ABILENE Ƶ A novel experiment underway in West Texas could help determine whether long-abandoned nuclear technology could be the future of Texas power.
At Abilene Christian University, a research lab is working to create the nationƵs first nuclear research reactor in more than 40 years. The intent is to prove small modular reactors are a clean, reliable energy source.
ƵOur goal is to take this technology and bless the world with it,Ƶ said Rusty Towell, an engineering professor at ACU who leads the universityƵs effort to build a small nuclear reactor.
Nuclear power Ƶ once panned as overpriced, overregulated and dangerous Ƶ is in the midst of a resurgence, overcoming stigmas associated with disasters at Chernobyl, Three Mile Island and Fukushima. Texas has noticed, and ACUƵs NEXT Lab isnƵt riding the nuclear wave alone.
Gov. Greg Abbott has signaled strong support for the technology after signing off on recommendations that included a $5 billion fund to develop nuclear power in Texas.
ƵTexas is the energy capital of the world, and we are ready to be No. 1 in advanced nuclear power,Ƶ Abbott said in November.
The CEO who oversees the Texas power grid, Pablo Vegas of ERCOT, sees vast potential for a fast-growing state hustling to meet future power demands.
ƵIƵm very positive about nuclear,Ƶ Vegas said in a recent interview. ƵIƵm looking forward to seeing the momentum that has started this last year continue into 2025.Ƶ
The diagram of a molten salt research reactor is seen past Rusty Towell, director of NEXT Lab and professor of engineering and physics at Abilene Christian University, during a tour of the facility, Thursday, Sept. 26, 2024, at Dillard Science and Engineering Research Center in Abilene, Texas. The reactor, Natura MSR-1, is expected to be the first Nuclear Regulatory Commission approved construction permit for a liquid-fueled molten salt reactor. (Shafkat Anowar/The Dallas Morning News/TNS)
Nuclear reactors check nearly all the boxes for bipartisan support. Democrats are supportive of an industry that emits virtually no greenhouse gases. Republicans tend to favor nuclearƵs ability to produce power that is not affected by weather, unlike solar and wind.
In short, much like batteries, nuclear power can provide relief on two critical fronts. It is a way to slow climate change and its effects, including more frequent devastating weather events and the potential for severe drought. It also is a stable energy source needed to address population growth.
Advocates of nuclear power see Texas as a potential tipping point for a long-dormant energy sector.
Still, the power source does carry risk, including the release of radioactivity in a major emergency, such as the 1986 reactor explosion in Chernobyl or the 2011 tsunami that damaged containment in three reactors in Fukushima, Japan.
The promise of small modular reactors is clouded by financial uncertainty, doubts about their reliability, slow deployment timelines and unresolved nuclear waste issues.
ƵThis technology is unproven Ƶ and it may not deliver results to Texas for six to 10 years,Ƶ John Umphress, a representative of the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen, said at a recent legislative hearing.
Universities take leadership role
In Texas, nuclear reactors generate power at two sites Ƶ Comanche Peak, about 45 miles southwest of Fort Worth, and the South Texas Project, about 100 miles northeast of Corpus Christi. Together, the sitesƵ four nuclear reactors can power about 1.3 million homes.
One other reactor is in the works as Dow Inc. moves forward with plans to build a nuclear power plant at its Seadrift site along the Texas coast.
ACU hit a significant milestone in September when federal regulators approved its proposal to test a novel small modular reactor design on campus. Instead of connecting to the power grid, its reactor will serve as a research vehicle to prove whether its concept Ƶ a molten salt reactor Ƶ is viable.
The small reactor, only the second of its kind to receive a permit from federal nuclear regulators, uses a liquid salt mix to cool nuclear fuel instead of the more conventional water mixtures seen in large reactors.
The project is being developed by the university and Natura Resources, a company led by longtime oilman Douglas Robison, who gave more than $30 million to the university to create its advanced nuclear lab.
The Texas A&M University System also is creating a nuclear power proving ground on university land in Bryan to test tech similar to what the NEXT Lab is developing in Abilene.
Texas A&M Chancellor John Sharp said massive projected increases in electricity demand drove him to pursue making the systemƵs 2,300-acre RELLIS Campus a federally approved site for nuclear power.
ƵWhat is your answer to the AI power demand, you know, doubling over the next few decades or less than that?Ƶ Sharp said. ƵWhatƵs your answer to, you know, 1,000 people moving into Texas every day? WhatƵs your answer to all this? I mean, there is no answer except for nuclear power.Ƶ
The university offers an enticing location because it is tackling the cumbersome and lengthy process of acquiring a site permit from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Projects selected for the site would still need federal approval of their reactor design, but having a preapproved site clears a major regulatory hurdle.
A&M announced in February it had picked four companies for the site, including Natura Resources. Sharp said a reactor could be switched on as early as 2030.
Jordan Robison, P.E. (left), vice president of engineering and program management of Natura Resources, and Rusty Towell, director of NEXT Lab and professor of engineering and physics, at Abilene Christian University, shows the location where a molten salt research reactor will be placed during a tour of the facility, Thursday, Sept. 26, 2024, at Dillard Science and Engineering Research Center in Abilene, Texas. The reactor, Natura MSR-1, is expected to be the first Nuclear Regulatory Commission approved construction permit for a liquid-fueled molten salt reactor. (Shafkat Anowar/The Dallas Morning News/TNS)
Nuclear powerƵs advantages
Reactors to be tested at A&M and ACU are known as small modular reactors, or SMRs. Far smaller than industrial nuclear plants with their monolithic steam towers and the ability to produce 1,000 megawatts or more, SMRs would generate 25 to several hundred megawatts.
Towell, the nuclear engineer at ACU, said the goal is a reactor design that can be mass-produced in a factory and transported on the back of a truck.
A power plant using a fleet of SMRs would require less upfront financial investment Ƶ and therefore risk Ƶ to develop. Their scalability and smaller footprint would allow them to be deployed in places where large, traditional nuclear reactors do not make sense, according to the Department of Energy.
Despite safety fears surrounding nuclear power, research shows it is safer than many of its less scrutinized counterparts.
According to data published by Our World in Data, only solar power causes fewer deaths than nuclear power. Coal power causes deaths at a rate roughly 800 times that of nuclear power, while more commonly used natural gas power is 93 times more deadly than nuclear, according to the study. The study examined how accidents, air pollution and greenhouse gases contributed to health problems and deaths worldwide.
Supporters say the problems with nuclear power are rare and should not outweigh its potential for safe, clean and reliable energy. Many welcomed last yearƵs announcement about plans to restart reactors on Three Mile Island as a milestone.
A partial meltdown in the Pennsylvania plant in 1979 led to the release of radioactive gas, resulting in a regulatory crackdown on nuclear power and a cratering of public support for the energy source. Microsoft is partnering with Constellation Energy, which owns 44% of the South Texas Project nuclear plant, to restart the reactors in 2028.
Nuclear faces obstacles
The rise of nuclear power in the U.S. faces obstacles, and most energy experts donƵt expect it to become a more significant part of the Texas power grid until the 2030s.
Unlike other power sources, nuclear power requires direct approval from federal regulators. The process is expensive and rife with uncertainty. It can take years, sometimes decades, for the NRC to approve a project, according to industry insiders, state officials and political leaders seeking to speed up the process.
Financial barriers include Ƶregulatory and licensing complexities that can be time- and resource-intensive and high risk for developers and investors,Ƶ said a November report from a state nuclear power task force convened by Abbott.
That could change under a second Trump administration. On the first day of his second term, President Donald Trump signed an executive order directing federal agencies to identify burdensome regulations that slow the development of fossil fuels and nuclear power.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, joined by Utah and an SMR developer, has sued the NRC, arguing its lengthy approval process and fee structure impose Ƶcrippling costsƵ on SMR developers. The regulatory commission has not yet filed a response to the lawsuit, and a spokesperson said the agency does not comment on ongoing litigation.
Walt Baum, CEO of the electric production industry group Powering Texas, which includes Texas power plant companies NRG and Vistra, said several companies are interested in SMRs, but are waiting on federal approval of the first designs before making investments.
ƵEverybodyƵs still waiting on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to approve these SMR modules, these new designs,Ƶ Baum said. ƵWhen I talk to people in the industry, you know, they say it could be two months, two years or two decades. Nobody ever really seems to know from the NRC.Ƶ
Questions also remain about how spent fuel would be disposed. Proponents of nuclear power say new methods that can safely reuse nuclear fuel in small reactors show promise, but some academic research has predicted the opposite.
For instance, a 2022 paper from Stanford researchers concluded that some small modular reactor designs would create nuclear waste at a rate between two and 30 times that of conventional large nuclear reactors.
Atrophy in the supply chain
Federal regulators have approved only three reactors for power production in the past 28 years. With so few projects, domestic manufacturing and mining industries supporting a nuclear power supply chain have decayed.
The only large nuclear plant developed in the U.S. in the past decade faced billions in cost overruns and major delays. By the time the Georgia nuclear facility Plant Vogtle switched on its first reactor, the project was seven years overdue and $17 billion over budget.
ƵThe U.S. nuclear energy, essentially, has atrophied,Ƶ said Jay Yu, president of uranium enrichment company LIS Technologies. ƵWeƵve just been sitting around, not really building up our capabilities.Ƶ
Most of the uranium used in domestic power production is imported from Canada and Kazakhstan. Russia had been a leading source, but the U.S. banned Russian uranium after the country invaded Ukraine in 2022.
In South Texas, two companies have leased 10 sites for uranium mining, Inside Climate News reported in December. However, those have largely remained dormant over the past 10 years, despite regulatory approval to begin mining from the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality.
That could change if lofty goals for nuclear power are realized.
In addition to AbbottƵs support for the industry, former President Joe Biden set a goal for nuclear power production to triple by 2050, and Trump has said he wants to limit regulations that slow the building process.
Industry experts said the most important signals for a nuclear jump start will come from the government. In Texas, that could take the form of a $2 billion fund of taxpayer cash to bring new nuclear generation to TexasƵ power grid by 2035.
House Bill 14 proposes creating a series of grant programs to encourage research and construction of small modular nuclear reactors. The bill is a priority of House Speaker Dustin Burrows, R-Lubbock, and is headed toward a vote in the House in coming weeks.
The proposal from Rep. Cody Harris, R-Palestine, has bipartisan support, but has a funding structure that would require an amendment to the Texas Constitution, leaving the ultimate decision up to voters.
Dallas Democratic Rep. Rafael Anchía said that while enthusiasm is high, public support for nuclear remains fragile.
ƵYouƵre one bad headline away from a collapse of public support,Ƶ Anchía said.
Commented
Sorry, there are no recent results for popular commented articles.