BLUE ENERGY: Accelerating deployments of SMRs

Nucleation announces its investment in Blue Energy's Series A with Fund I

Blue Energy is working to deploy small modular reactors (SMR) in a unique and cost-effective offshore formation that leverages shipyard manufacturing and existing, mature offshore wind technology to decrease siting difficulty, lower construction costs and increase safety by utilizing the vast cooling power of the ocean. Read Blue Energy's press release about their financing.

Blue Energy recognizes that speed to deployment really matters. By utilizing smaller, simpler and manufacturable SMR technology optimized for this purpose, combined with shipyard production, Blue Energy will have a competitive advantage being able to deploy off-shore at existing nuclear power facilities, where approvals to build already exist. This team has figured out a brilliant “ocean-cooled” deployment strategy that enables it to be technology agnostic and build the emerging SMR market with a more affordable and efficient implementation process, in partnership with existing utilities. Energy Secr. Jennifer Granholm believes nuclear needs to "at least triple,” and the U.S. together with some 25 other nuclear nations have also pledged to triple their nuclear generation as well. More recent estimates from the DOE put the amount of new power needed in the U.S. at 200 GW. Blue Energy’s design is poised to help accelerate this growth and are focused on deploying design that are low-cost, manufacturable and NRC-approved. Recently, the DOE announced plans to allocate some $900 million towards the deployment of SMRs. We believe that Blue Energy could be an early mover working to leverage this DOE funding and have significant advantage in having an implrementation plan ready to go. According to yet another DOE study, of the 65 nuclear power plant sites in 31 states, there is the potential to install as much as 60 to 95 GW of new capacity at these existing and/or recently retured nuclear power plant sites. For existing sites which are situated on the coast, Blue Energy's approach can give these sites the potential ability to increase that number by adding new, off-shore sitings. Additionally, we are extraordinarily delighted to share that both the U.S. House of Representative and the Senate reconciled versions of the Accelerating Deployment of Versatile, Advanced Nuclear for Clean Energy (ADVANCE) Act have passed, making sweeping changes to the approval process for new technology in the nuclear energy sector. The ADVANCE Act, more than anything else, seeks to accelerate the deployment of nuclear power, and passed with significant bipartisan majorities in both chambers and is now on President Biden's desk, awaiting his signature. HuffPo calls this the "The Biggest Clean-Energy Bill" since the passage of the IRA, and is designed to turn the NRC into a 21st century regulator. We have written about both House and Senate versions previously, and we will post more information about the final resulting legislation, which Biden is almost certain to sign, on our website shortly.

August 23, 2024

Help us expand our deal syndications

Atomic brilliance 2 1536x928

Nucleation Capital is growing!

Seeking help increasing our syndicate deal flow

The level of activity and new venture formation in the areas of advanced nuclear and deep decarbonization innovation is growing rapidly. Nucleation Capital is seeking to expand our reach and connect with as many of these new ventures as we can. We are thus pleased to invite you to work with us to help us expand our syndicate deal flow and earn a share of our upside syndicate compensation. Here's how it works.

You find and connect with a young, growing venture that fits our thesis. If this venture is actively looking to raise capital and has a fundraising pitch deck, you introduce them to us and we will review their deck. If we agree that it is a promising prospect, you can offer to help them raise capital through our pronuclear investor network and syndicate. If they like that idea and agree to give us an allocation of equity, you will then produce a deal memo and we will float a syndicate to help them raise capital.

When investors agree to participate in the syndicate, they pay no management fee but they agree to pay carried interest to the deal sponsor, which is Nucleation Capital. Depending upon your contribution to creating the deal memo and promoting the SPV, we will provide a fair split of the carried interest fee earned from the successful exit of this venture.

There are two ways that you can work with us to bring us potential deals and earn participation on the success of the ventures you bring:

1. Venture Associate: If you are a young professional keen to learn how to help ventures raise capital with some spare time to devote to meeting new teams and making introductions, we will bring you on as a Venture Associate. You'll get training, guidance on how to find and connect with new ventures, and invitations to participate in due diligence sessions as well as other opportunities to enage with our syndicate team. We'll help you build your skills in this area and show you how to evaluate new ventures.

2. Ventury Ally: Perhaps you are a bit too busy to take on the task of writing deal memos but you are well connected, want to help worthy ventures raise capital and would like to make introductions. We invite you to join our team as a Venture Ally and we will delegate syndicate prep tasks to another member of our team. We would welcome your help connecting us to new teams working in our sectors through simple introductions.

This is an incredible opportunity for those keen to learn the ins and outs of the venture capital industry and for those who are deeply connected into the start-up world to help to help build stronger ventures.

Learn more here about this opportunity to join Nucleation's syndication team.

Published by Valerie Gardner in Advanced Nuclear, Capital reallocation, Carbon emissions, Climate change, Energy abundance, Energy transition, Environmental support for nuclear, Fission, Future of Energy, Investor activity, NEWS, Nuclear competitiveness, Nuclear innovation, Nucleation communications, Solving climate, US competitiveness, US technological leadership, Venture capital support for nuclear, Zero emission energy

August 18, 2024

Aalo Atomics: Leveraging DOE R&D

Screenshot 2024 08 18 at 10.42.35 am

Nucleation announces its investment in Aalo Atomic's Series A with Fund I

Aalo Atomics is a group that recognizes the importance of being one of the first to market with an NRC-approved reactor design that can be shipped to customers. They have not only hit the ground running but they have adopted an approach that leverages publicly-funded DOE design and development work that will help to expedite the NRC's approval of the Aalo-1, which will be modeled upon the DOE's MARVEL reactor that is being built now and which will be producing test data within the next few years.

MARVEL, a sodium-potassium-cooled micro-reactor and the first Gen IV design to come out of the national labs in over thirty years, is being built now with completion expected in 2025. The Idaho National Laboratory (INL) expects to complete construction, load fuel in 2026 and begin testing this very pared-down design inside the Transient Reactor Test (TREAT) facility in 2027. Aalo will be well-situated to access the publicly available test data produced by this DOE research program, to provide it with a true competitive advantage when applying for their own NRC license for their comparable design.

In their own words, Aalo is "moving fast and continually hitting significant milestones," having managed to recruit nearly all of their technical team right out of the INL MARVEL program. With that level of highly experience technical expertise on board, they have been able to finish their conceptual design of the Aalo-1, a scaled up version of MARVEL, which they plan to use for their first commercial reactor. Aalo has also signed a siting memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the DOE for a site at the INL so that they have great access to the support team and testing facilities that are increasingly available to developers from the INL and they've set up an office in Idaho Falls for that purpose. Finally, they've already submitted a Regulatory Engagement Plan (REP) with the NRC and have negotiated a preliminary agreement with a potential customer for a fleet of Aalo-1 reactors. This is a pretty good start for a team that had previously raised just over $6 million, prior to closing the current round of $27 million just a few weeks ago. We are impressed by this team's speed, efficiency and competitive strategy and are honored to have joined an impressive group of investors backing them, which includes 50Y, Valor Equity Partners, Harpoon Ventures, Crosscut, SNR, Alumni Ventures, Earth Venture and more. The Aalo team is super-charging their efforts with this financing. They plan to continue to scale their team, adding sales, EPC, manufacturing, fuel and finance talent. They also plan to build a non-nuclear prototype to better refine and demonstrate their design (which we believe is a must in order to make real progress) and they also plan to open a factory headquarters to begin preparations for mass production capability, something that is only possibly because there are existing specifications available from the DOE's MARVEL design now being built.

We expect many more good things to come from this dynamic young team. Read more about Aalo and their Series A financing on their website, or from Bloomberg or Politico Pro. Follow some additional milestones with reporting from Sonal Patel, of Power Magazine, on Aalo negotiating its first PPA.

(Note: Investors who have subscribed to Nucleation's Fund I Q3-2024 will get participation in this investment.)

June 4, 2024

Fossil fuels lose market share when electricity is done right

By Rod Adams, Managing Partner

Screen shot 2021 05 26 at 5.22.09 pm

Mined hydrocarbons, also known as fossil fuels, have been the foundation of modern industrial society for several centuries. But most parts of society don't depend on the specific action of burning hydrocarbon fuels. People need and want the heat that the combustion reaction produces and the services provided using machinery designed to convert heat into motion.

The growing importance of electricity

Most energy use cases can be supplied by alternative sources of heat and mechanical motion, but non-emitting alternatives such as wind and solar have been constrained by temporal and geographic availability. By themselves, they are not as flexible or as deliverable as hydrocarbons. The electrical grid, however, enables a wide variety of non-fossil fuel alternatives (think wind, solar and nuclear) to deliver controllable heat and motion almost anywhere at almost any time.

When electricity is a) clean, b) abundant, c) reliable and d) cost competitive, it can often win in the markets for services provided by burning hydrocarbons. All four criteria are important. But electricity isn't a fossil fuel replacement, and thus cleaner, if is produced using fossil fuel power.

Currently, 60% of U.S. electricity is still produced by burning fossil fuels because they have generally been reasonably available and affordably priced. We are now producing most all of our own fossil fuels with enhanced U.S. production but we shouldn't forget those worrying times when the lack of availability and high prices of fossil fuels have threatened the rest of the economy.

Using electricity to replace fossil fuels requires continued reductions in the use of fossil fuels in the electricity sector, and substantial increases in the total amount of electricity produced. Some calculate that electricity production needs to more than triple to enable an energy transition away from fossil fuel dependence.

Several power sources have proven their ability to take significant shares of electricity production from fossil fuels. These include hydropower, nuclear power (from fission) and wind and solar power. Hydro power (essentially falling water) is a well proven way to generate electricity, but due to geographic and environmental constraints it has not grown in the US since 1970. Its production fluctuates with varying precipitation but remains close to 6% of electricity supply. We shall consider the remaining options.

Fission

All nuclear power used today comes from the fission of atoms. When it was initially developed and booming, nuclear energy quickly captured about 20% of the electricity market. Initially discovered in late 1942, fission entered the commercial market in 1957 and grew to 2300 terrawatt hours per year (TWh/yr) of primary energy production by 2000.

Eventually, due to aggressive political opposition, poor project cost and schedule performance, growing regulatory uncertainties – from both state public utility commissions and federal safety regulators – and flat electricity market growth combined to reduce and then halt new nuclear power plant orders by 1978. This was bad enough but, during the 1970s and 1980s, there were a significant number of project cancellations after major expenses had already been incurred. The new nuclear plant construction industry atrophied, nevertheless, ongoing plant operations and services continued to improve, and nuclear capacity factors grew and resulted in upratings on plant generation capability.

Memories of financial losses and periodic abundance of low priced hydrocarbons have helped to delay or derail attempts to revive the nuclear plant construction industry until now.

Wind and solar

Stimulated by Renewable Portfolio Standards, federal production and/or investment tax credits, similar pieces of legislation at state and local levels and tens of billions of dollars in investments appropriated as part of the Recovery Act of 2009, wind and solar have grown rapidly since 2000 to capture about 15% of the US electricity market. Sustained investments and growing markets enabled the supplier (mostly Chinese) and installation industries to achieve economical scale and substantial manufacturing cost reductions. Advocates for wind and solar have lauded these price reductions and have argued that, because these costs are so low, wind and solar are going to be able to grow to replace all of fossil fuel demand.

Unfortunately, the evidence surrounding the growth of renewables show that they are growing rapidly but not even keeping up with the rate of growth of energy demand. Additionally, they are not replacing fossil fuels, which plants are also growing as a function of being needed to supplant the intermittency and low capacity factors of both wind and solar.

The energy transition that we need to achieve has a far greater chance of success in a future where nuclear and renewable energy sources both grow to their potential instead of the historical either-or growth pattern shown to the right.

That binary alternative energy history of growing either nuclear or wind and solar has given us a history of doing very little to reduce fossil fuel consumption or its inherently associated pollution and greenhouse gas production. The graph below shows U.S. historical energy usage and the shifting patterns of growth of coal, natural gas, nuclear, wind and solar.

US historical energy production displaying coal, gas, nuclear, wind and solar This graph leaves out oil because it provides only 1 percent of electricity generation (though it is largely used in sectors like transportation and heating that are not yet seeing much impact from competition with alternative sources delivered to end users via electricity). It also leaves out geothermal because its production is barely visible in the graph. What's clear from this image is that wind and solar have helped enable the growth of natural gas, at the expense of coal usage but they have not caused a net decline in the total amount of fossil fuel use, just a marked shift in type.

Multiple tools needed

Transitioning our energy system from fossil fuel dominance to a system producing far less pollution while retaining the availability and abundance that provides prosperity is a difficult task requiring a full set of tools, including nuclear, wind and solar.

Using available tools to their fullest extent requires application of enabling policies, relying on experience of what has worked and what has failed to work. The undeniable success of the wind and solar build out offers lessons that can be applied to new nuclear as an energy source that is as clean and as safe as wind and solar.

Government policies

It is immensely encouraging to see that there is growing political support and action in this direction. Congresses over the last decade have managed to pass several major pieces of legislation supportive of nuclear energy with overwhelming bipartisan majorities. The parties have even engaged in positive competition boosting support to new nuclear energy. Most recently, the Biden Administrative launched the Nuclear Power Project Management and Delivery working group, an expert group empowered to accelerate the approval, construction and deployment of both traditional and advanced nuclear power. This is just the most recent initiative, yet it goes further than any prior administration, and reflects growing public support for the deployment of nuclear power to reduce carbon emissions and continued reliance on fossil fuels.

Internationally, the progress has been equally as impressive. At COP 28 in the UAE this past winter, the US joined with nearly every other nuclear-powered nation in a pledge to triple nuclear energy capacity by 2050, even as the entire conference itself agreed to "transition away from fossil fuels."

Investors and innovators

Along with the government enablers, private sector investors and innovators are applying lessons from the early rise (and then stagnation) of nuclear energy and from the accelerating rise of wind and solar. Nuclear energy sources, now both advanced fission and multiple approaches to fusion, are being developed in a wide variety of sizes, shapes and operating temperatures designed to fit the needs of a much larger universe of potential customers.

The term small modular reactor (SMR) has entered the lexicon and been the subject of much discussion within the small community of people that focus on energy. We like to think of the term as meaning smaller, manufactured reactors and believe it should be viewed as covering a market sector as broad and impactful as the terms PC or AI. We also assert that the world has successfully been using SMRs since the 1950s, but strategic and political considerations restricted their use to military applications, such as for powering submarines.

Some SMRs are designed to be small enough to be fully produced inside factories and delivered as complete units. These are often called micro or very small reactors. Many of these will be able to operate for a decade or more without needing new fuel, giving them capabilities that are unobtainable by fossil fuel generators.

Other SMRs are designed to allow various components and systems to be manufactured, fabricated and assembled in factories and then shipped to sites where the parts can be connected into a complete power plant. These are often being designed to reduce or avoid the mega-project risk that has plagued very large nuclear plants.

Some vendors are focusing on producing reactors as heat sources; letting others design and build systems that will either use the heat directly or as the driver for an energy conversion system that produces electricity. There are designs that focus on producing very high temperature heat and others that focus on improving the fuel cycle to make better use of the energy content of natural actinides like uranium and thorium.

Outside of reactor vendors there are emerging suppliers for waste handling, supportive IT and AI systems, improved displays and simulators, better ways to engage with communities and regulators and an emerging group of companies focused on developing nuclear projects. New business models are being developed to better fit a market that is no longer dominated by vertically integrated monopoly utilities.

The opportunities associated with renewed growth in nuclear are enormous and the variety of solutions is almost overwhelming. As someone who believes in the enormous prospects for nuclear power and as a managing partner in Nucleation Capital,, I spend my days focusing on understanding the teams, the improvements, the markets, the obstacles, the mitigations, the political situation and all of the other complexities associated with successfully deploy a new generation of advanced energy technologies to help change the direction of one of the largest segments of the world's economy. We are now in our third year of operations and continuing to assemble a portfolio of investments in companies in this sector with outsized growth potential.

Broadening Participation by Investors into Venture Capital

At Nucleation Capital, we believe a successful energy transition can only be accomplished when attacked with a complete range of the best available tools. This includes advanced nuclear. Plenty of other investors are focusing on wind and solar; we see new nuclear as an under-appreciated sector whose immense value is just beginning to be recognized, so we are focused on investing into this sector and providing access for more investors to participate.

Though some large, public companies will benefit from nuclear energy growth, most of them are widely diversified conglomerates whose nuclear divisions are a relatively small portion of the company. A number of them are working on SMRs of their own. These ventures can usually be accessed through the public markets. We focus our efforts on the younger, smaller and emerging ventures that are targeting nuclear energy innovations and which are raising venture capital to finance their development and growth. By targeting the energy buyers in various niches with products that can compete head-to-head with fossil fuels, they have enormous growth opportunities given the urgency with which the world needs to transition to carbon-free energy sources.

Nucleation Capital is an open-ended fund that has almost unlimited capacity to include new investors (at almost any capital level) that recognize the potential and want to gain investment exposure to this sector. We bring expertise to this sector to synthesize the complexities and make the investment choices for our investors. If this interests you, please make contact to find out how you might prosper with us.

Published by Rod Adams in Advanced Nuclear, Asset manager support, Carbon emissions, Electrification, Energy abundance, Energy transition, Fission, Fossil fuels, Future of Energy, Government support, NEWS, Nuclear competitiveness, Venture capital support for nuclear

May 4, 2024

Rod Adams: Investing in the Future of Energy

Rodney Adams, Managing Partner, Nucleation Capital, had the honor of speaking with Amy Rotman of 121 Mining, at their New York event on May 4th, 2024. For more information about the event, which connects mining companies with investors, see the 121 Mining website. Please click the arrow below to watch Rod's conversation.

Published by Rod Adams in Advanced Nuclear, Asset manager support, Biden-Harris Administration, Energy transition, Fission, Future of Energy, Investor activity, NEWS, Nuclear competitiveness, Nuclear financing, Uranium mining & Fuel resources, Venture capital support for nuclear

January 4, 2024

Dr. Hansen warning humanity to get its act together, deploy renewables and nuclear

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."

References:

"A Miracle Will Occur" is Not Sensible Climate Policy, by James Hansen, Pushker Kharecha, Makiko Sato, Columbia University, Earth Insitute's Climate Science & Solutions, December 7, 2023.

Columbia University, Climate Science, Awareness and Solutions Newsletter, "Groundhog Day. Another Gobsmackingly Bananas Month. What’s Up?, sent on January 4, 2024 from the same team.

"Dire Warnings from Dr. Hansen and Team, by Valerie Gardner, Nucleation Capital, Dec. 22, 2023.

November 10, 2023

About NuScale and implications of the CFPP cancellation

Why did the Carbon Free Power Project get cancelled? What does that mean for NuScale?

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.

CERAWeek presentation “Blue Energy | Offshore Nuclear Power” Mar 7, 2023

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.

Published by Valerie Gardner in Advanced Nuclear, Advanced Nuclear Customers, Carbon emissions, Climate change, Climate innovation fund, Construction costs, Corporate decarbonization, Energy abundance, Future of Energy, Government support, Investor activity, NEWS, Nuclear competitiveness, Nuclear financing, Nuclear innovation, Nuclear R&D, US competitiveness, US technological leadership, Venture capital support for nuclear

October 17, 2023

Marc Andreessen’s Pronuclear Techno-Optimism

Marc Andreessen, Cofounder and General Partner of Andreessen Horowitz, a phenomenally-successful $35 billion venture capital firm dubbed "a16z," has shared a litany of views of where humanity is and where it should be vis-à-vis technology in a post entitled "The Techno-Optimist Manifesto." Writing in Nietzsche-like style, Andreessen covers topics such as lies, truth, technology, markets, intelligence, energy, abundance and much more with bold pronouncements regarding our future. This manifesto is a wake-up call to us all to not presume our future's doom and allow pessimism to handcuff action. In fact, Marc posits that we have all the tools we need to create a better future, if we are optimistic and brave enough to use them.

There is much to appreciate about someone of Andreessen's stature putting his views out there in unapologetic style. We take the liberty of sharing an extract from Marc's manifesto on the topic of "Energy," which we agree with entirely and which informed our reasons for founding Nucleation Capital, but we urge everyone to take a moment to read the entire manifesto to refresh your brain and recharge your perspective.

Energy

Energy is life. We take it for granted, but without it, we have darkness, starvation, and pain. With it, we have light, safety, and warmth.

We believe energy should be in an upward spiral. Energy is the foundational engine of our civilization. The more energy we have, the more people we can have, and the better everyone’s lives can be. We should raise everyone to the energy consumption level we have, then increase our energy 1,000x, then raise everyone else’s energy 1,000x as well.

The current gap in per-capita energy use between the smaller developed world and larger developing world is enormous. That gap will close – either by massively expanding energy production, making everyone better off, or by massively reducing energy production, making everyone worse off.

We believe energy need not expand to the detriment of the natural environment. We have the silver bullet for virtually unlimited zero-emissions energy today – nuclear fission. In 1973, President Richard Nixon called for Project Independence, the construction of 1,000 nuclear power plants by the year 2000, to achieve complete US energy independence. Nixon was right; we didn’t build the plants then, but we can now, anytime we decide we want to.

Atomic Energy Commissioner Thomas Murray said in 1953: “For years the splitting atom, packaged in weapons, has been our main shield against the barbarians. Now, in addition, it is a God-given instrument to do the constructive work of mankind.” Murray was right too.

We believe a second energy silver bullet is coming – nuclear fusion. We should build that as well. The same bad ideas that effectively outlawed fission are going to try to outlaw fusion. We should not let them.

We believe there is no inherent conflict between the techno-capital machine and the natural environment. Per-capita US carbon emissions are lower now than they were 100 years ago, even without nuclear power.

We believe technology is the solution to environmental degradation and crisis. A technologically advanced society improves the natural environment, a technologically stagnant society ruins it. If you want to see environmental devastation, visit a former Communist country. The socialist USSR was far worse for the natural environment than the capitalist US. Google the Aral Sea.

We believe a technologically stagnant society has limited energy at the cost of environmental ruin; a technologically advanced society has unlimited clean energy for everyone. [Emphasis added.]

As investors in next-generation nuclear, we were thrilled to see Marc Andreessen rail in support of nuclear. Yet, a mere two days after the release of Andreessen's almost poetic Techno-Optimist Manifesto, Ryan McEntush from the a16z team published an even more significant piece, a profoundly well researched and comprehensive analysis called "How to Scale Nuclear." This article received almost none of the social media attention but is definitely well worth reading. To us, this article is evidence that Andreessen Horowitz is actively investing human capital into understanding and building expertise in nuclear fission and, if they aren't already, may soon become a fission investor.

Source:
Andreessen Horowitz, "The Techno-Optimist Manifesto," by Marc Andreessen, October 16, 2023.

Andreessen Horowitz, "How to Scale Nuclear," by Ryan McEntush, October 18, 2023.

Published by Nucleation Capital in Advanced Nuclear, Asset manager support, Brilliant thinkers, Energy abundance, Future of Energy, Investor activity, LINKS, Venture capital support for nuclear

September 18, 2023

Large Investors doubling down on Emerging Managers

Jessica Mathews, writing for the Fortune Term Sheet Newsletter, alerted us to the change just made by CalSTRS, one of the largest pension funds in the world. In "CalSTRS taps Sapphire Partners, with an office in Menlo Park, to manage its new emerging manager VC investments," we learned that CalSTRS has hired Sapphire Partners to manage its five emerging manager-focused funds, with $1.4 billion in assets. Sapphire will bring sole focus to CalSTRS' growing investment into emerging managers, a distinct asset class (of which we are a member). We are delighted to hear this news and applaud the decision and its rationale.

Though it may be obvious, when some of the largest and most successful investors in the world decide to redouble their focus on a certain asset class, there's usually a good reason for it. In this case, there are highly compelling economics—in the form of superior returns—coming from emerging managers. New managers, while they don't have an investment "track record" by definition, are often launching new funds because of some kind of significant shifts in markets for which they don't see viable options or for which they have a competitive advantage or discernable investment edge.

The challenge for LPs is being able to select which emerging teams to invest in, since there is a good distribution between top emerging managers and run-of-the-mill emerging managers, who have very little differentiation or specialization.

According to Beezer Clarkson, who leads Sapphire's fund investing business, a key piece for them is simply having an emerging GP being able to articulate why an entrepreneur would pick them as an investor to join a round and why an LP should be interested in their thesis as an investor.

According to David Zhou, in an interview published by Adam Metz of D.F.A. on his Substack, emerging managers regularly outperform. "My suspicion is that emerging managers have that chip on their shoulder. They have something to prove to the world. They’ll hustle for deals. When founders pick who they want on the cap table, they want people who care about them and their space."

We tend to agree. Nucleation remains the only venture fund focused on nuclear, especially the fission kind. And when you are the only fund focusing on the specific tech sector (namely advanced nuclear in our case) that a venture is in and you bring decades of experience, deep connections, plus expansive knowledge of the in's, out's, pro's, con's, competition, suppliers and regulators, history and a vision for what will be and a commitment to making it reality, the answer to these questions becomes apparent.

Nucleation Capital has completed eight quarters of investing, has made ten very promising investments and is starting its third year of operations. If you would like to receive a copy of our newly released Two Year Report, please send your request to us using this link.

Sources

1. TERM SHEET: CalSTRS taps Sapphire Partners to manage its new emerging manager VC investments

By Jessica Mathews
September, 13, 2023

When the California State Teachers’ Retirement System makes any kind of change to its portfolio, people pay attention.

With more than $321 billion in assets under management, CalSTRS is one of America’s largest public pension plans and therefore one of the world’s most important limited partners, with approximately $50 billion in capital strewn across private funds and, naturally, some of the world’s most influential private companies.

CalSTRS’ core private equity portfolio is littered with all the usual suspects: TPG, New Enterprise Associates, Thoma Bravo, Blackstone, and, as of 2021, Tiger Global, to name a few. But 21 years ago, the pension plan also began setting aside a small portion of capital to back first-time fund managers. It has hired out that responsibility to three third-party partners over the years: HarbourVest, Muller & Monroe, and Invesco.

Now, CalSTRS says that one of those partners—Invesco—is getting out of this line of business, so it is bringing on Sapphire Partners, the $3.6 billion LP arm of enterprise software-focused VC Sapphire Ventures, to manage five funds and $1.4 billion in assets focused on emerging managers. With the change, CalSTRS will, for the first time, have a fund class solely focused on emerging venture capital investors. (Invesco declined to comment for this story.)

“Standardizing one group to focus on venture—because it’s so specialized from an emerging manager standpoint—made a lot of sense for us,” Rob Ross, a private equity portfolio manager at CalSTRS, told Term Sheet in an interview. He added: “We just haven’t been as specialized as we should be, given the nuances of venture capital.” Ross pointed out that, while Invesco did make investments in emerging VC, PE, and growth investor managers over their 18 years working together, this will be the first time emerging VC managers will be singled out.

Beezer Clarkson, who leads Sapphire’s fund investing business, says that Sapphire will invest CalSTRS’ capital exactly the same way it deploys its own. Sapphire Partners backs VCs raising one of their first three funds, targeting a 3x net return for Series A funds and a 5x net return for seed funds. While Sapphire will look at both specialists and generalists, Clarkson says it’s important that a GP can articulate why an entrepreneur would pick them as an investor, and why she should be interested as an LP.

“I think the authenticity of that answer is the differentiator,” Clarkson says.

CalSTRS is currently investing out of its fifth fund, a $250 million fund from 2021, and Ross estimated there is approximately $80 million from that fund left to deploy. (CalSTRS filed with the SEC for a sixth fund vehicle in order to shift management responsibilities to Sapphire, though Ross clarifies this is not a new fund and CalSTRS has not set aside any additional capital at this time.)

The change at the pension fund will likely be a welcome one for first-time managers, as fundraising has been pretty dire for those just getting their start. As I wrote about last month, emerging managers are on track to raise less than they have in a decade, based on data from the first four months of the year.

Part of that has to do with risk. Emerging managers, by definition, have fewer than three funds, meaning they don’t have much of a track record to show investors. “Only about 17% of funds make it to fund four,” Clarkson says, citing data from PitchBook. Not to mention, the current market uncertainty has made price discovery more difficult, and LPs are being choosier across all their GPs.

“I think all LPs are being more selective than they had been in the past,” Ross says.

At the same time, a high-risk bet on a first-timer can turn into an enormous return. Cambridge Associates reported in 2019 that 72% of the venture industry’s highest-performing funds were run by emerging managers. (This is the most recent metric. Cambridge Associates didn’t respond to my request for updated figures.)

“There’s no guarantee it’s going to work out well. And because there are so many emerging managers every year, the challenge of picking the ones that will continue is extraordinarily hard—and that’s probably the nugget of why most LPs don’t do this,” Clarkson says.

For CalSTRS, returns for this class of funds have been strong so far. Here’s a look (I didn’t include the 2021 fund because it didn’t have a long enough track record to judge it fairly):

As it’s become more and more competitive for LPs to get exposure to top-performing funds, it makes sense for large-scale limited partners to be building relationships with promising investors earlier on. And there’s nothing preventing a pension plan or institutional LP from outsourcing most of the work. Just earlier this year, one of California’s other major pension plans, CalPERS, had said it was now working with TPG and GCM Grosvenor to deploy $1 billion into emerging manager funds.

2. SAPPHIRE Press Release: CalSTRS and Sapphire Partners Join Forces to Invest in New and Next Generation VC Managers

Sapphire Partners will assume management of the CalSTRS New and Next Generation Manager Funds, which includes managing available capital to make new investments into emerging managers focused on early-stage venture capital

WEST SACRAMENTO and MENLO PARK, September 13, 2023 / PRNewswire: The California State Teachers’ Retirement System (CalSTRS), the world’s largest educator-only pension fund with more than $320 billion in assets, and Sapphire Partners, the fund investing strategy of Sapphire, a specialized technology investment firm with over $11 billion in assets under management,⁽¹⁾ today announced a partnership to invest in emerging managers focused on early-stage venture capital. As a part of this partnership, Sapphire Partners will assume investment management responsibilities of five CalSTRS “New and Next Generation Manager Funds” existing funds, representing approximately $1.4 billion in assets under management.⁽²⁾ Sapphire Partners will also have capital available to continue making commitments to new and emerging venture capital managers.

“Emerging managers are critical to the venture ecosystem and an LP’s portfolio, and both CalSTRS and Sapphire Partners have long histories of supporting them on their journey,” said Beezer Clarkson, Partner, Sapphire Partners. “Sapphire believes we are well positioned to identify the next class of rising talent early and help them grow and scale their businesses.”

The announcement comes amid one of the most challenging fundraising environments in recent years, with 91% of emerging managers finding fundraising “difficult or very difficult” in 2023. With many LPs constrained on allocations, Sapphire Partners is excited to be an active and supportive partner for emerging managers seeking to fundraise in this environment and has invested in emerging managers since the strategy’s inception nearly twelve years ago.

“One of CalSTRS’ primary goals since the program’s inception in 2005 is to partner with diverse GPs that represent the demographics of California, and we know greater diversity is a natural byproduct of focusing on small emerging managers,” said Christopher J. Ailman, CalSTRS’ Chief Investment Officer. “This partnership with Sapphire aligns with our long history of finding diverse investment managers. We look forward to partnering with Sapphire on this important mandate.”⁽³⁾

Sapphire Partners has been an active Limited Partner since 2012, investing in early-stage venture capital (Seed to Series A) funds within the US, Europe and Israel, with, more recently, a focus on identifying managers Sapphire believes may become the “New Elite” in early-stage VC.

Managers may benefit from Sapphire’s industry insights, its experience investing in emerging managers, and its efforts to demystify the “LP Perspective” through OpenLP, a Sapphire-led resource for the VC community. In addition, the broader Sapphire technology investing platform, featuring a multibillion-dollar direct VC investing strategy, provides managers with market and industry insights from the investment and Portfolio Growth teams and a scaled firmwide infrastructure to tap into where relevant.

This partnership will allow Sapphire to expand its ability to support emerging managers while continuing to focus on established managers through its existing investment platform. Of note, approximately 60% of Sapphire Partners’ relationships began at the emerging manager stage.⁽⁴⁾ Since its inception, Sapphire and the New and Next Generation Manager platform have partnered with approximately 300 funds over their combined history. Today, approximately 70% of Sapphire Partners’ portfolio of existing managers have checkwriters from diverse backgrounds.⁽⁵⁾

About Sapphire Partners

Sapphire Partners has been investing in early-stage venture capital funds since 2012 and seeks to identify and support the “New Elite” managers across the US, Europe and Israel who are uniquely suited to invest in the next generation of technology category leaders. Through its underlying managers, Sapphire Partners has indirectly invested in over 3,200⁽⁶⁾ companies since inception. Sapphire Partners looks to partner with managers across their journey as a GP and is focused on adding value beyond its capital commitments through value-add services, industry insights, and its efforts to demystify the ‘LP Perspective’ through the OpenLP initiative. Sapphire Partners is part of Sapphire, a specialized technology investment firm with approximately $11 billion in assets under management across three distinct strategies and with team members across Austin, Menlo Park, San Francisco and London. To learn more, visit the Sapphire Partners website.

About CalSTRS

CalSTRS provides a secure retirement to more than 1 million members and beneficiaries whose CalSTRS-covered service is not eligible for Social Security participation. On average, members who retired in 2021–22 had 25 years of service and a monthly benefit of $4,809. Established in 1913, CalSTRS is the largest educator-only pension fund in the world with $321.3 billion in assets under management as of July 31, 2023. CalSTRS demonstrates its strong commitment to long-term corporate sustainability principles in its annual Sustainability Report.

Published by Nucleation Capital in Advanced Nuclear, Asset manager support, Brilliant thinkers, Capital reallocation, Climate innovation fund, Fund sustainability, Future of Energy, Investor activity, LINKS, Nuclear financing, Nuclear innovation, Solving climate, Venture capital support for nuclear

September 18, 2023

Nucleation’s first two years

Nucleation Capital completed its second full year as a fund at the end of June, 2023. During these eight quarters, we made ten investments and built a portfolio that showcases how we define our thesis. This then begins to answer the question that many people have: How does a nuclear-focused climate venture fund invest into this sector? The answer is presented in the Two Year Report which we have posted below. We have now commenced our third year and, as an "evergreen" fund, we are continuing to raise capital and welcome new investors. If you are an accredited or qualified investor and interested in getting an allocation in our ongoing investments, please let us know.