I summarise below my submission, of 8,000 words and 25 pages, from September 14, 2026 to the 32 questions in the Request for Information (RFI) by the Great Plains Institute (GPI) regarding the Minnesota Nuclear Energy Study (MNES) that ends on January 30, 2027. Enjoy.
Federal licensing
The RFI asked 1 question here regarding “federal regulations governing the licensing of nuclear-powered facilities.” In response, I quoted from the US Department of Energy (DOE) and Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). DOE stated there are “four executive orders aimed at reinvigorating America’s nuclear energy industry.” FERC announced “show cause orders” aimed at reforming how “large energy users connect to the electric grid.”
Technology and costs
The RFI asked 7 questions here regarding “technological advances,” “full lifecycle costs,” “electricity rates,” “public subsidies” and more. In response, I quoted mainly myself, but also from DOE, National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC), Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA), MasterResource, and World Nuclear Association (WNA).
Highlights from my quotes include:
- “Nuclear is 7.9x less expensive than wind and 13.3x less expensive than solar.”
- “Minnesota’s wind and solar renewables grew 1,784% from 2002 to 2024 [whilst clean] nuclear decreased 13%.”
- And this resulted in Twin Cities electricity CPI “inflation of 131% for 2002-2024; volatility of 23% for 2002-2024; and misery (inflation plus volatility) of 154% for 2002-2024.”
Highlights from the other quotes include:
- DOE: “Next-generation nuclear reactor designs are being developed with enhanced safety features. Described as being ‘walk away safe,’ these new designs leverage basic physics principles to maintain reactors in a safe shutdown condition without the need for human intervention, electrical power, or additional water.”
- NARUC: “Advanced nuclear reactors not only share beneficial characteristics with the current nuclear fleet but also offer distinct advantages including improved load-following capability, modularity, a smaller land-use footprint, new safety features and low operating costs.”
Small modular reactors and other advanced technologies
The RFI asked 1 question here regarding “the prospects for small modular reactors and factory-built portable modules.” In response, I highlighted NARUC‘s 2024 report that “Explores Innovative Use Cases for Advanced Nuclear Energy, Offering Key Insights for State Regulators and Energy Offices,” including “how these reactors can be utilized not only for generating electricity but also for various industrial applications.“
Siting and infrastructure
The RFI asked 7 questions here regarding “water resources,” “colocating,” “environmental and public health impacts,” “host communities,” “grid interconnection” and more. In response, I quoted myself, but mainly from Membracon, Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), Pew Research Center, Newsweek, Journal of Theoretical Politics (JTP) and Marginal Revolution.
Highlights from my quotes include:
- “Colocating has, not only been often feasible in recent times, but increasingly preferable. This is called Consumer Regulated Electricity (CRE) or Bring Your Own Power(BYOP).”
- “The best guide to understanding special interest and community support or opposition (including NIMBY) to nuclear power, data centers or anything else is through the economic lens of Public Choice Theory especially that of Bootleggers and Baptists.”
Highlights from the other quotes include:
- Membracon: “The water recycling systems used in the nuclear industry are among the most efficient, capable of recirculating water indefinitely, topped up with new water.”
- CEI: “The linear no-threshold (LNT) model. The theory underlying this model suggests that any exposure to ionizing radiation, no matter how small, increases cancer risks and that risks rise in a linear way with exposure levels. It’s not true.”
- JTP re NIMBYism: “But why cannot project developers (with large potential profits) compensate local residents? Not being compensated for local costs, residents therefore oppose development.”
Nuclear waste
The RFI asked 4 questions here regarding “radioactive waste,” “waste on-site,” “repository,” “transported,” and “reprocessing”. In response, I quoted from Institute of Public Affairs (IPA), Mackinac Center, MasterResource, Politico and Institute for Energy Research (IER).
Highlights from the quotes include:
- IPA: “Annual self-generated radiation is about a third of the maximum dose one could have received from being next to the Three Mile Island nuclear ‘disaster’.”
- Mackinac: “In fact, all of the waste produced in the United States since the 1950s could be stored on a single football field at a depth of less than 10 yards.” and “All forms of energy make waste, even renewables. Solar panels, for example, create 300 times more waste than a nuclear reactor does per unit of energy produced.” and “The uranium removed from reactors still contains as much as 90% of its potential energy and can be recycled many times over.”
- Politico: “The Trump administration is seeking to move past Yucca Mountain as the nation’s sole repository and … is seeking changes to federal law to allow [DOE] to partner with states willing to store waste generated at the nation’s nuclear reactors.”
The RFI asked 1 question here regarding “economic impacts … on a host community.” In response, I quoted as follows from the “gold standard of guides” that being the Australian Government’s 2006 Handbook of Cost Benefit Analysis:
- “Reliable evidence is needed to quantify costs and benefits. In practice quantification often depends on detailed technical studies – for example, the electricity output expected from a new power plant. In these circumstances, careful attention is needed to the pricing assumptions[.]”
- “Market prices provide a great deal of information concerning the magnitude of costs and benefits. Accordingly, that price can generally be taken as a measure of the value placed by society on the good or service.”
Public safety and emergency planning
The RFI asked 1 question here regarding “public safety officials and emergency responders.” In response, I quoted as follows from Heritage Foundation, WNA and Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI):
- Heritage: “The Atomic Energy Act of 1954 already allows states to regulate some nuclear materials. That should be expanded. If a state can demonstrate the technical know-how to oversee commercial nuclear operations within its borders, it should be free to do so.”
- WNA: “Of all the accidents and incidents [including Three Mile Island], only the Chernobyl and Fukushima accidents resulted in radiation doses to the public greater than those resulting from the exposure to natural sources.”
- NEI: “The performance of US nuclear power plants is assessed against standards established by the World Association of Nuclear Operators (WANO) and the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO). A review of the most current data shows that US nuclear power plants are either near or exceeding [operational excellence].”
Minnesota energy and climate goals
The RFI asked 1 question here regarding “Minnesota’s statutory greenhouse gas reduction and carbon-free electricity goals.” In response, I quoted as follows from myself and NEI:
- Me: “It has been reasonable to question, for at least 35 years, that the greenhouse gas (GHG) of CO2 drives climate change, is largely human in origin, and is net catastrophic. Even the UN recently backed away from the latter. However, be that as it may, and given current MN law, nuclear power is superior to wind and solar from a GHG perspective.”
- NEI: “Thanks to nuclear, the total [carbon dioxide or CO2] emissions avoided in 2025 in the United States was the equivalent of: 2.4 million railcars’ worth of coal burned; 70% of the annual carbon emissions from the agriculture sector; or the annual transportation sector emissions for California, New York, and Texas combined.”
Development timelines
The RFI asked 1 question here regarding “timelines, from initial planning and permitting through construction and operation.” In response, I quoted at length from Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and Energy Information Administration (EIA):
- NRC: “In 2025, [we] updated the NEIMA [Nuclear Energy Innovation and Modernization Act] milestone schedules for issuance of the final safety evaluation to align with the 12- and 18-month periods[.] These revised milestones took effect on May 23, 2025.”
- EIA: “Several companies are developing new small modular reactor (SMR) designs aimed at reducing capital costs and increasing siting flexibility, challenges associated with traditional nuclear power. The main components of SMRs are modular, factory-assembled parts shipped to the plant construction site for installation, which could reduce construction times.”
Minnesota laws and regulations
The RFI asked 1 question here regarding “Minnesota statutes or administrative rules [that] would need to be modified.” In response, I highlighted two MN laws plus one model law:
- MN law to repeal: 2025 Minnesota Statutes, UTILITIES, Chapter 216B, Section 216B.243, Subd. 3b. Nuclear power plant; new construction prohibited; relicensing. “The commission may not issue a certificate of need for the construction of a new nuclear-powered electric generating plant.”
- MN law to modify: 2025 Minnesota Statutes, UTILITIES, Chapter 216B, Section 216B.243, Subd. 3a. Use of renewable resource. “The commission may not issue a certificate of need under this section for a large energy facility that generates electric power by means of a nonrenewable energy source, unless …”
- American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) model law to pass: “The goal of the bill is to lay the groundwork for states to permit and begin construction on new nuclear facilities within 180 days. This bill removes bans, prohibits bans at local levels, and establishes a state official to work with nuclear companies to be the internal advocate within the state government to assist with permitting, siting, and other duties.”
Replacement of retiring generation
The RFI asked 1 question here regarding “replace retiring electricity generation facilities…with advanced nuclear reactors.” In response, I quoted at length from World Nuclear News (WNN) and GatesNotes (i.e. Bill Gates):
- WNN: “A study by researchers at the University of Michigan ranks the feasibility of converting 245 operational coal power plants in the USA into advanced nuclear reactors, providing valuable insights for policymakers and utilities to meet decarbonisation goals.”
- Bill Gates: “Kemmerer, Wyoming [is now the] home to the most advanced nuclear facility in the world…the first-ever Natrium plant, [bringing] safe, next-generation nuclear technology to life. The [former coal] plant was designed by TerraPower [to be] far safer than any existing plant, with the temperatures held under control by the laws of physics instead of human operators who can make mistakes. It [had] a shorter construction timeline and [is] cheaper to operate.”
Workforce and training
The RFI asked 3 questions here regarding “workforce needed,” “workforce available,” and “workforce development.” In response, I quoted from DOE, Catrin Wigfall of American Experiment (AE), and The Hechinger Report.
Highlights from the quotes include:
- DOE: “The 2025 U.S. Energy & Employment Report (USEER) report surveyed salaries and benefits across the US energy sector, and several nuclear careers came out near the top. Of 101 surveyed occupations in electric power generation, three of the top five careers by median salary were in nuclear energy[.]” and “Trump’s executive order on Reinvigorating the Nuclear Industrial Base aims to go even further, bringing more Americans into the nuclear energy workforce through expanded technical education and apprenticeship programs.”
- AE: “Minnesota’s state labor policies continue to undermine worker and taxpayer rights, according to a recent report on public-sector labor laws by the Commonwealth Foundation. The report gave Minnesota a “D” grade.” and “A variety of industries benefit greatly from apprenticeship programs and will be highlighted at the Minnesota apprenticeship summit.”
- Hechinger: “A new analysis from Harvard Business School’s Project on Managing the Future of Work … found that 74 occupations could be filled by apprentices who forgo pricey college degrees to earn a salary as they take courses and get on-the-job training. These occupations offer job stability, require a skillset easily obtained through specialized training and eschew hefty licensing requirements.”
Additional Information
The RFI asked 3 final questions here regarding “additional sources,” “other materials,” and “anything else.” In response, I quoted myself as well as two legendary economists, one from the right of Julian Simon, and one from the left of John Maynard Keynes.
Highlights from the quotes include:
- Me: “Ideas from the left are the animating force behind Minnesota’s 21st century policies on energy, environment and natural resources. These include: Galbraith’s discouraging energy use; Pigou’s encouraging renewables growth; and Malthus’s favoring nature over humanity. The consequences include: higher prices; increased scarcity; and more pollution.”
- Simon: “Nuclear power is fundamental to a discussion of energy because it establishes the long-run ceiling to [efficient and reliable] energy costs. The opposition to it is mainly ideological and political. The aim of [which] is…decreasing the use of energy for supposed environmental gains and beliefs about the ‘morality’ of simple living.”
- Keynes: “The difficulty lies, not in the new ideas, but in escaping from the old ones, which ramify, for those brought up as most of us have been, into every corner of our minds [and policies].”
- Me: “Better policies for Minnesotans in energy, environment and natural resources starts with better ideas. These include: Reisman’s encouraging energy growth; Cordato’s discouraging anti-human environmentalism; and Simon’s favoring more population over depopulation. The consequences include: enhanced affordability; greater abundance; and less pollution.”