Minnesota launched a study this week to examine the possibility of finally lifting its moratorium on new nuclear reactors. Though no review is needed to reverse the state’s poorly conceived ban, this is yet another positive sign that resistance to the much-needed energy source is slowly melting away.
State lawmakers quietly approved funding for the study on the last day of this year’s legislative session in May, mandating its completion by January 2027. The assessment will consider the costs, financial risks and environmental impacts of nuclear power, as well as technological advances that promise to make reactors safer and more efficient.
If the study achieves anything, it might be to dispel misconceptions about one of nuclear energy’s biggest political headaches: what to do with its radioactive waste. That was the primary reason that Minnesota imposed its moratorium more than 30 years ago, when anti-nuclear activists convinced several states to halt new reactors until a permanent federal repository for waste products was completed.
But these concerns were always detached from reality. Nuclear plants have been safely storing their spent fuel on-site for decades. Congress had chosen a site for a repository under Nevada’s Yucca Mountain, but the Obama administration halted it.
While a permanent repository would be useful for long-term storage, a better solution would be to recycle that fuel for further use. France has been doing that for years, and private companies are looking to build facilities to make it happen in the United States.
Should Minnesota undo its moratorium, it would follow multiple states that have already done so, including Illinois and New Jersey this year. Lawmakers in California, Oregon and Massachusetts are also pressing to unwind their states’ restrictions. Other states, such as Indiana and Kentucky, have passed legislation to reduce barriers to developments.
Critics often argue that nuclear energy is simply too costly and takes too long to build. Yet that is partly because of labyrinthine regulations that developers must navigate to build reactors. Of course, ensuring that nuclear plants are operated safely is crucial, but federal regulators and state rules have tied up developments with lengthy review processes and onerous design requirements — sometimes in the middle of construction.
A bipartisan movement has sought to ease those challenges. In 2024, Congress passed legislation to streamline federal licensing for reactors, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has since issued major reforms to trim some of the red tape. Just this week, the NRC announced a proposal to relax its overly stringent radiation standards, which were built on shaky science.
As demand for electricity skyrockets, it is foolish to turn away any energy source. It is heartening that even the states that have been most hostile to nuclear power are finally coming around.
The post Slowly but surely, resistance to nuclear energy is melting away appeared first on Washington Post.
