You’re out of free articles.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
Sign In or Create an Account.
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Welcome to Heatmap
Thank you for registering with Heatmap. Climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our lives, a force reshaping our economy, our politics, and our culture. We hope to be your trusted, friendly, and insightful guide to that transformation. Please enjoy your free articles. You can check your profile here .
subscribe to get Unlimited access
Offer for a Heatmap News Unlimited Access subscription; please note that your subscription will renew automatically unless you cancel prior to renewal. Cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. We will let you know in advance of any price changes. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.
Subscribe to get unlimited Access
Hey, you are out of free articles but you are only a few clicks away from full access. Subscribe below and take advantage of our introductory offer.
subscribe to get Unlimited access
Offer for a Heatmap News Unlimited Access subscription; please note that your subscription will renew automatically unless you cancel prior to renewal. Cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. We will let you know in advance of any price changes. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.
Create Your Account
Please Enter Your Password
Forgot your password?
Please enter the email address you use for your account so we can send you a link to reset your password:
On a coal comeback, permitting reform, and NRDC’s nuclear conversion

Current conditions: A megastorm is bombarding more than 200 million Americans from the Midwest to the East Coast, blasting dozens of states with wind speeds as high as 80 miles per hour • Eight states — Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, Missouri, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Texas — are bracing for sub-zero temperatures • It’s rainy and just over 50 degrees Fahrenheit in Dublin, Ireland, for St. Patrick’s Day.
When someone writes the definitive history of the Biden-era Inflation Reduction Act, one of the more ironic footnotes will be the fact that the breakthrough that gave rise to a new era for geothermal energy came 11 months after the law passed. As a result, geothermal was little more than a rounding error in the bill, receiving relatively little support compared to the billions of dollars allocated for next-generation nuclear power. Like nuclear power, geothermal is carbon-free, runs 24/7, and loved by both climate hawk Democrats and energy hawk Republicans. That’s exactly what’s behind a new bill to bolster the industry. Legislation set to be introduced in the Senate would boost federal funding and research for geothermal power, I can report exclusively in this newsletter. On Tuesday, Senators John Hickenlooper, the Democrat from Colorado, and Steve Daines, the Montana Republican, plan to propose the GEO Power Act to authorize the Department of Energy to “move beyond limited-scale pilots and unlock the large-scale geothermal electricity generation needed to meet surging demand and drive down costs,” according to the senators’ description of the bill. If passed, the GEO Power Act would allow the Energy Department to offer “innovative financing approaches” to help build up the industry in areas with little existing geothermal power. The bill would also “generate public data to de-risk future geothermal projects” and set milestones to make sure companies that receive funding maintain fiscal accountability. Two of the industry’s top trade groups, Geothermal Rising Action and the Enhanced Geothermal Systems Deployment Coalition, backed the bill, as did companies such as Fervo, Eavor, XGS Energy, and Quaise Energy. “We’re on the verge of harnessing a new wave of geothermal energy to meet surging electricity demand, lower prices, and address the climate crisis,” Hickenlooper said in a statement. “The key will be in scaling up new, next-generation geothermal projects across the country.”
Enhanced geothermal, a specific subset of next-generation technologies, could actually come online fairly quickly, too. New research by the Center for Public Enterprise, a think tank that tracks effective government spending on energy, suggests that a commercial-scale project of up to 500 megawatts could enter into commercial production within 36 to 52 months of active development, “with a conservative planning horizon of three to six years from project initiation to in-service,” assuming developers can secure necessary permits and transmission. That timeline “can be compressed even further, to less than three years, if a sufficient number of drill rigs and crews are available.”
Oklo has received its first license from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, allowing the nuclear startup to begin recycling and selling isotopes “across medicine, research, advanced manufacturing, and national security,” I can exclusively report in this newsletter. The approval makes the California-based company the first of the cohort of fourth-generation reactor startups whose technologies use coolants other than water to get the green light to start up a commercial operation of any kind. Once operational, it will also allow Oklo to begin generating revenue for the first time. The NRC has given out permits to rival fourth-generation companies only for construction activities. The Bill Gates-backed TerraPower, for instance, was granted permission just this month to begin construction on its first commercial power plant in Wyoming, as was the Google-backed Kairos Power for its demonstration facility in Oak Ridge, Tennessee.
The permit for the facility, dubbed Atomic Alchemy and located at the Idaho Radiochemistry Laboratory, authorizes the company to “receive, possess, use, store, and conduct” chemical and mechanical processing, packing, manufacturing, and distribution of a limited amount of Radium-226, which is used to make advanced cancer treatments, in addition to a handful of other isotopes. “Demand for critical isotopes is rising, but U.S. supply remains limited,” Jacob DeWitte, Oklo’s chief executive and co-founder, said in a statement. “This work helps create a more resilient and dependable domestic supply chain of isotopes and supports the transition from early operations to durable, commercial isotope production in the United States.” The license grants the company a foothold in one of its core businesses. On top of designing liquid sodium-cooled microreactors the startup plans to own and operate for electricity production, Oklo is building out a division to reprocess and recycle nuclear waste into fresh fuel for its power plants. That business, too, would involve extracting and selling high-priced medical isotopes from spent fuel, and Atomic Alchemy lays the groundwork for that future effort. To construct this debut facility, Oklo plans to build four non-power Versatile Isotope Production Reactors systems with a capacity of about 15 megawatts-thermal each.
The United States could get its first new coal-fired power plant since 2013 as part of a sweeping $56 billion deal the Trump administration announced Monday with 17 Indo-Pacific countries. Terra Energy Center reached a $1 billion deal with South Korea’s Hyundai Industries Power Systems to supply large-scale boilers for a new, more than 1.2-gigawatt coal plant in Alaska. It’s the first order for utility-scale coal boilers in the U.S. since about 2006. KOREIT, one of Korea’s largest private equity firms focused on infrastructure, pledged to make a $500 million equity investment in the Terra Energy Center project.
Coal use has collapsed in the U.S. over the past two decades as hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, made natural gas cheap and abundant, the prices of renewables and batteries dropped, and decarbonization policies encouraged the closure of existing stations. Today coal generates about 16% of America’s electricity. But President Donald Trump has sought to stimulate demand for coal by forcing retiring plants across the country to remain open past their closure deadlines and easing regulations such as limits on mercury emissions from existing stations. The policies have delivered mixed results. Coal use has recently seen spikes. But states such as Washington are finding loopholes, as Heatmap’s Emily Pontecorvo reported. Either way, as Heatmap’s Matthew Zeitlin wrote last year, coal plants just keep breaking down.
Sign up to receive Heatmap AM in your inbox every morning:
The Trump administration declined to appeal a federal court ruling in favor of the offshore wind project that, as I wrote yesterday, came online this week off the coast of Rhode Island. Last week, the Department of Justice whiffed on filing an appeal before the deadline to challenge a federal judge's injunction blocking a Department of the Interior order meant to stop construction on Revolution Wind over national security concerns.
E&E News called the move “a potential sign of the importance of bipartisan permitting negotiations.” In December, the top climate hawks in the Senate told Heatmap’s Jael Holzman that their votes on permitting reform hinged on the legislation barring the Trump administration from continuing its assault on offshore wind and solar. When the SPEED Act passed in the House later that month, right-wing Republicans conditioned their support on a carve-out specifically granting Trump the power to go after renewables. A new bipartisan bill introduced last month, called the FREEDOM Act, rekindled those negotiations by specifically barring the executive branch from yanking already-granted permits, whether it’s an offshore wind farm or an oil pipeline.

The Natural Resources Defense Council cut its teeth fighting against the expansion of nuclear power. Now the storied conservation group has come out in support of atomic energy for the first time. The NRDC filed comments in support of restarting Iowa’s defunct Duane Arnold nuclear plant, the state’s only atomic power station, which closed in 2020. “This is unprecedented for us because it marks the first time in our history that we have taken action in support of an individual nuclear power plant,” Manish Bapna, president and chief executive of NRDC, told Axios.
The move comes just days after the Nuclear Regulatory Commission took its latest step to speed up approvals of new reactors. The rule proposed last week would set fixed, accountable fee caps for new and current licensees and reduce fees for prospective applicants. “We need to cultivate accountability internally, incentivize applicants, and lower barriers for new technologies,” NRC Chairman Ho Nieh said in a statement. “This rule supports innovation and aligns with the NRC’s principles of efficiency and reliability.”
Nevada’s biggest utility is putting off launching a new rate structure that critics warn could raise household electricity costs by changing the billing formula. State regulators gave NV Energy permission last year to charge customers in southern Nevada on the 15-minute period each day when they use electricity the most rather than tallying up total usage. The new charge was set to come into effect on April 1. But NV Energy told E&E News it would hold off until October 1 to inform customers of what they should expect. “Postponing the implementation of daily demand is the right decision for our customers,” NV Energy President Brandon Barkhuff said in a statement. “This additional time will allow us to provide customers with personalized information and practical tools so they can better understand how their energy use affects their bill before daily demand takes effect.”
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
The spinoff of Lawrence Livermore National Lab has a new 10-point plan to get onto the grid by the 2030s.
One of fusion energy’s newest startups, Inertia Enterprises, is betting that the fastest route to commercial fusion runs through one of the field’s oldest ideas. The company, which raised a $450 million Series A earlier this year, plans to build a power plant based on the laser-driven fusion system pioneered at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory’s — the only tech yet to have produced more energy from a fusion reaction than it took to initiate it. Now, Inertia has shared its commercialization roadmap exclusively with Heatmap, detailing the 10 near-term capabilities it must demonstrate before this landmark experiment can become a grid-scale power plant by the mid-2030s.
The roadmap offers a route from the national lab’s impressive but commercially impractical fusion demonstrations to an economical power plant capable of producing electricity for the grid. At its core are a set of milestones — mostly aimed at developing cheap, mass-manufacturable components — that Inertia says it must clear before those individual systems can be integrated into a working plant. This road is not necessarily linear, however, as various teams will likely be working on many of these goals simultaneously.
At least the physics of Inertia’s approach are already proven, the startup’s CEO Jeff Lawson told me, pointing to the fusion experiments at Lawrence Livermore’s National Ignition Facility as a proof-of-concept. The lab’s demonstration of net energy gain caps more than six decades and $30 billion (in 2026 dollars) of U.S. fusion research. The remaining challenges, he argued, are all engineering-related, requiring “elbow grease, hard work, and smart people” rather than breakthroughs in fusion science.
"It seems to us like a startup or a commercial company of any variety should be focused on commercializing a proven scientific result, as opposed to actually trying to demonstrate the basic science to begin with," Lawson told me. Basic science, he argues, is better left to national labs and universities, where researchers can pursue "unbounded problems" that don’t align with the expectations and timelines of venture-backed startups.
Indeed, no fusion startup has yet achieved scientific breakeven, the milestone Lawrence Livermore first hit in 2022, and has since repeated numerous times. But leading players such as Commonwealth Fusion Systems and Helion Energy maintain that it’s only a matter of time before they validate the physics behind their own reactor designs, which they claim will be highly cost-competitive.
Lawson, on the other hand, readily acknowledged that Lawrence Livermore’s tech is uneconomical in its current form. His bet is simply that the more predictable path to a commercial reactor is to drive down the cost of the lab’s validated fusion approach, known as inertial confinement. This system relies on high-powered lasers firing at a millimeter-scale pellet of fusion fuel, compressing it to extreme temperatures and pressures until the atoms fuse. Today, the National Ignition Facility makes each individual fusion target by hand, a workable solution given that it only uses about a dozen per year.
That production model, however, isn’t remotely plausible for a grid-scale power plant. Because each fusion reaction lasts just a fraction of a billionth of a second, a commercial facility must fire its lasers at a fresh target about 10 times per second to generate continuous electricity — requiring the production of hundreds of millions of targets each year.
Scaling production to roughly a million pellets per day and making them inexpensive enough for commercial operation without compromising the strength or precision required for fusion ignition is central to Inertia’s roadmap. That includes goals five, seven, eight and nine — industrializing the manufacturing of the carbon shells that hold the fusion fuel, making the thin films that hold those carbon shells both durable and cheap, scaling up and automating fusion target assembly, and speeding up how fast targets are filled with the requisite deuterium-tritium fuel.
The other central focus of the roadmap is the laser system, which will ultimately consist of 1,000 individual units operating in concert to compress and heat the fusion fuel. Key priorities include reducing the system’s cost (goal two), dramatically increasing its firing cadence (goal three), and bolstering its durability to withstand high-intensity operations (goal four). Goal six also complements these efforts, calling for the development of a control system capable of tracking moving fusion targets to precisely align each laser shot.
Goals one and 10 bookend the journey with some broader milestones. The first focuses on increasing the fusion target’s energy gain — the ratio of fusion energy produced to laser energy delivered — to more than 25 times ignition. Today, the National Ignition Facility’s best-performing laser shot has yielded a gain of just over four times what it took to start the reaction. Goal 10 then zooms out to the ultimate objective: integrating all these technologies into a commercially viable power plant that can deliver either electricity or industrial heat to end customers.
To reach that point, Inertia has embarked on an industrial engineering hiring spree, recruiting folks with experience taking complex hardware systems from prototype to mass production, “not unlike the processes that are used in the semiconductor or consumer electronics world,” Lawson explained. The company has been making progress on its component development goals since the beginning of the year, he told me, and expects to announce the successful demonstration of a few of these milestones in the coming months. Lawson ultimately expects Inertia to complete the core components of its laser and target manufacturing systems by the middle of next year.
The team will spend the next two to three years integrating these individual pieces into two fully operational subsystems, a prototype laser system and a target manufacturing line. Around 2030, the company will begin combining those subsystems into a first-of-a-kind fusion power plant, which will also serve as the proving ground for the target chamber, tritium fuel breeding system, and power conversion system that turns fusion heat into electricity. By the middle of the next decade, Inertia aims to be generating power from this first plant, setting the stage for the company to build and connect additional grid-scale commercial power plants.
There are plenty of engineering trade-offs that the company will have to solve for. Take the decision around how to size the target chamber, for example. “If you make it bigger, your walls have an easier time and survive longer, but it’s more expensive. If you make it smaller, your walls have a tougher time because they’re closer to all the heat and energy that the fusion reaction is creating, but now your power plant costs less to build.”
But to Lawson, this represents exactly the type of problem Inertia was built to solve: complex engineering issues that come to the fore once scientists have demonstrated the fundamental physics are sound. He thinks other fusion companies may someday reach this stage, as well — though he’s unwilling to hazard a guess on exactly what approach or startup is best positioned to do so.
“There have been generations of scientists who’ve made their predictions about fusion energy and gotten it wrong,” he told me. “I’m not going to pretend to be smarter than them. All I’m here to say is, just knowing that one did work, we can commercialize it.”