August 10, 2026

A novel (and increasingly imminent) solution to nuclear waste

When Nucleation's portfolio company, Deep Isolation, choose in early 2025 to access the public markets to complete a reverse merger into a shell company and simultaneously raise approximately $30 million—their last tranche of capital—they did so with one big goal in mind: funding the costs to complete their full-scale test of their deep borehole nuclear waste solution.

Deep Isolation had been, by that point, developing this concept and testing aspects of their design for a full decade, having been founded in Berkeley, California in 2016 by the UC Berkeley physicist and MacArthur Genius Award-winner, Prof. Richard Muller, and his daughter, Elizabeth Muller, in an effort to provide a cheaper, easier and yet potentially permanent alternative solution for disposing and/or storing nuclear waste.

The only other waste solutions that have been developed and used for nuclear waste (post-cooling tank) include ground-level storage in dry cask containers in protected areas on the grounds of nuclear power plants (seen as temporary, not completely satisfactory but largely cost-effective), and below-ground mined repositories that are virtually impossible to site (think Yucca Mountain), are quite expensive, difficult and time-consuming to build and which would require being fully staffed and powered forever (needing electrical power for heat, lights, air circulation and ventilation, among other services, and requiring regulators to perform routine checks and security teams to provide protection around the clock, at enormous expense).

In contrast, the Deep Isolation solution leverages highly mature, deep-borehole drilling technology developed for the oil and gas extraction industry (which has now drilled hundreds of thousands of extractions boreholes) but modified so as to enable sealed stainless steel canisters of waste to be lowered into deep, horizontally-drilled boreholes and either termporarily or permanently sealed up, thereby minimizing ongoing costs.

It is an elegant and highly viable solution because the drilling technology exists to emplace those boreholes in layers of the earth's strata a mile or two underground that are highly stable. Deep Isolation has, in the interim ten years, been amassing patents and now has a portfolio of more than 100 patents protecting this waste storage solution. They have been working to educate potential customers about their solution, earning bits of revenue by developing feasibility studies with EPRI for the U.S. and European countries like the UK, Estonia, Solvenia and, through ERDO, Croatia, Denmark, the Netherlands and Norway. And, importantly, they have developed technology and provider partnerships with groups like Halliburton, Bechtel, Amentuk, NAK, Occlusion Nuclear Solutions and Westinghouse. These partners would do the hard work of the drilling, casing and emplacement—which they already know how to do—and Deep Isolation would continue to make sales and earn a premium as the technology developer and owner of the proprietary aspects of their solution. It's a highly workable solution.

Now that Deep Isolation is a publicly listed company (OTCQB: DBHL), there has been growing press coverage of their activities. We expect that, as word gets out, more investors and analysts will come to recognize that Deep Isolation has a very unique opportunity here to help address the nuclear waste issue. Furthermore, assuming their full-scale testing process is successful, there could be a sharp increase in revenues as orders are placed, which for this still small but highly innovative company, means that nearly all of their growth is ahead of them.

Fortune recently published an article by Jordan Blum, titled This nuclear startup and Halliburton repurposed oil-drilling tech in a bid to solve America's radioactive waste problem.  This title may give Halliburton too much credit but, thanks to its successful reverse merger financing, the company has the requisite capital to pay Halliburton to actually drill a new well at the larger diameter specified by the Deep Isolation design and deploy a full-scale test using the universal canister developed with the help of the U.K. government. Proving that they can actually store waste deep underground is the last hurdle anticipated to be covered before quite a few prospective customers could begin to place orders, according to company officials and others.

The Mullers moved on in 2024, having taken the company as far as they could, but Deep Isolation is now led by Rod Baltzer, the CEO since 2024 and the former COO, who is an experienced oil and gas executive. There could well be a little bit of trial and error completing this first true test of the technology, which must be drilled at about triple the standard fracking well size, yet those in the industry with expertise see no major barriers that would prevent their success, and Mr. Baltzer is up for the challenge.  Meanwhile, the real work is now happening at a time of intense and growing interest in deploying additional nuclear power as a solution to energy security, energy growth and concerns about carbon emissions and climate change, and the emergence of an easier, potentially cheaper and more flexible waste storage option can make those deployment decisions easier.

We are thrilled that Deep Isolation is finally going to be able to showcase a true demonstration of their solution and transition from a trickle of revenue—largely from feasibility studies and government grants—to actual orders in the hundreds of millions for their solution to be implemented both in Europe and in the U.S., where progress is being made in solving the nuclear waste storage impasse. The Trump Administration has already made noises about passing legislation that would enable each state to determine if they would like to host a waste storage facility. We think, placing nuclear waste deep underground in safe but cost-effective boreholes could be one of the most important technological steps forward that helps expand support for nuclear power while preserving our ability access to that used fuel material when we have better waste reprocessing capabilities.

July 13, 2026

Deep Isolation: Now publicly trading and preparing to solve nuclear’s last mile

Nucleation's portfolio company, Deep Isolation, is now a public trading entity, listed on the OTCQB Venture Market as DBHL. We are pleased to have recently announced the registration and listing to our LPs.

Now, the company, led by CEO Rod Baltzer, is focusing its full attention on completing its full-scale demonstration of its technology in Texas. Deep Isolation signed a amaster services agreement with Halliburton, through which Halliburton is providing drilling, well construction and subsurface engineering services for Deep Isolation’s first full-scale demonstration project. Other partners in the project include Westinghouse, NAC International, Occlusion Nuclear Solutions and Amentum.

While few investors are familiar with Deep Isolation Nuclear, as it is now called, Washington Post Intelligence reporter, Kathryn Clay, spoke with Deep Isolation CEO Rod Baltzer about the company’s technology, its recent Department of Energy support, the economics of deep borehole disposal and why he believes advances in drilling technology could reshape the decades-long debate over nuclear waste management. We think you'll find this interview compelling.

Read the WP Intelligence interview here:  https://wpintelligence.washingtonpost.com/topics/energy-climate/2026/07/13/solving-nuclears-last-mile/

May 14, 2026

Deep Isolation’s S-1 approved by SEC, preparing to trade

Nucleation portfolio company, Deep Isolation Nuclear, announced the registration of its S-1 by SEC as of May 8th, which will finally allow the company's shares to commence trading.

This news was shared by the company along with a number of other updates during what became the company's first investor call as a public company on May 14, 2026.

We are pleased to share that, after an extended delay, the SEC has finally declared Deep Isolation's registration statement effective, which allows the company to achieve initial liquidity. The company is now working with the OTC Markets Group to arrange for the company's common stock to be traded on the OTCQB (Quebec) exchange. We will be sending out a notification regarding this liquidity event to appropriate LPs in the coming days.

Among the highlights shared by the company for the first quarter of 2026 were:

  • The launch of the company's non-radiactive, full-scale, at depth demonstration project at the Halliburton Drilling Technology facility near Cameron, Texas.
  • Selection into ARPA-e’s SCALEUP Ready program, providing up to $20 million to accelerate market adoption of Deep Isolation’s deep borehole waste disposal technology and the first time a company in the nuclear industry has been selected to participate.
  • The appointments of a General Counsel, a Chief Financial Officer, a new Board Director and new Advisor.
  • Revenue of $1.4 million, a net loss of $5.4 million for the quarter, with 3/31/26 cash remaining of $22 million.

Please read more at the company's press release "Deep Isolation Nuclear, Inc. Reports Operational and Financial Results for the first quarter of 2026."

March 26, 2026

NRC Unveils Final Part 53

At long last, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has finalized its new regulatory framework for advanced reactors that are designed to  accelerate regulatory reviews by simplifying and tailoring the review and safety burdens to the specific types of reactor being reviewed, which is why the regulation is titled “Risk-Informed, Technology-Inclusive Regulatory Framework for Advanced Reactors.”

The Nuclear Energy Innovation and Modernization Act (NEIMA), signed in 2019 formally directed the NRC to develop the new, technology-inclusive regulatory approach, since prior to this time, only light water reactors have been licensed by the NRC. The resulting rule—10 CFR Part 53—brings an updated, modernized approach to regulatory and, hence, safety reviews for next generation reactors and industry participants.

Newly appointed NRC Chairman, Ho Nieh, said “This is really a historic milestone. With the addition of Part 53 to Part 50 and 52—and I believe some of you know that we’re working on a microreactor licensing framework—America now has many options available to applicants and licensees that want to pursue the development and deployment of new nuclear technologies.” This final rule from the NRC action is intended to provide a clear risk-informed, technology-inclusive licensing framework that enables advanced nuclear designs to move from concept to construction more rapidly and safely.

Part 53’s shift from a technology-specific to a technology-neutral approach to reactor licensing is intended to address a long-standing issue in regulatory frameworks that were developed specifically for light water reactor technology. Licensing reactors that do not use LWR technology has required applicants to seeking regulatory exemptions to many burdensome prescriptive requirements, leading to a cumbersome licensing process.

“Part 53 offers a comprehensive new approach to license advanced reactors, including non-light-water reactors, across their life cycles,” according to the NRC release. “It provides designers and operators with more flexibility in how they build and run their plants while continuing to ensure safety.”

This week’s announcement comes more than a year after the NRC first published their Part 53 proposed rule, which was widely viewed as not being the solution the industry was looking for. Some 158 public comments were accepted including from Westinghouse, The Breakthrough Institute, the Nuclear Energy Institute, the Idaho National Laboratory and many others. Apparently, the newly revised rule incorporated many of the changes requested by commenters and eliminated sections of the rule that some parties deemed unusable.  Nieh said the final version of Part 53 addresses many of the complaints and comments he and the NRC heard regarding earlier versions of the rule. “I do believe this framework does provide the appropriate flexibility and risk-informed approaches that will make it a usable tool among the other options that are already available,” said Nieh.

According to Acting Deputy Office Director for New Reactors Jeremy Bowen,  Part 53 could enable reactor designs to receive approval in 18 months or less. The cost of the application could be reduced by half or more, given the shorter review and the added flexibility of Part 53. A 2023 analyses of the earlier draft regulation estimated the net averted costs to the industry and the agency for just one applicant could range from $53.6 million to $68.2 million, which may be bigger under the updated final rule.

History: Part 53 is the first new reactor licensing framework issued by the NRC since 1989, when the agency introduced Part 52. NRC officials added that it is the first major update to reactor licensing standards since 1956, when the Atomic Energy Commission (the NRC’s predecessor) issued Part 50. The final rule’s has been long awaited by the industry but, even with the five year time frame that it took, was issued ahead of the 2027 deadline ordered by NEIMA. Today's rules will hopefully update rules that were put in place many, many decades ago that were being used to license the first wave of nuclear reactors built in the United States in the ’60s and ’70s. Said Ho, "We did not know as much about the technology [then] that we know today, where we [did] not have the sophistication and analytical tools to evaluate safety cases that we have today. . . . To me, I see this as removing the friction in legacy frameworks that are no longer needed today.”

According to the NRC website, the Part 53 final rule will be published on April 3, and the rule will go into effect 30 days after it appears in the Federal Register. As part of the posting, the NRC will publish nine additional guidance documents, with additional guidance to follow.

References

ANS, NRC unveils Part 53 Final Rule, March 26, 2026

February 2, 2026

Deep Isolation Launches Borehole Disposal Demonstration Program ()

Portfolio company, Deep Isolation, launches its Full-Scale, At-Depth Demonstration Program to advance its deep borehole nuclear waste disposal technology and generate operational data to support regulatory confidence, following the completion Project UPWARDS announced in December last year.

January 9, 2026

Illinois Officially Lifts Moratorium on New Nuclear Reactors ()

Illinois has lifted its decades-old ban on new large nuclear reactors through the Clean and Reliable Grid Affordability Act, opening the door to new nuclear investment as part of a broader clean energy and grid affordability package...

December 17, 2025

NRC Grants Subsequent License Renewals for Browns Ferry Reactors ()

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has approved 20-year subsequent license renewals for all three reactors at the Browns Ferry nuclear power plant, extending authorized operations into the mid-2050s...

September 15, 2021

Woke Nuclear


Author Maureen T. Koetz explores nuclear's history and how air emission credits were the economic birthright of the nuclear industry since the passage of the 1990 Clean Air Act (CAA) amendments, when emission control capability first became a tradable commodity. Yet it took until 2016 for ratepayers and shareholders to receive even a small fraction of this valuable return on investment.

Nuclear’s emission control value actually more accurately dates to 1957, when the first civilian production plant came on line, and this past exclusion of nuclear from credit markets has mislead decision makers for decades. Factoring nuclear out of emission credit markets over the last three decades has proved costly for the entire fission industry. As a policy director at the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), I first developed emission avoidance calculations in 1997; the new data sets confirmed nuclear’s role in eliminating both criteria pollutants under the CAA and greenhouse gases then the subject of planned international controls under the Kyoto Protocol. The calculations also identified what were then hundreds of millions of dollars in emission credit value that had never been booked or realized by plant owners and operators on behalf of shareholders. Twenty years on, the forgone return on investment value has only multiplied.

According to NEI, a 16.4 percent increase in nuclear generation from 1990 to 1995 in 21 states avoided 480,000 tons of sulfur dioxide, or 37 percent of the 1990 CAA amendments reduction requirement. Noting that “no credit was allocated to nuclear plants,” NEI estimated the “contribution” to emission control would have been worth about $50 million, but that’s really only a fraction of the cumulative value. Actual emission credit value accruing to shareholders and ratepayers since the 1960s spans multiple emission categories and regions. Besides historic sulfur prevention, the avoided emission value of nitrogen oxide and particulate matter in heavily controlled areas like California and the Ozone Transport Region are more likely billions even before greenhouse gases are included.

While recent state-by-state ZEC programs are positive steps, they have yet to equalize the value of a proverbial ounce of greenhouse gas prevention with pounds of sequester cure provided to fossil fuel technology. New York’s early adoption of ZECs uses complex formulas based the social costs of carbon that price credits at $17 per megawatt hour at four upstate nuclear units. The overall estimate of $480 million per year in ZEC payments to the James A. Fitzpatrick, R.E. Ginna, and Nine Mile Point Units 1 and 2 plants that annually avoid 15 million tons of greenhouse gases yields $31 per ton controlled under a straight credit pricing basis.

Read more about this fascinating history at NuclearNewswire Woke nuclear?, by Maureen T. Koetz, published September 15, 2021.

© 2026 Nucleation Capital | Terms & Policies

linkedin, for social media footer
X-logo, for social media footer
Nucleation transparent