Tuesday, April 15, 2025
NRC Accepts Disa License Application for Review
Monday, April 14, 2025
VFP China Group U.S. Revives Talks With Saudi Arabia on Transfer of Nuclear Technology - The New York Times
paywall.
U.S. Revives Talks With Saudi Arabia on Transfer of Nuclear Technology
Energy Secretary Chris Wright said he sees a “pathway” to a deal that would allow the kingdom to develop a commercial nuclear power industry and potentially enrich uranium.
The Trump administration has revived talks with Saudi officials over a deal that would give Saudi Arabia access to U.S. nuclear technology and potentially allow it to enrich uranium, Energy Secretary Chris Wright said on Sunday.
The deal — which the Biden administration had pursued as part of a broader agreement for Saudi Arabia to establish ties with Israel — would enable the kingdom to develop a “commercial nuclear power industry,” Mr. Wright told journalists in Riyadh. He added that he expected to see “meaningful developments” this year.
“We’ve not reached the details on an agreement, but it certainly looks like there is a pathway to do that,” he said. “The issue is control of sensitive technology. Are there solutions to that that involve enrichment here in Saudi Arabia? Yes.”
For years, Saudi Arabia has pressed the United States to help it develop a nuclear energy program, as Saudi officials look beyond oil to provide energy and diversify the economy. But talks on a nuclear partnership stalled, partly because the Saudi government refused to agree to conditions intended to prevent it from developing nuclear weapons or helping other nations do so.
A crucial sticking point, for example, has been whether the kingdom would import uranium or enrich it domestically, which could theoretically enable it to produce uranium for use in nuclear weapons.
The deal gained momentum under the Biden administration when Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, the kingdom’s de facto ruler, offered to establish diplomatic relations with Israel in exchange for cooperation on building nuclear reactors and other concessions from the United States, including security guarantees. Those talks faltered after the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza upended the Middle East, deepening support for the Palestinians and enmity toward Israel across the region, including in Saudi Arabia.
“It’s critical that it becomes the United States as the partner,” Mr. Wright said on Sunday. “The fact that may have been in doubt is probably indicative of unproductive relationships between the United States and Saudi Arabia in the last several years.”
The deal faces several obstacles. The United States requires countries to meet high standards of nonproliferation before cooperating on a nuclear program, including in some cases banning uranium enrichment and fuel reprocessing in their territory. The pact must be reviewed by Congress, which can block it.
In the past, members of Congress on both sides of the aisle have expressed opposition to an agreement, including Marco Rubio, who is now secretary of state.
At the same time it is negotiating with Riyadh, the Trump administration has restarted nuclear talks with Iran in an effort to contain Tehran’s growing nuclear program, after the United States withdrew from a multilateral 2015 agreement in the first Trump presidency.
Trump administration officials visiting Riyadh had discussions with Saudi officials about energy, mining, critical minerals and climate change, Mr. Wright said. A broader agreement on increasing cooperation between the two countries to develop energy resources will be signed “at a later date,” he said.
American officials did not discuss oil prices or production levels with their Saudi counterparts, Mr. Wright said.
President Trump has said that he wants energy to be cheaper and that he would “ask Saudi Arabia and OPEC to bring down the cost of oil.” Oil prices have fallen by around $10 a barrel since he imposed tariffs, and then reduced many of them, on U.S. trading partners around the world.
Mr. Wright, who was a fracking executive before his appointment as energy secretary, played down any divergence in oil policy between the two countries.
Vivian Nereim is the lead reporter for The Times covering the countries of the Arabian Peninsula. She is based in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Tuesday, April 8, 2025
DOE Offers Private AI its Gov't DOE research facilities & power for AI
Energy Secretary Chris Wright delivers remarks outside the White House on March 19, 2025. Wright said in an April 3 press release that Energy has identified 16 public land sites for potential construction of data centers needed to further power the development of AI toolsThe Department of Energy identified 16 locations on its own land to build the new infrastructure
The Department of Energy is moving forward with some of the Trump administration’s plans to support both artificial intelligence infrastructure development and energy production, identifying 16 public land sites for potential construction.
In a Thursday announcement, Energy confirmed that these 16 locations are uniquely positioned for the construction of data centers ready to process the large volumes of compute needed for AI applications. Some of these sites include in-place energy infrastructure, which will expedite the requisite permitting needed to begin research on new forms of energy generation, such as fusion.
The advent of more AI-ready infrastructure and development of energy resources needed to generate power for that infrastructure are both tenants outlined in President Donald Trump’s January executive orders on AI and U.S. energy security.
“The global race for AI dominance is the next Manhattan project, and with President Trump’s leadership and the innovation of our National Labs, the United States can and will win,” Secretary of Energy Chris Wright said in the press release announcing the sites selected. “With today’s action, the Department of Energy is taking important steps to leverage our domestic resources to power the AI revolution, while continuing to deliver affordable, reliable and secure energy to the American people.”
The 16 sites span multiple states and are listed relative to nearby Energy facilities. They include:
- Idaho National Laboratory
- Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant
- Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant
- Argonne National Laboratory
- Brookhaven National Laboratory
- Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
- National Energy Technology Laboratory
- National Renewable Energy Laboratory
- Oak Ridge National Laboratory
- Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
- Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory
- Los Alamos National Laboratory
- Sandia National Laboratories
- Savannah River Site
- Pantex Plant
- Kansas City National Security Campus.
Alongside the announcement, Energy is launching a request for information to gather feedback from industry experts — specifically data center and energy developers — along with the general public on possible uses of Energy-controlled land for data center construction, operational models and economic considerations, along with other input. The RFI also states that it will collaborate with impacted local and Tribal governments to ensure the data centers are built responsibly.
In addition to soliciting comments, the press release said Energy is prioritizing a public-private partnership model to spearhead innovation in both AI and energy technologies and systems.
The appeal for private industry is Energy’s pledge to allow partner companies and entities access to these data centers and the research facilities located alongside the 16 sites.
“The sites also offer the industry a chance to partner with DOE’s world-class research facilities co-located on the sites, furthering advancements in both the power systems design needed to run the centers and developing next-generation data center hardware,” the press release stated.
Ecological Options NetworkP.O. Box 1047, Bolinas, CA 94924415-868-1900 - office
Saturday, April 5, 2025
NRC Proposes $9,000 Civil Penalty Against Missouri-based Healthcare Provider
NRC Proposes $9,000 Civil Penalty Against Missouri-based Healthcare Provider
For Immediate Release: Palisades Restart Nuclear Licensing Board Rejects All Environmental, Safety, and Health Contentions: Watchdog Coalition Vows to Appeal
Dear Palisades Trackers, Please share
|
FERC review of PJM colocation rules for data centers, large loads may extend past mid-year: analysts
FERC review of PJM colocation rules for data centers, large loads may extend past mid-year: analysts
“Participants involved in co-location arrangements should pay the costs of any grid services they consume and the arrangements must be reliable and operationally manageable,” PJM told FERC.
Published April 1, 2025
Ethan HowlandSenior Reporter
The Susquehanna nuclear power plant near Salem Township, Pennsylvania. The PJM Interconnection on March 24, 2025, outlined options for rules governing locating data centers and other large loads at power plants. The image by Jakec is licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0
The PJM Interconnection’s response to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s investigation into the grid operator’s rules for colocated loads indicates FERC may not approve new regulations by mid-year, as some people initially thought, according to utility-sector analysts.
FERC on Feb. 20 launched a review of issues related to colocating large loads, such as data centers, at power plants in PJM’s footprint. The outcome of the review could set a precedent for colocated load in the power markets FERC oversees.
Talen Energy, Constellation Energy and PSEG Power, a Public Service Enterprise Group subsidiary, are among the companies that are considering hosting data centers at their nuclear power plants in PJM.
In its “show cause” order, FERC asked PJM and stakeholders to explain why the grid operator’s colocation rules are just and reasonable or to offer rules that would pass agency muster. FERC established a comment schedule that enables the agency to issue a response by June 20. The agency said it could make a decision on a PJM proposal within three months.
However, instead of proposing new colocation rules, PJM on March 24 said its existing rules are just and reasonable. The grid operator also offered five conceptual colocation options that have been proposed by stakeholders or developed by PJM.
PJM urged FERC to issue “detailed guiding principles” that the grid operator could use to craft colocation rules for the agency’s approval.
The lack of a proposal from PJM likely extends FERC’s review process, according to analysts.
“FERC may still act on the show cause order in June, but we don’t rule out a new iteration of process instead of a clear policy decision,” ClearView Energy Partners analysts said in a client note on Friday.
It will likely take FERC until late this year to approve changes to PJM’s colocation rules, according to Capstone analysts.
Morgan Stanley analysts said their “base case” expectation is a FERC decision in September. “We were hoping for a more definitive proposal to move the process forward more quickly,” the analysts said.
In its response to FERC, PJM noted that any colocation rules may be affected by state laws. “Regardless of what co-location arrangements are ultimately sanctioned by the commission, permitted by the states, and elected by developers, participants involved in co-location arrangements should pay the costs of any grid services they consume and the arrangements must be reliable and operationally manageable,” PJM said.
PJM also said it prefers that colocated load be deemed front-of-the-meter, “network” load, a designation that would require a colocated data center, for example, to pay for certain grid services.
Among the options PJM floated, it said it preferred three of them, partly because they would maintain resource adequacy. The colocation options are:
- Load that elects to be network load and brings its own generation (preferred).
- Load that will cut its electric use during grid emergencies (preferred).
- Load that elects to be network load and that participates as demand response (preferred).
- Load connected to the grid with protections to avoid delivery of system energy to serve the colocated load (less preferred).
- Load connected to the grid with protections to avoid delivery of system energy to serve the colocated load or for the co-located load to receiveback-up service from PJM with permission (less preferred).
PJM’s colocation options “bode poorly” for Talen’s proposed colocation arrangement at the company’s majority-owned Susquehanna nuclear plant with Amazon Web Services and other behind-the-meter deals, Capstone said, noting PJM gave the only “true” behind-the-meter proposal a “less preferred” grade.
“We view PJM’s three front-of-the-meter … options as most amendable to the broadest pool of stakeholders, yet these would erode economics for merchant generators and data centers relative to the ‘isolated’ arrangements previously sought,” the research firm said.
Responses to PJM’s comments, and those filed by other stakeholders, are due April 23.
RECOMMENDED READING
- FERC launches colocation review, plus 6 other open meeting takeawaysBy Ethan Howland • Updated Feb. 21, 2025
- FERC rejects interconnection pact for Talen-Amazon data center deal at nuclear plantBy Ethan Howland • Nov. 4, 2024
- AEP, others press for FERC guidance on ‘gargantuan’ issue of data center colocationBy Ethan Howland • Nov. 4, 2024