Nucleation announces its investment in Zeno Power’s $50 Million Series B with Fund I
Nucleation is delighted to announce our participation in Zeno Power’s $50 million Series B funding round, led by Hanaco Ventures with participation from Seraphim, Balerion Space Ventures, JAWS, Vanderbilt University, RiverPark Ventures, Stage 1 Ventures, 7i Capital, Beyond Earth Ventures, and other investors.
In an article released today, Axios has first reported on Zeno Power's close of this funding together with news of the company's appointment of Admiral John Richardson, USN (Ret.), former Chief of Naval Operations and Director of the Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program, to its Board of Directors. This brings the total raised by Zeno to over $70 million, following the company's Series A, which was led by Tribe Capital.
Zeno Power is working to power strategic frontiers, which include the deep ocean, the Artic and space, regions where there are prospects for commerce, strategic influence and international competition for resources. The company builds nuclear batteries, essentially radioisotope power systems, which convert the heat from nuclear "waste" materials like Strontium-90 (Sr-90) into long-duration energy sources. The demand for such power systems—by groups seeking to operate on the moon, Mars, in the Artic and deep ocean—prove the high value of many of the highly radioactive materials found in nuclear waste. Over the last three years, Zeno has secured over $60M in contracts from the U.S. Department of Defense and NASA, built and demonstrated their first nuclear prototype at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, and secured the nuclear fuel and facilities to build their first 10+ nuclear batteries.
The company's Series B funding is expected to unlock the team's plans to:
Demonstrate full-scale nuclear batteries in 2026 to enable maritime and space deliveries in 2027
Scale their manufacturing capabilities to meet growing demand from government and commercial customers
Expand into seabed telecommunications, deep-sea mining for critical minerals, and commercial space markets
Grow our team from 65 to 100+ team members across Seattle and Washington D.C.
To learn more about Zeno and their business of unlocking the value of nuclear waste, read Zeno Power CEO Tyler Bernstein's blog post, Powering the Frontier: Our $50M Series B Round, with more information about the raise and Zeno's plans for the coming years.
Meredith Angwin is a chemist, author and electricity and grid expert, who published "Shorting the Grid: The Hidden Fragility of our Electric Grid." She also serves as an advisor to Nuclation Capital.
Radiant, a Nucleation portfolio company working to mass produce portable nuclear microreactors, was selected by the Department of Energy to receive an allocation of HALEU fuel for its first test of Kaleidos, the group’s reactor design.
Ida Noddack (1895 - 1978) was a German chemist who overcame obstacles including sexism and restrictive provisions under the Nazi regime preventing women from entering professions and engaging in academic research, to make a meaningful contributions to nuclear science. Together with Walter Noddack, her husband, and Otto Berg she co-discovered element 75, Rhenium. Ndaddack also proposed the idea of fission of an element, before anybody else envisioned it.
Ida Noddack (née Tacke), was born in Lackhausen in the Northern Rhine region. She loved science, but did not want to be stuck teaching, which was considered a woman’s job. Instead, she decided to study chemistry and then work in the chemical industry. Her father who owned a small varnish factory supported her choice.
She was one of very few women (3%) to graduate with a degree in chemistry and chemical and metallurgical engineering from the Technical University of Berlin in 1915. Her first job was in the chemistry laboratory of the Berlin’s turbine factory of AEG, a company affiliated with General Electric in the USA.
In 1924, Ida resigned from her job and instead started working full-time as an unpaid collaborator at the University of Berlin’s Physical Chemistry Department, helping Walter’s research to search for the missing elements of the Periodic Table. In 1926 Walter Noddack and Ida Tacke got married.
In 1925, she co-published a paper about the discovery of two new elements: Rhenium (75) and Masurium (43). While Rhenium was confirmed, the “Masurium” discovery was not accepted since their equipment sensitivity was too poor to separate it chemically. The name “Rhenium” came from the name of the region she came from (Rhine region). Finally, in 1937, “Masurium” was produced in a nuclear reaction Carlo Perrier and Emilio Segrè and renamed “Technetium.”
In 1929, Walter and Ida were granted a German patent for the Rhenium coating of lamp filaments, and a British patent for the use of Rhenium as a catalyst for oxidation processes. During 1931 and 1932 they secured three patents in the USA for, respectively: filaments for incandescent lamps and vacuum tubes, Rhenium concentrates, and the use of metallic Rhenium as an electric glower for incandescent lamps.
With the onset of the great depression, in 1932, a new law forced married women to leave their jobs and to make them available for men. Luckily, Noddack was able to continue her research because she was an “unpaid collaborator.”
In 1934 Fermi investigated uranium being bombarded with neutrons. He claimed the evidence of new transuranic elements. On the contrary, Ida published a paper “On Element 93” questioning the chemistry of this experiment and suggesting the possibility of fission process way before it was later correctly identified and confirmed by Otto Hahn and Lisa Meitner as nuclear fission.
Ida Noddack faced many professional obstacles because of her scientific nonconformity and gender, the resentment of physicists against intrusion in their field, and the overall difficulty of research under and after the Nazi regime, still she was able to persist.
Ida and her husband were nominated three times for the Nobel Prize in Chemistry. The two of them were also awarded the German Chemical Society’s prestigious Liebig Medal in 1931. In 1934, they received the Scheele Medal of the Swedish Chemical Society as well as the German patent for rhenium concentrate.
In 1968 Ida retired from her scientific work. She died in 1978 in Bad Neuenahr in Germany at the age of 84.
The 118th Congress may go down in history as the least productive Congress ever seated. By the end of its first year, only 24 bills had been passed by both chambers. While much of this dysfunction was the result of infighting among Republicans, the partisan divide between Democrats and Republicans has rarely been greater. It would seem that there is almost nothing that Democrats and Republicans agree on. But, in fact, there is something—and it's not funding Ukraine's (our ally) war against Russia, our enemy, or ensuring that the U.S. doesn't default on its debts. No, both sides agree about the importance of nuclear power and they want more of it!
Has anyone else noticed this?
Despite historic levels of strife and discord between the parties, and decades of Democratic opposition to nuclear power, on February 24, 2024, the House passed HR 6544 – The Atomic Energy Advancement Act — by the overwhelmingly bipartisan vote of 365 to 36. This bill, sponsored byRepublican Rep. Jeff Duncan (SC) and Democratic Rep. Diana DeGette (CO), aims to have the NRC accelerate the review and approval of new nuclear designs by requiring that they factor in the benefits of nuclear energy against the risks of not doing so. Given that people demand firm power and this results in fossil fuels being burned, the risks posed by not providing a clean, firm alternative through nuclear are clear.
This is just stunning legislation and it provides important acknowledgement from the (largely climate-denying) Republican Party that the world needs nuclear and unjustified delays in the licensing process pose extremel risks to humanity. The bill received support from 175 Democratic representatives. The "No" votes came from mostly junior Democratic Representatives (possibly because energy is not yet among the top issues they focus on).
This bill mirrors the Senate's Accelerating Deployment of Versatile, Advanced Nuclear for Clean Energy (ADVANCE) Act, which was passed April, 2023 by a vote of 86 to 11. Senators Shelley Moore Capito (R., W.Va.), Tom Carper (D., Del.), and Sheldon Whitehouse (D., R.I.) were the bipartisan sponsors of a bill whose purpose is to support the preservation, development, and deployment of nuclear energy while "making the nuclear licensing process more affordable, predictable, and efficient.” Lawmakers are already at work reconciling the differences between these two bills and the final bill is expected to be signed by President Biden, who has been steadily laying the foundation for the U.S. to lead the world in next generation of nuclear power. In anticipation of this legislation being enacted, the NRC has directed its staff to prepare changes to Part 53.
So, is this a one-off? A freak occurence? No, in fact, this is a continuation of a very long but below the radar series of bipartisan legislative and executive efforts to modernize, streamline and update the capabilities of the U.S. nuclear sector, including securing fuel production and accelerating regulatory oversight.
More than s Decade of Bipartisan Progress on Nuclear
At the end of 2023, Congress passed the National Defense Authorization Act (HR 2670) for 2024, a must-pass bill to keep the government funded. It included an amendment containing the Nuclear Fuel Security Act (NFSA) and an appropriation of $2.7 Billion to boost domestic US production of enriched uranium (both LEU and HALEU) and end American reliance on Russian fuel.
The Prohibiting Russian Uranium Imports Act (H.R. 1042) also passed in the House in December with a bipartisan voice vote. Although the Senate has yet to pass a similar act, now that the NFSA has passed with funding to help build US domestic capacity, the Senate is very likely to pass their own version of the Prohibiting Russian Uranium Imports Act with strong bipartisan support and have the reconciled law be signed by President BIden.
These legislative accomplishments follow the passage of Biden's Inflation Reduction Act, which expanded federal support for nuclear power, by leveling the playing field and giving nuclear the same tax incentives as solar and wind. Biden also enacted the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, which provided $6 billion to protecting existing nuclear power from premature closure, recognizing that the loss of a working nuclear power plant meant adding back fossil fuel generation and increasing carbon emissions. This funding enabled Democratically-controlled California to save Diablo Canyon from premature closure and may help Michigan to restart the shuttered Palisades power plant.
The Biden Administration has stimulated a resurgence in nuclear power but the ball really got rolling with legislation passed with bipartisan support and signed by President Trump. The Nuclear Energy Innovation and Modernization Act (NEIMA), enacted in 2019, and the Nuclear Energy Innovation and Capabilities Act (NEICA), enacted in 2018, provided critical funding a number of advanced nuclear development projects and ventures and began the process of revamping NRC mandates.
Even prior to Trump, the Obama Administration got to work on "Actions to Ensure that Nuclear Energy Remains a Vibrant Component of the United States’ Clean Energy Strategy." Obama recognized that "the continued development of new and advanced nuclear technologies along with support for currently operating nuclear power plants was an important component of our clean energy strategy while also advancing economic competitiveness, job creation, enhancing nuclear nonproliferation efforts, and increasing energy security."
As a result, Obama almost doubled the nuclear budget that existed under President Bush and allocated more than $900 million for the Department of Energy (DOE) to expand support the U.S. civilian nuclear energy sector. Among the important programs and initiatives he created were the Gateway for Accelerated Innovation in Nuclear (GAIN), expanding the Loan Guarantee Program's support for nuclear energy, and Investing in SMR Licensing of first-of-a-kind engineering costs for NRC certification of advanced designs.
Summary
In today's polarized political environment, there's shocklingly little that Democrats and Republicans agree on. Yet in administration after administration, nuclear power has received bipartisan support. For Democrats, their support comes from knowing that nuclear power helps to solve climate change, reduce air pollution and maintain grid reliability. In contrast, Republicans see the U.S.'s nuclear strength as a crucial geopolitical power that addresses both energy security and national security, as we increasingly compete with Russia and China for influence over the energy-hungry developing world. These extraordinarily different sets of political priorities are entirely aligned in the center—on the need to improve and expand US nuclear power.
(Click to enlarge)
Nuclear energy, once seen as a threat to humanity, is emerging as crucial to reducing the much bigger threats we face—namely climate change and the threatening power of fossil fuel-enriched totalitarian regimes tying energy access with influence. Defanging these regimes by reducing global use of fossil fuels goes hand-in-hand with solving climate change. Using nuclear power to achieve this has gained widespread supported. Recent polls also show nuclear's increasing public popularity, with support strongest among those most knowledgeable. Which have fortunately included both Democratic and Republican presidents, all determined to see that next-generation nuclear—promising smaller, safer, flexible and affordable designs—has a chance to accelerate the world's transition away from fossil fuel dependence. In that, there's a lot to agree on.
The Atomic Energy Advancement Act, which aims to accelerate the deployment of nuclear energy technologies, such as advanced nuclear reactors, was passed by the otherwise highly polarized House of Representatives by the overwhelmingly bipartisan vote of 365 to 36. The bill directs the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) "To advance the benefits of nuclear energy by enabling efficient, timely, and predictable licensing, regulation, and deployment of nuclear energy technologies."
In particular, the Atomic Energy Advancement Act (HR 6544) gives the Nuclear Regulatory Commission one year to update the mission statement of the Commission to specifically ensure that the licensing and regulation of nuclear energy activities be conducted in a manner that "does not unnecessarily limit: (A) the potential of nuclear energy to improve the general welfare; and (B) the benefits of nuclear energy technology to society. This is a welcomed shift, as previously, the NRC acted as though their only mandate was "zero accidents." When that translates to zero licensed reactors, that makes us all far less safe because the alternative is the use of deadly fossil fuels. The NRC must now balance these clear priorities!
Representative Jeff Duncan of South Carolina applauded the passage of the HR 6544 saying: “The Atomic Energy Advancement Act restores American leadership in nuclear energy and technology which is critical to our economic and national security. I’m proud to lead the most significant update to nuclear energy policy in the United States in over a generation.”
Rep. Diana DeGette, a Democrat from Colorado, who co-led the bill with Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-S.C.), released the following statement celebrating its passage: “Tackling the climate crisis means we must modernize our approach to all clean energy sources, including nuclear. From enhancing our energy supply chain to recruiting a highly trained and skilled workforce, this bill makes critical updates to improve safety and ensure our nuclear regulations are up-to-date, pushing us closer to a carbon-free energy future.”
“Nuclear energy is not a silver bullet, but if we’re going to get to net zero carbon emissions by 2050, it must be part of the mix,” DeGette continued. “As this bill heads to the Senate, I look forward to continuing to work with my colleagues in the House and Senate to find bipartisan solutions to address our clean energy needs.”
This House bill must now be reconciled with the Senate’s ADVANCE Act (S.1111), which passed in 2023 and was very similar. Once they are reconciled and passed again, the bill can be signed by President Biden.
Dr. James Hansen's year-end update contains an admonishment right in the title, "A Miracle Will Occur" Is Not Sensible Climate Policy." Those who have followed his work and his typically well-tempered writing will recognize this as a very strong indictment of what we've not done to date to address climate change. This is, for this mild-mannered scientist, the equivalent of "Hey Guys, Get your S _ _ T together!"
Dr. Hansen proceeds to call "bunk" on the assertions from both the COP 28 Chairman and the UN Secretary General who imply that the goal of keeping temperature rise to below 1.5°C is still feasible. According to Dr. Hansen, the already banked warming will take us beyond 2.0°C "if policy is limited to emission reductions and plausible CO2 removal." In other words, he makes it clear that this is now merely wishful thinking and does not reflect a realistic understanding of the way that emissions released create future warming, which he calls "Global Warming in the Pipeline"and describes in the linked paper.
The only realistic approach is to take true climate analysis that is informed by knowledge of the warming "forcing" effects and to use that to drive decisions about policy options. If we can possibly use the next several years to define and commence more effective policies and courses of action, then there is a modicum of a chance that we can still save the future for our young people. If this isn't a bomb of an alarm, it would be hard to say what else would be, especially because the IPCC has made it very clear that major ecosystems, starting with coral reefs and then, therefore, all marine life, will be threatened with substantial (90%) collapse by 1.5°C and with 100% by 2°C.
Unfortunately, climate science is complicated and most people don't have a good understanding of the "human-made forcings that are driving Earth's climate away from the relatively stable climate of the Holocene (approximately the past 10,000 years.)" Even if they could grasp the implications about climate science from the graphs that Dr. Hansen and his team provide, very few are even reading Hansen's work. These graphs are very scary but clearly they are not being used as the basis for policy discussions by either politicians, government agencies (like the EPA), or by leading environmental groups and that is likely the primary reason why many people are still arguing about renewables versus nuclear power, thinking they have a certain luxury of time, rather than saying "Renewables and nuclear, YES!"
For his part, Dr. Hansen doesn't make it as easy as he could for those with less expertise in climate science. He spends a lot of effort discussing two major climate forcings: greenhouse gases (GHGs) and aerosols (fine airborne particles), which in fact have opposing forcings. But then goes into detail on many other related forcings. This level of detail may provide a more scientifically accurate picture of what is going on but it makes for much sparser readership. Clearly, there are many different kinds of feedback loops, including how the aerosols impact cloud formation, albedo effects and also the way the ocean absorbs a considerable amount of the warming that is happening to our climate. It's important that he understands these effects but it takes considerable sifting work to get to the point that what it all adds up to is that there is much more warming that has occurred than what we are actually now experiencing, so in fact, the effect of warming will be accelerate and we're now seeing this.
Even for those of us who finding climate science fascinating, this 14-page paper is incredibly dense and gets relatively badly bogged down with details on things like cloud forcings, albedo changes, reviewing differences between expected temperatures and real world measurements, catching up with a 40-year old mystery having to do with the last glacial maximum and describing the impacts of an "experiment" that occurred when the International Maritime Organization limited sulfur content in ship fuel and the variability introduced by El Nino and La Nina events. The bottom line of quite extensive discussion that few will wade through, is that global warming is now accelerating. This is very important but definitely buried. The key graphic of the whole paper depicts this acceleration.
On page 7, we finally get to the implications of global warming acceleration. As shown in the above graph, were the warming happening at a steady rate, we'd be on the green dotted line. Instead, we are veering off into the yellow zone of accelerated warming, which means that we'll "exceed the 1.5°C mark within the next few months and reach a level far above 1.5C by May 2024."
Hansen, while recognizing that there could be some up and down based upon El Nino and La Nina effects, believes that the baked in energy imbalance already "in the pipeline" means that it does not serve anybody's interests to "wait a decade to declare that the 1.5°C limit has been breached." In summary, Hansen argues that, "unless purposeful actions are taken to reduce our present extraordinary planetary energy imbalance," the 2°C global warming limit will also be breached.
By its very nature of having a delayed, baked-in response, human-made climate change makes this an intergenerational issue. What we have done in the past is already having consequences but what we do today and going forward will mostly impact the next generation for better or worse.
To his credit, Hansen dives yet again into Climate Policy, unlike most other scientists. This has been long been a huge source of frustration for him and you can almost see him stomping on his own hat, in his anger and impatience with the political processes that have thwarted action. First he reviews just what makes solving cilmate extra hard, starting with the fact that the principal source of GHGs is fossil fuels, which are in his words "extremely beneficial to humanity." They have raised starndards of living worldwide and still provide 80% of the world's energy. "Fossil fuels are readily available, so the world will not give up their benefits without equal or better alternatives."Because of this conundrum, we are near a point of no return, where extreme consequences can spiral out of humanity's control.
Dr. Hansen has been a first-hand witness to humanity's failure to act over the last 35 years or so and his exasperation with that and his desperation to communicate to those in power about our increasingly limited options is abundantly clear. He's been advising governments around the world on possible approaches with little of the urgent response that is warranted. He delves into some of these details but then finally hones on in the three actions that are required to successfully address climate and achieve the bright future we desire for our children.
The first is a near-global carbon tax or fee. It is the sine qua non required to address the "tragedy of the commons" problem" wherein fossil fuels waste products can be dumpted in the atmosphere for free. There can be a range of approaches, yet something that penalizes those dumping GHGs is required to be enacted globally. A corollary to a carbon fee is a "clean energy portfolio standard," with government policies that are far more supportive of nuclear power.
The second major policy requirement, is the need for the West to cooperate with and support the clean energy needs of emerging and developing nations. There are economic imbalances with developed nations having caused the past emissions but emerging nations increasingly being the driver of future emissions:
The clear need is to replace the world’s huge fossil fuel energy system with clean energies,
which likely would include a combination of “renewables” and nuclear power. Even if the
renewables provide most of the energy, engineering and economic analyses indicate that
global nuclear power probably needs to increase by a factor of 2-4 to provide baseload power
to complement intermittent renewable energy, especially given growing demands of China,
India and other emerging economies. The scale of China’s energy needs makes it feasible to drive down the costs of renewables and nuclear power below the cost of fossil fuels.
Lastly, Dr. Hansen proposes that "a multitude of actions are required within less than a decade to reduce and even reverse Earth’s energy imbalance for the sake of minimizing the enormous ongoing geoengineering of the planet; specifically, we will need to cool the planet to avoid consequences for young people that all people would find unconscionable."
By Rod Adams, Nov. 10, 2023 Cross-posted from our related blog, Atomic Insights
I’ll start with a disclosure. I’m still long on NuScale in my personal portfolio and have no intention of changing that position in the near future. I believe that the company has a good product and excellent potential for growth. The image above with Jose Reyes and me is from a visit I paid to the NuScale test loop in October 2014.
Yesterday (Nov 8, 2023), an expected shoe dropped. NuScale and UAMPS (Utah Association of Municipal Power Systems) announced that they had decided to abandon their Carbon Free Power Project. The press release stated, “Despite significant efforts by both parties to advance the CFPP, it appears unlikely that the project will have enough subscription to continue toward deployment.”
A chorus of commentary has erupted on social media. Some are cheers from the usual suspects who have never met a nuclear reactor that they like. Others are from people who ardently support different designs that range from different water reactors to gas-cooled, molten salt or liquid metal reactors that don’t use water cooling and moderation.
Some believe that the decision proves that NuScale Power Modules are hopelessly uneconomic and that the CFPP cancellation proves that NuScale is on shaky grounds as a company. Self-admitted short sellers are doing everything they can to undermine investor confidence so that the company stock price falls quickly and profitably for those betting on that behavior.
My conclusions from the project cancellation are different. There is no doubt that a smooth first-of-a-kind demonstration of a 6-12 unit NuScale power plant would have been better for the company’s prospects in the short term. That result would have also helped to increase interest in new nuclear power projects and would have increased investor FOMO (fear of missing out.)
As a venture capitalist helping to manage a fund that is focused on advanced nuclear energy as a major, undervalued tool for the energy transition from high carbon fossil fuel combustion to ultra low carbon energy sources, that result would have been a welcome reinforcement of our investment thesis.
Competitive headwinds fighting Carbon Free Power Project
During the past few years, however, the prospects for success for the CFPP have repeatedly dimmed to the point where its cancellation was readily foreseeable. The initial 12-unit power plant was scaled down to a 6-unit facility. Individual members of the UAMPS association pulled out as it became ever clearer that a new, first of a kind nuclear plant built in the remote Idaho desert would produce power that was measurably more expensive than the low priced mix of coal, natural gas, hydro and wind they were used to.
That cost disadvantage only grew as it became less and less likely that there would ever be a price on carbon in the states UAMPS serves. Rising interest rates also reduced the economic viability of capital-intensive power plants compared to established, depreciated plants burning cheap local coal, low capital cost plants burning natural gas from nearby places like North Dakota or onshore wind located in sparsely-populated windy plains near mountain ranges.
As coal demand falls throughout the US as a result of changing air pollution regulations, increased production from natural gas, solar and wind and continued excellent performance by existing nuclear plants, coal prices soften. The long term prospect is that they will remain affordable and perhaps decline considerably, especially in places that are close to established mines. UAMPS member power systems have ready access to local coal sources.
The UAMPS-served areas are close to productive oil shale formations that contain substantial quantities of associated natural gas. Sometimes North Dakota gas is almost given away – even in the dead of winter – because it is an annoying byproduct of oil production. Associated gas is still flared – burned without serving any customers – for safety reasons. Regulators are increasingly enacting rules that discourage the practice. There are also financial incentive programs that encourage operators to find customers that will pay something.
UAMPS members also benefit from their favorable wind locations. They have wide open spaces and good wind associated with nearby mountains. On-shore wind turbines are well proven and numerous developers have cost effective processes and experienced installation teams. The Inflation Reduction Act provides long term certainty for clean energy subsidies, ensuring that the power prices are consumer friendly. It also opens new avenues for non profit utilities to directly benefit from tax credit programs. A nuclear power project like the CFPP would be eligible for the same subsidy level as other clean energy sources but the tax credit programs in the IRA start paying real money only after projects are completed. A wind project can be finished in just a year or two in places where there isn’t much opposition. Earlier monetary flows are more valuable than later flows.
Even if they are led by people who would like to decarbonize, municipal power systems have a mandate to provide the most cost-effective power possible within the given constraints. They have access to relatively low cost, tax exempt debt, but bond issues needed to access that debt capability are often tenaciously debated, political choices. The interest rates paid may be lower than commercial rates, but rates for new debt are still linked to those paid in the rest of the borrowing market. Rising rates affect all borrowers.
Munis have no access to capital markets where investors have more understanding and appetite for a certain amount of financial risk. It is highly unlikely that they could convince their customers to pay catalytic prices for power from new technology with significant room for growth.
in summary, economic conditions for the Carbon Free Power Project have been deteriorating for several years. The total expenditures associated with that project have not been publicly released, but the amount spent is nowhere near the amount of money that was earmarked. UAMPS only submitted an application for “Limited Work Authorization” to the NRC in August of 2023 and it has only been a few weeks since the NRC accepted that application for review. No dirt has been moved at the site, other than that needed to conduct environmental impact studies.
Where does NuScale go from here?
This commentary is not supported by any direct communication with NuScale. It is based on publicly available news and announcements.
The CFPP was an important project for NuScale, but it is not the only sale that the company is working on. UAMPS is not the only customer attracted by a passively cooled, light water reactor using established fuel forms, materials and chemistry refined through many decades of operation in large fleets of nuclear power plants.
NuScale’s power modules have been issued a design certification at a time when none of the alternative choices have submitted an application for review. Submission is needed to start a regulatory calendar that moves at an excruciatingly slow pace. Though we hope the next review will be quicker, it took more than six years from the time NuScale submitted its Design Certification Application until the 5-member commission issued the final document. (Dec 31, 2016 – Feb 21, 2023)
According to Fluor, which still holds its large stake in NuScale, 18 active and signed Memorandums of Understanding from 11 different countries were in effect at the end of 2021.
Though none have yet achieved the status of a signed contract, there have been public announcements of serious interest in Romania and other Eastern European countries. NuScale is one of the six finalists selected for the Great Britain Nuclear light water reactor SMR program. Standard Power announced its interest in using NuScale power plants for two data centers, one in Ohio and one in Pennsylvania.
In March, 2023, an early stage start up company named Blue Energy visited Houston, TX – arguably the energy capital of the United States – for CERAWeek. The founders gave a presentation on their concept for offshore power plants that combine NuScale power modules with proven technology from offshore oil and offshore wind. They shared some startling numbers about the cost reduction potential available for NuScale power modules when using the ocean for the ultimate heat sink instead of a giant man-made pool that must be protected from aircraft impact.
Blue Energy is “productizing” nuclear fission by manufacturing pre-certified light water small modular reactors in shipyards as fully-completed, transportable nuclear power plants that are leased to industrial facilities and countries seeking energy security, price stability, and turnkey decarbonization. We leverage existing oil & gas platform manufacturing infrastructure and a simplified plant design to shrink the construction schedule from 10 years to 24 months and the overnight capital cost from greater than $6,000/kW to less than $2,500/kW while putting nuclear on a learning curve down to $1/W.
The news of the demise of the CFPP should not discourage nuclear energy advocates for very long. It’s not good news, but no one should expect 100% good news with new nuclear development. CFPP’s demise should not – but certainly will – provide PR fodder for those who have never met a nuclear project that they like. It should not – but certainly will – provide a reason for “I told you so” commentary among nuclear energy cheerleaders who are rooting for a different kind of nuclear power system.
I am neither a registered investment advisor nor a broker-dealer and I do not provide stock market recommendations. As a managing partner of Nucleation Capital, I invest solely in private equity. My personal public market portfolio, however, includes some SMR (NuScale’s NYSE ticker symbol) stock that I have no intention of selling.
Additional References
Nov. 22, 2023: The Clean Air Task Force published Lessons learned from the recently cancelled NuScale-UAMPS project, with yet another very powerful argument against reading too much into the cancellation of NuScale's demonstration project as a reflection of the prospects of the broader SMR and advanced reactor market in the United States or globally.
Grace Stanke, as the reigning Miss America, has literally changed the face of nuclear power. As a 21-year old nuclear engineering student, she is much more than a pretty face, and is studying to become a nuclear fuels engineer. In her spare time, however, she entered the Miss America contest, was crowned Miss Wisconsin and then, in 2022, won the Miss America pageant. Having the brains to study nuclear engineering is not what distinguishes Miss Stanke, as she serve her year as an ambassador of the Miss America contest. It's that she's chosen to use her platform to promote and elevate the nuclear industry and the benefits of nuclear power for addressing climate change.
Much of the press that she has garnered in her travels this past year, has remarked on the changing trends that Miss Stanke's efforts have aided. Nearly 60% of Americans favor nuclear power plants and believe that the US should protect existing nuclear power and boost nuclear capacity. This represents a big increase from being clocked in at just 43% support as recently as 2020.
Miss Stanke, as Miss America, has an extraordinary platform and she hasn't been shy about using it to support and extoll the virtues of nuclear energy. She's bringing nuclear to entirely new constituents at the same time that nuclear power is gaining traction with governments around the world trying to decarbonize, with filmmakers like Oliver Stone, whose documentary "Nuclear Now," laid the groundwork for more Americans to get educated about the benefits of nuclear power, and with billionaire entrepreneurs and business leaders like OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, Elon Musk and Bill Gates, all of whom have been consistently touting the benefits of atomic energy but probably not reaching too many young women.
As the reigning Miss America and soon-to-be nuclear fuels engineer, Miss Stanke's year-long campaign to promote nuclear power in over 20 states was probably seen by millions of young women students, who now see her as a role model, both highly educated and very elegant and poised, bringing them information that might have been impossible to convey in almost any other way.
Now, combined with the efforts of nuclear social media influencers like Isabelle Boemeke and widely-regarded documentaries, Ms. Stanke is probably sweeping along an entire generation of young women in her wake who may be primed to consider careers in nuclear, where they had previously probably never thought much about nuclear power at all. Now a growing percentage will recognize that nuclear power attracts women like Grace Stanke both for a career but also for its instrumental role in combating climate change and achieving both net-zero goals and sustainable development goals.
Miss Stanke will graduate next year and still has the majority of her professional career ahead of her. But, having accepted a position with Constellation Energy after her graduation, she is sure to continue to have a big impact on the industry.
To provide the best experiences, our website uses technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional
Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
In an article released today, Axios has first reported on Zeno Power's close of this funding together with news of the company's appointment of Admiral John Richardson, USN (Ret.), former Chief of Naval Operations and Director of the Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program, to its Board of Directors. This brings the total raised by Zeno to over $70 million, following the company's Series A, which was led by Tribe Capital.
