Senator Schwertner introduced SB1468, which concerns the Texas A&M University System's ability to construct and acquire power plants on University property in Brazos County.
The bill aims to grant the Texas A&M Board of Regents the necessary statutory authority to build and acquire electric generating facilities at the Rellis campus.
Texas A&M has proposed creating an energy proving ground at the Rellis campus to test nuclear reactors and other technologies.
Texas A&M Chancellor Sharp announced collaborations with four nuclear companies to bring reactors to the Rellis campus.
The current statutory limitation only allows the Board to improve existing power plants rather than construct new generating facilities.
The bill is intended to enhance Texas' role in energy innovation and meet future energy demands, supporting a state-funded approach for advancing nuclear technology.
Senator Kolkhorst raised questions about how this initiative aligns with other bills and efforts, such as the consortium of A&M, Abilene Christian University, and Texas Tech with private funding.
The bill is a mechanism for a state owned and funded system to foster controlled development and research in early-stage nuclear technology.
A&M is viewed as a suitable institution for this endeavor, with existing applications with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
The meeting included discussions on how these initiatives could integrate, highlighting collaborations with private and other educational institutions.
Clif Lange, general manager for South Texas Electric Co-op, provided public testimony.
STEC has 2,300 miles of transmission facilities across Texas.
Post-winter storm Uri efforts were acknowledged and appreciated.
STEC focuses on pole integrity to ensure reliable power for its members.
20,000 of their poles are legacy wood poles, built to exceed NESC or RUS standards.
Annual inspections of the entire transmission system are conducted.
Pole inspections cover 10% of the system annually, with a rejection rate of about 5%.
During Hurricane Beryl, 1,750 poles experienced wind loading, with fewer than 20 failures.
Lange expressed uncertainty over the need for new standards by the PUC due to existing successful practices.
▶️Ryan Brown and Doug Turk, Sam Houston Electric - Public Testimony SB1789
Ryan Brown introduced himself and indicated his role was to answer questions regarding Sam Houston Electric's program on pole testing and standards.
Doug Turk expressed gratitude to the staff for discussing the bill and emphasized ongoing cooperation.
Sam Houston Electric aims to maintain efficient and effective pole testing and maintenance without profit motives, focusing on public safety and reliable service.
During Hurricane Beryl, over 90% of the system lost power, restored fully in six days, with less than 0.1% of poles needing replacement.
Concerns were raised regarding new regulations potentially supplanting Sam Houston's refined program.
A recommendation was made for a framework similar to the PUC's emergency response plan reporting to leverage existing expertise.
Support for non-discriminatory emergency operation plans and weatherization standards was noted.
The dialogue included the statewide application of regulations across all ERCOT-regulated generation and transmission facilities.
▶️Jason Ryan, CenterPoint Energy - Public Testimony SB1789
Jason Ryan, EVP at CenterPoint Energy, provided testimony on SB1789.
Appreciation expressed for ongoing dialogue with Chairman Schwertner's office regarding the bill.
CenterPoint Energy's main suggestion: make the penalty provision more objective by linking it to compliance with future standards.
Suggested that if a company doesn't meet standards, a plan filed with the commission should be approved to avoid penalty.
Ryan addressed Senator Kolkhorst’s question about pole attachments: telecom companies pay a fee set by the FCC.
Revenue from pole attachments offsets consumer rates, not for pole replacements or integrity.
FCC sets attachment fee rates, and CenterPoint doesn't have the authority to change them.
SB2717 proposes the creation of the Texas Energy Efficiency Council and the Public Utilities Commission of Texas.
The purpose is to enhance demand-side energy efficiency performance in Texas.
The council would be composed of members from several state agencies including TCEQ, ERCOT, and other relevant bodies.
The main goals are to promote energy efficiency, develop a list of operating energy efficiency programs, make information available online, and publish a biannual report with evaluations or recommendations for the legislature.
Evidence suggesting other states have implemented similar councils with significant cost savings.
If passed, the bill could help save constituents over $100 million and reduce energy demands.
SB2717 is described as a financially viable, sensible solution.
A similar bill passed in the house with 93 votes previously.
Note that the initiative does not require additional funding.
▶️Cyrus Reed, Sierra Club - Public Testimony SB2717
Cyrus Reed represented the Lone Star Chapter of the Sierra Club.
Discussion on SB2717, a nonregulatory bill that doesn't spend any money but creates the Texas Energy Efficiency Council.
The council would consist of nine members, including the comptroller, PUC, TDHCA, ERCOT, TCEQ, and Water Development Board.
The council aims to reduce demand for large and small consumers by promoting collaboration among agencies.
The bill proposes creating a website at CECO under the PUC to inform consumers of available programs.
Mention of other states like New Jersey and Arkansas having similar coordination efforts with their PUCs.
Senator Schwertner introduced SB2967, focusing on advanced nuclear and innovative energy technologies in Texas.
The bill aims to address questions regarding the commercial viability of nuclear technology, its role in the Texas energy portfolio, and the need for state-supported financial incentives.
Discussion points include public funding allocation for workforce development, supply chain, or R&D, and whether there's a need for a dedicated office for nuclear initiatives.
The session is intended to craft the Senate's version of legislation to advance nuclear energy, considering inputs from stakeholders and the testimony from experts in the field.
SB2967 is a framework bill aimed at fostering a discussion on nuclear and other innovative energy technologies.
The bill highlights strategies such as streamlining permitting processes, targeting nuclear research, and exploring funding for early project development and supply chains.
The hearing serves as an opportunity to contribute to Senate legislation on advancing nuclear energy and other innovative resources.
Jimmy Glotfelty, a former public utility commissioner, discussed developing a nuclear strategy for Texas.
Glotfelty emphasized the potential benefits of nuclear power for Texas' future growth.
Acknowledged Senator Zaffarini for supporting workforce issues identified in the nuclear strategy report.
Expressed support for SB2967, urging collaboration with other leaders to finalize the strategy.
Highlighted the importance of economic development through permitting support, supply chain grants, and bridge financing.
Permitting support is seen as critical due to high costs and uncertainties in building nuclear plants.
Stressed the need for shared risk in permitting to encourage private sector involvement.
Emphasized the importance of supply chain grants to lead in modular reactor components development.
Described the launch of Aalo reactor unit in Austin, a first test structure by a privately funded small reactor company.
Industries like Aalo, Natura, and X-Energy need state or federal support to scale operations.
Costs of reactors are a significant concern, with first plants being potentially 2-3 times as expensive as subsequent ones.
Discussed potential market design changes, including a regulated sector for nuclear power in Texas.
Called for legislative action to keep Texas competitive nationally and internationally.
Encouraged further questions and discussions on the technology and the strategy report specifics.
▶️Doug Robison, Natura Resources - Public Testimony SB2967
Doug Robison introduced himself as the founder and CEO of Natura Resources with a background in energy, recently involved in nuclear.
He spoke about SB2967, focusing on the current state of nuclear energy development in Texas.
Robison outlined how Texas could better support nuclear technologies and offered strategies to advance nuclear reactor companies, especially through the “valley of death” between current financial and developmental obstacles and commercial viability.
He emphasized the benefits of advanced nuclear energy, particularly molten salt reactors, highlighting their modular nature, safety, and potential for less waste.
Potential applications of Molten Salt Reactors include water desalination, industrial processes, and the production of medical isotopes.
Natura Resources has secured a construction permit for an advanced nuclear demonstration reactor from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, marking a significant milestone.
Completion of this demonstration reactor is critical for obtaining NRC approval for a commercial reactor.
Texas stands at a promising point in nuclear energy, with a favorable regulatory environment and skilled workforce, but faces challenges in project financing and development hurdles.
Robison recommended several measures for Texas: establishing milestone-based programs, streamlining permitting processes, fostering public-private partnerships, and investing in infrastructure and workforce training.
These initiatives could help nuclear reactor companies bridge the “valley of death” and enhance Texas' competitiveness in the energy market.
Ensuring progress in nuclear energy will promote economic growth, innovation, and sustainable solutions.
▶️Chairman Schwertner to Jimmy Glotfelty, SB2967 - Concerns about Funding Nuclear Projects
Commissioner Glotfelty chaired the working group on nuclear projects.
Concerns raised about the cost and timeline of potential nuclear projects in Texas.
Past nuclear project in Georgia faced significant delays and cost overruns.
Private sector companies are funding nuclear technologies, and many were originally developed by Oak Ridge National Lab.
Discussion on whether the free market or state should drive nuclear technology in Texas.
State involvement could support economic development, jobs, and tax revenue.
Nuclear technology can serve multiple purposes beyond electricity, such as desalination and industrial steam production.
Expectation that no new commercial reactors will be operational before 2030.
Many other states are pursuing nuclear projects, potentially giving them a competitive edge.
Comparisons made to other state-supported industries like aerospace and oil and gas.
Funding nuclear projects is seen more as economic development rather than immediate energy solutions.
Discussion about potential funding models, referencing Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (CPRIT) approach.
No current operational molten salt reactors in the US, with only one known in China.
Dow and X-Energy are partnering on a nuclear project with substantial investment from companies like Amazon.
Discussion on Georgia's nuclear project failures, attributed to building before completing design and regulatory issues.
▶️Senator Menéndez to Panel, SB2967 - Timeline, Types of Projects, and Benefits
Partnership between public and private sectors for energy development.
Timeline for new gas-powered plants estimated around 2027, contingent on turbine availability.
Advanced nuclear project permitting can take 18 months to 5 years.
Jimmy Glotfelty suggests prioritizing molten salt reactors due to the range of applications and strong existing capital support in the private sector.
Texas should consider sharing priority decisions if taxpayer money is invested.
Advanced nuclear projects positioned to reach commercial deployment the fastest include those by X-Energy and Dow, Natura Resources, and GE Hitachi.
Doug Robinson highlights the necessary planning and engineering required before the plant construction.
Focus on obtaining necessary permits from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for deployment.
Natura Energy’s goal is to have the first advanced reactor in Texas to reinforce the grid with dispatchable power.
Competition with international advancements in nuclear energy, particularly from China and Russia.
Potential benefits include reinforcing the grid, capturing the nuclear industry for Texas, and advancing international competition.
Projects are 100% privately funded at present, aiming not to rely on federal dollars.
The first advanced reactor in Texas could be a significant strategic achievement.
▶️Senator Johnson to Panel, SB2967 - Grant Program Details and Types of Reactors
Senator Johnson expressed confidence in the potential and eventual success of the new technology.
Discussion about the budget for the bill, which amounts to several billion dollars.
Clarification on the role of the market versus government in deciding which technologies to advance.
Emphasis on supporting companies with commercial backing and progression toward construction or operating permits.
Recognition of 17 different reactor designs, noting potential company mergers and the prominence of molten salt reactors.
Acknowledgment of ongoing fusion reactor projects and their timeline for commercial viability.
Explanation of the cost and scale of molten salt and small modular reactors.
Comparison of the levelized cost of electricity for molten salt reactors to natural gas, stating it is expected to be at or below that of natural gas.
Discussion of the role of universities in research and their collaboration with private industry, funded by the private sector, not government subsidies.
Possible implications and locations for where the technology will be deployed, highlighting an international scope.
Mention of the DOE's interest in making the U.S. a world supplier of advanced nuclear technologies.
▶️Senator Zaffirini to Panel, SB2967 - Distribution of Benefits, Scope of Bill, Safety, and Labor Demand
A study by the Bureau of Business Research at the University of Texas found that all regions of Texas could benefit economically from the advanced reactor industry.
The Greater Houston Partnership is actively working to ensure Houston remains the 'energy capital of the world' by possibly deploying reactors.
The panel finds that the expansion and discussion of components in the framework bill are necessary, including grants and supply chain funding for early site permits.
Doug Robison states that HB14 includes 13 recommendations from the advanced nuclear working group, and projects should only be supported once they have been docketed by the NRC.
Molten salt reactors do not generate unspent nuclear fuel; the nuclear waste issue should be addressed separately and not in this bill.
New reactors are designed with passive safety systems that automatically shut down to prevent radiation release, unlike light water reactors.
The NRC is rigorous in its application review, with a process involving 15,000 man-hours, ensuring only safe technologies are licensed.
Texas is well-positioned for workforce needs, but expansion of the industry will require more engineers and a growing supply chain.
▶️Senator Campbell to Panel, SB2967 - Clarification on Types of Reactors and Materials
Jimmy Glotfelty discussed different types of reactors: micro and small modular reactors.
Micro reactors produce 20 megawatts or less; small modular reactors range between 50 and 300 megawatts, and anything over 300 is considered large.
Natura’s commercial molten salt reactor will provide 250 megawatts thermal and 100 megawatts electric per reactor core.
New molten salt reactors are part of emerging technology and might face challenges.
Discussion on fuel type: currently using high assay, low-enriched uranium (HALEU) and experimental breeder reactor program fuels from the Idaho National Lab. .
Concerns over HALEU supply shortage in the U.S.
Thorium as a potential fuel for molten salt reactors has been considered but lacks licensing by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Thorium is abundant in Earth's crust but hasn't been commercially licensed.
Molten salt reactors built in the 1960s; no major accidents reported.
These reactors are considered safer and efficient due to their automatic shutdown and minimal waste.
Kreshka Young represents Dow as North American Business Director of Energy in support of SB2967.
Dow is a longstanding material science company with 85 years of operations in Texas.
Dow is partnering with X-Energy to develop four advanced nuclear reactors totaling 320 megawatts at a site in Seadriff, Texas.
X-Energy's reactors provide reliable, clean electricity and high-temperature steam, beneficial for round-the-clock Dow operations.
Advanced nuclear reactors offer advantages like a compact footprint, competitive costs, reliability, and better environmental performance.
The Seadriff site needs replacing cogeneration assets reaching their end of life, for which advanced nuclear is seen as optimal.
The partnership leverages Dow's experience in mega projects and X-Energy's expertise in modular nuclear design.
Dow and X- Energy have submitted a construction permit application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).
The permit approval and board approval will allow construction to begin.
Early deployments like this encourage advanced nuclear reactor fleet development, boosting manufacturing and workforce in Texas.
Benefits include zero emissions, reliable electricity, support of local economy, and development of nuclear supply chains in Texas.
▶️Rudy Garza, CPS Energy - Public Testimony SB2967
CPS Energy is the nation's largest municipally owned electric and gas utility and the fourth-largest generator in Texas.
CPS Energy controls approximately 8,000 megawatts of dispatchable energy and an additional 2,500 megawatts from solar, wind, and battery storage.
San Antonio is rapidly growing, and CPS Energy is planning to secure generation resources for the next 20-25 years to meet future demands.
The focus is on exploring small modular nuclear reactors (SMRs) as part of the future energy mix.
The desired timing for SMR commercial viability could vary between 2030 and 2040, depending on technological and economic factors.
Garza is optimistic about the role of SMRs in the energy generation resource stack.
The strategy involves selecting diverse SMR technologies to meet future energy needs.
Support from institutions like Abilene Christian University in advancing these technologies is mentioned as beneficial.
There's a need to reduce current SMR costs to make them affordable.
Advocacy for regulatory reforms at the federal level to streamline the permitting process for SMRs is seen as crucial.
The involvement of both state and federal levels is emphasized for the development and integration of new energy technologies.
▶️Scott Nolan, General Matter - Public Testimony SB2967
Scott Nolan, CEO of General Matter, discusses the company's role in enriching uranium for nuclear energy to address the U.S.'s lag in global uranium enrichment production.
The U.S. currently controls less than 1% of the global uranium enrichment market, trailing behind Russia, China, and Europe.
General Matter aims to restore U.S. leadership in uranium enrichment to support the advanced reactor industry and nuclear energy growth.
The company is participating in DOE programs and evaluating sites for a large-scale enrichment facility to produce HALEU and other fuels.
General Matter's project could bring economic incentives to states, making Texas a potential site due to its pro-business and energy-friendly environment.
The nuclear fuel supply chain faces bottlenecks including enrichment, conversion, and fuel fabrication, requiring coordination to resolve.
Federal permitting processes with NRC and state incentives are critical to the project's success.
The meeting included discussions on the permitting timeline and the importance of having final designs before construction to avoid past mistakes.
There were questions about the current production of enriched uranium by General Matter, with a response that production is planned by the end of the decade.
Discussions included the need for federal incentives similar to those for renewable energy and how the state could play a role in supporting nuclear projects.
San Antonio's CPS Energy representatives spoke on the need for diverse energy mixes, including nuclear, and stressed the importance of state intervention in building new reactors.
Panel 3
▶️Nick Morriss, Shepherd Power - Public Testimony SB2967
Nick Morriss works for Shepherd Power, a newly formed venture within National Oilwell Varco (NOV), headquartered in Houston, Texas.
NOV is a global manufacturer known for contributing to the shale revolution with products such as turnkey drilling rigs and hydraulic fracturing units.
NOV is approached by energy companies seeking solutions for dense, clean electricity and heat-producing devices, especially in West Texas.
There's a perception that the nuclear industry is not as efficient in building modular systems as the oil and gas sector.
Shepherd Power, established in January 2024, aims to own and operate advanced nuclear technologies and sell power and heat to energy companies through power purchase agreements.
Challenges faced by these technologies include high costs and immature development stages.
The state of Texas is taking a leadership role to aid the advancement of this industry.
▶️Rodney Chaplin, REPLOY Power - Public Testimony SB2967
Rodney Chaplin, CEO of REPLOY Power, expressed support for a legislative bill.
Replay Power is a strong proponent of the nuclear supply chain in Texas.
Chaplin highlighted Texas's advantages, including its experienced workforce and industrial capacity, to lead in the nuclear supply chain globally.
He presented a statistic indicating that only 32 out of 195 countries use nuclear power.
Chaplin noted the global energy demand growth and the anticipated retirement of aging energy assets as an opportunity for Texas.
REPLOY Power aims to be an industrial supply chain model capable of deploying various proven commercial reactor technologies, initially focusing on light water reactors.
The company's business model focuses on reducing nuclear costs through centralized manufacturing.
REPLOY Power is negotiating for a factory site on the Texas Gulf Coast.
Experienced infrastructure investors support the project, bringing expertise from industries like coal, oil, gas, and aluminum smelting.
Chaplin emphasized the importance of supply chain and manufacturing opportunities alongside energy generation.
He mentioned that REPLOY Power is planning to commission its first two 600-megawatt units in the early 2030s.
Chaplin concluded by opening the floor for questions, to be addressed after the panel.
▶️Cyrus Reed, Sierra Club - Public Testimony SB2967
Opposition to SB2967 and the use of taxpayer funds for permitting and construction of nuclear projects.
Reference to the costly experience with the Vogtle nuclear project in Georgia, which rose from $14 billion to $35 billion.
Mention of canceled NuScale projects originally projected at $4.2 billion, rising to $9.3 billion before cancellation.
Economic concerns with current projects and reliance on taxpayer grants.
Recommendation to implement guardrails and not reimburse companies like Dow for prior investments.
Suggestion for matching requirements to prevent unnecessary burden on taxpayers.
Unresolved issues regarding nuclear waste.
Importance of involving multiple agencies, not just the governor's office, in decision-making.
▶️Adrian Shelley, Public Citizen - Public Testimony SB2967
Adrian Shelley from Public Citizen opposes the bill and any state subsidies for energy forms. Concerned about the financial viability of advanced technologies.
Cites a Tennessee Valley Authority project with high costs: $18 million per megawatt for a 300 MW plant.
Suggests that projects funded should be required to contribute electricity to the ERCOT grid with set timelines and repayment provisions if no electricity is generated.
Opposes exemptions for industrial applications and raises concerns about waste from new technologies.
Discussion on cost comparisons: natural gas plants ($1 million/MW), wind ($1.4 million/MW), compared to nuclear at $18 million/MW.
Panel discussion on key obstacles: advanced nuclear projects face challenges from both technology and regulations.
These technologies haven’t been regulated at scale before; potential for the federal government to work on maximizing benefits while updating regulations.
Emphasis needed on different characteristics of advanced reactors, e.g., molten salt reactors, which require new regulatory approaches.
Calls for new regulatory processes, possibly requests for waivers to help advanced technologies.
Chairman Schwertner emphasizes the need for careful evaluation of the bill and refining legislation on nuclear development. Open to opinions but cautious about committing state funds without further refinement and diligence.
