Texas is often considered the energy capital of the U.S. – but usually that means oil and gas. Nuclear power has a much smaller presence in the state, but Gov. Greg Abbott has vowed to change that.
This week the governor’s office and the Public Utility Commission released a report from the Texas Advanced Nuclear Reactor Working Group, outlining plans to bolster nuclear power production in the state. Recommendations include creating incentives programs and workforce training to build up the state’s infrastructure and power generating capacity.
Reed Clay, president of Texas Nuclear Alliance, an industry group, joined Texas Standard to talk about the report and the future of nuclear power in Texas. Listen to the interview above or read the transcript below.
This transcript has been edited lightly for clarity:
Texas Standard: So what are your first impressions of this report by the Texas Advanced Nuclear Reactor Working Group? What are some of the key points in the report?
Reed Clay: The governor’s vision here and Commissioner Glotfelty’s vision is great – it’s really a fantastic report we were very much in favor of and applauded over a year ago.
You know, at first blush is that this is really designed to build nuclear energy. There are aspects of research here, but they’re focusing on every aspect of what Texas needs to do in order to build nuclear in the state – from an incentive fund that would incentivize the development of these, to incentivizing the manufacturing to be here, to workforce solutions that are going to be needed to deploy these reactors throughout the state of Texas.
Very clear that they gave a lot of thought to the whole value chain. And, you know, that’s something that we talk about a lot, is that Texas really does and can have the whole value chain here in the state, and there’s no place better for it.
Well, Texas has a few nuclear reactors now, but we produce much less power than leading states, like Illinois and Pennsylvania. What are some of the roadblocks to developing nuclear energy infrastructure in Texas?
Look, I mean, it’s no secret the anchor around nuclear’s neck has been two things.
One has been cost – and they’re related, by the way, the two things. The costs of deploying a nuclear reactor is a very significant upfront capital expenditure and with a much longer payback period.
The other big obstacle traditionally has been – and I think this is changing – but traditionally it’s been public opinion about nuclear. You know, the anti-nuclear activists in the ’60s and ’70s really did a good job of sort of tainting the industry with really sort of fantastical ideas about how nuclear was bad. And a lot of those sort of suppositions remain.
One of the things that the alliance is here to do is to educate folks about the benefits of nuclear and the safety of nuclear. But those are the two biggest obstacles. And this report, by the way, one of the things that it’s really honed in on is trying to de-risk the investment into nuclear by some of the recommendations – the state would come in and help seed some of these projects.
» RELATED: Microsoft may reinstate Three Mile Island nuclear plant for AI operations
Well, we’re many decades removed from disasters like Chernobyl and Three Mile Island, but as you see it, is there still work to do in changing public perception of nuclear power?
I think it’s come a long way. And, you know, I definitely think a lot of this is generational.
I think the younger generation doesn’t remember Chernobyl. They don’t remember Three Mile Island. I don’t remember Three Mile Island. I think it happened in my lifetime, but I was too young to remember it.
The generational shift has helped, but I think the other thing that’s helped is just the concern around climate change and the need for low-carbon or no-carbon emissions, coupled with an understanding that reliable energy is an important thing. You know, nuclear is really the only energy source that can solve both of those problems at the same time. And so those those two things I think are definitely changing and shifting public opinion.
You know, we shouldn’t count on public opinion being static and we should be doing the things that we need to do to educate people about the benefits of nuclear – some of which I just talked about – so that people understand that these are worthwhile projects and they’re safe projects that are ultimately going to benefit ratepayers and consumers.
Well, Leslie, in the little time we have left, what are you most optimistic about when it comes to the future of nuclear power generation in Texas?
Well, look, I mean, I think this report is indicative of something that has made me optimistic about nuclear in this state for a long time.
For a long time, nuclear has been treading water. And what we need is leadership that is going to step up and decide that we’re going to deploy nuclear in this state. And I think what you’re seeing in this report from Gov. Abbott, Commissioner Glotfelty – this is their report, but I think you’re seeing this across leadership in both chambers of the Legislature, as well – they’re bringing to bear the Texas spirit of of building things, of solving our own problems to the nuclear industry. That’s what makes me optimistic about this marriage.
The flip side is Texas is also bringing the demand. We clearly need energy. The projected growth is staggering. And we have no shortage of demand for the nuclear industry to come in and service.
So it’s that sort of two-sided coin that really gives me the optimism that Texas is going to end up being the home for nuclear going forward.
