Supreme Court confronts what to do with growing pile of nuclear waste

The Debate Continues

Republicans and Democrats, environmental groups and the oil and gas industry all oppose the temporary sites. Photo via uh.edu

The Supreme Court will hear arguments Wednesday in a fight over plans to store nuclear waste at sites in rural Texas and New Mexico.President Joe Biden's administration and a private company with a license for the Texas facility appealed a ruling by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that found that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission exceeded its authority in granting the license. The outcome of the case will affect plans for a similar facility in New Mexico roughly 40 miles away.

On this issue, President Donald Trump's administration is sticking with the views of its predecessor, even with Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican ally of Trump, on the other side.

The push for temporary storage sites is part of the complicated politics of the nation’s so far futile quest for a permanent underground storage facility.

Here's what to know about the case.

Where is spent nuclear fuel stored now?

Roughly 100,000 tons of spent fuel, some of it dating from the 1980s, is piling up at current and former nuclear plant sites nationwide and growing by more than 2,000 tons a year. The waste was meant to be kept there temporarily before being deposited deep underground.

A plan to build a national storage facility northwest of Las Vegas at Yucca Mountain has been mothballed because of staunch opposition from most Nevada residents and officials.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has said that the temporary storage sites are needed because existing nuclear plants are running out of room. The presence of the spent fuel also complicates plans to decommission some plants, the Justice Department said in court papers.

Where would it go?

The NRC granted the Texas license to Interim Storage Partners LLC for a facility that could take up to 5,000 metric tons of spent nuclear fuel rods from power plants and 231 million tons of other radioactive waste. The facility would be built next to an existing dump site in Andrews County for low-level waste, such as protective clothing and other material that has been exposed to radioactivity. The Andrews County site is about 350 miles west of Dallas, near the Texas-New Mexico state line.

The New Mexico facility would be in Lea County, in the southeastern part of the state near Carlsbad. The NRC gave a license for the site to Holtec International.

The licenses would allow for 40 years of storage, although opponents contend the facilities would be open indefinitely because of the impasse over permanent storage.

Political opposition is bipartisan

Republicans and Democrats, environmental groups and the oil and gas industry all oppose the temporary sites.

Abbott is leading Texas' opposition to the storage facility. New Mexico Democratic Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham also is opposed to the facility planned for her state.

A brief led by Republican Texas Sen. Ted Cruz on behalf of several lawmakers calls the nuclear waste contemplated for the two facilities an “enticing target for terrorists” and argues it's too risky to build the facility atop the Permian Basin, the giant oil and natural gas region that straddles Texas and New Mexico.

Elected leaders of communities on the routes the spent fuel likely would take to New Mexico and Texas also are opposed.

What are the issues before the court?

The justices will consider whether, as the NRC argues, the states forfeited their right to object to the licensing decisions because they declined to join in the commission’s proceedings.

Two other federal appeals courts, in Denver and Washington, that weighed the same issue ruled for the agency. Only the 5th Circuit allowed the cases to proceed.

The second issue is whether federal law allows the commission to license temporary storage sites. Opponents are relying on a 2022 Supreme Court decision that held that Congress must act with specificity when it wants to give an agency the authority to regulate on an issue of major national significance. In ruling for Texas, the 5th Circuit agreed that what to do with the nation’s nuclear waste is the sort of “major question” that Congress must speak to directly.

But the Justice Department has argued that the commission has long-standing authority to deal with nuclear waste reaching back to the 1954 Atomic Energy Act.

Some of those counties affected include production hot spots within the San Juan Basin in northwestern New Mexico and the Permian Basin, which straddles the New Mexico-Texas line. Photo via Getty Images

New Mexico court upholds emissions crackdown impacting oil, gas operations along Texas border

eyes on the west

The New Mexico Court of Appeals has upheld regulations aimed at cracking down on emissions in one of the nation’s top-producing oil and gas states.

The case centered on a rule adopted in 2022 by state regulators that called for curbing the pollutants that chemically react in the presence of sunlight to create ground-level ozone, commonly known as smog. High ozone levels can cause respiratory problems, including asthma and chronic bronchitis.

Democratic Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham's administration has long argued that the adoption of the ozone precursor rule along with regulations to limit methane emissions from the industry were necessary to combat climate change and meet federal clean air standards.

New Mexico Environment Secretary James Kenney said the court's decision on Wednesday affirmed that the rule was properly developed and there was substantial evidence to back up its approval by regulators.

“These rules aren’t going anywhere,” Kenney said in a statement to The New Mexican, suggesting that the industry stop spending resources on legal challenges and start working to comply with New Mexico's requirements.

The Independent Petroleum Association of New Mexico had argued in its appeal that the rule disproportionately affected independent operators.

“The administration needs to stop its ‘death by a thousand cuts’ hostility to the smaller, family-owned, New Mexico-based operators,” the group's executive director, Jim Winchester, said in an email to the newspaper.

The group is considering its legal options.

Under the rule, oil and gas operators must monitor emissions for smog-causing pollutants — nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds — and regularly check for and fix leaks.

The rule applies to eight counties — Chaves, Doña Ana, Eddy, Lea, Rio Arriba, Sandoval, San Juan and Valencia — where ozone pollutants have reached at least 95% of the federal ambient air quality standard. Some of those counties include production hot spots within the San Juan Basin in northwestern New Mexico and the Permian Basin, which straddles the New Mexico-Texas line.

The industry group had argued that Chaves and Rio Arriba counties shouldn’t be included. The court disagreed, saying those counties are located within broader geographic regions that did hit that 95% threshold.

Ten-year-old radioactive waste is currently being debated about by New Mexico officials. Photo via Getty Images

Texas, New Mexico officials contemplate what to do with nuclear waste

in debate

Federal officials gathered Tuesday in southern New Mexico to mark the 25th anniversary of the nation’s only underground repository for radioactive waste resulting from decades of nuclear research and bomb making.

Carved out of an ancient salt formation about half a mile (800 meters) deep, the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant outside Carlsbad has taken in around 13,850 shipments from more than a dozen national laboratories and other sites since 1999.

The anniversary comes as New Mexico raises concerns about the federal government’s plans for repackaging and shipping to WIPP a collection of drums filled with the same kind of materials that prompted a radiation release at the repository in 2014.

That mishap contaminated parts of the underground facility and forced an expensive, nearly three-year closure. It also delayed the federal government’s multibillion-dollar cleanup program and prompted policy changes at labs and other sites across the U.S.

Meanwhile, dozens of boxes containing drums of nuclear waste that were packed at the Los Alamos National Laboratory to be stored at WIPP were rerouted to Texas, where they've remained ever since at an above-ground holding site.

After years of pressure from Texas environmental regulators, the U.S. Department of Energy announced last year that it would begin looking at ways to treat the waste so it could be safely transported and disposed of at WIPP.

But the New Mexico Environment Department is demanding more safety information, raising numerous concerns in letters to federal officials and the contractor that operates the New Mexico repository.

“Parking it in the desert of West Texas for 10 years and shipping it back does not constitute treatment,” New Mexico Environment Secretary James Kenney told The Associated Press in an interview. “So that’s my most substantive issue — that time does not treat hazardous waste. Treatment treats hazardous waste.”

The 2014 radiation release was caused by improper packaging of waste at Los Alamos. Investigators determined that a runaway chemical reaction inside one drum resulted from the mixing of nitrate salts with organic kitty litter that was meant to keep the interior of the drum dry.

Kenney said there was an understanding following the breach that drums containing the same materials had the potential to react. He questioned how that risk could have changed since the character and composition of the waste remains the same.

Scientists at Sandia National Laboratories in Albuquerque were contracted by the DOE to study the issue. They published a report in November stating that the federal government's plan to repackage the waste with an insulating layer of air-filled glass micro-bubbles would offer “additional thermal protection."

The study also noted that ongoing monitoring suggests that the temperature of the drums is decreasing, indicating that the waste is becoming more stable.

DOE officials did not immediately answer questions about whether other methods were considered for changing the composition of the waste, or what guarantees the agency might offer for ensuring another thermal reaction doesn't happen inside one of the drums.

The timetable for moving the waste also wasn't immediately clear, as the plan would need approval from state and federal regulators.

Kenney said some of the state's concerns could have been addressed had the federal government consulted with New Mexico regulators before announcing its plans. The state in its letters pointed to requirements under the repository's permit and federal laws for handling radioactive and hazardous wastes.

Don Hancock, with the Albuquerque-based watchdog group Southwest Research and Information Center, said shipments of the untreated waste also might not comply with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's certification for the containers that are used.

“This is a classic case of waste arriving somewhere and then being stranded — 10 years in the case of this waste,” Hancock said. “That’s a lesson for Texas, New Mexico, and any other state to be sure that waste is safe to ship before it’s allowed to be shipped.”

Ad Placement 300x100

Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

Property Showcase

Solar surpasses coal to become ERCOT’s third-largest power source in 2025

by the numbers

Solar barely eclipsed coal to become the third biggest source of energy generated for the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) in 2025, according to new data.

In 2024, solar represented 10 percent of energy supplied to the ERCOT electric grid. Last year, that number climbed to 14 percent. During the same period, coal’s share remained at 13 percent.

From the largest to smallest share, here’s the breakdown of other ERCOT energy sources in 2025 compared with 2024:

Combined-cycle gas: 33 percent, down from 35 percent in 2024
Wind: 23 percent, down from 24 percent in 2024
Natural gas: 8 percent, down from 9 percent in 2024
Nuclear: 8 percent, unchanged from 2024
Other sources: 1 percent, unchanged from 2024

Combined, solar and wind accounted for 37 percent of ERCOT energy sources.

Looking ahead, solar promises to reign as the star of the ERCOT show:

An ERCOT report released in December 2024 said solar is on track to continue outpacing other energy sources in terms of growth of installed generating capacity, followed by battery energy storage.
In December, ERCOT reported that more than 11,100 megawatts of new generating capacity had been added to its grid since the previous winter. One megawatt of electricity serves about 250 homes in peak-demand periods. Battery energy storage made up 47 percent of the new capacity, with solar in second place at 40 percent.

The mix of ERCOT’s energy is critical to Texas’ growing need for electricity, as ERCOT manages about 90 percent of the electric load for the state, including the Houston metro area. Data centers, AI and population growth are driving heightened demand for electricity.

In the first nine months of 2025, Texas added a nation-leading 7.4 gigawatts of solar capacity, according to a report from data and analytics firm Wood Mackenzie and the Solar Energy Industries Association.

“Remarkable growth in Texas, Indiana, Utah and other states ... shows just how decisively the market is moving toward solar,” says Abigail Ross Hopper, president and CEO of the solar association.

New UH white paper pushes for national plastics recycling policy

plastics paper

The latest white paper from the University of Houston’s Energy Transition Institute analyzes how the U.S. currently handles plastics recycling and advocates for a national, policy-driven approach.

Ramanan Krishnamoorti, vice president for energy and innovation at UH; Debalina Sengupta, assistant vice president and chief operating officer at the Energy Transition Institute; and UH researcher Aparajita Datta authored the paper titled “Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) for Plastics Packaging: Gaps, Challenges and Opportunities for Policies in the United States.” In the paper, the scientists argue that the current mix of state laws and limited recycling infrastructure are holding back progress at the national level.

EPR policies assign responsibility for the end-of-life management of plastic packaging to producers or companies, instead of taxpayers, to incentivize better product design and reduce waste.

“My hope is this research will inform government agencies on what policies could be implemented that would improve how we approach repurposing plastics in the U.S.,” Krishnamoorti said in a news release. “Not only will this information identify policies that help reduce waste, but they could also prove to be a boon to the circular economy as they can identify economically beneficial pathways to recycle materials.”

The paper notes outdated recycling infrastructure and older technology as roadblocks.

Currently, only seven states have passed EPR laws for plastic packaging. Ten others are looking to pass similar measures, but each looks different, according to UH. Additionally, each state also has its own reporting system, which leads to incompatible datasets. Developing national EPR policies or consistent nationwide standards could lead to cleaner and more efficient processes, the report says.

The researchers also believe that investing in sorting, processing facilities, workforce training and artificial intelligence could alleviate issues for businesses—and particularly small businesses, which often lack the resources to manage complex reporting systems. Digital infrastructure techniques and moving away from manual data collection could also help.

Public education on recycling would also be “imperative” to the success of new policies, the report adds.

“Experts repeatedly underscored that public education and awareness about EPR, including among policymakers, are dismal,” the report reads. “Infrastructural limitations, barriers to access and the prevailing belief that curbside recycling is ineffective in the U.S. contribute to public dissatisfaction, misinformation and, in some cases, opposition toward the use of taxpayers’ and ratepayers’ contributions for EPR.”

For more information, read the full paper here.

Investment bank opens energy-focused office in Houston

new to hou

Investment bank Cohen & Co. Capital Markets has opened a Houston office to serve as the hub of its energy advisory business and has tapped investment banking veteran Rahul Jasuja as the office’s leader.

Jasuja joined Cohen & Co. Capital Markets, a subsidiary of financial services company Cohen & Co., as managing director, and head of energy and energy transition investment banking. Cohen’s capital markets arm closed $44 billion worth of deals last year.

Jasuja previously worked at energy-focused Houston investment bank Mast Capital Advisors, where he was managing director of investment banking. Before Mast Capital, Jasuja was director of energy investment banking in the Houston office of Wells Fargo Securities.

“Meeting rising [energy] demand will require disciplined capital allocation across traditional energy, sustainable fuels, and firm, dispatchable solutions such as nuclear and geothermal,” Jasuja said in a news release. “Houston remains the center of gravity where capital, operating expertise, and execution come together to make that transition investable.”

The Houston office will focus on four energy verticals:

Energy systems such as nuclear and geothermal
Energy supply chains
Energy-transition fuel and technology
Traditional energy

“We are making a committed investment in Houston because we believe the infrastructure powering AI, defense, and energy transition — from nuclear to rare-earth technology — represents the next secular cycle of value creation,” Jerry Serowik, head of Cohen & Co. Capital Markets, added in the release.

View All Listings

ENERGYCAPITALHTX EMAILS ARE AWESOME