AI’s Power Gap and Nuclear’s Return with The Nuclear Company
Juliann Edwards is Chief Development Officer at The Nuclear Company. The United States has 93 operating nuclear reactors providing about 20% of the nation’s electricity. After decades without new builds, Vogtle Units 3 and 4 in Georgia finally came online—despite cost overruns and delays that nearly derailed the project. Meanwhile, China has dozens of reactors under construction and is on pace to surpass the U.S. as the world’s nuclear leader by 2030.
At the same time, an energy-demand gap—driven by AI data centers, reshoring of manufacturing, and widespread electrification—has put nuclear back in the conversation. Hyperscalers like Microsoft, Google, Amazon, and Meta are scrambling for clean, reliable baseload power.
The Nuclear Company believes it can crack what’s held nuclear back in America. Rather than inventing new reactor designs, they’re using proven models and targeting “the other 88%” of costs—construction, financing, and project management. Their approach is fleet-scale deployment: building multiple reactors at once to drive down costs through repetition and shared learning. They’re also partnering with Palantir to build an AI-powered operating system to orchestrate these projects.
Beyond her role at The Nuclear Company, Juliann chairs U.S. Women in Nuclear. With 15 years in the industry—from steel commodities to the 2000s nuclear renaissance and the decommissioning wave—she’s seen the cycles and why today’s interest feels different.
MCJ is a multiple-time investor in The Nuclear Company through our venture funds.
Episode recorded on Aug 7, 2025 (Published on Oct 7, 2025)
In this episode, we cover:
[2:57] Juliann’s background and path to nuclear
[05:30] Women in Nuclear’s mission and growth
[06:38] Lessons from a six‑state nuclear bus tour
[08:22] NIMBY sentiment shifting toward nuclear acceptance
[10:25] U.S. build history and why it stalled
[18:06] What went wrong and right at Vogtle
[24:05] Nuclear reactor ~12% of cost; 88% is everything else
[25:42] Workforce gaps and training pipelines
[26:40] An overview of nuclear project types
[32:59] Timelines: restarts soon; new builds in years
[34:42] TNC’s executive makeup
[37:40] The role of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
[40:35] Palantir and TNC’s newly announced partnership
[48:35] Solving the nuclear waste problem
[50:30] Juliann’s predictions for the future of nuclear
[53:10] Hyperscalers’ evolving nuclear appetite
-
Cody Simms (00:00):
Today on Inevitable, our guest is Juliann Edwards, Chief Development Officer at The Nuclear Company. The United States has 93 operating nuclear reactors that provide about 20% of our nation's electricity. We hadn't completed a new reactor in decades until Vogtle 3 and 4 finally came online in Georgia after massive cost overruns and delays that nearly killed the project. Meanwhile, China has dozens of reactors under construction and is on pace to surpass the US as the world's nuclear leader by 2030. As we've covered here a lot, we're now in an energy demand gap driven by AI data centers, reshoring of manufacturing, and widespread electrification. And over the last year, nuclear has become part of the conversation in a way it wasn't just a couple of years ago. The hyperscalers, Microsoft, Google, Amazon Meta are scrambling for clean, reliable base load power. The Nuclear Company believes they can crack the code on what's held nuclear back in America.
(01:04):
They're not innovating on reactor technology. They're using proven designs. Instead, they're attacking what they call the other 88% of costs, the construction, the financing, the project management. Their approach is to build multiple reactors at once, fleet scale, as they call it, to drive down costs through repetition and shared learning. And they're partnering with Palantir to build an AI-powered operating system to orchestrate these massive infrastructure projects.
(01:34):
In addition to her role at The Nuclear Company, Juliann is also the chair of US Women in Nuclear. She's been in the nuclear industry for 15 years, starting in steel commodities for reactors and working through both the failed nuclear renaissance of the 2000s and the decommissioning wave that followed. So the current wave of interest definitely has her fired up. MCJ is proud to be multiple-time investors in The Nuclear Company via our venture capital funds. From MCJ, I'm Cody Simms, and this is Inevitable.
(02:08):
Climate change is inevitable. It's already here, but so are the solutions shaping our future. Join us every week to learn from experts and entrepreneurs about the transition of energy and industry. Juliann, welcome to the show.
Juliann Edwards (02:30):
Hey, good to be here.
Cody Simms (02:31):
Well, this is a timely conversation. There is so much going on in your space and obviously with your company as well. I thought I'd start just by having you give us a little bit of a personal bio because you're not a new entrant to this nuclear world. You've been living and breathing this space for quite some time now. So maybe share a little bit about the work you've done. I think you've started your journey on the supply chain component side for the industry and have worked across multiple facets of it.
Juliann Edwards (02:57):
That's absolutely right. I'm not nuclear engineer, not a technical person, but I definitely snuck into the industry and they have not kicked me out yet. But yeah, I started out my career selling commodities, so pipe valve fittings to operating plants mainly in the Southeast, and discovered pulp and paper mills, natural gas plants, coal plants, fabricators and nuclear reactors, and just really fell in love with it. And my journey started actually before that. It was a Google search in the early 2000s. I come from a pretty rural part of Florida and a lot of phosphate mining there. Long story short, we had some devastation that occurred in our hometown, groundwater contamination led to essentially cancer. And I have a special needs daughter and there's class action lawsuits. And when you live in those rural communities and you have a large economic driver like a mine, they want to hire locally and they want to ensure that they keep some of that talent pool and workforce by providing scholarships.
(03:51):
And I just told my guidance counselor, "I don't want to work in the mines. I want to go do something that's safe and environmentally friendly and regulated." Nuclear popped up in a Google search in the early 2000s and I made it my mission to go into it and found one of my tables one night, I was a bartender and waitress through college and high school, and I would interrogate all of them and ask them what they did for a living and say, "Please God, will one be in the nuclear industry?" And finally one was, and he was launching a steel commodity business focused on nuclear and wanted to do this in Charlotte, North Carolina. That was where the birth of the renaissance was going to occur in the early 2000s. There was a lot of talent there. And so yeah, I worked for him for seven, eight years and just really fell in love with the traceability aspects, how fake things are.
(04:36):
I audited steel mills over in Europe back to the rare earth mineral and truly understand material test reports and just ultimately how much regulation and safety goes into every single intimate piece that gets installed into a nuclear reactor. And I've had some pivots, of course, like all of us do in our career, worked in small modular reactors when they were very conversational. Also was a part of a coal-to-gas phase out because sadly there was a nuclear decommissioning renaissance that had occurred because of how much Marcellus Shale that our country found. So I cut my teeth on really project and infrastructure development on the gas side and then took that and applied it to nuclear. And I've landed at The Nuclear Company just a little over a year ago and definitely in love with the organization and the mission.
Cody Simms (05:19):
And you also, in addition to your work at The Nuclear Company, are the chair of the US Women in Nuclear Group organization. Maybe describe a little bit about what that is all about.
Juliann Edwards (05:30):
Absolutely. So US Women in Nuclear was really born out of Three Mile Island and Chernobyl. So when those events occurred decades and decades ago, they found that community leaders and voices that were credible were women. So births Women in Nuclear Global then Women in Nuclear United States. And the United States chapter is around 6,000 members really focused on four objectives, but I am so fortunate to be able to lead that organization of women really focusing on building and retaining workforce, obviously diversifying our workforce at all levels of any company, government, agency. Also really focused on advocacy and making sure that the truth is being told at the local, state and federal level, and of course professional development and networking. You got to make sure you have a little bit of fun. And we just actually had our national conference in New Orleans just last week and had almost a thousand women in the room for four days. It was amazing.
Cody Simms (06:24):
When I first got to know you, it seems like one of your first things you did when you joined The Nuclear Company was this big bus tour thing. So it seems like bringing people together around the industry is certainly a key skill or interest or both that you have.
Juliann Edwards (06:36):
I know, I need to put it on the resume. It wasn't like a proficiency I was seeking. And the best tour was definitely a lot of fun. I felt like a rock star my first couple of weeks. And my husband's like, "What are you doing for six days across how many states?"
Cody Simms (06:50):
Describe it for us.
Juliann Edwards (06:51):
Well, we launched the company out of stealth mode. I mean, I really give the credit to our founders and our CEO. He's like, "Listen, the folks that are going to be in the backyards or the communities of where we want to go build nuclear need to understand it and we need to essentially educate them and maybe to learn from them as to what's important to make sure we're not disruptive and we're being a very good steward of that community." And we launched the company out of stealth mode from my US Women in Nuclear National Conference last year, which was in Pittsburgh, the birthplace of civil nuclear in the United States. We went on a six state tour and just drove to trade schools, universities, went and met with elected and appointed officials, really met with some of the trades and went to a couple conferences and just learned so much and took that back, spread the knowledge across our lean and mighty team at the time, we've since grown pretty substantially, and used that as a mechanism to inform how we're going to grow and where we're going to grow in the United States.
Cody Simms (07:49):
From a learning and listening tour perspective, which it sounds like was a big chunk of what that was all about. You used the phrase, going and talking to people in their backyards who would be in the neighborhood of where these plants are. That obviously brings to my mind the phrase, not in my backyard, the classic NIMBY phrase, which I think is very much associated with nuclear, which is everyone thinks it's a great idea unless it's going to be five miles away from their home or their backyard. What did you hear? What did people share about the idea of nuclear moving in near them? And pros cons learnings.
Juliann Edwards (08:20):
It was wildly impressive. My perception going in was, okay, I've got to create defendable facts and I've got to go in just with a lot of empathy and not go into ultra sales mode of, "Hey, we're here and we want to make sure that we bring all this economic development to you." First off, people ran to the bus, flocked to it because it said nuclear frontier and a bunch of guys at these truck stations were like, "Is this fueled by nuclear?" And we're like, "No, it's just old gasoline." So that was refreshing. But no, a lot of folks were actually replacing not in my backyard with nuclear in my backyard. They all wanted it. So I think we're seeing a generational shift. I didn't grow up going to school, hiding under the desk, going through nuclear bomb drills like parents did. I don't think you did either.
Cody Simms (09:05):
Let's maybe take a step back from your journey and just set the context on the industry. You already described two phases that the industry has gone through since you joined, and I would argue we're probably in a third phase now. You talked about the nuclear renaissance of the mid-2000s. You talked about the nuclear decommissioning wave of the 20-teens, and then where we are now, which is this new wave of power purchase agreements and re-commissioning and repowering and all this stuff that's being discussed today. What has that been like for you as a journey and what caused each of those waves? If you can maybe take Juliann's own personal perspective out of it and just walk us through the historical context too, that would be really helpful.
Juliann Edwards (09:41):
Very good question. Our country's... You have a book in front of you. Chapter one of civil nuclear for purposes of energy really began in the 1960s, 1958 actually to be exact. Shipping Port Pennsylvania was where we commissioned our first civil nuclear reactor. And at the time our government was very open. We were wanting to make sure that we did not use nuclear for proliferation purposes, for weapons, and we actually had an order book of 200 large light water reactors to be built across the United States. And we started to build a ton, actually built over a hundred in roughly a 25 year period. Then we had some economic events occur. The oil crisis, deregulation, also energy demand started to go flat because around the early 2000s we started to lose manufacturing to China and other countries. And so that started to stall and really put a screeching halt to nuclear development and new builds in the United States.
Cody Simms (10:38):
Three Mile Island and Chernobyl also certainly contributed to that from a mind share perspective, I would think.
Juliann Edwards (10:43):
Oh my gosh, yeah, the fact that Three Mile Island happened just days after the China Syndrome movie aired was just the horrible series of consequences. But yes, that fear started to really just deepen into the American public and folks just didn't want to take the risk even though we're actually failed the way it was supposed to. Nobody was hurt, there was no radioactive exposure. And people are getting those facts now, which is great. So we started to have a little bit of an uptick from the mid-2000s to build nuclear again focused on small modular reactors. However, we didn't have the trifecta we have now, what we have now is surging energy demand, and you could say energy crisis. You've got an administration and really a lot of agencies around the government that are trying to streamline and do what we did for liquefied natural gas and get more of a predictable and tightened rigor around how we site and permit pieces of land across the country to go build.
(11:36):
And then we also have really good operational foundation and safety standards that public perception is like we've proven that we can do this for the last 40, 50, 60 years. We need to keep doing this because it's a matter of national security and maybe if there's a four leg to that stool is I love that we're finally giving a voice to the export ability of nuclear. We've got to look at this as a technology and also an energy source that forges those 80-year, 100-year relationships with other countries that are trying to lift themselves out of poverty or just create more clean-based solutions so that they don't have to have all the devastation that comes from carbon emissions.
Cody Simms (12:16):
And if I understand correctly, you talked about this wave of growth happening in the '50s and '60s into the '70s, and then the slowdown after that. You talked about the 200 large light-water reactors that were on order or in plans at one point. We built about half of those. I think 94 is the number reactors in the US and zero currently, I think, in active development, if I'm correct from that perspective.
Juliann Edwards (12:39):
We have a lot of pilot projects.
Cody Simms (12:42):
A lot of stuff starting to spin back up today, but then China has 20 or 30 active projects. So when you talk about national security, certainly there's a difference in at least over the last 10 years how China has approached the space relative to what's been happening in the US up until recently. How does that factor into how you think decision-making is happening in Washington amongst big utility providers in general?
Juliann Edwards (13:06):
Great question. Most people don't realize, perhaps. I know folks are starting to get this attention of China has 58 roughly reactors I think operating today, like you said, they're building about 10 a year. In 2030, they will surpass us, so we lost the manufacturing race in 2010. We will lose the nuclear race in 2030. People think if. No, it's when. It's 2030. It is definitely starting to shift perception of how we treat the enablement and using government to build new nuclear. And that's why you're seeing things related to investment tax credits and the expansion and the extension of the loan program office, but that's why we exist. We don't have in this country a technology problem, a reactor safeguards problem or an operation problem or capacity problem in terms of how our technology performs. What we have is a build problem. And China realized very early on that to make themselves become a larger economy, they have to bring their total system costs or total energy costs down.
(14:04):
They were in the low twenties, early teens per kilowatt hour in terms of cents per kilowatt hour, and now they're hovering over the eight to 9 cents per kilowatt hour because they keep building more nuclear. And so imagine if you're a large manufacturer like a steel producer, you've got to make a very conscious decision because your operating costs and your energy costs every year probably make up 40 to 50% of that balance sheet load. You got to make a decision, am I willing to pay two to three times more building in the United States when I could go build in China? And these are tough decisions people are having to make, so that's why we have to look at that and say, "If China wins manufacturing like they did, nuclear like they're going to, and then AI, we are going to become so reliant on them." And that's what keeps us up at night.
Cody Simms (14:47):
I want to hit on the cost side of nuclear because I think this is where from The Nuclear Company's perspective is where you guys are really trying to lean in and solve problems. And I think to do that, let's have the conversation about Vogtle here in the US, which has been the only deployments. The US, I mean we're talking about US slowing down deployments. We did two in the last 15 years and they were, I would say, riddled with challenges. What did we learn from Vogtle? How is that a blueprint for what we need to do going forward? Maybe define Vogtle for folks who don't know what that is first, too.
Juliann Edwards (15:19):
Vogtle 3 and 4, it's adjacent to an operating set of nuclear reactors. Vogtle 1 and 2 sits in Georgia owned by Southern Company. These were two reactors that were built under a design built type model, meaning when they decided to file a construction permit with our regulator and hit the go button, the design was 30, 40% complete maybe. And when you do that and you file under a totally different regulatory model where you're trying to combine your construction operating license, it was a first of a kind on way too many fronts. And it was also, you have a muscle atrophy because you haven't built in 30 years, so you're also building up a supply chain, a workforce from scratch. And so I mean huge kudos to Southern for finishing and completing that project because what that enabled is we started to export that technology globally. We started to set a foundation of what does it take to bring advanced nuclear online.
(16:12):
What went wrong though is we didn't have a design complete and we used a totally different regulatory model to go build. And so you're seeing small modular reactor companies today take those learnings and say, "You know what? I'm going to go back to the port 50 process, which means I'm going to bifurcate construction and operations. I'm going to file a construction permit, get through that process and then I'll file for an operating permit." If your design's complete like a Westinghouse AP1000 or a GE ABWR or Korea's APR 1400, you can combine that process and you can go faster. But that was what went wrong is they didn't have the design complete.
Cody Simms (16:47):
Was Vogtle the first AP1000 deployments in the US?
Juliann Edwards (16:51):
That's correct. There was an order book that followed after that, but that was the first one to hit the go button.
Cody Simms (16:56):
Which are, just for reference, 1000 means it's one gigawatt of power per plant.
Juliann Edwards (17:01):
That's correct.
Cody Simms (17:02):
These are big, big Homer Simpson style reactors.
Juliann Edwards (17:06):
They are, and you typically build them in pairs, so it's technically two gigawatts of power. And I would also say something that went wrong is that there wasn't a firm commitment and order book. People didn't really lock arms and say, "We are going to achieve a financial investment decision and we're going to sequence it in such a way." They thought in a single project myopic view. That's what's differentiating us. We're a fleet scale company. You can't get the cost benefits, the certainty, you can't really even rally predictability in commodity type products unless you give an order book and a market signal and a demand to those suppliers. So yes, we're focused on building six to eight gigawatts at a time. Is that a big, hairy, audacious goal? Absolutely. But the cost of doing it the old way, single projects at a time, that just doesn't work and we proved that. And China has proved fleet scale also works, so has the French, so has South Korea. This is what we need to continue to do.
Cody Simms (18:00):
So I'm hearing you say, and we haven't even taken a step back to have you define what The Nuclear Company is or does yet, but I'm hearing you say a focus on avoiding first-of-a-kind reactor technology and then focus on deploying multiple reactors at once so that you get cost benefit of economies of scale, can learn across the engineering procurement construction phase of the project and try to wring out as much as you can from a cost perspective there. Am I following that correctly?
Juliann Edwards (18:27):
Absolutely correct.
Cody Simms (18:29):
Who was the developer record for Vogtle? What did that look like from a project management perspective?
Juliann Edwards (18:33):
It was Southern Company.
Cody Simms (18:35):
So the utility was the project owner?
Juliann Edwards (18:37):
Correct. And when we built all those a hundred plus reactors in the '60s and '70s, it was all built under a utility rate regulated model. We've deregulated half the country, we've gone a little bit more and so even the rate regulated model today, we're seeing market signals and we're seeing direct statements made publicly that it's going to take cost overrun insurance, it's going to take construction work in progress, and that's because people don't have faith that there's going to be this predictability in the suite scale deployment. That's what we're trying to provide.
Cody Simms (19:08):
So from a risk perspective in the traditional model, the utility actually takes on all of the financial risk of the project, which means ultimately ratepayers are the ones taking on the financial risk of that project. And what I'm hearing you say is the new model you're proposing going forward is having a third party, essentially EPC, engineering, procurement, construction firm in the middle that can take on some of the risk of that project deployment?
Juliann Edwards (19:33):
Correct. We're building more of a fully integrated delivery arm, so we will ultimately become that entity that yes, sites, permits, does the front end development. We will oversee, stand up the project management organization in-house to go ensure that we are setting the same expectations and intentions with our prime contractors that are doing the actual in-field construction. We'll take it all the way to commissioning and then we'll work with licensed operators that are already in the country.
(19:59):
But the utilities today aren't set up to do this large, capital-intensive infrastructure type projects. I mean it's a bet the company type of investment, one. Two, because they haven't built these types of investments over the last couple of decades, their organizations are established on an operation and maintenance model where they do refueling outages every 18 years. They don't have these massive projects. So you've got to go piecemeal that together and bring folks that have both done it for nuclear across the globe as well as those that have done it in other highly regulated industries like SpaceX or Tesla or Intel and Panasonic. They have created these massive projects that are either linear or large infrastructure projects that are capital intensive and they've insourced that as much as possible so they can control the outcome.
Cody Simms (20:46):
I've heard you guys say that something like 12% of the cost of a nuclear project is the reactor and the 88% is everything else, which includes I think construction, surface power generation from the steam coming off the reactor. Maybe break that part down because as I understand it, you guys are not innovating on the reactor side at all. Again, you're going to take for now an AP1000 reactor technology that has been deployed obviously at Vogtle and I think elsewhere in the world at this point, and you are focused on other aspects of wringing cost out of these projects.
Juliann Edwards (21:17):
That's correct. If you think about a pie, you're right, 10 to 12% is the reactor itself. And what we're seeing in the industry and actually abroad is focusing on just that 12%. They think that, again, we have a technology problem. We don't. We have proven technology. What's broken is that other 80%. It's how you set up project controls, it's how you insource the engineering, how you actually create some predictableness in your supply chain and how you think ahead securing those long lead equipment orders well in advance of a financial investment decision so that you can ensure that you're setting up your construction team for success. It's the financing cost. This is a critical component as to why the loan program office is so essential to deploying nuclear in this country because that borrowing cost is next to zero, it's roughly 5% over the life of a project.
(22:04):
And so we are focused on that 80%. That is what we are building in terms of capability, so that means what we build in terms of a company, resource, project controls, just management model is going to be deployable and transferable to small modular reactors. As they hit that design certification or they hit those technical and operational risks are now behind them, we want to be their deployment arm and help bring those lessons learned so they can go quickly from first of a kind to end of a kind as fast as possible so we can export that technology around the world. But obviously domestically we want to focus on that first.
Cody Simms (22:40):
Does the skilled workforce exist in the US or do you have to create some pretty significant training programs just given that we've slowed down pace of deployment so much over the last 20, 30 years, it seems like most of the people who probably have actually built these plants have aged out of the workforce at this point.
Juliann Edwards (22:55):
That's correct. We are fortunate that our 93 reactors operating today across the country have routine refueling outages. We're also seeing a mandate through the executive orders to conduct extended power uprates. Those can capital-intensive projects, restarts like Three Mile Island called the Clean Crane Energy Center, Palisades, maybe Duane Arnold. These are all going to start building up that capability set, but this is probably why we're obviously going on a second bus tour in a couple of weeks and we're focused on trade schools and universities so that we can recruit that talent and get them really mission-driven about wanting to build. So it is a risk register item for the entire industry. And we're seeing this actually in data centers too. I mean, electricians, I think you just had Russo on and he talked about how many electricians we were truly going to need just to build all the data infrastructure in that economy.
Cody Simms (23:44):
Coley said, "Electricians can name their price right now."
Juliann Edwards (23:46):
I know I sent the podcast over to a couple of family members, I'm like, "Listen guys, you need to go into this industry if you're not going to go into mine."
Cody Simms (23:53):
You mentioned a few different types of projects. Maybe let's unpack those for folks who aren't fully living and breathing the nuclear movement in the US right now. You talked about repowering, you talked about recommissioning, and then there's obviously net new projects. What are the different buckets of project types that are out there today and what do those each mean?
Juliann Edwards (24:12):
There's a few operating reactors today that didn't perform what's called extended power upgrades.
Cody Simms (24:17):
That was the word you said. Sorry. Upgrading.
Juliann Edwards (24:19):
Now it's fine. Upgrading. That's when you increase the life of the facility by five, 10 years and you also increase the power production by roughly 20%.
Cody Simms (24:28):
So this was like a project that was supposed to be decommissioned in 2040. You're going to go in and do some work and make it last till 2045 or 2050.
Juliann Edwards (24:36):
Exactly. You take out some large components, valves, maybe do a turbine rewind and get the asset just a facelift and essentially put in all that capital so that you can extend both the outputs and the life of the units. And those were something that we started to do a couple years ago, about 10, 15 years ago, and you're seeing that this administration is saying, "Listen, let's call that to action and start getting a little bit more juice out of those reactors."
Cody Simms (25:01):
So that's upgrading and again, in the traditional model it would've been the facility who owned that asset funding the work to go do that and managing those projects. And this is an area where you believe the nuclear company can step in as a third party and drive those projects?
Juliann Edwards (25:15):
Absolutely. I mean that is definitely a call to action that we're interested in. We're seeing that there's a little bit of a deficit on that muscle as well, but some of that capital depends on which the utility or IPP is and do they have the offtake to back it, but that is a service we're definitely willing to provide, so that's upgrades.
(25:31):
Then you've got restarts. That is reactors that have shut down I would say in the last two to five years because there becomes a tipping point, a point of no return. So three that come to mind are Three Mile Island. The reason that one came about is Constellation unfortunately had to make the economic decision to shut it down. It was a single unit reactor that just didn't have the economies of scale, the dual twin configuration site, and they were able to convince Microsoft to step in and say, "I will provide you a 20 year fixed PPA at a premium to get that single unit back online because it could happen in less than five years." Same thing is happening for Palisades and maybe Duane Arnold. Duane Arnold is owned by NextEra. Palisades is owned by a company called Holtec. Both are going through that cost and schedule process to determine do I have a supply chain? Is there a regulatory pathway? And can I find an offtaker that's interested in securing that long lead power to make the economics work? That's a restart.
Yin (26:30):
Hey everyone, I'm Yin, a partner at MCJ, here to take a quick minute to tell you about the MCJ collective membership. Globally startups are rewriting industries to be cleaner, more profitable, and more secure. And at MCJ we recognize that a rapidly changing business landscape requires a workforce that can adapt. MCJ Collective is a vetted member network for tech and industry leaders who are building, working for, or advising on solutions that can address the transition of energy and industry. MCJ Collective connects members with one another, with MCJ's portfolio, and our broader network. We do this through a powerful member hub, timely introductions, curated events, and a unique talent matchmaking system and opportunities to learn from peers and podcast guests. We started in 2019 and have grown to thousands of members globally. If you want to learn more, head over to mcj.vc and click the membership tab at the top. Thanks and enjoy the rest of the show.
Cody Simms (27:32):
And then what is it called when you have an existing site that maybe has two reactors and units three and four never got built and you're going to step in like is exactly what happened with Vogtle but doing that better?
Juliann Edwards (27:43):
There's a ton of those around the country right now and most people don't realize that when we built out the reactors in the '60s and '70s, a lot of the initial siting and permitting and even the interconnect was designed for four units sites and they only built one or two units because, again, events like Three Mile Island and Chernobyl. So I would call that extensions, so you get to extend the facility to increase more power. Now there's a lot of benefits there obviously from a permitting standpoint, you've already done your system impact studies, you've got access to water, your emergency planning zone has been well-established and so now it's just a matter of going in, doing maybe some gap analysis on characterization and getting ready to file a construction permit. And there's a lot of utilities and IPPs that are taking a look at, do I have a massive insurgence of energy demand coming to my backyard and do I have favorable conditions and support at the state level to go enable that to happen?
Cody Simms (28:39):
Now I would assume other than in Georgia, most of these sites where they have an existing reactor or two are not AP1000s because you said Vogtle 3 and 4 were first of a kind deployments of AP1000. Does it matter if you have different reactor technologies sitting next to each other at a plant?
Juliann Edwards (28:55):
Technically, no. You can have a boiling water and a pressurized water reactor next to each other and I believe we have a few of those around the country. They'll have a little bit of an efficiency due to refueling outages. You're going to have just different types of fuel, different types of systems, so that impacts your, we'll call it your muscle memory with your maintenance and operators. The question will be do you site small modular reactors next to large light-water reactors? And that has not been, we'll say tested or that precedent has not been set yet.
Cody Simms (29:24):
We haven't deployed any small modular reactors yet, so hopefully we get there, but lots to be learned there for sure.
Juliann Edwards (29:29):
I hope we get there fast because when you look at, again, back to the export beauty of nuclear, there are certain countries that just can't bear the infrastructure build out of a whitewater reactor. They're going to have to depend on small, or maybe they have a water deficiency and they need something like molten salt. So the innovation in small has to continue, but we also have to start building what we know today that we can get on the grid in the next six, eight, 10 years because our energy demands are right at the forefront.
Cody Simms (29:56):
And from a time horizon perspective, one of the arguments about nuclear is this all sounds great, but we're talking about a decade from now. What are we realistically looking at in terms of when the first large scale light water reactors might start coming back online in the US?
Juliann Edwards (30:11):
So for the restarts, you're looking at the next two years, the Clean Crane Energy Center, formerly known as Three Mile Island, that's going to come online pretty fast. For a new build, it all depends on if a fleet scale approach is you. So for us, we call it internally and Jonathan and Jason and Joe, I guess the four J's, that's our executive team, really start to drive 55 across the organization. We got to get to what China's doing, which is $5 billion a reactor in five years. We're not there yet, but if we had a cluster, if we had a demand, if I had land option agreement, procurement secured with long lead equipment providers, equity and capital formation in place, you could get there in the next, I would say your first [inaudible 00:30:55] is going to be around seven to eight years of FID to COD, and then you could start to bring that cost curve and that schedule curve down.
(31:02):
So the reports that we're seeing out of the DOE Liftoff report, they showed when you do that, use proven technology, get regulatory certainty and pathway and you build it at fleet scale, and you design once, you don't change the design any further, and you build many, you get the cost curve benefits much faster.
Cody Simms (31:19):
So restarts in the next handful of years, so before the end of the decade it sounds like, and net new reactors sometime within the next seven to eight years I guess depending on how quickly we move in terms of getting these projects going.
Juliann Edwards (31:33):
Exactly.
Cody Simms (31:34):
You shared a bit about your team. Maybe describe the executive team and I think of the team as two waves. There's the founder wave who have some names that regular listeners to this pod likely know, and then you have the leadership team that's been brought in which has extensive experience in your space. Describe that a little bit for us.
Juliann Edwards (31:54):
Absolutely. We've got three founders, Jonathan Webb, who really sunk his teeth into the energy space when he was working within the government, building out a lot of renewables for military installations and started to understand just how energy infrastructure works, and I think for his calling specifically for nuclear was really tied to his home roots in Kentucky and he wanted to make sure that he brought jobs back to the Appalachian because he saw the devastation that occurred when we shut down all these coal plants across the East Coast and Midwest. And then Kiran and Patrick, both venture capitalists, both have also been in the energy space, really trying to invest in companies that are trying to make a move on climate change, make a move on bringing back American jobs and this American spirit and pride of we can build it here.
Cody Simms (32:40):
Just to unpack that a little bit, so Kiran Bhatraju, founder of Arcadia, I think he was one of the first 10 guests on this show way back in the day and certainly a friend of MCJ. And then Patrick Maloney, one of the co-founders, also partner or CEO, I think, at CIV, early stage investment firm, and Patrick just was on the show a couple months ago. We did a live pod together with him here in LA at LA Climate Week earlier this spring. So some good archives for folks to go listen to if you want to dive into their backgrounds.
Juliann Edwards (33:07):
Great archives and very passionate human beings, very articulate and convinced me to join the executive team. So it's myself, Jonathan, of course our CEO, our president and CFO is Jason Thompson. He came from Redwood. And then Joe Klecha who came from a nuclear industry like me. So you've got this blended DNA at the top of folks that have come from nuclear, we have the scars, the gray hair.
Cody Simms (33:29):
Joe in particular I think had a pretty sizable role in getting Vogtle over the finish line, did he not?
Juliann Edwards (33:34):
He was instrumental when they started to see really the insolvency that was occurring at the time with their prime contractors and stepped in and helped self-perform all of that work from the utility side. And Joe comes from the Navy. He is like a true, when you look up nuclear and Wikipedia professional, Joe Klecha's picture would probably be there amongst many others. But he started out and knew exactly what he wanted to go do. He wanted to go build own and operate first submarines which are powered by nuclear fission, and then civil nuclear which is obviously what we use today to power our homes and businesses.
(34:07):
And so I came from the development side. So it's funny, I was the pre-FID nuclear professional and Joe was the post-FID so we make a good team. And then you bring in Jason and Jonathan again, all mission-driven, like-minded human beings, but they think about things totally differently, very disruptive, just challenge the status quo. Why are things done this way with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission? Why does it take five to seven years to permit a plot of land and a billion dollars? That doesn't make any logical sense. And that is a healthy friction to have at the top and to permeate throughout the organization.
Cody Simms (34:40):
On that note, the NRC is often cited by many as the boogeyman in this whole story. Do you agree with that or do you think that the NRC is doing the right thing and challenged from the technology that it's there to assess?
Juliann Edwards (34:53):
Listen, I think when you have a stalemate and no energy demand and you're not building, people get comfortable. Governments get comfortable. The status quo just doesn't need to get disrupted because no one's saying it's broken. And when you have this we'll call it disruption that's occurring currently, I will say the NRC is going through some growing pains and having to challenge itself on how do I embrace the AI future? How do I take what's decades of data related to just permitting and compliance from an operating plant and allow them to accelerate building right next door just a couple hundred feet away? And so I don't think they're the boogeyman. I think that they have done a phenomenal job of being that independent agency that has kept our units online safe and making sure that we're operating at the top quartile of operational excellence. But just like all of us, we're going to have to think about things differently so that we can build as quickly as possible if we're going to win this AI arms race.
Cody Simms (35:49):
I mean if we have 94 existing reactors or 93 or whatever it is in the US and the vast majority of them have been first of a kind projects, I can't even imagine the amount of data and tech debt mess that the NRC has to manage for things like uprating as you mentioned. How do you go in and take an existing plant and navigate it? It's like, oh crap, that plant was built in 1972 and there's one design spec for it. What a mess. That has got to be so hard. And it's a government agency. They're not at the cutting edge of AI in terms of understanding the designs and accessing all the materials. I feel for this department, to be honest.
Juliann Edwards (36:25):
No, I should not laugh, but a story just popped into my head. Again, I was at my WIN conference and I overheard a conversation about this woman saying, "We needed to find this document related to a smaller uprate." It was about a three to 5% up rate in the facility going through their subsequent license renewal, again, extending the life of their plant. And she's like, "We had to call this guy that's been retired for 15 years because he knew where the document was." How is it possible?
Cody Simms (36:49):
Someone's like going through the microfiche archives. For sure. That is definitely what's happening.
Juliann Edwards (36:53):
Could you imagine the toxins you're breathing in and just all the paper cuts. And that just sounds like a monotonous type tap. But then I look at things like Iron Mountain, which I didn't even know existed until DOGE got put into place and I'm like, do we really put all of our paper into a massive mine underground? And so yes, this is one thing that I think, well, there's many things that I think AI is just going to accelerate us as humankind, but this is something for nuclear that just excites me so much because there's so much data, we just need to dump it so that we don't have those hallucinations and we're using it in a way to harness efficiency, reduce administrative burden, and just create some certainty that yes, I can file a license that can get in my hand within 12 months, not 24 months.
Cody Simms (37:37):
Well, you guys have just announced a pretty big thing with respect to software and how AI can come in and be part of your solution. Can you share more about what you've just announced with Palantir?
Juliann Edwards (37:48):
Absolutely. Palantir is a partnership we just brought forward. It's a hundred million dollars partnership over the next five years using their Foundry platform. And we are essentially taking all of the lessons learned either on paper and Excel spreadsheets and our brains, putting it into the system is operating software that will create this single point of connection of how we're going to go from development to financing to procurement and construction. And you'd imagine everything beyond what system. So we're very excited about it because again, back to like-minded businesses, they have been trusted by our government for national security and they already understand those strict cybersecurity requirements that are going to be required for nuclear. And we're very excited that we're going to be doing a launch of what the first platform is going to look like and what the deliverables are going to appear roughly in early September. So very excited about that partnership.
Cody Simms (38:44):
You mentioned the like-mindedness to the company. I do think of you guys as having a similar orientation to Palantir, a company that is a private company, but is there solving horizontal use cases across government and private enterprise. And there's also parallels to the defense industry which does similar things, whether it's Lockheed or you name it, they're working hand in hand and trying to create consistency across projects as opposed to things being stamped out vertically in different directions. Is that the right way to think about The Nuclear Company?
Juliann Edwards (39:18):
No, absolutely. For nuclear, it's a lot of problem prevention. How do you use AI predictive analytics, all the data to think light years ahead? So one example that we're toying around with right now is there's a lot of imported equipment that comes in for nuclear reactors today because it just doesn't exist on our shores. What if your reactor pressure vessel is six months behind schedule? Nuclear operating system will essentially tell us-
Cody Simms (39:43):
That's the name of the Palantir project, Nuclear Operating System.
Juliann Edwards (39:46):
Nuclear OS. And let's assume that happens, but you've already onboarded and mobilized 6,000 [inaudible 00:39:54] to do all the work to support that vertical lift. Well, it can start to shift. Hey, you won't eat into your contingency if you actually shift your work plans and packages on the Turban Island or maybe you can go do a different scope of work. So it creates that predictive problem prevention using just construction sequencing practices at its best, but it's coupled with what are the lead times, what are some of the risk items that can perhaps occur based on all equipment that we have to import?
Cody Simms (40:20):
Why did you guys partner for this? If this is a critical part of your future strategy, why didn't you just build it internally as a software platform?
Juliann Edwards (40:28):
We had that internal debate and when you looked at what it takes to hire the software engineers, put your vision into practice, create something that is going to also pass all of the regulatory and compliance checks, you weigh the pros and cons and they just put us light years ahead. So they laid that foundation so that we can get there in a matter of months versus a matter of years.
Cody Simms (40:50):
It almost feels like from a strategy perspective, this is how you get your foot in the door on a lot of these projects. Hey, we'll come in, we'll do a software assessment, we'll lay out a plan, we'll build a roadmap, et cetera. And then the business gets into, I think what I understand the core business of the nuclear company to be, which is then getting into the actual project development, construction management of the plants themselves. Is that the right way to think about it? It lets you put tentacles out across the industry essentially from a software perspective.
Juliann Edwards (41:15):
Absolutely. And the level of transparency across all the stakeholders that have to be interwoven into that, it just drives the right behaviors. You're not going to become litigious and thinking about planes day one when you're mobilizing on a site because you now see a fully integrated schedule that shows all of the potential scenarios could occur. And so yes, it's meant to be both something that we use internally, but it's going to be a service that we can provide and help enable the broader industry, again, large light water reactors, small modular reactors, Gen IV, and maybe even for services for operating plants today so that they can just get those units online faster, maybe keep those outages down to a shorter duration of time and just get that capacity factor up.
Cody Simms (41:56):
And it sounds like there is a software business model for you in terms of selling software into these projects. There is a, for lack of a better term, construction services business model. And then are you actually participating in the economics of plants that you ultimately stand up from a business model perspective for the company? Are there different revenue streams that the business is building over time that you see building out?
Juliann Edwards (42:16):
So when we think about how we go to market, ultimately what has to be our north star is putting nuclear electrons on the grid. So if it's not driving towards that north star, it's not of interest. There's some easy low hanging fruit that we can go after in terms of consulting and teaching utilities and IPPs how to develop and do it fast. If it doesn't result in us being able to really control that partnership and control the outcome of getting all of those lessons learned applied and getting those electrons on the grid as quickly as possible, it's not of interest. But I would say traditional development fees, yes, but we want to be a long-term equity partner in all of these reactors so that we can keep recycling and sustain the business and we're not becoming a potential risk item for the industry and all of that lesson and learn dies with us. We want to propel and accelerate it.
Cody Simms (43:06):
And so you'll work from a fees perspective, but ultimately you don't just want to be an hourly billing partner to these projects. You actually want to be part of the projects is what I'm hearing, and participate.
Juliann Edwards (43:15):
We're consumers of energy, so I want my utility bill to go down and I can't do that.
Cody Simms (43:20):
If your entire business is based on I want to charge you more because you've asked for some kind of change, ultimately if it's better for the project, if you're an equity holder, you can make that trade-off of, do we charge a fee for this or in this case do we eat this fee, take on the risk because we're going to benefit on the upside on the back end?
Juliann Edwards (43:36):
1000%. And if you think about the full cycle, the flywheel, well the businesses I'm trying to lower their costs, steel providers, forging. Guess what? I'm buying their product. So if their electricity cost goes up, my cost goes up. I want to bring their costs down. So we are going to be maniacal, our culture is going to be driven and anybody that wants to partner with us, this design-once-build-many approach has to be the way that we get this off the ground and create a predictable foundation for nuclear energy for once. And that's what we're excited about.
Cody Simms (44:08):
We're obviously on an uptrend right now in terms of this technology. Is there a risk with future administration change or whatnot, things turn back around the other way again, and if so, where does that leave everything that's been worked on for the last few years.
Juliann Edwards (44:23):
If you look at history, you would say, "Yeah, there's going to be risk." However, I would caveat that to say it's hard to turn this ship around. Now that the facts are out there, now that people are finally truly understanding the core value that nuclear brings, not just from economics, from clean energy, non-carbon emitting base load 24/7, it's going to be hard to create arguments against that in the future.
Cody Simms (44:48):
It seems like also just the power demand gap that you highlighted is what's different now versus 10, 15 years ago, too.
Juliann Edwards (44:54):
Exactly. But both administrations are fans of nuclear. We are seeing bipartisan support and it's definitely permeating through the state level as well. I have not seen any state say, "Let me create a moratorium and you cannot build here." We're seeing the opposite. All of them are decimating, they are getting rid of their moratoriums.
Cody Simms (45:11):
Let's hope wind and solar didn't use to be a partisan issue either. So things change there for sure, but certainly let's hope that we can be in the world of recognizing that we need to build power to power our future.
Juliann Edwards (45:23):
We'll just see to do more bus tours, wanting to get the word out.
Cody Simms (45:25):
A topic we haven't talked about at all is what's the situation with waste? I don't think that's a solved problem for the industry yet. How do you envision that becoming solved or evolving? Because right now, as I understand it, most projects just bury their waste underground at the site. And I don't know that that was intended to be the long-term solution.
Juliann Edwards (45:42):
So I was in the nuclear waste business for a short period of time and decommissioning just to understand and truly get intimate with that because you're right, public perception is nuclear waste is what they see on the Simpsons. It's green goo. What is very funny is nuclear waste is the best part of the nuclear industry story. It is the most highly accounted for, inventoried, safe. And actually we don't put it in the ground. We put it right above the ground on like a football-sized field and we put it in these concrete caps that sit there for honestly forever until we decide if we're going to recycle. But I would say we don't have that for wind or solar or gas, coal. We can't account for how much are we actually accumulating in terms of waste into our environment. Another fun fact about nuclear, quote, unquote, "waste" is it's technically just spent fuel and it's only been depleted about maybe a fifth to a third of its use.
Cody Simms (46:32):
France I think actually does a great job of recycling. It's expensive, but the government has invested in making that infrastructure work, I think.
Juliann Edwards (46:40):
100%. And we need to do that. We need to get to a point where we're actually starting to unlock all of these spent fuel canisters, taking out that used fuel, and repurposing it and creating some mixed fuel with new uranium and putting it back into our reactors.
Cody Simms (46:55):
So what do you envision the world looks like over the next decade or two in terms of growth of the industry? Do you believe the US becomes an exporter of nuclear technology in a major way, whether that's large light water reactors or whether that's SMRs? Do you see significant adoption in other countries of these technologies? Let's hit on that. And then I think maybe let's also, we haven't really hit on the hyperscaler issue at all, or phenomenon, I guess is lack of the better word.
Juliann Edwards (47:26):
There's a global demand to quadruple nuclear. We're seeing a call to action where 30 countries today are operating nuclear power plants around the globe and 33, 34, I mean, every day I feel like I pick up the news and there's another country that's saying, "Hey, somebody can help me understand how I set up regulatory frameworks. How do I pick a design?" So you're going to see more and more countries want nuclear. If you're a country that doesn't have nuclear today, you have to go to a showroom. You need to go see how does the technology work, what does the workforce look like? What does supply chain, how do you do a refueling outage? What the world needs to look like in the next couple of decades is the United States has to build first domestically as fast as possible while forging relationships with countries that want to have this clean base load energy source.
(48:12):
If we don't do that, China and Russia, China specifically through their Belt and Road Initiative, is going to create these massive dependencies of other countries onto their economy. They're already going into the backyards of South Africa, South America, parts of Europe, and they are saying, "Hey, I will come finance, build, own, operate, and I'll also take your spent fuel if you'll lock arms with me and choose my technology." Well, that's a little bit fearful for me because the United States requires other countries when they want to build our technologies to sign a little document called the 123 Agreement, and that ensures that they don't use nuclear for proliferation purposes. China and Russia don't set those same standards. And so if you have all these countries choosing a China or Russian technology and they're not having to say, "Hey, Russia and China, you actually can come in my backyard and build nuclear." And they don't know if they're enriching uranium for weapons purposes, that's a whole different role.
Cody Simms (49:08):
We just went through that with Iran literally in the last few months.
Juliann Edwards (49:12):
On the edge of my seat watching that unfold. And I am very thankful for the actions that we had to take and that we had the foresight and the ability and the guts to do that. People don't realize that that is a huge threat that is driving the mission behind The Nuclear Company. We have to build as fast as possible, otherwise these countries are going to become dependent on other nations that are not our allies, they're our adversaries.
Cody Simms (49:35):
And then some would say that in general, domestic nuclear programs end up begetting weapons development programs, and there's a history of that happening over and over again. Do you really think the document the US puts in front of companies halts that?
Juliann Edwards (49:48):
I think if it's properly maintained and we continue to show proper use of nuclear, it remains safe and we can lower political tensions around the world. I do. Call me gullible, but I don't ever want to see us use nuclear weapon around the world ever again, and it'll hurt our ability to really grow.
Cody Simms (50:06):
And then lastly, we haven't really talked about the whole data center phenomenon, but that's one of what I would call the three big drivers of the energy demand gap right now. Data centers, re-onshoring of manufacturing, and just electrification of transportation and industry in general together, it's the hyperscalers that have been most vocal on the need for nuclear. I think primarily because they're having such a hard time getting access to the power they need from a power purchasing agreement perspective to build the data centers that they envision they need to build and view nuclear as a solution there. How do you see that playing out in terms of large-scale reactors for data centers relative to off-grid SMRs, and that whole phenomenon? Do you see one of those solutions ultimately winning the day and it's a matter of timing? Or do you think it's a mix of all of the above?
Juliann Edwards (50:54):
If I follow the bouncing ball of what the hyperscalers have done, said that they weren't going to do and then do, what I mean by that is a lot, "We're not into nuclear." They wanted to fill renewable with batteries. They were phasing off of coal gas and trying to get as clean as possible. They didn't understand and unlock the value of nuclear. There was an anti back to not in my backyard sentiment with the Magnificent 7 and others. Then you saw the ball bounce to hyperscalers are going to now invest in the reactor technologies that are newer. The Gen IV technologies, the SMR companies, the microreactor companies. You're like, huh. Or maybe they equate that to a product that's similar to their product, so it could be something that creates a, diversify my portfolio. I can get a revenue stream from this and also get an under-the-hood look at how this technology truly works and how do I make this something that I can depend on and maybe ring-fence it and do a microgrid play.
(51:44):
And you would say that they would never help enable or take construction risk. They would never put in development capital risk. I'm seeing a shift. I'm talking to all of them, and you're seeing them say, "Hey, my energy demands are literally going to go through the roof, we'll say in the next two to three years. I don't know where that's going to come from. Nuclear, you're telling me it's going to take five to 10 years. What can I do to help you?" They're talking about development capital. They're talking about taking, we'll call it construction risk and keeping that in through COD. We're seeing a massive shift and it's how do you get them to really lean in, no longer market signals, but sign the dotted line. And I think we're going to see that in the next six to nine months because we're seeing gas turbines and steam turbines hit a lead time that is almost equivalent to what step-up transformers were over the last couple of years.
(52:29):
And I think when you compare that, when gas starts to compare, sit neck and neck with nuclear, and you look at the capacity factor and the design life of these facilities, nuclear always wins. But someone's going to have to take a leap of faith and make that investment. And I think that's truly going to happen, if not by the end of the year, first quarter next year.
Cody Simms (52:47):
Well, Juliann, I appreciate you joining. If there's anything else you want to share about ways for any listeners who are interested, who want to dive in. I'm sure we're going to get feedback on this episode. Nuclear is, I mean, you've lived it your entire career. It is a topic that we will get feedback on. There will be people who disagree vehemently with some or much of what you've said. I'm sure I'm going to get feedback on some of the questions I've asked. That is the nature of this industry. And I guess maybe that's my last question for you is do you feed on that energy? Tell me about you living in essentially a fairly controversial space for the bulk of your career.
Juliann Edwards (53:20):
Listen, arms wide open. If you've got somebody that wants to have a little debate or just have a conversation for the world to listen to, I welcome it. And this is maybe the last plug I'll do for The Nuclear Company. This is a huge reason why we filmed the Nuclear Frontier Documentary most people don't know about. We've been quietly leaking it to a few partners and friends, and we're airing it September 15th at the Kennedy Center. We've invited members of the cabinet, industry partners that have helped enable us to get to where we are today. And the reason we decided to do a documentary is because that exact reason, it's controversial still to some audiences, and I think it's because we haven't humanized it.
(53:54):
We haven't explained truly the benefits and what it means. Yes, you can talk about national security, you can talk about just base load energy sources, but to the everyday human, they want to know that there's tens of thousands of jobs that are high paying and decade long. That level of security as a human being that is generated when you build nuclear in your backyard. So this documentary I'm really excited about. It's going to launch a two week bus tour going around college campuses and trade schools around the United States to again, further educate, inform, recruit, and help people understand why nuclear is so cool.
Cody Simms (54:33):
Juliann, thanks for your time.
Juliann Edwards (54:33):
Thank you.
Cody Simms (54:34):
Inevitable is an MCJ podcast. At MCJ, we back founders driving the transition of energy and industry and solving the inevitable impacts of climate change. If you'd like to learn more about MCJ, visit us at mcj.vc and subscribe to our weekly newsletter at newsletter.mcj.vc. Thanks and see you next episode.
