nuclear-news

The Microreactor Miracle Meets a Morphing AI-Nuclear Future

questions about whether the country will achieve its long-term core nuclear deployment objectives. And over-relying on a boost from the micro reactor miracle offers meager dividends when deployment is paramount.

August 15, 2026, By: Kenneth Luongo, https://nationalinterest.org/blog/energy-world/the-microreactor-miracle-meets-a-morphing-ai-nuclear-future

The microreactor milestone is real, but shifting AI models, China’s challenge, and deployment delays could complicate America’s nuclear ambitions.

It was impressive that four microreactor start-up companies beat the clock and achieved reactor criticality in compliance with the Trump administration’s arbitrary July 4 Reactor Pilot Program (RPP) deadline. But these reactors are years away from deployment, and the excessive swaggering associated with this modest achievement is out of step with the quavering nuclear energy realities ricocheting off a rapidly evolving artificial intelligence (AI) system.  

US Microreactor Achievements

Of the four reactors that achieved zero power, only Antares has an identified market application beyond this demonstration. Its Mark-1 reactor has been selected as a pilot technology for powering Joint Base San Antonio, Texas.

The Antares Mark-0 reactor, which is the zero-power test reactor and prototype for the commercially oriented R1 Mark1, was the first to meet the criticality deadline on June 4 at Idaho National Laboratory (INL). It uses High Assay Low-Enriched (HALEU) TRistructural isotropic (TRISO) fuel and is sodium-cooled. The projected commercial reactor can provide 100 kilowatts to 1 megawatt (MW) electric power. Beyond its work with the Department of Defense (DOD), Antares also has been working with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) on potentially powering a Moon base. 

Valar Atomics’ Ward-250 achieved criticality on June 18 in Utah and claimed it produced 10 kilowatts (kW) of thermal output. It had previously announced a criticality test at Los Alamos National Laboratory in November 2025. The Ward-250 is a TRISO-fueled high-temperature gas reactor (HTGR) that uses helium as a coolant. After the test, Valar announced a partnership with Nvidia to explore powering AI data centers and stated that its evolving commercial unit could be “deployed by the hundreds at ‘gigasites’” that could support manufacturing as well as energy production.

Deployable Energy, a year-old company, met the criticality mark on June 30 at Idaho National Laboratory (INL). The company’s founder reportedly delivered the reactor core in the bed of a Ford F-150 truck. The reactor is part of the Nuclear Energy Launch Pad initiative at INL, which is designed to carry the RPP into the future. The reactor is a water-moderated, helium-cooled design using 4.9 percent enriched fuel. It is considered a “nuclear battery” and would max out at 1 MW. It is designed to fit in a 20-foot shipping container and be dropped at any location.

Aalo Atomics Aalo-X Critical Test Reactor sneaked in under the criticality deadline at midnight on July 4 at INL. The test reactor included a full-scale core and was designed to demonstrate key components that will be used in the Aalo-X, a low-enriched uranium (LEU) fueled, sodium-cooled 10 MW reactor. The goal is to deploy groups of these reactors in 50 MW Aalo Pods to support commercial data centers. Aalo recently formed a strategic partnership with Crusoe, a vertically integrated AI infrastructure provider, to  “validate nuclear power’s effectiveness with AI workloads” at INL.

The Mutating AI Data Center Model 

With the microreactor milestone behind them, the Trump administration and reactor developers now face an evolving landscape for nuclear energy. AI data centers have been viewed as the top driver of America’s energy growth and ideal for pairing with nuclear energy. Projections indicate these centers could add 100 gigawatts (GW) to the US grid by 2030. 

But the data center opportunity is rapidly morphing, and opposition is growing; the now-dominant American AI model is under pressure at home and abroad. That raises questions about what role new nuclear power ultimately will play as the AI arena evolves.

The assumption has been that the hyperscalers, including Apple, Amazon Web Services, Microsoft Azure, and Google Cloud Platform, will build massive data centers as fast as they can to support US AI  frontier modelcomputing growth. One assessment identified the data center build time as roughly two to three years

But the frontier model concept and its computing campuses are under pressure.

Alex Karp, CEO of Palantir, has been on a recent crusade criticizing the American AI frontier model as a trap that requires businesses to provide their intellectual property (IP) to AI’s leading companies like Anthropic and OpenAI. Karp claims that these models’ architecture creates an “addiction” among users and allows the system provider to absorb proprietary corporate data that can be used to compete against their current customers in the future. 

He argues that companies should build their AI systems on models they own, training them on their proprietary content and keeping their data under their control. He also advocates for an “application layer” his company has developed with NVIDIA that can protect an enterprise’s IP. If Karp’s concept catches on, and Meta seems to have taken note, it could impact the mega data center build-out, reducing the number required and downsizing their power requirements. That could be a challenge for some leading nuclear reactor companies betting on the data center boom, or it could favor dial-an-output modular reactors if the costs are competitive.

China’s Dual AI Challenge

A version of the Karp concept seems to have already been adopted by China, which, because it is already closing the quality gap with the best US AI models, now poses a double threat to US dominance. 

China is giving away fast, cheap open-source AI models. These free Chinese AI platforms are popular in Africa and Latin America but are also being used by US and European companies, including Siemens, DoorDash, and Airbnb. 

Of course, one goal of China is to allow companies to easily build systems on their platform in order to serve geopolitical objectives and create dependencies it can exploit in the future. The US National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) evaluated China’s DeepSeek AI model and found that its AI offerings advance Chinese Communist Party narratives. It concludes that China’s DeepSeek “remains a leading open weight model developer and has contributed to a rapid increase in adoption of PRC [People’s Republic of China] models globally.”  It cautions that the expanding global use of these models “May pose a threat to application developers, to consumers, and to US national security.” 

This approach by AI is similar to China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), which has helped the country capture hundreds of infrastructure projects across over 140 countries, resulting in deep relationships and financial dependencies, particularly with emerging economy nations. And while its energy projects so far have heavily tilted toward fossil fuels, BRI’s relationships and financial model enhance China’s position as a future provider of new nuclear energy in the Global South, posing a threat to the future US export of small reactors and creating worry for the US political, commercial, and national security establishment.

Lagging Nuclear Reactor Technology and Scaling Challenges

Even if the US data center boom were to play out as planned, there are questions about when and whether new US nuclear power will be ready to power it. 

So far, the hyperscalers have modestly invested in small modular reactors (SMRs), but they are unlikely to be available in time for a near-term data center boom. If the buildout is over by the early 2030s, most SMRs will still be on the sidelines.

As a hedge, these companies have banked on the resurgence of mothballed nuclear power plants like Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania and Palisades in Michigan. Both of those projects are estimated to deliver new power before the end of this decade for a combined 1.6 GW. What the hyperscalers have not done is back construction of new large reactors despite the fact that a single Westinghouse AP-100 can provide over one GW of power. 

The US government wants 10 new AP-1000s under construction by 2030, but its $80 billion strategic partnership with Westinghouse and its commitment to provide $17.5 billion in loans for long lead items haven’t attracted the necessary additional investment and commitment required from the private sector. 

The US government wants 10 new AP-1000s under construction by 2030, but its $80 billion strategic partnership with Westinghouse and its commitment to provide $17.5 billion in loans for long lead items haven’t attracted the necessary additional investment and commitment required from the private sector. 

This reticence reflects a cost-overrun risk aversion from domestic electric utilities and Wall Street. In response, the administration is repurposing federal lands to create data center-nuclear power campuses. And it has turned to allies such as South Korea and Japan to jumpstart the process with foreign cash derived from bilateral trade and tariff deals. 

But that avenue also doesn’t seem to be working. The Trump administration has been frustrated with the lack of progress on the nuclear energy component of the $350 billion South Korean commitment to invest in the United States, and with Japan, it has found that its involvement in a $40 billion nuclear power project is running aground over nuclear liability concerns.

With less than 30 months left in Trump’s term, and the prospect of a hostile House of Representatives sucking the air out of his agenda, there is an urgency in rethinking the Trump administration’s nuclear deployment policy. The dependence on a rapidly evolving AI and data center market leaves questions about whether the country will achieve its long-term core nuclear deployment objectives. And over-relying on a boost from the micro reactor miracle offers meager dividends when deployment is paramount.

About the Author: Kenneth Luongo

Kenneth N. Luongo is a recognized innovator, entrepreneur, and leader in global nuclear energy and transnational security policy. He is the president and founder of the Partnership for Global Security (PGS). He has been a TEDx presenter, written over 100 articles, including in The New York Times and Foreign Affairs, and engaged extensively with global media, governments, and audiences around the world on nuclear energy and transnational security challenges and responses. He was formerly a senior advisor to the secretary of energy and a professional staff member on Capitol Hill.

August 18, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, USA | Leave a comment

A Kansas Town Is Split Over Plans to Bury a Nuclear Reactor a Mile Underground.

“This is a nuclear experiment,” Reynolds said. She questions how the company will perform maintenance so far underground, why drillers are operating under oil-and-gas regulations rather than nuclear-specific rules, and what happens to the site if Deep Fission goes out of business.

026-07-30, https://finance.biggo.com/news/1fb78f6c-786f-4381-be62-937bfa684157

Deep Fission, a California startup, plans to operate the first commercial nuclear reactor a mile underground in Parsons, Kansas, by 2027 or 2028. The project has raised $150 million and is part of a DOE pilot program to fast-track advanced reactors amid surging AI-driven electricity demand. The company says deep burial eliminates the need for costly containment buildings, with each 15-megawatt reactor powering 12,000 homes. However, the plan has sharply divided the town of 9,600. Opponents, including local group Prairie Dog Alliance and watchdog Beyond Nuclear, warn of environmental risks and insufficient oversight, while supporters view it as a vital economic spark for the struggling rural community. The project faces regulatory hurdles and broader questions about nuclear waste storage underground.

An ambitious plan to bury a commercial nuclear reactor a mile beneath a small Kansas town is pitting residents who see a coming economic renaissance against those who fear their community is being turned into a testing ground for an unproven experiment. The project, spearheaded by a California startup founded by a father-daughter team, would be the first time a commercial reactor has ever been operated so far underground.

Deep Fission, the company behind the so-called Gravity Reactor, has already drilled one test hole on the outskirts of Parsons—a rural community of 9,600 people roughly midway between Kansas City and Tulsa, Oklahoma. The firm, founded by Chief Executive Liz Muller and her father Richard Muller, an emeritus professor of physics at University of California, Berkeley, has raised roughly $150 million in the past year, with $40 million of that earmarked for the Parsons work. The startup plans to send a canister loaded with nuclear fuel into a third borehole to heat water deep underground and generate electricity on the surface as early as 2027 or 2028, a timeline that is remarkably short by industry standards.

“It’s allowing us to develop a first reactor within a time frame that had been unthinkable previously,” Liz Muller told The Wall Street Journal.

The reactor design relies on well-established pressurized water technology, but its innovation lies in its location. By operating a mile underground, Deep Fission argues it can eliminate some of the most expensive components of conventional nuclear plants. The immense pressure from rock and water at that depth would replace costly safety structures like massive containment buildings and complex cooling systems. Each reactor would generate 15 megawatts of electricity from inside a 30-inch borehole, enough to power roughly 12,000 homes. However, Muller’s long-term vision is far larger: an array of 100 or more reactors providing over a gigawatt of power, enough to supply a major data center.

Federal push meets local pushback

The Parsons project is one of 11 in a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) pilot program designed to accelerate the development and testing of small, advanced reactors. Participating companies can fast-track environmental review procedures and construct reactors outside of traditional national laboratory settings. The initiative is part of a broader push by the Trump administration to spur a “nuclear renaissance,” aiming to quadruple America’s nuclear-power generation by 2050 amid skyrocketing electricity demand driven largely by data centers for artificial intelligence.

But the expedited process has drawn sharp criticism from nuclear watchdogs and local advocacy groups. Earlier this year, a coalition of state attorneys general challenged the DOE’s new categorical exclusion for advanced nuclear reactors, arguing it bypasses rigorous environmental review and weakens public safety protections.

“It’s simply unacceptable to even consider exempting Deep Fission from a peer-reviewed environmental impact statement on the generation of high-level nuclear waste under Parsons,” said Paul Gunter of Beyond Nuclear, a group that opposes nuclear power and weapons.

The Energy Department has stated that the administration remains focused on safety and security.

In Parsons, the divide is stark. When Deep Fission broke ground in December at the Great Plains Industrial Park, a decommissioned U.S. Army ammunition base, many residents were caught off guard by the lack of public discussion. Marjorie Reynolds, a pediatric nurse and seventh-generation Kansan, quickly formed a nonprofit called the Prairie Dog Alliance to oppose the project. Its logo features a prairie dog inside a black-and-yellow nuclear symbol.

“This is a nuclear experiment,” Reynolds said. She questions how the company will perform maintenance so far underground, why drillers are operating under oil-and-gas regulations rather than nuclear-specific rules, and what happens to the site if Deep Fission goes out of business.

Jerel Johnson, an IT professional who had planned to retire in Parsons, voiced a similar frustration. “I put $125,000 into my house, and now a nuclear reactor is coming to town. I can’t think of a worse idea.”

Liz Muller has pushed back against the environmental concerns, stating that the reactor is far too deep to affect underground aquifers and that the company will follow all nuclear and oil-and-gas regulations. Because the reactors are expected to last six to seven years with few moving parts, she added, the likelihood of requiring maintenance is low. “We have simplified our reactor quite extensively,” she said. The company also plans to open a local office where residents can ask questions, emphasizing that the project “needs to be done in partnership with the community.”

Economic hopes in a struggling farm town

For others in Parsons, a 19th-century boomtown that has long sought a new economic spark, the potential payoff is worth the risk. The town was once home to one of the largest rail yards west of the Mississippi, but recent victories have been small—attracting a Taco Bell or saving a local furniture store.

Verlyn Bolinger, an insurance agent and city commissioner whose great-great-grandfather also served on the commission, captured the conflicted mood. “Any time you’re putting a nuclear reactor in a hole, it’s kind of scary,” he said. “It’s great that it’s here. It’s kind of bad that we’re the guinea pigs.”

Robert Spinks, Parsons’ police chief, is more optimistic. He views the reactor as a potential catalyst that could draw manufacturers and data centers to the region. “It’s a proven technology, just in a new application,” Spinks said. “And if that is a trigger which draws in other manufacturing and brings in living-wage jobs, I think that’s a win.”

Wayne Gilmore, an optometrist who owns the local radio station, echoed that sentiment, arguing that rural communities cannot build their futures by rejecting new technology before it is fully evaluated.

Deep Fission’s plan to store spent nuclear fuel underground is also drawing scrutiny. The company says it could eventually seal the waste in place or move it to another site. Liz Muller and her father previously founded Deep Isolation, a firm that designs underground disposal systems for nuclear waste. Still, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission will need to approve any commercial licensing before electricity from the reactor can be sold. Dozens of companies are designing smaller reactors, but none yet operate commercially in the United States, and Deep Fission must still prove it can meet its aggressive timelines and contain costs in an industry notorious for overruns.

August 3, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, USA | Leave a comment