Trump II’s ‘Nuclear Renaissance”: A Government Play

From MasterResource

By Robert Bradley Jr. — March 4, 2026

On January 26, the U.S. Department of Energy released the Fact Sheet, “The Energy Department Is Delivering on Accelerating the Deployment of Nuclear Power, subtitled “President Trump is Unleashing America’s Next Nuclear Renaissance.”

Nuclear Renaissance? Like that of Joe Biden? George W. Bush? Here is a summary of federal subsidies/initiatives for commercial nuclear power from the US Department of Energy (to date).

THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION IS WORKING TO MAKE ENERGY MORE AFFORDABLE AND RELIABLE INCLUDING ADVANCING NUCLEAR POWER

  • The Trump administration is reversing the previous administration’s energy subtraction policies which made energy more expensive, and the grid less reliable.
  • The Department of Energy (DOE) is fully committed to unleashing America’s next nuclear renaissance, from reinvigorating domestic supply chains to delivering gigawatts of new reactors.
    • The Energy Department has taken numerous actions to accelerate the development of next generation nuclear technology and restore domestic supply chains to accomplish President Trump’s goal of expanding American nuclear energy capacity from approximately 100 GW in 2024 to 400 GW by 2050.  
    • Building out the next generation of American nuclear is an investment in our growing energy needs today, and once built, will become another 80-year asset for future generations.
    • Thanks to the Energy Dominance Financing Program (EDF), established under the Working Families Tax Cut, the Energy Department will continue to sponsor the development of nuclear projects in the U.S. 
       

THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION AND DOE HAVE BEEN UNLEASHING INFRASTRUCTURE AND SUPPLY CHAINS TO EXPAND NUCLEAR POWER IN THE U.S. 

  • The Trump administration has already taken numerous actions to expand nuclear power, infrastructure, and supply chains for nuclear fuel in the U.S.
    • January 2026: The Energy Department announced a $2.7 billion investment to strengthen domestic enrichment, in support of President Trump’s commitment to expand U.S. capacity for low-enriched uranium (LEU) and jumpstart new supply chains and innovations for high-assay low-enriched uranium.
    • December 2025: The Energy Department awarded $800 million to TVA and Holtec to advance deployment of U.S. small modular reactors.
    • November 18, 2025: DOE announced the financial close of a $1 billion loan to Constellation to help finance the Crane Clean Energy Center Restart project, a nuclear power plant located on the Susquehanna River in Londonderry Township, Pennsylvania.
    • October 28, 2025: The US Government established a strategic partnership with Cameco Corporation and Brookfield Asset Management to accelerate the development of Westinghouse’s nuclear reactor technologies in the US and abroad.
    • September 30, 2025: The Energy Department selected four companies for Advanced Nuclear Fuel Line Pilot Projects in order to strengthen domestic supply chains for nuclear fuel.
    • August 26, 2025: The Energy Department made a second round of conditional commitments to provide high-assay low-enriched uranium to three U.S. companies to meet near-term fuel needs.
    • August 12, 2025: The Energy Department announced the 11 initial selections for President Trump’s Nuclear Reactor Pilot Program to move their technologies toward deployment.
    • July 24, 2025: The Energy Department announced site selections for AI data center and energy infrastructure development on federal lands.
    • July 16, 2025: The Energy Department announced the start of a new pilot program to accelerate the development of advanced nuclear reactors and strengthen domestic supply chains for nuclear fuel.
    • May 23, 2025: President Trump issued four executive orders related to advancing the nuclear energy industry in the United States. The executive orders included:
    • April 9, 2025: The Energy Department made conditional commitments to provide high-assay low-enriched uranium (HALEU) to five U.S. nuclear developers to meet their near-term fuel needs.
    • February 5, 2025: Secretary Wright issued his first Secretarial Order that prioritizes unleashing commercial nuclear power in the United States. 
The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
5 7 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
20 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
GeorgeInSanDiego
March 4, 2026 10:21 pm

I have a linear no threshold tolerance for those who want to put billions of human lives at risk by trying everything that they can think of to end the Age Of Machines and drive us all back to the Age Of Muscle.

strativarius
March 5, 2026 1:08 am

The British have mad Ed Miliband and messing up our energy isn’t quite enough for him.

Miliband led Cabinet revolt against Trump’s Iran war
Starmer fell in with ministers’ ‘petulant’ case against strikes, only to change his mind 48 hours later
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2026/03/04/miliband-led-cabinet-revolt-to-trumps-iran-war/

strativarius
Reply to  strativarius
March 5, 2026 1:49 am

Story blanked by the BBC and Guardian!

Donald Trump ‘calls Keir Starmer a loser who has no future’  – GB News

Bruce Cobb
March 5, 2026 2:57 am

Baby steps, but in the right direction at least.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
March 5, 2026 5:34 am

All journeys begin with a first step.
The trick is to start in the right direction, something we have not seen in a while.

Ex-KaliforniaKook
Reply to  Sparta Nova 4
March 5, 2026 12:37 pm

I was thinking the exact same thing.

I know – that makes me redundant.

rovingbroker
March 5, 2026 3:29 am

We’ve turned our backs on safe, clean and reliable nuclear power many times.

“Failure is simply the opportunity to begin again, this time more intelligently.” — often attributed to Henry Ford
“Success is stumbling from failure to failure with no loss of enthusiasm.” — also popularly linked to Churchill
“The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.” — misattributed to Einstein, but thematically adjacent

March 5, 2026 5:12 am

Availability of HALEU is the big stop gap. It’s the key thing that needs to be addressed.

Once upon a time, it would have been easy to come by from downblending weapons-grade uranium from the Cold War, but that has been used up.

Richard Mott
March 5, 2026 6:39 am

The problem for nuclear power is not the technology. It is regulatory and legal environment generated by the persistence of the Linear No-Threshold risk model for radiation exposure. That model is nearly 100 years old, first proposed in 1928, 25 years before the structure of DNA was understood. It derives from work on fruit flies, which diverged from what became mammals 650 million years ago. What it missed is that mammals have the ability to repair their DNA, which evolved in response to a warm-blooded oxygen metabolism. Only when the repair mechanism is overwhelmed does the probability of a cancer-causing mutation increase. Thus the risk is not proportional to lifetime cumulative dose, but to radiation intensity (dose rate). Here is a slide set that shows how ionizing radiation works and why LNT is wrong. It has many citations if you wish to dig further: https://u.pcloud.link/publink/show?code=XZWKDd5ZSLgDSejg6x4YkcP7P58arjK8OXMk

March 5, 2026 6:45 am

Nuclear Renaissance XXIX: Still not happening
Same with affordable nuclear. Without military interests nuclear would be even more niche.

Dave Andrews
Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
March 5, 2026 7:36 am

The World Nuclear Association say 66 reactors are currently under construction world wide. South Korea has built 13 reactors since 1996 with an average construction time of 4.5 years, the more recent ones quicker than that.

Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
March 5, 2026 8:20 am

Tell that to the French.

Without the mass of regulatory hoops that reliable energy goes through and useless, unreliable wind and solar don’t, the UK could have had a fleet of nuclear plants providing cheap, clean electricity.

Thank the far left idiots for that.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
March 5, 2026 9:48 am

Wrong and pointless to try to explain it to you.

Not worth the powder.

Colin Belshaw
Reply to  Sparta Nova 4
March 6, 2026 12:45 am

That’s for bloody sure!

Colin Belshaw
Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
March 6, 2026 12:44 am

Said with such confidence and assurance and overwhelming knowledge . . . which reflects fantastically ridiculous ignorance.

March 5, 2026 11:58 am

Let’s git’er done! Trump is doing about all he can administratively and now we need Congress to step up and write some laws to support nuclear and defund the renewables insanity.

March 5, 2026 12:04 pm

Tax it . or Subsidize ,
or Both .

March 5, 2026 2:04 pm

The thermal efficiency of nuclear power plant is 33% whereas a power plant using CCGT is 64% thermal efficient. Since the US has an abundant supply of natural gas, there is no need to build nuclear power plants. Unfortunately many countries do not have an abundant supply of natural gas as does the US and thus will build nuclear power plants.

Colin Belshaw
Reply to  Harold Pierce
March 6, 2026 12:57 am

LFTRs – yes, a few years away yet – will have a thermal efficiency of 45-50%. And complexity, cost of construction, cost of generation, and safety will blow away current designs. Furthermore, once commercially deployed, the destruction of the idiotic and profligate wind and solar industry will be instant . . . which I very much look forward to.

kwinterkorn
Reply to  Harold Pierce
March 6, 2026 10:52 am

The best, most stable supply is diverse supply—-including energy. Hydro, coal, nat gas, thermal, nuclear—-even some wind and solar, as a diverse mix is the way to go long term.

Nuclear is wonderful for reliable 24/7 energy with a small footprint—-and with modern reactors, is safe. Nuclear “waste” is a phony issue. The “waste” is a resource, useful if reprocessed again and again.