The Reactor Pilot Program is Just the Beginning

On July 4th, 2026, America celebrated its 250th birthday. Meanwhile, the nuclear industry celebrated something else: it met and exceeded a deadline many believed it couldn’t–and made history in the process.

In May 2025, President Trump directed the Department of Energy (DOE) to get at least three advanced reactors critical by Independence Day 2026. The nuclear industry is often measured in decades, not months, so this ambitious goal was met both with skepticism and excitement.

The goal turned out to be conservative. The program overshot. Four DOE-authorized test reactors achieved criticality by the deadline. Over the last month, the Antares Mark-0, Valar Atomics Ward 250, the Deployable Energy Unity and Aalo Atomics Aalo-X achieved criticality. This makes the United States the first country in history to achieve criticality in multiple unique advanced microreactor designs in a single month.

While the criticality goal made the headlines, the Reactor Pilot Program demonstrated something even more important: that private-industry-led, government-enabled programs are the fastest way to move from design to demonstration. The national labs were empowered by the May 2025 executive order to take advantage of existing statute in the Atomic Energy Act and more recent Congressional authorizations signed into law near the end of President Trump’s first term within the Nuclear Energy Innovation and Capabilities Act (NEICA). 

The Reactor Pilot Program demonstrated a new model for how the government can accelerate private innovation. The leap straight from the design table to commercial operations is one of the reasons why commercial nuclear is often plagued by technology and construction risk. Testing and iterating can mitigate these risks. These test reactors can help bridge the gap to deployment by establishing a foundation for supply chains, construction and operating procedures, fuel qualification and operating data. The reactor criticality goal, strong DOE leadership and industry-funded user facilities brought these first four test reactors online. 

Criticality is just the start.

Zero-power criticality was  technically first achieved with a pile of bricks in 1942 and many steps away from reliably delivering commercial power. It simply demonstrates that the nuclear chain reaction behaves as expected and is a milestone after the first leg of the race. The true value of these demonstrations is in the journey to achieving that milestone–reducing technological uncertainty in a way that only real-world experience can.

These reactors are not expected to be a commercial product. Historically, reactor designers have felt pressure to pursue a commercial project too early and therefore carry technical, regulatory and financial risk simultaneously into their first project. This program offered the ability to progressively derisk technology in phases.

Instead of jumping straight to commercialization, companies now have a dedicated pathway to build, operate, test, modify and improve first-of-a-kind designs under DOE authorization before pursuing commercial deployment. The main product of this program isn’t reactors, but data, experience and confidence. Validating designs, collecting operational data, training operators, and gaining project management and construction experience are all invaluable to new companies working on innovative technology, nuclear or not.

So what’s next?

The Reactor Pilot Program itself was intended as a sprint. An ambitious, time-boxed goal that would build confidence and move the ball forward on technological readiness. The next phase of this effort is the new, sustained Launch Pad initiative administered by the National Reactor Innovation Center (NRIC) at Idaho National Laboratory (INL). 

Launch Pad isn’t a replacement for the pilot program, but an evolution of its philosophy of innovation. Across three capabilities, Launch Pad will feature even greater opportunities for innovative companies to prototype their technology: 

Starting in 2026, the U.S. will have a dedicated platform to provide reactor developers with access to national lab expertise, dedicated testing infrastructure, and a framework for demonstrating prototypes.

Each company will have different goals and objectives through these programs. Some developers may sprint toward criticality, while others may spend more time developing a closer-to-commercial design. Not every one of these efforts will ultimately succeed, which is fine. That’s exactly how innovation should work.

Measuring Success

The achievement of this program wasn’t just meeting the criticality goal. There is, after all, still a significant amount of work to be done before that translates into commercial results. The greatest achievement is unlocking America’s ability to innovate and build. 

The revitalization of the nuclear industry has the makings of a hallmark accomplishment of the Trump administration. But to get there, eventually, prototypes will need to become commercial offerings. Companies must demonstrate reliable operation, develop repeatable manufacturing methods, build supply chains, attract private capital and secure customers. Ultimately, they need to prove they can put electrons on the grid reliably and at a competitive cost.

As these companies progress toward commercialization, the July 4, 2026 goal will be remembered not as the end of a successful program, but as the revitalization of the American nuclear innovation engine.

The Lesson From 250 Years Of Powering America (Daily Caller)

This op-ed was originally published by Daily Caller on July 5, 2026. Click here to read the entire piece.

It took energy to power America’s first 250 years, and it will take energy to power the next 250 years. To meet growing global energy demand, and fulfill President Donald Trump’s American energy dominance goals, America needs its next energy revolution.

America’s success is rooted in its ability to innovate – and that same spirit is shaping the next era of energy leadership. Right now, American entrepreneurs and engineers are developing breakthroughs in LNG, nuclear energy and leveraging more than a century of oil and gas expertise to deploy geothermal energy. Other next-generation technologies are also moving forward to define the future of affordable, reliable and clean energy. (RELATED: America’s Energy Dominance: The Fruit Of Freedom On Our 250th) 

Here’s the roadmap: innovate fast, build here, sell globally.

In 1912, LNG arrived on the scene when the first LNG plant was built in West Virginia. Almost a century later, advances in horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing sparked the “Shale Revolution” in 2008, unlocking vast domestic natural gas reserves, making the U.S. the world’s top producer, and laying the foundation for its modern LNG export industry. In 2022, the U.S. became the largest LNG exporter in the world.

Today, the LNG industry supports 495,000 well-paying American jobs. Here’s another way to look at it: since 2016, the U.S. has supplied enough LNG to power the energy use of about 400 million people globally. A stunning number over 100 years in the making. 

Can you imagine the U.S. without the shale revolution? The loss of wealth, jobs, and security for our country would be staggering – not to mention the opportunity to reduce global emissions by replacing higher-emitting foreign fuels with U.S. LNG, which is among the lowest-carbon, natural gas options on Earth.

Building on success and lessons from the past, it’s time for America to set its sights on future horizons as electricity demand will surge by 50% over the next two decades in the U.S. alone. Just as the LNG revolution drove America’s energy security during the first quarter of the 21st century, new sources of power generation will need to be commercialized at scale to drive American jobs and energy dominance through the rest of the century.

Click here to read the full article

Carbon Dioxide Removal 101

Interconnection 101: Clearing the Path for New Power

The United States must rapidly deploy new sources of reliable, affordable, and clean power to meet rising electricity demand from data centers, industrial growth, and the electrification of multiple sectors. Whether the power comes from nuclear, natural gas, geothermal, or other sources, every new project must navigate the grid interconnection process, which is the biggest bottleneck for deploying all types of infrastructure. 

Interconnection is the process of connecting a new energy facility to the electric grid. You can think of the interconnection process in two steps: first, a study, and second, the physical connection for commercial operation.

In the first step, grid operators study how a proposed project will affect electricity flows across the entire grid system, assess reliability impacts, and determine whether grid upgrades are needed and their costs. These can include building new transmission lines, rebuilding transmission lines to be higher voltage, or reconductoring of existing lines, as well as deploying new equipment at substations or onto other parts of the system to ensure reliability. The interconnection study process takes over three years on average, with some parts of the country taking nearly five years on average. Then, step two, the actual physical connection, can take an additional two to four years. This inefficient process results in less than 20% of proposed projects reaching commercial operation.

Interconnection is Slowing Down Energy Addition

Source: LBNL. (2026). Queued Up 2026 Data File.

The main cause of this bottleneck is a disconnect between three critical processes:

  1. Generation interconnection, which brings electricity supply onto the grid.
  2. Demand (Load) interconnection, which connects electricity consumers and increases system demand.
  3. Transmission planning, which evaluates and identifies the grid infrastructure needed to ensure reliability, reduce congestion, and meet future energy needs.

These processes are deeply interdependent, yet they are often planned and executed in isolation. This misalignment leads to delays, higher costs, and missed opportunities to efficiently align supply, demand, and infrastructure.

Addressing these challenges requires a multi-pronged approach that can:

  1. Maximize existing grid capacity;
  2. Integrate transmission planning with generation and load growth; and
  3. Leverage innovation to accelerate studies and grid connection

Together, these reforms can help unlock the full potential of the existing project pipeline, reduce timelines, and ensure the grid can support continued economic growth. Addressing siting, permitting, and supply chain bottlenecks will also be essential to building a grid capable of meeting rising demand.

1. Maximize existing grid capacity

Making better use of the existing grid is one of the fastest, lowest-cost ways to bring new power online. Instead of waiting years for new transmission to be built, there are other ways projects can connect to and use the grid. Three approaches can tap into existing capacity to make their electrons available to the grid faster: energy-only service, surplus interconnection service, and generator replacement.

  1. Energy-only transmission service
    Some energy projects seek full deliverability of their power on the transmission system, meaning they reserve capacity and are willing to pay for the infrastructure to support delivery. Other projects, however, may be willing to accept energy-only transmission service, allowing them to deliver power when transmission capacity is available, without firm capacity rights.

    The benefit of this energy-only service is that these projects can connect to the grid without needing major network upgrades, which lowers costs and speeds up the connection process. However, these projects take on the risk that the system is full or congested, and their energy is therefore curtailed. ERCOT successfully uses this model, enabling faster, higher project completion rates for all types of energy technologies.In other regions, however, grid operators often study these projects as if they seek deliverability, triggering unnecessary upgrades that increase costs and timelines. Aligning studies to project service needs can unlock faster, lower-cost connections. Projects can also transition from energy-only service to having full deliverability over time, allowing them to operate while upgrades are being built.
  2. Surplus interconnection
    Most interconnection points are underutilized because generators don’t run at full capacity all of the time, or even most of the time. For example, over 200 GW of generation on the grid today is designed to serve peak load periods, meaning that for much of the year, these points of interconnection are underutilized. Co-locating new projects, such as natural gas peakers, with existing solar projects can maximize use of this infrastructure, avoiding grid upgrades and saving time and costs. Streamlining these requests and proactively identifying opportunities can further accelerate energy deployment.
  1. Generator replacement
    When an existing energy project retires, the point of interconnection it utilized and any capacity rights should be expeditiously reallocated to a new project or projects. Proactively developing the procedure is the critical first step and should be designed to prioritize projects that fully utilize capacity and can be rapidly built and connected. By minimizing the time this grid capacity remains underutilized, transmission providers can ensure resource adequacy needs are met and that efficient market entry and exit are achieved, thereby promoting affordability.

    Transmission providers can also consider allowing replacement projects to be located somewhere other than the retiring plant, provided the new location offers electrically equivalent grid access and capacity rights. The Midwest Independent System Operator made this change last year.

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has laid the groundwork for these interconnection pathways through Order 2023, which updated the interconnection process in 2023 to operate in a first-ready, first-served study process for clusters of projects, and Order 845, which established surplus interconnection service in 2018. However, implementation by utilities and Regional Transmission Organizations (RTOs) can lead to study approaches and processes that inhibit their effective use, leaving prime speed to power opportunities off the table. In response, some RTOs have proactively amended their implementation of surplus interconnection service to remove barriers and accelerate energy additions, and more utilities and RTOs should follow suit to address reliability and affordability.

Additionally, FERC can identify and direct utilities and RTOs to remedy deficiencies that are unjust, unreasonable, unduly discriminatory or preferential through a Federal Power Act Section 206 proceeding. This approach enables FERC to identify specific deficiencies in a utility’s or RTO’s procedures and require revisions to address them, promoting more just and reasonable rates and regulations. It is faster than rulemaking and can improve these pathways to remove market barriers, helping get more electrons onto the grid faster.

2. Integrate transmission planning with generation and load growth

The siloing of interconnection processes from transmission planning is a core challenge. Today, information about the timing and cost of transmission and other network upgrades comes after a project enters the interconnection process and at the end of the multi-year long study process. This incentivizes developers to submit many projects, knowing that most will be withdrawn when they realize it will take too long or cost too much to interconnect a project. This creates delays and restudies for other projects whose study results are interdependent with other projects in the queue. Integrating information about the cost of connecting into the transmission system and when that capacity will be available at the beginning of the interconnection process can reduce uncertainty and enable more efficient allocation of scarce grid capacity.

Allocating this capacity can take many forms, such as project scoring criteria, entry-fee models, or open seasons. Regardless of the specific method different utilities or grid operators pursue, it’s essential to allocate capacity on a technology-neutral basis to projects that meet strict commercial-readiness requirements and financial commitments to accelerate energy deployment. These can include take-or-pay provisions for transmission capacity to reflect that projects will have greater certainty about timing and cost for interconnection. They could also eliminate grace periods for energy projects to reach commercial operation after the interconnection agreement is reached. This would help ensure that projects that are not commercially ready to build within three years of getting the go-ahead don’t prevent others from using available transmission capacity.

Proactive transmission planning is also essential. As demand grows, new transmission, not just generation, is required to maintain reliability and move power to customers. Equally important is coordinating generation and load interconnection. Today, they are studied separately, missing opportunities for shared infrastructure. In Ohio, for example, a 1.5 GW gas plant withdrew after facing $1.3 billion in grid upgrade costs, even as data center growth drove similar transmission needs in the region. An integrated approach could align investments, lower costs, and improve certainty for both generators and large loads.

Grid Access Impacts Connection Speed

This approach to interconnection is similar to how runners organize themselves for a race. Assuming all projects are prepared for the race with their permits, site control, equipment and workforce contracts, and financial offtake ready to go, the projects that run faster will be those that can more quickly connect to the grid at their desired service level. The fastest projects would be those seeking energy-only service, surplus interconnection service, or generator replacement. Projects that can utilize existing transmission capacity or are planning to build in areas where new transmission capacity is under development may move at a more moderate pace. Meanwhile, projects that want full transmission deliverability but will need new infrastructure to be studied, planned, and built to meet their needs will move more slowly. By sorting projects by how quickly they can obtain their desired grid access and aligning their interconnection process to reflect only the studies and steps necessary to support their desired grid access, more energy can be added to the grid efficiently.

Grid operators can follow in California and SPP’s lead in prioritizing the efficient allocation of existing and forthcoming transmission capacity to provide greater cost and timing certainty to energy projects. FERC could also initiate a rulemaking to streamline interconnection processes for projects seeking full deliverability into areas with existing or forthcoming transmission capacity. This proceeding could also break down silos across large-load and generation interconnections to identify more efficient, cost-effective grid solutions.

3. Leverage innovation to accelerate studies and grid connection

Modernizing interconnection studies through automation and artificial intelligence (AI) is a clear near-term opportunity. Today, engineers spend significant time manually validating and updating data, creating and solving models, identifying grid upgrades to address constraints, and generating reports on the studies. Because these steps are fragmented and completed manually, they introduce more opportunities for human error and make replicating results challenging and time-consuming. Automation can dramatically reduce timelines. For example, the regional transmission operator in the Midwest, MISO, demonstrated how automation reduced its Phase One study from 686 days to 10 days, or from two years to just over one week. These time savings were made while achieving over 99% accuracy and minimal changes in the estimated grid upgrade costs for projects. In addition to the benefits of automation, new software tools leverage more advanced computational processes that can drastically reduce the time it takes to complete computations. All together, these tools allow engineers to spend more time applying their expertise than conducting manual data and model manipulation.

In addition to AI and automation, data-sharing must also improve. Today’s fragmented, email-based exchanges of information create delays due to the lack of timely access to accurate and up-to-date system information, leading to restudies. Notably, MISO’s computer systems completed the analysis in only 0.3 days, indicating a significant opportunity to further reduce study time through improved data-sharing practices. 

Scaling these tools nationwide could transform interconnection timelines. While some operators have begun adopting them, all transmission providers should prioritize deploying software that improves speed, cost, and accuracy. FERC could require all transmission providers to issue a Request for Proposal (RFP) for software tools that improve the speed, cost, and accuracy of interconnection study processes. Utilities and RTOs will be able to evaluate all innovations on the market and select the tools that best fit their needs, or demonstrate that their current process and toolset are sufficient.

Another opportunity to better leverage innovations is in the deployment of advanced transmission technologies to upgrade the grid for new energy projects. Today, FERC regulations only require transmission providers to evaluate alternative transmission technologies that can enhance the performance of the existing infrastructure or replace existing equipment to increase capacity and efficiency, such as through reconductoring with advanced conductors. Transmission providers have sole discretion over whether to actually implement them. This means lower-cost, faster solutions may be underutilized.

To better support economic growth and lower consumer bills, FERC could update regulations to require providers to use these alternative technologies whenever they offer time or cost savings and meet all reliability standards. Furthermore, interconnection customers, who pay for network upgrades, should have the right to choose a solution so long as it meets all reliability standards.

Conclusion

Energy demand is growing, and the grid is not keeping pace. Growing the grid and addressing inefficient interconnection processes is crucial to economic growth, reliability, and energy affordability. These recommendations will let American energy move.

Unleashing U.S. Energy: Lessons from Japan

Energy security doesn’t just power economies; it defines alliances. Few nations understand this better than Japan. With scarce domestic resources and deep import dependence, the country knows firsthand how vulnerable it is to global supply shocks, making energy security a national imperative. ClearPath’s educational series, the Clean Energy Innovation Academy (CEIA), took nine U.S. Senate Republican staff to Japan to see that commitment firsthand. At every stop, the case for American energy leadership was clear and demonstrated why the United States must innovate fast, build here and sell globally.

U.S. Senate Staff pictured with U.S. Ambassador to Japan George Glass. [L-R]: Micah Chambers, Dan Horning, Lucas Da Pieve, Chris Prandoni, Wendy Baig, Jake McCurdy, Ambassador Glass, Joshua Sizemore, Jeremy Harrell, Duncan Rankin, Alicia Badley

Key takeaways:

American LNG is essential for Japan: American liquefied natural gas (LNG) is a critical piece of Japan’s energy mix, and American technology is woven throughout Japan’s energy systems. Standing inside JERA Futtsu Thermal Power station, one of Japan’s largest natural gas power plants, the scale of U.S. involvement was on full display. GE Vernova turbines manufactured in Greenville, South Carolina, drive the bulk of the more than 5,000 megawatts powering the Tokyo metropolitan area. The fuel feeding those turbines is increasingly American, too. The U.S. currently supplies roughly 10 percent of Japan’s total LNG imports, and with U.S. export capacity projected to nearly double by 2031, the U.S. is well-positioned to expand that share. As Japan continues to prioritize energy security and diversify its supply base, the U.S. is a natural partner, offering LNG that is reliable, affordable and strategically aligned with the interests of both nations.

he ClearPath team and U.S. Senate staff pictured at the JERA Futtsu Thermal Power Station.

Japan is backing American energy: Japan has committed $550 billion in investment into U.S. strategic industries, with roughly $300 billion directed toward energy, including LNG, grid modernization and nuclear development. Conversations with senior officials across the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI), Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) and Ministry of Environment (MOE) reinforced that this capital flows here because our allies trust American reliability and see the U.S. as their partner of choice on energy. The energy policy decisions in Washington, D.C. carry weight far beyond U.S. borders.

Nuclear fuel independence is a long-term investment: The Rokkasho Nuclear Fuel Complex, operated by Japan Nuclear Fuel Limited, is one of the most significant energy infrastructure projects in the world, bringing together uranium enrichment, spent fuel reprocessing, mixed oxide (MOX) fuel fabrication and low-level waste management in a single facility. It represents Japan’s commitment to a closed nuclear fuel cycle and taking control of its own energy future. Japan has no domestic uranium, yet rather than remain vulnerable to the geopolitical risks of import dependence, the country has spent decades building the industrial capacity to maximize and reuse what it imports. The U.S. has the potential to pursue a similar path, with growing investments in domestic uranium enrichment and used fuel management pointing toward long-term nuclear energy independence. Rokkasho paints a vivid picture of what that long-term commitment looks like in practice.

The ClearPath team and U.S. Senate staff pictured at the Rokkasho Nuclear Fuel Complex.

Nuclear power is making a comeback in Japan: Fukushima Daiichi has defined Japan’s energy story for over a decade. In the aftermath of the 2011 disaster, Japan stepped back from nuclear power, but the economic and energy security costs of that decision proved too significant to sustain. Today, Japan is recommitting to nuclear as an essential part of its energy future, and its partnership with the U.S. is central to that effort. American nuclear technology, expertise and regulatory standards have long set the global benchmark, and the opportunity to deepen that leadership has never been greater.

Strategic export financing drives energy leadership: Japan has modernized its export and investment financing to prioritize strategic sectors, with energy and supply chain resilience at the core of that effort. The Japan Bank for International Cooperation (JBIC) plays a central role in financing and facilitating those investments, helping to move strategic projects from ambition to reality. That enhanced capacity makes JBIC the tip of the spear in driving the investment deals that underpin the broader U.S.-Japan Strategic Investment Initiative. The upcoming reauthorization of the Export-Import Bank (EXIM) presents a critical opportunity for the U.S. to take a more strategic approach to its own export financing. Done right, it creates the flexibility American energy projects need to compete and win in global markets.

U.S.-Japan industry partnerships are delivering real results: Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. (MHI) exemplifies what U.S.-Japan private sector collaboration looks like at its best. As AI data centers and industrial expansion drive electricity demand, innovation and industrial competitiveness have become shared priorities for both nations. MHI’s carbon capture technology is deployed globally, including at the Petra Nova project in Texas, and MHI has invested in Fervo Energy, a U.S.-based enhanced geothermal startup, signaling a shared interest in geothermal as a critical baseload resource. These are not one-sided arrangements; they are cutting-edge technologies developed through a partnership that creates value for both countries. With American electricity demand projected to grow 35 to 50 percent by 2040, every reliable and affordable baseload source matters, and U.S.-Japan industry partnerships are well-positioned to deliver at the scale the moment demands.

The opportunity ahead

Japan invested deliberately in technology, alliances and industrial capacity to secure its energy future – a remarkable achievement for a nation with scarce domestic resources. The U.S. has every advantage Japan lacks: abundant natural gas, uranium reserves and geothermal potential, backed by a private sector that consistently leads the world in energy innovation.

What emerged is a partnership built on mutual interest. Japan is investing to scale technologies in both countries while the U.S. is well positioned to be the world’s energy solutions provider; the demand is real, and the opportunity to innovate fast, build here and sell globally has never been greater.

 

 

American Chemical Innovation Can Secure Supply Chain Independence

The Strait of Hormuz is not just a key shipping corridor for oil; it is a critical artery for the transportation of chemicals like fertilizers, sulfuric acid and plastics. The recent disruptions in the Strait show that while supply chain volatility creates economic and strategic risks for the United States, it also presents an opportunity to let America do what it does best: innovate fast. American innovators are creating critical, clean technologies to address the current vulnerabilities in the chemical supply chain, but they need supportive industrial innovation policy to scale these technologies.

History has shown that robust industrial policy has already helped the U.S. innovate around supply chain challenges again and again. Targeted public investments enabled the shale gas revolution, transforming the U.S. into the world’s top natural gas producer and insulating the country from global energy shocks.

On the chemicals front, however, the U.S. is not completely insulated:

The U.S. has a unique opportunity to accelerate chemical manufacturing innovation from the lab to commercialization, which requires industry investment and bipartisan policy support. 

American innovators are already doing their part to develop next-generation production methods that reduce import reliance, reduce emissions and strengthen supply chains. To understand the scale of the opportunity ahead, it helps to examine three essential chemicals now facing mounting supply and production pressures: fertilizers, sulfuric acid and plastics. 

Fertilizers for Agriculture

Disruptions in the Strait have affected one-third of the fertilizers traded by sea, specifically nitrogen-based chemicals such as ammonia and urea. Nitrogen-based fertilizer prices are up over 30% from 2025, a market signal that Strait disruptions are no longer a distant shipping problem, but a cost impacting the agriculture sector. Alternative ports cannot sufficiently offset this supply, especially during the spring planting season when demand spikes.

In Texas, HyCO1 is unlocking new feedstocks to create hydrogen, a key building block for fertilizers. Their drop-in catalyst allows hydrogen producers to use CO2 and methane in existing production systems. This gives producers a lower-emissions, more flexible way to make this critical ingredient for fertilizers. FUEL, the Future Use of Energy in Louisiana program supported by the National Science Foundation, has partnered with HyCO1, exemplifying how federal RD&D programs can help innovators improve their drop-in solutions and quickly reach industrial producers.

Sulfuric Acid for Industry and Technology

Sulfuric acid is the most manufactured chemical in the world, and Gulf countries produce more than 24% of the seaborne traded supply. Manufacturers use it in batteries, petrochemical refining and critical minerals processing for copper and zinc, key inputs for America’s AI infrastructure and energy security. A shortage could ripple across the industrial base, and to prepare for these impacts, China has restricted its sulfuric acid exports, and other countries are moving to secure supply.

In New York, Travertine is creating a domestic, resilient source of sulfuric acid. Its electrolysis and recycling technology effectively turns industrial byproducts into valuable ingredients for manufacturing. At Travertine’s demonstration plant, the company captures CO2 from the air to use as a feedstock, processing the CO2 and local gypsum rock into sulfuric acid. Recognizing the benefits of this innovation, ARPA-E has partnered with Travertine to refine these technologies for critical minerals recovery. 

While China is facing shortages and restricting sulfuric acid exports, the U.S. is creating new pathways to turn its industrial waste into valuable resources, and federal RD&D resources would provide the support needed to scale these technologies.

Plastics for Consumer Goods

Petrochemicals are the building blocks of plastics, and Gulf countries now export both the petrochemicals and plastic polymers used in everyday goods. While the U.S. still leads in clean petrochemical production, today’s supply disruptions, combined with higher crude oil prices, are driving up the price of plastics.

In Tennessee, Trillium Renewable Chemicals is manufacturing homegrown, biobased acrylonitrile, a key petrochemical used in plastics, carbon fiber, and rubber goods. Trillium’s biobased process supports American farmers and avoids the impact of crude oil price swings, helping keep these goods affordable and made in America. The Department of Energy (DOE) was one of the first investors in Trillium’s technology, and now private dollars have followed. Trillium has completed a $13.3 million raise for its first commercial-scale demonstration plant, demonstrating the value of DOE’s tactical investments to accelerate technologies from the lab to demonstration.

Federal Policy Can Unlock Innovative Chemical Manufacturing

While the Energy Act of 2020, signed into law by President Trump, modernized industrial innovation policy for the first time in over a decade, these authorizations will soon expire. Congress has the opportunity to renew Congressional direction authorizing industrial research and development and dedicated resources for chemical innovation. With the help of these policies, America can turn today’s chemical supply shock into tomorrow’s manufacturing advantage, creating lower-emissions products at home and selling them to the world.

 

Where Three Tax Credits Meet: Mapping America’s Best Sites for New Nuclear

This summer, Governors will have a unique opportunity to bolster clean, firm energy deployment in their states through Opportunity Zone designations. Selected strategically, these designations can overlap in areas eligible for additional clean energy tax incentives, improving the economics of advanced nuclear and geothermal projects. The result would be more investment in clean, reliable power that can drive economic growth and grid reliability for decades to come. Multiple federal tax credits can now be utilized in an Opportunity Zone to amplify their impact.

Opportunity Zones are a bipartisan policy first championed by Senators Tim Scott (R-SC) and Cory Booker (D-NJ) that provide tax incentives for investments made in economically distressed census tracts. The 2025 Working Families Tax Cuts built on the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act by making Opportunity Zones a permanent part of the tax code. Starting in July 2026, Governors have 90 days to determine which of their state’s eligible census tracts will receive this designation. The choices will last a decade and create durable signals for investors.

The Working Families Tax Cuts also preserved and strengthened Section 48E investment and Section 45Y production clean energy tax credits, reflecting a Republican commitment to supporting innovative, dispatchable clean technologies such as advanced nuclear and geothermal. Built into those credits are two place-based bonuses that direct investment toward communities with existing energy infrastructure and workforce capacity. First, the Energy Community bonus adds 10% to the tax credit value for projects located in areas with significant fossil fuel employment and above-average unemployment, near retired coal mines or coal-fired power plants, or on brownfield sites. These are regions where new clean energy development can build on existing grid connections, skilled labor, and industrial land. Second, the new Nuclear Energy Community designation under the 45Y production tax credit adds an additional 10% to advanced nuclear projects in metropolitan areas with established nuclear workforces and supply chains.

Taken together, these three federal incentives, including Opportunity Zones, the Energy Community adder, and the Nuclear Community adder, can now be jointly utilized on a single site. Based on published IRS data and ClearPath’s internal analysis, thousands of census tracts are likely to qualify for all three, but only if Governors take action this summer. These tracts deserve close attention from developers, investors, and state energy offices ahead of the July designation window. Here’s how the three incentives compare:

Why the Combination Matters

Each incentive reduces the cost of a new nuclear project in a different way. Opportunity Zones make it cheaper to attract private investment, as investors who put capital gains into a qualifying project can defer and reduce the taxes they owe on those gains, making the investment more attractive compared to alternatives outside Opportunity Zones. The Energy Community bonus directly increases the tax credit value of each megawatt-hour produced or dollar invested in a new energy project, while the Nuclear Energy Community bonus increases the tax credit value of each megawatt-hour produced by advanced nuclear energy projects. When all three apply to a census tract, they combine to meaningfully reduce the cost of capital for advanced nuclear, one of the most significant barriers to building American nuclear power.

Where do these tax incentives overlap?

Our analysis finds that 3,662 census tracts across 32 states may qualify for all three credits. These locations are found in the Rust Belt, the Tennessee Valley, the Carolinas, the Western Gulf Coast, and pockets of Southern California. These locations have the construction trades, fuel cycle facilities, research and development facilities, and a manufacturing base for advanced nuclear in addition to a broader history and growing presence of energy-centric industries. Opportunity Zone designations this summer create the rare opportunity to utilize three federal tax benefits on the same site.

We also pulled the broader overlays: tracts where Opportunity Zone eligibility intersects with the Energy Community Bonus alone, 8,401 tracts in 46 states relevant to all types of clean energy projects, and with the Nuclear Energy Community designation alone, 10,782 tracts in 40 states with advanced nuclear-ready metros. Together, the layers show Governors where their designations can do double or triple duty, driving private investment in reliable, dispatchable clean energy projects like advanced nuclear and geothermal that strengthen both local economies and grid reliability.


The Bottom Line

Demand growth from emerging industries like AI and the revitalization of manufacturing represents a generational opportunity to bring economic development to communities across the country. Governors have 90 days, starting July 1, to designate Opportunity Zones that spur the development of clean, dispatchable power in their states. The map shows where to start.

Sources

Opportunity Zones
Census tracts eligible for designation as an Opportunity Zone must meet income and poverty-level criteria calculated from the American Community Survey. The most recent data was published in 2026, and the 2026 Opportunity Zone designations are available here.

Energy Communities 
Census tracts that qualify for this bonus due to a coal closure do not change year-to-year, except when new coal plants close. Census tracts that qualify on the basis of employment (whether in the fossil industry or the overall employment level) change yearly, and the Treasury Department publishes new files as data becomes available. Both datasets are available here. Census tracts with brownfield sites would also qualify for this bonus, but we do not include them here because the majority of qualifying brownfields sites are not registered in EPA’s database.

Nuclear Energy Communities
Treasury has not yet released guidance on the Nuclear Energy Communities, so the eligible regions shown above reflect ClearPath’s interpretation and analysis of authorizing language in the 2025 Working Families Tax Cuts Act. We used developer profiles from the Gateway for Advanced Innovation in Nuclear (GAIN) and supply chain data from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) to identify the universe of companies and facilities that could meet the qualification requirements for a Nuclear Energy Community. Due to poor data, we were unable to estimate employment levels at these companies and facilities as would be required by the authorizing language. The regions shown on the map should be interpreted as MSAs that could potentially qualify for the Nuclear Energy Communities bonus, pending further data collection and Treasury guidance.

 

From Energy Act to IPO: Federal Energy R&D Programs Deliver Results

The next phase of America’s energy future made its Wall Street debut this spring with resounding success. Within just a few weeks, two of the country’s most promising next-generation energy companies made their entrances to the public markets through initial public offerings (IPOs) of their corporate stock. X-energy, a Maryland-based designer of high-temperature gas reactors and fuel, raised over $1 billion in what became the largest advanced nuclear IPO on record. Fervo Energy, the Houston-based pioneer of enhanced geothermal systems, followed with an upsized IPO offering that raised $2.2 billion, making it the largest-ever clean energy IPO. In an industry where billion-dollar IPOs are exceptionally rare, to see two in quick succession is a sign of strong investor demand for firm, dispatchable, carbon-free generation as rising electricity demand reshapes the American power sector.

These financing milestones were both enabled by forward-looking federal research and development (R&D). Both X-energy and Fervo are products of the Energy Act of 2020, a landmark bipartisan federal legislation that reauthorized critical Department of Energy (DOE) innovation programs like:

Early-stage investments from ARPA-E laid the groundwork for X-energy’s TRISO fuel in 2020. When the Department of Energy selected X-energy in 2020 as one of two ARDP awardees, the program provided up to 50% cost-sharing for a commercial-scale project. That federal partnership enabled X-energy to complete the engineering and basic design of its reactor and fuel fabrication facility, navigate licensing with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and recently begin construction on its TRISO-X fuel fabrication facility in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. X-energy and Dow Chemical are awaiting NRC approval of their construction permit application for the four-unit, 320-MWe Xe-100 plant at Dow’s manufacturing facility in Seadrift, Texas.

Fervo Energy’s story is similar. Founded in Houston in 2017, Fervo has transformed the next-generation geothermal industry using tools pioneered by the oil and gas sector during the shale revolution. Fervo’s technique uses applied horizontal drilling, hydraulic fracturing and fiber-optic sensing to unlock resources that were once considered too difficult or too expensive to tap at scale.

Fervo Energy’s Publicly Announced Funding to Date and Most Notable Investors

Source: Rystad Energy

Like X-energy, ARPA-E grants to Fervo Energy as early as 2019 paved the way for the company’s dynamic growth. Fervo’s founders also benefitted from DOE-aligned fellowship programs, including Activate and Cyclotron Road, a DOE lab-embedded entrepreneurship program at Lawrence Berkeley National Lab, unlocking critical expertise to validate the company’s technology at its earliest stages.

The results speak for themselves. Between 2022 and 2025, Fervo reduced drilling times by approximately 80%. The Utah FORGE site helped unlock these commercial breakthroughs, allowing the company to develop and test the stimulation and reservoir engineering techniques that now define its approach. As a result, Fervo’s flagship Cape Station project in Utah is on track to begin delivering electricity this year.

Federal R&D and Demo Funding Catalyzes Tech up the S-Curve

Today, most of the Energy Act of 2020 programs that made Fervo and X-energy’s first-of-a-kind projects possible are expiring or have already expired. As energy demand continues to grow, Congress has the opportunity to reauthorize these programs that will help America continue to lead the world in energy innovation, win the AI race and meet rising energy demand. In the six years since the Energy Act of 2020, much has changed in the energy sector and DOE needs the most up-to-date set of tools to support exciting new technologies like quantum computing, enhanced grid technologies and energy storage. These IPOs should be the green light needed to recommit to fully authorizing and funding DOE’s R&D apparatus for the AI era.

The innovation programs authorized under the Energy Act of 2020 are the engine of American energy dominance for the next generation of firm clean power technologies. Capital markets have proven the model works. Now, the conditions are right for a similar bipartisan Congressional effort to unlock the next Fervo, the next X-energy, and ensure the next energy tech unicorn has the same federal R&D foundation to build on.

 

How Trump’s Nuclear Orders Sparked America’s Nuclear Revival (The National Interest)

This op-ed was originally published by The National Interest on May 21, 2026. Click here to read the entire piece.

Public and private investment is accelerating reactor deployment, rebuilding the domestic fuel supply chain, and laying the foundation for a long-awaited American nuclear renaissance.

One year ago, President Donald Trump signed four executive orders (EOs) that charted a new course to rebuild America’s nuclear industry. Together, they represent the most ambitious steps any president has taken to advance nuclear energy in the 21st century, aiming to deliver the long-promised nuclear renaissance. 

Trump’s Nuclear Executive Orders Set Ambitious Goals for US Nuclear Energy 

These executive orders established a framework to accelerate reactor deployment, rebuild the nuclear fuel supply chain, and restore US competitiveness globally through agencies such as the US Export-Import Bank (EXIM) to finance major American projects abroad. They provided specific, measurable targets to rapidly test new reactor designs, begin construction on 10 large reactors by 2030, quadruple US nuclear capacity to 400 gigawatts (GW) by 2050, address fuel shortages and waste disposal, streamline the regulatory environment, and rebuild a globally competitive industry capable of outcompeting China and Russia.

In this era of rising demand, the federal government cannot constrain nuclear development; all levers of government are increasingly working to enable more nuclear development. President Trump’s orders are more than just headlines; they’re part of a cohesive public-private strategy to accelerate the American nuclear industry. 

Big Tech and Industry Are Powering Advanced Nuclear Reactor Deployment 

Many of these projects are private sector-driven. Some of America’s largest companies, including Google, Microsoft, Amazon, Dow, and others, are turning to both existing and new nuclear energy to meet skyrocketing power needs.

Today, some of these companies are supporting commercial advanced nuclear reactor projects under construction in Wyoming, Texas, and Tennessee. Furthermore, several companies are also now on track to reach first criticality through the Department of Energy’s (DOE) Reactor Pilot Program, and the Department of Defense (DOD) is actively moving to deploy microreactors across military installations through the Janus program and Project Pele. 

These programs provide a critical opportunity to demonstrate and test advanced technologies. Beyond that, roughly 8 GW of new reactors are planned, another 2 GW are coming back online through plant restarts, and up to 5 GW more are being explored through uprates at existing facilities.

Click here to read the full article

How Surface Transportation Reauthorization Can Drive America’s Next Materials Revolution (American Affairs)

This op-ed was originally published by American Affairs on May 20, 2026. Click here to read the entire piece.

The Interstate Highways run through America as asphalt and concrete strands, binding the nation together, facilitating interstate commerce, and enabling a uniquely mobile American culture. They are fundamental to the operating system of American life, yet few appreciate their scale as the largest public works project undertaken in U.S. history and one of the few engineered structures visible from space.

America’s Interstate system emerged in its current physical and administrative form in response to the technological innovation of mass manufactured automobiles, defense needs amid the specter of the Cold War, and political compromises among different interest groups. Development started 110 years ago, with the passage of the Federal-Aid Road Act of 1916, marking the first time the federal government provided support for nationwide roadbuilding. The Interstate Highway System as we know it today was subsequently authorized when President Dwight D. Eisenhower signed the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956 into law.

Seventy years after the passage of that milestone law, the expiry of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) in September 2026 offers an opportunity to bring Eisenhower’s transportation legacy into the twenty-first century. As surface transportation legislation is due for reauthorization at the end of the 2026 fiscal year, Congress has an opportunity to leverage this process in order to advance industrial policy goals across a host of fields; foremost among these is a materials revolution in the raw materials and production processes used to make cement, concrete, and asphalt—the building blocks of American transportation and building infrastructure. This revolution can be accelerated by the scaling up of domestically manufactured, low-carbon variants of these essential materials.

Congress should approach this surface transportation reauthorization by channeling the intent of the 1956 law, which bolstered economic growth and national security. It should be noted, however, that utilizing surface transportation in this broader stimulative way would represent a departure from contemporary approaches to highway legislation.

In recent authorizations, debates centered on issues such as resolving the fiscal solvency of the Highway Trust Fund (HTF) and expanding federal support for multi-modal transportation (including as light rail and mass bus transit). In other words, authorizations tended to focus on what to build, how fast to build, and how to finance the system. But 2026 will push Congress to confront the question of what we build with; the materials revolution provides an answer and pursuing it will lead to valuable supply chain and emissions reductions benefits.

Click here to read the full article