Nuclear Stocks Crash, With A Potential Payoff Still Years Away
- Uranium prices have surged amid a structural supply deficit and a global policy-driven nuclear revival, but the sector faces long project timelines and mounting volatility.
- Despite major investment pledges like the U.S.–Canada $80 billion reactor partnership, nuclear and uranium stocks have plunged 15–45% in recent weeks.
- Investors confront the industry’s slow path to revenue.
Over the past couple of years, uranium and nuclear energy markets have enjoyed a renaissance thanks to surging global power demand and the global energy crisis triggered by Russia’s war in Ukraine. Uranium is no longer trading on legacy sentiment, with prices moving more on fundamentals characterized by tight physical supply, underbuilt production pipelines, and a policy-driven nuclear revival that’s accelerating faster than commodity markets anticipated.
The uranium market is experiencing a structural supply deficit, creating potential challenges for nuclear operators.
Unlike many commodities, uranium trading usually involves small volumes with specialized participants, making the nuclear fuel susceptible to significant uranium market volatility. Meanwhile, governments across the globe are repositioning nuclear as critical infrastructure rather than transitional tech. Last month, the Trump administration struck a partnership with Canada’s Cameco Corp. (NYSE:CCJ) and Brookfield Asset Management (NYSE:BAM) to build at least $80 billion in nuclear reactors.
However, the harsh reality of the long lead and construction times of nuclear facilities, coupled with the fact that some stocks in the space with zero revenues are in nosebleed territory, has sent the sector into a tailspin. Nuclear and uranium stocks have pulled back sharply from recent highs, with many seeing double-digit losses: the sector's popular benchmark, VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NYSEARCA:NLR) has declined -16.6% over the past 30 days, at a time when the S&P 500 has gained nearly 3%.
Meanwhile, shares of advanced fission power plant developer, Oklo Inc. (NYSE:OKLO), are down -42.0% over the past month; Centrus Energy (NYSE:LEU) -35.9%, Energy Fuels Inc. (NYSE:UUUU) -33.9%, NuScale Power Corp. (NYSE:SMR) -47.7%, Uranium Energy Corp. (NYSE:UEC) -22.9%, BWX Technologies (NYSE:BWXT) -9.6%, Cameco Corp. (NYSE:CCJ) -6.1%, Vistra Corp. (NYSE:VST) -14.2% and NANO Nuclear Energy (NASDAQ:NNE) -40.2% and NexGen Energy (NYSE:NXE) -7.9%.
The market appears to be waking up to the reality that it could be up to a decade before we start to reap the benefits from the billions of dollars flowing into the sector. Whereas $80 billion can build enough reactors to power Virginia’s Data Center Alley, traditional reactors typically take 10 years or more to build. Meanwhile, the frequently touted small, modular reactors (SMRs) by the likes of NuScale Power, TerraPower and X-energy are still far from going mainstream primarily because the technology is still in early development and faces significant economic and regulatory hurdles.
While some prototype units are operational in countries like Russia and China, most designs are still in the theoretical or early construction phases. Indeed, NuScale is the first and only U.S. company to have its SMR design certified by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. NuScale's SMR features include a factory-fabricated, modular design that is scalable from one to 12 modules, with each module producing 77 MWe of power. Key features are its passive safety systems relying on gravity and convection, flexibility for on-grid and off-grid use, redundancy through independent modules, and a smaller footprint than traditional plants.
Amazon, on the other hand, has invested in X-energy with the goal of deploying up to 5 GW of SMRs by 2039.
Only Oklo Inc., Kairos Power and TerraPower have begun construction of their SMR plants; however, none have proven they can produce power at a commercial scale nor received regulatory approval to build a commercial system.
“There’s a lot going on, and nothing is going on,” BloombergNEF’s head nuclear analyst Chris Gadomski recently quipped.
To exacerbate matters, the markets have bid up these companies to absurd valuations despite many having no revenues to show for their troubles. To wit, Oklo’s market cap has at times exceeded $20 billion, despite the company having no operating reactors, no licenses to operate commercially, and no binding contracts to supply power. Wall Street analysts currently project Oklo will not generate significant revenue until late 2027 or 2028. Oklo’s current market cap is $15.3 billion.
Similar to Oklo, NANO Nuclear Energy currently sports a market cap of $1.6 billion with no revenue, no commercial products, and no commercial operation timeline. Its valuation is purely based on investor optimism about the future potential of nuclear energy, particularly in powering artificial intelligence data centers.
That said, the nuclear sector could see a quicker turnaround from restarting abandoned nuclear plants. Holtec International has laid out plans for its Palisades plant in Michigan to resume service early 2026 while Constellation Energy Corp. (NYSE:CEG) is on track to switch on its Three Mile Island reactor in 2027. Further, NextEra Energy Inc. (NYSE:NEE) recently announced that its Duane Arnold plant in Iowa will come back online by 2029.
By Alex Kimani for Oilprice.com
- Uranium prices have surged amid a structural supply deficit and a global policy-driven nuclear revival, but the sector faces long project timelines and mounting volatility.
- Despite major investment pledges like the U.S.–Canada $80 billion reactor partnership, nuclear and uranium stocks have plunged 15–45% in recent weeks.
- Investors confront the industry’s slow path to revenue.
Over the past couple of years, uranium and nuclear energy markets have enjoyed a renaissance thanks to surging global power demand and the global energy crisis triggered by Russia’s war in Ukraine. Uranium is no longer trading on legacy sentiment, with prices moving more on fundamentals characterized by tight physical supply, underbuilt production pipelines, and a policy-driven nuclear revival that’s accelerating faster than commodity markets anticipated.
The uranium market is experiencing a structural supply deficit, creating potential challenges for nuclear operators.
Unlike many commodities, uranium trading usually involves small volumes with specialized participants, making the nuclear fuel susceptible to significant uranium market volatility. Meanwhile, governments across the globe are repositioning nuclear as critical infrastructure rather than transitional tech. Last month, the Trump administration struck a partnership with Canada’s Cameco Corp. (NYSE:CCJ) and Brookfield Asset Management (NYSE:BAM) to build at least $80 billion in nuclear reactors.
However, the harsh reality of the long lead and construction times of nuclear facilities, coupled with the fact that some stocks in the space with zero revenues are in nosebleed territory, has sent the sector into a tailspin. Nuclear and uranium stocks have pulled back sharply from recent highs, with many seeing double-digit losses: the sector's popular benchmark, VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NYSEARCA:NLR) has declined -16.6% over the past 30 days, at a time when the S&P 500 has gained nearly 3%.
Meanwhile, shares of advanced fission power plant developer, Oklo Inc. (NYSE:OKLO), are down -42.0% over the past month; Centrus Energy (NYSE:LEU) -35.9%, Energy Fuels Inc. (NYSE:UUUU) -33.9%, NuScale Power Corp. (NYSE:SMR) -47.7%, Uranium Energy Corp. (NYSE:UEC) -22.9%, BWX Technologies (NYSE:BWXT) -9.6%, Cameco Corp. (NYSE:CCJ) -6.1%, Vistra Corp. (NYSE:VST) -14.2% and NANO Nuclear Energy (NASDAQ:NNE) -40.2% and NexGen Energy (NYSE:NXE) -7.9%.
The market appears to be waking up to the reality that it could be up to a decade before we start to reap the benefits from the billions of dollars flowing into the sector. Whereas $80 billion can build enough reactors to power Virginia’s Data Center Alley, traditional reactors typically take 10 years or more to build. Meanwhile, the frequently touted small, modular reactors (SMRs) by the likes of NuScale Power, TerraPower and X-energy are still far from going mainstream primarily because the technology is still in early development and faces significant economic and regulatory hurdles.
While some prototype units are operational in countries like Russia and China, most designs are still in the theoretical or early construction phases. Indeed, NuScale is the first and only U.S. company to have its SMR design certified by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. NuScale's SMR features include a factory-fabricated, modular design that is scalable from one to 12 modules, with each module producing 77 MWe of power. Key features are its passive safety systems relying on gravity and convection, flexibility for on-grid and off-grid use, redundancy through independent modules, and a smaller footprint than traditional plants.
Amazon, on the other hand, has invested in X-energy with the goal of deploying up to 5 GW of SMRs by 2039.
Only Oklo Inc., Kairos Power and TerraPower have begun construction of their SMR plants; however, none have proven they can produce power at a commercial scale nor received regulatory approval to build a commercial system.
“There’s a lot going on, and nothing is going on,” BloombergNEF’s head nuclear analyst Chris Gadomski recently quipped.
To exacerbate matters, the markets have bid up these companies to absurd valuations despite many having no revenues to show for their troubles. To wit, Oklo’s market cap has at times exceeded $20 billion, despite the company having no operating reactors, no licenses to operate commercially, and no binding contracts to supply power. Wall Street analysts currently project Oklo will not generate significant revenue until late 2027 or 2028. Oklo’s current market cap is $15.3 billion.
Similar to Oklo, NANO Nuclear Energy currently sports a market cap of $1.6 billion with no revenue, no commercial products, and no commercial operation timeline. Its valuation is purely based on investor optimism about the future potential of nuclear energy, particularly in powering artificial intelligence data centers.
That said, the nuclear sector could see a quicker turnaround from restarting abandoned nuclear plants. Holtec International has laid out plans for its Palisades plant in Michigan to resume service early 2026 while Constellation Energy Corp. (NYSE:CEG) is on track to switch on its Three Mile Island reactor in 2027. Further, NextEra Energy Inc. (NYSE:NEE) recently announced that its Duane Arnold plant in Iowa will come back online by 2029.
By Alex Kimani for Oilprice.com
Iran Minister Claims Nuclear Enrichment Halted After U.S.-Israeli Attack
- Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi claimed that Iran has been unable to enrich uranium since the US-Israeli attacks in June because their nuclear facilities were damaged.
- Araghchi asserted that all facilities are under IAEA monitoring and that there is no undeclared enrichment, yet he defended Iran's "inalienable" right to pursue peaceful nuclear technology including enrichment.
- The article suggests Iran's admission could be a bluff, as the country now has an incentive to secretly develop nuclear weapons while publicly claiming no enrichment is happening.
Iran, having seen its key nuclear facilities blown up by the Israeli and US surprise attacks of last June, and having long been under Washington and Western-led sanctions, could now be signaling a major olive branch. It is telling the West that there is nothing to worry about in terms of allegations of uranium enrichment or that it is striving toward a nuclear weapon.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Sunday that the Islamic Republic has been unable to enrich uranium since the 12-day US-Israeli war.
In a very blunt and direct answer given to an Associated Press journalist visiting Iran, Araghchi stated "There is no undeclared nuclear enrichment in Iran." He described that "All of our facilities are under the safeguards and monitoring" of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Araghchi said.
"There is no enrichment right now because our facilities - our enrichment facilities - have been attacked," he asserted.
Still, he defended Iran's right to enrich uranium as a matter of national sovereignty, saying "Iran’s right for enrichment, for peaceful use of nuclear technology, including enrichment, is undeniable."
"We have this right, and we continue to exercise that, and we hope that the international community, including the United States, recognize our rights and understand that this is an inalienable right of Iran. And we would never give up our rights," he added.
This has remained a consistent and standard argument from Iranian leaders - that it is not seeking a nuke, and that all its efforts are for peaceful nuclear energy needs. Various Ayatollahs over the years have even called nuclear weapons 'unIslamic'.
Throughout its prior limited engagement with Washington on the nuclear issue, the Trump administration has continued to insist on zero enrichment and also sought limits on Iran's ballistic missile program.
But then the June war happened and all official dialogue has been off. President Trump has all along proclaimed the end of Iran's ability to enrich, and it is significant that Tehran is now admitting this is accurate.
However, it could also be a bluff. Iran now has every incentive to develop secret nuclear weapons while telling the world there is no enrichment happening.
Many analysts say that another round of fighting between Iran and Israel could be on the horizon. For starters, the Netanyahu government does not believe that Iran has given up its enrichment efforts, but Tel Aviv is likely being held back by the Trump White House.
By Zerohedge
- Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi claimed that Iran has been unable to enrich uranium since the US-Israeli attacks in June because their nuclear facilities were damaged.
- Araghchi asserted that all facilities are under IAEA monitoring and that there is no undeclared enrichment, yet he defended Iran's "inalienable" right to pursue peaceful nuclear technology including enrichment.
- The article suggests Iran's admission could be a bluff, as the country now has an incentive to secretly develop nuclear weapons while publicly claiming no enrichment is happening.
Iran, having seen its key nuclear facilities blown up by the Israeli and US surprise attacks of last June, and having long been under Washington and Western-led sanctions, could now be signaling a major olive branch. It is telling the West that there is nothing to worry about in terms of allegations of uranium enrichment or that it is striving toward a nuclear weapon.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Sunday that the Islamic Republic has been unable to enrich uranium since the 12-day US-Israeli war.
In a very blunt and direct answer given to an Associated Press journalist visiting Iran, Araghchi stated "There is no undeclared nuclear enrichment in Iran." He described that "All of our facilities are under the safeguards and monitoring" of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Araghchi said.
"There is no enrichment right now because our facilities - our enrichment facilities - have been attacked," he asserted.
Still, he defended Iran's right to enrich uranium as a matter of national sovereignty, saying "Iran’s right for enrichment, for peaceful use of nuclear technology, including enrichment, is undeniable."
"We have this right, and we continue to exercise that, and we hope that the international community, including the United States, recognize our rights and understand that this is an inalienable right of Iran. And we would never give up our rights," he added.
This has remained a consistent and standard argument from Iranian leaders - that it is not seeking a nuke, and that all its efforts are for peaceful nuclear energy needs. Various Ayatollahs over the years have even called nuclear weapons 'unIslamic'.
Throughout its prior limited engagement with Washington on the nuclear issue, the Trump administration has continued to insist on zero enrichment and also sought limits on Iran's ballistic missile program.
But then the June war happened and all official dialogue has been off. President Trump has all along proclaimed the end of Iran's ability to enrich, and it is significant that Tehran is now admitting this is accurate.
However, it could also be a bluff. Iran now has every incentive to develop secret nuclear weapons while telling the world there is no enrichment happening.
Many analysts say that another round of fighting between Iran and Israel could be on the horizon. For starters, the Netanyahu government does not believe that Iran has given up its enrichment efforts, but Tel Aviv is likely being held back by the Trump White House.
By Zerohedge
Iran’s Hidden Nuclear Push Resumes Under Pickaxe Mountain
- Iran is blocking IAEA access to key nuclear sites, including Fordow, Natanz, and the nearby Pickaxe Mountain.
- Western intelligence fears Iran may be rebuilding centrifuge facilities or creating a new undeclared enrichment site.
- The E.U. expects escalating tensions as Iran boosts its defense budget by 200% and accelerates long-range missile development
Iran is blocking the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) from inspecting multiple sites of interest in its nuclear weapons development programme, a senior source in the European Union’s (E.U.’s) security complex exclusively told OilPrice.com late last week. “These include the major sites targeted during the U.S. and Israeli strikes on its nuclear programme facilities in June, including Fordow and Natanz, and another site in particular -- close to Natanz that seems to be the focus of significant Iranian activity since then,” he said. “The pace has picked up even more since the ‘Snapback Sanctions’ were reimposed,” he added. So, what is Iran doing that it does not want the IAEA or anyone else to see, and what have the newly reimposed sanctions going to do with it?
August 28 saw the U.K., France, and Germany (the ‘E3’) begin the process of triggering the ‘snapback’ mechanism of restoring sanctions on Iran for its “significant non-performance” in meeting the terms of the Joint Comprehensives Plan of Action (JCPOA, or colloquially ‘the nuclear deal’) agreed between Iran and the P5+1 group of nations (the U.S., U.K., France, Russia, and China, ‘plus’ Germany) in 2015. At the end of the 30-day period, with no blocking resolution adopted, the sanctions legally snapped back into force. These included an arms embargo, a ban on uranium enrichment and reprocessing, a ban on launches and other activities with ballistic missiles capable of delivering nuclear weapons, a ban on ballistic missile technology transfer and technical assistance, a targeted global asset freeze and a travel ban on Iranian individuals and entities. They also gave authorisation for countries to inspect Iran Air cargo and the cargoes of Iran’s Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines for banned goods. Further sanctions relate to measures connected to the Financial Action Task Force (FATF). This has 40 active criteria and mechanisms in place to prevent money laundering -- an activity that is vital to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps’ (IRGC) activities across the world, as analysed in full in my latest book on the new global oil market order. It also has nine criteria and mechanisms in place to do the same for the financing of terrorism and related activities -- again, a core of the IRGC’s role in promoting Iran’s brand of Islam around the globe. The FATF also has sweeping powers to wield against individuals, companies, or countries that transgress any of its standards and is extremely aggressive in using them by degrees, depending on whether the sanctioned entity is on its ‘grey’ or ‘black’ list
In response to this – and to the earlier U.S. and Israeli attacks on its sites connected to its nuclear weapons development programme -- Iran’s official stance has been that it is prepared to re-engage with the U.S. in talks aimed at constructing a new ‘nuclear deal’ of some kind, although it is “not in a hurry” to do so. This is despite a significant deterioration in the country’s economy, including projections that the unemployment rate in the key ‘Under-35’ demographic will hit 44% by the end of 2026, according to the E.U. source. Unofficially, according to a senior energy source who works closely with Iran’s Petroleum Ministry and exclusively spoken to by OilPrice.com last week, pressure is growing from the IRGC on Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei to expedite the rebuilding of those key elements in the nuclear programme that were damaged in June. Additional pressure is coming from the same quarters for the Supreme Leader to approve Iran’s formal withdrawal from the ‘Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty’ (NPT). “[Iranian President, Masoud] Pezeshkian has said that [Iran] won’t leave [the NPT], but it’s what the Supreme Leader thinks and does that is relevant here,” he said. “The NPT is crucial because the CSA [Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement] – which is overseen by the International Atomic Energy Agency -- is linked to the NPT, and Iran cannot advance its nuclear programme at this point without new builds [of nuclear facilities] and it can’t do this with the IAEA sniffing around on the ground,” he added.
The key reason why the IRGC is pushing for Iran’s withdrawal from the NPT is that all the new measures that would be included in any new nuclear deal negotiated now with the U.S. – from Iran’s current position of weakness – would be targeted at the eventual eradication of the IRGC as we know it, as also detailed in full in my latest book. “Washington has long made it clear – even under [former U.S. President, Barack] Obama -- that it wants the broader powers of the IRGC removed and for it to be rolled into the regular Iranian army,” said the E.U. source. “For the IRGC, and the Supreme Leader, this would remove the force from its primary role of protecting the legacy of the [1979 Iranian] Revolution and undermine the core purpose of that new Islamic order,” he added. “It’s the IRGC’s view that Iran needs to up the ante, and the best way for doing that right now is to leave the NPT, or at least make very serious threats to do it,” he underlined.
Prior to the June military strikes by the U.S. and Israel, the IAEA stated in February that Iran had further increased its stockpile of enriched uranium even after the Agency had announced just three months before that the Islamic Republic had been “dramatically accelerating enrichment of uranium”. According to the IAEA, Iran’s stock of uranium refined to up to 60% in the form of uranium hexafluoride grew by 92.5 kg from December 2024 to February 2025 to 274.8 kg. It underlined that the 60% level of purity was very close in practical terms to the 90% or so weapons-grade benchmark. The Agency added that the 274.8 kg of 60%-enriched uranium Iran had even then was sufficient, if enriched further, for six nuclear bombs, and that there was enough for more weapons at lower enrichment levels. That said, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said earlier this month that this figure had since increased to around 400kg, but that “almost all” of that was “buried under the rubble” of nuclear facilities bombed by the U.S. and Israel. He added: “We have no intention of removing them from under the rubble until conditions are ready. We have no information on how much of the 400kg is untouched and how much is destroyed, and we will have no information until we dig them out.”
The problem with that is that Washington, Tel Aviv, London, and Brussels are not so sure. They have little doubt that considerable damage was done to several key Iranian nuclear installations – most notably perhaps, at the Fordow uranium enrichment facility, located in a mountain near Qom. However, this is still one of the sites to which the IAEA has not been granted access since the June attacks, so even this is not fully corroborated. The same is true of another such site close to Natanz and its associated facilities, with one of these in particular having come under close international scrutiny in recent days. The Institute for Science and International Security highlighted in early October that satellite imagery of Pickaxe Mountain (Mount Kolang Gaz-La) – a site around a mile south of the Natanz enrichment facility, that has been under construction since about 2020 -- shows that Iran is continuing construction activities there, although it did not characterise this as an expansion of the site. At the end of last month, the Center for Strategic and International Studies reported satellite imagery showing a significant uptick in mining and drilling into the mountain, and the construction of a huge security perimeter around the site. The Center has posited that there are three explanations for this. The first is that Iran is preparing for a centrifuge assembly facility. The second is that the Pickaxe Mountain site has been expanded to include some of the facilities and research and metallurgy that the U.S. destroyed at Isfahan. And third, that it may be a future uranium enrichment site that Iran is building undeclared.
“The fact that we can’t answer any of these questions on this site, and on many others, sets Iran and us [the E.U., U.S., Israel, and Great Britain] on a collision course again, with more sanctions being the next step, after which we will have to reassess our options,” added the E.U. source. “This is likely to get worse quite quickly, as Iran will increase its military budget by more than 200% next year, with much of this to go on fast tracking the development of intercontinental ballistic missiles with multi-warhead delivery systems with a range of up to 10,000 kilometres,” he said. “[Supreme Leader, Ali] Khamenei is determined to take the missile delivery systems at least to the level of North Korea when it began intercontinental ballistic missiles with multi-warhead capabilities for the first time,” he concluded.
By Simon Watkins for Oilprice.com
- Iran is blocking IAEA access to key nuclear sites, including Fordow, Natanz, and the nearby Pickaxe Mountain.
- Western intelligence fears Iran may be rebuilding centrifuge facilities or creating a new undeclared enrichment site.
- The E.U. expects escalating tensions as Iran boosts its defense budget by 200% and accelerates long-range missile development
Iran is blocking the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) from inspecting multiple sites of interest in its nuclear weapons development programme, a senior source in the European Union’s (E.U.’s) security complex exclusively told OilPrice.com late last week. “These include the major sites targeted during the U.S. and Israeli strikes on its nuclear programme facilities in June, including Fordow and Natanz, and another site in particular -- close to Natanz that seems to be the focus of significant Iranian activity since then,” he said. “The pace has picked up even more since the ‘Snapback Sanctions’ were reimposed,” he added. So, what is Iran doing that it does not want the IAEA or anyone else to see, and what have the newly reimposed sanctions going to do with it?
August 28 saw the U.K., France, and Germany (the ‘E3’) begin the process of triggering the ‘snapback’ mechanism of restoring sanctions on Iran for its “significant non-performance” in meeting the terms of the Joint Comprehensives Plan of Action (JCPOA, or colloquially ‘the nuclear deal’) agreed between Iran and the P5+1 group of nations (the U.S., U.K., France, Russia, and China, ‘plus’ Germany) in 2015. At the end of the 30-day period, with no blocking resolution adopted, the sanctions legally snapped back into force. These included an arms embargo, a ban on uranium enrichment and reprocessing, a ban on launches and other activities with ballistic missiles capable of delivering nuclear weapons, a ban on ballistic missile technology transfer and technical assistance, a targeted global asset freeze and a travel ban on Iranian individuals and entities. They also gave authorisation for countries to inspect Iran Air cargo and the cargoes of Iran’s Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines for banned goods. Further sanctions relate to measures connected to the Financial Action Task Force (FATF). This has 40 active criteria and mechanisms in place to prevent money laundering -- an activity that is vital to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps’ (IRGC) activities across the world, as analysed in full in my latest book on the new global oil market order. It also has nine criteria and mechanisms in place to do the same for the financing of terrorism and related activities -- again, a core of the IRGC’s role in promoting Iran’s brand of Islam around the globe. The FATF also has sweeping powers to wield against individuals, companies, or countries that transgress any of its standards and is extremely aggressive in using them by degrees, depending on whether the sanctioned entity is on its ‘grey’ or ‘black’ list
In response to this – and to the earlier U.S. and Israeli attacks on its sites connected to its nuclear weapons development programme -- Iran’s official stance has been that it is prepared to re-engage with the U.S. in talks aimed at constructing a new ‘nuclear deal’ of some kind, although it is “not in a hurry” to do so. This is despite a significant deterioration in the country’s economy, including projections that the unemployment rate in the key ‘Under-35’ demographic will hit 44% by the end of 2026, according to the E.U. source. Unofficially, according to a senior energy source who works closely with Iran’s Petroleum Ministry and exclusively spoken to by OilPrice.com last week, pressure is growing from the IRGC on Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei to expedite the rebuilding of those key elements in the nuclear programme that were damaged in June. Additional pressure is coming from the same quarters for the Supreme Leader to approve Iran’s formal withdrawal from the ‘Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty’ (NPT). “[Iranian President, Masoud] Pezeshkian has said that [Iran] won’t leave [the NPT], but it’s what the Supreme Leader thinks and does that is relevant here,” he said. “The NPT is crucial because the CSA [Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement] – which is overseen by the International Atomic Energy Agency -- is linked to the NPT, and Iran cannot advance its nuclear programme at this point without new builds [of nuclear facilities] and it can’t do this with the IAEA sniffing around on the ground,” he added.
The key reason why the IRGC is pushing for Iran’s withdrawal from the NPT is that all the new measures that would be included in any new nuclear deal negotiated now with the U.S. – from Iran’s current position of weakness – would be targeted at the eventual eradication of the IRGC as we know it, as also detailed in full in my latest book. “Washington has long made it clear – even under [former U.S. President, Barack] Obama -- that it wants the broader powers of the IRGC removed and for it to be rolled into the regular Iranian army,” said the E.U. source. “For the IRGC, and the Supreme Leader, this would remove the force from its primary role of protecting the legacy of the [1979 Iranian] Revolution and undermine the core purpose of that new Islamic order,” he added. “It’s the IRGC’s view that Iran needs to up the ante, and the best way for doing that right now is to leave the NPT, or at least make very serious threats to do it,” he underlined.
Prior to the June military strikes by the U.S. and Israel, the IAEA stated in February that Iran had further increased its stockpile of enriched uranium even after the Agency had announced just three months before that the Islamic Republic had been “dramatically accelerating enrichment of uranium”. According to the IAEA, Iran’s stock of uranium refined to up to 60% in the form of uranium hexafluoride grew by 92.5 kg from December 2024 to February 2025 to 274.8 kg. It underlined that the 60% level of purity was very close in practical terms to the 90% or so weapons-grade benchmark. The Agency added that the 274.8 kg of 60%-enriched uranium Iran had even then was sufficient, if enriched further, for six nuclear bombs, and that there was enough for more weapons at lower enrichment levels. That said, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said earlier this month that this figure had since increased to around 400kg, but that “almost all” of that was “buried under the rubble” of nuclear facilities bombed by the U.S. and Israel. He added: “We have no intention of removing them from under the rubble until conditions are ready. We have no information on how much of the 400kg is untouched and how much is destroyed, and we will have no information until we dig them out.”
The problem with that is that Washington, Tel Aviv, London, and Brussels are not so sure. They have little doubt that considerable damage was done to several key Iranian nuclear installations – most notably perhaps, at the Fordow uranium enrichment facility, located in a mountain near Qom. However, this is still one of the sites to which the IAEA has not been granted access since the June attacks, so even this is not fully corroborated. The same is true of another such site close to Natanz and its associated facilities, with one of these in particular having come under close international scrutiny in recent days. The Institute for Science and International Security highlighted in early October that satellite imagery of Pickaxe Mountain (Mount Kolang Gaz-La) – a site around a mile south of the Natanz enrichment facility, that has been under construction since about 2020 -- shows that Iran is continuing construction activities there, although it did not characterise this as an expansion of the site. At the end of last month, the Center for Strategic and International Studies reported satellite imagery showing a significant uptick in mining and drilling into the mountain, and the construction of a huge security perimeter around the site. The Center has posited that there are three explanations for this. The first is that Iran is preparing for a centrifuge assembly facility. The second is that the Pickaxe Mountain site has been expanded to include some of the facilities and research and metallurgy that the U.S. destroyed at Isfahan. And third, that it may be a future uranium enrichment site that Iran is building undeclared.
“The fact that we can’t answer any of these questions on this site, and on many others, sets Iran and us [the E.U., U.S., Israel, and Great Britain] on a collision course again, with more sanctions being the next step, after which we will have to reassess our options,” added the E.U. source. “This is likely to get worse quite quickly, as Iran will increase its military budget by more than 200% next year, with much of this to go on fast tracking the development of intercontinental ballistic missiles with multi-warhead delivery systems with a range of up to 10,000 kilometres,” he said. “[Supreme Leader, Ali] Khamenei is determined to take the missile delivery systems at least to the level of North Korea when it began intercontinental ballistic missiles with multi-warhead capabilities for the first time,” he concluded.
By Simon Watkins for Oilprice.com
Microbial teamwork slashes uranium pollution in just 48 hours
image:
The energy scheme diagram of uranium reduction conducted by S.MR-1 and P. LXZ1 individually (a) or accelerated by the synthetic consortia syncomS + P (b). The red arrows indicate the rapid electron flow in syncomS + P, while the black arrows denote the normal electron flow in S.MR-1. The blue arrows represent the transport of lactate to acetate from S.MR-1 to P. LXZ1, and the black dotted arrows illustrate the minimal electron flow in P. LXZ1. The bold black solid and dotted lines indicate the redox potentials corresponding to the respective reactions, while the red line represents the redox potential after syncomS + P formation.
view moreCredit: Environmental Science and Ecotechnology
A research team has developed a synthetic microbial consortium that completely reduces soluble uranium [U(VI)] to insoluble U(IV) within 48 hours, showing nearly twice the efficiency of a single-strain system. The study reveals how Shewanella oneidensis MR-1 and Pseudomonas aeruginosa LXZ1 cooperate to accelerate extracellular electron transfer (EET). P. aeruginosa LXZ1 secretes pyocyanin, which interacts with the outer-membrane cytochrome OmcA in MR-1, while its extracellular DNA forms conductive networks within the biofilm. These mechanisms jointly enhance electron flow and energy metabolism, overcoming the limitations of conventional microbial reduction. The findings highlight a community-based approach for sustainable uranium bioremediation.
Uranium contamination from mining and natural leaching threatens groundwater safety due to the high solubility and mobility of hexavalent uranium [U(VI)]. Bioreduction by dissimilatory metal-reducing bacteria converts soluble U(VI) to insoluble U(IV), offering an environmentally friendly remediation strategy. However, this process is often limited by low redox mediator production and poor biofilm conductivity in single-species systems. Synthetic microbial communities that combine complementary metabolic and electron-transfer functions may provide a more efficient alternative. Due to these limitations, it is necessary to investigate cooperative microbial systems that can achieve faster and more complete uranium reduction.
A study by the University of South China and Xi’an University of Technology, published (DOI: 10.1016/j.ese.2025.100629) in Environmental Science and Ecotechnology in October 2025, reports a synthetic microbial consortium capable of complete uranium reduction within 48 hours. The system combines Shewanella oneidensis MR-1, a model metal-reducing bacterium, with Pseudomonas aeruginosa LXZ1 isolated from uranium-contaminated soil. Through electrochemical experiments, molecular simulations, and gene expression analysis, the researchers revealed how phenazine-mediated electron transfer and extracellular DNA jointly improve the efficiency of microbial uranium reduction.
The researchers co-cultured S. oneidensis MR-1 with P. aeruginosa LXZ1, forming a synthetic microbial community that removed 75% of uranium within 12 hours and achieved complete reduction after 48 hours, compared with 60% by MR-1 alone. This improvement arose from two complementary mechanisms. P. aeruginosa LXZ1 secreted pyocyanin, a redox-active phenazine, which bound to MR-1’s outer-membrane cytochrome OmcA and shifted its redox potential, facilitating directional electron flow and reducing proton-transfer constraints. Meanwhile, P. aeruginosa LXZ1 released extracellular DNA (eDNA) that organized into conductive structures, enhancing electron transport across the biofilm. Electrochemical gating tests showed a fourfold increase in current output, which decreased sharply after DNase I digestion, confirming the essential role of eDNA. Transcriptomic results indicated upregulation of metabolic and EET-related genes (ldh, ndh, fdh, pflB, ackA), along with higher NAD⁺/NADH ratios and ATP levels. Together, these processes established a stable and efficient electron-transfer network for uranium immobilization.
“Our results show how naturally occurring microbial interactions can be used to improve metal reduction efficiency,” said Dr. Xizi Long, corresponding author of the study. “By combining Shewanella and Pseudomonas, we achieved a balance between metabolic complementarity and electron transfer enhancement. Pyocyanin functions as an intercellular redox mediator, while extracellular DNA provides a conductive matrix. This cooperative design illustrates how microbial communities can be organized for more effective environmental remediation.”
The synthetic microbial consortium offers a feasible and sustainable method for uranium-contaminated soil and groundwater treatment. Its design demonstrates how interspecies electron exchange can improve the stability and conductivity of biofilms, potentially extending to other redox-active pollutants such as chromium, arsenic, or technetium. Beyond environmental cleanup, the findings deepen understanding of microbial electrochemical cooperation and may inform future developments in bioenergy conversion and microbial material design. This approach exemplifies how ecological cooperation principles can be applied to optimize bioremediation efficiency in complex environments.
###
References
DOI
Original Source URL
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ese.2025.100629
Funding Information
This work was financially supported by Hunan Provincial Natural Science Foundation [2024JJ4035, 2022JJ10040], the Science and Technology Innovation Program of Hunan province [2024RC3210]. National Natural Science Foundation of China grant number [42207073, 42107030, 12275123], Department of Natural Resources of Hunan Province [HBZ20240138], and Open Fund for Research at Hunan Provincial Key Laboratory of Geochemical Process and Resource Environmental Effect [GRE202306G].
About Environmental Science and Ecotechnology
Environmental Science and Ecotechnology (ISSN 2666-4984) is an international, peer-reviewed, and open-access journal published by Elsevier. The journal publishes significant views and research across the full spectrum of ecology and environmental sciences, such as climate change, sustainability, biodiversity conservation, environment & health, green catalysis/processing for pollution control, and AI-driven environmental engineering. The latest impact factor of ESE is 14.3, according to the Journal Citation ReportsTM 2024.
Journal
Environmental Science and Ecotechnology
Subject of Research
Not applicable
Article Title
Complete uranium bioreduction in 48 hours: Synergistic electron transfer in a synthetic microbial consortium
IAEA warns of safety importance of substations
_65262_84357_45285.jpg)
Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi, in his latest update, says that Ukraine's Khmelnitsky and Rivne nuclear power plants have been operating at reduced capacity after military action damaged an electrical substation.
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said such substations "are indispensable for maintaining off-site power supplies that support safety systems and cooling functions, making their integrity vital for nuclear safety and security".
Grossi said: "Reliable off-site power is vital for the maintenance and operation of nuclear safety functions. To this end, Agency experts will, through dedicated expert missions, continue to assess the functionality of substations critical for nuclear safety and security."
Meanwhile, Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant, which has been under Russian military control since early March 2022, has had its main external power line shut since Friday after the activation of a protection system. The IAEA said the cause was still being investigated and they were "engaging with both sides to assist in the timely restoration of the line".
The loss of the 750 kV Dniprovska line means the plant is relying on its 330 kV backup Ferosplavna-1 line for external power at the moment. The plant recently went a month relying on emergency diesel generators for power, before IAEA-mediated local ceasefires allowed necessary repair work to take place to reconnect.
Meanwhile, Energoatom issued a statement explaining that Khmelnitsky unit 2 has "been operating with a damaged turbine since 2022 ... currently, the power unit can produce up to 900 MW of electricity". The company added that it is in the process of purchasing a new, modernised rotor which "will not only restore the design nominal capacity, but also increase it by 40 MW to 1,040 MW".
Construction of new Chinese nuclear power plant begins
_81209.jpg)
In November 2022, the Ministry of Ecology and Environment announced the formal acceptance of the environmental impact assessment documents covering the site selection stage for the Zhaoyuan plant. Construction of Phase I (units 1 and 2) of the Zhaoyuan plant was approved by China's State Council in August 2024.
The project is being constructed and operated by Shandong Zhaoyuan Nuclear Power Company, a subsidiary of China General Nuclear (CGN).
The plant, representing a total investment of about CNY120 billion (USD16.9 billion), will eventually house six Hualong One units. Each unit is expected to start generating power 50-60 months after the start of its construction. With a total installed capacity of 7.2 GWe, the plant is expected to generate 50 TWh of electricity annually - enough to meet the yearly needs of about five million people. It will be equivalent to cutting standard coal consumption by roughly 15.27 million tonnes and reducing carbon dioxide emissions by about 46.2 million tonnes each year, according to CGN.
At a press briefing, Shandong Zhaoyuan Nuclear Power Company Executive Director Yu Xiangdong said that the project's most distinctive feature is its 203-metre natural draft cooling tower with a 16,800 square metre spray area, Global Times reported. "This is the first time secondary-circuit cooling technology has been applied to a Hualong One unit," he said.
Yu explained that the tower shifts the conventional island cooling source from the ocean to the atmosphere, using atmospheric heat-sink effect to carry away residual heat from the thermal cycle, while seawater serves only as a supplementary source, Global Times said. The design enables water to be reused, significantly reduces pumping height and energy consumption, and minimises drift, he said. "By adopting this technology, the Zhaoyuan project expands the siting possibilities for nuclear facilities and provides new reference experience for China's future nuclear development."
Zhaoyuan Phase I is CGN's first nuclear power project in Shandong and its tenth nuclear power plant site.
Building work starts at US SMR fuel plant
_50545.jpg)
The plant is expected to be the first facility in the USA to exclusively manufacture fuel for advanced small modular reactors (SMRs) and will fabricate X-energy’s proprietary tristructural-isotropic (TRISO) fuel for the first proposed deployment of the Xe-100 in partnership with Dow, Inc at Dow's Seadrift site on the Texas Gulf Coast, and future Xe-100 deployments.
Deployment of the Xe-100 high-temperature gas-cooled modular reactor is receiving support through the US Department of Energy’s (DOE) Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program (ARDP). The programme is providing up to 50% cost-shared funding for the Xe-100 Advanced Reactor Demonstration Project, including construction of the TX-1 fuel fabrication facility
In August, TRISO-X announced that it had selected Clark Construction Group for a USD48.2 million award to complete the building construction phase of TX-1, including the completion of the core and shell of the 214,812 square foot (19,957 square metres) facility. At the same time, the company said it had received DOE approval to authorise an additional USD30 million for early procurement of critical long-lead equipment and materials to support the successful delivery of subsequent construction phases, and to help keep the project on schedule.
TX-1 is the first of two planned TRISO manufacturing facilities at X-energy's site in Oak Ridge, and is set to be the first Category II Fuel Fabrication Facility licensed by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in the USA with an estimated output of 5 tonnes of uranium or 700,000 TRISO pebbles per year, enough fuel for up to 11 Xe-100 reactors.
Pebbles of TRISO-X fuel recently began 13 months of irradiation testing at Idaho National Laboratory to evaluate fuel performance across operating scenarios and qualify them for commercial use.
The NRC groups what it calls special nuclear materials - plutonium, uranium-233, or uranium enriched in the isotopes uranium-233 or uranium-235 - and the facilities that possess them into three categories based upon the materials' potential for use in nuclear weapons or their strategic significance. The NRC’s physical security and safeguards requirements reflect these categories. Category II materials are classed as having moderate strategic significance, while Category I materials are classed as having high strategic significance and Category III as having the lowest significance.
Currently, three US fuel fabrication plants processing low-enriched uranium are licensed as Category III facilities by the NRC. Two fabrication plants are licensed as Category I facilities and can produce nuclear fuel containing high-enriched uranium - for example, under government contracts to produce fuel for the US Naval Reactors programme - as well as low-enriched uranium. The high-assay low-enriched uranium - or HALEU - that will be needed to fuel many of the SMRs currently under development will need to be fabricated in Category II-licensed facilities. The NRC has received applications for several proposed plants from different companies.
"The start of vertical construction marks another significant milestone in bringing our bold vision for the future of nuclear energy to life," TRISO-X President Joel Duling said. "As TX-1 takes shape, it will stand as a symbol of our team's relentless dedication and determination to bring this transformative project forward in just a few years, not decades."
Study highlights potential benefits of Dutch SMR design
_22888.jpg)
In June, Allseas launched a five-year plan to design, develop and deploy a small modular reactor (SMR) tailored for integration into offshore vessels and for onshore use. The company has selected high-temperature gas-cooled reactors (HTGRs), using tri-structural isotropic - or TRISO - particle fuel, with a power output of about 25 MWe or 70 MWt. The "compact, intrinsically safe and scalable design" of Allseas' SMR makes it suitable for a wide range of applications – from offshore operations, commercial shipping, and port areas to industrial sites such as chemical clusters, steel plants, refineries, and data centres, the company said. Additionally, the SMR can provide an autonomous, resilient energy supply for defence critical infrastructure. The technology could also provide a reliable and powerful energy source for growth sectors such as semiconductors, AI, quantum technology and supercomputing.
In the first year of its plan, Allseas aims to finalise initial design studies for offshore and onshore use. This will be followed by prototype development and pre-licensing discussions in consultation with key stakeholders, including regulators as well as safety and classification bodies, and in close collaboration with its research and innovation partners, including TNO, NRG-Pallas, Delft University of Technology, and the Royal Association of Netherlands Shipowners.
Aalo Atomics and Microsoft collaborate on AI tools for new nuclear
Their initial project won awards for impact and technology advancement at Microsoft’s annual Hackathon.
Yasir Arafat, CTO of Aalo Atomics, said: "So far, we have tackled three of the most impactful challenges in the nuclear industry - using AI to simplify, accelerate, and ultimately transform how complex energy systems are licensed, built and operated at scale."
The work has involved using Microsoft’s Generative AI for Energy Permitting Solution Accelerator and is now expanding to include AI agents to create a "digital super-operator platform" which can turn "regulatory complexity into actionable intelligence, bringing us closer to building the clean-energy future, faster than ever before".
Darryl Willis, Corporate Vice President Energy & Resources Industry at Microsoft, said: "Together, the team began developing AI agents that leverage rich internal and external datasets - like design data and risk models - to embed generative AI into Aalo's workflows, boosting permitting speed and operational efficiency. We're excited to scale these capabilities to help Aalo advance carbon-free, factory-built nuclear power."
Aalo Atomics broke ground in August at a site in Idaho to start construction of its first experimental reactor, the Aalo-X. Aalo said it planned to complete construction and achieve criticality by 4 July 2026, the goal date set by the US Department of Energy for at least three test reactors to reach criticality under the programme to expedite the testing of advanced reactor designs it announced in June.
Aalo-X will be manufactured at Aalo's pilot factory in Austin, Texas, before being transported to and installed at the INL site. The test reactor is the precursor to the Aalo Pod, a 50 MWe XMR (Extra Modular Reactor) power plant purpose-built for data centres - demand for which is increasing rapidly following the widespread adoption of AI. Each fully modular Aalo Pod will contain five factory-built, sodium-cooled, Aalo-1 reactors, using low-enriched uranium dioxide fuel. The company says it will be in commercial use by 2029.
Microsoft has, over the past two years, chosen nuclear as one prong of its strategy to secure reliable, carbon-free electricity to meet growing energy demand. It has signed long-term agreements including a 20-year power purchase agreement with Constellation Energy to restart the Crane Clean Energy Center, formerly known as the Three Mile Island Unit 1, in the USA and signed one of the first deals with fusion energy technology company Helion, through a long-term power purchase agreement
Allseas has now released the findings of an impact study conducted by Roland Berger confirming that its nuclear technology can play a critical role in strengthening the Dutch economy, reducing grid congestion, enhancing energy security, and decarbonising the maritime sector and industry.
Roland Berger estimates potential for deploying up to 110 Allseas SMRs on land in the Netherlands and 700 across the global maritime sector, generating substantial economic value and CO₂ reduction. It estimates Allseas' SMRs could contribute up to EUR130 billion (USD150 billion) to the Dutch economy by 2050, generated directly through investments by Allseas and its value chain and indirectly via growth in Dutch industry and maritime sectors. This would help retain 10,000-15,000 jobs and create 35,000-40,000 new skilled positions.
By generating energy directly at the point of use, Allseas' SMR reduces strain on the national electricity grid, the study found. This autonomous energy supply frees up grid capacity, allowing existing businesses to expand and making the Netherlands more attractive to new enterprises. According to the study, this could unlock EUR40 billion in additional economic value and save up to EUR12 billion in high-voltage grid investments – a significant portion of the EUR104 billion planned through to 2050.
Roland Berger said Allseas' SMR would deliver clean electricity at prices competitive with fossil and renewable alternatives. It would also supply industrial heat up to 650°C, 30% cheaper than gas turbines and 80% cheaper than renewable heat sources. The technology also enables significant CO2 reductions – up to 25% (10 million tonnes annually) in Dutch industry and up to 5% (55 million tonnes annually) in the global maritime sector by 2050. Together, this equals the annual emissions of 3.5 million Dutch homes.
Roland Berger validated the findings with leading knowledge institutions, energy experts and market players, including TNO, COVRA, Urenco and the Port of Rotterdam.
Allseas said: "The results provide a factual foundation for the further development of nuclear technology within Allseas."
"This study demonstrates our small modular reactor is technologically innovative and strategically valuable for the Netherlands," said Stephanie Heerema, Project Manager Nuclear Developments at Allseas. "With this technology, we can meet the urgent demand for stable, clean, and affordable energy, while creating an export product that accelerates the global energy transition."
"As a responsible family-owned company, we always take a long-term view. The conclusions of this study show exciting potential for our technology to address today's challenges and strengthen our commitment to executing our five-year plan."
In December 2021, the Netherlands' new coalition government placed nuclear power at the heart of its climate and energy policy. In addition to keeping the Borssele plant in operation for longer, the government also called for the construction of new reactors. Based on preliminary plans, two new reactors will be completed around 2035 and each will have a capacity of 1000-1650 MWe. The government is also taking steps to prepare the Netherlands for the possible deployment of SMRs.
South Africa lifts PBMR from care and maintenance
The Pebble Bed Modular Reactor is no longer under care-and-maintenance after the country's cabinet approved the decision to allow South Africa to further develop the technology and to transfer the Pebble Bed Modular Reactor company from Eskom to Necsa.
_28367.jpg)
The decision will enable South Africa to take its "rightful place" as a major fuel cycle player and will bring commercial opportunities as well as support production of domestic electricity and the country's role as a major supplier of medical radioisotopes, Minister of Energy and Electricity Kgosientsho Ramokgopa said
"So, what does this decision really mean? It's going to enable the PBMR (Pebble Bed Modular Reactor), that we can reopen the fuel development laboratories to undertake the research and development," the minister told a press briefing. "So, we have placed them on ice. Now we're reopening these development laboratories and making sure that scientists get to participate in this space."
Referring to the pledge made by more than 30 countries to back the goal of at least tripling global nuclear capacity by 2050, Ramokgopa said high-temperature reactors will play a "large part" in this. South Africa intends to place itself as a key player in the small modular reactor (SMR) space, in the fuel cycle as well as reactor technology, he said.
The PBMR was to have been a small-scale high-temperature reactor using graphite-coated spherical uranium oxycarbide tristructural isotropic (TRISO) fuel, with helium as the coolant, able to supply process heat as well as generating electricity. Based on well-proven German technology, South Africa had been working on the PBMR project since 1993, and PBMR Ltd was established in 1999 with the intention of developing and marketing the reactor. However, in 2010 the government formally announced its decision no longer to invest in the project, which was then placed under care and maintenance. PBMR Ltd was reincorporated into South African utility Eskom, its sole shareholder, in 2012. In 2020, the company said it was seeking to take PBMR out of care and maintenance and commercialise the business, and issued a request for expressions of interest from would-be investors.
South Africa now needs to make up for about 16 years of "lost time" for development while the PBMR has been under care-and-maintenance but has "every ambition of catching up", Ramokgopa said.
The announcement comes weeks after the South African government approved a draft Integrated Resource Plan which includes 5,200 MW of new nuclear capacity and the rebuilding of the country's nuclear supply chain.
"So the point I'm making is that South Africa is now announcing its ambition that first we're going to build our own domestic generation ... and then we want to play it globally and that's why we lifted the care and maintenance on the PBMR," he said.
Turning to waste management, Ramokgopa noted that South Africa has set up the National Radioactive Waste Disposal Institute (NRWDI) as the agency which is now responsible for managing the country's storage for low and intermediate level radioactive waste at the Vaalputs facility. With the Koeberg nuclear power plant now cleared to operate until 2045, the institute will also be focusing on dealing with used fuel from the two-unit nuclear power plant, he said. The government will be investing up to ZAR2.1 billion (USD123 million) to establish a central interim storage facility for used fuel, "and then over the long term we want to have what we call the deep geological repository".
South Africa is looking to participate in the entire nuclear fuel cycle and is "looking at partnering with some of our neighbouring countries for the enrichment of uranium as a fuel", he added.
New chapter
The South African Nuclear Energy Corporation (Necsa) said lifting the PBMR out of care-and-maintenance and transferring it to Necsa marked a "significant step" towards reactivating one of South Africa's most strategic scientific and industrial assets.
"The transfer of PBMR to Necsa and taking it out of care and maintenance aligns with South Africa's broader nuclear strategy for energy security and sovereignty, achievement of net zero objectives, and expanding the use of nuclear technology for impactful reasons beyond power," Necsa Group CEO Loyiso Tyabashe said. "Necsa is ready to utilise the technology to produce nuclear fuel and engage strategic partners for the development of the technology and intellectual property," he added.
The recent "global surge" in interest in nuclear power, especially specially small modular reactors for various applications, "augurs well" well for the revival of the PBMR technology, Necsa said.
"The Cabinet's approval marks a new chapter in South Africa's nuclear innovation journey. Necsa embraces the new era of reactivating the entire nuclear fuel cycle and is committed to ensuring that the PBMR project not only advances national energy and industrial goals but also strengthens regional and global cooperation in the development of next-generation nuclear technologies," it added.
