Insiders are discussing fuel vulnerabilities, proliferation risks, thorium, and the potential costs and benefits of DOGE.
America’s nuclear energy industry has bipartisan support, with both Democrats and Republicans investing heavily in advanced nuclear technologies. The ADVANCE Act of 2024, which supports the deployment of new reactor technologies, received bipartisan backing in Congress.
There is hope that the new administration will boost domestic production of high-assay, low-enriched uranium (HALEU) used by advanced reactors. Concerns have been raised about the weaponization potential of HALEU compared to low-enriched uranium.
Trump’s proposed National Energy Council aims to promote American energy dominance, while the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) seeks to improve regulatory processes, including potential changes to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).
Industry reactions to DOGE are mixed, with some expressing caution about potential cuts to essential programs within the Department of Energy. There is optimism about the use of artificial intelligence to streamline licensing processes for new reactor designs.
grid.
DoE Destruction of Uranium-233 Worries Thorium Advocates
While Kutsch defended some aspects of the Department of Energy, he’s not happy with its approach to uranium-233, a uranium isotope that can be used in thorium-based nuclear energy production.
“This is what gets me mad about bureaucracies,” said Kutsch, whose organization in 2023 signed a memorandum of understanding with El Salvador.
Kirk Sorensen of Flibe Energy, a molten salt reactor company exploring thorium in one of its designs, described uranium-233 as “a marvelous pre-fuel” during the Heritage roundtable with Spencer and Brown.
The Department of Energy has started eliminating the U-233 stored at Oak Ridge National Laboratory.
Sorensen said the department’s U-233 disposition “should be stopped immediately.”
Kutsch said much of that stored U-233 could be used in thorium-based molten salt reactors or in nuclear medicine.
Please rewrite the following sentence to make it clearer: “The research team’s findings were inconclusive due to insufficient data.”
“The research team could not draw a definitive conclusion because there was not enough data available.”
Source link