July 16, 2025: The Water Cost of Electricity on the Susquehanna River

May 15, 2025: Data Centers and Nuclear Power on the Susquehanna River: More Questions than Answers

Sep 29, 2024: The case against restarting Three Mile Island’s Unit-1


Radioactive: The Women of Three Mile Island

Did you catch "The Meltdown: Three Mile Island" on Netflix?
TMI remains a danger and TMIA is working hard to ensure the safety of our communities and the surrounding areas.
Learn more on this site and support our efforts. Join TMIA. To contact the TMIA office, call 717-233-7897.

    

The Frothiest AI Bubble Is in Energy Stocks

Story by Jinjoo Lee  • 3 min read

 


Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI, has backed zero-revenue energy company Oklo.© Kyle Grillot/Bloomberg

Forget about the froth in tech valuations. The real excess might be building up in energy stocks.

For all the fears about stretched technology shares, many of those companies are hugely profitable ones that will keep chugging along even if the artificial-intelligence boom doesn’t have legs. Not so in the energy sector. A group of non-revenue-generating energy companies have collectively ballooned in value to more than $45 billion in hopes that tech companies will one day pay for their yet-to-be-built power.

The biggest of these is the OpenAI CEO Sam Altman-backed nuclear startup Oklo, whose shares have risen about eightfold year to date. The company now has a market cap of roughly $26 billion, making it the biggest U.S.-incorporated public company that generated no revenue in the past 12 months, according to data from S&P Global Market Intelligence.

Oklo is developing small modular nuclear reactors that use a non-water coolant—liquid metal sodium—and an enriched type of uranium fuel that is in limited supply. It doesn’t yet have a license from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission or binding contracts with power purchasers. Wall Street analysts don’t expect the company to generate substantial revenue until 2028.

Another zero-revenue company is Fermi, which was valued at roughly $19 billion upon its public debut earlier this month. Only two other no-revenue companies had larger market caps than Fermi on their first day of trading after an IPO, adjusted for inflation, according to Jay Ritter, finance professor at the University of Florida. These are EV-maker Rivian, which went public in 2021, and Corvis, an optical network equipment maker that went public during the dot-com bubble.

The company is backed by former energy secretary Rick Perry and helmed by Toby Neugebauer, the former chief executive of the failed anti-woke bank startup GloriFi. It has plans to build out 11 gigawatts worth of power for data centers, roughly the amount of capacity in New Mexico. Though its shares haven’t sustained their initial pop after listing, the company still commands a market capitalization of over $17 billion. That isn’t too far from the valuation of Talen Energy, a company that already owns an operating power fleet of about 11GW.

Fermi plans to meet that 11GW target using natural gas, nuclear, solar and battery power. It has a way to go: So far, it has secured natural-gas equipment that would cover just 5% of its total capacity goal. The company hasn’t lined up any binding customer contracts.

Companies developing even smaller “micro-modular” nuclear reactors are also commanding hefty market caps despite their lack of revenue. Shares of Nano Nuclear Energy, which made its debut on the public markets last year, have more than doubled so far this year. The company is valued at more than $2 billion. Terra Innovatum, which went public last week through a SPAC merger, is valued at over $1 billion.

Chain Reaction

Others swept up in the AI excitement generate revenue but aren’t expected to turn a profit for many years. Such companies include nuclear small modular reactors company NuScale Power, which earns some engineering and licensing fees for an SMR project in Romania. Its shares have surged 155% so far this year. Hydrogen fuel-cell company Plug Power’s shares, which had been in the gutter for many years, surged 90% this year to $4.8 billion on AI excitement. Neither company is expected to turn a profit until 2030, according to Wall Street analysts polled by FactSet.

One reason investors are piling into more speculative energy companies could be because profit-generating ones already command lofty multiples. Fuel-cell company Bloom Energy’s shares have rallied more than 400% year to date and are now valued at 133 times forward earnings. The company added about $5.4 billion in market cap on Monday after Brookfield Asset Management said it would invest up to $5 billion to deploy Bloom’s technology. Nuclear-fuel company Centrus Energy is valued at 99 times forward earnings.

Arguably, more commercial interest might be just what was needed to help expensive or unproven technologies take off. But based on the track record of zero or minimal revenue EV startups that went public in 2020, (remember Nikola, Fisker and Lordstown?), it is likely that many such companies will fizzle rather than pop.

If the AI bubble ever deflates, these energy companies with no revenue have the farthest to fall and little in the way of a cushion.

Why big tech's nuclear plans could blow up

(Image credit: Jeff Fusco/ Getty Images)

The Three Mile Island Nuclear Plant in Middletown, Pennsylvania, in 2011 with the still-operating reactor in the foreground (Credit: Jeff Fusco/Getty Images)

By Mike Wendling15th October 2025
 
Eager to find new energy sources to power artificial intelligence, big tech companies are betting on nuclear – even though there are still huge questions over public perception, cost and, perhaps most importantly, the time it will take for a potential new nuclear technology to become viable.
 

For many Americans, dropping "Three Mile Island" into conversation is like mentioning "Fukushima" or "Chernobyl" – places that have become synonymous with nuclear disaster, no explanation needed.

The actual history is more complicated.

In March 1979, one of two reactors at the Three Mile Island plant in central Pennsylvania partially melted down, in what is to this day the most serious nuclear accident in US history.

But it resulted in just a small fraction of the damage caused by those disasters in Japan and the Soviet Union. There were no fatalities and few if any long-term health effects (scientific studies have drawn slightly different conclusions on that point).

The whole thing would likely have been a much smaller news story had it not been for a film released only a few days before.

The China Syndrome was a thriller starring Jane Fonda as an intrepid reporter investigating safety problems at a nuclear plant. It was a work of fiction, not a documentary, but the parallels with Three Mile Island damaged the reputation of US nuclear power for years.

The plant was recently in the news again – not for an accident or a hit movie, but by a deal signed by tech giant Microsoft to buy energy from Three Mile Island’s remaining functioning reactor.

And it's just part of a larger trend. Silicon Valley is on the hunt for new sources of power to drive enormous data centres and in particular, the high-power chips that have become the backbone of the artificial intelligence (AI) industry.

Nuclear could help meet that challenge in two respects – it's a potential source of "always on" energy, and unlike fossil fuels, it's carbon-free.

Big tech is making a big bet on nuclear – Microsoft has even recently joined the industry's lobbying group, the World Nuclear Association.

China has one operational small reactor. Others including Linglong are planned or under construction (Credit: Luo Yunfei/ China News Service/ VCG via Getty Images)

China has one operational small reactor. Others including Linglong are planned or under construction (Credit: Luo Yunfei/ China News Service/ VCG via Getty Images)

The maker of the Xbox is not alone. Google, Amazon and others are also funding nuclear projects, albeit taking a different tack with a newer technology known as small modular reactors (SMRs).

SMRs run at cooler temperatures, theoretically reducing the risk of a meltdown, and their smaller size also means lower construction costs.

Two such small reactors already provide a relatively small amount of power to electricity grids, one each in China and Russia's far east. So in some respects, SMRs sound like the perfect solution to the growing energy AI demand – if only it were that simple.

"Most SMRs are on paper" and haven't progressed beyond the testing stage, says Allison Macfarlane, the former chair of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission and now a professor at the University of British Columbia in Canada.

Commercialising the technology will be difficult, Macfarlane says, because a smaller reactor core also means a less efficient reactor – producing less energy from the same amount of fuel. She estimates SMRs are years away from being financially viable.

"You just can’t get around economies of scale," she says. "These are fun ideas. But the tech bros don’t seem to be grounded in reality."

Undaunted, energy companies and tech giants are ploughing resources into research and pilots.

A tourist postcard celebrates the long history of the nuclear industry in Oak Ridge, Tennessee (Credit: Jim Heimann Collection/ Getty Images)

A tourist postcard celebrates the long history of the nuclear industry in Oak Ridge, Tennessee (Credit: Jim Heimann Collection/ Getty Images)

Kairos Power, Google's partner, is hoping to generate 50 megawatts of nuclear power by 2030 – equivalent to the amount of energy needed to power a small town.

The company has set up shop in Oak Ridge, Tennessee – another noteworthy American nuclear site, one that provided crucial support to the Manhattan Project which produced the first atomic bomb.

Kairos calls Oak Ridge a "proving ground" and in a statement to the BBC said that advanced construction techniques will increase efficiency and lower costs.

But even though the company aims to boost energy generation tenfold by 2035, practically it still won't help meet the supercharged energy demands of AI – which is ramping up right now.

"Small modular reactors can provide 24/7 clean energy near data centres," says Haider Raza, an expert in AI and energy use at the University of Essex. "But they won’t come close to solving the coming demand issue in the next year or two."

A report released in April by the International Energy Agency noted that the power demand from data centres, which currently account for around 1.5% of the world's electricity consumption, could double in the next five years. Beyond that, there's huge uncertainty – both in the amount of future demand and what sources might rise to meet it.

Nuclear reactors, Raza and other experts say, may have a role in meeting the AI energy crunch, but only years into the future – and only if the industry can convince an often-sceptical public.

The Three Mile Island meltdown affected the reputation of nuclear energy in the US for decades (Credit: Keystone/ Hulton Archive/ Getty Images)

The Three Mile Island meltdown affected the reputation of nuclear energy in the US for decades (Credit: Keystone/ Hulton Archive/ Getty Images)

In March, the small suburb of North Tonawanda, halfway between Niagara Falls and the rust-belt city of Buffalo in Western New York state, took what to outsiders looked like a fairly drastic step – banning nuclear power generation within its borders.

The law was a direct reaction to anger over a proposal floated by a local tech company to build a small reactor for cryptocurrency mining. Deb Gondek, a local activist who prior to retirement had worked as director of sustainability for a food company based in the area, said that many residents were wary of the proposal because they'd already been upset by the noise of the crypto mining operation.

"The initial reaction was 'Oh brother, what are they cooking up now?'," she says. The council vote was unanimous in favour of a ban.

And then there's the issue of what to do with radioactive waste. Researchers at Stanford found that SMRs actually produce more such waste than larger conventional reactors, because more subatomic particles escape from a smaller nuclear core, contaminating surrounding materials.

However, in some places, the possible benefits balance out the risks. Kairos, the company that has partnered with Google, touts its local support in Tennessee, and a recent study by the nonpartisan Pew Research Center found that a slight majority of Americans are in favour of more nuclear energy.

At the same time, there are researchers working on other ways out of the upward demand spiral – ones that don't require a hunt for huge new sources of energy.

Small generators such as this one are receiving a lot of attention even though most have not yet reached the commercial stage (Credit: John Keeble/ Getty Images)

Small generators such as this one are receiving a lot of attention even though most have not yet reached the commercial stage (Credit: John Keeble/ Getty Images)

Mosharaf Chowdhury, an associate professor at the University of Michigan notes that AI is growing much faster than previous energy-intensive technologies. Automobiles and computers, for instance, took decades to achieve mass adoption. 

"AI has got to saturation point in not even 15 months," he says. "It just grew so fast, we didn't have a second to imagine how to account for it."

Chowdhury and his colleagues are looking at the ways that chips can be configured to suck up less power, or use AI models that rely on smaller or more focused databases of information.

Unfortunately, Chowdhury says, so far "there is no good solution where we have managed to find models that are significantly smaller and run significantly faster but accuracy-wise are just as good."

Still, he insists: "Whatever else is going on, what we should continue to do is more research on how to make energy-optimal AI."

And many businesses are taking a hard look at how they use AI applications and whether they can actually afford them.

"There's no way around the economics," says Haider Raza from the University of Essex, who consults with businesses about their AI use. "When the demand is high, and the supply is low, the only option is to increase the price (of energy), and somebody has to pay for it."

Raza says some of his customers have decided to hold off on AI for the time being – and notes that nuclear will be only one of many sources powering the future of technology.

And for all their big bets on splitting the atom, the tech giants agree. In a recent policy brief, Microsoft noted: "There is no one technology or solution that will meet the vast electricity and decarbonization needs of the markets, societies, and communities across the globe."

New York to appeal after judge OKs radioactive Indian Point water in the Hudson

by Johan Sheridan - 10/14/25 4:08 PM ET

ALBANY, N.Y. (NEXSTAR) — A federal judge in New York last month struck down the state’s Save the Hudson Act, a law that aimed to prevent Holtec International, the owner of the decommissioned Indian Point nuclear plant, from dumping over a million gallons of radioactive wastewater into the Hudson River.

Still, despite the ruling and her openness to expand nuclear power in the state, Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) maintains that the site will not reopen.

“Let me say this plainly: No,” Hochul wrote in a letter to Westchester County Executive Ken Jenkins on Friday, which can be read at the bottom of this story.

Entergy, the previous owners of the Indian Point Energy Center, shut down its final reactor, Unit 3, in April 2021. Holtec bought the three-unit nuclear power plant located in the northwestern corner of Westchester County on the eastern bank of the Hudson River in May 2021.

The plant is undergoing a decommissioning process that includes removing equipment and structures, reducing residual radioactivity, and dismantling the facility. Holtec projects that process to finish by 2033.

The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York sided with Holtec in a lawsuit they filed in April 2024, agreeing that state law can’t block the discharge of radioactive wastewater from nuclear sites being decommissioned. The court found that only the federal government has that authority, because federal law like the Atomic Energy Act overrules the state under the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

The judge determined that S6893/A7208 wasn’t meant to protect the radiological safety of the public or the environment, which falls under federal jurisdiction. Gov. Kathy Hochul and Attorney General Letitia James announced their intent to appeal the decision, arguing that the law represents vital protections for the iconic river and the economic health of the region through tourism and real estate values.

Jenkins applauded the decision to appeal, saying, “The Hudson River is the lifeblood of our region—a source of recreation, natural beauty, and economic vitality—and we must do everything in our power to protect it.” And in the letter to Jenkins, Hochul directly addressed the concern that the state government may plan to reopen Indian Point or build small modular reactors on the site.

Radiant Nuclear Picks Tennessee Over Wyoming To Build Nuclear Microreactor Facility

Radiant Nuclear announced Monday afternoon that it will build its first nuclear microreactor manufacturing facility in Tennessee, abandoning plans for the controversial project near Bar Nunn, after months of heated debate over spent nuclear fuel storage.

 David Madison | October 14, 2025 | 6 min readBar Nunn

After months of debate and amid regulatory uncertainty in Wyoming, Radiant Nuclear announced Monday that it’s ditching its controversial plan to build nuclear microreactors and store spent fuel in Natrona County.

After months of debate and amid regulatory uncertainty in Wyoming, Radiant Nuclear announced Monday that it’s ditching its controversial plan to build nuclear microreactors and store spent fuel in Natrona County. (CSD File)

Editor's note: This story has been updated to add more reaction to Monday's announcement by Radiant Nuclear.

Radiant Nuclear announced Monday afternoon that it will build its first nuclear microreactor manufacturing facility in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, abandoning plans for a controversial project near Bar Nunn, after months of heated debate over spent nuclear fuel storage.

The decision comes after Radiant repeatedly warned Wyoming officials that regulatory uncertainty could drive the company elsewhere.

Radiant announced Monday it will build a factory on portions of the historic K-27 and K-29 Manhattan Project sites, with construction beginning in early 2026. The company plans to deliver its first mass-produced semitrailer-sized Kaleidos microreactor by 2028 and scale up to producing 50 reactors annually within a few years.

"We choose Oak Ridge, Tennessee, because of their strong workforce, the community's rich nuclear heritage and the public's second-to-none nuclear IQ," said Tori Shivanandan, Radiant's chief operating officer. "Just as importantly, the state's business-friendly environment gave us the immediate regulatory certainty we needed to move fast."

State Sen. Ed Cooper, R-Ten Sleep, told Cowboy State Daily that members of the Wyoming Freedom Caucus need to answer for their role in driving away the project.

"This is disappointing for Wyoming's economic future," Cooper said, adding that vocal opposition from certain legislators erased years of economic development work aimed at bringing high-paying manufacturing jobs to the state.

Freedom Caucus Responds

Rachel Rodriguez-Williams, chairman of the Wyoming Freedom Caucus, responded to Cooper's charge and told Cowboy State Daily the Freedom Caucus "draws the line at out-of-state waste storage."

She said the group is standing up to California billionaires who "insist on saddling our landscapes with their windmills, their solar panels and now their radioactive waste."

Ray Wert, Radiant's vice president of communications and marketing, said the contrast between Wyoming and Tennessee is stark. 

The company faced "zero opposition" in Tennessee, he said, while in Wyoming it was criticized by a few loud voices of opposition in Bar Nunn and among a group of legislators. 

"Oak Ridge's nuclear IQ is absolutely second to none," Wert said. "They were the first community in the United States to enrich uranium. They're not afraid of it. They understand it."

Bar Nunn Mayor Peter Boyer said he doesn't expect another opportunity like this to appear on the horizon.

"I don't see any other $200 or $300 million companies banging down the door to come here to Bar Nunn," Boyer said. "I think a lot of businesses would be really reluctant to come to Bar Nunn after seeing what happened with Radiant."

Boyer said the whole debate raises big questions about state legislators using their influence over local issues, saying legislators were "way out of line" in interfering with local politics.

Justin Farley, CEO of Advance Casper, said it now remains unclear how Wyoming will participate in the current "nuclear Renaissance."

"I mean, it's happening," said Farley, who worried about other nuclear tech companies like BWXT in Gillette, which "is already getting heat from that same group," he said, referring to the Wyoming Freedom Caucus.

The decision by Radiant to drop Wyoming as a potential manufacturing site comes after months of consideration, company officials say.

"We are absolutely looking at our second and third choices,” said Radiant's Wert in a June interview with Cowboy State Daily. "We're hopeful that Wyoming is going to be the right location for us. But it's all dependent on whether or not the state is interested in having us.”

Regulatory Roadblock

In a letter to the editor sent to Cowboy State Daily on Monday, Radiant Senior Director of Operations Matt Wilson explained the company had spent months in "open dialogue" with Wyoming officials about building the factory in Natrona County near Bar Nunn.

"Recent commercial wins, our growing work with the U.S. military, and the speed at which Radiant is moving towards successfully turning on our first reactor next year, all demanded a turnkey location where we could be quickly up and running to meet customer demand," Wilson said. "Given that, this week we had to make a very tough decision to site our first factory in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, instead of Wyoming."

Wilson said the decision ultimately came down to regulatory certainty. 

Wyoming law currently allows spent fuel storage only at operating reactor sites, not at manufacturing facilities. 

Radiant's business model requires returning reactors back from deployment for refueling and temporarily storing used fuel in above-ground containers at its factory.

"Radiant was only seeking to safely and temporarily store used fuel from Wyoming-built reactors returned from deployment," Wilson said. "Sadly, Wyoming's law currently does not accommodate that model."

The company conducted community polling and door-to-door conversations that it says showed Natrona County was supportive of the investment, Wilson said. But legislative opposition proved insurmountable.

Video: Radiant Nuclear Picks Tennessee Over Wyoming To Build Nuclear Microreactor Facility

Local Opposition

The project faced intense criticism from Bar Nunn residents and key legislators throughout 2025.

Rep. Bill Allemand, R-Midwest, delivered a scathing critique of the project at a Natrona County Commission meeting in June, telling commissioners that residents "overwhelmingly oppose it."

"The people of Bar Nunn do not want this in their backyard," Allemand told Cowboy State Daily in June. "I really like nuclear energy, but my constituents do not want it stored in their backyard. And I will do as my constituents say."

Allemand argued there was "no benefit for the state of Wyoming, for Natrona County or for Bar Nunn" and predicted the project would face an "uphill battle in the Legislature."

Mayor Boyer had supported the project, telling Cowboy State Daily he believed it would benefit the community despite acknowledging opposition.

"I think it would be a good thing for the town. I do," Boyer said in a July interview. "There are some who are for, there are some who are against, and some, they don't even know. It's kind of a lot of different camps here. I think overall it'll be a good thing for the community."

The project would have started with around 70 jobs and ramped up to more than 200 at full production, according to company officials. Natrona County commissioners had approved Radiant's application for a $25 million state grant for infrastructure despite some public opposition at hearings.

David Madison can be reached at david@cowboystatedaily.com.

Extracting Profits from the Public: How Utility Ratepayers Are Paying for Big Tech’s Power

New paper from the Harvard Electricity Law Initiative uncovers how utilities are forcing ratepayers to fund discounted rates for data centers 
 


March 5, 2025
A new paper by Legal Fellow Eliza Martin and Electricity Law Initiative Director Ari Peskoe explores how the public is paying the energy bills of some of the largest companies in the world. Amazon, Google, Meta, Microsoft, and other technology companies are looking to secure electricity for their new power-hungry data centers. To provide energy to these new facilities, electric utilities are expanding their systems with new power plants and transmission lines. Because utilities profit by building infrastructure, serving data centers is a lucrative opportunity that is incentivizing utilities to offer attractive rates to Big Tech companies.
 
The paper uncovers how utilities are forcing ratepayers to fund discounted rates for data centers. Martin and Peskoe explain that government-regulated utility rates socialize a utility’s costs of providing electricity service to the public. When a utility expands its system in anticipation of growing consumer demand, ratepayers share the costs of that expansion based on the premise that society benefits from growing electricity use. But data centers are upending this long-standing model. The very same utility rate structures that have spread the costs of reliable power delivery for everyone are now forcing the public to pay for infrastructure designed to supply a handful of wealthy corporations.
 
The authors reviewed nearly 50 regulatory proceedings about utility rates for data centers. After describing how rate-setting processes can shift utility costs among ratepayers, the paper explains how rate structures, as well as secret contracts between utilities and data centers, could be transferring Big Tech’s energy costs to the public. It also provides recommendations to limit hidden subsidies in utility rates. Finally, the authors question whether utility regulators should be making policy decisions about whether to subsidize data centers and speculates on the long-term implications of utility systems dominated by trillion-dollar software and social media companies.

Nuclear storage project in New Mexico terminated

Holtec International in Camden, N.J. May 10, 2019. JOE LAMBERTI/COURIER POST-USA TODAY NETWORK

Adrian Hedden
Carlsbad Current-Argus
achedden@currentargus.com

Local officials in southeast New Mexico are searching for a new path to see a nuclear facility built and operated near the border between Eddy and Lea counties, after a company planning to do so terminated the project.

In canceling its plans, New Jersey-based Holtec International pointed to a tide of opposition from state officials – despite local support in Carlsbad and Hobbs – to its proposal to store spent nuclear fuel rods brought in from power plants around the country.

Holtec first applied for a federal license for the facility in 2017, touching off a controversial licensing process that was delayed by litigation and plagued by opposition from the state administration, New Mexico’s congressional delegation and environmental advocates.

The company was recruited to the location by the Eddy Lea Energy Alliance, a consortium of local officials from the two counties and the cities of Carlsbad and Hobbs. The Alliance owns the 1,000-acre plot of land where the facility would have operated.

Company officials wrote in a July 28 letter to the Alliance that the project “was impossible” amid strong opposition from state lawmakers and current agreements in place with local leaders, stating the company was terminating an agreement to buy the land from the Alliance once the facility was operational.

Holtec spokesperson Patrick O’Brien confirmed Wednesday, Oct. 8, that the company and the Alliance agreed to part ways, allowing the Alliance to seek other companies to develop the site and Holtec to pursue projects in other states amid recent efforts by the U.S. Department of Energy to facilitate state consent.

“After discussions with our longtime partner in the HI-STORE project, the Eddy-Lea Energy Alliance, and due to the untenable path forward for used fuel storage in New Mexico, we mutually agreed upon canceling the agreement,” O’Brien wrote in an email.

“This allows for (the Alliance) to work to redevelop the property in a manner that fits their needs and allows Holtec to work with other states who are amenable to used fuel storage based on the recent DOE work on public education and outreach.”

During a Wednesday, Oct. 8, meeting of the Alliance held in a Carlsbad, Chair John Heaton said the Alliance offered to dissolve a noncompete clause, which would allow Holtec to pursue other projects in Colorado and Utah, while continuing to pursue the site in New Mexico.

He said the company’s president, Krishna Singh, responded that he “would not put another penny” into New Mexico after heavy state opposition was voiced and the project delayed.

The Alliance’s board voted unanimously to accept the letter and termination of the project.

“He is just so frustrated with the constant roadblocks from the state of New Mexico,” Heaton said of Singh. “They just said they’re through. They want to cancel it.”

Supreme Court favors nuclear storage

The company appeared ready to build the facility which would hold up to 100,000 metric tons of the refuse after a U.S. Supreme Court verdict in June reinstated a federal license to build and operate the site.

Justices ruled the project’s opponents who initially challenged the license for the site had no legal standing to enter the licensing process in the first place.

That left Holtec and its supporters claiming victory and expecting the project to move forward, after more than a decade of debate, public hearings, and negotiations between the company and the Alliance.

But Senate Bill 53, passed by state lawmakers in 2023 barred any state agency from issuing permits Holtec would need to operate the site, a problem noted in Holtec’s letter along with the overall “political climate” in New Mexico.

“Unfortunately, the passage of state legislation that effectively prohibits the construction of the (consolidated interim storage facility), combined with the continued public opposition expressed by New Mexico’s current administration, has made the project impossible in the near future,” read the letter signed by William F. Gill, Holtec vice president and senior counsel.

During the Wednesday meeting, Heaton made a motion for the Alliance to accept the July 28 letter from Holtec canceling the land sale and a revenue sharing agreement. The motion was supported by a unanimous vote.

Other nuclear options considered

Heaton said the site could still be used for a nuclear project developed by a different company to either store or repurpose the spent fuel, but that such a move would require a new license application process.

“Any other entity that would want to create an interim storage facility at the site would need to go through the (Nuclear Regulatory Commission). It (the license) is not assignable,” Heaton said.

Hobbs Mayor Sam Cobb said that if Holtec officially terminates its role in the project, the Alliance must seek another company to build and bring the facility into service.

He argued that the commission, the U.S. government’s main approval arm for nuclear facilities, already approved the project federally, meaning it could be viable with another willing participant.

“I think it’s incumbent on us to explain any possible forward movement at the site which the (Nuclear Regulatory Commission) has deemed suitable,” he said. “The nuclear industry is resurging and it’s going to keep expanding.”

But Heaton countered that the project as approved involved “proprietary” technology owned by Holtec, meaning a new company would need to pay Holtec for its use or seek approval for a new design.

He said Holtec has built but not operated storage facilities in other areas and could be open to doing so for a new operator of the facility with new federal approval.

“They will still have to go through the process,” Heaton said. “That is the big barrier.”

He did say Wisconsin-based Shine Technologies might be ideal for a different project at the site in lieu of Holtec’s participation.

In February, Shine Technologies announced it was selected by the U.S. Department of Energy to receive funding through its Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy program to aid in developing technology to reprocess spent nuclear fuel.

That could involve the Alliance’s site, Heaton said. He said the fuel rods initially planned to be stored at Holtec’s facility could instead be reprocessed at the location, potentially by Shine Technologies or a similar company.

“Reprocessing has much more economic benefit than storage,” Cobb said. “We probably need to put together a plan to make those presentations.”

NY AG to appeal ruling allowing Indian Point owners to dump nuclear waste into Hudson

The Indian Point nuclear power plant in March, 2021.
Mario Tama/Getty Images

New York Attorney General Letitia James will appeal a court ruling allowing the owners of the shuttered Indian Point nuclear facility to resume dumping radioactive wastewater into the Hudson River.

Manhattan federal Judge Kenneth Karas struck down a state law last month that would prevent Holtec, the plant’s owners, from discharging waste water into the river.

Holtec filed a lawsuit shortly after the Save the Hudson law was passed in 2023. The judge ruled that New York overstepped its authority by preventing Holtec from releasing radioactive waste from Indian Point, which the facility has been doing lawfully for decades. The ruling stated that only the federal government has the authority to regulate nuclear discharges.

But states have significant authority over water discharge and pollution, and James said in a statement that the federal court decision was misguided.

“We must ensure that the Hudson River and its surrounding communities are protected for future generations,” James said. “Indian Point must be decommissioned responsibly, and my office will be appealing this decision to defend New Yorkers and our natural resources.”

The wastewater released by the former plant contains tritium, which the Nuclear Regulatory Commission says is a mildly radioactive type of hydrogen. Tritiated water is chemically indistinguishable from normal water and cannot be filtered.
 

Humans are exposed to tritium through air and water. The releases from Indian Point are within federal standards, but nuclear experts have expressed uncertainty about what a safe level of exposure is and whether exposure has been studied enough. Gothamist previously reported that when tritium chemically embeds into organic matter, such as plants and animals in the food chain, its radiation dose can intensify tenfold.

“Holtec’s plan to release millions of gallons of tritiated wastewater into the Hudson River will depress interest in tourism and recreation in the Hudson Valley,” Tracy Brown, president of the environmental advocacy group Riverkeeper, wrote in a statement. The organization focuses on protecting the Hudson River. “After how far we have come in remediating both the Hudson and people’s relationship with it, this is the last thing our communities need.”

Theoretically, Holtec can resume with its plan to release 45,000 gallons of tritiated water, which is the cheapest viable option for disposing of the waste. The company has not released a date for the discharge but expressed support for the judge’s decision.

“We are pleased with recent federal court ruling, as it has always been our contention that radiological water discharge falls under the purview of the federal government and the [federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission], we will continue to decommission the Indian Point site in an environmentally responsible manner working with local, state and federal stakeholders,” Patrick O’Brien, Holtec’s director of government affairs and communications, wrote via email.

Holtec said it doesn't plan to release the waste until the legal fight has concluded.

Westchester County Executive Ken Jenkins asked the commission “to direct Holtec to stop this reckless action, and to protect the health and safety of our communities. The fight to safeguard the Hudson River is far from over.”

Gov. Kathy Hochul’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

A business case for continued investment in solar and adaptation to stay competitive. A recent Ember study on 24/7 solar, at the 97% benchmark towards full solar supply supported by battery storage forum, the LCOE is $104/MWh – 22% below last year’s global average and cheaper than coal ($118/MWh) or nuclear ($182/MWh), which in itself is a reason strong enough to continue the investment in solar. Mike Drop! the numbers alone tell the story

Pages