In a pivotal meeting of the Texas Senate Committee on Business and Commerce, lawmakers gathered on May 8, 2025, to discuss House Bill 14, a proposed legislation aimed at advancing nuclear energy in the state. The atmosphere was charged with anticipation as committee members and stakeholders engaged in a dialogue about the future of nuclear power in Texas, a topic that has sparked both enthusiasm and skepticism.

Chairman Schwartner opened the session by reflecting on previous discussions with nuclear experts, emphasizing the importance of positioning Texas as a leader in next-generation nuclear technologies. He outlined the major provisions of HB 14, which include the establishment of the Texas Advanced Nuclear Energy Office, a nuclear permitting coordinator, and a fund to support nuclear development through grants. The bill aims to create a robust framework for advancing nuclear projects, including a workforce development program to prepare Texans for jobs in this emerging sector.

Supporters of the bill, such as representatives from Fermi America and Dow Chemical, voiced their strong backing, highlighting the need for reliable base load power in Texas. They argued that nuclear energy is a safe and efficient solution to meet the state's growing energy demands. Griffin Perry from Fermi America noted the advancements in modular nuclear technology, which promise quicker and more cost-effective deployment compared to traditional methods. Billy Barton from Dow Chemical echoed these sentiments, emphasizing the potential for nuclear energy to provide zero-emission electricity and steam, crucial for industrial operations.

However, the meeting also revealed significant opposition to the bill. Adrian Shelley from Public Citizen raised concerns about the financial implications of the proposed grants, arguing that they could lead to taxpayer money being spent on projects that may never generate electricity. He urged the committee to consider converting the grant program into a loan system with stricter benchmarks to ensure accountability. Similarly, Craig Daser from the Sierra Club expressed skepticism about the viability of nuclear energy, citing the unresolved issue of nuclear waste management and the high costs associated with nuclear projects.

As the discussion unfolded, committee members grappled with the complexities of investing in nuclear energy. Questions arose about the long timelines and substantial costs associated with nuclear projects, especially in light of Texas's abundant natural gas resources, which can be deployed more rapidly and economically. Some lawmakers expressed hesitation about creating a new bureaucracy to oversee nuclear development, fearing it could divert attention and resources from more immediate energy solutions.

The meeting concluded with a sense of urgency as committee members recognized the need for a balanced energy strategy that includes nuclear power while also leveraging Texas's existing natural gas capabilities. As the state navigates its energy future, the outcome of HB 14 will play a crucial role in shaping Texas's energy landscape, with implications for economic growth, job creation, and environmental sustainability. The committee's deliberations will continue, reflecting the broader national conversation about the role of nuclear energy in addressing climate change and energy security.