Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Power

Westinghouse Is Claiming a Nuclear Deal Would See $80 Billion of New Reactors (arstechnica.com) 50

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: On Tuesday, Westinghouse announced that it had reached an agreement with the Trump administration that would purportedly see $80 billion of new nuclear reactors built in the US. And the government indicated that it had finalized plans for a collaboration of GE Vernova and Hitachi to build additional reactors. Unfortunately, there are roughly zero details about the deal at the moment. The agreements were apparently negotiated during President Trump's trip to Japan. An announcement of those agreements indicates that "Japan and various Japanese companies" would invest "up to" $332 billion for energy infrastructure. This specifically mentioned Westinghouse, GE Vernova, and Hitachi. This promises the construction of both large AP1000 reactors and small modular nuclear reactors. The announcement then goes on to indicate that many other companies would also get a slice of that "up to $332 billion," many for basic grid infrastructure. The report notes that no reactors are currently under construction and Westinghouse's last two projects ended in bankruptcy. According to the Financial Times, the government may share in profits and ownership if the deal proceeds.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Westinghouse Is Claiming a Nuclear Deal Would See $80 Billion of New Reactors

Comments Filter:
  • by usedtobestine ( 7476084 ) on Tuesday October 28, 2025 @11:52PM (#65757544)

    I think its 4.

    • by methano ( 519830 )
      it's
    • by dunkelfalke ( 91624 ) on Wednesday October 29, 2025 @06:58AM (#65758018)

      Two at best considering the usual cost overruns, but more likely just one. And it will take 10-15 years to build.

    • It'll quite possibly be 1. Initially, they'll start construction of the first, followed shortly after by the second. The second won't get the manpoower it needs, so it'll be slower than the first.

      Assuming the whole project doesn't get shut down by a future administration, the first will eventually go into service. By then, renewables will have eaten a lot of the power lunch, and so the price per W won't really be high enough to make any proper money (or possibly it'll be loss making, propped up by the gover

  • by mattyVN ( 6871776 ) on Wednesday October 29, 2025 @12:03AM (#65757556)
    If you look at the cost escalation of reactors in the west particularly in UK and USA then I would expect each reactor to cost $40 billion. Best they could do but unlikely would be $20 billion a reactor so they'd get four. Nothing to write home about. .
  • That'll be the day.

  • by ISayWeOnlyToBePolite ( 721679 ) on Wednesday October 29, 2025 @12:31AM (#65757598)

    "Hitachi GE Vernova Nuclear Energy, Ltd" is afaik a single company: https://www.hitachi-hgne.co.jp... [hitachi-hgne.co.jp]

  • by Linux Torvalds ( 647197 ) on Wednesday October 29, 2025 @12:40AM (#65757604)

    On Tuesday, Westinghouse announced that it had reached an agreement with the Trump administration

    In other news, Wayne Industries announced that it has reached a licensing and cross-marketing agreement with the Joker.

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      At best it's got a ~3 year lifespan on it, which is long enough to soak up some federal cash but little else.

  • by locater16 ( 2326718 ) on Wednesday October 29, 2025 @12:56AM (#65757618)
    When Mexico pays for the entirely visible border wall and the Epstein files are released I'll congratulate Westinghouse on their totally real and tangible nuclear reactors.
  • by Jeremi ( 14640 ) on Wednesday October 29, 2025 @01:02AM (#65757630) Homepage

    In a fission nuclear plant, nuclear fuel is used to generate heat to boil water to run a steam turbine.

    That's all well and good, but there's no reason the heat has to come from nuclear fission; any similarly reliable heat-source would do just as well. Perhaps there are cheaper and safer ways [interestin...eering.com] to obtain the required heat? You can do a whole lot of drilling with $80,000,000,000 dollars, especially since without any radioactive material to worry about, you don't have to spend all that money on security, failsafe backup systems, and long-term waste disposal anymore.

  • This does not seem like a deal that benefits the nation or could ever be trusted on a national security level.

    Surely there are US companies licensed to build these facilities.

    • Are you sure about that? I heard MBS through a Canadian wealth management firm.

      • by Sethra ( 55187 )

        China controls Westinghouse - the investment was to purchase the technology behind the Westinghouse AP1000 megawatt nuclear designs.

      • Are you sure about that? I heard MBS through a Canadian wealth management firm.

        Yes, Brookfield. Our Canadian PM Carney's former wealth management firm.

        Totally coincidence I'm sure.

    • A Chinese company owns the rights to the Westinghouse appliance division. The nuclear division is different.

  • I wonder what version they will build if any - SBWR, or the smaller unit based on its deign. My guess this is a "gone before we have to spend significant money but keeps him happy while we get gov't cash" kind of deal.
  • Raising the operating temperature of reactors by using molten salt as a coolant would be a big advantage, even with the current overall design. It would permit dry air to be used as the heat sink. Reactors could be installed in desert and on military bases far from NIMBYs and their lawyers.

    We have three years to get this started. When the Democrats come back we will be able to use modern healthcare tech again, but our clean energy options will shrink back to EU levels.

  • So like what two, maybe three, of them after all their "unplanned" cost overruns?

Your good nature will bring you unbounded happiness.

Working...