• Privacy Policy
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
Climate Change Dispatch
  • Home
  • Videos
  • Who We Are
  • Facts Vs. Fearmongering
    • Real science vs Junk Science
      • 1100-plus Peer-Reviewed Studies
      • Michael Crichton: Aliens Cause Global Warming
      • Climate change and its causes
      • Climate Science Primer
      • CO2 is not pollution
      • Deceptive Surface Temperature Records
      • Editorial: Great Global Warming Hoax
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 1
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 2
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 3
      • Why CO2 Is A Minor Player In Global Climate
      • Why Politicized Science Is So Dangerous
    • Facts Not Fear
      • A Simple Question For Climate Alarmists
      • Climate Change – The Facts
      • Climate Change Fears Are Empirically Baseless
      • Global Warming 101
      • Global Warming Q&A
      • Understanding The Medieval Warm Period
      • Ocean Cycles and Climate
      • Overview of Plate Climatology Theory
      • Precautionary Principle
      • Should We Celebrate Carbon Dioxide?
      • The Skeptics Handbook
      • Weather Versus Climate
      • Why I’m a GW skeptic
      • Winning the climate debate with facts
      • Why Aliens Cause Global Warming
    • Greenhouse FAQs
      • CO2, Plants, & Industry
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • Is global warming real?
      • Measuring temperature
      • Swimming in CO2?
      • Scientists urge caution?
      • Today’s warming trend
      • Variations in temperature
    • Gore’s Greatest Goofs
      • Deconstructing the Truth
      • Fact-Checking Al Gore’s Latest Predictions
      • How Gore Created The Global Warming Hoax
    • Inside Real Climate
      • Closer look at the 97% Consensus
      • GW’s Amazing Story
      • IPCC gets failing grade
      • Real Climate Exposed!
      • Truth about Real Climate
      • We’ve Been Conned
      • What is there a 97% consensus about?
    • Behind the IPCC
      • 1,000 Scientists Dissent
      • Climategate: Caught Green-Handed!
      • Climategate Inquiries
      • Climategate Inquiries 2
      • NIPCC Report Now Available
      • Understanding the Climategate Inquiries
  • Submissions
  • Contact Us
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Videos
  • Who We Are
  • Facts Vs. Fearmongering
    • Real science vs Junk Science
      • 1100-plus Peer-Reviewed Studies
      • Michael Crichton: Aliens Cause Global Warming
      • Climate change and its causes
      • Climate Science Primer
      • CO2 is not pollution
      • Deceptive Surface Temperature Records
      • Editorial: Great Global Warming Hoax
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 1
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 2
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 3
      • Why CO2 Is A Minor Player In Global Climate
      • Why Politicized Science Is So Dangerous
    • Facts Not Fear
      • A Simple Question For Climate Alarmists
      • Climate Change – The Facts
      • Climate Change Fears Are Empirically Baseless
      • Global Warming 101
      • Global Warming Q&A
      • Understanding The Medieval Warm Period
      • Ocean Cycles and Climate
      • Overview of Plate Climatology Theory
      • Precautionary Principle
      • Should We Celebrate Carbon Dioxide?
      • The Skeptics Handbook
      • Weather Versus Climate
      • Why I’m a GW skeptic
      • Winning the climate debate with facts
      • Why Aliens Cause Global Warming
    • Greenhouse FAQs
      • CO2, Plants, & Industry
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • Is global warming real?
      • Measuring temperature
      • Swimming in CO2?
      • Scientists urge caution?
      • Today’s warming trend
      • Variations in temperature
    • Gore’s Greatest Goofs
      • Deconstructing the Truth
      • Fact-Checking Al Gore’s Latest Predictions
      • How Gore Created The Global Warming Hoax
    • Inside Real Climate
      • Closer look at the 97% Consensus
      • GW’s Amazing Story
      • IPCC gets failing grade
      • Real Climate Exposed!
      • Truth about Real Climate
      • We’ve Been Conned
      • What is there a 97% consensus about?
    • Behind the IPCC
      • 1,000 Scientists Dissent
      • Climategate: Caught Green-Handed!
      • Climategate Inquiries
      • Climategate Inquiries 2
      • NIPCC Report Now Available
      • Understanding the Climategate Inquiries
  • Submissions
  • Contact Us
No Result
View All Result
Climate Change Dispatch
No Result
View All Result

Under Trump’s EO, Four Companies Have Jumpstarted America’s Nuclear Race

Four reactors hit criticality, beating the president's July 4 deadline.

by Duggan Flanakin
July 15, 2026, 11:23 AM
in Energy, Money & Finance, News and Opinion, Politics
Reading Time: 5 mins read
A A
3

tranmission lines reactor
On May 23, 2025, President Trump, via Executive Order 14301, took multiple actions to jumpstart the nation’s long-dormant nuclear energy industry. [some emphasis, links added]

Besides “expeditiously” processing applications for qualified test reactors and revising agency policies to expedite review, approval, and deployment of advanced reactors under Energy Department supervision.

The goal was to enable operational testing of microreactors within two years following a completed application. Toward that end, the DOE created a pilot program to construct and have operational at least three reactors outside the National Laboratories (but under a DOE contract) to achieve “criticality” by July 4, 2026 – the nation’s 250th birthday.

Last August, the DOE selected 11 reactor projects for the pilot program and offered them land and support from the national laboratories system – every effort to fast-track success.

Four of them – Antares Nuclear Inc., Valar Atomics, and Aalo Atomics (which got there the morning of July 4), all founded in 2023, made the President’s first deadline.

But so did one-year-old Deployable Energy, whose test reactor was the first to reach criticality under the DOE’s Nuclear Energy Launch Pad, a joint project of the Idaho National Laboratory and the National Reactor Innovation Center in June 2025.

The Launch Pad, which builds on the success of the Reactor Pilot Program and the Fuel Line Pilot Program, assists advanced reactors, fuel fabrication, enrichment, reprocessing, and related innovations.

Criticality is a technical milestone that establishes a reactor can sustain a chain reaction – but that alone does not mean the reactor can provide electricity. Zero-power criticality can be achieved without meaningful engineering progress on fuel or design.

So what have these firms achieved – and how about the progress of the other eight grant recipients?

Antares Nuclear’s Mark-0 test reactor achieved criticality on June 4 at Idaho National Laboratory as the first privately funded non-light-water design to go critical there in four decades. The Mark-0 is a sodium heat-pipe-cooled design running NALEU TRISO fuel.

Antares had been testing at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center to provide 100 kW of nuclear energy to a future moon base. The firm already has an order to deliver its microreactors to Joint Base San Antonio in 2027.

Valar Atomics’ minivan-sized Ward 250 reached criticality on June 22 at its test site at the San Rafael Energy Lab in Utah, following a core-only test at Los Alamos National Laboratory that also reached criticality. The Ward 250 is a TRISO-fueled, helium-cooled, high-temperature gas reactor.

Aalo’s Critical Test Reactor (CTR) went from groundbreaking to criticality on July 4, eight months after startup, before an audience of all 200 company employees for what CEO Matt Loszak described as “a nuclear Burning Man.”

Aalo’s success has greenlit the construction of a 10-MWe reactor that can power an on-site data center and be deployed by 2027.

Deployable Energy’s test reactor is water-moderated and helium-cooled and runs on standard 4.95% enriched uranium dioxide using commercially available materials instead of HALEU or exotic components.

Founder Bobby Gallagher partnered with Texas A&M University’s nuclear engineering department on a 1-MW container reactor, the Unity Nuclear Battery.

The DOE says no other country had ever taken three – no, four – distinct advanced microreactor designs critical in a single 30-day period. Energy Secretary Chris Wright called the joint accomplishments “a significant milestone on a timeline many thought was unachievable.”

These firms meeting the July 4 deadline mark a major milestone for President Trump’s initiative to incentivize a nuclear energy renaissance, according to the DOE. In just one year, the nation has taken bold steps to remove excessive regulatory barriers, give new life to retired nuclear power plants, and secure a domestic nuclear fuel supply chain.

All of the other initial grant recipients are also making progress toward criticality and deployment.

Deep Fission is building a 15-MWe modular reactor prototype that will be placed in an optimized borehole 1 mile beneath the earth’s surface in Parsons, Kansas. The Gravity Nuclear Reactor design uses pressurized water reactor technology and low-enriched uranium fuel; the tiny footprint and dense power output enable multiple units on a single site.

Just this month, the factory-built, non-nuclear prototype canister was delivered to the Kansas site, a major step toward validating installation, infrastructure readiness, and operational sequencing before fuel loading. Deep Fission, whose project is beginning real-world installation and testing, anticipates achieving criticality very soon.

On July 1, Oklo Inc. announced that the DOE had approved the Documented Safety Analysis for its Isotopes’ Groves Isotope Test Reactor. As soon as Oklo passes the DOE’s readiness review and gains approval for startup, the facility will load nuclear fuel, conduct startup testing, and proceed towards criticality, which it hopes to achieve by the end of July.

Oklo also signed an Other Transaction Authority with the DOE to support the design, construction, and operation of a radioisotope pilot plant under the Reactor Pilot Program.

Atomic Alchemy Inc., an Oklo subsidiary, will use the Radioisotope Pilot Facility to lay the groundwork for future commercial plants that make medical and research radioisotopes.

In February, Radiant Energy’s Kaleidos 1-MWe portable microreactor received DOE approval to proceed with a full-power design test at Idaho National Laboratory.

Kaleidos, which uses fans and an air jacket to cool the core through natural convection (and no on-site water), is built for diverse environments and provides 1.9 MW of thermal power for facility heating or desalination. If all goes well, Radiant will build a larger reactor in Oak Ridge, Tennessee.

The construction of the DOME facility was accelerated by almost a year. It is intended to promote the expansion of US nuclear energy and support a reliable, affordable power supply. Idaho National Laboratory

Also in February, Terrestrial Energy Inc. entered into an agreement with the DOE for a pilot reactor to support the design and safe operation of the TETRA reactor.

This molten salt-fueled, graphite-moderated reactor will use standard assay, low-enriched UF4-based fuel (SALEU) containing less than 5% uranium-235. Last September, Terrestrial Energy was also selected for the DOE’s Fuel Line Pilot Program.

In May, the DOE approved the Preliminary Documented Safety Analysis for Last Energy Inc.’s PWR-5 pressurized water pilot reactor, to be built at Texas A&M’s Rellis Campus.

The action clears the way for fuel receipt, criticality demonstration, and operations. The firm is also engaged with the NRC in pre-application activities for its planned PWR-20, a 20-MW pressurized water microreactor, to be built in Haskell, Texas.

Natura Resources LLC is on track to deploy its 1-MW high-temperature, low-pressure MSR-1 liquid-fuel Gen IV molten salt reactor later this year at its demonstration site on the campus of Abilene Christian University.

The NRC issued a construction permit for the reactor in September 2024, and Natura is now preparing for an operating license application. The project intends to advance Gen IV molten salt reactor technology with dual applications in energy and medicine.

Dozens of other nuclear energy startups – and older companies – are also working on reactors of various sizes, designs, and physics. The race is on – and there is a plethora of companies seeking to meet the nation’s fast-growing electricity demand.

The winners may or may not be the first to go operational, but will be the ones whose costs and timelines best fit customer needs.

Read more at RealClearEnergy

  • Truth
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Gettr
  • Threads
  • gab-logo Gab
  • Mastodon
  • Buffer
  • Telegram
  • Email
  • Copy Link
  • Share Using More Networks…

Popular Posts

Bipolar

New Study: Ice Core Data Shows Modern Warming Is Statistically Unremarkable

Mar 05, 2026
Energy

Professor Makes Stunning Discovery: ‘Absolutely, 100 percent, Offshore Wind Kills Whales’

Jul 15, 2024
Energy

Climate Science’s Biggest Shift In Decades: IPCC’s RCP8.5 Is Officially Dead

Apr 29, 2026

Comments 3

  1. Steve Bunten says:
    2 months ago

    This article didn’t mention it but I hope at least one of these companies will use Th-232 as their seed for Uranium. Thorium is plentiful and the only isotope is Th-232 which when bombarded by neutrons will decay through two steps to U-233 in about 27 days. It is the only other fissile isotope of Uranium. It would reduce the need for the expensive task of enriching Uranium since U-235 is .72% of natural Uranium with the rest is U-238.

    Reply
  2. Richard Greene says:
    2 months ago

    stop the nuclear cheerleading
    not one new nuclear reactor or new nuclear SMR will be added to the US electric grid while trump is president

    Reply
    • Steve Bunten says:
      2 months ago

      What’s your point Greene? Have you ever been involved in building a nuclear reactor? I did go through an initial installation and load of a reactor including taking it critical for the first time. And then went through the process of operating at different power levels to test the reactor design. This was a land-based reactor for testing a new reactor design in the Navy. This took us two years of testing and the reactor compartment, pressure vessel, primary coolant system had already been installed before I got there. So to expect a new plant would be built in 2 1/2 years and be operational would never happen. So again, what’s your point?

      Reply

Comments are welcome! Those that add no discussion value may be removed.Cancel reply

Stay Connected!

gab-logo

Donate Today

Beating back the alarmist narrative takes time and money. Please donate today to help!

Subscribe To CCD Via Email!

Subscribe to receive a digest of daily stories, or get instant notifications. Check your Junk/Spam folder for a verification email.

Recent Posts

  • coral reefNY Times’ Coral Climate Doom Collides With Resilient, Recovering Reefs
    Sep 2, 2026
    The NY Times warns climate change threatens coral reefs, but evidence of recovering reefs and adapting corals complicates its climate-doom narrative. […]
  • us nuclear power plantWhy America’s AI Boom Needs A Nuclear Power Revival
    Sep 2, 2026
    America’s AI boom is straining the grid, making nuclear power in America increasingly vital for reliable electricity and industrial growth. […]
  • nas advocacyNational Academy Of Sciences Faces Mounting Scandal Over Climate Activism
    Sep 2, 2026
    Internal documents fuel a mounting NASEM climate advocacy scandal, raising questions about donor funding, independence, and political activism. […]
  • wind turbine graveyardWhy Cutting CO2 Emissions Would Have Virtually No Effect On Global Warming
    Sep 1, 2026
    Cutting CO2 emissions and warming are assumed to go hand in hand, but the analysis finds enormous costs would yield only tiny temperature reductions. […]
  • Governor Kathy Hochul and Attorney General Letitia JamesObama Judge Blocks NY Climate Superfund, Hands Letitia James Major Courtroom Defeat
    Sep 1, 2026
    A federal judge blocked New York’s climate superfund law, which sought $75 billion from energy companies for costs attributed to global emissions. […]
  • NYT Rushes To Blame Climate Change For Nepal’s Glacier Collapse—It Wasn’t
    Sep 1, 2026
    The NYT rushed to blame climate change for the Nepal glacier collapse, but evidence points instead to geological failure and vulnerable infrastructure. […]
  • nepal flood glacierThe Media’s Ghoulish Race To Turn Nepal’s Deadly Floods Into A ‘Climate Crisis’
    Sep 1, 2026
    As media rush to blame climate change for Nepal’s deadly floods, scientists say the glacier collapse’s cause is under investigation. […]
  • maryland import energyMaryland Electricity Prices Soar 50% As State Shutters Reliable Power, Pushes Wind And Solar
    Aug 31, 2026
    Maryland electricity prices have soared as state policies shutter reliable generation, increase dependence on imported power, and push wind and solar. […]
  • noaa hurricane news coverageMedia Pushes ‘Catastrophic Climate’ Narrative Despite IPCC’s Extreme Weather Findings
    Aug 31, 2026
    As climate change coverage declines, some media outlets still link worsening extreme weather to global warming despite the IPCC’s findings. […]
  • cartoon thunberg podium how dare you‘How Dare You?’ The Human Cost Of Greta Thunberg’s Climate-Policy Crusade
    Aug 31, 2026
    Greta Thunberg’s “How dare you?” comes full circle as costly climate policies undermine energy security, living standards and prosperity worldwide. […]

Books You May Like

Cold Facts About the Great Global Warming Scam

Climate prn book

Sunset on Net Zero

Canary in a Climate World

Have a suggestion? Let us know! We swap out books based on your input. We participate in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program. See here.

  • Privacy Policy
  • DMCA Policy
  • About Us
  • Contact Us

© Portions copyright Climate Change Dispatch

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Videos
  • Who We Are
  • Facts Vs. Fearmongering
    • Real science vs Junk Science
      • 1100-plus Peer-Reviewed Studies
      • Michael Crichton: Aliens Cause Global Warming
      • Climate change and its causes
      • Climate Science Primer
      • CO2 is not pollution
      • Deceptive Surface Temperature Records
      • Editorial: Great Global Warming Hoax
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 1
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 2
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 3
      • Why CO2 Is A Minor Player In Global Climate
      • Why Politicized Science Is So Dangerous
    • Facts Not Fear
      • A Simple Question For Climate Alarmists
      • Climate Change – The Facts
      • Climate Change Fears Are Empirically Baseless
      • Global Warming 101
      • Global Warming Q&A
      • Understanding The Medieval Warm Period
      • Ocean Cycles and Climate
      • Overview of Plate Climatology Theory
      • Precautionary Principle
      • Should We Celebrate Carbon Dioxide?
      • The Skeptics Handbook
      • Weather Versus Climate
      • Why I’m a GW skeptic
      • Winning the climate debate with facts
      • Why Aliens Cause Global Warming
    • Greenhouse FAQs
      • CO2, Plants, & Industry
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • Is global warming real?
      • Measuring temperature
      • Swimming in CO2?
      • Scientists urge caution?
      • Today’s warming trend
      • Variations in temperature
    • Gore’s Greatest Goofs
      • Deconstructing the Truth
      • Fact-Checking Al Gore’s Latest Predictions
      • How Gore Created The Global Warming Hoax
    • Inside Real Climate
      • Closer look at the 97% Consensus
      • GW’s Amazing Story
      • IPCC gets failing grade
      • Real Climate Exposed!
      • Truth about Real Climate
      • We’ve Been Conned
      • What is there a 97% consensus about?
    • Behind the IPCC
      • 1,000 Scientists Dissent
      • Climategate: Caught Green-Handed!
      • Climategate Inquiries
      • Climategate Inquiries 2
      • NIPCC Report Now Available
      • Understanding the Climategate Inquiries
  • Submissions
  • Contact Us

© 2026 Climate Change Dispatch

 
Share via
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Pinterest
  • LinkedIn
  • Digg
  • Tumblr
  • VKontakte
  • Print
  • Email
  • Reddit
  • Buffer
  • Love This
  • Weibo
  • Pocket
  • Xing
  • Odnoklassniki
  • WhatsApp
  • Meneame
  • Blogger
  • Amazon
  • Yahoo Mail
  • Gmail
  • AOL
  • Newsvine
  • HackerNews
  • Evernote
  • MySpace
  • Mail.ru
  • Viadeo
  • Line
  • Flipboard
  • Comments
  • SMS
  • Viber
  • Telegram
  • Subscribe
  • Facebook Messenger
  • Kakao
  • LiveJournal
  • Yammer
  • Edgar
  • Fintel
  • Mix
  • Instapaper
  • Copy Link
  • Truth
  • gab-logo Gab
  • Gettr
  • Baidu
  • Mastodon
  • Threads
  • Bluesky
Share via
  • Tumblr
  • VKontakte
  • Print
  • Email
  • Reddit
  • Buffer
  • Love This
  • Weibo
  • Pocket
  • Xing
  • Odnoklassniki
  • WhatsApp
  • Meneame
  • Blogger
  • Amazon
  • Yahoo Mail
  • Gmail
  • AOL
  • Newsvine
  • HackerNews
  • Evernote
  • MySpace
  • Mail.ru
  • Viadeo
  • Line
  • Flipboard
  • Comments
  • SMS
  • Viber
  • Telegram
  • Subscribe
  • Facebook Messenger
  • Kakao
  • LiveJournal
  • Yammer
  • Edgar
  • Fintel
  • Mix
  • Instapaper
  • Copy Link
  • Truth
  • gab-logo Gab
  • Gettr
  • Baidu
  • Mastodon
  • Threads
  • Bluesky