From Vision to Reality: The U.S. Fusion Imperative

Fusion energy, generated by combining atoms like hydrogen, has the potential to supply enormous amounts of clean energy. Decades of research have brought this technology to the precipice of first-of-a-kind commercial deployment. Today, there are 45 fusion energy companies in the United States, and several of them are aiming to build a commercially viable fusion power plant between 2030 and 2035. If America leads the way in deploying this technology, we could establish a new manufacturing industry, new long-term energy partnerships and trade agreements, and a foundation for global energy dominance.

Without investments in public-private partnerships and a resilient domestic supply chain, America risks ceding leadership to its foreign adversaries. China is investing at least $1.5 billion annually in fusion, although some reports suggest significantly more, and already possesses robust supply chains for power electronics, forged parts and the advanced materials necessary to commercialize this technology. Similarly, allied nations like Germany and the UK are also investing huge sums, with Germany investing over $2 billion by 2029 and the UK investing around $3 billion over the next five years.

The Commission on the Scaling of Fusion Energy (CSFE), led by Senators Jim Risch (R-ID) and Maria Cantwell (D-WA), and Ylli Bajraktari, the President of the Special Competitive Studies Project, published a report that lays out a plan to ensure the United States acts with purpose to capitalize on this technology. The CSFE report outlines a list of three strategic actions the U.S needs to win the fusion race:

The DOE Office of Science released its Fusion Science & Technology Roadmap, which sets a national strategy to accelerate the deployment of commercial fusion power by the mid-2030s. The roadmap outlines three core pillars that are essential to American fusion success:

In November 2025, the DOE released its new organizational structure, which includes a standalone Office of Fusion Energy, reporting to the Under Secretary for Science. Together, these announcements reflect a growing sense of urgency amongst both Congress and the Trump Administration to deliver fusion power to the grid within the next decade and secure enduring U.S. leadership in this emerging industry.

The U.S. is Moving Fast…

Today, companies are already proving that commercialization is no longer speculative. Among the many industry accomplishments, Commonwealth Fusion Systems (CFS) is building its SPARC (by 2027) and ARC (by the early 2030s) power plants using advanced superconducting magnets. Helion Energy raised $425 million in 2025 and, in partnership with Microsoft, is constructing a commercial fusion plant in Washington state, which aims to enter operation by 2028. In February, Type One Energy signed a cooperative agreement with the Tennessee Valley Authority to initiate fusion deployment. Serious investors and tech companies are placing very real bets on this technology.

Recent Notable Investments into the Fusion Sector

Source: Fusion Industry Association, “The global fusion industry in 2025“

…But China is Catching Up

China invested $1.5 billion in fusion last year, nearly double U.S. funding of $800 million. Additionally, state-owned enterprises have been investing heavily in fusion supply chains to ensure a swift path to commercialization. As part of this initiative, in July 2025, China established a new state-owned fusion company known as the China Fusion Energy Co. (CFEC) to accelerate commercialization. Since its genesis, CFEC has registered $2.1 billion in raised capital. This new company is just one example of China’s commercialization efforts to complement its scientific advances at its two main fusion enterprises, the Institute of Plasma Physics and the Hefei Institute of Physical Science. In contrast, despite private industry momentum, the U.S. fusion industry currently lacks the supply chains and infrastructure required to sustain a full commercial buildout. 

America’s Moment to Lead

Energy drives all human prosperity, which is why the Trump Administration has made American energy dominance a core policy priority. America now faces an opportunity to commercialize an entirely new source of energy. This moment is a rare opportunity for America to dominate an entirely new energy technology, building energy security and supporting reindustrialization. The private sector is ready, but it cannot outcompete state-backed corporations alone. The Trump Administration laid out a roadmap for U.S. leadership in fusion; now it’s time to capitalize and win.

 

Time to Fix America’s Permitting Problems and Let America Build

America’s permitting system is not just slow and costly; it is a threat to our economic and energy security. Long delays, unpredictable reviews and escalating costs create investment uncertainty and lost opportunities. Projects across sectors take an average of four to five years to move through the permitting system, and delays cost $100-140 billion a year in the form of jobs, revenue and capital returns. We cannot meet rising energy demand and compete globally with a system that stands in the way of progress. 

If the U.S. is to lead in the AI-driven future, catalyze American manufacturing and keep energy costs low, we need to build more of everything and strengthen the energy system to deliver affordable, reliable and secure power.

Weighted Average Permitting Time for Projects Varies by Sector

Source: BLM NEPA National Register; Breakthrough Institute; Columbia University; USFS NEPA Database; Council on Environmental Quality; EIS Length Database; Federal Permitting Dashboard; Federal Permitting Improvement Steering Council: Baseline Performance Schedules; Federal Register: Section 404 Permits; Government Accountability Office; Federal Energy Regulatory Commission; NOAA: EFH Consultation; PNAS; Stanford University; University of Utah; McKinsey & Company

The 119th Congress has an opportunity to deliver bipartisan permitting reform that will let America build. Here are four solutions:

1. Modernize NEPA

Building in America should always require careful consideration of a project’s impacts on the environment. The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) was signed into law in 1970 to ensure this is done and needs to be updated to meet today’s energy realities. NEPA is a procedural statute to inform decision-making, not dictate outcomes. The May 2025 Seven County Supreme Court case reaffirmed this and importantly clarified both the scope and limits of agency discretion in the NEPA process. In the 2023 Fiscal Responsibility Act, Congress made a down payment to refocus NEPA reviews. It is time to build on those bipartisan NEPA reforms. 

Modernizing NEPA should:

2. Address NEPA Litigation

NEPA litigation rarely changes outcomes, but it does often delay or kill projects. A July 2025 Breakthrough Institute study found federal agencies win 74% of NEPA cases. By repeatedly filing lawsuits, project opponents aim to delay the process until developers run out of funding and abandon their projects. This chills investor confidence and can be a hurdle to building new energy assets like geothermal, hydropower, transmission lines and critical mineral enterprises. These lawsuits also drain federal agency resources, as agencies try to preempt lawsuits by making their documentation “litigation proof.” To increase predictability and halt harmful delay tactics, we need to reform NEPA judicial review and litigation practices. 

Reforming NEPA judicial review and litigation practices will:

In addition to addressing NEPA, Congress could further improve the permitting process by updating environmental regulations, like the Clean Water Act, and expanding categorical exclusions where appropriate. 

3. Increase Transparency

A modern permitting system should have public, real-time data on the status of environmental reviews and permits to increase certainty and transparency for all stakeholders. Today, missing, fragmented and outdated data makes navigating the permitting process harder for developers, agencies and the public. By increasing transparency, all stakeholders have better visibility into the process and drive efficiency.

Increasing transparency includes:

4. Fix the Grid

Fixing permitting alone is not enough. We must let American energy move. With demand for power increasing, we need to strengthen our grid and do it fast. To fix the grid, America should:

There are bills in Congress that capture many of the ideas described above and that can help us meet the challenges we face. These bills include:

It’s time to let America build and let American energy move. With bipartisan reforms, Congress can design a permitting system that meets the scale of the challenge, and advances U.S. leadership in energy, manufacturing and innovation.

 

USMCA Turns Five: Securing America’s Energy and Economic Edge

When the first Trump Administration negotiated the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) in 2018, it rebuilt the foundation of North American competitiveness. The USMCA created a market-driven framework that protects American workers, strengthens U.S. industries and gives our country a competitive edge over non-market economies such as China.

The USMCA is successful because it establishes regulatory transparency, the alignment of cross-border standards and the alleviation of trade barriers. This framework fostered a stable environment critical for cross-border investment, innovation and the development of American energy infrastructure. By locking in fair and predictable rules, the USMCA is designed to support America’s competitive strength, ensuring long-term energy and industrial leadership. 

Five years later, that framework continues to deliver measurable results for America’s economy, including the energy sector, which remains one of the most strategic sectors for long-term prosperity and security. In 2024 alone, U.S. energy trade with Canada and Mexico totaled nearly $208 billion, fueling millions of jobs and ensuring a stable source of reliable, affordable energy across the continent.

As Washington prepares for the USMCA’s first joint review, policymakers have an opportunity to preserve what works, build on its strengths and resist efforts to inject uncertainty into the most successful trade agreement in modern history.

North America’s Energy Defense Line

Energy security is central to America’s competitive advantage. The USMCA secured that advantage by creating a stable and predictable environment for cross-border investment and innovation.

Consider nuclear energy. While the USMCA does not include a dedicated chapter on nuclear energy, the U.S. nuclear sector benefits directly from the core principles of reducing trade barriers, improving regulatory transparency and aligning cross-border standards. These features create the foundation for advanced, high-value energy projects that sustain and expand high-paying American jobs in engineering, construction and manufacturing. A leading example is the partnership between GE Vernova Hitachi and Ontario Power Generation to build North America’s first grid-scale small modular reactor, the BWRX-300. American expertise and industry participation are central to the effort. The Tennessee Valley Authority and Lynchburg, Virginia-based BWXT are key contributors, with BWXT manufacturing the reactor vessel in the U.S.

Uranium mined in Canada is enriched and fabricated into fuel at U.S. facilities, supporting skilled labor and advanced manufacturing across the American supply chain. The same applies to critical minerals, which are essential to America’s energy and manufacturing strength. Canada and the U.S. are each other’s largest trading partners and have a reliable critical minerals supply chain that supports U.S. industry and jobs. By deepening cooperation through trade and investment, the U.S. can secure access to the materials that power advanced technologies, reduce exposure to geopolitical risks and strengthen domestic processing and manufacturing capacity.

The USMCA also provides a stable foundation for cross-border energy infrastructure, from oil and gas pipelines to electric transmission lines. Nearly 70 percent of U.S. crude oil imports originate from Canada and Mexico, ensuring steady feedstock for U.S. refineries that support higher-value American products, such as gasoline and diesel, for domestic use and export. This energy relationship contributes to over $688 billion in annual economic activity and supports nearly three million jobs across the U.S. Predictable cross-border trade and permitting frameworks are critical to maintaining this advantage.

Keeping North America Competitive in a Changing World

The USMCA’s architects understood that modern competition depends on clear standards, strong investment rules and the regulatory predictability that allows American innovators to lead. Several core principles in key chapters should be reaffirmed and, in some cases, expanded, such as:

Maintain American Leadership

The upcoming review is an opportunity to fine-tune a proven model. Several bipartisan ideas now circulating in Congress could strengthen the USMCA’s focus on energy and security, including the following.

The USMCA has proven that pro-growth trade and strong national security go hand in hand. By locking in fair, predictable rules with America’s regional neighbors, the U.S. has strengthened its energy and industrial leadership, supporting millions of high-quality jobs. As the joint review approaches, we encourage policymakers to remember what makes the USMCA work: it favors markets over mandates, innovation over regulation and America’s closest partners over China. ClearPath’s views are detailed further in our public comments for the U.S. Trade Representative’s USMCA review. Preserving and enhancing the USMCA will uphold American energy and manufacturing leadership, reminding the world that when North America is united, the U.S. wins. 

 

 

The Race to Scale Global Nuclear Energy (The National Interest)

This op-ed was originally published by The National Interest on October 2, 2025. Click here to read the entire piece.

The administration has set one of the boldest energy goals in American history: quadrupling nuclear energy production by 2050. This is an ambitious but necessary goal if the United States’ electricity demand is to double by 2050. Scaling nuclear energy would be necessary in order to come close to meeting that projected demand while also reducing emissions.

This goal would require a new reactor build-out at a scale never before seen in the United States. At current trajectories, the United States would need to add the equivalent capacity of our current fleet of 95 reactors every decade through 2050. The United States isn’t alone in its effort to meet this challenge. More than 30 other countries have set a goal to triple the global nuclear capacity. A targeted United States strategy and strong global leadership, along with allied cooperation on fuel, manufacturing, and financing, can make both goals a reality. 

The greatest asset the United States has to achieve this is a world-leading, innovative private sector. But even as tech and industrial customers are promising large investments, the United States must focus public and private resources to ensure companies have the tools to scale. Congress has demonstrated its commitment to nuclear energy with bipartisan policy and financial incentives, but more can be done to reduce investment risk as nuclear technology companies look to attract private capital, such as concepts like Senator Risch’s (R-ID) Accelerating Reliable Capacity Act.

In addition, the United States must work effectively with its allies. Countries like Canada have a reliable supply of uranium, Japan has nuclear fuel recycling expertise, and Japan and South Korea have robust manufacturing capabilities focused on international collaboration and export-driven growth. Furthermore, the United States and the UK just signed a partnership to collaborate on nuclear energy exports to expand the global market. Finally, with countries like Poland and Romania seeking alternatives to Russian energy in Eastern Europe, the United States has many opportunities for partnerships.

Click here to read the full article

Energy dominance means building more domestically, selling more globally (The Washington Times)

This op-ed was originally published by The Washington Times on September 29, 2025. Click here to read the entire piece.

In a world of growing demand, having energy is power. The United States faces a dual threat — meeting domestic demand and competing for global market share. China has been quietly reshaping the global energy landscape, exponentially building more on their soil, and outspending the U.S. nearly ten-to-one in overseas energy finance.

China added 475 gigawatts of new electricity generation in 2024. Meanwhile, the U.S. added just one-tenth of that. China built 74 gigawatts of new energy storage. The U.S. built 10. China built 54 gigawatts of new fossil fuel generation, primarily unmitigated coal. The U.S. built just two gigawatts of lower-emission gas.

By every metric, China is building more energy than we are. And that energy is fueling growth across their economy.

And make no mistake, as China further develops its own domestic capacity, it will sell even more of its products globally, furthering its global influence.

A first-of-its-kind analysis by ClearPath of U.S. and Chinese energy investments reveals staggering numbers: since 2015, China has poured $446 billion into global public energy projects compared to just $45 billion from the U.S. In Brazil, the Western Hemisphere’s second-largest economy, China has spent more than $60 billion, dwarfing America’s $472 million. 

Click here to read the full article

Put Energy Security at the Center of U.S. Foreign Policy

American innovation drives energy security, a key factor in geopolitical influence. The U.S. can leverage its energy abundance by putting energy at the center of its foreign policy strategy, mutually benefiting America’s partners while reducing global emissions and advancing U.S. national interests. As Secretary of State Marco Rubio made clear, energy will be “at the forefront of foreign policy for the next 100 years.” To meet this moment, the U.S. must lean into its strengths and create a coordinated, agile and effective energy diplomacy and delivery system. 

One way to do so would be through the bipartisan creation of Energy Security Compacts (ESCs) that align American technical assistance and financing tools to strengthen the Trump Administration’s work in elevating energy security as a core pillar of U.S. foreign policy.

Scattered Goals, Strategic Costs

The American foreign policy apparatus has become enormously cluttered. Institutions from the U.S. Trade and Development Agency (USTDA) to the Export-Import Bank of the U.S. (EXIM) work hard for the American people, but disjointedly toward scattered goals. 

On the other hand, American adversaries are speeding ahead. The Chinese Belt and Road initiative, led by state-backed or outright-owned corporations, deploys large amounts of capital in a coordinated effort. In Brazil, for instance, the largest Latin American economy, China has invested more than $60 billion into the nation’s energy sector since 2015. The Chinese Communist Party now controls over 12 percent of Brazil’s energy infrastructure. Meanwhile, the U.S. government’s foreign investment institutions have supported less than $472 million, with one of the main projects being a streetlighting system. Worthwhile, but not transformative or strategic. 

While trying to out-subsidize China is unrealistic and economically unsound, the U.S. needs to leverage its strengths. Countries want to work with the American private sector, which is the largest and most innovative in the world, but U.S. companies are at a disadvantage. For example, Egypt wanted to select American nuclear technology for its El Dabaa power plant, but ultimately had to go with Russian technology. America is the preferred vendor for many countries, including Ghana, Saudi Arabia and Indonesia, but private businesses can’t compete alone against heavily state-subsidized corporations. U.S. policies should level the playing field to support U.S. business and streamline bureaucracy so we can more effectively use the tools we do have.

Chinese energy finance from official sources is 10x more than the U.S. since 2015

From Bureaucracy to Strategy

The creation of the U.S. Development Finance Corporation (DFC) and the modernization of  EXIM under the first Trump Administration were strong steps towards a more proactive international policy. While those tools need to be sharpened further through their upcoming reauthorizations, the next step toward ensuring American energy dominance and global prosperity is to build an Energy Security Compacts mechanism to maximize the toolkit’s effectiveness.

America already has a model to build on. The Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) utilizes a compact framework that can serve as a platform to coordinate the interagency, advance American national security interests and support American energy innovations in foreign markets. These compacts would be bilateral, U.S.-led engagements designed to:

Imagine how this might work in a country like Brazil, a nation with vast reserves of rare earths that the U.S. needs for advanced manufacturing, energy and defense, but whose power grid is unreliable and vulnerable to droughts. An ESC would begin with a joint analysis of the country’s energy and infrastructure bottlenecks and result in a five to 10-year framework that channels existing U.S. tools toward projects that both strengthen Brazil’s grid and directly advance U.S. strategic and economic interests. 

This ESC would align American technical assistance and financing tools, some of which already operate on a cost-recovery basis and often return money to the U.S. Treasury. This could be designed to support a portfolio of complementary projects to build out mining capacity in commodities the U.S. needs and the energy infrastructure to support those projects and provide reliable power to Brazil’s interior. The USTDA could fund feasibility studies and early engineering work across the projects, while MCC provides grant capital for new transmission lines and capacity upgrades. The DFC could take equity stakes in new mining facilities, as it did with TechMet, supplied by EXIM-financed power plants built with American components, like in the Bahamas or Honduras. With the right alignment, these tools could offer more than fragmented assistance; they could deliver a unified, strategic alternative to America’s adversaries that reflects the full strength of U.S. innovation, partnership and purpose.

By combining diplomatic leadership from the U.S. State Department, commercial support from the Commerce Department and technical expertise from DOE, and the financing muscle from DFC and EXIM, an ESC with Brazil would help the U.S. compete more effectively with China. Therefore, strengthening critical supply chains in a fiscally responsible way. In short, this is a smart investment in American national interests, not just aid for Brazil.

Congress has an opportunity to work with the Administration to make this kind of scenario a reality, successfully replicated with America’s strategic partners and allies. Instead of reacting to Chinese and Russian efforts to corner global energy markets, U.S. efforts can proactively empower the private sector to unlock economic opportunity and advance our national interests for mutual benefit with our partners abroad. ESCs can be a bipartisan next step to build on America’s aim to lead the world in deploying affordable, reliable and clean energy systems, while recognizing the central role of energy security to geopolitical influence and reducing global emissions. 

 

8 Ways to Refocus Federal Innovation Programs on U.S. Energy Dominance

At the start of the 119th Congress, the U.S. energy sector stands at a pivotal crossroads. With historic investments in American energy projects already made and the potential for comprehensive permitting reform on the horizon, it is more important than ever for policymakers to provide clear, strategic direction and strong support for federal energy innovation programs. This is the moment to refocus these initiatives on achieving American energy dominance and securing a prosperous, clean energy future.

Over the last five years, U.S. energy policy has undergone a series of transformative updates through the passage of four major federal laws: the Energy Act of 2020, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the Inflation Reduction Act, and the CHIPS and Science Act. Together, they modernized dozens of innovation programs at the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and provided the U.S. research community with a roadmap for the next decade of technology investments. These laws, enacted across both Republican and Democratic administrations, underscore an important truth: investing in American energy innovation is a deeply bipartisan issue.

A key driver of this consensus is a growing recognition that in order to maintain U.S. energy dominance, the U.S. needs to be more globally competitive over a wide range of advanced energy technologies. As our adversaries continue to invest heavily in energy R&D, policymakers recognize that whoever leads in the development of an emerging technology will not simply dominate its global market, they will also set the standard for how that technology is deployed and adopted – not just in the near term, but for decades to come. Whether you consider this opportunity from an economic, environmental, or humanitarian perspective – what’s clear is that America must lead the way.

It won’t be easy. China will outspend us on R&D – and depending on who you ask, they already have. According to the Congressional Research Service, the U.S. currently leads the world in R&D investments, but this position is eroding at an alarming rate. Over the last 60 years, the U.S. share of global R&D has fallen from approximately 70 to 30 percent. Meanwhile, in the last 20 years alone, China’s share has risen from roughly 5 to 25 percent.

Fortunately, the U.S. has a competitive advantage: thanks to our unique decentralized innovation ecosystem and a tradition of scientific discovery fostered across the national labs, universities, and private sector, America’s return on investment of our limited federal R&D dollars is extremely high. According to analysts at the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, over the past 70 years, non-defense federal R&D investments have shown estimated returns of 140 to 210 percent and account for approximately one-fifth of the U.S. business sector’s total factor productivity growth since WWII.

Nowhere is this more visible than in the U.S. energy sector, where DOE investments in both applied and basic research have led to landmark scientific discoveries that have strengthened American energy independence and driven down energy costs for consumers. In the 1970s, DOE’s early-stage research in horizontal drilling technologies led to the discovery of hydraulic fracturing, and, thanks to strategic partnerships with American industry – the shale gas revolution. In other words, as a direct result of investment in DOE innovation, the U.S. is now the world’s largest natural gas producer and LNG exporter. Why does that matter? Not only is natural gas responsible for nearly half of U.S. electricity generation, but it also, along with oil, contributes $1.8 trillion per year to the U.S. GDP – all while playing a major role in reducing U.S. methane emissions by as much as 18% overall.

Today, the stakes have never been higher. What our innovation ecosystem did for American LNG, it can and must do for American nuclear, American geothermal, and American manufacturing. To maintain U.S. competitiveness and reduce global energy emissions, American innovation is needed to drive the deployment of new clean energy technologies and systems. To succeed, these cannot just be clean – they must also be affordable, reliable, and secure.

It is at this critical moment that many of the foundational DOE programs authorized under the Trump Administration’s Energy Act of 2020 are set to expire. The time is now to examine ongoing federal investments in American energy, identify gaps in existing U.S. energy policy, and take lessons learned from the Biden administration’s implementation of recent laws.

Each of the eight policy recommendations below focuses on a DOE innovation program that is either expiring in 2025 or has yet to be authorized by law. Together, they provide a complete picture of the tremendous opportunity that is before Congress today to refocus DOE’s innovation mission on activities that are essential for U.S. energy dominance.

1. Reform federal processes to safeguard taxpayer dollars and maximize ROI. To unlock the full potential of the American innovation ecosystem, there is an urgent need for common-sense reforms to DOE grantmaking and oversight processes that will remove barriers for American researchers while adding guardrails to protect R&D investments from our adversaries. These include efforts to streamline funding opportunity announcements, remove permitting bottlenecks for demonstration projects, and secure American intellectual property while providing the National Laboratories with the ability to make decisions at a pace that matches industry partners’ needs. While many of these can be accomplished without additional Congressional authorities, core DOE modernization provisions in the Energy Act of 2020 could be revisited by Congress to ensure the durability of these reforms.

2. Invest in DOE next-generation geothermal initiatives to unleash abundant baseload energy. Advanced geothermal energy technologies have the potential to provide emissions-free, reliable baseload power anywhere in the country. What’s more, given similarities between conventional energy production and enhanced geothermal systems (EGS), these technologies are expected to preserve and leverage up to 200,000 existing American jobs. However, in recent years, DOE’s EGS demonstration projects have received 100 times less funding than other clean firm technologies like advanced nuclear, storage, or carbon capture. Congress could consider amplifying federal support for EGS demonstration projects and geothermal user facilities like Utah’s Frontier Observatory for Research in Geothermal Energy (FORGE), so that American companies can maintain their leadership edge.

3. Codify critical DOE materials science research to strengthen the next generation of American pipelines. America’s vast network of pipelines – over three million miles – are the backbone of the U.S. energy and industrial sectors. As this critical infrastructure continues to age and as new clean energy pathways come online, there is an urgent need to modernize American pipelines for the next generation. Federal research agencies require updated policy guidance and funding for research, development, and demonstration activities to ensure the longevity of our energy infrastructure, including in areas like materials science, metrology, and advanced computing. Congress could protect and preserve these activities by authorizing DOE’s long standing pipeline RD&D activities – which have never been codified in law.

4. Protect industry-led DOE carbon removal initiatives to future-proof American energy. Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) is an important component of America’s clean energy portfolio and refers to a suite of technologies that remove excess carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. CDR is needed to help us reduce global emissions while maintaining U.S. leadership in affordable, reliable, and exportable energy. Thanks to basic research in CDR innovation, widespread American deployments are on the horizon but are being held back by the absence of a clear market demand for these technologies. To capitalize on American leadership in CDR – which has the potential to create as many as 130,000 U.S. jobs per year, strategic investments in DOE’s cutting-edge CDR RD&D and demand-side efforts are urgently needed.

5. Establish an advanced mining R&D initiative to eliminate mineral reliance on China. The long-term security of America’s energy, industrial, and defense sectors hinges on access to a reliable and sustainable domestic supply of critical minerals. Current U.S. mining and mineral processing methods rely on outdated technologies that often undermine these efforts. According to the U.S. Geological Service, the U.S. is 100 percent net import reliant on countries like China for 12 of the 50 mineral commodities deemed critical by the Department of the Interior. DOE programs in critical minerals RD&D and advanced mining approaches can address this strategic vulnerability by accelerating U.S. innovation in breakthrough mineral mining technologies that are otherwise heavily underfunded. By authorizing DOE’s mine of the future activities, Congress could build fundamental long-term support for U.S. critical minerals supply chains and energy independence.

6. Expand DOE clean industrial technology programs to unlock global markets for American manufacturers. Leadership in advanced manufacturing technologies is essential to strengthening American industry’s global competitiveness in cement, concrete, asphalt, and chemicals. DOE’s clean industrial technology mission is to accelerate American innovation in manufacturing and grow the global demand for American-made products. To take advantage of the global construction boom and reduce reliance on foreign imports, DOE’s core programs in advanced industrial technologies could be expanded and extended to maximize the return on investment of committed demonstration dollars.

7. Formally establish a DOE grid security office to safeguard the energy sector from emerging threats. As global energy demand doubles in the coming decades and new, variable clean energy resources come online, our aging electric grid faces many new and evolving vulnerabilities — both physical and cyber. It is imperative that the federal government consider support for innovation in grid security technologies in parallel with the deployment of clean energy technologies. DOE is the lead agency for grid security in the energy sector and these activities are primarily carried out through its Office of Cybersecurity, Energy Security and Emergency Response (CESER), which was created under the Trump Administration in 2018. CESER is tasked with enhancing the security and resilience of U.S. critical energy infrastructure, mitigating the impacts of disruptive events and responding to and facilitating recovery from various energy disruptions. To protect and strengthen the essential function of this office, and to ensure its close coordination with the Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, Congress could consider formally authorizing CESER.

8. Recommit to innovative nuclear programs to unleash advanced nuclear deployments. Over the last five years, DOE’s Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program (ARDP), first authorized in the Energy Act of 2020, has given new life to the U.S. advanced nuclear industry. ARDP investments have a strong track record of follow-on investments from private industry – through this program, U.S. innovators have teamed up with utilities, project developers, and end-users to maximize ROI of limited R&D dollars. Continued strong investments in this program will be instrumental in launching a commercial nuclear fuel supply chain, reducing new technology risk, and improving Nuclear Regulatory Commission practices. As ARDP’s authorization expires, there is an opportunity for Congress to recommit to this program and its public-private partnerships.

DOE’s research, development, and demonstration activities, stewarded by our national laboratories and designed by industry, are the engine of the American innovation ecosystem. To maximize the return on investment of limited innovation dollars and position U.S. industry for success as new energy permitting regimes are considered, it is essential that Congress examine new ways to refocus these activities on American energy dominance.

 

U.S. Export Finance for Energy Dominance

The Trump administration has set a bold vision for America’s trade policy, economic security and U.S. energy dominance. To deliver, the federal government must unleash private-sector innovation and sharpen America’s competitive edge. An important but often underutilized tool in this effort is the U.S. Export-Import Bank (EXIM). Created in the wake of World War II to support U.S. exports and jobs, EXIM has been a force for helping American industry win at home and abroad. To continue this movement, it is key that EXIM is reauthorized in 2026, modernizing the agency and ensuring it advances America’s clean energy leadership on the world stage.

“EXIM supports American jobs, strengthens our manufacturing base and enhances our competitiveness in the global economy,” said ClearPath’s Niko McMurray during his testimony before the U.S. House Financial Services Committee. As McMurray pointed out, “These aren’t handouts, they are commercially oriented efforts that earn a return on investment (ROI) – $80 million back to taxpayers in 2024.” It is estimated that EXIM has returned $9.7 billion in revenues to the U.S. Department of Treasury since 1992, underscoring EXIM’s ability to support America’s private sector while providing a positive ROI for the American taxpayer.

EXIM’s Role in Supporting American Business and Global Energy Security

In 2024, EXIM approved a $500 million loan to facilitate the sale of goods and services from over a dozen U.S. companies for a natural gas project in Guyana. The project will double Guyana’s installed electricity capacity, drive emissions reductions and generate 1,500 American jobs. In the same year, EXIM approved $50 million to ESS Inc. under its Make More in America Initiative (MMIA), which finances U.S. manufacturers aiming to export. The project will support the company’s long-duration battery storage production in Oregon to meet increasing demand.

With a strong project pipeline moving forward, EXIM is paving the way for further advancements in affordable, reliable and clean energy. Romania was in formal negotiations with China to finance the Cernavoda nuclear power plant Units 3 and 4 before EXIM’s $3 billion letter of interest (LOI). In addition, EXIM signed LOIs for NuScale’s small modular reactor (SMR) deployment in Romania, Poland’s GE-Hitachi SMRs and Westinghouse AP1000 nuclear plants and Bulgaria’s Westinghouse AP1000s.

Today, our competitors’ export credit agencies (ECAs) are aggressive in advancing their national interests, particularly as China works to corner global markets and control vital supply chains. Foreign ECAs, like those of Australia and Canada, are adjusting policies to proactively support domestic industries. China operates under a different set of rules, offering financing that is not required to adhere to the same standards as Western countries. Meanwhile, EXIM only provides financing when necessary for a U.S. export to proceed. This underscores the need for EXIM to modernize trade finance to help U.S. industry compete more effectively around the world.

February 11- EXIM Senior Staff met with Bulgaria’s Minister of Energy

Equipping American Producers for Competition

EXIM’s current limitations prevent the U.S. from fully competing in energy and manufacturing, putting American exporters at risk of falling behind in crucial sectors. There are four key opportunities to strengthen EXIM’s capabilities and, therefore, bolster U.S. clean energy leadership, create domestic jobs and enhance energy security for partners.

1. Create a National Interest Account:

The China & Transformational Exports Program (CTEP), created in 2019, was a strong first step in countering Chinese influence over advanced technologies. Building on this, EXIM can establish a National Interest Account (NIA), prioritizing strategic projects related to U.S. national interests. The NIA can incorporate CTEP’s existing technology areas while expanding beyond a narrow focus on renewables to encompass an all-of-the-above energy dominance approach. The MMIA can be codified and enhanced by including it in the NIA, which would strengthen U.S. manufacturing and improve America’s trade position.

This NIA would uphold EXIM’s role in an America First Trade Policy by leveling the playing field for U.S. companies against countries using similar tools to work against American interests.

2. Default Rate Cap Exclusion:

EXIM’s current 2% default rate cap is a unique requirement placed on the Bank that other countries do not face and discourages its staff from meeting Congressional mandates. The cap could be raised to 4% to align the Bank with the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) norms while exempting NIA-eligible projects entirely to provide flexibility for strategic sectors like clean energy. This requirement is an unnecessary obstacle that was created over a decade ago and is linked to an outdated lending limit.

3. Reinforce the U.S. Jobs Mandate:

EXIM’s current domestic content policy is the least flexible among ECAs globally, creating a significant obstacle for American innovators’ and manufacturers’ ability to leverage the Bank as a resource for world-class competition. Congress has the opportunity to update this outdated internal Bank policy with a modernized metric fit for today’s shifting supply chains. One option is to implement a simplified, scalable metric based on the number of jobs supported per dollar of financing, similar to how the MMIA program operates today. This would help center America at the heart of secure supply chains, unleash domestic production capacity and fulfill the Bank’s jobs mandate.

4. Modernize the Mission:

EXIM needs to update its mission to support American jobs and advance U.S. national interests. This revitalized mission would direct the Bank to proactively develop a project pipeline aligned with U.S. national security objectives and partner agencies like the Development Finance Corporation, fostering a clear understanding that global competitiveness is a core priority.

American Strategy over Subsidies

The U.S. should not try to match China’s state-backed subsidies dollar-for-yuan but instead go beyond and adopt a more agile, strategic approach. By using targeted financing tools to de-risk projects, attract private capital and create favorable market conditions, America can empower innovators and manufacturers to compete and lead globally. Strategic reforms will enable EXIM to support U.S. trade, energy and security goals, level the playing field for American businesses and solidify global leadership in key sectors, driving global emissions reductions while strengthening our economy.

 

Advancing American Clean Energy Leadership at COP28

November 30 marked the start of the 28th annual meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP28), where a historic 97,000 participants registered and over 80,000 convened in Dubai, UAE to collaborate on solutions to reducing global emissions.

The outcome of the first global stocktake has received mixed feedback; regardless there were several developments from COP28 that should be celebrated.

First, the U.S., UK and Canada, along with more than 20 other countries, launched an ambitious call to triple nuclear energy capacity by 2050.

To triple nuclear capacity from now until 2050, the world will have to build around 30 large reactors each year, even more, if replacing retiring capacity is necessary or if smaller reactors take off.

ClearPath partnered with the World Nuclear Association on a number of events, including one where ClearPath CSO Jeremy Harrell spoke of the increasing bipartisan support for advanced nuclear and America’s position to lead global deployment.

Second, at COP28, conservatives took a leadership stake by driving discussions centered around an all-of-the-above approach to clean energy solutions.

In fact, there were a record number of Congressional Republicans at COP28, solidifying their ambitions to be part of the dialogue and present positive solutions. ClearPath collaborated with the bipartisan delegation by hosting several panels and joining them at others. Our CEO Rich Powell and Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) hosted a fireside chat highlighting American policies that have catalyzed a range of technologies. Senator Murkowski emphasized the impact the Energy Act of 2020 had on authorizing advanced nuclear, but called for restructured permitting to ensure projects face reasonable timelines for attracting private investment.

ClearPath discussed permitting with Congressional leadership including Representative John Curtis (R-UT), Representative Garret Graves (R-LA), Representative Tim Walberg (R-MI) and Representative Scott Peters (D-CA). Powell led the conversation around the time-sensitive need for bipartisan legislation to address the broken permitting system.

L to R: ClearPath CEO Rich Powell, Representative Garret Graves (R-LA), Representative Scott Peters (D-CA), Representative John Curtis (R-UT), and Representative Tim Walberg (R-MI).

Alongside participation with conservative leadership, ClearPath highlighted pragmatic solutions to fill the white space of clean energy deployment. Compared to previous years, carbon management and nuclear energy were previously shunned; however, at this year’s conference, the final agreement calls for the acceleration of carbon capture and nuclear technologies. ClearPath’s participation in events helped underscore the importance of these vital technologies.

Speaking of technologies, that brings up a third key theme of COP28 — carbon management. In an event with Axios, ClearPath CEO Rich Powell referenced the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report which specified the need for carbon removal technologies to stabilize global temperatures, while also noting the technology’s unique ability to retrofit existing infrastructure and preserve jobs.

L to R: Rich Powell (CEO, ClearPath); Nicholas Johnston (Publisher, Axios)

Photo Credit: Arthur Abraham/ Haiku D Photography on behalf of Axios

By collaborating with a diverse range of stakeholders with big ideas on solving the climate challenge, ClearPath left COP28 with a great deal of optimism. It was a pivotal opportunity to elevate nuclear energy, carbon management and conservative leadership. Ensuring American leadership remains prominent on the international stage is crucial for securing a future with both a prospering environment and economy.

America’s Development Finance Shows Global Energy Leadership

Rising geopolitical tensions mark the enduring need for international leadership from the United States, not only for our energy security and clean energy goals but also for U.S. allies and partners. The U.S. has made significant strides toward reducing carbon dioxide emissions while improving its energy security over several decades. However, reducing global emissions and curbing the ambitions of America’s adversaries will require both the deployment of next-generation clean energy technologies domestically and abroad.

U.S. export and development financing are key dimensions of American engagement around the world to address the dual imperatives of energy security and clean energy deployment. To this end, the International Development Finance Corporation (DFC) is a key, independent agency within the U.S. government that works with the private sector to finance projects that address pressing international challenges, including energy and critical infrastructure.

Congress formed the DFC in 2018 with bipartisan support amid growing competition for overseas infrastructure projects. Alongside partner agencies, the DFC brings unique flexibility and capabilities – such as direct equity investments – that are important for U.S. energy diplomacy. The DFC’s upcoming reauthorization in 2025 will provide an opportunity to reinforce and enhance its unique capacity to drive international impact with American-backed energy.



Making Energy a Priority

Since its creation, the DFC has made some notable geostrategic clean energy investments. For example, the DFC recently invested in TechMet Limited to develop nickel and cobalt resources in Brazil and approved a $500 million loan to set up First Solar’s India factory, both of which help to diversify clean energy supply chains away from China.

Additionally, in 2020, the DFC removed its moratorium on funding nuclear energy projects. Lifting this ban enhanced DFC’s potential impact by allowing it to support the commercialization of clean, firm energy in strategically important areas and create markets for the U.S. nuclear industry. The DFC has submitted letters of interest to support $1 billion in advanced nuclear projects in Poland and Romania. Although the DFC has expressed interest in these cases, it is yet to robustly engage in supporting nuclear energy projects.

The DFC committed to growing its climate-focused investment to 33% of new investments by fiscal year 2023. However, this will likely require significant expansion of energy investments, which only made up 18% of outlays from 2020-2022.


DFC Energy Financing (2020-2022)

Source: USASpending.gov,ForeignAssistance.gov; Data represents the DFC’s total outlays and does not include political risk insurance.

Energy systems” pertains to projects broadly aimed to improve energy reliability and affordability.
“Other” includes a combination of smaller scale clean energy projects such as a hydrogen project, geothermal project, agriculture project and a critical minerals project.



Looking Ahead: Enhancing DFC’s Clean Energy Capabilities

The DFC is slated for reauthorization in 2025, presenting an opportunity to improve its efficiency and impact. Six improvements that could significantly expand DFC capabilities to promote U.S. national and economic security through energy investments, while retaining its core developmental mandate are:

1. Expand Expertise with Personnel – The DFC could have a greater impact with more geographical and domain-specific expertise. The DFC was originally constructed in teams based around its products. However, the DFC’s leadership has proposed reorganization to focus on sectors like energy. In doing so, it will be important for the DFC to build personnel capabilities in areas such as nuclear power, long-duration energy storage, carbon capture and critical minerals in order to better structure deals and make strategic investments.
2. Investment Scoring Fix – Despite being the only agency with Congressional authorization to make direct equity investments, this critical tool has largely gone unused. This is due, in part, to how the investments are “scored” from a budgetary standpoint. In particular, the DFC’s equity investments are scored like a grant instead of a loan, so it assumes no return on the investments made. Thus, this method of scoring requires significantly more budget authority, especially for larger projects, which limits the ability to invest in such projects. In a recent Senate Foreign Relations hearing, DFC CEO Scott Nathan noted that fixing the equity scoring challenge was his “highest priority.” Senators John Cornyn (R-TX) and Chris Coon (D-DE) recently introduced legislation (S.3005 – Enhancing American Competitiveness Act of 2023) proposing a fix.
3. Contingent Liability Cap – The DFC has the authority to maintain up to a $60 billion project portfolio from the U.S. Treasury. In comparison to the capital expenditure needed for large-scale infrastructure projects, including clean energy, $60 billion in total financing is not adequate. For perspective, since 2000, Chinese state-owned banks have provided over $234B in international financing just for energy sector projects. Expanding the DFC’s liability cap to $100B, as proposed in S.3005, or introducing an automatic inflation adjustment would give significant breathing room to make more impactful investments.
4. Loan Size Cap – Large projects like nuclear power plants, mines for critical minerals and energy supply projects require large investments. The DFC currently has a hard cap of $1 billion for an individual loan or guarantee. Raising this, tying it to a fraction of the portfolio, or removing it entirely would allow DFC greater flexibility to invest in large-scale energy projects.
5. Middle-income country restrictions – The DFC currently requires a waiver to work outside low-income countries. Expanding the DFC’s country eligibility would allow for higher-impact investments in Southeast Asia, South America and Eastern Europe, all aligned with strategic goals. This is relevant for larger economies where global carbon emissions carbon emission reduction potential is greater but still requires significant developmental support.



DFC Energy Financing by Region (2020-2022)

Source: USASpending.gov,ForeignAssistance.gov; Data represents the DFC’s total outlays and does not include political risk insurance.

6. Addressing Currency Risk – One of the biggest challenges for developing bankable projects in emerging markets is currency risk (e.g., when the local currency loses value while the original liabilities remain denominated in U.S. dollars). The DFC already has statutory authority to make loans in local currencies but could benefit from additional safeguards. Taking on some currency risk, either by lending in local currency or by cost-sharing risk out of its program account, could make some projects more viable for the DFC.

For a relatively new federal agency, the DFC has already established itself as a key player in the United States’ global strategic and development efforts. To hone the DFC’s capabilities, targeted improvements and enhancements can allow it to make the most efficient use of relevant resources. The 2025 upcoming reauthorization for the DFC is an opportune time to cut bureaucratic red tape and make meaningful changes, empowering the DFC to be an even more impactful player in America’s clean energy strategy around the world.