https://www.cnn.com/2025/05/23/politics/trump-nuclear-energy-executive-orders
Intended to streamline nuclear plant permitting and reorganize the NRC. Will it work?
Opponents to nuclear power know they can drive up costs and discourage new projects by endless delay. Opponents to nuclear power should we purged from the approval process. We need people sincerely committed to safety.
No this will not work because permitting/licensing and opponents of nuclear power do not drive the cost of nuclear plants any longer. What drives the cost of nuclear power plants are the following:
I think we hope modular construction will reduce complexity and help reduce delays and cost overruns.
Maybe for Small Modular Reactors, but not for large reactors like Vogtle 3&4.
I hope so, because you definitely want to rush the construction of something near a population center that, if done badly, can cause thousands of square miles to become uninhabitable.
The future seems to be SMRs. Or restarting old reactors.
Are more large on site constructed reactors back under consideration?
From the presidential order…
Sec. 3. Deployment and Use of Advanced Nuclear Reactor Technologies at Military Installations. (a) The Secretary of Defense, through the Secretary of the Army, shall establish a program of record for the utilization of nuclear energy for both installation energy and operational energy. The Secretary of Defense, through the Secretary of the Army, shall commence the operation of a nuclear reactor, regulated by the United States Army, at a domestic military base or installation no later than September 30, 2028. The Secretary of Defense shall designate the Secretary of the Army as the executive agent for both installation and operational nuclear energy across the Department of Defense.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
I have long been in favor of this idea. The government could pay for the development of the first SMRs at a military base. This way any cost overruns for the first plants are absorbed by the entire nation, rather than an individual utility company. Once the SMRs are on-line, and they have some experience in building the plants, then the private sector can start building with less of a financial risk.
I also think it is crazy for the Army to take the lead on this. The US Navy has been operating small modular reactors on surface ships and submarines for several decades. The Navy already has the system in place to train operators and technicians in the proper nuclear standards and procedures. I suppose the Army could learn how to do it, but it will take time. The order says the first reactor is to be operational by September 2028. I doubt this will happen by that time.
_ Pete
IMO the DOE sites are much better place for first of a kind SMRs. Most early reactors were developed by utility companies on their own property.
This government payment for the construction of SMRs is anti-capitalism. Picking favorites in the large SMR field of companies will cause legal actions by the ones left off.
Putting nuclear reactors on army bases like Ft Knox should address the issue of protection from attack by terrorists or others who want to make a political statement or use capture of a nuclear plant as a bargaining chip for ransom.
A step in the right direction.
Army projects will go to low cost bidders. As always there will be winners and losers. But there is always the next contract.
Unless one is writing the script for an action thriller, one where the bad guys are either part of the hierarchy, or unstoppable super elite forces with their own ideas of how the world should be.
We have about 90 operating nuclear power reactors that are not on any DOD or DOE base. These nuclear reactors are not protected by any DOD or DOE security forces at their current locations. They rely on onsite security and local police.
From the presidential order…
(a) The Secretary of Defense, through the Secretary of the Army, shall establish a program of record for the utilization of nuclear energy for both installation energy and operational energy. The Secretary of Defense, through the Secretary of the Army, shall commence the operation of a nuclear reactor, regulated by the United States Army, at a domestic military base or installation no later than September 30, 2028.
A little more information on this from the Army Times…
Pentagon officials announced in early 2022 that the Defense Department would build a nuclear microreactor that could be flown to an austere site by a C-17 cargo plane and set up to power a military base.
The initiative, dubbed “Project Pele,” outlined a 40-ton reactor that could fit in three to four 20-foot shipping containers and provide one to five megawatts of power on full power for up to three years before refueling.
The Pentagon awarded an initial $300 million contract in June 2022 to Lynchburg, Virginia-based BWX Technologies to build the reactor.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
BWX Technologies is part of the old Babcock & Wilcox company, and has made nuclear reactors for many years. The currently operating Davis Besse plant in Ohio is a B&W reactor, for instance, but there are others around the country.
From the BWXT website, their microreactor is called the BWXT Advanced Nuclear Reactor (BANR).
However, the BANR is listed at 50MW-thermal capacity, whereas the Army Times article said “one to five megawatts” of electric power. Perhaps they will scale down the BANR to perhaps 15 MW-thermal, with a power plant efficiency of 33%, to provide 5 MWe.
Whatever, the size, the BANR appears to have TRISO pebble-type fuel, and is gas-cooled. The reactor would use HALEU, enriched to just below 20%. These sort of reactors, particularly in this size, are inherently safe, and can keep the fuel below melting temperature with just passive conductive and convective heat transfer. The passive safety was demonstrated a few years ago at China’s HTR-PM power plant, which uses TRISO fuel.
_ Pete