Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Trump’s Nuclear Power ‘Renaissance’
Issues & Insights ^ | 12 Dec, 2025 | I & I Editorial Board

Posted on 12/12/2025 7:36:07 AM PST by MtnClimber

After years of being scorned, derided and shrunk, the nuclear power industry is getting a boost from the Trump administration. Faced with rapidly growing demand for energy to supply a growing U.S. economy and booming AI sector, President Donald Trump’s Energy Department says it will help finance up to 10 new nuclear power plants – a huge reversal of decades of anti-nuclear sentiment and excessive regulation by the U.S. government.

You might be tempted to think: Oh, boy, another big government boondoggle. Nope. This is mainly reviving an industry that has languished largely due to excessive regulations and active political campaigns to make nuclear power a pariah among all possible energy sources.

This isn’t a massive subsidy. It’s a leg up, restarting an industry after decades of overt political hostility from Hollywood, journalists, activist groups, and the Democratic Party.

The private sector will do the work and generate the bulk of the financing.

“We want things built by and risk capital coming from the private marketplace, and most everything we’re doing is dominantly going to be funded by private capital,” Energy Secretary Chris Wright told the Washington Free Beacon. “But the government smothered the nuclear industry for 40-plus years. We’ve got to get it back up on its feet again.”

Wright calls it a nuclear “renaissance.” It’s one of the rare times use of that word is not hyperbole. The change of course follows Trump’s goal announced in May to quadruple U.S. nuclear energy output over the next decade, arriving at a crucial time for America’s energy future.

Even leftists now grudgingly acknowledge that switching to so-called renewable energy sources — such as solar, wind, hydropower, geothermal energy, and biomass — is not feasible for meeting growing U.S. and world needs. It’s painfully obvious, after decades of anti-nuclear propaganda and media scare-mongering, that only one energy source meets all the “green” criteria for efficiency, safety and cleanliness: nuclear.

Unfortunately, for three decades the U.S. has systematically allowed its atomic power infrastructure to languish and wither, leaving us with inefficient and not really clean renewable sources, instead of cleaner and cheaper, natural gas, clean coal and nuclear.

The total number of operating nuclear reactors peaked at about 112 in the early 1990s, falling to a little more than 90 today, a decline of 20%. And yet, nuclear plants still provide nearly 20% of all U.S. electricity on an annual basis, thanks to the industry’s plant upgrades, innovative new technologies and other efficiencies.

But we’re at a crossroads, and Trump fully understands this. Right now some 22 operating nuclear reactors at 18 separate sites are in the process of being deactivated. Their output must be replaced, or Americans will face even higher rates for electricity to heat, cool and light their homes.

Without replacing already lost capacity and future capacity, the U.S. will find satisfying its growing hunger for low-cost, reliable energy impossible. This means a reduced standard of living for all.

If you think that’s an exaggeration, it isn’t. In Europe, countries (we’re looking at you, Germany) have been decommissioning nuclear plants in favor of so-called green alternatives. The result is the massive deindustrialization of the European Union. According to World Bank data, per capita GDP in the European Union as a percentage of U.S. GDP fell from 77% in 2008 to just 50% in 2023.

As a result of poor energy choices along with a multitude of other productivity-killing policies, Europe is becoming an also-ran in the world economy. As the late, great journalist Charles Krauthammer once said, “Decline is a choice.”

Here in the U.S., blue states are emulating Europe, pushing up energy costs with needless regulations and restrictions, while red states pursue energy-friendly policies. The result, according to a recent study by the Institute for Energy Research: “The data is clear: bluer states tend to have much higher electricity prices than red states.”

This is why Trump’s nuclear “renaissance” is so important. It reverses our nuclear energy decline. Along with drilling for oil, and pursuing new technologies such as nuclear fusion and improved battery storage, nuclear power will help propel America into the future – a future of higher standards of living and opportunities for all, rather than the grim, dystopic, energy-poor America the left sees.


TOPICS: Society
KEYWORDS: greenenergy
Message from Jim Robinson:

Dear FRiends,

We need your continuing support to keep FR funded. Your donations are our sole source of funding. No sugar daddies, no advertisers, no paid memberships, no commercial sales, no gimmicks, no tax subsidies. No spam, no pop-ups, no ad trackers.

If you enjoy using FR and agree it's a worthwhile endeavor, please consider making a contribution today:

Click here: to donate by Credit Card

Or here: to donate by PayPal

Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794

Thank you very much and God bless you,

Jim


1 posted on 12/12/2025 7:36:07 AM PST by MtnClimber
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: MtnClimber

Thank you President Trump. The democRATs would be following Germany’s example.


2 posted on 12/12/2025 7:36:31 AM PST by MtnClimber (For photos of scenery, wildlife and climbing, click on my screen name for my FR home page.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MtnClimber

These plants create jobs in local communities. And reduce prices which are skyrocketing already.

There is every reason to do this if we want AI and domestic production.


3 posted on 12/12/2025 8:21:24 AM PST by Bayard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MtnClimber

This is a very good thing.

Reluctance to develop nuclear power generation to its full potential over the last half century - has to be the most costly example of mass human retardation since the dark ages.

Well… that and replacing a commodity backed dollar with worthless fiat money.

The future was looking bright a century or so ago.


4 posted on 12/12/2025 8:29:05 AM PST by enumerated (81 million votes my ass)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MtnClimber

If you even casually study the energy sector you will be struck by the absolutely massive scale of the industry.

The only way you can make sufficient energy for the future is incorporating nuclear.

Just don’t put the plants in a tsunami zone.


5 posted on 12/12/2025 8:38:51 AM PST by packagingguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith; AnonymousConservative; Arthur Wildfire! March; Berosus; Bockscar; BraveMan; cardinal4; ...
Getting rid of nuclear power was part of the Port Huron Statement agenda, which called for unilateral disarmament. We're in the process of getting rid of that agenda, and when its postwar advocates are finally dead and buried, so will it be.

6 posted on 12/12/2025 8:39:16 AM PST by SunkenCiv (NeverTrumpin' -- it's not just for DNC shills anymore -- oh, wait, yeah it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: enumerated

There has been a revolution in the production of electric energy from nuclear sources. These new small modular nuclear reactors are so compact, they may be manufactured almost on an assembly line in a factory, loaded on freight cars or eighteen-wheel semi trailers, transported to site, and installed up and running in days.

https://www.nuclearbusiness-platform.com/media/insights/top-5-smr-tech


7 posted on 12/12/2025 8:43:56 AM PST by alloysteel (You gotta accentuate the positive, Eliminate the negative, Latch onto the affirmative....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: MtnClimber

This means nothing. Virtue signaling. The treehuggers control all building. Get rid of them and you MIGHT be able to get one unit on line in <7 years.

Might.


8 posted on 12/12/2025 8:46:00 AM PST by bobbo666
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MtnClimber
Getting the government out of the way is a good thing.

I personally would like it if we had a bunch of small nuclear power plants spread out all over the country.

This would be the easiest, cheapest and most resilient way to meet our electricity needs.

Not a few big plants but a bunch of small ones.

Many small beats few big every time there are problems.

And there are always problems.

9 posted on 12/12/2025 8:49:47 AM PST by Harmless Teddy Bear (It's like somebody just put the Constitution up on a wall …. and shot the First Amendment -Mike Rowe)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bobbo666
The treehuggers control all building.

Which is why red states are moving forward and not the Blue states.

10 posted on 12/12/2025 8:51:04 AM PST by 1Old Pro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: MtnClimber

We desperately need one in New England.

-SB


11 posted on 12/12/2025 8:52:26 AM PST by Snowybear (Do or do not, there is no try.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: packagingguy

50% of my stock market profile is invested in Energy stocks. From oil companies to those who provide electricity, I have a wide range of stock devoted to this sector.


12 posted on 12/12/2025 10:01:53 AM PST by packrat35 (“When discourse ends, violence begins.” – Charlie Kirk, and they killed him anyway)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson