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.

The Supreme Court will not hear an appeal from oil and gas companies. Photo by Getty Images

Supreme Court declines to hear from oil and gas companies trying to block climate change lawsuits

The Supreme Court said Monday, January 13, it won’t hear an appeal from oil and gas companies trying to block lawsuits seeking to hold the industry liable for billions of dollars in damage linked to climate change.

The order allows the city of Honolulu's lawsuit against oil and gas companies to proceed. The city's chief resilience officer, Ben Sullivan, said it's a significant decision that will protect "taxpayers and communities from the immense costs and consequences of the climate crisis caused by the defendants’ misconduct.”

The industry has faced a series of cases alleging it deceived the public about how fossil fuels contribute to climate change. Governments in states including California, Colorado and New Jersey are seeking billions of dollars in damages from things like wildfires, rising sea levels and severe storms. The lawsuits come during a wave of legal actions in the U.S. and worldwide seeking to leverage action on climate change through the courts.

The oil and gas companies appealed to the Supreme Court after Hawaii's highest court allowed the lawsuit to proceed. The companies include Sunoco, Shell, Chevron, Exxon Mobil and BP, many of which are headquartered in Texas.

The companies argued emissions are a national issue that should instead be fought over in federal court, where they've successfully had suits tossed out.

“The stakes in this case could not be higher," attorneys wrote in court documents. The lawsuits “present a serious threat to one of the nation’s most vital industries.”

The American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank, said declining to hear the Honolulu case now means the companies could face more lawsuits from activists trying to “make themselves the nation's energy regulators.”

“I hope that the Court will hear the issue someday, for the sake of constitutional accountability and the public interest,” said Adam White, a senior fellow at the institute.

The Democratic Biden administration had weighed in at the justices' request and urged them to reject the case, saying it's fair to keep it in state court at this point — though the administration acknowledged that the companies could eventually prevail.

The incoming Republican Trump administration is expected to take a sharply different view of environmental law and energy production.

Honolulu argued it's made a strong case under state laws against deceptive marketing and it should be allowed to play out there. “Deceptive commercial practices fall squarely within the core interests and historic powers of the states,” attorneings wrote.

Environmental regulations, meanwhile, have not always fared well overall before the conservative-majority court. In 2022, the justices limited the Environmental Protection Agency’s authority to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from power plants. In June, the court halted the agency’s air-pollution-fighting “good neighbor” rule.

Justice Samuel Alito recused himself from consideration of the appeal. He did not specify a reason, but he owns stock in companies affected by the lawsuits, according to his most recent financial disclosure.

Ad Placement 300x100
Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

Solar power and storage help save Texans millions on electric bills, CEO tells Senate

price stability

Solar power and battery storage are saving Texans hundreds of millions of dollars on their electric bills, the president and CEO of the Solar Energy Industries Association recently told a congressional committee.

Abigail Ross Hopper, the association’s president and CEO, said in testimony given to the U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee that states like Texas that are adding significant capacity for solar power and battery storage are enjoying lower, more stable prices for electricity.

“Unsubsidized solar is now the cheapest source of electricity in history in much of the country,” Hopper said. “With no fuel costs, solar provides a hedge against natural gas price volatility that continues to cause electricity price spikes.”

“The only way to put downward pressure on prices is by bringing more power online, not less,” she added.

To illustrate the value of solar power and battery storage, Hopper compared two hot summer days in Texas—one in July 2022 and the other in July 2025.

Hopper explained that the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) had begun installing solar on its grid in 2022 but had very little battery storage. ERCOT manages 90 percent of the state’s electrical load.

When ERCOT grid conditions buckled under high demand on the highlighted day in 2022, the price of electricity spiked to nearly $1,500 per megawatt-hour, Hopper said.

“Three years later, the amount of solar had increased substantially and was complemented by energy storage,” she said.

On the specified day in 2025, under even greater demand than three years earlier, sizable amounts of solar power, battery storage and wind power kept ERCOT’s midday price of electricity low and stable—around $50 per megawatt-hour. That dollar amount represented a nearly 100 percent decrease compared with the highlighted day in 2022.

Solar and wind supplied nearly 40 percent of Texas’ power during the first nine months of 2025, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA).

Despite the state’s expansion of solar power and battery storage capacity, residential electricity prices in ERCOT’s territory rose 30 percent from 2020 to 2025 and are expected to climb another 29 percent from 2025 to 2030, according to a forecast from the Texas Energy Poverty Research Institute.

The increase in electric bills is tied to factors such as:

  • Higher natural gas prices
  • Greater demand from AI data centers and cryptomining facilities
  • Extreme weather
  • Population growth
  • Development of new transmission and distribution lines

The strain on ERCOT’s grid is only getting worse. An EIA forecast predicts demand for ERCOT electricity will jump 9.6 percent in 2026, and ERCOT expects a 50 percent jump in demand by 2029.

Spring-based private equity firm acquires West Texas wind farm

power deal

Spring-based private equity firm Arroyo Investors has teamed up with ONCEnergy, a Portland, Oregon-based developer of clean energy projects, to buy a 60-megawatt wind farm southeast of Amarillo.

Skyline Renewables, which acquired the site, known as the Whirlwind Energy Center, in 2018, was the seller. The purchase price wasn’t disclosed.

Whirlwind Energy Center, located in Floyd County, West Texas, comprises 26 utility-scale wind turbines. The wind farm, built in 2007, supplies power to Austin Energy.

“The acquisition reflects our focus on value-driven investments with strong counterparties, a solid operating track record, and clear relevance to markets with growing capacity needs,” Brandon Wax, a partner at Arroyo, said in a press release. “Partnering with ONCEnergy allows us to leverage deep operational expertise while expanding our investment footprint in the market.”

Arroyo focuses on energy infrastructure investments in the Americas. Its portfolio includes Spring-based Seaside LNG, which produces liquefied natural gas and LNG transportation services.

Last year, Arroyo closed an investment fund with more than $1 billion in total equity commitments.

Since its launch in 2003, Arroyo has “remained committed to investing in high-quality assets, creating value and positioning assets for exit within our expected hold period,” founding partner Chuck Jordan said in 2022.

$524M Texas Hill Country solar project powered by Hyundai kicks off

powering up

Corporate partners—including Hyundai Engineering & Construction, which maintains a Houston office—kicked off a $524 million solar power project in the Texas Hill Country on Jan. 27.

The 350-megawatt, utility-scale Lucy Solar Project is scheduled to go online in mid-2027 and represents one of the largest South Korean-led investments in U.S. renewable energy.

The solar farm, located on nearly 2,900 acres of ranchland in Concho County, will generate 926 gigawatt-hours of solar power each year. That’s enough solar power to supply electricity to roughly 65,000 homes in Texas.

Power to be produced by the hundreds of thousands of the project’s solar panels has already been sold through long-term deals to buyers such as Starbucks, Workday and Plano-based Toyota Motor North America.

The project is Hyundai Engineering & Construction’s largest solar power initiative outside Asia.

“The project is significant because it’s the first time Hyundai E&C has moved beyond its traditional focus on overseas government contracts to solidify its position in the global project financing market,” the company, which is supplying solar modules for the project, says on its website.

Aside from Hyundai Engineering & Construction, a subsidiary of automaker Hyundai, Korean and U.S. partners in the solar project include Korea Midland Power, the Korea Overseas Infrastructure & Urban Development Corp., solar panel manufacturer Topsun, investment firm EIP Asset Management, Primoris Renewable Energy and High Road Energy Marketing.

Primoris Renewable Energy is an Aurora, Colorado-based subsidiary of Dallas-based Primoris Services Corp. Another subsidiary, Primoris Energy Services, is based in Houston.

High Road is based in the Austin suburb of West Lake Hills.

“The Lucy Solar Project shows how international collaboration can deliver local economic development and clean power for Texas communities and businesses,” says a press release from the project’s partners.