kept the scientific knowledge tied to nuclear energy and weapons as top-secret 'restricted data.' But in 1954, Congress shifted gears and passed the Atomic Energy Act. Unlike its 1946 predecessor, this Act allowed for the commercialization of nuclear knowhow. The role of government was vital in creating an atomic marketplace because it had to determine which technologies private companies could trade in, without posing risks to U.S. national security—a most important tenet during the early Cold War to prevent nuclear proliferation. This early technological ambiguity posed security challenges. In one case, the American company Vitro International ended up selling blueprints for a plutonium reprocessing plant to India—a key piece of infrastructure useful both for generating nuclear power and for developing a nuclear weapon. The sale ended up helping advance India's nuclear weapons program, exposing the need for clear rules and laws governing the sale of nuclear information, which only the federal government could devise. In addition to setting rules about what companies could do with nuclear information, the government offered subsidies to spur nuclear energy growth within the United States. It also encouraged U.S. companies to sell nuclear reactors abroad as part of broader goal of maintaining American technological primacy in the postwar world order. The federal government also enacted regulation to ensure nuclear energy's safety and security. In 1957, Congress passed the Price-Anderson Act, which limited the liability of the nuclear industry for accidents and also provided the public with mechanisms for seeking compensation when they occurred. In other words, the nuclear industry accepted regulation because the government was providing the majority of funding to build nuclear power plants. This acceptance, however, would change within a decade. By the late 1960s, the federal government's willingness and capacity to support nuclear energy had diminished—for reasons having little to do directly with energy policy. The U.S. had to accumulated large deficits due to military escalation in Vietnam, which prompted a budget crunch. Moreover, as the public became more skeptical of political elites and the government due to anti-war sentiments against Vietnam, and later, the Watergate scandal, opposition to large state-led projects such as nuclear power grew. The U.S. Atomic Energy Commission was even reorganized, beginning under President Richard Nixon's administration, to curtail the power of the Commission. By the Carter years, the Commission had become the Department of Energy and Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which exists till this today, but whose regulatory powers the Trump Administration plans to drastically reduce. As government funding for the nuclear energy industry dropped, private finance stepped into the void. But, being primarily motivated by profit, private banks did not find nuclear energy lucrative enough, especially owing to frequent cost overruns of reactor construction projects, red tape, and regulation. Thus, private funding did not match the same levels of economic support that the state had once provided. Without government subsidies, the nuclear energy industry experienced financial difficulties— years before the accident at Three Mile Island shocked the nation in 1979. The Reagan Administration attempted to revive the industry by cutting regulations, or what it called 'Carter-era anti-growth policies,' while also boosting funding for nuclear energy by 36% in 1981. But the effort to save the industry failed. While the funding boost was quite generous in the context of an administration that was cutting spending on social service programs, it was not enough to cover the constant cost overruns of nuclear energy projects. Additionally, the general public came to mistrust and reject nuclear energy projects, further disillusioned by the Three Mile Island disaster. New operators even feared financial liability in the event of future accidents. Read More: The U.S. Is Losing a New Nuclear Arms Race In 1986, the severe nuclear accident in Chernobyl in the Soviet Union further increased opposition to nuclear power globally. In the U.S., the construction of new nuclear power plants halted. The only new nuclear units to be added to the grid in the 1980s were those whose construction began in the 1960s and 1970s. The current push for nuclear energy looks very different from the original one in the 1950s. Unlike in the past when the majority of funding for nuclear energy came from the state, private investments from the Silicon Valley are now flowing to the U.S. nuclear energy sector at unprecedented levels. Nuclear energy startups have mushroomed, a large number of these funded by Big Tech. This threatens to tilt the technocratic and regulatory power away from the state. President Trump's executive orders support this tilt through a variety of measures, including reducing power of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and emphasizing advanced reactor testing outside the national laboratories that are hubs of American scientific and technological innovations resulting from the Manhattan Project. And yet, historically, the U.S. nuclear energy industry has thrived when government provided strong guidance. When the federal government stepped back, the industry suffered immensely. China, Russia, and France have all learned this lesson too, embracing state-led and majority state funded industries. The ethos of Big Tech to 'move fast and break things' could spur unprecedented innovation in nuclear energy, especially through the construction of small modular reactors, microreactors, and even fusion. But, just like Silicon Valley itself, which has historically flourished through the invisible hand of the state, the nuclear energy industry might also need increased guidance from the government in order to be safe, secure, and reliable. Jayita Sarkar is Professor of Global History of Inequalities at the University of Glasgow and author of the award-winning book, Ploughshares and Swords: India's Nuclear Program in the Global Cold War (Cornell University Press, 2022). She is currently finishing her next book, Atomic Capitalism (Princeton University Press, under contract). She is a British Academy Global Innovation Fellow for 2024-25 at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington, D.C. Made by History takes readers beyond the headlines with articles written and edited by professional historians. Learn more about Made by History at TIME here. Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of TIME editors.
IOL News
3 days ago
- Business
- IOL News
Koeberg Nuclear Power Station's Unit 1 return postponed: what it means for South Africa's energy
Eskom said the return to service of Unit 1 at the Koeberg Nuclear Power plant has been moved to August, after initially scheduled to return to service in July after planned maintenance. Image: Supplied Eskom announced that Unit 1 at the Koeberg Nuclear Power Station, South Africa's only nuclear facility located in Cape Town, that is supposed to return to service this month, has been pushed back to the end of next month. Currently offline for the second phase of its long-term operational maintenance programme, Unit 1 was initially expected to return to service by July 2025. Eskom said this adjustment reflects their "unwavering commitment to thorough inspections and maintaining the highest quality standards to ensure the safety and reliability of the facility". As part of the scheduled maintenance, detailed eddy current inspections — an essential non-destructive testing method—revealed defects in four tubes across two of the newly installed steam generators. Eskom said it acted promptly, deploying an advanced automated process to rectify the identified issues, with specialised international teams working in tandem with local experts to ensure the repairs met global safety and quality standards. "The successful completion of these critical repairs marks a significant milestone in reinforcing the safety framework at Koeberg." In addition to the tube repairs, the maintenance activities included the legally mandated 10-year Integrated Leak Rate Test (ILRT). "During this rigorous test, the reactor building was pressurised over a continuous 72-hour period, carefully monitoring its leak rate and structural integrity. The results from the ILRT confirmed the robustness of Unit 1's containment structure, thereby aligning with international safety protocols." Bheki Nxumalo, Eskom's Group Executive for Generation, emphasized the importance of prioritising safety at Koeberg. 'Our top priority is always the safety of our employees, the public and the environment. Carrying out these additional inspections and repairs to world-class standards, we are investing in the long-term reliability of Koeberg and South Africa's energy future,' he said. Nxumalo reiterated that the maintenance of Unit 1 is vital for delivering decades of affordable, low-carbon power, advocating how nuclear energy contributes to economic growth and environmental sustainability. Eskom is concurrently progressing on other generation projects, including the recently synchronised 800MW Kusile Unit 6, which is expected to enter commercial operation by September 2025. "This year has already seen the reconnection of Kusile Units 1, 2, and 3 to the repaired west stack, as well as the return to service of Medupi Unit 4 after a prolonged outage. Together, these initiatives are aimed at bolstering generation capacity and securing a stable electricity supply." Eskom said the revised return date for Koeberg Unit 1 is not anticipated to increase the risk of loadshedding. "The latest Winter Outlook released in May remains valid, indicating that the planned return of 2,500MW this winter is unaffected by the status of Unit 1. The report shows that loadshedding will not be necessary as long as unplanned outages stay below 13,000MW. Even with potential increases in outages, Eskom has projected a maximum of 21 days of loadshedding during the winter season, capped at Stage 2. As the winter season progresses, Eskom continues to encourage energy efficiency among customers while assuring them of the national power system's stability. Unit 2 of Koeberg remains operational, currently contributing up to 946MW and recording an impressive Energy Availability Factor (EAF) of 99.98% as of the end of June 2023. Once all maintenance work is completed, Unit 1's reactor core will undergo refuelling, testing, and will be synchronised back to the national grid. Eskom said it meticulously plans these outages to ensure that both Koeberg units are not offline simultaneously, maintaining an essential power supply for the country.
LeMonde
29-05-2025
- Health
- LeMonde
In Japan, newly released archives reveal the scale of human experimentation between 1938 and 1945
Service records of officers and soldiers before Japan's defeat in 1945, made public on May 15 by the country's National Archives, revealed that some were assigned to secret units in China: one in Nanjing, identified as Unit 1,644, and another in Guangzhou, numbered 8,604. The military personnel in these units reportedly conducted bacteriological experiments on human subjects. Until now only Unit 731, located near Harbin – now in China's Heilongjiang province and then the capital of Manchukuo, a puppet state controlled by Tokyo – was known for carrying out such activities from 1938 until the end of World War II. "The service records confirm the existence in China of a network of units conducting these experiments and coordinating their activities," explained Katsuo Nishiyama, emeritus professor at Shiga University of Medical Science and a specialist in Japan's imperial-era biological weapons programs. Units 1,644 and 8,604 − with the one in Nanjing being the largest − were overseen, like Unit 731, by the Tokyo-based Epidemic Prevention and Water Purification Department. Their primary activity reportedly involved experimenting on humans to enable Japan to develop biological weapons, in violation of the 1925 Geneva Protocol prohibiting chemical and biological weapons.
Zawya
06-03-2025
- Business
- Zawya
Zimbabwe Joins Other African Nations in Pursuit of Nuclear Power
Zimbabwe is joining other African nations exploring nuclear power as a way to help solve chronic problems with electricity supply. Demand for power continues to increase on the continent due to growing populations and economic expansion. 1. The Koeberg nuclear power station in South Africa is the only nuclear power plant on the African continent. Its two units, with more than 1,800 MW of generation capacity in total, have operated since the mid-1980s. Courtesy: Eskom The only African country currently producing nuclear energy is South Africa. The French-built Koeberg plant (Figure 1) near Cape Town, with two Framatome reactors and just more than 1,800 MW of generation capacity, has operated for 40 years. Officials have said Russia will work on an expansion of that power station, and possibly on construction of new reactors elsewhere in the country. Eskom, South Africa's state power company, said it re-connected Unit 2 at Koeberg to the national grid on Dec. 30 of last year after replacing three steam generators, conducting comprehensive inspections, and refueling the reactor. A decision on extending the unit's operating license is expected this year. Koeberg Unit 1's operating license was renewed last year for another 20 years, to 2044. The Koeberg units, both pressurized water reactors, have operated since 1984 and 1985, respectively. Bheki Nxumalo, group executive for generation at Eskom, in a statement said, 'As South Africa phases out some of the aging coal-fired power plants by 2030, nuclear energy is poised to provide a reliable and stable baseload supply. Unlike intermittent renewable sources, nuclear power ensures continuous electricity generation, meeting the needs of both residential and industrial users. Its ability to produce carbon-free energy also supports South Africa's climate goals by reducing greenhouse gas emissions.' Edgar Moyo, minister of Zimbabwe's Energy and Power Development, said his country plans to increase its power generation capacity to at least 4 GW by 2035, up from the current 2.6 GW, although government data shows actual daily power generation is about half of capacity. Moyo said his country will collaborate with Russia on construction of small nuclear reactors. Moyo in late December told journalists at a meeting in Harare, Zimbabwe, that the IAEA 'have indicated their willingness to take us through paces until we get there.' Russia already has agreements to build nuclear power plants with Egypt, Nigeria, and Burkina Faso, in addition to South Africa. Russian nuclear energy state-owned company Rosatom and the Ministry of Energy of the Republic of Zimbabwe in 2021 signed a memorandum of understanding to cooperate on nuclear energy. Economists and geopolitical analysts have said Russia wants to take a lead role in Africa's energy future to expand its influence on the continent. 'A reliable nuclear energy infrastructure could supply electricity to millions of people in rural or underserved areas,' said Irina Tsukerman, an adviser and foreign policy expert with Scarab Rising, a U.S.-based geopolitical research group. 'Many African countries still face significant gaps in electricity access, and nuclear power can help bridge that gap, particularly in countries with a growing urban population. Nuclear energy can provide a stable supply for expanding economies, ensuring industries and households have reliable power without frequent outages or blackouts, which are common in many parts of Africa.' Tsukerman told POWER, 'Right now, South Africa is the only country in Africa with a nuclear plant, although several more are being planned. In theory, introduction of nuclear power throughout the continent could be effective in addressing power shortages. That's because nuclear power has significant advantages over other forms of energy that could work well, including in developing countries.' Tsukerman said nuclear power would benefit Africa because it would provide 'reliable energy production' as well as 'large amounts of energy from relatively small amounts of fuel. For countries with limited land or resources, nuclear power can provide a reliable source of electricity without requiring vast areas of land, unlike solar or wind energy, which depend on large installations.' Gloria Magombo, Zimbabwe's secretary for energy and power development, during a December 2024 media briefing said that in addition to nuclear power, the country also wants to deploy more renewable energy resources apart from hydropower, which has been impacted by drought conditions. Magombo said, 'We are looking at coming in by 2030 with up to about 2,000 megawatts' from solar, wind, and hydropower resources. The country has a National Renewable Energy Program, though officials have said private investment along with public capital will be needed to support a build-out. A Renewable Energy Fund was launched in September of last year. The U.S. State Department in a report last year said, 'Debt significantly hinders Zimbabwe's economic growth and development,' noting the country 'owes over $9 billion [$7.0 billion of which is in arrears and penalties] to international financial institutions and bilateral creditors, equating to about 33% of the country's GDP [gross domestic product].' Dr. Lisa Marshall, president of the American Nuclear Society, and Dr. Sola Talabi, president of Pittsburgh Technical, a nuclear power consulting firm, told POWER that nuclear power would offer reliable baseload power for Zimbabwe and other African nations, and serve as a complement to other sources of energy while promoting foreign investment. The two noted that with 'population growth and socio-economic needs, what nuclear energy brings to the table is an energy course that can be coupled with district heating [providing higher efficiencies and better pollution control than localized boilers, for instance], as well as the potential of radioisotopes for medical diagnosis and treatment.' The two said that the World Bank Group categorizes Zimbabwe as a 'lower middle-income country with strong human and natural capital and significant growth potential. Building on its highly educated workforce, abundant natural resources, and recent advances in economic policy, together with key structural and institutional reforms, Zimbabwe could achieve steady and rapid growth and move towards an upper middle-income country status, which the Government of Zimbabwe has targeted for 2030.' They noted that the 'simplified and decentralized infrastructure of advanced reactors make them very attractive to emerging markets where large infrastructure deployment is very challenging. For example, a microreactor can be deployed within days, thereby providing immediate power.' Tsukerman agreed that nuclear power would be a way to attract foreign investment to Africa. 'Nuclear power projects, due to their size and complexity, can attract foreign investments, boosting economic development and infrastructure in the surrounding regions,' she said. 'Building and maintaining nuclear power plants requires skilled labor, including engineers, technicians, and construction workers. This can help boost local economies and create long-term employment.' Tsukerman also noted that nuclear power could help lower or even eliminate some African countries reliance on imported oil, natural gas, and coal for power generation. 'Nuclear power can help reduce this reliance, enhancing energy security and ensuring a more stable energy supply,' she said. Tsukerman also noted that 'Africa has significant uranium reserves, and mining it for nuclear power could provide a domestic source of fuel. Countries like Namibia, Niger, and South Africa have the potential to harness this resource.' Marshall and Talabi said there would be a connection between Zimbabwe's mining industry and its increased interest in nuclear power, saying that advanced reactors and microreactors have the potential to decarbonize the mining sector. They said that advanced reactors can provide reliable, low-carbon heat and electricity for mining operations, replacing traditional fossil fuel-based energy sources. This would help reduce greenhouse gas emissions and support climate goals. The two also noted that many of the country's mining operations are located in remote areas where access to the grid is limited. They said that microreactors 'can be readily deployed in these off-grid locations to provide a stable power supply, reducing reliance on diesel generators.' Talabi and Marshall said that the country's 'mining sector is essential for the clean energy transition, as it supplies critical minerals like lithium, cobalt, and rare earth elements needed for renewable energy technologies. Microreactors can enable sustainable and cost-effective mining of these minerals.' Whether U.S. companies, particularly those in the nuclear power space, would invest in Zimbabwe is questionable. The U.S. government ended its Zimbabwe Sanctions Program in March of last year, but continues to monitor individuals and companies under its Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act, or GloMag, part of the Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control. Officials in the U.S. and other countries, including the UK, have cited corruption, political instability, and the country's high levels of debt as reasons to be wary of investment. Tsukerman noted the economic issues in Zimbabwe and other African countries are also a factor. 'A downside of the U.S. reactors is that they tend to be more expensive than the Russian and Chinese technologies, they are limited in scale and size, and so more would need to be purchased to serve communities,' she said, noting the U.S. 'has yet to negotiate agreements with many of these countries, which in itself could be a monumental task given an anti-Western trend, particularly in West Africa, on the one hand, and the aggressive entry of other actors, such as Russia and China, on the other. Moreover, the U.S. has strict anti-corruption laws, which complicate bidding for tenders in countries with a different business culture, and many of the U.S. companies are reluctant to engage anywhere with an apparent high business risk.' India is another country working to make inroads in Africa. 'India currently is at the forefront of building thorium reactors,' said Tsukerman. 'According to plan, 30% of the Indian electricity in 2050 will be generated from thorium-based reactors. India is also a growing power throughout Africa, striving to compete with China and to expand its own geopolitical and economic reach. It has no shortage of workforce or engineers, and its work would be cheaper than U.S. or European implementation. However, so far India has not applied power plant outreach to its economic programs in Africa, and also struggles with modernizing its own business culture and implementation, focusing on exports of raw materials for the time being.' 2. Officials in Ghana, along with U.S.-based Regnum Technology Group, last year reached an agreement to deploy a NuScale VOYGR-12 small modular reactor in Ghana. Courtesy: NuScale Power There is some U.S. investment for nuclear technology in Africa. At the U.S.-Africa Nuclear Energy Summit in Nairobi, Kenya, last year, Nuclear Power Ghana and U.S. nuclear technology project developer Regnum Technology Group reached an agreement to deploy a single NuScale VOYGR-12 (Figure 2) small modular reactor (SMR) facility in Ghana. Their goal is to own and operate the continent's first commercial advanced light-water SMR plant. 'Of course, whether the Western powers decide to compete with the Russian and Chinese variants depends a lot on the terms they can negotiate,' said Tsukerman. She said that Japan, 'which is making slow headways in the more-developed African countries like Kenya, could be well-positioned to provide a viable alternative to Russia and China in the nuclear sector.' — Darrell Proctor is a senior editor for POWER.
Reuters
19-02-2025
- Business
- Reuters
Big Tech contracts inject life into new nuclear
Summary Nuclear developers are benefitting from long-term power purchase agreements (PPAs) with Big Tech companies racing to secure 24/7 clean energy supply for large data centers. February 19 - Big Tech interest is helping to restart mothballed reactors and driving investment in small modular reactors (SMRs). Constellation Energy plans to restart the 837 MW Three Mile Island Unit 1, which had been idle for five years, to support a 20-year PPA with Microsoft announced in September to supply data centers in the mid-Atlantic region. Amazon Web Services and Talen Energy Corporation signed a 10-year PPA in March 2024 to take power in 120 MW increments from the latter's 2.5 GW Susquehanna nuclear plant in Pennsylvania to supply a planned 960 MW data center campus. Amazon is also among a consortium investing $500 million in X-energy with the aim of installing 5 GW of SMR capacity in the U.S. by 2039. As a first step, Amazon and Energy Northwest will develop four SMRs with combined capacity of 320 MW in Washington State. In May 2023, Helion Energy agreed a PPA with Microsoft for at least 50 MW from its first fusion power plant, scheduled for completion in Washington State by 2028. Unlike traditional water-cooled fission reactors, fusion has not yet been commercially used for power generation. U.S. power demand from data centers is forecast to double within five years, rising from 176 TWh in 2023 to between 325 and 580 TWh in 2028, government data shows. Big Tech companies favour adjacent dedicated power generation to ensure a steady supply of energy around the clock. In October, Google signed an agreement with Kairos Power to develop 500 MW of SMRs close to data centers from 2030. Some PPAs have flexible terms because of uncertainty over the scale of data center demand and the potential development of new technologies that make AI more energy efficient, several industry sources told Reuters Events. Including non-binding capacity targets provides 'protection for both parties in case the plant cannot be built on time or if indeed the electricity demand does not end up materializing,' said Tanguy de Bienassis, an Investment and Finance Analyst at the International Energy Agency (IEA). Impact of the PPAs Thanks to hefty investments from Big Tech, SMR developers including Oklo, NuScale, X-energy and TerraPower are competing to develop the first U.S. commercial SMRs but the technologies must first be proven through demonstration reactors. The PPAs show that net zero energy procurement is a strategic priority for large load energy consumers but 'investing in SMRs will involve a higher level of investment risk compared to a PPA offtake for an existing asset,' David Brown, Director, Energy Transition Practice at Wood Mackenzie, told Reuters Events. CHART: Small modular reactor construction costs in major markets, 2040 ($/kW) Nuclear supply chains have atrophied because of the lack of new reactor development, Benton Arnett, said Senior Director of Markets and Policy at the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI). However, the completion of Vogtle 3 & 4 by Southern Company in Georgia in 2023-24 was a huge step forward in revitalizing these supply chains and 'bringing down the construction risk' for future projects, he said. They were the first new nuclear units in the U.S. for more than 30 years. Join us at Reuters Events SMR & Advanced Reactor 2025 and network with over 600 utilities, developers, financiers, technology suppliers and regulators. In addition, growing tech industry interest has led to new investments that have also benefitted 'uranium miners, fuel processors and enrichment companies,' Brandon Rakszawski, VP, Director of Product Management at asset manager VanEck, told Reuters Events. Investment in the nuclear energy ecosystem has increased exponentially, said Rakszawski. 'Assets and net flows into our VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF are both up substantially [year-on-year],' he said. The recent PPAs will have 'a strong signalling effect to the industry and finance community,' as they highlight confidence in the ability of nuclear to supply reliable power to data centers, thereby addressing the offtake risk that can potentially thwart the development of large scale nuclear 'conventional' plants, noted de Bienassis. Rising tech demand Typical data centers need 5 to 10 MW but new hyperscale centers to power AI can require more than 100 MW. According to the IEA, data centers account for 2 to 4% of current U.S. electricity demand but this figure surpassed 10% in five states in 2023, according to the Electric Power Research Institute: Virginia (25.6%), Nebraska (11.7%), Oregon (11.4%), Iowa (11.4%) and Wyoming (11.3%). Given that large tech companies including Microsoft, Google and Amazon have ambitious decarbonization targets, much of this new power will likely come from renewables and nuclear. Strategies to overcome cost hurdles for new nuclear - download our webinar. The Department of Energy (DOE) calculates that U.S. nuclear capacity could triple to 300 GW by 2050, driven by Big Tech load growth, coupled with a desire for 24/7 low-carbon power. However, future sector demand is uncertain because of rapid efficiency gains. Developers would benefit from aligning the length of PPAs with the life of nuclear assets to improve project economics, while variable pricing would help project owners and offtakers share early mover risk, said Arnett. Change of government President Trump, who took office on January 20, is yet to officially unveil his energy strategy but has instructed the DOE to review support for nuclear energy within 90 days of his inauguration. New Energy Secretary Chris Wright – a former Oklo board member – has highlighted the benefits of SMRs, while Trump himself has voiced concern over the cost of large, traditional reactors. Private financial institutions consider government support a crucial factor in deciding whether to finance nuclear projects, de Bienassis told Reuters Events. Government backing could ensure that mothballed reactors are brought back online within five years but developing new reactors will take at least a decade, said Brown. For exclusive nuclear insights, sign up to our newsletter. Although it is unclear how many mothballed reactors could be brought back online in the short term, according to the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, 13 reactors were retired over 2013-2022 with combined capacity of 10.5 GW. 'Now is a golden window of opportunity for policymakers to leverage the immense interest in advanced reactors that we are seeing from the private sector,' said Arnett. As more PPAs come to fruition, they provide 'additional confidence that this nuclear resurgence we are seeing is real,' he said.
