Rebecca Tuhus-Dubrow, author of "Atomic Dreams," makes a compelling case for California to rethink its 1976 moratorium on building nuclear plants — arguing that clean-firm power is essential for meeting climate and energy goals, in an increasingly electrified economy.
Path Power – An innovative, early-stage California-based developer of a robotic and AI-enabled system for drilling and laying transmissions lines underground, without the need for trenching.
Published by Nucleation Capital in Electrification, Energy transition, Grid Resiliency, PORTFOLIO, Transmission
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.
Published by Valerie Gardner in Advanced Nuclear, Climate policy, Energy transition, Fission, Future of Energy, Land Use by Energy, NEWS, Nuclear competitiveness, Nuclear innovation, Nuclear R&D, Portfolio Venture, Solving climate, US competitiveness, US technological leadership
As we reported in a post titled "States vying to host nuclear development," most U.S. States—along with many countries—recognize that nuclear power is vital to every jurisdiction's ability to generate reliable and clean power and that demand for nuclear is going to grow. Accordingly, many U.S. States have begun efforts to attract nuclear developments and nuclear power developers so as to both gain the additional power being added and the economic development benefits of hosting some portion of this growing sector. Now that AI development has sent Big Tech out in search of locations to build new data centers, which require massive amounts of energy, the race to attract nuclear power has grown even fiercer. There are so many developments, it would not be practical to post each individual state's initiatives separately. Thus, we are using this page to try to provide current updates on each state's nuclear initiatives, listed alphabetically.
Arizona
Arizona, home to one of the country's largest nuclear power plants, lawmakers are considering a utility-backed bill to relax environmental regulations if a utility builds a reactor at the site of a large industrial power user or a retired coal-fired power plant..
California
Alone among the most populated, industrial and progressive U.S. states, California remains mired in antiquated antinuclear politics. Although there is a large fraction of advanced nuclear innovation happening at startups located in California, California’s moratorium on new nuclear plants will force these ventures to seek alternative states in which to build their technologies. California’s leadership has shown no interest in competing to win the race to attract all of the talent, federal funding, jobs and economic development that will accompany the growth of this innovative sector and, by all appearances, the state has now fallen behind Texas, Wyoming, Illinois, New York and even Connecticut.
But, there are signs of attitudinal shifts happening even in deep blue California. Both California’s progressive Governor, Gavin Newsom, who for years workd to force the retirement of Diablo Canyon, and the state’s legislature reversed their decisions at the last minute and delayed the closure of the nuclear facility for five more years. They recognized, if reluctantly, that the plant had reliably provided almost 20% of the state’s zero-emission power and 8% of its electricity for decades. Shutting it down would expose the state to dire and life-threatening power outages without the plant’s high capacity-factor reliability and highly differentiated, non-intermittent generation. It would also set back progress on the state’s climate goals.
Sadly, despite several attempts over the years by elected legislators to bring the state into competitive parity with the country and do away with its 49-year old nuclear moratorium, make exceptions for SMRs, and/or conduct feasibility studies about SMRs, these bills have not made it out of committee. Thus, the state appears poised to miss out on the energy revolution made possible by next-generation nuclear, even with many advanced nuclear ventures being located in California.
Connecticut
Connecticut has a state-wide ban but passed an exception in 2022 that allows more nuclear construction at the site of the state’s one operating nuclear power plant, the Millstone Power Station. This specifically allows Dominion Energy to build advanced nuclear at the Millstone site. Dominion has shown interest in SMRs and recently announced a deal with X-energy to build their advanced design, in partnership with Amazon.
Illinois
One of the largest nuclear generating states, Illinois produces 53% of its electricity (and 90% of its clean energy) from nuclear power, and recently passed HB 2473, lifting the state’s moratorium on building new nuclear reactors—but only for small modular reactors (SMRs) rated for 300 megawatts or less. This measure was signed by Gov. JB Pritzker, a Democrat.
Indiana
Indiana lawmakers passed legislation to let utilities more quickly seek reimbursement for the cost to build a modular reactor, undoing a decades-old prohibition designed to protect ratepayers from bloated, inefficient or, worse, aborted power projects.
Maine
Maine, which has not had an operating nuclear power plant since 1996, considered a bill to classify nuclear power as “clean,” to thus qualify it for carbon credits and other preferential treatment.
Maryland
Maryland joined the National Association of State Energy Officials’s Advanced Nuclear First Mover Initiative, or ANFMI, to develop supportive policies, coordinate with private stakeholders, and work toward unique procurement and financing options for nuclear energy projects. Meanwhile, lawmakers in Maryland are considering a bill that would include nuclear power in a new zero-emissions credit program, creating an additional revenue stream for nuclear projects there.
Michigan
Michigan has worked to protect and increase its nuclear power and sits at the forefront of resurgent state interest in nuclear energy. Michigan’s Democratic Governor, Gretchen Whitmer, worked to prevent the closure of the Palisades nuclear power plant. But, when a mechanical problem forced the plant’s sudden closure, the state legislature agreed to put $150 million toward the potential restart of Palisades, in what would be the US’ first-ever restart of a shuttered generating station. Under the Biden Administration’s Civil Nuclear Credit program, the plant subsequently received a $1.5 billion conditional loan commitment from the U.S. Department of Energy, to help fund the repairs and restart and potentially enable Holtec to build several SMRs on the site as well. Michigan lawmakers are also considering millions of dollars in incentives to develop and use the reactors, as well as train a nuclear industry workforce.
New York
New York has no statewide restriction but still has a narrow ban on new reactor development in the service territory of the Long Island Lighting Company, which covers Nassau, Suffolk and some of Queens counties. Although New York’s disgraced former governor, Andrew Cuomo, forced the premature closure of Indian Point which eliminated 80% of the then available clean energy for downstate New York, New York’s current Governor, Kathy Hochul appears to be bringing nuclear back. She announced the state’s largest and most ambitious initiative to tackle the climate crisis with a new master plan. This includes a commitment of $1 billion by the state and specifically includes NYSERDA’s Blueprint for Consideration of Advanced Nuclear Energy Technologies, which outlines a process for the inclusion of advanced nuclear in the state’s Master Plan consideration process. Additionally, New York State will co-lead a multi-state initiative to support nuclear refurbishment and new nuclear development. This seems to place New York State firmly in the race to attract next-generation nuclear developers. New York joined the National Association of State Energy Officials’s Advanced Nuclear First Mover Initiative, or ANFMI.
New York issued a request for information from “entities either already pursuing, or interested in pursuing, a potential role in advanced nuclear energy technology development” and an interim “blueprint” for nuclear power deployment as it prepares to release a more comprehensive nuclear “master plan”. Constellation Energy said that, with support from the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, it would apply for a federal grant to seek an early site permit “for one or more advanced nuclear reactors” at its 1,907-MW Nine Mile Point Clean Energy Center near Oswego, New York.
Pennsylvania
Pennsylvania joined the National Association of State Energy Officials’s Advanced Nuclear First Mover Initiative, or ANFMI, to develop supportive policies, coordinate with private stakeholders, and work toward unique procurement and financing options for nuclear energy projects.
Tennessee
Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee proposed allocating more than $90 million to help subsidize a Tennessee Valley Authority project to install several small reactors, boost research and attract nuclear tech firms. As a long-time proponent of the TVA’s nuclear project, Lee also launched Tennessee’s Nuclear Energy Fund in 2023, designed to attract a supply chain, including a multibillion-dollar uranium enrichment plant billed as the state’s biggest-ever industrial investment.
Texas
Texas prides itself on being the “energy capital of the world.” It is setting itself up to become the “epicenter” for deployment of advanced nuclear and has taken some impressive steps to achieve this goal. In the aftermath of Winter Storm Uri, which resulted in extended power outages that caused many cold-related fatalities, an industry group got together to form the Texas Nuclear Alliance, dedicated to the advancement of nuclear technology in Texas and a mission to make Texas the “Nuclear Capital of the World.” TNA’s underlying premise was that, to meet the need for low-carbon and reliable energy, Texas could not afford to turn its back on “clean, safe, reliable and secure” nuclear energy.
By late 2023, Texas Governor, Greg Abbott, directed the Texas Public Utility Commission to establish a working group to study advanced nuclear. A year later, in November 2024, the Governor and the PUCT announced the release of the Texas Advanced Nuclear Reactor Working Group’s final report on Texas’ plan to build a world-leading advanced nuclear power industry. The report’s multiple goals sought to enhance electric reliability and energy security, promote economic development, and unleash new opportunities for the growing Texas workforce. In commenting on the PUC’s report, Governor Abbott said:
“Texas is the energy capital of the world, and we are ready to be No. 1 in advanced nuclear power. By utilizing advanced nuclear energy, Texas will enhance the reliability of the state grid and provide affordable, dispatchable power to Texans across the state. As we build an advanced nuclear industry in our great state, we will ensure Texas remains a leader in energy and strengthen the Texas grid to meet the demands of our growing state.”
If you click on the report image on the right, it takes you directly to the report package, which is a thing of beauty. The Executive Summary finds five key benefits to making Texas the epicenter of advanced nuclear in the U.S.: 1) Enhance energy security; 2) Improve grid reliability; 3) Expand economic development opportunities; 4) Capture first-in-nation advantages that bring jobs, revenue and industrial growth; and 5) Capture international trade opportunities as the world works to triple the amount of nuclear available by 2050.
How will Texas take this lead? By doing what Texas does best: cutting “red tape” and establishing major “incentives” to “attract investments,” accelerate advanced nuclear deployments and overcome regulatory hurdles. It’s a very good plan . . . and far exceeds efforts by any other state to attract advanced nuclear development to itself.
Best of all, Texas isn’t merely posturing. The Texas Nuclear Alliance has partnered with the Texas A&M University System (TAMUS, which boasts eleven universities, eight agencies and an enormous 2100 acre parcel of land called the Rellis Campus devoted to supporting technology innovation) and announced that they have selected four advanced nuclear ventures to build their own advanced reactor at Texas A&M. These companies, called TNA Founding Members, include: Kairos Power, Natura Resources, Terrestrial Energy and Aalo Atomics. These companies responded to an RFP in the summer of 2024 to bring their designs to the Rellis campus and were accepted. While there are unknowns about what this selection means for these companies, solving the siting issue can provide a significant advantage in the highly competitive race to be the first to deploy. [Click here to see how beautifully Texas A&M promotes the Rellis campus.]
Utah
Utah Gov. Spencer Cox announced “Operation Gigawatt” to double the state’s electricity generation in a decade. He wants to spend $20 million to prepare sites for nuclear. State Senate President J. Stuart Adams told colleagues when he opened the chamber’s 2025 session that Utah needs to be the “nation’s nuclear hub.”
Virginia
Virginia’s recent pro-nuclear moves include state funding for an energy “career cluster” and a state-supported energy lab that help enable deployment of advanced nuclear reactors near former coal mines. These efforts are designed to attract workers, jobs and investments by companies in the growing advanced nuclear sector, which is poised to begin building SMRs at the country’s already shuttered and retiring coal plants. Dominion Energy issued a request for proposals for a possible small modular reactor deployment at its 1,892-MW North Anna Power Station and subsequently announced a memorandum of understanding with Amazon to support the Virginia project. Virginia joined the National Association of State Energy Officials’s Advanced Nuclear First Mover Initiative, or ANFMI, a regional initiative.
West Virginia
West Virginia joined the National Association of State Energy Officials’s Advanced Nuclear First Mover Initiative, or ANFMI, to develop supportive policies, coordinate with private stakeholders, and work toward unique procurement and financing options for nuclear energy projects.
Wisconsin
In Wisconsin, several lawmakers introduced a resolution calling on the Legislature to publicly support nuclear power and fusion energy. They intend that the state, in passing the resolution, makes what could be deemed a formal declaration that Wisconsin is open for nuclear industry business.
Wyoming
Wyoming, seen as an “early mover,” is one state that began laying the groundwork to attract and build next-generation nuclear prior to 2020, when Republican Gov. Mark Gordon, signed a bill forbidding coal plants to close but allowing small modular reactor capacity to replace the coal generation capacity. Subsequent legislation in 2022 and 2023 provided regulatory streamlining for advanced reactor deployment and authorized the state to match private funds up to $150 million. These actions helped the state win over TerraPower, the advanced nuclear venture owned by Bill Gates, which is now building infrastructure for what may be the first advanced nuclear power plant near the site of a retiring coal-fired power plant, in Kemmerer, Wyoming. It helped Wyoming a lot that Bill Gates was then close friends with Warren Buffet whose Wyoming-based company, PacifiCorp, owns many struggling coal plants and so found a site they were willing to let TerraPower use. Wyoming joined the National Association of State Energy Officials’s Advanced Nuclear First Mover Initiative, or ANFMI, to develop supportive policies, coordinate with private stakeholders, and work toward unique procurement and financing options for nuclear energy projects.
[Note, we endeavor to keep this article updated with more recent information.]
Sources
- Office of the Texas Governor | Greg Abbott, Texas Leads As Energy Capital Of The World In 2024, December 27, 2024.
- Texas Nuclear Alliance, Texas Nuclear Alliance Members Selected to Build Nuclear Reactors at Texas A&M University System’s RELLIS Campus, press release of 2/4/25 by the Texas Nuclear Alliance and Time to Build. (See video of the announcement.)
- Texas Advanced Nuclear Reactor Working Group, Deplying a World-Renowned Nuclear Industry in Texas: Considerations and Recommendations for Action, November 18, 2024.
- DOE, Office of Nuclear Energy, What is a Nuclear Moratorium? Sept. 20, 2024
- Governor Kathy Hochul, Governor Hochul Commits More Than $1 Billion to Tackle the Climate Crisis – the Single Largest Climate Investment in New York’s History, January 14, 2025.
- CALMatters, Artificial intelligence is bringing nuclear power back from the dead — maybe even in California, by Alex Shultz, January 30, 2025.
- NYSERDA, Blueprint for Consideration of Advanced Nuclear Energy Technologies, January 2025
- LexisNexis, States Take Another Look at Nuclear Power to Combat Climate Change, Dec. 17, 2023.
- Associated Press, Majority of US states pursue nuclear power for emission cuts, by Jennifer McDermott, Jan. 18, 2022.
- Utility Dive, As states increasingly look to advanced nuclear, Wyoming, Virginia and Michigan lead the way, by Brian Martucci, April 17, 2024.
- Stateline, Federal money could supercharge state efforts to preserve nuclear power, by Alex Brown, February 12, 2024.
- Hannah Ritchie, Data Explorer: US State-by-State Electricity Sources, updated in 2025.
- Wisconsin Public Radio, 2 GOP state lawmakers pushing to advance nuclear energy in Wisconsin, by Joe Schultz, Feb. 13, 2025
- Seattle Times, New wave of smaller, cheaper nuclear reactors sends US states racing to attract the industry, by Marc Levy, Mar. 28, 2025
- UtilityDive, As offshore wind struggles, is advanced nuclear a viable Plan B for Eastern states? by Brian Martucci, March 27, 2025
Published by Nucleation Capital in Advanced Nuclear, Air pollution, Climate change, Climate innovation fund, Construction costs, Energy abundance, Energy transition, Fission, Future of Energy, Government support, Land Use by Energy, NEWS
Twelve (Q1-24) – A Berkeley, California-based developer and producer of sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) and naphtha using a “power-to-liquid” approach to reducing carbon by 90%.
Published by Nuclea_Admin in PORTFOLIO
Heirloom Carbon Technologies has opened the first commercial carbon capture plant in the U.S. This key moment presages the start of what is widely expected to be an important new industry whose entire purpose is preventing the carbon emissions released by burning fossil fuels from destroying life on our planet.
Brad Plumer, writing in the New York Times, provides the details of this very small demonstration plant built in Tracy, California. It's an open air structure, with 40-foot racks holding hundreds of trays, each sprinkled with calcium oxide powder that turns into limestone when it binds with airborne carbon dioxide. This is a natural process that Heirloom is working to speed up.
Once the carbon dioxide is "captured" through the creation of the limestone, the company expects to heat up the limestone in a kiln at 1,650 degrees Fahrenheit, which then releases the carbon dioxide, where it then gets pumpted in a storage tank, leaving the calcium oxide to be returned and reused on another set of trays.
The carbon dioxide (called CO2) is expected to be transferred again to be permanently stored. For now, Heirloom is looking at the large concrete marketplace and working with CarbonCure, a company that was launched to mix CO2 into concrete to make concrete stronger by having it turn into limestone again where it will be permanently stored and reduce the carbon footprint of concrete (which ordinarily releases a lot of carbon emissions through its normal creation and use throughout the building industry).
Providing CO2 to CarbonCure has a value for sure but for now, that value is far below the costs of capturing the carbon. Let's look at what these economics are now. The Tracy facility will be able to absorb 1,000 tons of CO2 per year. At the estimated $50/tonne "social cost" of carbon, the Heirloom facility would earn $50,000 per year. Although Heirloom hasn't released info on its specific costs, those funding breakthrough carbon capture activity, such as Frontier (which includes Stripe, Alphabet, Shopify, Meta and McKinsey Sustainability), are typically paying between $500 and $2,500 per ton to accelerate innovation and market development. These high prices are intended to generate sufficient revenue for these early-stage ventures to actually cover their costs. At $1000/ton, Heirloom could earn $1,000,000 per year. However, Plumer estimates that Heirloom's actually costs may be in the range of $600 per ton or higher.
Fortunately for Heirloom and other ventures working in this space, there are a lot of large corporations willing to spend millions to pay for "carbon removal credits" in what has been a voluntary carbon market to effectively be able to claim that they are reducing their carbon footprints. These corporations see reputational benefits from those outlays, even if they do not result in even meaningful actual carbon reductions at this stage. The Biden Administration is also getting into the act and awarded $1.2 billion to help Heirloom
Many people still don't know much about carbon capture and storage, or what has been called "Carbon Capture, Utilization and Sequestration" (CCUS). There are a multitude of approaches being taken to capture carbon and, as a result, a plethora of acronyms have emerged. The approach used by Heirloom is now called Direct Air Capture (DAC) and specifically involve capturing CO2 out of the air but other approaches are simply called Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) and utilize a range of methods to bind that CO2 in a semi-permanent or permanent way, such as through marine-based CDR or natural processes such increasing the CO2 content in soils or accelerating the use of CO2 by plants, such as by growing crops or trees with the intention of having them capture the CO2.
Utilization of CO2 involves finding valuable ways to use that CO2 or just the carbon (C) from captured CO2. Ventures working on the utilization part of this process pose the prospects of having profitable business models. Nucleation Capital, as a climate-focused venture fund, recognizes that CCUS is a growth industry that is anticipated to become a large consumer of energy. We are following the activity in this nascent space and we are investing in some of the most promising approaches, especially where that approach has strong profit and growth prospects or where it intersects with the need for abundant clean energy. While knowing all the acronyms isn't critical, there are a few key things to know about CCUS in general.
Key Facts to Know about CO2 and Carbon Capture, Utilization & Sequestration
- While CO2 itself is natural and not toxic (except in high doses), the enormous amount that we have polluted our atmosphere with by burning fossil fuels for energy is causing our climate to warm up at a very fast rate. We need CCUS in order to lessen and possibly reverse the rate of warming, so we can restore a healthy climate.
- All technological approaches to capturing carbon back out of the air or water are expensive and early stage. So are the approaches to carbon utilization and sequestration (i.e. methods to utilize and/or store the carbon so it doesn't get released back into the atmosphere).
- To stop making our climate crisis worse, we have to stop burning fossil fuels, as our highest priority mitigation effort. While some might think that capturing the carbon emitted from burning fossil fuels right at the point source may warrant continuing to burn fossil fuels, that will not enable us to use carbon capture to restore the damage already done, which is the primary rationale for CCUS.
- Even if we stopped burning fossil fuels today, the amount of damage the long-lived CO2 pollution is causing the world will continue to heat the planet for decades or centuries. The only way to prevent that is by removing this excess CO2 pollution.
- Today, there are only a handful of dedicated carbon capture plants in existence globally but, to prevent serious damage to earth ecosystems, we will need to scale up these plants in record time to be able to reverse most of the emissions produced by the fossil fuel industry in its entire history. We will also need to scale utilization and sequestration capabilities.
- The cost of cleaning up all of the emissions caused by our past use of fossil fuels will be enormous and we haven't come to any agreement as to who bears that burden. Some of that cost can be mitigated with valuable commercial utilization technologies.
- Powering CCUS plants will require massive amounts of low-carbon clean energy because it makes no sense to emit carbon in the process of capturing carbon. The best and least-cost approach will likely involve using the coming generation of small modular reactors to generate 24x7 power in remote areas.
- The cost of clean energy used to capture and sequester carbon will be a significant factor in the total cost of that activity but powering CCUS can help SMRs scale up, which will help reduce the manufacturing costs.
- There is no scenario in which the cost of burning fossil fuels and capturing all the CO2 from that activity and permanently storing it will cost less than replacing the fossil fuels with renewables or nuclear and avoiding the release of new emissions in the first place.
- Fossil fuel companies are already lobbying to earn carbon credits by pairing carbon capture with the extraction and burning of fossil fuels. This is why some environmentalists, like Al Gore, oppose providing funding for CCUS to oil and gas companies, even though the most cost-effective CO2 capture is done at or close to the fossil fuel smokestack source point.
Read more in the New York Times, "In a U.S. First, a Commercial Plant Starts Pulling Carbon From the Air," by Brad Plumer, November 9, 2023.
Learn more about Frontier a consortium that is providing advance market commitments (AMC) that aim to accelerate the development of carbon removal technologies, without picking winning technologies at the start of the innovation cycle. The goal is to send a strong demand signal to researchers, entrepreneurs, and investors that there is a growing market for these technologies.
The 2021 Bipartisan Infrastructure Law included $3.5 billion to fund the construction of four commercial-scale direct air capture plants. In August, the Biden Adminstration announced $1.2 billion in awards for the first two, one to be built by Battelle in Louisiana and the other to be built by Occidental Petroleum, in Texas, through a 50-50 cost share.
Published by Nucleation Capital in Advanced Nuclear, Carbon emissions, Carbon markets, Carbon negative, Climate change, Climate policy, Construction costs, Government support, History Timeline, History-making, Investor activity, LINKS, Private companies, Solving climate, US competitiveness, US technological leadership
Valerie Gardner, founder and managing partner of Nucleation Capital, and Dr. Rachel Slaybaugh, a partner at DCVC, presented remarks on the topic of "Procuring Investments for Commercialization" in the concluding session of ARPA-E's Fission Summit covering Technology to Market, held in Hollywood, California, April 18-20, 2023.
This was the 2023 Annual Fission Program Review Meeting being held as a showcase of all of the groups funded by ARPA-E for cutting edge research and development of new fission technologies and materials.
Day 1 of the program covered the CURIE and OnWARDS Programs provided an opportunity for the grantees to do project "lightening talks," and covered topics including NRC Engagement, Technology-to-Market preparedness, Industry Perspectives on Reprocessing and Legal Considerations. There were also presentations from TerraPower, GE Global Research, the IDNL, Deep Isolation, Brigham Young University and Citrine Informatics.
Day 2 of the program covered Processing Technologies, Advanced Reactor Waste Disposal, Materials, Microreactors and Enabling Technologies. In addition to remarks from Jon Carmack, Danny Cunningham,, Jenifer Shafer adn Bob Ledoux, there were a range of panels that included speakers from Dow Chemical, EPRI, Southern Company and Westinghouse. The CURIE, ONWARDS, GEMINA, MEITNER AND OPEN Program grantees also gave more lightening talks.
On the third and final day of the event, the discussion shifted to commercialization and raising capital. After Danny Cunningham of ARPA-E gave a quick overview of "How to Commercialize an Idea, John Bistline of EPRI covered a view of the Energy Market in Transition. Following this, Valerie and Rachel discussed how ventures procure investments from venture capital. They presented an overview of how venture capital works and the range of financing prospects that young companies could expect. In a final hat tip to innovation, Valerie described how innovation in the finance and venture fields was enabling a range of non-traditional funds to enter the market with missions to fund high-risk innovation technologies such as advanced nuclear. To view Valerie's slides for the presentation, click the image below.
Learn more about ARPA-E's Funding Programs, please see this link.
Published by Valerie Gardner in Advanced Nuclear, Brilliant thinkers, Climate policy, Energy abundance, Future of Energy, Government support, History Timeline, History-making, Investor activity, NEWS, Nuclear competitiveness, Nuclear financing, Nuclear innovation, Nucleation communications, Politicians supporting nuclear, Pro-nuclear campaign, Solving climate, US technological leadership, Zero emission energy
On Dec. 5, a team at Lawrence Livermore National Lab’s (LLNL) National Ignition Facility (NIF) conducted the first controlled fusion experiment in history to reach fusion "ignition," which is believed to be a breakthrough milestone, where the fusion reaction begins to produce more energy from fusion than the energy applied to drive it.
Scientists studying fusion energy at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) in California determined via calculations that they had crossed a long-awaited threshold in reproducing the power of the sun in a laboratory. It took a few days for them to do their analysis of the energy product but by Sunday, Dec. 11th, word had begun to leak out. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) , having provided the primary funding for this work, took the lead in taking credit for the achievement and scheduled a press announcement for Tuesday, Dec. 13th. Meanwhile, various results were reported in the press, some claiming 120% gain, some going as high as 150% gain. While the exact number is not that critical, what is important is that these scientists and experts believe that there was a notable achievement in the operation of the plasma ignition that took place, even though it lasted for all of a fraction of a second.
“This is a landmark achievement for the researchers and staff at the National Ignition Facility who have dedicated their careers to seeing fusion ignition become a reality, and this milestone will undoubtedly spark even more discovery,” said U.S. Secretary of Energy Jennifer M. Granholm. “The Biden-Harris Administration is committed to supporting our world-class scientists — like the team at NIF — whose work will help us solve humanity’s most complex and pressing problems, like providing clean power to combat climate change and maintaining a nuclear deterrent without nuclear testing.”
LLNL’s experiment surpassed the fusion threshold by delivering 2.05 megajoules (MJ) of laser energy to the target, resulting in 3.15 MJ of fusion energy output, demonstrating for the first time a most fundamental science basis for inertial fusion energy (IFE). Many advanced science and technology developments are still needed to achieve simple, affordable IFE to power homes and businesses, and DOE is currently restarting a broad-based, coordinated IFE program in the United States. Combined with private-sector investment, there is a lot of momentum to drive rapid progress toward fusion commercialization.
Led by physicist John Nuckolls, who later served as LLNL director from 1988 to 1994, this revolutionary idea became inertial confinement fusion, kicking off more than 60 years of research and development in lasers, optics, diagnostics, target fabrication, computer modeling and simulation and experimental design.
To pursue this concept, LLNL built a series of increasingly powerful laser systems, leading to the creation of NIF, the world’s largest and most energetic laser system. NIF — located at LLNL in Livermore, California — is the size of a sports stadium and uses powerful laser beams to create temperatures and pressures like those in the cores of stars and giant planets, and inside exploding nuclear weapons.
[Note: Nucleation Capital has invested in Focused Energy, a private venture which has chosen to develop fusion by following the same Inertial Fusion Energy approach as that used by LLNL. Focused was founded by scientists who had worked at LLNL and who have spent their careers studying both fusion and lasers. Focused Energy has based their ability to deliver fusion upon their expertise in developing the next generation of high-powered laser and the next generation of fuel target, taking what LLNL has done forward with proprietary technology.]
Read more at Lawrence Livermore National Lab: National Ignition Facility achieves fusion ignition, published December 13, 2022; The New York Times, Scientists Achieve Nuclear Fusion Breakthrough With Blast of 192 Lasers, by Kenneth Chang, December 13, 2022; and the Financial Times, Fusion energy breakthrough by US scientists boosts clean power hopes, by Tom Wilson, December 13, 2022. Also see the statement from TAE, a fusion competitor, TAE Technologies’ statement on US nuclear fusion advancement.
Published by Nucleation Capital in Advanced Nuclear, Brilliant thinkers, Energy abundance, Future of Energy, History Timeline, History-making, Investor activity, LINKS, Nuclear competitiveness, Nuclear innovation, Nuclear R&D, Politicians supporting nuclear, Private companies, Solving climate, US technological leadership, Zero emission energy
California's legislature, by nearly unanimous votes in both the Assembly and the Senate, agreed with Governor Gavin Newsom, to extend the operating life of Diablo Canyon. This was the result of multiple converging factors, the most important of which was that the closure would have worsened the already fragile state of the California energy grid, maing black-outs far more likely. But, behind this looming awareness were many other factors influencing public opinion and political pressure, which include pronuclear advocacy, scientific concerns about climate change, shifting political winds in the face of Russia's invastion of Ukraine and leadership from the Biden Administration. There will be many efforts to understand what tipped the political weights in favor of saving Diablo Canyon, and not all will be correct, but the good news for is that rationality prevailed in California, despite concerted anti-nuclear pressures.
Climate change and Russia's invasion of the Ukraine are looming backdrops to this stunning victory. Yet, most directly, the basis of the success comes down to the fact that Governor Newsom himself became convinced that delaying the closure of Diablo Canyon was both the right thing to do and was politically feasible. It isn't clear exactly how he arrived at this conclusion but it is certain that his political weight made it happen. What caused the politics to shift? Possibly, Newsom found sufficient political cover and acceptable polling data from the fact that Illinois Governor Pritzker and Michigan Governor Whitmer, both Democrats, took action to protect their nuclear power.
Nevertheless, coming out in favor of extending the life of Diablo Canyon, was enormously risky and difficult for Governor Newsom, as it involved making a 180 degree shift from his prior position of working to ensure that Diablo got closed. Yet, with state policy experts warning that the closure would cause blackouts and likely deaths as a result, Governor Newsom bit the bullet and did the right thing.
There were a multitude of pronuclear individuals and groups providing support and political cover for this decision. As far back as 2015, Michael Shellenberger and his organizations, The Breakthrough Institute and Environmental Progress, argued on behalf of nuclear power. Shellenberger split out of TBI, a think tank, in order to engage in more active pronuclear advocacy. He and a group of younger activists organized and held the first pronuclear rally, a three day protest and parade against the closure of Diablo Canyon. From there, numerous groups were formed which contributed advocacy towards the support of nuclear power: Californians for Green Nuclear Power, Generation Atomic, Mothers for Nuclear, Climate Coalition, Rethink Nuclear, Nuclear New York, Protect Nuclear NOW and many others.
Meanwhile, filmmakers Robert Stone and Dave Schumacher produced luscious documentaries that challenged the status quo attitudes about nuclear power. Their films, Pandora's Promise and The New Fire respectively brought new insights into our understanding of both the facts about nuclear power and the reality about the concerted and often nefarious efforts to besmirch nuclear's reputation. These films had surprising reach and helped soften widespread knee-jerk antinuclear reactions. Then, the academics from Stanford and MIT played their parts and issued a report providing evidence that closing Diablo Canyon would cost the state $21 billion.
While, no single person or group can take sole credit for this victory, there was little discernable action until the joining of Isabelle Boemeke to the campaign. Representing the younger generation and signing up to support Diablo Canyon as the first "nuclear influencer," Isabelle served as the spark to ignite public attention to the support that Diablo Canyon had as our largest source of clean energy, and helped turn the tide in favor of saving it. Under the handle "Isodope," she adroitly leverage social media tech platforms, including Instagram, TicTok and Twitter, to send highly stylized, informative and compellingly snarky videos to a broad spectrum of followers. She also acted on the momentum garnered by the Stanford/MIT report to organize an in-person rally in San Luis Obispo, complete with support from local politicians and residents. That turned to be very successful and she then parlayed that success to corral scientific experts to weigh in with a direct letter appeal to Governor Newsom.
Finally, with the introduction of the Biden Administration's Civil Nuclear Credit program and its offer of up to $6 billion in support of saving aging plants, Governor Newsom could no longer afford to ignore the reality that saving Diablo Canyon could help him avoid energy embarrassment and liability from the rash of civil lawsuits that would have followed black-out related deaths.
There are now many articles coming out with their assessments of the factors that enabled this success. None capture the whole picture, which spans much more engagement, work and adroit advocacy in California, across the US and even internationally, that contributed to making ignoring reality of nuclear impossible for Gov. Newsom.
Read the Forbes article, In Big Win For Nuclear, California Legislators Vote To Save Diablo Canyon, by Robert Bryce, September 1, 2022 here. There are many other articles reporting on this significant achievement but we can't list them all here.
Published by Nucleation Capital in 100% Renewables, Anti-nuclear campaign, Carbon emissions, Climate change, Climate mayhem, Environmental support for nuclear, Government support, History Timeline, History-making, LINKS, Nuclear-inclusive energy policy, Politicians supporting nuclear, Pro-nuclear campaign, Solving climate, Zero emission energy
Governor Gavin Newsom, a consumate politician, finally is willing to declare his support for Diablo Canyon, something he has long refused to do. As the L.A. Times reports in an article titled California promised to close its last nuclear plant. Now Newsom is reconsidering, Newsom has chosen to come out publicly with support for saving Diablo Canyon. It is doubtful that Newsom has suddenly "seen the light" about nuclear. More likely, he's seen recent polling showing that a majority of Democrats and Republican understand the importance of nuclear power for addressing the goal of reliable clean energy in the absence of fossil fuels.
It appears that Governor Newsom is now working to delay the closure of Diablo Canyon. While this will disappoint his fossil fuel donors and those touting renewables (which is a majority of environmental organizations of all stripes), it is definitely the right thing to do.
There are numerous reasons for Newsom having finally found the political will to disrupt what many in California consider a settled matter. As the article mentions, the reality is that shutting Diablo would cause the forthcoming energy shortages that are already projected to be far worse. Back in August 2020, hundreds of thousands of homes and businesses lost power during some of the hotest and smokiest days of the year, and the state narrowly avoided even worse blackouts a few weeks later. Now CALISO is projecting increased grid fragility going forward, even without shuttering Diablo Canyon, given increasing heat waves, more aggressive forest fires and reduced hydropower supply, as a result of California's extended drought.
Additionally, the DOE recently announced their Civil Nuclear Credit program and are now dangling some $6 billion that is earmarked for at-risk nuclear power plants. Gavin recognizes that such funds could help underwrite some face-saving upgrades to the plant, possibly even to the once-through-cooling (OTC) system, the imposed costs of which by the State Water Resources Board were ostensibly the basis for PG&E finally giving up on their plan to re-license the plant.
Then there the small matter of the upcoming election and a Democratic primary where the leading contenders for Gavin's place on the ticket were nearly all expressing strong pronuclear positions and calling Gavin out for his apparent retrograde or donor-induced political ignorance of climate science.
Needless to say, that the joint Stanford/MIT report providing evidence that closing Diablo Canyon would cost the state $21 billion, which was followed by a pronuclear rally in San Luis Obispo, itself followed by the very public letter from 79 high-level scientists, academics and business leader urging Governor Newsom to protect this existing (and paid for) asset, was a triple punch that probably alarmed everyone that he was being seen as being on the wrong side of science.
While the article suggests that Newsom is simply in process of "reconsidering," in fact the word on the street is that a deal has been done to preserve Diablo Canyon, although what that is remains unknown, as no information has yet been officially issued. Needless to say, these are very encouraging signs. Nucleation Capital supports protecting Diablo Canyon, Michigan's Palisades plant and other at-risk plants.
Read the L.A. Times article, California promised to close its last nuclear plant. Now Newsom is reconsidering, by Sammy Roth, April 29, 2022 here. To learn more about what you can do to support Diablo Canyon, see the Save Diablo Canyon campaign at Climate Coalition.
Published by Grant Mills in Carbon emissions, Climate change, Energy abundance, Future of Energy, Government support, History-making, LINKS, Nuclear competitiveness, Nuclear-inclusive energy policy, Politicians supporting nuclear, Reduced ecosystem impacts, Regulatory reform, Scientific debate, Solving climate, US technological leadership, Zero emission energy
Sign up to receive Nucleation Insights
For Current Investors
(Note: Must be logged in at AngelList)
Nucleation Direct Messages
Nucleation (Fund I) Posts
Your Portfolio Dashboard
Your Funding Page
How to Contact Us
© 2025 Nucleation Capital | Terms & Policies
