You’ve reached your free article limit
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:
Thanks to a flurry of state legislation, Coloradans now stand to win big from the Inflation Reduction Act. They can even pick up one of the last new Chevy Bolts for $15,000 or less.

No one really knows how big the United States’ signature climate legislation could become. The Congressional Budget Office projects the incentives in the Inflation Reduction Act add up to about $369 billion. But many of those incentives are uncapped, meaning the government will keep shelling out tax credits and rebates as long as there’s demand for them. Some outside analysts think the law could ultimately total $800 billion, or even more than $1 trillion.
State policy will be a deciding factor. And Colorado just wrote a playbook for how to bring as much of that money into its economy as possible while steering the IRA’s programs to better fit its own climate agenda. I call it: The Inflation Reduction Act 2.0.
Last week, the state passed a series of bills that replicate much of the federal climate act, including tax credits and rebates that double down on some IRA programs while building on others.
One of the biggest bills expands the state’s incentives for consumers to electrify their heating systems and purchase electric vehicles. Will Toor, the executive director of the Colorado Energy Office, told me the idea was basically for the state to spend money to make money.
“The philosophy was creating state incentives that would encourage businesses and consumers to act in ways that will then draw down federal tax credits and bring more federal funding into the state,” he said.
Heat pump installations can be complicated, and costs can quickly balloon into the tens of thousands of dollars. While the federal incentives in the IRA help, they may not be big enough for many interested customers. Toor said that a state analysis revealed that additional state-level incentives for heat pumps would significantly increase uptake of related federal programs.
The idea behind a $5,000 tax credit for electric vehicles was slightly different. Toor told me that because of the domestic content requirements for the federal tax credits, there won’t be many models that are eligible in the next three to five years. “Given the momentum that we have in growing the EV market share in Colorado, we wanted to make sure that we were able to maintain that during that period,” he said.
Colorado’s EV tax credit also bumps up to $7,500 for vehicles that are under $35,000. As Toor said, not many EV models are eligible for the federal tax credit yet, but the Chevy Bolt, which retails for less than $30,000 is one. That means Coloradans have a limited chance (RIP Chevy Bolt) to pick up the 2023 model for $15,000 or less.
Get the best of Heatmap directly in your inbox:
They’ll also have access to the first state-run rebate in the country for e-bikes, which was included in the same bill, and will complement cities like Denver’s plans to expand bike lanes. An e-bike rebate was in an earlier version of the IRA, back when it was called the Build Back Better Act, but it was ultimately cut from the final draft.
The other big thing Colorado did was set the stage to solve long-term climate challenges by expanding the IRA’s incentives for emerging technologies. It basically made the pot a little sweeter for some climate-solutions companies to set up shop in Colorado. For example, the federal government now offers tax credits for the production of sustainable aviation fuel, a lower-carbon version of jet fuel. Colorado will try and lure that industry with a new tax credit for the construction of the production facilities.
Similarly, the IRA created a tax credit for clean hydrogen production. But it’s still unclear whether industries that don’t already use hydrogen in their operations will adopt the fuel. Colorado will make it more attractive by offering a new tax credit for the use of the fuel — a first-in-the-nation program. The goal was not only to attract the federal tax credit funding, but also to support Colorado’s application to become one of the Department of Energy’s “hydrogen hubs.”
Here, lawmakers went a step further, showing how states can really determine how some of these riskier solutions supported by the IRA, like clean hydrogen, take shape in the U.S. Hydrogen is a flexible fuel with many potential applications, but it’s very energy intensive to produce. Many climate advocates recommend using it in limited, hard-to-decarbonize industries, rather than, for example, as a replacement for natural gas in home heating. But thus far, Congress has funded programs that encourage its use in almost every conceivable way. With its new tax credit, Colorado is the first state to prioritize the fuel in a few select industries, like aviation and heavy-duty trucking.
Notably, lawmakers also took a stand in a contentious debate over how to define clean hydrogen, adopting very strict rules for what will qualify for its tax credit. Climate advocates hope the decision will influence the U.S. Treasury Department’s guidance for the federal tax credit, which has yet to be published.
“The IRA and the Infrastructure Act create new opportunities,” Toor told me. “So I do think it's very important for states to consider those opportunities and think through how to design state policies that complement the IRA.”
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
‘Our entire company was built for this purpose.’
After decades of stagnation, the nuclear industry has drummed up all kinds of ideas meant to revive the prospects for building reactors in the United States. Make the reactors smaller. Micro, even! Cool them with helium or molten salt instead of water. Invite the Koreans or Canadians to come teach us how to construct atomic power stations again.
Yet the startup bold enough to name itself The Nuclear Company launched in 2024 on a simpler thesis: Just go with the large-scale reactors we have built before, and construct them in bulk to bring down costs.
Essentially, do what the Chinese did.
While the U.S. struggled for 15 years to complete its first two Westinghouse AP1000s, the 1.1-gigawatt units designed at the dawn of this century to be America’s flagship nuclear technology, China built four in the same time period. Beijing then reverse-engineered the technology to make its own version with an entirely domestic supply chain. China now has 10 operating Hualong One reactors and at least 37 more on the way. The U.S. ultimately completed its first two AP1000s at Southern Company’s Alvin W. Vogtle Electric Generating Plant in eastern Georgia right around the same time.
The Nuclear Company was formed by hiring former managers who oversaw the Georgia project. Despite the Trump administration’s pledge to finance construction of at least 10 more large nuclear reactors, the only projects that have broken ground are new, first-of-a-kind small modular reactors that skeptics fear will face the same billion-dollar cost overruns that the AP1000s faced at Plant Vogtle — but without the same output of electricity to balance out the expenses.
On Wednesday morning, The Nuclear Company announced its most significant attempt at a Chinese-scale buildout yet. The firm unveiled plans to build 6.6 gigawatts of new, large-scale reactors at a greenfield site in Kentucky, along the Ohio River. Dubbed Prosperity One, the project would be located in Lewis County, on property once assembled for a coal-fired station that was later abandoned. The site sits half a mile from a 765-kilovolt transmission line that connects to PJM Interconnection, the nation’s second-largest and arguably most stressed grid system.
“Our entire company was built for this purpose,” Joe Klecha, The Nuclear Company’s chief nuclear officer and a former manager on the Plant Vogtle buildout, told me. “We recognize that this is different and unique in our country. We believe it’s very much needed.”
The project will begin with two reactors at a time; the Kentucky site has room for up to six. The Nuclear Company is already negotiating potential offtake agreements with electricity buyers to help finance construction, and it expects deals by next year. The company told me it has not yet decided whether it will run the Prosperity One as an independent power provider or sell the facility to a utility or another plant operator. “We are preserving all options and will make that decision as we pull the other partners onboard formally,” Klecha said.
Since its inception, The Nuclear Company has focused on the AP1000 as the most promising design in the U.S. That’s particularly true after the Nuclear Regulatory Commission certified the Vogtle Unit 4 design last week as the permanent, settled schematic for future AP1000s.
But Klecha left open the possibility of another technology. “The AP1000 is our basis for the site at this point, but we’ll continue to evaluate other options as we get through the site characterization,” he said. He expects that process to wrap up in “the first half of next year.”
The company’s options are limited, though. Last month, as I reported, South Korea agreed to help the U.S. build up to six new AP1000s at an as-yet-unspecified site in addition to constructing at least two APR1400s — that is, essentially the Korean version of the American technology. In theory, The Nuclear Company could build APR1400s, too. But it’s highly unlikely, since Westinghouse accused the state-owned Korea Electric Power Corporation of ripping off its technology for the APR1400 in 2022. That led to a yearslong lawsuit and settlement that gave the American company the right to demand royalties and keep Seoul out of markets where Westinghouse aims to compete.
The only other viable option is the ABWR. The world’s first so-called advanced reactor, the ABWR was built with General Electric’s boiling water reactor technology, which is used across about a third of the U.S. fleet. It serves as the second-most popular design after Westinghouse’s pressurized water reactor model. Japan successfully built four ABWRs over a decade from 1996 to 2006, and Taiwan nearly completed two before killing the project in a bid to phase out nuclear power altogether. The NRC certified the ABWR for construction in the U.S., but a project in southern Texas that aimed to build the first in the U.S. was scrapped about a decade ago.
“The ABWR has an impressive pedigree of construction success as well as experience being built to U.S. standards that is hard to find outside of the Vogtle project,” Brett Rampal, a veteran nuclear consultant who advises Deloitte and Veriten, told me. Still, he said, the AP1000 is the leading contender for the Kentucky site.
Rampal said Prosperity One represents a welcome break from how large-scale reactors have been planned in recent years. While most of the industry remains focused on small modular reactors, research I covered last month indicates the technologies could face worse cost problems than large-scale units, and the emerging consensus on building AP1000s focuses on expanding existing nuclear plants.
Indeed, The Nuclear Company’s first major deal was to help Brookfield Asset Management, which owns 51% of Westinghouse, complete a thwarted AP1000 project at the V.C. Summer plant in South Carolina. But other potential sites considered for new AP1000s included expansions of Florida Power & Light’s Turkey Point nuclear plant in Florida, the Tennessee Valley Authority’s Bellefonte nuclear station in Alabama, or even adding another two units to Plant Vogtle.
“A lot of the thoughts around AP1000s and large reactors have always been around existing or already-licensed sites,” Rampal said. “It’s very interesting to see TNC’s first project buck the trend of what folks have been talking about around the large reactor story in this country."
At least one thing is certain about The Nuclear Company’s approach: It will settle on one design. The company is animated by the need to avoid one of the U.S. nuclear industry’s biggest financial mistakes, known simply and derisively as “Whoops.” In 1983, the Washington Public Power Supply System — WPPSS — triggered what was then the largest municipal bond default in U.S. history after its buildout of several different reactor designs at once fell apart in a major boondoggle.
Building different reactors at Prosperity One “really goes against our mission, our vision, and our thesis as a company,” Klecha confirmed.
The key is repeating the same design over and over again so the project managers sort out the fastest, most efficient ways to build and workers hone skills in actually constructing the design. “Six AP1000 units on one site creates the scale and repetition needed to drive down costs and sends a strong signal to the supply chain,” Lin Yuan, the senior advisor at the Nuclear Scaling Initiative, a non-profit collaboration working to create the enabling commercial and policy conditions for safe and secure nuclear energy scaling, told me in an email. “Manufacturers and craft labor need to see a sustained order pipeline to invest in capacity, factory expansion, and training.”
Vogtle Unit 4 came online in 2024 roughly 30% cheaper and faster than Vogtle Unit 3, completed a year earlier. Klecha said that’s the minimum cost reduction The Nuclear Company expects for the first two reactors built at Prosperity One.
“The 30%, I would say, is the floor on the savings from the first unit to the second unit,” he said. “How do we capture those lessons? Obviously, our team’s experience. We have a pretty rigorous ‘lessons learned’ document.”
Soon, he hopes, there will be even more lessons learned — in concrete, rather than on paper.