They discuss aspects of the operational pilot, the MSR-1 (I assume it stands for "Molten Salt Reactor") and is very small, only 1 MW capacity, but it is a pilot. (NOTE: This is in contrast with Communist China (which AI apparently considers the "world leader" which is using gas-cooled units already in production. But as far as I know, safety of these is unknown, and they are not designed as the Natura Resources project is, to be safer, scaleable, and modularly produced which is what we should be aiming for.)
Here is the AI Summary, which I have edited mostly for readability:
Summary
Key facts about the project
Advantages of Natura's Generation IV reactor
As you can surmise, I am excited about this. Comments?
https://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/articles/2025/10/14/ausa-news-army-announces-program-to-bring-small-nuclear-reactors-to-military-installations
Seems to be a reason the US Military is heading in that direction.
Great news. It’s about time.
“You can always count on Americans to do the right thing—after they’ve tried everything else,” -attributed to Churchill.
As soon as that nuclear tech is usable and we start depending on it, the left will try to shut it down.
Molten salt has been a design I’ve wanted to see done here. I did not know we had it, anywhere.
Go Abilene Christian University!
Any idea how the energy storage thing works?
Hopefully with a better track record than Operation Warp Speed.
To bureaucrats, efficiency = corner-cutting time.
The headline and video state it to be a power plant. It does not produce electricity thus will NOT come “online”.
The bureaucratic, environmentalist, and legalistic roadblocks were put in by deepstate anti-nuke kakistocrats to increase the costs, the plans to develop nuclear power, and relieve radical leftwing politicians from having to publicly oppose nuclear power when ranting about global warming.
During the Traitorobama regime, the deepstaters in the NRC added a requirement that any high-level nuclear waste repository be proven to be safe for one million years (since the 1980s, the safety requirement had been only for 10,000 years). A large meteorite hit, ice age, or a Yellowstone supervolcano could occur in the next 1 Myr.
In a million years, the Demonicrats in the Senate may still not be voting for the House-passed spending bill.
For years, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has been a bastion of leftist environmentalism, and many commentators have said its real job for the past 30 years has been to HINDER development of nuclear energy in the USA.
Looking at results, that seems to be an accurate statement
Trump gutting/reforming it will have huge, positive consequences.
I am not familiar with Natura Resources, but other small modular reactor companies, with deep-pocketed investors, are coming into the space. That can only mean advancing technology, faster development, and lower energy costs.
All good.
My Cuz is Nuclear certified and worked at the Palo Verde plant and then the Solar Plant at Ivanpah Nv until he retired. He always said many small ones rather than one big one is the way to go.
As I understand it the NRC still does not have a mechanism for regulating (i.e. approving) reprocessing in the United States. How much that hinders the development of commercial MSRs remains to be seen. (It would certainly improve our current antiquated nuclear waste storage practices.) More later after FReepers closer to the action chime in.
“Natura Resources LLC” is not a publicly traded company.
Any word on a pending IPO?
Whatever the fence line to the plant is, add a mile in all directions for better security.
Ping
later
It’ll sure be handy for running all the server farms going up.
Yes,it’s been shown that nuke plants must be done properly. Three Mile Island...Chernobyl...the Japanese coast. But if done properly they’re very good.
Comments?
Cool.
—
Nuclear was hamstrung by government.
These newer gen reactors are inherently stable, they don’t create the hydrogen that can explode...
Low cost, reliable (independent of light, temperature, tide, or wind), domestic production, ability to produce huge amounts, low power density by area needed, ability to produce in proximity to where demand is (near an aluminum plant for example), very safe, very clean (no H2SO4, HNO3, soot, hydrocarbons, sledge, CO2, little mining) and able to provide power for generations (probably hundreds of generations).
It was pure stupidity that we haven’t expanded our nuclear capacity years ago.
People like me, sceptical of electric cars, get the wind taken from our sails when you start talking about nuclear power generation. At that point, the shift to electric vehicles, heating of homes (where applicable) makes complete sense and isn’t just eyewash as has been the case when most the power is generated with coal or natural gas as is the case today.
Nuclear making a small comeback is great news.
Ultimately, that’s where we will be FORCED to go anyhow sooner or later. It’s just as long as you have cheap fossil fuels available, and you have an established industry with huge sums of money and jobs tied up in that, we’ll stick around until the well dries up (pun intended).
As an engineer in Oak Ridge, I spent most of my life involved in or close to things nuclear. I strongly endorse your position. Until fusion power becomes practical, sustaining life as we know it in the US and the world will depends on clean, safe nuclear power. There is no practical alternative.