In the face of ongoing pushback against renewable energy generation project development from both federal and certain state governments, coupled with the need to address continually increasing electricity demand, a turn back to fossil fuels is not the only avenue of interest. “Alternative Energy” sources, including nuclear and geothermal, as well as battery storage systems as key components to alternative energy infrastructure, have been offered an increased opportunity to meet the growing demands. This limited series will review recent and current federal and state initiatives to expand nuclear and geothermal, as well as battery, projects given that barriers to the establishment of other renewable and alternative energy options persist.
Nuclear Energy.
According to the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, in 2023, nuclear energy provided about 19% of all U.S. electricity and about 47% of U.S. zero-emissions power. For 2026 and 2027, the U.S. Energy Information Administration forecasts that nuclear power will maintain an 18% share of U.S. electricity generation. Notably, in light of growing electricity demands, particularly regarding proliferation of data centers, utilities and tech companies continue to announce plans to reopen retired nuclear plants.
Nuclear power proliferation presents unique potential challenges despite its zero-emissions benefit during operation, including radioactivity and long-term storage of waste. Nuclear plants are also expensive to build, including protracted permitting and approval processes which can often take many years longer than renewable energy project permitting and development. Thus, while nuclear power may be considered an alternative it is not an immediate solution to current demand. However, unlike wind and solar power, nuclear energy availability is not dependent on the weather, supporting the characterization of nuclear energy as a more direct substitute for fossil fuels than other zero-emissions energy sources. Accordingly, nuclear energy is seen as an important option for its role in addressing energy demand and reliability issues, as well as energy transition goals.
Federal Nuclear Revival.
In May 2025, President Trump issued four executive orders with the goal of reviving the U.S. nuclear energy industry through, among other things, speeding up licensing, adding around 300 GW of nuclear capacity by 2050, and maximizing domestic production of nuclear fuel. Since the orders, Department of Energy (“DOE”) loans have supported the revival of retired nuclear plants, the DOE has announced a $2.7 billion investment to support the buildout of domestic supply chains for nuclear fuels, the DOE has selected recipients of up to $800 million in cost-share funding to support deployment of advanced light-water small modular reactors, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (“NRC”) has granted several 20-year license extensions to nuclear power plants.
However, the buildout of new nuclear has been slow-moving and is not without its own challenges relating to local pushback on permitting and development. One of the administration’s goals is to have 10 new large nuclear reactors under construction by 2030. In October 2025, Westinghouse Electric Company, Brookfield Asset Management, and Cameco Corporation announced a strategic partnership with the U.S. Government to invest at least $80 billion to construct Westinghouse nuclear power reactors across the country. Since this announcement, however, little to no progress has been made or announced regarding site selections and constructions plans. As a result, the administration has reportedly begun to explore other alternatives, participating in recent talks with representatives of GE Vernova Hitachi Nuclear Energy and Korea Electric Power Corporation of South Korea regarding potential financing if either decide to compete with Westinghouse to build their own reactors. The main hurdle seems to stem from cost overrun concerns as potential partnering utilities and developers are wary about subsequently shouldering the bill if such projects exceed estimated costs.
State Nuclear Revival.
Five out of at least 16 states which imposed restrictions on the construction of new nuclear power plants since 2016 have since lifted such moratoria while other states have softened restrictions without full removal. An additional five are also considering doing away with outright bans. States with existing restrictions for new nuclear plants include California, Oregon, Minnesota, New York, Vermont, Maine, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New Jersey, and Hawaii. The states which lifted previous restrictions include Montana, Wisconsin, Illinois, Kentucky, and West Virginia. Regarding New Jersey, Governor Mikie Sherrill signed legislation this month, April 2026, removing the state’s moratorium on new nuclear power and launching New Jersey’s new Nuclear Task Force. Governor Sherrill supported the legislation’s promotion of new advanced nuclear power as a solution to the state’s energy demand while lowering costs.
Also this month, April 2026, Kentucky and Texas have created and offered incentives to establish new nuclear energy projects. Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear signed legislation aiming to lower utility costs through the establishment of the Nuclear Reactor Site Readiness Pilot Program, providing grant funding for site development and licensing to boost nuclear energy development and subsequently lower utility costs over the long term. Texas Governor Greg Abbott and the Texas Advanced Nuclear Energy Office (established in 2025) opened applications for programs under the Texas Advanced Nuclear Development Fund to increase advanced nuclear construction and strengthen nuclear manufacturing capacity in Texas. Governor Abbott recognized nuclear energy as an efficient and reliable energy solution.
A Closer Look: The Diablo Canyon Power Plant Revival.
The Diablo Canyon Power Plant (“Diablo Canyon”) in Avila Beach, San Luis Obispo County, California is a nuclear plant among those which recently received 20-year license extensions from the NRC. Diablo Canyon is California’s only operating nuclear facility and, in 2024, Diablo Canyon supplied about 10% of California’s total electricity and provided about 16% of California’s zero-carbon electricity. The plant was scheduled to retire by 2025. While the NRC license extension authorizes operations until 2044 for Unit 1 and 2045 for Unit 2, current California state law restricts the plant’s operations until 2030 unless the California Legislature takes action to approve an extension of plant operations.
According to a recent California Governor Gavin Newsom press release, the NRC extension of operations at Diablo Canyon will allow the plant to provide critical daily, carbon-free electricity essential to tackle growing demand and extreme weather. Despite the California Governor’s support for the NRC-granted extension, however, there is no explicit call for the California Legislature to allow further extension past the 2030 statutory cutoff. Proponents for Diablo Canyon’s continued operation provide that it would cost less to keep the plant operational than to close and replace it with alternatives, but critics argue that ratepayers are being charged more than what is necessary to operate the plant and call for reform of the plant’s payment structure. The latter, however, still recognize Diablo Canyon as a valuable clean energy asset, assisting California in reaching its climate goals and enhancing grid reliability.
Conclusion.
Continued expansion of nuclear energy in the United States, and the revival of previously decommissioned plants, will likely soon intensify if anticipated plans for new plants materialize, states continue to join in on the resurgence of the industry, and investments continue to support domestic supply chain buildout, as well as the development and deployment of relevant technologies. Such expansion is one to keep on the radar.
For more information, please contact Sylwia Dakowicz or Paige Punzalan.
