Sign In or Create an Account.

By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy

Climate Tech

Radiant Nuclear Is Aiming to Build Microreactors ASAP

The company is well-positioned to take advantage of Trump’s nuclear policies, include his goal of installing a microreactor on a military base within the next few years.

•
The Radiant logo and camouflage.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images, Radiant

At one point during his 12-year stint at SpaceX, Doug Bernauer turned his attention to powering a Martian colony with nuclear microreactors. Naturally, these would also fuel the rocket ships that could shuttle Mars-dwellers to and from Earth as needed. Then he had an epiphany. “I quickly realized that yes, nuclear power could help humanity become multiplanetary in the long term, but it could also transform life on Earth right now,” Bernauer wrote in 2023.

Indeed it can.

As nuclear power reemerges as a prominent player in the U.S. energy conversation, its potential to help drive a decarbonized future has crystallized into a rare bipartisan point of consensus. Radiant Nuclear, the Earth-based microreactor company that Bernauer founded after leaving SpaceX in 2019, is well positioned to take advantage of that, as its value proposition might as well be tailor-made for the Trump administration’s priorities

The startup’s aim is to make highly portable 1-megawatt reactors that can replace off-grid power sources such as diesel generators, which are ubiquitous in remote areas such as military bases. It’s fresh off a $165 million Series C funding round, with plans to begin commercial deployment in 2028. That aligns neatly with Trump’s recently announced goal of deploying a reactor on a military base by the same year. It’s an opportunity that Radiant Chief Operating Officer Tori Shivanandan told me the company is uniquely well-suited to take advantage of.

“A diesel generator that operates at 1 megawatt you have to refill with diesel about every three to five days,” Shivanandan explained. That means having regular access to both fuel and the generator itself, “and that’s just not reliable in many locations.” The company says its reactors only need refueling only every five years.

Radiant’s goal is to be cost competitive with generators in far flung locales — not just military bases, but also distant mines, rural towns, oil and gas drilling operations, and smaller, more dispersed data centers. “A customer who’s on the North Slope of Alaska, they might pay $11 or $12 a gallon for diesel,” Shivanandan told me. That’s a price she said Radiant could definitely compete with.

“The military’s interest in microreactors has been coming for quite a long time,” Rachel Slaybaugh, a climate tech investor at the venture firm DCVC told me. The firm led Radiant’s Series C round. Some of Radiant’s appeal is “right place, right time,” she said. “Some of it is putting in a lot of work over a long time to make it the right place, right time.”

Trump’s recent nuclear-related executive orders also have Shivanandan and her team over the moon. As the administration looks to streamline nuclear licensing and buildouts, one order explicitly calls for establishing a process for the “high-volume licensing of microreactors and modular reactors,” which includes “standardized applications and approvals.” These orders, Shivanandan told me, will keep Radiant on track to start selling by 2028, and set the stage for the company’s rapid scale up.

Alongside DCVC, the company's latest round included funding from Andreessen Horowitz’s “American Dynamism” team, Union Square Ventures, and Founders Fund. This raise, Shivanandan told me, will cover Radiant’s expenses as it builds out its prototype reactor, which it plans to test at Idaho National Lab next year. It will be the first fueled operation of a brand new reactor design in 50 years, she said.

“My perspective is the bigger reactors are important and interesting, and there are a lot of great companies, but they’re not a very good fit for venture investing, Slaybaugh told me. “We like microreactors, because they just need so much less capital and so much less time.”

That potential buildout speed also means that even as the Inflation Reduction Act’s clean energy tax credits look poised for a major haircut, Radiant may still be able to benefit from them. In the latest version of the budget bill, nuclear projects are only eligible for credits if they begin construction by 2029 — a tall order for the many startups that likely won’t start building in earnest until the 2030s. But if all goes according to plan, that’s a timeline Radiant could work with — at least for its initial reactors, which would be the most expensive and thus most in need of credits anyway.

The company aims to reach economies of scale relatively quickly, with a goal of building 50 reactors per year at a yet-to-be-constructed factory by the mid 2030s. The modular design means Radiant can deploy multiple 1-megawatt reactors to facilities with greater power needs. But if a customer wants more than 10 or so megawatts, Radiant recommends they look to microreactors’ larger cousins, the so-called small modular reactors. Companies developing these include Last Energy, which makes 20-megawatt reactors, as well as NuScale, Kairos, and X-energy, which aim to build plants ranging from 150 megawatts to 960 megawatts in size.

While it could take one of these SMR companies years to fully install its reactors, Radiant’s shipping container-sized products are not designed to be permanent pieces of infrastructure. After being trucked onsite, the company says its reactors can be switched on the following day. Then, after about 20 years of continuous operation, they’ll be carried away and the site easily returned to greenfield, since there was no foundation dug or concrete poured to begin with.

This April, the Department of Defense selected Radiant as one of eight eligible companies for the Advanced Nuclear Power for Installations Program. The winner(s) will design and build microreactors on select military installations to “provide mission readiness through energy resilience” and produce “enough electrical power to meet 100 percent of all critical loads,” according to the Defense Innovation Unit’s website.

Also on this list was the nuclear company Oklo, which counts OpenAI CEO Sam Altman among its primary backers and went public last year. This Wednesday, the Air Force announced its intent to enter into a power purchase agreement with the company to build a pilot reactor on a base in Alaska. The reactor will reportedly produce up to 5 megawatts of power, though Oklo’s full-scale reactors are set to be 75 megawatts. Whether the military will opt to contract with other nuclear companies is still an open question.

Perhaps more meaningful, though, is the show of support Radiant recently gained from the Department of Energy, which selected it as one of five companies to receive a conditional commitment for a type of highly enriched uranium known as HALEU that’s critical for small, next-generation reactors. Much of this fuel came from Russia before Biden banned Russian uranium imports last year, in a belated response to the country’s invasion of Ukraine and an attempt to shore up the domestic nuclear supply chain.

America’s supply of HALEU is still scarce, though, and as such, Shivanandan considers the DOE’s fuel commitment to be the biggest vote of confidence Radiant has received from the government so far. The other companies selected to receive fuel are TRISO-X (a subsidiary of X-energy), Kairos Power, TerraPower, and Westinghouse, all of which have been around longer — the majority a decade or more longer — than Radiant.

Though the company is currently focused on Earth, Radiant hasn’t completely abandoned its interplanetary dreams. “We do believe that, should you want to colonize Mars and also create the environment in which you could refuel your rocket and send it back, then you would need 1-megawatt nuclear reactors,” Shivanandan told me. Anything larger might be too heavy to put in a rocket.

Good to know.

Green
🔒

You’ve reached your free article limit

Subscribe to Heatmap News for unlimited access to daily energy and climate coverage.
To continue reading
Create a free account or sign in to unlock more free articles.
or
Please enter an email address
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Politics

The Battleground Districts Where Electricity Bills Have Surged the Most

September bills in competitive Republican-held districts have risen by a median of 21% between 2024 and 2026.

Voting and power lines.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

New Jersey’s 7th District is an odd place for an affordability fight.

The 15th wealthiest congressional district in the country, NJ-7 stretches from the tidal strait bordering New York’s Staten Island to the winding Delaware River state line with Pennsylvania. Between those two bodies of water, roughly a third of households earn more than $200,000 a year. The 7th Congressional District is also New Jersey’s “one rare and surprising swing district,” per Gothamist, and, as a result, it is also the spendiest on elections: the 2024 high-water mark of $26.3 million in campaign spending will likely be surpassed this year by incumbent Republican Tom Kean Jr. and Democrat Rebecca Bennett.

Keep reading...Show less
Green
AM Briefing

PoorWeave

On X-energy’s next plant, Italian power, and Chinese solar exports

A data center interior.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

Current conditions: A new nor’easter is washing the ocean over North Carolina’s Highway 12 right as crews complete reconstruction on the Outer Banks thoroughfare following last month’s storm • After whipping Mexico’s Pacific Coast with heavy rains, Hurricane Trudy has weakened to a Category 1 storm • Super Typhoon Champi knocked out power for more than half of Guam before barreling toward the Philippines as a potential Category 5 storm.


THE TOP FIVE

1. Wall Street’s AI rout ends for chipmakers, but not for indebted cloud computing giants

Last week was the worst week for the tech-heavy Nasdaq 100 Index since President Donald Trump’s tariffs roiled the market in April 2025. The reason? Hotter than expected federal data on inflation fueled fears of an interest rate hike that could prove devastating to the buildout of artificial intelligence infrastructure. Investors were already worrying the physical investments would cost more than giants such as ChatGPT-maker OpenAI or Claude-creator Anthropic are set to earn. But on Monday, semiconductor makers such as Oracle, Intel, and Micron Technology rallied as the AI rout came to an end. Yet CoreWeave, the cloud-computing heavyweight that led the selloff last week, closed slightly lower. The issue, investors told CNBC, is the company’s debt load. “The market tends to get worried about companies that have refinance risk when rates are higher, and CoreWeave was a little bit of the poster child,” John Lloyd, global head of multi-sector and corporate credit at Janus Henderson, whose firm owns CoreWeave bonds due in 2031, told the broadcaster. “They need the debt markets in order to grow, in some form or fashion.” That CoreWeave came close to bouncing back at all comes down at least in part to Ark Investment Management chief Cathie Wood opting to buy about $12 million of shares in the company amid the market plunge last week, a play for which The Street notes she’s known. Notably, Oracle, which was previously dubbed the “canary in the coal mine” for concern over AI debt, closed just 1% higher before plunging in after-market trading.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Climate Tech

Exclusive: Veckta Raises $11 Million to Help Businesses Buy Onsite Solar and Storage

The company simplifies the process of getting consistent, apples-to-apples bids.

Solar panels.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

With commercial electricity prices steadily climbing, many businesses and real estate owners are increasingly eager to generate and store their own power onsite, cutting their bills and making costs more predictable. But figuring out whether solar and storage can actually pencil out — and under what conditions — can be a nightmare. Ask a handful of developers for a quote and you might get a rooftop solar array from one, a ground-mounted solar and battery system from another, and a gas turbine from a third, each with its own size, price, and financing terms.

That leaves buyers comparing apples to oranges. And for businesses evaluating a portfolio of potential projects, the process gets even messier. “These are very local-centric systems. Different interconnection requirements, different permits, different suppliers,” Gareth Evans, CEO of the onsite energy planning and procurement startup Veckta, told me. “There are hundreds of solar developers in every state.” The hard part, he added, is “knowing what supplier to go with, how to ask them the right questions in the right language, in the right format, so that you’re getting consistent bids back that you can compare and contrast.”

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow