Securing Indiana's Nuclear Energy Future

Indiana is on the brink of a new era in energy security​​–one that will strengthen its economy and pave the way to a reliable energy future. Driven by Governor Braun’s commitment to advanced nuclear power, private sector investments can boost local power generation, provide businesses with predictable energy costs and meet rising demand. 

Reimagining Indiana’s grid to capitalize on AI technology and the American manufacturing resurgence will require new state and federal policies to let Indiana build. A multi-faceted effort by Indiana's government, academic institutions and a major utility is underway to explore, incentivize and prepare for the integration of advanced nuclear energy technologies into the state's future energy landscape.

Indiana is facing an unprecedented surge in electricity demand. Regional grid projections indicate that demand will climb nearly 2% annually through 2030, then double to 4% annually through 2040 – a rate that is 10 to 20 times higher than in the past decade. Over the next 15 years, this growth translates to a potential 60% increase in electricity demand – more than Colorado’s energy demand today.

The state government is proactively preparing for this increase. In 2024, it commissioned a study by Purdue University to explore the feasibility and impacts of building new nuclear in Indiana, which identified three key opportunities:

Since his inauguration, Governor Braun has committed to exploring pathways for new nuclear projects and is positioning the state at the forefront of energy innovation. Several major milestones advanced this mission:

Support for nuclear energy is recognized at a national level. Over the past eight years, the U.S. Congress has passed several bipartisan bills to support demonstrations, improve regulations and secure America’s nuclear fuel supply. Most recently, Senator James Risch (R-ID) introduced the Accelerating Reliable Capacity (ARC) Act, which mitigates risk and provides insurance against escalating costs. There is undeniable momentum for new nuclear energy in the U.S., particularly in Indiana.

With increasing momentum, companies are taking notice. The utility, Indiana Michigan Power (I&M), applied for $50 million to begin the early stages of nuclear reactor deployment near a coal facility in Rockport, Indiana. I&M is a participant in a coalition of utilities, industry and universities that collectively applied for a public-private partnership of $800 million to advance deployment at several sites.

America needs an energy addition, not an energy transition. With so much growth potential, consider the economic advantages of a robust and reliable energy sector. Businesses will be attracted to Indiana, knowing they can rely on a steady and affordable power supply, especially from a reliable source like nuclear energy. Indiana is positioning itself as a leader in energy innovation and empowering its utilities to plan for the future and adopt new technologies, ensuring it remains a competitive and thriving state for decades to come. By embracing innovation and prioritizing reliability, along with the incorporation of advanced nuclear energy, Indiana can secure its energy future.

 

Power Demand Explained: Watts, Gigawatts and the Future of Energy

These days, we hear a lot about the rapid increase in global energy demand due to various factors like growing economies, widespread electrification, and the rise of data centers as AI expands. And it’s true. Here in the United States, after 15 years of static growth, our electricity demand is rising at an accelerated rate. Researchers estimate that by 2030, we will need 20% more energy - a total of 5 million gigawatt-hours of electricity each year.

“5 million gigawatt-hours.” That sounds like a lot. But what does that really mean?

Let’s start with the basics. A watt is a measure of power in an instant. For example, the 60-watt light bulb in your lamp at home requires 60 watts of power to turn on. A Watt-hour is a measurement of that power usage over time.

So, let’s say you turn on your lamp to read a book for two hours, you use 120 watt-hours of electricity. Easy enough.

Now, let’s take a look at a few other examples, going in order from smallest to largest. But first a reminder about unit prefixes: there are one thousand watts in a kilowatt, one million in a megawatt, and one billion in a gigawatt. 

While you’re reading your book, your lamp might only use 120-watt hours of electricity, but the average American household will use 2.4 kilowatt-hours during that time. That’s your lamp, the AC, the TV playing, and so on. Scaling up - with 150 megawatt-hours - you could power 42,000 American households for three hours while they watch a Sunday afternoon football game… or you could use your 150 megawatt-hours to power the NFL stadium itself. In the same amount of time, a large city like Washington D.C. would consume 25 times that much electricity, almost 4 gigawatt hours.

Currently, the U.S. needs around 4 million of these gigawatt-hours a year - again that’s 4 million billion watt-hours - or 4 with 15 zeros after it - and those needs are met with a mixture of 60% fossil fuels, 30% renewables, and 10% nuclear energy. And to get us 20 percent more energy - up to 5 million gigawatt hours a year  - we would need the equivalent of 1,500 Hoover dams in additional generation. That means we are going to need a lot more of ALL of these energy sources to keep up with expected demand.

And, we don’t just need more energy, we need energy that is affordable, reliable and clean. In other words, we need to take a pragmatic, all of the above approach to U.S. energy development. To keep the lights on - at a price that consumers can afford, we need more baseload energy –  the 24/7/ 300 and 65 days a year electricity sources that provide clean power. That means things like advanced nuclear, geothermal, and natural gas with carbon capture.

Ultimately, in order to generate and move all this energy around, we are going to need more than 15,000 new energy projects in this decade alone, and every single one of those projects starts with a permit. Unfortunately today in the United States, you can get a college degree faster than you can get a permit to build a clean energy project. That is why we all must work together to streamline federal permitting processes and unleash American energy. 

ClearPath’s answer to the power demand challenge? It’s time to Let America Build.

Five States to Watch for New Nuclear

U.S. power use is projected to hit record highs in 2024 and 2025, with electricity demand expected to rise 9% by 2028. Several states are deciding to act now, and positioning nuclear as a key solution to meet growing needs and attract early business opportunities. 

The time is ripe: 2024 showed the strongest wave of interest in nuclear power development from industries other than utilities since construction began on Vogtle over a decade ago. Tech giants like Google, Amazon and Microsoft have made deals with nuclear developers to meet clean energy goals in response to soaring electricity demand fueled by AI investment.

These developments reflect years of strong bipartisan support and policy wins. The growing collaboration among project developers, utilities, and major corporations underscores the critical role nuclear power will play in meeting future energy demand.

The U.S. currently consumes 4,300 TWh of electricity annually, with 60% generated from fossil fuels, 19% from nuclear power, and 21% from renewables. Surging energy demand from data centers and manufacturing growth is driving states to seek more reliable power. Electrifying these industries could add 6,000 to 10,000 TWh to grid demand, more than tripling current electricity consumption. This dramatic increase stresses the importance for states to expand clean energy generation and grid infrastructure. Large industrial economies, like Indiana, West Virginia and North Dakota where industry consumes ~50% of energy, are seeking additional energy generation sources, including nuclear, to meet demand.

Federal Programs and Incentives for Nuclear Energy

While federal policy drives broad nuclear innovation, states play a critical role in actually building and deploying the nuclear energy. The U.S. has seen early mover states collaborate with developers to streamline permitting, reduce delays and support early-site preparation. This state-level action is crucial for moving projects from concept to reality.

U.S. State Limits on New Nuclear Deployment

Several states have recently lifted historical bans on nuclear development or passed updated policies. West Virginia ended a 25-year ban, and Illinois repealed its 36-year moratorium. Connecticut passed legislation exempting the Millstone Power Station from the state’s nuclear construction moratorium, allowing for potential new reactor development at the site. Montana, Kentucky and Wisconsin also removed bans, signaling a shift toward nuclear for grid reliability and economic stability.

In April 2024, Georgia celebrated the launch of Units 3 & 4 at Plant Vogtle, two of three U.S. commercial reactors built in the 21st century, marking a major milestone in U.S. nuclear leadership. Terrapower bolstered this momentum, building the Natrium Reactor in Kemmerer, WY, a project supported by the Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program (ARDP). Vogtle’s completion and projects like Natrium are revitalizing interest in nuclear energy. This includes the restarts of decommissioned plants in Michigan and Pennsylvania, as well as new policies creating energy funds and strengthening public-private partnerships.

Five States to Watch

Indiana’s Nuclear Innovation

Governor Mike Braun released his Freedom and Opportunity Agenda, which includes support for advanced nuclear power in the state.

Tennessee Nuclear Momentum 

Tennessee is advancing nuclear innovation by leveraging Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) and strategic partnerships.

Texas’ Nuclear Strategy 

Texas released a landmark report in response to Governor Greg Abbott’s 2023 directive to the Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUCT) to position Texas as a leader in advanced nuclear energy.

Utah’s Nuclear Expansion

Governor Spencer Cox is driving nuclear innovation in Utah with his 2025 budget announcement, prioritizing site identification, permitting readiness, and creating the infrastructure and economic ecosystem needed to enable nuclear leadership. 

Virginia’s Nuclear Progress 

Virginia’s load growth is projected to double by 2039, the highest electricity demand in the nation, causing the state to position itself to lead in new reactor development.

A unified state-federal policy effort is essential to unlocking nuclear’s potential, meeting growing energy needs and achieving a clean, reliable future. Federal incentives alone cannot ensure the economic viability of advanced nuclear projects. Because of this, states are taking on their own initiatives to complement federal policies. There is not a one-size-fits-all approach to deploying new nuclear; states deserve to optimize their own resources in conjunction with federal resources to meet their power needs.

Delivering America First Energy Policy — 5 Priorities for the 119th Congress

The 119th Congress and incoming Administration have a major opportunity: Make America the world innovation leader in clean energy and clean manufacturing. This opportunity builds on the foundation established under the first Trump Administration to unleash American energy projects and build a stronger America.

The incoming Trump administration has nominated leaders to key agencies who have the experience to deliver on these results – Lee Zeldin for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Chris Wright for the Department of Energy (DOE), and former Governor of North Dakota Doug Burgum for the Department of the Interior (DOI).

And Congress is poised to deliver on this too by focusing on innovation over regulation and markets over mandates to advance clean, reliable, and affordable American-made energy.

ClearPath has outlined five policy areas for the 119th Congress to unleash the power of American innovation:

ClearPath’s mission is to accelerate American innovation to reduce global energy emissions. ClearPath therefore supports all-of-the above energy and innovation policies that make America stronger and more secure. 

We look forward to advancing policies that will further strengthen America’s leadership role in clean energy and innovation.

Let’s get to work.

Top 5 New Technologies for Clean U.S. Chemical Production

Chemical production and refining play a critical role in producing essential fuels for, power, heat and transportation while also creating vital inputs for a wide range of products such as plastics, fertilizers and pharmaceuticals—key export commodities for the U.S.. Chemical production and refining processes are also the largest contributors to industrial CO2 emissions in the U.S. economy, accounting for 11 percent of energy-related emissions and a striking 37 percent of all industrial CO2  emissions. Those emissions are projected to increase by 20 percent by 2050, largely driven by a rise in demand for chemicals. As demand increases, the U.S. has the opportunity to lead the way forward in clean chemical manufacturing while reducing emissions.

The good news is that clean solutions do exist for the chemical sector. Let’s take a deeper look at announcements to date and what has yet to come.

Mapping the Top 5 Tech Innovations for Emission Reduction

Combining Nuclear with Clean Chemical Production: Seadrift Advanced Reactor
Dow and X-energy have partnered to deploy a groundbreaking small modular, high-temperature nuclear reactor at Dow’s chemical production site in Seadrift, Texas. This advanced reactor, equipped with four modules, is set to reduce site emissions by approximately 440,000 metric tons of CO2  equivalent per year. The project, backed by ARDP funding, marks a significant milestone as the first high-temperature gas reactor to be deployed domestically in the U.S.. Only one other reactor of its kind exists, which began operations in China in December 2023. This first-of-its-kind initiative will help decarbonize power and heat needs for industrial customers, positioning the U.S. as a leader in advanced nuclear technology for clean manufacturing applications. Construction is slated to begin in 2026, with operations expected to start by 2028.

Reducing Emissions with Electric Steam Cracking: Channelview E-Furnace Demonstration
Technip Energies, LyondellBasell and Chevron Phillips are collaborating on the design, construction, and operation of a demonstration unit for an electric steam-cracking furnace in Channelview, Texas. This innovative technology enables clean electricity to be a heat source for the olefins cracking process (a petrochemical process in which large hydrocarbons are broken down into smaller hydrocarbons), which is responsible for approximately 12 to 13 percent of CO2  equivalent emissions. Steam-cracking furnaces, which operate at over 1,500°F, play a vital role in breaking down hydrocarbons into olefins and aromatics — key building blocks for various chemicals. By switching to electric power, the new e-furnace has the potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by up to 90 percent compared to conventional furnaces. 

PET Recycling Decarbonization Project: Eastman’s Circularity Initiative
Eastman is leading the way in plastic recycling with its first-of-its-kind molecular recycling facility in Longview, Texas, which aims to transform landfill-bound waste streams into virgin-quality polyethylene terephthalate (PET). PET is a kind of plastic derived from petroleum and is known for its durability, malleability, and widespread use in various fields (i.e., fiber materials, plastic bottles, etc.). The Longview facility, which has received up to $375 million in funding from the Department of Energy's Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations, plans to use thermal energy storage coupled with on-site solar power to recycle approximately 110,000 metric tons of hard-to-recycle plastic waste. By doing so, Eastman’s process will create products that have 70% lower emissions than traditional products. When accounting for avoided incineration emissions, this figure rises to 90%.

Advancing Opportunities to Fuel Switch: ExxonMobil Baytown Olefins Project
Exxon’s Olefins Project in Baytown, Texas, is set to revolutionize ethylene production by using hydrogen in place of natural gas. Ethylene is a base chemical that is used as a feedstock for more complex chemicals, like polymers. This project, which has secured up to $331.9 million in federal funding, involves implementing new burner technology capable of using 100% hydrogen. The switch is expected to avoid 2.5 million tons of CO2  emissions annually, reducing site-wide emissions by approximately 30 percent of current operations. In addition to creating 400 construction jobs and retraining 140 workers, this project is a significant step in proving that clean hydrogen can decarbonize large industrial facilities. The successful demonstration of hydrogen fuel switching could provide a pathway for reducing emissions across the entire chemical industry.

Clean Feedstocks for Cleaner Ammonia: Trammo and ReMo Energy Pilot Project
Trammo, Inc., a raw materials distributor, and ReMo Energy, Inc., a clean chemical start-up, have signed a Memorandum of Understanding to produce clean ammonia at ReMo’s forthcoming plant in Meredosia, Illinois, which could be the first-of-its-kind in the U.S. ReMo will produce clean ammonia from clean hydrogen at a site co-located with  Trammo’s existing ammonia terminal in Illinois. Trammo is the exclusive off-taker of ReMo’s ammonia. By optimizing the plant design with distributed scale and electrolyzer integration, ReMo aims to build ammonia production plants at a lower cost than traditional plants. This partnership represents a major step toward cleaner ammonia production, which is essential for reducing emissions from agriculture and other industries.

The Path Forward: U.S. Leadership in Clean Manufacturing
As the demand for chemicals grows, so do the challenges and opportunities in decarbonizing the U.S. clean manufacturing sector. By embracing advanced technologies such as small modular reactors, electric steam cracking, molecular recycling, hydrogen and others, America can lead the global shift towards cleaner, more innovative chemical production processes. This is not only an opportunity to reduce emissions but also an economic opportunity, as U.S. producers can utilize their emissions advantage over global competitors, particularly China, to access markets with demand for cleaner goods. Now is the time for the U.S. to build off this momentum and position itself as the global leader in reducing emissions through clean manufacturing.

CO2 Pipelines Are Safe…and We Need a Lot More

You’ve probably heard about a clean energy technology called Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage – or “CCUS” for short.

This is a method of capturing carbon dioxide or “CO2” from emissions sources like power plants and industrial facilities. Another method for reducing emissions is called Direct Air Capture, which removes CO2 that is already in our atmosphere — think a giant vacuum. If we’re serious about global emissions reduction — we need both.

In addition to driving down emissions, captured CO2 is also a valuable commodity.  CO2 is not only used to make your beer fizz, carbon oxides can be used for everyday products like building materials, fertilizer, and fuels. CO2 that is not in use can be permanently and safely stored - usually underground - where it resides for thousands of years. 

Often, when CO2 is captured, it’s not located near an available storage or use site and has to be transported to another location. Today, the best and safest way to move CO2 is through pipelines. 

Pipelines are everywhere - often without us even realizing it. They are beneath our highways, run through our cities, and connect our homes. Other essential resources, like natural gas, water, and waste, are all moved by pipelines. That’s because pipelines are the most land-efficient way to transport materials while minimizing environmental impact.

The Pipelines and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, also known as “PHMSA”, has long regulated the security of this infrastructure. PHMSA provides national standards for pipeline design, construction, maintenance and operation. These ensure that all necessary measures are taken to mitigate risks and safeguard the well-being of your family and the environment.

Now let’s talk about CO2 pipelines. The U.S. currently has more than 5,000 miles of these pipelines, which have been safely operating across our country for over 50 years. CO2 is a stable, non flammable gas - we know it’s safe. We breathe it in and out every day - it’s even used in fire extinguishers. Over the last twenty years, there have been zero recorded fatalities associated with the very few CO2 pipeline incidents that have occurred. A pipeline accident, like we saw in 2020 in Satartia, Mississippi, while concerning, is extremely uncommon and is not representative of the safety performance of this critical infrastructure over the last several decades.

As demand for clean, reliable, and affordable energy grows, so will the demand for effective carbon management technologies. That means, to meet our energy security and global emission reduction goals, the build-out of CO2 pipeline infrastructure is vital.  An estimated 30,000 - 96,000 miles of CO2 pipelines will be needed by 2050 – that’s roughly 5 to 18 times the length of our existing network. 

We get it, some people are uneasy about new infrastructure. But let’s face it, whether you care about climate change or U.S. competitiveness- we need these technologies. By building CO2 pipeline infrastructure, we are not only building our capacity to reduce emissions and protect our environment, we’re also creating jobs, bolstering local economies, and continuing to use the energy sources that make our country strong. In America, we’re not afraid to build — it’s what we do. 

And, through R&D and innovation, we’ll leverage the efficiency and maintain the strong safety record of this vital American infrastructure.

Let America build - A policy path to modernize energy permitting

Our team spends a lot of time on reliable, affordable, clean energy systems that run 24/7. These types of technologies are an integral part of our energy future, but with a growing economy and electricity demand doubling, we need MORE power.

This means building a lot of new nuclear, geothermal, and clean fossil power plants. We’ll also need immense new transmission and pipeline infrastructure to move energy around the country.

But we’ve got a ton of work to do in very little time. 

Whether you are motivated by deep emissions reductions, furthering our nation’s energy security, or enabling the next generation of American manufacturing, the coming decades are essential. By many estimates, that means at least 10,000 new clean energy projects this decade alone. And, every one of those projects will require new permits to build. 

Unfortunately, the U.S. has a world-class apparatus… for getting in the way.

Let me give you an example. The National Environmental Policy Act, or NEPA, calls for developers to measure the environmental impact of their projects. But NEPA was passed years before we had other laws with strict environmental standards like the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, or Endangered Species Act. 

Each of those are important — but all together … permit reviews can spiral into extremely long efforts, spanning thousands of pages with duplicative analyses and dozens of bureaucrats required to sign off on each individual project. And, this is not even taking into account the time it takes for any local permitting or state regulations. While this system may have made sense 50 years ago, the surge in new energy demand requires a new way.    

When we think about how to build tens of thousands of new clean energy projects, and how to balance speed and safety, it's obvious the U.S. needs a more predictable process. 

At ClearPath, we always focus on solutions. Here are two that should be pretty simple: 

First, grant immediate approval to projects on a site that have already undergone an environmental review.

Second, we must expedite court challenges so a final decision on projects is made in a timely manner. 

Let me simplify both concepts.

Do you remember standing in line at the airport before TSA pre-check? That was brutal! Now, individuals who have proven they are not a risk can move through an expedited line.

Here’s another example.

There are mountains of evidence that some projects have little to no environmental impacts, such as an advanced manufacturing facility that produces parts for clean energy on a brownfield, or converting a retired coal plant to an advanced nuclear facility or siting a new geothermal plant at a depleted oil and gas well. These are the types of projects we should automatically permit to move forward.

Just like random screenings at TSA, we can audit the operators to ensure they’re complying with all environmental laws as we go. So new energy accelerates at no new environmental costs.

And for those projects that do need permits up front, we should ensure reviews are complete within 1 year and resolve any legal disputes within 6 months.

Under the current system, clean energy projects can suffer long delays, sometimes decades, largely because of obstructive litigation practices. We must strike the right balance while halting the never-ending cycle of frivolous lawsuits. 

At ClearPath, we believe all of this can be done without rolling back environmental protections or eliminating the public’s opportunity to be involved in the review process. Even with these necessary changes, a project would still be required to comply with environmental laws during its entire lifetime.*

It’s a win-win. Let’s get building.

Vogtle Was a Smart Investment

In April of 2024, the second of two new AP1000 nuclear reactors – Vogtle units 3 & 4 – came online in Georgia. These reactors were an ambitious project, deploying a first-of-a-kind design to provide clean and reliable electricity to Georgia. This is a story of unwavering aspiration and perseverance. Before the reactors were ever even turned on, redesigns, bankruptcies, construction mistakes and more drove the final cost to double what was initially projected, delaying operation beyond the original 2016 and 2017 targets. Despite the challenges, Vogtle is an investment that will pay dividends for decades.  

Building first-of-kind anything is hard, and the true story here is about how Georgia persevered through these challenges and secured a major investment in its future. Georgia made a significant investment in the Vogtle expansion, and in return, they will get clean, reliable energy capable of powering 1 million households and businesses 24/7 for decades to come. One evergreen benefit of this energy is its resistance to price inflation, fuel risks, and global economic conditions. The Vogtle reactors are a gift to the next generation in the state, capable of operating for the next 80 or even 100 years. Few, if any, other energy sources can provide this combination of attributes. 

With the doubts in the rearview mirror, let’s look at the deal as a whole, compared to potential alternatives:

1)Lazard LCOE 2) Department of Energy 3) S&P Global 4) Pacific Northwest National Lab

Incremental additions of solar power are cheap, but say Georgia wanted to procure a similar amount of 24/7 clean power using only solar, the storage required would balloon the price quickly. Solar with additional storage is already about twice as expensive as solar alone, but the attached battery storage only averages between one to four hours of output, as longer durations generally mean worse economics. This means Georgia would still need to build additional generation for “firming,” also known as backing up, to meet required reliability needs. However, even with all of these resources, this still “does not represent the cost of building a 24/7 firm resource.” 

We strongly support a fully diverse grid — one that uses all energy sources. For those who say we can just use all renewables to power America aren’t looking at the big picture. Wind energy in the Southeastern United States isn’t as prevalent as in other parts of the country for the simple fact that it’s just not as windy. That’s why they are using more solar which makes sense. But, today, the largest percentage of 24/7 reliable power is gas turbines, so if Georgia had to use natural gas to back up solar, they would have needed to build four new combined cycle turbines the size of those at Plant Wansley in Georgia.

Today’s affordable natural gas is an innovation success story and has been a boon for the U.S. economy and deserves credit for a 20 percentage decrease in emissions. Natural gas is also low-cost, dispatchable power. Yet despite its strengths, solely relying on new gas power presents challenges as well. For instance, natural gas power is pipeline dependent and more gas would likely require more pipelines — not an easy lift. Gas is also largely driven by fuel prices, so today’s low prices are predicated on low-cost, reliable natural gas supply. This can create a significant commodity risk, especially over the comparable lifetime of a nuclear power plant. 

For example, in Oklahoma, the state finalized a bond that will cost ratepayers $4.5 billion over the next 25 years to pay for gas supply during Winter Storm Uri when prices neared $1,200/Metric Million British Thermal Unit (MMBTU), while today it averages $2-3/MMBTU. In the same storm, Texas paid about $3.5 billion. And of course, to make this important power source low to no emissions, the U.S. must advance innovative natural gas technologies, as well as carbon capture and its associated infrastructure.

Finally, grid planners must also consider the lifecycle of these projects. A nuclear power plant's lifespan is more than double that of a gas or solar power plant and many times that of today’s battery technology. To cover nuclear power's longer operating period, new assets will need to be built, potentially several times over. This exposes future power supply both to normal inflation and significant supply chain risks.

Vogtle isn’t the only example where in hindsight, completing a project turned into a good deal. Millstone 3, a 1260MW reactor in Connecticut, had a famously embattled development process, including delays and at least seven cost increases. Today, that plant provides half of all Connecticut’s power and over 90% of its zero-emissions power. While the upfront cost felt high during a tumultuous construction in the 1980s, today, multiple analyses find that Millstone and other nuclear plants like it bring down wholesale power prices in the region.  

Similarly, Georgia paid a high upfront cost to complete the Vogtle reactors. But now that they’re built, the operational costs of a nuclear power plant are relatively small. The fully depreciated costs of existing power plants are about $32/MWh today. Georgia’s power will not just be clean and reliable for the next 80+ years, but also largely immune to price inflation and fuel risk. Like Millstone 3, this may mean keeping future prices much lower.  Industry has responded to this: Georgia is experiencing an economic boom, winning a fifth of all new clean manufacturing projects, and the second–most data center capacity under construction in the country. The ability to provide clean, reliable, and affordable power — like nuclear energy — is an economic advantage, and Georgia just made an enormous investment in its future. The Vogtle tale is one of perseverance and success. Further nuclear deployments – while inevitably cheaper than a first-of-a-kind – will require large investments. These are investments in the future and should be seen as such.

TerraPower Breaks Ground in Wyoming, Clearing Path for New Nuclear

TerraPower broke ground on its Natrium reactor in Kemmerer, Wyoming. This is the first time in four decades that a company has started construction on an advanced reactor in the United States. Natrium is a sodium fast reactor with integrated molten salt energy storage. This exciting 345 megawatt (MWe) reactor can ramp up to 500 MWe, enough to provide reliable, clean power to 400,000+ homes for more than five and a half hours.

TerraPower is building this first plant through a public-private partnership with the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program (ARDP), a concept ClearPath started working on in 2016 in partnership with congressional leaders like U.S. Sens. Lamar Alexander (R-TN), Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), Idaho National Lab, Oak Ridge National Lab, and DOE.

L to R: ClearPath’s Chris Tomassi (a Kemmerer, WY native), Jeremy Harrell and Jake Kincer at the groundbreaking

ClearPath has played a role over the past seven years in building bipartisan Congressional support for the U.S. DOE’s ARDP. We supported the Trump Administration’s efforts to launch the program and select cutting-edge projects like this, and continue to advocate the program’s importance. TerraPower will be putting clean electrons on the grid by the end of this decade. It is a true bipartisan win for American clean energy. Developing the next generation of nuclear technology now is essential as power demand from industrials and data centers is skyrocketing across America.

ARDP Timeline

For more information on this program, and the long road to get here, check our blog: It’s Happening… US to Build Two New Advanced Nuclear Reactors, from October 2020.

Advanced Nuclear Fuel 201

Congratulations! If you have read our Nuclear Fuel 101, you are already well on your way to understanding the importance of the nuclear fuel supply chain. This second installation goes a bit further, discussing what happens after fuel is used, innovations in nuclear fuel and why new types of fuel are important for new reactor designs. 

Innovative Reactors Demand Innovative Fuel

Most new advanced reactor designs incorporate passive and inherent safety features (like heat transfer) that remove the need for active, engineered safety systems (like a pump or valve). This allows designs to shut down naturally and safely in case of an event, like a total loss of power.

Advanced reactors are designed to be smaller, more affordable, safer, and more fuel efficient. Like other types of new reactors – fast reactors – can harness the energy from used fuel. This could reduce proliferation risks and decrease the volume of high-level nuclear waste by around 85%. Currently, the U.S. safely stores used nuclear fuel at more than 80 sites across 35 states.

Used Fuel Storage and Recycling: The Back End of The Nuclear Fuel Cycle

After nuclear fuel is used in nuclear reactors, there are a few options for managing the fuel.

Storage. When removed from any type of reactor, nuclear fuel continues to emit both radiation and heat. Once the fuel has reached the end of its useful life, the assembly is loaded into a nearby storage pool to allow the heat and radiation levels to decrease. After several years, the fuel may be transferred to naturally-ventilated storage, typically in dry casks like the ones shown below at the Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant.

The Comanche Peak Nuclear Plant has provided jobs for 1,300 workers since 1990 and supplies Texans with 2,425 MWe, enough to power 500,000 homes.

Recycling. One factor that makes nuclear energy so unique is the ability to reprocess and recycle used fuel. In a reactor, uranium splits into two new atoms (or elements). Over time, these new atoms build up like dirt on a windshield until the fuel is no longer usable. Used fuel reprocessing removes that “dirt,” giving the remaining uranium a second life. Even after several years in a reactor, the fuel retains more than 90% of its potential energy. Globally, in 2019, recycled fuel replaced the need for more than 2,200 tons of new natural uranium, despite reprocessing capacity being limited to France, the U.K., Russia, Japan and India.

The Nuclear Fuel Cycle

Source: World Nuclear Association

Innovations in Nuclear Fuel

There are a number of innovations in nuclear fuel that are currently in early stage use or research, development and demonstration (RD&D) phases. 

Recycling Innovation: MOX fuel is recycled fuel for existing reactors.

Mixed oxide fuel (MOX) is the second, third, fourth and even fifth life of the low-enriched uranium (LEU) from light water reactors (LWRs). Programs that leverage MOX fuel exist in Europe, Russia, and Japan. MOX fuel has been used commercially since the 1980s, and currently fuels about 10% of France’s nuclear plants. 

Making MOX fuel requires mixing depleted uranium with plutonium. Depleted uranium is the less-valuable coproduct from uranium enrichment. Plutonium is produced naturally in the reactor’s fuel during operation and can be extracted from used fuel during reprocessing. 

MOX fuel can be used in qualified existing reactors alongside fresh fuel. They decrease the overall amount of waste produced per megawatt, reduce the consumption of natural uranium by about 20% with each recycle and can be recycled up to five times.

Fuel Form Innovation: TRISO pellets are the safest form of fuel for advanced reactors. 

Tri-structural isotropic fuel (TRISO) is an innovation in fuel form that makes it impossible for the fuel to meltdown. The idea behind TRISO fuel is to give each piece of nuclear fuel, no bigger than the tip of a pen, its own containment and pressure vessel, two vital safety features in a full-sized plant. This feature makes the fuel durable even at very high temperatures. TRISO particles remain securely intact up to 3250°F, a temperature that exceeds even worst-case conditions in a reactor. For context, high-temperature reactors operate between 1350 and 1750°F, well below the melting threshold for TRISO. The U.S. Department of Defense and NASA both use TRISO fuel for their upcoming reactor programs because of its exceptional safety features.

Fuel Composition Innovation: Thorium-based fuel could be used in addition to uranium. 

Thorium as an alternative source of nuclear fuel has been a promising innovation over the past decade. Thorium occurs naturally as thorium-232. It is slightly radioactive, is about three times more abundant than uranium, and has a half-life that is three times the age of the Earth. In a reactor, it is possible to create more thorium than is used, although economic and technical hurdles remain. 

India has established the long-term goal of a three-stage, thorium-based, closed-loop fuel cycle. Stage one involves pressurized water reactors fueled by natural uranium. In stage two, the used fuel from stage one will be reprocessed to recover plutonium, which will be used to fuel India’s fast reactors. Finally, stage three would involve fueling advanced heavy water reactors with thorium-plutonium fuel. Using thorium-based fuel could help diversify the fuel cycle, however thorium is expensive to extract, and additional RD&D is needed to capture its full potential.

Fuel Composition Innovation: Natural uranium can reduce waste and proliferation risk.

Another potential composition for nuclear fuel is natural uranium (i.e., unenriched uranium) fuel pellets. Natural uranium does not require enrichment, and enrichment infrastructure is required for making nuclear weapons; therefore, if a country wants to reduce proliferation risk, it can opt to use natural uranium as a fuel source. 

Two schools of reactors can take advantage of natural uranium: heavy water reactors and fast reactors. The most famous heavy water reactor design is the Canadian CANDU reactor which first went online in 1977. Canada has exported CANDU reactors to Argentina, China, India, Pakistan, Romania and South Korea. There are 30 CANDU reactors in operation globally. British-designed Magnox reactors also use natural uranium fuel, and have been in operation since 1956. Because natural uranium is unenriched, the storage and reprocessing is more simple and less expensive than for enriched uranium fuel. 

Fast reactors are designed to operate with high-energy, fast neutrons (imagine neutrons moving 9000 miles per second). Fast reactors are less common today than CANDU reactors but dominate the field of advanced reactors because they are up to 60 times more fuel efficient than today’s LWRs.

Recycling Innovation: Fast reactor fuel is more efficient and consumes waste. 

Fast reactors were some of the first nuclear reactors built in the U.S. because they can extract more energy from fuel than traditional LWRs, and can use energy from material that would be considered “waste” in traditional LWRs. The Experimental Breeder Reactor (EBR-I and EBR-II) test facilities were operational from 1951 to 1964 and 1965 to 1994, respectively. EBR-I was the world’s first plant to generate electricity from atomic energy, and the combined test facilities successfully demonstrated a complete breeder reactor cycle with on-site fuel reprocessing. 

France also took an early interest in recycling fuel in fast reactors. France’s Phénix prototype reactor, which operated from 1973 to 2009, was designed to maximize fuel utilization and recycle all of the plutonium it produced. The recycling facility, the Marcoule Pilot Plant has reprocessed a total 25 tons of fuel from the Phénix reactor. 

Because some of the fuel was reprocessed multiple times, France was able to illustrate a closed-loop fuel cycle and demonstrate the value of the fast breeder reactor system.

What's in Fuel

Source: Japan Nuclear Fuel Limited

Why it Matters

Fuel form, composition and enrichment level create many combinations of fuel types that could service remote communities, military installations and massive metropolitan centers. Nuclear batteries power our space missions and nuclear reactors power our submarines, but the individual technologies taking advantage of that energy look drastically different. 

Completely carbon-free, nuclear energy powers nearly 20% of U.S. electricity consumption using variations of the same fuel developed in the 1940s. More than 80 years later, new advanced reactor designs are gaining momentum and we could see them in the marketplace this decade. The fuels in development for these new designs enable the recycling of used fuel and prevent the reactor from melting down. Although the U.S. does not currently recycle any used nuclear fuel, in 2022 the Department of Energy awarded $38 million for twelve projects aimed at developing domestic recycling capacity. 

Asking everyone to have a complete understanding of nuclear fuel is unnecessary, but it is important that people understand the magnitude of its potential to provide reliable, clean and affordable energy to our power grid.