Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

BumRushDaShow

(152,875 posts)
Fri May 23, 2025, 05:45 AM 8 hrs ago

Trump to sign orders to boost nuclear power as soon as Friday, sources say

Source: Reuters

May 22, 2025 5:46 PM EDT Updated 12 hours ago


WASHINGTON, May 22 (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump will sign executive orders as soon as Friday that aim to jumpstart the nuclear energy industry by easing the regulatory process on approvals for new reactors and strengthening fuel supply chains, four sources familiar said.

Facing the first rise in power demand in two decades from the boom in artificial intelligence, Trump declared an energy emergency on his first day in office. Chris Wright, the energy secretary, has said the race to develop power sources and data centers needed for AI is "Manhattan Project 2", referring to the massive U.S. program during World War II to develop atomic bombs.

A draft summary of the orders said Trump will invoke the Cold War-era Defense Production Act to declare a national emergency over U.S. dependence on Russia and China for enriched uranium, nuclear fuel processing and advanced reactor inputs. The summary also directs agencies to permit and site new nuclear facilities and directs the Departments of Energy and Defense to identify federal lands and facilities for nuclear deployment and to streamline processes to get them built.

It also encourages the Energy Department to use loan guarantees and direct loans to increase the build out of reactors. Trump only used the Loan Programs Office in his first administration to support a large nuclear plant in Georgia. The LPO has now has hundreds of billions of dollars in financing thanks to legislation passed during former President Joe Biden's administration, but has been hit hard by job cuts during Trump's second administration. The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Read more: https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/trump-sign-orders-boost-nuclear-power-soon-friday-sources-say-2025-05-22/

10 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

BlueTsunami2018

(4,381 posts)
1. I'm not against this. However.....
Fri May 23, 2025, 05:57 AM
8 hrs ago

I don’t trust this administration’s Department of Energy to do it right. There are reasons why there are strict regulations and safety standards surrounding the nuclear energy industry. I don’t trust these sons of bitches not to cut corners and loot the funding.

brush

(59,931 posts)
2. I don't trust TSF and his clown car cabal to saveguard and addequately regulate nuclear energy installations as...
Fri May 23, 2025, 06:07 AM
8 hrs ago

they've proven in just four months in power how incompetent they are. Meanwhile green energy sources such as solar, wind, hydrogen etc. don't rate even a glance from the bumblers.

This nation is being run so poorly under trump 2.0.

Javaman

(63,851 posts)
3. meh. the reality is: he'll be long gone (if we have elections again) before even the first one goes online.
Fri May 23, 2025, 07:23 AM
6 hrs ago

smoke and mirrors folks.

Prairie Gates

(5,082 posts)
6. Renewing America's Energy Future by 2055 and similar nonsense
Fri May 23, 2025, 07:49 AM
6 hrs ago

It's a complete boondoggle and procurement capture for some contractors and corporations here and there.

The usual hostage taking of our government and Treasury by these trashbags.

progree

(11,926 posts)
4. I'm wondering if the nuclear subsidies remain cut in the "Big Beautiful" Tax bill that the HOR just passed --
Fri May 23, 2025, 07:46 AM
6 hrs ago

Nuclear power ‘dead in its tracks’ with House GOP tax bill, advocates warn, 5/15/25 (that's a week ago already)
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1127182610

The article in so many words pretty much said the subsidies are essential for the projects (including restarts and in some cases continued operation) to be economically viable for the utilities and entities building them. Without them, they wouldn't get built (or restarted) unless they were coerced into building them by the Coercer-In-Chief.

AltairIV

(859 posts)
5. Mar a Lago
Fri May 23, 2025, 07:47 AM
6 hrs ago

Should build one in Mar a Lago. it's sparsely populated year round so if something goes wrong there won't be much of an impact.

NNadir

(35,859 posts)
10. I'd rather have one built near me. Just out of curiousity...
Fri May 23, 2025, 10:13 AM
3 hrs ago

...how many people involved with "something going wrong" at a nuclear plant have died as a result in the last 70 years of commercial nuclear power?

Anything like the roughly 19,000 people who will die today, died yesterday, died every day last year, and will die every day this year and next year from fossil fuel plants operating normally, dumping fossil fuel waste, aka "air pollution" into the planetary atmosphere?

Global burden of 87 risk factors in 204 countries and territories, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019 (Lancet

The top five risks for attributable deaths for females were high SBP (5·25 million [95% UI 4·49–6·00] deaths, or 20·3% [17·5–22·9] of all female deaths in 2019), dietary risks (3·48 million [2·78–4·37] deaths, or 13·5% [10·8–16·7] of all female deaths in 2019), high FPG (3·09 million [2·40–3·98] deaths, or 11·9% [9·4–15·3] of all female deaths in 2019), air pollution (2·92 million [2·53–3·33] deaths or 11·3% [10·0–12·6] of all female deaths in 2019), and high BMI (2·54 million [1·68–3·56] deaths or 9·8% [6·5–13·7] of all female deaths in 2019). For males, the top five risks differed slightly. In 2019, the leading Level 2 risk factor for attributable deaths globally in males was tobacco (smoked, second-hand, and chewing), which accounted for 6·56 million (95% UI 6·02–7·10) deaths (21·4% [20·5–22·3] of all male deaths in 2019), followed by high SBP, which accounted for 5·60 million (4·90–6·29) deaths (18·2% [16·2–20·1] of all male deaths in 2019). The third largest Level 2 risk factor for attributable deaths among males in 2019 was dietary risks (4·47 million [3·65–5·45] deaths, or 14·6% [12·0–17·6] of all male deaths in 2019) followed by air pollution (ambient particulate matter and ambient ozone pollution, accounting for 3·75 million [3·31–4·24] deaths (12·2% [11·0–13·4] of all male deaths in 2019), and then high FPG (3·14 million [2·70–4·34] deaths, or 11·1% [8·9–14·1] of all male deaths in 2019).


Note that these deaths do not include deaths from extreme weather resulting from extreme global heating.

NNadir

(35,859 posts)
8. To go full Godwin: Hitler pushed for the development of the Volkswagen Bug. That didn't make the Bug...
Fri May 23, 2025, 10:03 AM
4 hrs ago

a bad car for its time, affordable, cheap, reliable and fuel efficient.



Without the expansion of nuclear power as fast as possible, the death spiral of the planetary atmosphere continues to accelerate.

Kick in to the DU tip jar?

This week we're running a special pop-up mini fund drive. From Monday through Friday we're going ad-free for all registered members, and we're asking you to kick in to the DU tip jar to support the site and keep us financially healthy.

As a bonus, making a contribution will allow you to leave kudos for another DU member, and at the end of the week we'll recognize the DUers who you think make this community great.

Tell me more...

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Trump to sign orders to b...