Last Energy will build a 5-megawatt reactor at the Texas A&M-RELLIS campus. Photo courtesy Last Energy.

The Texas A&M University System and Last Energy plan to launch a micro-nuclear reactor pilot project next summer at the Texas A&M-RELLIS technology and innovation campus in Bryan.

Washington, D.C.-based Last Energy will build a 5-megawatt reactor that’s a scaled-down version of its 20-megawatt reactor. The micro-reactor initially will aim to demonstrate safety and stability, and test the ability to generate electricity for the grid.

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) fast-tracked the project under its New Reactor Pilot Program. The project will mark Last Energy’s first installation of a nuclear reactor in the U.S.

Private funds are paying for the project, which Robert Albritton, chairman of the Texas A&M system’s board of regents, said is “an example of what’s possible when we try to meet the needs of the state and tap into the latest technologies.”

Glenn Hegar, chancellor of the Texas A&M system, said the 5-megawatt reactor is the kind of project the system had in mind when it built the 2,400-acre Texas A&M-RELLIS campus.

The project is “bold, it’s forward-looking, and it brings together private innovation and public research to solve today’s energy challenges,” Hegar said.

As it gears up to build the reactor, Last Energy has secured a land lease at Texas A&M-RELLIS, obtained uranium fuel, and signed an agreement with DOE. Founder and CEO Bret Kugelmass said the project will usher in “the next atomic era.”

In February, John Sharp, chancellor of Texas A&M’s flagship campus, said the university had offered land at Texas A&M-RELLIS to four companies to build small modular nuclear reactors. Power generated by reactors at Texas A&M-RELLIS may someday be supplied to the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) grid.

Also in February, Last Energy announced plans to develop 30 micro-nuclear reactors at a 200-acre site about halfway between Lubbock and Fort Worth.

A business group is suing Texas over the so-called “anti-ESG law.” Photo via Getty Images

Group sues Texas over law banning state business with firms 'boycotting' fossil fuels

shut it down

A progressive business group sued Texas on Thursday over a 2021 law that restricts state investments in companies that, according to the state, “boycott” the fossil fuel industry.

The American Sustainable Business Coalition filed suit against Attorney General Ken Paxton and Comptroller Glenn Hegar, alleging that the law, Senate Bill 13, constitutes viewpoint discrimination and denies companies due process, in violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments. The group asked a federal judge in Austin to declare the statute unconstitutional and permanently block the state from enforcing it.

“Texas has long presented itself as a business-friendly state where limited state regulation facilitates the ability of businesses to conduct themselves as they see fit,” lawyers for the group wrote. “Yet in 2021, the Legislature passed SB 13 to coerce and punish businesses that have articulated, publicized, or achieved goals to reduce reliance on fossil fuels.”

Known as the “anti-ESG law” — which stands for “environmental, social and governance” — Senate Bill 13 requires state entities, including state pension funds and the enormous K-12 school endowment, to divest from companies that have reduced or cut ties with the oil and gas sector and that Texas officials deem antagonistic to the fossil fuel industry.

In approving the legislation, Republican officials looked to protect Texas oil and gas companies and to bite back at Wall Street investors pulling financial support from the industry in an effort to incorporate climate risk into their investments and respond to pressure to divest from fossil fuels, which play an outsized role in accelerating the climate crisis.

In March, Texas Permanent School Fund, Austin, cut ties with BlackRock, which managed roughly $8.5 billion of the $52.3 billion endowment and which was listed by Texas as one of the companies that should not handle state business.

The statute defines “boycott” as, “without an ordinary business purpose, refusing to deal with, terminating business activities with, or otherwise taking any action that is intended to penalize, inflict economic harm on, or limit commercial relations with” a fossil fuel company. It also prohibits state agencies from doing business with a firm unless it affirms that it does not boycott energy companies. And it charges the state comptroller with preparing and maintaining a blacklist of companies based on “publicly available information” and “written verification” from the company.

In a statement, Hegar, the comptroller, called the lawsuit an “absurd” attempt to “force the state of Texas and Texas taxpayers to invest their own money in a manner inconsistent with their values and detrimental to their own economic well-being.”

“This left-wing group suing Texas,” he said, “is hiding their true intent: to force companies to follow a radical environmental agenda that is often contrary to the interests of their shareholders and to punish those companies that do not fall into lockstep and put politics above earnings.”

Paxton’s office did not immediately reply to a request for comment.

Texas has blacklisted more than 370 investment firms and funds, including BlackRock and funds within major banks like Goldman Sachs and J.P. Morgan. BlackRock, among other companies, pushed back on its designation as “boycotting” fossil fuels, calling the decision “not a fact-based judgment” and citing over $100 billion in investments in Texas energy companies.

“Elected and appointed public officials have a duty to act in the best interests of the people they serve,” a BlackRock spokesperson said at the time. “Politicizing state pension funds, restricting access to investments, and impacting the financial returns of retirees, is not consistent with that duty.”

In Thursday’s suit, the American Sustainable Business Coalition argued that the physical and financial risks posed by climate change are a legitimate investment and business consideration and cause for efforts to reduce carbon emissions.

The group said the Texas law was enacted to go after what Republican lawmakers saw as a “burgeoning fossil fuel discrimination movement,” and that it effectively “infringes rights of free speech and association under a scheme of politicized viewpoint discrimination” and allows Texas officials to “punish companies they believe are insufficiently supportive of the fossil fuel industry.”

The group argued that the law penalizes companies for their energy policies and membership in certain business associations, and compels them to adopt positions that align with Texas officials “as a condition” of doing business with state entities.

The suit also alleged that the law violates companies’ right to due process because vagueness in the statute “encourages arbitrary enforcement” and fails to provide blacklisted companies a fair process to contest their designation.

Texas blacklisted “the flagship investment funds” of Etho Capital and Sphere, two climate-focused firms represented by the American Sustainable Business Coalition, according to the lawsuit.

“Among ASBC’s many projects are efforts to encourage sustainable investing and sustainable business practices,” the lawsuit reads. “These are all cornerstones of the modern Texas economy. Yet, SB 13 takes aim at, and punishes, companies that speak about, aspire to, and achieve this goal.”

———

This story was originally published by The Texas Tribune and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.

Ad Placement 300x100
Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

New Gulf Coast recycling plant partners with first-of-kind circularity hub

now open

TALKE USA Inc., the Houston-area arm of German logistics company TALKE, officially opened its Recycling Support Center earlier this month.

Located next to the company's Houston-area headquarters, the plant will process post-consumer plastic materials, which will eventually be converted into recycling feedstock. Chambers County partially funded the plant.

“Our new recycling support center expands our overall commitment to sustainable growth, and now, the community’s plastics will be received here before they head out for recycling. This is a win for the residents of Chambers County," Richard Heath, CEO and president of TALKE USA, said in a news release.

“The opening of our recycling support facility offers a real alternative to past obstacles regarding the large amount of plastic products our local community disposes of. For our entire team, our customers, and the Mont Belvieu community, today marks a new beginning for effective, safe, and sustainable plastics recycling.”

The new plant will receive the post-consumer plastic and form it into bales. The materials will then be processed at Cyclyx's new Houston Circularity Center, a first-of-its-kind plastic waste sorting and processing facility being developed through a joint venture between Cyclix, ExxonMobil and LyondellBasell.

“Materials collected at this facility aren’t just easy-to-recycle items like water bottles and milk jugs. All plastics are accepted, including multi-layered films—like chip bags and juice pouches. This means more of the everyday plastics used in the Chambers County community can be captured and kept out of landfills,” Leslie Hushka, chief impact officer at Cyclyx, added in a LinkedIn post.

Cyclyx's circularity center is currently under construction and is expected to produce 300 million pounds of custom-formulated feedstock annually.

Houston quantum simulator research reveals clues for solar energy conversion

energy flow

Rice University scientists have used a programmable quantum simulator to mimic how energy moves through a vibrating molecule.

The research, which was published in Nature Communications last month, lets the researchers watch and control the flow of energy in real time and sheds light on processes like photosynthesis and solar energy conversion, according to a news release from the university.

The team, led by Rice assistant professor of physics and astronomy Guido Pagano, modeled a two-site molecule with one part supplying energy (the donor) and the other receiving it (the acceptor).

Unlike in previous experiments, the Rice researchers were able to smoothly tune the system to model multiple types of vibrations and manipulate the energy states in a controlled setting. This allowed the team to explore different types of energy transfer within the same platform.

“By adjusting the interactions between the donor and acceptor, coupling to two types of vibrations and the character of those vibrations, we could see how each factor influenced the flow of energy,” Pagano said in the release.

The research showed that more vibrations sped up energy transfer and opened new paths for energy to move, sometimes making transfer more efficient even with energy loss. Additionally, when vibrations differed, efficient transfer happened over a wider range of donor–acceptor energy differences.

“The results show that vibrations and their environment are not simply background noise but can actively steer energy flow in unexpected ways,” Pagano added.

The team believes the findings could help with the design of organic solar cells, molecular wires and other devices that depend on efficient energy or charge transfer. They could also have an environmental impact by improving energy harvesting to reduce energy losses in electronics.

“These are the kinds of phenomena that physical chemists have theorized exist but could not easily isolate experimentally, especially in a programmable manner, until now,” Visal So, a Rice doctoral student and first author of the study, added in the release.

The study was supported by The Welch Foundation,the Office of Naval Research, the National Science Foundation CAREER Award, the Army Research Office and the Department of Energy.

The EPA is easing pollution rules — here’s how it’s affecting Texas

In the news

The first year of President Trump’s second term has seen an aggressive rollback of federal environmental protections, which advocacy groups fear will bring more pollution, higher health risks, and less information and power for Texas communities, especially in heavily industrial and urban areas.

Within Trump’s first 100 days in office, his new Environmental Protection Agency administrator, Lee Zeldin, announced a sweeping slate of 31 deregulatory actions. The list, which Zeldin called the agency’s “greatest day of deregulation,” targeted everything from soot standards and power plant pollution rules to the Endangerment Finding, the legal and scientific foundation that obligates the EPA to regulate climate-changing pollution under the Clean Air Act.

Since then, the agency froze research grants, shrank its workforce, and removed some references to climate change and environmental justice from its website — moves that environmental advocates say send a clear signal: the EPA’s new direction will come at the expense of public health.

Cyrus Reed, conservation director of the Lone Star Chapter of the Sierra Club, said Texas is one of the states that feels EPA policy changes directly because the state has shown little interest in stepping up its environmental enforcement as the federal government scales back.

“If we were a state that was open to doing our own regulations there’d be less impact from these rollbacks,” Reed said. “But we’re not.”

“Now we have an EPA that isn’t interested in enforcing its own rules,” he added.

Richard Richter, a spokesperson at the state’s environmental agency, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, said in a statement that the agency takes protecting public health and natural resources seriously and acts consistently and quickly to enforce federal and state environmental laws when they’re violated.

Methane rules put on pause

A major EPA move centers on methane, a potent greenhouse gas that traps heat far more efficiently than carbon dioxide over the short term. It accounts for roughly 16% of global greenhouse gas emissions and is a major driver of climate change. In the U.S., the largest source of methane emissions is the energy sector, especially in Texas, the nation’s top oil and gas producer.

In 2024, the Biden administration finalized long-anticipated rules requiring oil and gas operators to sharply reduce methane emissions from wells, pipelines, and storage facilities. The rule, developed with industry input, targeted leaks, equipment failures, and routine flaring, the burning off of excess natural gas at the wellhead.

Under the rule, operators would have been required to monitor emissions, inspect sites with gas-imaging cameras for leaks, and phase out routine flaring. States are required to come up with a plan to implement the rule, but Texas has yet to do so. Under Trump’s EPA, that deadline has been extended until January 2027 — an 18-month postponement.

Texas doesn’t have a rule to capture escaping methane emissions from energy infrastructure. Richter, the TCEQ spokesperson, said the agency continues to work toward developing the state plan.

Adrian Shelley, Texas director of the watchdog group Public Citizen, said the rule represented a rare moment of alignment between environmentalists and major oil and gas producers.

“I think the fossil fuel industry generally understood that this was the direction the planet and their industry was moving,” he said. Shelley said uniform EPA rules provided regulatory certainty for changes operators saw as inevitable.

Reed, the Sierra Club conservation director, said the delay of methane rules means Texas still has no plan to reduce emissions, while neighboring New Mexico already has imposed its own state methane emission rules that require the industry to detect and repair methane leaks and ban routine venting and flaring.

These regulations have cut methane emissions in the New Mexico portion of the Permian Basin — the oil-rich area that covers West Texas and southeast New Mexico — to half that of Texas, according to a recent data analysis by the Environmental Defense Fund. That’s despite New Mexico doubling production since 2020.

A retreat from soot standards

Fine particulate matter or PM 2.5, one of six pollutants regulated under the Clean Air Act, has been called by researchers the deadliest form of air pollution.

In 2024, the EPA under President Biden strengthened air rules for particulate matter by lowering the annual limit from 12 to 9 micrograms per cubic meter. It was the first update since 2012 and one of the most ambitious pieces of Biden’s environmental agenda, driven by mounting evidence that particulate pollution is linked to premature death, heart disease, asthma, and other respiratory illnesses.

After the rule was issued, 24 Republican-led states, including Kentucky and West Virginia, sued to revert to the weaker standard. Texas filed a separate suit asking to block the rule’s recent expansion.

State agencies are responsible for enforcing the federal standards. The TCEQ is charged with creating a list of counties that exceed the federal standard and submitting those recommendations to Gov. Greg Abbott, who then finalizes the designations and submits them to the EPA.

Under the 9 microgram standard, parts of Texas, including Dallas, Harris (which includes Houston), Tarrant (Fort Worth), and Bowie (Texarkana) counties, were in the process of being designated nonattainment areas — which, when finalized, would trigger a legal requirement for the state to develop a plan to clean up the air.

That process stalled after Trump returned to office. Gov. Greg Abbott submitted his designations to EPA last February, but EPA has not yet acted on his designations, according to Richter, the TCEQ spokesperson.

In a court filing last year, the Trump EPA asked a federal appeals court to vacate the stricter standard, bypassing the traditional notice and comment administrative process.

For now, the rule technically remains in effect, but environmental advocates say the EPA’s retreat undermines enforcement of the rule and signals to polluters that it may be short-lived.

Shelley, with Public Citizen, believes the PM2.5 rule would have delivered the greatest health benefit of any EPA regulation affecting Texas, particularly through reductions in diesel pollution from trucks.

“I still hold out hope that it will come back,” he said.

Unraveling the climate framework

Beyond individual pollutants, the Trump EPA has moved to dismantle the federal architecture for addressing climate change.

Among the proposals is eliminating the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program, which requires power plants, refineries, and oil and gas suppliers to report annual emissions. The proposal has drawn opposition from both environmental groups and industry, which relies on the data for planning and compliance.

Colin Leyden, Texas state director and energy lead at the nonprofit Environmental Defense Fund, said eliminating the program could hurt Texas industry. If methane emissions are no longer reported, then buyers and investors of natural gas, for example, won’t have an official way to measure how much methane pollution is associated with that gas, according to Leyden. That makes it harder to judge how “clean” or “climate-friendly” the product is, which international buyers are increasingly demanding.

“This isn’t just bad for the planet,” he said. “It makes the Texas industry less competitive.”

The administration also proposed last year rescinding the Endangerment Finding, issued in 2009, which obligates the EPA to regulate climate pollution. Most recently, the EPA said it will stop calculating how much money is saved in health care costs as a result of air pollution regulations that curb particulate matter 2.5 and ozone, a component of smog. Both can cause respiratory and health problems.

Leyden said tallying up the dollar value of lives saved when evaluating pollution rules is a foundational principle of the EPA since its creation.

“That really erodes the basic idea that (the EPA) protects health and safety and the environment,” he said.

___

This story was originally published by The Texas Tribune and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.