Accelerating Nuclear Energy Through Interstate Collaboration

The United States is entering an era of rapidly growing power demand, driven by a manufacturing boom and the adoption of advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence. To keep up with this heightened demand, companies are seeking to deploy more generation to ensure electricity availability, reliability and affordability. In response, power utilities and state governments are beginning to treat nuclear power as essential infrastructure.

While some state governments enacted bans or limitations on nuclear power in recent decades, many have already begun to reverse course in order to compete in the energy race. Increasingly, state governments are exploring how to work together to create the conditions for successful and timely deployment of new nuclear reactors.

Deploying a fleet of new nuclear power plants is a tall order, which makes coordinating the resources of multiple states an attractive option. However, doing so requires navigating a highly complex legal and regulatory landscape as well as the physical infrastructure of the U.S. power grid. The concept of an “interstate compact” itself opens legal questions related to the Compact Clause. In practical terms, any collaboration will need to account for market and regulatory differences, or even the lack of appropriate physical infrastructure. Overcoming these challenges will require careful negotiation to find a model capable of pushing nuclear deployment forward. This piece reviews U.S. power system management and offers suggestions on how to construct interstate agreements effectively to accelerate these deployments.

The U.S. Power System

The Advantage of State Compacts for Nuclear Deployment

Collaborative efforts between states to deploy new nuclear, through interstate agreements called compacts, are not a new concept. Hundreds of compacts are used to address various policy issues. These agreements allow states to utilize resources efficiently by sharing expertise, financial resources, supply chains or other means, depending on the policy issue.

Utah, Idaho and Wyoming signed a tri-state agreement to support nuclear energy deployment last year. Collaboration on nuclear energy is particularly fitting for these states because they share energy infrastructure, have similar energy profiles and face comparable geographic constraints:

With utilities across the West joining different markets, including in Utah, Idaho and Wyoming, there is potential to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of joint nuclear energy development. Shared challenges and individual strengths create a robust foundation for collaboration. States can bridge gaps in infrastructure and expertise by leveraging National Lab resources and existing nuclear expertise in one state, while co-developing regional manufacturing and workforce pipelines that can support new nuclear across several states.

Many states are beginning to address shared opportunities through state-supported feasibility studies or by considering programs to either repurpose their existing workforce, by creating, improving or expanding specialized education systems, or supporting an influx of workers with existing, necessary experience. Aggressive and intentional state-level policy to support early deployment of nuclear energy sends a strong signal to developers, but may not be enough to overcome challenges with early project deployments. Regional agreements could allow states to share and expand these resources collaboratively and more efficiently, or form a “buyers club” across similar markets to help spread the risk of early deployments.

Policy and Market Considerations

State energy market structures impact the commercialization path of nuclear projects. In a state with vertically integrated utilities, states can enact advanced rate recovery mechanisms to recover costs in real time rather than waiting until a plant is operational. The upfront revenue reduces the amount that needs to be borrowed and the total interest cost during construction.

Conversely, generation, transmission and distribution are separated in a state with restructured utilities, and generators earn revenue by selling their electricity into the competitive market. With most utilities procuring their electricity from the market and other entities that own the generation, advanced rate recovery isn’t an option. To make early nuclear reactor deployments financially viable in a deregulated market, multiple policy levers and financial contracts will likely need to be stacked to supplement the wholesale market revenue once the nuclear reactor is sold into the marketplace.

A collaborative effort between, for example, deregulated states with existing nuclear energy (e.g., OH, PA, MD, CT and NY) could pull multiple levers in tandem to see new nuclear development in their state.

These include: 

Example Policy Levers

Strategic Planning and State-Level Support

Regardless of market structure, it is common for utilities to own generation assets in one state serving customers in another. Decisions on where to locate generation assets are built on factors including power needs, resource availability, environmental considerations, regulatory requirements, cost and policy incentives. Utility Integrated Resource Plans (IRPs) will have to consider all of these aspects when planning to build out new nuclear. 

State-level recognition of nuclear energy as a clean energy source also significantly impacts project viability and access to funding. Some states, such as Virginia and Maryland, have Renewable Portfolio Standards, and later clarified that nuclear energy would count toward those goals. Other states have adopted technology-agnostic Clean Energy Standards that focus solely on zero- or low-carbon goals. By ensuring that existing state statutes consider nuclear technology on a level playing field with other technologies, states can enable nuclear projects to qualify for certain loans, grants and other funding opportunities that might otherwise be unavailable.

Federal Oversight

Effective nuclear deployment also hinges on robust, efficient and predictable federal oversight. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is the independent federal agency responsible for overseeing and regulating civilian nuclear energy and nuclear materials. Before operation, nuclear power plants must undergo NRC safety, financial and environmental reviews for their construction and operating licenses.

Beyond direct NRC licensing, the Interstate Compact Clause is an important federal dynamic to consider. Stemming from the landmark case Virginia v. Tennessee (1893), this clause draws a line requiring Congressional approval for a certain level of collaboration between states. This will not categorically prevent states from working together, but it complicates the types of collaboration possible and may require states to seek congressional approval.

Geographic and Transmission Infrastructure Considerations

Even with effective policies and regulatory frameworks, a significant barrier to certain regional agreements and broader nuclear deployment can be physical: moving electrons requires significant transmission capacity and transfer capability, a major constraint for all kinds of energy development in the U.S. Though projects to improve connections both inter- and intra-regionally are underway, these infrastructure limitations will remain a primary consideration for nuclear deployments; it may not be physically possible to move sufficient power from one area of a state to another, especially if significant distance or geographic barriers are present. These limitations could become the subject of state-to-state collaborations.

Framework for Evaluating State Collaborative Efforts for Nuclear Deployment

Several factors can affect states’ success as they seek collaborative agreements. Below is a table with examples of how these factors may impact certain regions. States should consider the weighting of each category, as individual factors will significantly matter.

Examples of Alignment for State Collaboration

Nuclear energy has a long-standing history with interstate compacts around low-level radioactive waste across the nation and the Western Interstate Nuclear Compact. As identified previously, these compacts require congressional approval, so less formal agreements may be preferred.

Memoranda of Understanding or other Regional Energy Initiatives, such as the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, Northeast States Collaborative on Interregional Transmission and the Western Governors’ Association, serve as forums for states to support each other in regional energy policy. Over the past few years, various states have worked to push projects and legislation with varying degrees of success with interstate partners.

Examples of Supportive State Legislation Proposed or Passed in 2025

Conclusion

Achieving widespread nuclear energy deployment will hinge on initial order books of five to 10 units of the same design being committed to and financed as soon as possible. States, working together, can lead by sharing the risk of a first-of-a-kind reactor through strategic partnerships. This initial step will pave the way for the commercialization of new nuclear reactors driven by economies of scale.

State collaboration offers a strategic lever to catalyze momentum. By joining forces across multiple regions, states can sync project timelines to support workforce and supply chain needs in the construction phase. Pooled demand will amplify the market signal to developers and supply chain industries, especially if states enter formal agreements. Participating states can collaborate on workforce training and retraining, standing up qualified supply chains, aligning regulatory requirements and siting and approval challenges. Regional collaboration can create a unified voice to advocate for federal support.

However, the challenges of achieving an interstate compact, especially one that can accomplish the goal of creating an orderbook of new nuclear, should not be understated. States will need to carefully consider the type of collaboration they want to pursue and identify the partners best suited. If successful, regional collaboration could be a powerful lever to usher in the next wave of nuclear projects and drive a national strategy to dramatically increase American nuclear capacity.

Appendix

Key Concepts in the Governance of the U.S. Power System

Bryson Roberson is a former ClearPath Conservative Leadership Program Fellow. He is now a Legislative Correspondent for Senator Dave McCormick (R-PA).

Cason Carroll is a Program Manager at Envoy Public Labs.

Austin Blanch is a Senior Analyst at Envoy Public Labs.

 

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 Financing Power: America vs. China

Clean Baseload Power: A Politically Durable Energy Agenda

ClearPath was founded in 2014 to fill the whitespace in the energy debate. Plenty of technology and industry-specific organizations existed. But who was working on an American innovation agenda and policy strategy focused on building clean, baseload energy? And, more specifically, who were the conservative voices? 

That’s where ClearPath founder Jay Faison stepped in: “I want conservatives to be leaders on clean energy—from nuclear to hydropower to clean fossil fuels—both to improve the environment and strengthen real conservative leadership.” 

Today, politics remain polarized, and there is still healthy debate over which technology is the best, most affordable way to meet growing demand. 

Instead of falling into the false choice trap of fossil fuels versus renewables, or the economy versus the environment, we espouse choosing markets over mandates and innovation over regulation. 

And now, as the post-One Big Beautiful Bill dust settles, an actual clear path for a politically durable American energy system has emerged.

Amidst the political noise, a quiet, bipartisan consensus has formed around a critical piece of America’s energy future: clean, firm, 24/7 energy technologies.

Both parties recognize that if we want to maintain a reliable grid, meet growing electricity demand to win the AI race, and reduce emissions, we need firm, always-on clean power.

This is where technologies like advanced nuclear, carbon capture, hydropower, fusion and enhanced geothermal systems come in. These solutions can provide round-the-clock electricity. And crucially, they have gained champions on both sides of the aisle. Recent federal policies prove the point. The Energy Act of 2020, which had strong bipartisan support in Congress and was signed into law by President Trump, authorized research, development and deployment policies for clean, firm power. 

The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2021, passed with bipartisan support and signed by President Biden, dedicated billions to fund demonstrations of those technologies authorized in the Energy Act of 2020. 

The Inflation Reduction Act, driven by Democrats in 2022, and One Big Beautiful Bill, by Republicans this year, both have one thing in common — support for new nuclear, long-duration energy storage, carbon capture, geothermal and hydropower, or, as we’ve already said…clean, 24/7 reliable energy. 

At the same time, Republican-led states like Wyoming, Utah, Louisiana and West Virginia are actively partnering with private developers to host small modular nuclear reactors and carbon capture projects, while Democratic strongholds like California, New York and Michigan are extending the life of their nuclear plants to keep clean, reliable power on the grid.

The motivation is not ideological; it’s practical. A manufacturing renaissance, more electrification of buildings and industry, and a data-driven economy all require massive amounts of reliable electricity. Without 24/7 power, renewables alone cannot meet that demand without risking blackouts or skyrocketing costs. And while we want to see more fossil fuel power plants with carbon capture get built, supply chains and infrastructure challenges make meeting the entire demand challenging. 

Policymakers in both parties are seeing the same reality: the U.S. must invest in American-made technologies that can run all day, all year.

The alignment is not just good for political discourse; it’s good for American energy dominance. China and Russia are aggressively deploying advanced nuclear and other clean energy infrastructure around the world. To beat them, we must diversify our innovations and accelerate the deployment of technologies at home while opening up new global buyers of American-made energy. 

At the same time, the drumbeat for modernizing energy permitting is getting louder and for good reason. If we want America to lead the world and develop more of the clean, baseload power that has bipartisan support, developers must have a better path to obtaining permits. 

Energy policy may never be completely free from partisanship, but we should not lose sight of the common ground that now clearly exists. When it comes to keeping the lights on, powering the economy and new AI, and lowering global emissions, clean 24/7 energy is one issue where America can still move forward together.

 

20 Years Since the Energy Policy Act of 2005

It is hard to believe that this month marks 20 years since Congress passed the Energy Policy Act (EPAct) of 2005. EPAct 2005 focused on increasing energy supplies, building energy infrastructure and driving investment in American innovation. While it was far from perfect, EPAct was bold and set the stage for U.S. energy dominance. Congress can build on the lessons from EPAct 2005 and continue to deliver energy policy that moves our nation forward.

When EPAct 2005 was crafted, the country was facing complex energy issues. We were grappling with the impacts of the 2003 Northeast Blackout, which affected more than 50 million people and caused an estimated $10 billion in economic losses. There were growing concerns about too much dependence on foreign oil and gas. The nuclear industry was in need of a serious revival to meet its potential. Innovative technologies were struggling to get the financing needed to achieve speed and scale. Congress took these challenges and turned them into opportunities.

Some key provisions of EPAct 2005 included:

Today, the saga of challenging energy issues continues. Our grid must be ready to meet increased demand driven from data center growth, industrial reshoring and widespread electrification while also dealing with aging infrastructure, the complexity of integrating variable resources and an evolving regulatory landscape. Permitting hurdles remain a major barrier to building critical energy infrastructure. Innovative technologies still need strong public-private partnerships to bridge the commercialization gap and scale to competitive solutions. These challenges set the stage for the next opportunity for energy leadership.

Forecast of Data Center Demand Growth by 2030

Adapted from DOE’s Resource Adequacy Report (2025), underlying data from EPRI, McKinsey & Company, LBNL, S&P

Congress has shown in EPAct 2005 as well as the Energy Act of 2020 that it can deliver broad, bipartisan energy policy. It is time for an updated big, bold, bipartisan energy bill.  

The following are examples of policies that can address today’s energy challenges:

Streamline Permitting: Outdated permitting processes are jeopardizing critical infrastructure development. Bills like the SPEED Act, introduced by House Natural Resources Chairman Bruce Westerman (R-AR) and Rep. Jared Golden (D-ME), can help modernize NEPA to reduce duplication, increase transparency and reform judicial and litigation practices. The administration and legislation proposals like the FREE Act introduced by Sen. Lummis (R-WY) and Rep. Maloy (R-UT) have also highlighted the potential for using a regulatory tool called permit-by-rule to expedite permitting, which is a process that allows certain activities to proceed without undergoing a full individualized permit review, as long as they meet predefined criteria.

Improve the Grid:  American energy security, AI leadership and manufacturing competitiveness require a robust transmission system. Transmission siting and permitting improvements could streamline grid expansion while balancing and fully respecting states’ roles in the process. Innovative grid technologies and transformer manufacturing deployed at scale would also help optimize the grid. Safeguarding the grid, such as through the work of DOE’s Office of Cybersecurity, Energy Security and Emergency Response (CESER), is also critical.

Strengthen Pipelines: A modern pipeline system is essential to deliver reliable, affordable energy to homes and industry, including AI data centers. Policy ideas like the Next Generation Pipelines Research and Development Act, which passed the House on a bipartisan basis in the 118th Congress and was reintroduced in April 2025 by Reps. Randy Weber (R-TX) and Deborah Ross (D-NC) would support the build-out of all types of pipelines, such as natural gas, LNG, petroleum, carbon dioxide, hydrogen and more. There are also opportunities to update some safety regulations for pipeline infrastructure.

Expand Critical Minerals: Critical minerals are essential to America’s energy security, industrial base and national defense. President Trump’s March 2025 Executive Order prioritized U.S. mineral production and directed DOD and DOI to accelerate support for mining and processing. There have also been several legislative efforts in the 118th and 119th Congress that seek to accelerate permitting for mining projects, boost R&D and strengthen strategic mineral partnerships and finance domestic mineral supply chains. Some examples include: the Critical Mineral Consistency Act, the Mining Regulatory Clarity Act, the Unearth Innovation Act and the STRATEGIC Minerals Act.

Expand Nuclear: Building more clean, firm nuclear power is essential for national and economic security. Bills like the Accelerating Reliable Capacity (ARC) Act introduced in the 118th Congress by Senator Risch (R-ID), or a similar policy, can spur nuclear deployment by addressing cost uncertainty and reducing investment risk. Also, continued funding for the DOE’s Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program (ARDP), first authorized in the Energy Act of 2020, has supported ongoing nuclear energy projects and their fuel supply chain.

Promote Geothermal: Next-generation geothermal technologies have the potential to expand beyond the Western U.S. to provide emissions-free, reliable baseload power all across the country and leverage up to 200,000 existing American jobs in the oil & gas sector. The Trump DOE has prioritized funding for project demonstrations. Innovators have already shown great success, like reducing drilling times by more than 70 percent. Bills like the GEO Act, introduced in the 118th Congress by Sens. Lee (R-UT) and Heinrich (D-NM), can streamline federal permitting requirements and apply best practices to unlock additional deployments of these next-generation projects. The energy unlock that EPAct 2005’s categorical exclusion provided for certain oil and gas activities on federal lands could be replicated for geothermal.

Reshore Manufacturing: Meeting infrastructure needs requires producing and deploying core building materials at scale and speed. Bills like the Concrete and Asphalt Innovation Act (CAIA), introduced in March 2025 on a bipartisan basis by Sens. Coons (D-DE) and Tillis (R-NC), are designed to bring innovative cement and asphalt technologies to market faster, increase domestic production and meet the demand for 1 million tons of cement by 2028, triggered by AI data center development.

Accelerate Carbon Technologies: Industrial innovation includes carbon management innovation. Bipartisan bills like the Carbon Removal and Emissions Storage Technologies Act (CREST), introduced in the 117th and 118th Congresses, would authorize DOE’s carbon removal innovation efforts and help keep American companies ahead of global competitors. By driving private investment and reducing costs to meet growing demand, CREST can help build a trillion-dollar American industry capable of delivering gigaton-scale removals by 2050.

Strengthen Global Leadership: In order to advance U.S. national interests, level the playing field for American businesses and solidify global leadership in key energy sectors, strategic enhancements are needed at the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC) and the Export-Import Bank of the U.S. (EXIM). The DFC authorization expires in October 2025 and the EXIM authorization expires in December 2026. These are financing tools designed to secure U.S. energy leadership and push back against China’s aggressive, state-funded energy expansion.

 

Advanced Nuclear Energy Is Coming to U.S. Military Bases

A reliable energy supply is key to a prepared and effective military, especially considering the amount of digital and electric domestic infrastructure used today. Approximately 95% of the U.S. Department of Defense’s (DoD) military bases are powered by the existing regional grid, making it the foundation for national defense. The Trump administration’s four nuclear energy executive orders recognize the role advanced nuclear technology can play in securing reliable power for both military and civilian use, marking a bold vision for an energy-dominant America that leads the world in nuclear energy deployment. These orders prioritize rapid reactor deployment, set a goal of quadrupling nuclear capacity to 400 GW by 2050, direct the DoD to demonstrate military applications of advanced nuclear energy and outline a whole-of-government approach to streamline licensing and revitalize domestic nuclear energy and fuel infrastructure.

In addition to providing a dedicated power supply to support these efforts, a reliable grid with a robust transmission system is key to ensuring certainty for national security. Avoiding power disruptions is essential to maintaining mission readiness, communications and defense operations. By securing their own reliable energy supply, military bases reduce vulnerability to grid failures, cyberattacks and fuel supply chain disruptions, ensuring consistent operational capability in both peacetime and conflict.

May 2025 Executive Order: Deploying Advanced Nuclear Reactor Technologies for National Security

Sources: Whitehouse.gov

The Deploying Advanced Nuclear Reactor Technologies for National Security executive order tasks the DoD with demonstrating at least one advanced nuclear reactor on a military installation by September 30, 2028, a clear milestone that aligns with previous initiatives in the DoD and Defense Innovation Unit (DIU). To achieve this, they will collaborate closely with the Department of Energy (DOE) and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to streamline development, testing and approval processes, focusing on pilot microreactor programs at military bases. This effort can reduce the military’s dependence on vulnerable fuel supply lines and enhance the energy resilience of installations through reliable off-grid power. Additionally, these efforts can have transformative effects on the broader nuclear energy industry. Establishing a steady pipeline of military-led advanced reactor projects can help build out an order book that enables more predictable demand for manufacturers, encourages investment in domestic supply chains and promotes regulatory certainty that can significantly lower costs over time. As more units are built and deployed, economies of scale and standardization can help bend the cost curve, making advanced nuclear reactors more accessible for commercial use.

This push to leverage nuclear innovations to support defense capabilities mirrors history. Naval reactors, first developed in 1954, pioneered many design innovations and critical safety protocols that paved the way for the first civilian power plants. The DoD could jump-start the civilian nuclear industry again by procuring and de-risking advanced reactor technology. 

Existing DoD Advanced Nuclear Energy Initiatives

Sources: 1. Advanced Nuclear Power for Installations (ANPI), 2. Air and Space Forces Magazine, 3. ClearPath, 4. American Nuclear Society

Overall, President Trump’s nuclear energy executive orders represent a strategic connection between national defense and energy independence. By placing advanced nuclear technologies at the core of military reliability and broader energy security, these initiatives create a forward-looking framework for public-private collaboration. The potential results following recent DoD initiatives and executive orders not only enhance military readiness but also revitalize the U.S. nuclear industry by providing an early demand signal. Ultimately, this effort lays the foundation for a clean, secure and self-reliant energy future for the military.

 

The New Realities of Grid Planning: A Dominion Energy Case Study

It’s no secret that U.S. electricity demand is skyrocketing. New manufacturing, electrification and data centers are driving this growth. U.S. power demand is expected to increase 78% by 2050. This contrasts with the North American Electric Reliability Corporation’s (NERC) forecasts, which predict an 18% winter peak demand growth and 15% summer peak demand growth over the next 10 years. This dramatic increase represents a significant shift from the last two decades of relatively stagnant demand, fundamentally shifting the paradigm for utilities. Nationwide, power providers must quickly build new generation and transmission assets to meet this demand while maintaining affordability, reliability and energy security. Dominion Energy, for example, faces a particularly daunting path as the demand growth in its service area is growing, at nearly 6% annually, due to Virginia’s status as the data center capital of the world.

To deliver affordable, reliable and secure energy, utilities develop comprehensive integrated resource plans (IRPs), which outline how they intend to build energy infrastructure and meet the needs of ratepayers. Utilities must excel at forecasting energy needs to avoid the costly mistakes of building too little or too much generation capacity. In today’s era of fast-paced growth, an all-of-the-above approach strategy is necessary to bring enough new generation online to keep up.

To put this into perspective, Dominion Energy’s energy demand forecasts jumped from an annual growth rate of 1-1.4% in its 2020 IRP to nearly 7% in its 2023 IRP and are now projecting 5.5% in its 2024 IRP. This signals that forecasting energy demand is turbulent, especially when facing evolving laws, retiring generation assets and demand.

The Road Ahead

The passage of the Virginia Clean Economy Act (VCEA) in 2020, which mandates a transition to 100% carbon-free electricity by 2045, is a factor that Dominion must address in its IRP development. The VCEA encourages significant deployment of clean, firm power sources like nuclear energy to ensure grid reliability and meet growing demand. The VCEA has made it challenging to continue operating and developing new natural gas or coal projects, leading to the forced retirement of several operating fossil fuel plants by 2045, which collectively provide more than 4.5 GW of baseload energy generation. This loss of reliable generation is a central hurdle for Dominion, making clean, firm power critical to ensure grid reliability and affordability. 

The U.S. needs to be focused on energy addition, not subtraction. Focusing on data centers alone, in 2023, Dominion connected 15 data centers to the grid, with 15 more in 2024, adding nearly two GW to the grid. This additional demand is roughly the size of two advanced large reactors, such as Vogtle units 3 & 4 in Georgia. This demand will not slow anytime soon and will be the main driver of the 183% increase in unconstrained demand by 2040, according to a study conducted by the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission (JLARC), the Virginia General Assembly’s oversight agency.

In a “show me the money” moment reminiscent of Jerry Maguire’s Rod Tidwell, Dominion is significantly increasing its five-year capital expenditure plan, now totaling approximately $50.1 billion through 2029, up from a previous estimate of $43.2 billion. This is an enormous capital investment, and it is only one utility in one state. Dominion is also:

Rapid Energy Addition

Fusion energy was not even mentioned 5 years ago in Dominion’s 2020 IRP or subsequent updates until 2023. SMRs were not viewed as an “available resource” for deployment until the 2022 IRP. Prior to that, in the 2020 IRP, SMRs were only discussed as a developing technology under investigation. Now, plans call for significant new SMR capacity, such as the 1.3 GW proposed by 2039 in the 2024 IRP. Battery storage also shows a striking increase in Dominion’s plans. While the 2022 IRP called for approximately 100 MW of new battery storage capacity, the 2024 IRP now projects as much as 4,500 MW of battery storage by 2039. 

As utilities like Dominion Energy face the monumental task of building new energy infrastructure, getting projects online sooner is an imperative. The multi-year wait times for permitting are a significant bottleneck, which is why modernizing the U.S. permitting system should be a bipartisan priority. Robust support for innovative technologies like advanced nuclear and fusion energy is equally vital. Tech-neutral clean electricity credits like 45Y and 48E support quicker scale-up of new generation. Programs such as the Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program (ARDP), which aims to demonstrate new nuclear technologies, and the Loan Program Office (LPO), which provides much-needed financing for early-stage scale-up, are essential for providing the financial backing these innovative projects need to reach commercialization. Addressing these challenges head-on can ensure a more reliable, secure and affordable energy future. 

 

Transformative Regulatory Reform for New Reactors

Energy Incentives Will Unlock Energy Dominance (The Washington Times)

This op-ed was originally published by The Washington Times on April 28, 2025. Click here to read the entire piece.

The first 100 days of the new Trump administration have reshaped the energy landscape. Reliable, affordable energy is a top priority as the president seeks to unleash a new era of American energy dominance. Lower energy prices can usher in a true golden age for U.S. consumers. Done well, this agenda can also reduce global carbon dioxide emissions.

This dynamic is underscored by the president’s work to recruit new artificial intelligence and data center investments to the U.S. These investments can lead to economic development and will require rapid energy demand growth when paired with an American manufacturing resurgence, increasing U.S. energy demand by as much as 18% over the next decade, according to data from the North American Electric Reliability Council. Energy prices are one of the most important cost drivers in these energy-intensive industries.

A rapid increase in supply is required to maintain affordable costs for all American consumers. The U.S. must rapidly deploy all types of new American power. To effectively deploy these new technologies at speed, the administration will need to break down permitting barriers to accelerate the buildout of new energy infrastructure like pipelines, transmission, and other grid-enhancing technologies.

In addition to streamlining the permitting process to increase and maximize new investments, minimizing the tax burden on developers is another essential part of this equation. Maintaining low corporate rates is certainly going to help, but tax incentives also play an enormous role in minimizing investment risk and keeping prices low. Fortunately, some key incentives will not require drastic policy changes like the green new deal or a heavy-handed government regulation.

Existing incentives authored or supported by Republicans in Congress under current law are critical for American leadership in new, affordable, 24/7 American power. These forms of power include advanced nuclear, geothermal, hydropower, natural gas with carbon capture, and even new breakthroughs in fusion technology. Key incentives, like 48E/45Y technology-neutral electricity credit; the 45X advanced manufacturing credit; the 45Q carbon capture, utilization, and storage credit; and the 45V hydrogen credit, can reduce the costs for American producers and support the manufacturers and the mineral supply chain across the economy. Simply put, consumer prices go up if the U.S. doesn’t lower the tax and energy cost burden for American producers and manufacturers.

Click here to read the full article

State of Play: The Chemical and Refining Sectors