>> Illinois gets a majority of its energy from nuclear power.

Despite a decades long moratorium on building new nuclear power plants.

With that moratorium lifted earlier this year, Governor JB Pritzker signed an executive order directing state agencies to start planning for nuclear power plant construction.

That could begin by 2033, here's a bit of what Pritzker had to say.

>> We can take years off of the development and launch of new base load energy production.

It sets a new nuclear energy framework for Illinois.

One that prioritizes affordability, safety and reliability.

Our state agencies have been ordered to immediately begin working together and reaching out to local governments to identify sites for new reactors.

It will also advance the development of a state regulatory framework with rigorous safety and citing standards.

>> Joining us to talk about the future of nuclear energy in Illinois are Tom Fanning a nuclear engineer at Argonne National Laboratory.

Mark Pruitt, former chair of the Illinois Power Agency and now an independent consultant at the Power Bureau and Madison, Hilly managing director at Radiant Energy Group, a nuclear energy consultancy.

also reached out to a number of groups with concerns about nuclear power and were able to join us.

We have some statements to share and a moment, but thank to 3 of you for being here.

happy to have Thank you.

Thank So, you know, Tom Fanning, a lot of folks are may be familiar with the concept of nuclear reactors, but not exactly how they work.

So that briefly, how do they generate electricity?

>> So nuclear power plants generate electricity via fission, which is the splitting of typically a heavy elements like uranium.

This is a technology that was here in Chicago back in the 1940's, the first chain reaction was in 1942.

In the city actually.

And then that eventually moved on to the suburbs.

And in 1946, Argonne National Laboratory was was established.

And we've been developing that technology since them.

so the idea, of course, is to generate heat to make either a very high temperature gas for steam to turn a turbine, turns a generator project to produce electricity.

>> Alright, simple enough.

But I would have been able to say it as well medicine.

You know, looking at the current state of nuclear power in Illinois.

How much are we producing?

>> Yeah, so we're actually leading the nation in nuclear energy production are 6 nuclear plants generate over half of Illinois's electricity.

And yeah, it's part of what keeps our Northern Illinois is electricity mix.

Some of the most affordable and cleanest in the nation.

And what's the sort of maintenance that's required for the current fleet of reactors that we have here in the state?

>> Honestly, the boring answer is just.

>> Proper maintenance, in part replacement mean that these nuclear plants can Ryan in pristine condition for decades.

So we actually have reactors in Illinois that have licenses to run for 80 years.

And there's no reason that they couldn't possibly run beyond that.

The NRC is actually investigating life extensions out to 100 years as we speak.

Interesting.

So if that sort of, you know, the regular upkeep is maintain, they may actually be able to go longer than initially thought.

Oh, yeah, exactly.

Our existing fleet could continue to provide electricity for Illinois for decades to come.

My crew, we just heard a bit of a Governor Pritzker announcing his order.

What was your reaction that measure?

thought it was good for the first time in 30 maybe more years.

>> great in Illinois in our neighboring states has actually started to show signs of low growth, which is more demand for electricity, which quite quite different kind of the managed decline that we've been noticing over the past, especially 10 to 20 years.

So no, the game has to change from deciding which plants close to.

How do we meet the new demand?

Well, not leaving the existing consumers behind.

So there's there's cost issues.

There's reliability issues.

you know, the sooner they start thinking about how to bring these types of resources.

To the market, the better the result is going to Yeah.

I mean, with that increased demand.

How important of a role do you see nuclear playing?

You know, obviously the state has a lot of has passed legislation to.

>> You know, encourage the development of clean energy, wind, solar, things like that that has nuclear fit into that mix.

>> Well, you I don't know that there's any.

One better than the other there.

They're just different when we're looking at the demands for electricity from some of the new industries to, of course, the data centers, but also the battery manufacturers.

The electric vehicle manufacturers, and then, you know, electrification of buildings moving away from.

More traditional forms of energy.

What you really need is several layers and different types of energy because in the end, we're wanting to spread our bets across a broader portfolio of resources so that we're always a sure that the grid can deliver when the demand greatest.

And I think that that nuclear and solar and wind, they all have a role to play.

But the bottom line is we need more of >> So after the governor's executive order, the nuclear energy Information Service industry watchdog, they raised some concerns.

Those include a lack of language in the order around waste management and post closure plans for reactor communities.

Concerns about staffing cuts at the federal level that could affect oversight as well as concerns about the high costs of reactors.

Madison, hilly, what do you make of some of those concerns?

>> I mean, I think this is sort of a last ditch effort to scare communities from what is going to be a really powerful economic engine and investment for the future nuclear in America has an impeccable safety record.

It doesn't get better 0 deaths over more than 70 years of commercial operation.

In terms of the waste.

The nuclear waste is great.

It's easily contained.

It's currently getting safer day by day.

It can be recycled.

Very few people know that it can actually be fuel for this next generation of nuclear reactors.

We're looking to invest in.

So I think.

Like clearly momentum is for new clear for growth for new economic prosperity in the state.

And I'm glad to hear that.

You know, Tom Fanning, when you look at that next generation of nuclear reactors, you know, designs have come a long way since they were last built an in Illinois many decades ago.

>> What might this next generation of of local reactors look like?

>> as I mentioned, are gonna started a long time ago working on nuclear technology in the focus has always been on secure, safe and sustainable energy production worldwide.

Really?

so what developed in the early days was light water reactor technologies.

And I think that will continue for the foreseeable future.

But there are also companies and are gonna has partnered with some of those companies to develop what we called the advanced reactors or Gen for technologies that look at different cooling options, different fuel types.

But ultimately our focus has always been on safe and sustainable operations of that power supply.

>> You medicine who just mentioned haven't built nuclear plants in Illinois and many decades.

Does the state have the necessary workforce and expertise to build the next generation of reactors?

Absolutely.

If anything, Illinois should be the frontrunner in this competition for new nuclear investment.

>> We have the most nuclear energy production of any state.

We have an existing workforce with deep expertise.

We have wonderful institutions, including National labs.

So it really was ours to lose.

But while we were coasting on our existing nuclear fleet, other states were actively competing for new nuclear investment.

We can catch up, but we do have to catch up.

>> My Pruitt, you know, the governor's office says Illinois will not impose facilities on communities.

That participation is voluntary be dilip driven by local interest.

What sorts of things should communities be thinking through as they try to decide whether nuclear is right for them.

Well, I think like every type of large industrial development, there's going to be an analysis of the tradeoffs, right?

There's there's desire for jobs and for property tax revenue and all the plus sides.

But >> I think that the communities have some additional due diligence to, of course, there's going to be concerned about safety and operations.

And what does this really mean?

Long term?

Is this 20 year, a 50 year, 400 year.

>> type of institution that that's going to exist or community.

I can say that a number of the existing communities that are hosting nuclear facilities Illinois are very closely associated with those facilities firing Clinton, etc.

>> And I think that they have a very close working relationship with the nuclear operator.

Things could get a little scary sometimes if a, if there's word that the nuclear plant is going to close, we saw that not that long ago in Illinois.

we're state intervention was necessary to keep the plants operating.

And I think that those communities during that experience really had start thinking about, okay, we have this great economic driver.

What else do we need to be doing?

You know, it's not just a one and done or filing forget they they need to continue to manage their position.

And I think that the communities are up for it.

There are patterns and experience that other communities you know, patterns already been cut.

I think that they can.

They can learn a lot from those other communities, income to a good conclusion by themselves.

you know, medicine.

You mentioned the excellent safety record of new clear.

But, you know, a lot of folks may have things that stick in their mind.

Things like 3 Mile Island What are the sorts of safety concerns you hear from folks when you talk with them about nuclear?

>> I mean, I do really think it's sort of the their worst case scenario.

They think about China Syndrome, 3 Mile Island.

Where's, you know, 3 Mile Island is actually nuclear safety.

Sort of that.

It's best where?

An accident happens.

And plant just shuts down on itself.

No serious environmental releases.

No, you know, harm or public health issues to any of the workers or to the public.

You know, that same thing can be said of similar energy accidents and other industries.

So it's just it's hard to argue with the historical track record of new clear in the U.S.

and, you know, I you talk to the people in these communities and they're very defensive about their plan.

They know that it's safe because it's the members of their community that they go to church with, that they go to lunch with that.

They have book club with Keep that plant safe.

So I have no concerns that Illinois couldn't lead on this while maintaining its excellent safety record.

You know, Tom Fanning Argonne does a lot of You know, how did the technology's >> go from sort of research in a lab toward actual commercial uses in these reactors.

What's that pathway like?

So so that that is the big challenge, right?

Getting from the R and d space into the commercial environment the industry does a lot of innovation on its own where the National Labs come in and come partner with industry is when there are new materials are new components or or even new designs that they would like help, you know, from a national lab to to kind of get through that gap right from the R and D space to to the commercial space.

Madison mentioned earlier about fuel, the potential for it to be recycled that's that's a big political challenge.

But there's also a G that needs to be developed to support that.

And that's one of the big areas that are going does research in.

And without that support them, it's going to be even harder for industry to try to take the next step.

Yeah.

So looking ahead, you as Illinois's anticipating trying to get more plants online, that some think there's the potential there for for Oregon to partner with with government with no industry.

Yeah.

And and the the the executive order specifically mention the University of Illinois.

So I want to give them a shout out there they have a great program down there as well.

I don't remember them and mentioning are gone, but certainly our gun would overjoyed to help the only in in our own backyard in our communities.

The people that work at Argonne work all around live all around the Chicago suburban area.

So the group any I s that we referenced earlier, they also brought up concerns about.

>> Cost effectiveness, saying that it is, quote, utterly incomprehensible.

Why the governor and legislature would promote the most expensive slowest to deploy at least cost-effective greenhouse gas, displacing most of dangerous.

And in the case of small modular nuclear reactors, nonexistent method to deal with it, you know, weighing that sort of the multi-billion dollar cost of new nuclear against falling prices of renewables like wind or solar or proof.

You know, how do you square that circle?

>> Again, this goes back to, you know, are are some energy sources better than others, The issue with the new clear is I think that, you know, sometimes things are more expensive because they the higher value being able to have power plant that can operate at close to 100% capacity for 2 years with then a very short-term fueling turnaround time.

That's a very valuable asset.

And really it's that type of of generating profile that placed Illinois initially as just more or less that the energy.

Of the Midwest over the 60 70's and 80's.

again, that's not to take anything away from the wind and solar which can deploy quicker.

But those aren't 80 your These are just different.

They have a different cost structure.

But when we look at the normalized or level cost of the volume of electricity that's generated, I think it's probably a little bit different cost comparison and what the group indicates.

All right.

Well, there is a lot of interest in this topic.

I'm sure we'll be talking about it much more to come.