Save The Date:

-

Wed. September 9, 2026, 7-8:30 PM ET

 

&

 

THREE MILE ISLAND:
LEGACY & RESISTANCE TO REOPENING 

 

A PUBLIC FORUM

Wednesday September 9, 2026, 7-8:30 PM Eastern time

Three Mile Island was the site of the most serious nuclear accident in U.S. history. Unit 2 suffered a partial meltdown in 1979 and has been shuttered ever since. People in central Pennsylvania still face lingering health effects from the reactor meltdown, and are now organizing to stop the re-0pening of Unit 1.

The announced restart of Three Mile Island Unit-1 is aimed to serve just one client: Microsoft, and has been met with unabashed enthusiasm by Governor Shapiro and the PA legislature. This deal was cooked up in dark in board rooms and political parlors with the backing of Microsoft founder, Bill Gates.

 

SPEAKERS

Eric Epstein is the spokesperson and Chairman of Three Mile Island Alert, founded in 1977. He first joined the Lancaster-based Susquehanna Valley Alliance (SVA) in 1982, working to prevent the illegal dumping of 700,000 gallons of radioactive water into the Susquehanna River. Eric has litigated at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and other regulatory bodies, written numerous professional papers, and provided testimony regarding utility rates, electric power competition and radioactive waste isolation.

 

Patricia Longenecker is a retired teacher and healthcare professional who has lived on a family homestead near TMI since 1974.  She has been an active member of Three Mile Island Alert for over four decades. She will discuss the powerful contributions of women and mothers who have tirelessly exposed the risks to children and other vulnerable groups following the massive TMI radiation release.

 

Aaron Datesman is a researcher and inventor based in Washington, DC, who led a recent biomedical study of residents exposed to radiation from the TMI meltdown who are still at risk. He has held technical positions at Argonne National Laboratory, the US Department of Energy, NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center, and the University of Virginia. His recent book, with Doug Brugge, Dirty Secrets of Nuclear Power in an Era of Climate Change challenges the claim that low-level ionizing radiation released by nuclear power reactors is not dangerous, and demonstrates that there is no such thing as low-risk exposure. 

 

Moderator: Joseph M Hunt is an activist with the Clamshell Alliance  and Massachusetts Peace Action, a development economist with 30 years’ experience in Asia and Africa working on public health and food security programs, and a retired instructor in Harvard's graduate sustainability degree program.

 

REGISTRATION LINK WILL AVAILABLE BY AUGUST 11th


ACCESSIBILITY: Live captioning will be available.
If you have accessibility questions, reply to your registration email to confirm your requirements or request more information.

 

QUESTIONS?
Contact us at info@clamshellalliance.com

From World Nuclear News, September 7, 2026
 

New Mexico Land Commissioner Stephanie Garcia Richard has issued an executive order banning the leasing of state lands for new uranium mining and related activities, and directing the State Land Office "to focus on cleaning up legacy uranium sites and calls on the uranium industry and the federal government to prioritise, fund and meaningfully address the legacy problems caused by uranium production". The order does not restrict the Land Office from re-issuing existing permits, rights-of-way or business leases related to "existing mineral leases with valid existing rights”. 

A Defunct Nuclear Site Had a Meltdown in 1959. A New Study Shows It’s Still Causing Health Problems

The Santa Susana Field Laboratory in Ventura County, California.
The Santa Susana Field Laboratory in Ventura County, California. © U.S. Department of Energy via Wikimedia Commons

Researchers found elevated reports of autoimmune and endocrine disorders among people living within 5 miles (8 kilometers) of the Santa Susana field Laboratory.

By 

Reading time 3 minutes

The Santa Susana Field Laboratory (SSFL) in Ventura County, California, is one of the most contaminated sites in the state. During its nearly 60 years of operation, the nuclear reactor and rocket testing site experienced several accidents—including a partial nuclear meltdown in 1959—that polluted the soil and groundwater with radioactive and chemical waste.

Since the SFFL was declared a superfund site in 1989, researchers have been working to understand the risk it poses to public health. Previous investigations focused on cancer incidence among residents living within 5 miles (8 kilometers) of the site, but a study published today in the journal Risk Analysis took a broader look, surveying people living as far as 15 miles (24 km) away and looking beyond cancer to other chronic illnesses commonly associated with contaminant exposure.

The findings suggest that people living closest to this superfund site may experience higher rates of autoimmune, endocrine, and metabolic disorders.

Not your typical superfund site

Affluent Ventura County is an unusual setting for a superfund site (an area designated by the EPA as being particularly polluted and dangerous). These toxic areas are disproportionately located near lower-income communities and minority populations. In this way, SFFL offers a unique research opportunity. A team led by Jenna Blyler of the University of California’s Wrigley Institute for Environment and Sustainability surveyed people living near SSFL to investigate several unanswered questions.

First, they wanted to know whether health risks extended beyond the diseases and geographic range examined in previous studies and whether those risks increased with proximity to the site. They also examined how residents perceive and respond to environmental health risks and whether their behavior matched theoretical predictions about risk perception and protective action.

The researchers surveyed 475 residents living within 15 miles (24 km) of the SSFL. Of the population sampled, 56% earned $100,000 or more annually. More than a third of residents reported at least one diagnosis since moving into their current residence. While this is on par with the national rate of 38%, chronic illness is normally much less common in high-income communities.

According to the study, 18% of surveyed residents living within 5 miles (8 km) of SSFL reported autoimmune diagnoses, compared with just 4% of those living 11 to 15 miles (18 to 24 km) away. This trend showed up in metabolic and endocrine disorders as well, with 15% of residents within close range of the facility reporting a diagnosis compared to just 2% of those farther away.

While this suggests that some illnesses may be more common the closer people live to the SFFL, it will require more research to confirm this, Blyler told Gizmodo in an email. She noted that her study relied on self-reported diagnoses that were not medically verified and did not capture the frequency or recurrence of individual diagnoses.

Surprising risk responses

The study also revealed some surprising trends in residents’ behavior. For example, risk research generally suggests that people who feel more capable of dealing with a threat are more likely to take protective action. In this study, however, people who felt more threatened by contamination were more likely to report taking precautions.

Cost is usually a barrier to protective action, but here, people who saw protection as more expensive were more likely to take precautions. Interestingly, proximity to the SSFL had no effect on protective action, but personal experience with illness did.

Understanding the public health hazards associated with this site and how the surrounding community responds to them will become increasingly important as the world warms. Research has shown that the spread of contaminants at the SSFL has been exacerbated by drought and wildfires, which are becoming more prevalent.

Blyler’s next study investigates how perceived proximity to an environmental hazard influences individual and community-level protective actions. “It may be that people in wealthier and more influential communities have the resources, access, or preference to advocate for protection at a broader level of society, rather than acting only to protect themselves individually,” she said.

by Zia Weise
 

With help from Benjamin Storrow, Sara Schonhardt and Zack Colman in the U.S., Brian Dabbs in Singapore, Mike Blanchfield in Canada, Alexandre Léchenet and Nicolas Camut in France, and Charlie Cooper in the United Kingdom.

CLIMATE MELTDOWN: Nuclear power is buzzing. Nations worldwide are pouring money into an atomic renaissance to confront rising temperatures and exploding electricity demand.

But climate change showed this summer how those plans could be at risk.

Nuclear plants across Europe were forced to halt or curtail generation in August as heat waves and drought plunged river levels to record lows, depriving reactors of cooling water.

Bulgaria’s sole nuclear plant throttled supply. Romania blew up a rock to keep the water flowing but was eventually forced to shutter both of its reactors. Hungary narrowly avoided shutting down its only nuclear plant, which provides half the country’s electricity, but slashed production by three-quarters. In France, a record number of reactors had to halt or cut output.

That prompted some governments and companies to question whether their multibillion-euro plans to build new plants should be adjusted to account for the rising threats of climate-related disasters.

Hungarian Prime Minister Péter Magyar is reconsidering expansion plans, citing a cooling system that he said is unfit to deal with global warming.

Romania’s energy ministry told POLITICO in a statement that the country isn’t backtracking on its nuclear ambitions, but that events this summer “reinforces the importance of ensuring that future projects are appropriately assessed against a broad range of climate, hydrological, environmental and energy-system conditions.”

The impacts come as nuclear power's popularity is resurging. Wars, data centers and climate change are driving the rebound. A coalition of European Union countries wants to boost generation 50 percent by midcentury.

In the U.S., the Trump administration aims to quadruple it over the same period, in part to account for the explosion of energy-intensive infrastructure for AI.

Europe, the fastest-warming continent, is particularly exposed to climate risks because many of its reactors were built along inland rivers or depend on cooling ponds that are vulnerable to drought.

“The temperature increases within Europe have been among the highest in the world,” said Brent Wanner, head of the power sector unit at the International Energy Agency. “So Europe would see some of these impacts first.”

In Europe, South Asia and some areas of the U.S. (such as Arizona and Texas), the biggest threats are drought and rising water temperatures. In coastal North America and other parts of Asia, it's hurricanes and typhoons, which can damage power lines.

And then there's jellyfish, which thrive in warming waters and clogged pumping systems at a French plant last month. It was the second year in a row it happened — on the same day.

Despite this summer’s problems, leaders so far say the promise of nuclear power is too big to abandon.

“Anyone who truly wants to protect the climate cannot be anti-nuclear,” Magyar said when he inspected Hungary’s vulnerable plant in late August.

Read the full story here.

HELLO AND WELCOME TO SURGE: I’m Zia Weise, senior climate reporter in POLITICO’s Brussels newsroom, bringing you the third edition of Surge.

If you’re wondering how Europe’s nuclear reactors are doing now, most of them are back at full capacity after some much-needed rain in late August. The jellyfish, though, are still at it — they brought another French plant to its knees last week.

Send tips and feedback, but please no jellyfish recipes, to zweise@politico.eu.

 
 
 
 

Inger Andersen, Executive Director UNEP, speaks at the German Pavilion during the COP29 U.N. Climate Summit, Thursday, Nov. 21, 2024, in Baku, Azerbaijan.

UNEP Executive Director Inger Andersen says the world is expected to surpass the Paris Agreement's 1.5-degree target. | Rafiq Maqbool/AP

SPEAKING OF ADAPTATION: A U.N. report out Wednesday underscores the grid-reliability threats of a warming world.

The U.N. Environment Programme finally said the quiet part out loud in a report Wednesday: The world is going to miss its goal of limiting global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius — and not only does that mean we'll need more power, the power will be harder to get.

It warns that the new best-case scenario of peaking warming at 1.8 degrees Celsius risks overstraining power grids as the world faces sharply rising electricity demand from data centers, electric cars and a growing need for air conditioning.

Rising temperatures could triple the amount of power needed for keeping people cool, going from 5,000 terawatt-hours in 2002 to as much as 18,000 TWh by 2050. And the aforementioned heat waves, drought and other climate extremes could strain supplies further.

The report suggests scaling renewable power to 60-70 percent of global electricity generation by 2030 — up from around 32 percent in 2024.

The cost of holding warming at 1.8 degrees is around $2.4 trillion annually. —Sara Schonhardt

NOT WHAT YOU THINK IT MEANS: The good news for climate action: Renewable energy is booming. The bad news: so are fossil fuels.

Bottom line: Adding clean tech to the globe’s energy systems won’t be enough to drastically curb planet-heating emissions as electricity demand soars, according to a new report from consulting firm McKinsey.

It’s no longer a given that efficiency improvements and plummeting costs for renewables will offset the world’s energy appetite. McKinsey said that “demand came from sources that earlier outlooks did not fully anticipate," such as energy-hungry artificial intelligence and higher air conditioning usage in Asia.

The paradox: While policymakers have focused on increasing electrification and clean energy deployment, the size of the energy pie is growing. That has made those contributions relatively smaller.

“Against this backdrop, and despite resilient renewables growth in some regions, expectations that oil demand is set to peak before 2030 warrant scrutiny. In fact, the entire system is growing, building all fuel and power industries in parallel,” the report said.

The findings are relevant for the United Nations climate talks in Turkey, known as COP31, in November. Officials will focus on a plan to increase global electrification to 35 percent of total energy consumption by 2035, though that pact will sit outside the official negotiations. The question is whether that target will help reduce emissions, given the rise of fossil fuels.

The report identifies a clear gap for renewables. Low carbon technologies like solar and wind are attracting as much investment as fossil fuels for the first time. But money is lagging for storage, transmission and other infrastructure to support it. — Zack Colman

GREEN RUSH: The U.S. was the world’s largest recipient of foreign investments in renewable energy between 2020 and June of this year, amounting to nearly $200 billion, according to BloombergNEF.

Foreign cash accounted for 49 percent of total dollars going to American renewables, with more than half of those international investments coming from the European Union. (Domestic and foreign investments amounted to $399 billion over that time — see the chart below.)

Renewable investments remain strong as projects race to qualify for tax breaks

Sara Schonhardt/POLITICO

Much of the foreign money has gone toward solar projects, with investments growing as the price of panels fell. Solar was also buoyed by challenges related to permitting wind energy projects.

Boomerang: Trump’s efforts to kill green subsidies have helped propel the investment rush as companies try to qualify for tax credits before they expire.

Despite their disappearance, booming electricity demand could make America an attractive market for clean energy investors.

“The fundamentals outside of the policy environment in the U.S. are extremely strong for renewable energy, especially when you look at load growth,” said Meredith Annex, head of clean power research at BloombergNEF. “I would imagine that investors will continue to look for wherever they're going to get their return, and if that's the U.S., it's the U.S.” —Sara Schonhardt

 

A message from AFPM:

The United States has the strongest fuel refining, petrochemical manufacturing and midstream energy industries in the world, backed by the most talented and innovative workforce. We produce more gasoline, diesel, jet fuel and refined products than any other country — more than we consume, and enough to export to our allies. Our petrochemical industry benefits from an abundance of affordable U.S. natural gas liquids and is able to keep critical materials flowing to manufacturers here and thousands of miles away.

Refineries, petrochemical facilities and energy pipelines are strategic national assets, essential to our economy, national security and modern life. American-made fuels power transportation, manufacturing and supply chains. Our petrochemicals are the building blocks for modern medicine, the homes we live in, the vehicles we drive and technologies shaping our future.

Learn more about how We Make Progress.

Our open tabs

STEP GINGERLY: U.S. House Republicans are divided over how to address the backlash around data centers ahead of midterm elections, report Amelia Davidson and Kelsey Brugger — just as President Donald Trump is doubling down on his support for them.

DATA CENTER SPEED BUMP: A judge blocked the approval of the first data center on U.S. public lands Tuesday, saying the Interior Department's Bureau of Land Management’s move to switch a solar farm to a data center failed to prove the projects would have similar environmental footprints. The order may be more of a speed bump than a roadblock, writes Alex Guillén.

ANDY'S TEST: British Prime Minister Andy Burnham has promised to ease the cost of living for citizens facing what he says are the highest energy bills in Europe. But his options are limited amid an energy crunch stemming from the war in Iran. Charlie Cooper has the details.

TAX BIG OIL?: The EU’s green transition chief is proposing a tax on fossil fuel profits, more joint debt and a bigger budget to manage the costs of coping with climate change, Zia Weise reports. Those ideas aren’t likely to be embraced by all countries in the 27-member bloc, but they come as a summer of extreme weather took a toll on many of its economies.

That’s all for today. Thanks for reading!

Did someone forward Surge to you? Sign up here if you're in the U.S. or here if you're in the EU.

​​​

https://www.yahoo.com/news/politics/articles/york-big-bet-nuclear-energy-073000578.html
 

Canary Media

New York’s big new bet on nuclear energy

Alexander Kaufman
Thu, September 3, 2026 at 3:30 AM EDT

When Gov. Kathy Hochul took office in 2021, New York was in the middle of a complicated energy transition. Albany had passed one of the nation's most ambitious decarbonization laws only two years earlier, yet the state had just shuttered its single largest source of carbon-free power: the Indian Point nuclear station.

Five years later, the situation has flipped. Hochul, a Democrat who is up for reelection in November, watered down the state's decarbonization goals this spring and is now calling for the biggest buildout of new nuclear reactors in decades.

"Expanding our nuclear energy capacity will play a key role in my all-of-the-above energy strategy to ensure we have enough reliable power to keep the lights on and costs down for New Yorkers while helping attract 21st century economic development opportunities," Hochul said in a statement to Canary Media.

If successful, the 5 gigawatts of new nuclear power plants that Hochul aims to build would make New York the No. 3 state in the country in terms of atomic generating capacity.

It's an ambitious target. The entire U.S. has built just over 3 GW of new nuclear capacity over the last 20 years, and most of it came from the first-of-a-kind AP1000 buildout at Southern Company's Alvin W. Vogtle Electric Generating plant in Georgia, which was plagued by cost and deadline overruns.

Hochul's nuclear embrace comes as federal support flows toward efforts to build both smaller next-generation reactors and larger-scale facilities similar to the three New York already has.

"This is part of the return of energy realism to the Western world," said Isuru Seneviratne, the co-founder of Nuclear New York, an advocacy group that has pushed for more atomic energy in the state.

Not everyone is happy with the move. Influential local groups such as NY Renews say the state has not done enough to maximize wind and solar power, and some state lawmakers have called for a moratorium on nuclear.

Hochul, for her part, has cast nuclear energy as necessary for long-term decarbonization. The state has struggled to execute on its plan to build large-scale renewables upstate and ferry the power downstate, and President Donald Trump has all but crushed the offshore wind industry that New York was otherwise banking on for clean power.

"While dangerous policies coming out of Washington, D.C., threaten to halt our progress, I am doubling down on our efforts to strengthen our grid and invest in the clean energy we need to power New York," Hochul said in the statement to Canary Media.

Changing tides

The Empire State's turnaround marks a major shift in state energy policy.

Indian Point station, north of New York City — at one point the state's largest nuclear plant — shut down its last reactor in April 2021, following a decades-long campaign by those who believed the facility represented a grave risk from a September 11–style terrorist attack; among them were then-Gov. Andrew Cuomo and Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who also argued that the warm water the facility discharged harmed wildlife in the Hudson River.

Hochul took office later that same year, but it wasn't until 2024 that she began calling for the state to revisit nuclear energy.

In January 2025, Hochul issued a nuclear "master plan" for the state. Five months later, she ordered the New York Power Authority (NYPA) — the largest state-owned utility in the country — to help bring down the cost of building the first gigawatt of new nuclear capacity.

That December, New York inked a partnership with Ontario, where the conservative government is building what will likely be North America's first small modular reactor: a 300-megawatt BWRX-300 from the American Japanese giant GE Vernova Hitachi Nuclear Energy. The pact was aimed at working together to settle on one or two reactor designs that the entire Northeast could get behind, allowing for a regional supply chain to form that would bring down the costs of building the second, third, and fourth versions of the same technology.

In January 2026, Hochul upped the target, adding another 4 GW of capacity to the state's nuclear goal while announcing that eight upstate New York communities had responded to NYPA's request for information to express their interest in hosting nuclear facilities.

Two months later, she spearheaded a deal with the governors of all six New England states to coordinate plans for new nuclear projects with the hopes of further cementing a regional standard for nuclear. In June, her office kicked off the Public Service Commission process to begin siting the plants.

While Hochul has moved fast in recent months, the process of actually getting a new nuclear power plant built will be much slower.

"These are generational investments that we're talking about," said Doreen Harris, the chief executive of the New York State Research and Development Authority, the government agency in charge of charting the state's energy future. "These are not investments that necessarily mean you have a project in the ground in a small number of months. This is an infrastructure investment that the governor has committed us to that will be beneficial for many generations to come."

Political blowback could build once projects get underway.

Already, state Sen. Kevin Parker, a Democrat from Brooklyn, has introduced legislation to temporarily ban construction of any nuclear power projects. The bill, proposed in April, calls for a two-and-a-half-year pause and mimics the tactic data center opponents used in pushing the state to adopt the nation's first moratorium on the computing facilities.

Plans by the U.S. Army to deploy a microreactor at Fort Drum, located in the state's northern reaches, also drew pushback following the announcement last week.

"This is going to be the first one of these reactors that's ever been deployed anywhere. You'll discover how expensive it is and you'll discover how potentially dangerous it is," Alan Kuperman a professor at the University of Texas at Austin and coordinator of the Nuclear Proliferation Prevention Project, told WWNY, a CBS affiliate located upstate.

Figuring out financing

Still the biggest hurdle to building a new nuclear power plant is financing it. In New York, electricity markets make the task that much harder.

In 1999, Albany established the New York Independent System Operator as the new overseer of the liberalized electricity market, officially breaking up the monopoly utilities

New York isn't alone in this. In the post–Cold War scramble to apply market logic to as many facets of American society as possible, most states broke up their utilities. Rather than one company owning the power plants, the distribution system, and the sales to customers, new electricity markets forced vertically integrated utilities to split apart, pitting electrical generators against one another at an auction overseen by new nonprofit grid operators. The idea was to drive down prices.

The new system had benefits. No longer could an obstinately coal-burning utility, for example, block the construction of increasingly cheap renewables. Independent developers could just build clean energy on their own and compete.

But financing large-scale power plants that take years to build has proved virtually impossible. The hydroelectric buildout of the 1920s and 1930s — and the nuclear boom of the 1960s and 1970s — relied on utilities offsetting the losses from megaprojects with soaring electricity sales in another division of the business. The private developers who now build power plants in markets like New York have no such ability, and are thus generally not willing to bear the risk of a capital-intensive project like a nuclear power plant.

New York's most recent nuclear reactor, Unit 2 of Nine Mile Point plant, in Oswego, came online in 1988. No new nuclear projects have even been attempted in the state since then.

All that is what makes NYPA's role so compelling. The state created the power authority in 1931, when then-Gov. Franklin D. Roosevelt sought a way to harness more hydroelectric power. NYPA later served as a national model once Roosevelt became president and enacted the New Deal, establishing federal utilities such as the Tennessee Valley Authority in the rural Southeast. Now, it can serve as a tool to help Albany exceed the typical limits of a liberalized market.

The state-owned power company can provide steady financing and support to help lower the hurdles private developers face in building electricity megaprojects.

NYPA's current nuclear mandate is limited to the first gigawatt Hochul wants to build. Asked whether NYPA could be used for more projects going forward, Sean Ewart, the deputy secretary of energy Hochul tasked with overseeing the new reactor buildout, said Albany was open to the idea.

"My honest answer to that question is that it's TBD," he said. "Our mission is to build this in the fastest way possible … so we're not thinking about this from any kind of ideological perspective. We're just thinking about this practically. Let's get this done.”

NOW JUST A WEEK AWAY!
 
Please share widely and invite all who might be interested:
 
Wednesday September 9, 2026, 7-8:30 PM ET
 
&
&
 
 
 
THREE MILE ISLAND:
LEGACY & RESISTANCE TO REOPENING 
 
AN ONLINE PUBLIC FORUM
 
Wednesday September 9, 2026, 7-8:30 PM Eastern time
 
Three Mile Island was the site of the most serious nuclear accident in U.S. history. Unit 2 suffered a partial meltdown in 1979 and has been shuttered ever since. People in central Pennsylvania still face lingering health effects from the reactor meltdown, and are now organizing to stop the re-0pening of Unit 1.
 
The announced restart of Three Mile Island Unit-1 is aimed to serve just one client: Microsoft, and has been met with unabashed enthusiasm by Governor Shapiro and the PA legislature. This deal was cooked up in the dark in board rooms and political parlors with the backing of Microsoft founder, Bill Gates.
 
SPEAKERS
 
Eric Epstein is the spokesperson and Chairman of Three Mile Island Alert, founded in 1977. He first joined the Lancaster-based Susquehanna Valley Alliance (SVA) in 1982, working to prevent the illegal dumping of 700,000 gallons of radioactive water into the Susquehanna River. Eric has litigated at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and other regulatory bodies, written numerous professional papers, and provided testimony regarding utility rates, electric power competition and radioactive waste isolation.
 
Patricia Longenecker is a retired teacher and healthcare professional who has lived on a family homestead near TMI since 1974.  She has been an active member of Three Mile Island Alert for over four decades. She will discuss the powerful contributions of women and mothers who have tirelessly exposed the risks to children and other vulnerable groups following the massive TMI radiation release.
 
Aaron Datesman is a researcher and inventor based in Washington, DC, who led a recent biomedical study of residents exposed to radiation from the TMI meltdown who are still at risk. He has held technical positions at Argonne National Laboratory, the US Department of Energy, NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center, and the University of Virginia. His recent book, with Doug Brugge, Dirty Secrets of Nuclear Power in an Era of Climate Change challenges the claim that low-level ionizing radiation released by nuclear power reactors is not dangerous, and demonstrates that there is no such thing as low-risk exposure. 
 
Moderator: Joseph M Hunt is an activist with the Clamshell Alliance  and Massachusetts Peace Action, a development economist with 30 years’ experience in Asia and Africa working on public health and food security programs, and a retired instructor in Harvard's graduate sustainability degree program.
 
 
ACCESSIBILITY: Live captioning will be available.
If you have accessibility questions, reply to your registration email to confirm your requirements or request more information.
 
QUESTIONS?
 
For social media sharing: 
 
To share on Facebook, paste this link into a page:
Or go to: 
https://www.facebook.com/ClamshellAlliance/ and copy the top/featured post.
 
A copy of the social media blurb is attached and the flyer, but please make sure the register link is included.

https://www.canarymedia.com/articles/batteries/us-built-more-grid-batteries

The US built more grid batteries last quarter than ever before

The outlook for storage construction keeps getting brighter as everyone from the Trump White House to clean energy advocates to AI giants clamors for more.

By Julian Spector

 

Two green-vested workers stand near batteries near a dirt road
Workers at the Pastoria battery energy storage facility in Arvin, California (Eric Thayer/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images)

There’s never been a better time to build energy storage in the U.S. than right now.

Grid batteries — which sop up power when it’s abundant and discharge that energy when it’s needed — have been ascendant for a decade, as the price of the underlying lithium-ion cells fell precipitously. Bolstered by plummeting costs and increasing familiarity with the tech, developers started building bigger and in more parts of the country.

Now, the U.S. power sector has added more battery capacity in the second quarter of this year than any quarter ever, according to a report out today from the Solar Energy Industries Association and Benchmark Mineral Intelligence. Even as the wind and solar industries face uncertain futures, the outlook for continued battery growth is so strong that Benchmark Minerals upped the prediction for cumulative installs through 2030 by 11.5% from its previous report, issued just three months ago.

The 20.2 gigawatt-hours of battery capacity built from April through June represents one-tenth of the nation’s entire grid storage capacity. Seven of the new projects mustered at least 1 GWh or more of storage capacity, reflecting developers’ rising appetite for megabatteries.

To contextualize the numbers, the second-quarter installations can inject 6.7 gigawatts of instantaneous power onto the grid — equivalent to nearly seven big old-school nuclear reactors, but without the decade-plus wait time for construction. That comparison has its limits, though, because nuclear plants can generate around the clock, whereas batteries must refill and discharge.

Batteries can make a huge difference in places where the grid is stretched thin, and can be built quickly and closer to centers of energy consumption than new fossil-fuel-burning plants with their smokestacks and emissions.


Those qualities make the tech attractive in places where capacity is scarce, which happens to include California, Texas, the Southeast, the mid-Atlantic, the Northeast, and just about anywhere else. AI data center developers are turning to batteries to ensure they can keep the algorithms running during peak demand hours. And solar developers leverage batteries to turn their clean electrons into a more valuable on-demand resource; 44% of the new storage capacity was built alongside solar plants.

This widespread zeal for batteries extends to the Trump White House, which revoked wind and solar subsidies last year but kept Biden-era tax incentives for batteries. As the executive branch found novel and often legally dubious means to thwart wind and solar construction, it has left battery developers to go about their business.

Recently, the administration has more proactively encouraged the battery industry, loaning $490 million dollars to a battery project in Puerto Rico as well as funding efforts to reshore the supply chain for critical minerals used to make the tech. Energy Secretary Chris Wright, who regularly blasts solar power on his official platforms, recently stopped by the Maine site of a novel iron-air battery that Form Energy plans to build, with help from Department of Energy grant funding.

An observer unencumbered by historical nuance might conclude that Trump is the battery president, and that no president has done more for batteries than he. SEIA even gestures in that direction, noting in its press release that large-scale storage nearly doubled during the first year and a half of the second Trump term, and that 74% of the second-quarter storage additions happened in states that voted for him — like Texas, Utah, and newly minted battery storage powerhouse Arizona.

The reality is these outcomes took years to build up to. Technologists tinkered with batteries in big boxes; California mandated its utilities buy storage and subsidized it for smaller customers; Texas wildcatters took big risks on early battery investments and made windfall profits; and companies like LG and Tesla built huge factories to solidify domestic battery supplies. Now, all that hard work is paying off with installations on a scale we’ve never seen before.

Oklo has another permitting application denied for lack of information – this one by PJM.
 
Oklo is appealing to FERC. The matter includes a clearer picture of what Oklo is planning under its power deal for a Meta data center in Ohio:
 
  • 150 MW of nuclear (evidently, comprised of two of its now-75 MW reactors)
  • 300 MW of fuel cells
  • 300 MW of gas generation
 
This is a far cry from the 1.2 GW of nuclear generation Oklo said the deal involved early this year. And it begs the question of how the fuel cells are going to be powered (perhaps with H2 produced from methane, or operated as a storage system using electricity generated by the other sources?). 

Westinghouse Renews IPO Bid Amid AI Power Crunch, With U.S. Government Targeting $30 Billion Valuation

Westinghouse Renews IPO Bid Amid AI Power Crunch, With U.S. Government Targeting $30 Billion Valuation

U.S. nuclear power plant company Westinghouse is pursuing an initial public offering (IPO) in a bid for a comeback, nine years after suffering its worst crisis — a 2017 bankruptcy. The surge in electricity demand driven by the proliferation of artificial intelligence (AI) data centers, along with the Donald Trump administration's nuclear expansion policies, are cited as the key drivers behind the IPO push.

The Wall Street Journal reported on August 31 (local time) that Westinghouse filed confidentially for an IPO in July. The listing timeline and offering size have not yet been finalized.

Market estimates project Westinghouse's enterprise value at between $15 billion (approximately 20.6 trillion won) and $20 billion (approximately 27.4 trillion won). David Nicholas, CEO of X Funds, which manages a nuclear energy exchange-traded fund (ETF), said, "If investors assign value to the AP1000, a valuation exceeding $20 billion is not out of the question."

From Bankruptcy to Revival

Founded in 1886, Westinghouse began as an electrical equipment company and went on to lead the nuclear power industry, building the world's first commercial nuclear power plant after World War II. However, competition intensified as latecomers such as South Korea and Japan gained market share, and the company ultimately filed for bankruptcy in 2017 amid construction delays and cost overruns at the Vogtle nuclear plant project in Georgia.

The two Vogtle reactors were originally expected to cost $14 billion (approximately 19.2 trillion won) to build, but with construction delayed by roughly seven years, the final cost exceeded $30 billion (approximately 41.2 trillion won). Its then-parent company, Japan's Toshiba, could not absorb the losses.

In 2023, Canadian private equity firm Brookfield and uranium miner Cameco acquired Westinghouse for $8 billion (approximately 11 trillion won). At the time of the acquisition, the nuclear construction business — the direct cause of the bankruptcy — was assigned no value, with only the nuclear fuel manufacturing and nuclear services segments, which generate stable cash flow, included in the valuation.

Full-Throated Support from the Trump Administration

The Trump administration is aiming to push Westinghouse's valuation above $30 billion. In October of last year, the administration entered into a partnership with Westinghouse shareholders and agreed to pursue $80 billion (approximately 109.8 trillion won) in domestic nuclear construction. In exchange for providing regulatory streamlining and financial support including low-interest loans, the U.S. government would secure a 20% equity stake if the company's post-listing valuation exceeds $30 billion.

President Trump has set a goal of expanding U.S. nuclear generating capacity from the current roughly 100 gigawatts (GW) to 400 GW by 2050, with an interim target of breaking ground on 10 new reactors by 2030. Westinghouse's AP1000 reactor technology is considered central to this plan.

Dan Sumner, CEO of Westinghouse, emphasized, "There is virtually no realistic path to achieving AI infrastructure expansion and energy security without nuclear power."

Power demand from AI data centers is already emerging as a tangible constraint. Last month, New York Governor Kathy Hochul signed an executive order halting new data center construction for one year. Applications totaling 12 GW of data center capacity are pending on New York's power grid — equivalent to Portugal's peak electricity demand.

Overseas Order Prospects

The U.S. government is also working to secure business opportunities for Westinghouse abroad. The United States agreed in July to a nuclear cooperation agreement (a "123 Agreement") with Saudi Arabia, under which Westinghouse is expected to become the exclusive supplier of AP1000 reactors to the kingdom. The contract value is expected to reach several billion dollars, with some analysts projecting the economic impact of the 30-year agreement at tens of billions of dollars.

However, having suffered bankruptcy during full-scale nuclear construction, Westinghouse has maintained a management principle of not bearing direct construction risk. Accordingly, the U.S. government and Westinghouse are reportedly proposing partnerships with South Korean companies that have extensive nuclear construction experience to serve as construction partners.

As part of trade agreements tied to tariffs, the United States secured commitments last year for large-scale investments from South Korea and Japan. The U.S. government is also reportedly developing plans to channel a portion of those investment funds into its domestic nuclear revival.

NRC Masthead

Updated Inspection Plan for Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2 (Report 05000387/2026005 and 05000388/2026005)

ADAMS Accession No. ML26240A056

ADAMS Public Search - Home

Bookmark and Share

Pages