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.

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

Property Showcase

Greentown names 5 climatech startups to manufacturing accelerator

Catalyst Cohort

Greentown Labs has named five climatech startups to its Go Make 2026 cohort, including one from Houston.

Greentown Go Make 2026 is in partnership with Shell Catalysts & Technologies and Technip Energies. Startups will be able to collaborate with leadership from Shell and Technip and have opportunities to work directly with their process engineering teams and develop potential partnerships, pilots and demonstrations, according to Greentown.

This year's manufacturing cohort focuses specifically on process technology and catalytic innovations, which, according to Greentown, have the potential to be a "critical enabler of the global energy transition." Greentown shares that 90 percent of chemical processes depend on catalysis, but traditional methods rely on fossil fuels and consume significant amounts of energy.

“Catalysis underpins the majority of industrial chemical processes, which together account for a significant share of global emissions, making it a critical lever for reducing carbon intensity while improving performance,” Georgina Campbell Flatter, CEO of Greentown, said in a news release. “Greentown Go Make 2026 is designed to close the gap between breakthrough innovation and industrial deployment. By connecting startups with Shell and Technip Energies’ technical expertise and global scale, we’re helping accelerate solutions that improve efficiency and drive industrial decarbonization.”

The five Greentown Go Make 2026 companies include:

Houston-based Biosimo, which makes scalable biochemicals from ethanol
Missouri-based Catalyxx, which transforms bioethanol into drop-in, cost-competitive, carbon-negative chemicals
Sydney, Australia-based HydGene Renewables, which produces low-carbon hydrogen and industrial chemicals from waste biomass
Switzerland-based TreaTech, which turns waste into renewable gas, water and minerals through catalytic hydrothermal gasification
California-based Unifuel, which has developed a chemical technology platform to make sustainable aviation fuel, renewable gasoline and other renewable chemicals

The cohort will be celebrated at a kickoff event in Houston at The Ion on June 9.

In addition to Greentown Go Make, Greentown also runs its Go Move (transportation), Go Energize (energy and electricity), Go Build (buildings), and Go Grow (food and agriculture) cohort-based programs. The climatech incubator announced its Go Build 2026 cohort in March. Read more here.

Houston developer launches AI-powered water platform to boost efficiency

eyes on AI

Houston real estate company McCord Development has launched an artificial-Intelligence-run water management platform, MizuWatch.

MizuWatch aims to help operators, districts, and municipalities detect leaks faster, reduce water loss and improve efficiency, according to the company. MizuWatch pulls data from supply sources, smart meters, historical usage and maintenance records, and combines them into a single platform. The AI system also uses visual mapping and digital twin technology to deliver near-real-time system insights.

“MizuWatch brings the right data together daily, so teams can see what’s happening now, intervene earlier and focus their resources where they have the greatest impact,” Jerzy Wielgus, chief product officer for MizuWatch, said in a news release.

MizuWatch was built to “scale across geographies and system sizes to help assist with water scarcity, aging infrastructure, and operational complexity,” according to the company. It was developed at Houston’s Generation Park, McCord’s 4,300-acre master planned commercial district. McCord was able to pilot the platform onsite to help manage its complex, real-world water systems at scale.

“Resilient infrastructure is a key factor for the companies choosing Generation Park,” Ryan McCord, CEO of McCord Development and Founder & CEO of MizuWatch, added in the release. “We made the decision to deploy smart meters, but no one knew how to use the data they generate. This is an opportunity across all infrastructure where sensors are deployed. What started as an internal solution has become a platform we believe can help stakeholders everywhere be more efficient in their operations, investment, and compliance.”

Last fall, Eli Lilly and Co. selected Generation Park for its $6.5 billion manufacturing plant. More than 300 locations in the U.S. competed for the factory. Bristol Myers Squibb Co., another pharmaceutical giant, also announced it is considering Generation Park for a new manufacturing hub earlier this month.

Oil giant BP ousts new chairman over serious conduct concerns

Sudden Exit

BP has ousted its chairman over what it called serious concerns related to “important governance standards, oversight and conduct.”

The departure was abrupt and unexpected, with Albert Manifold having been appointed to the position late last year.

“Albert has helped bring a welcome focus and pace to BP’s transformation," Amanda Blanc, senior independent director, said in a statement Tuesday, May 26. "However, the board has been surprised and disappointed to learn of governance oversight and conduct issues it deems unacceptable and has taken decisive action.”

BP's board named Ian Tyler as interim chair, effective immediately.

BP, based in London and with North American headquarters in Houston, is a “supermajor,” one of the five largest oil production and exploration companies in the world when measured by revenue and profit.

Manifold, who had been the top executive at Dublin-based global building materials company CRH for 10 years, became the chair at BP in October. BP was looking for someone to revamp the oil giant and went with an industry outsider in Manifold, who had made major strategic changes at CRH.

After a new focus on renewable energy at BP in 2020, by 2025 the company was seeking a return to its roots. BP's hard reset was criticized by environmentalists, as well as some shareholders.

CEO Murray Auchincloss said last year that optimism over opportunities in renewable energy was misplaced, with the company moving “too far and too fast.”

Changes in leadership at BP in recent years has been tumultuous.

CEO Bernard Looney resigned in late 2023 after BP determined that he had misled the company over his past relationships with colleagues.

Auchincloss stepped down in December, and the company named Meg O'Neill as his successor.

Manifold’s was challenged almost immediately when shareholders defeated company resolutions this spring that would have allowed BP to reduce climate reporting requirements and move its annual meetings fully online. Some 18% of shareholders voted against Manifold’s election as chairman, a high level of opposition for an appointment that is generally rubber stamped by investors.

Legal & General, one of Britain’s largest insurers and investment companies, said at the time that Manifold was responsible for resolutions that would have had “a negative impact on shareholders’ insight into how the company is addressing financially material long-term risks, and seizing long-term value creation opportunities, associated with the energy transition,” the Times of London reported on April 23.

Glass Lewis, an influential shareholder advisor, urged investors to vote against Manifold’s election. It held that BP took “unprecedented action” by refusing to consider a resolution from a group of climate activists and pension funds hoping to force the board to create an alternative strategy should demand for fossil fuels decline, the Times reported.

Like other big oil companies, BP has struggled with falling demand in recent years.

BP’s 2025 earnings fell 16% from a year earlier to $7.49 billion as the price of Brent crude, a benchmark for international oil prices, dropped 16.9%. The company’s preferred measure of earnings is underlying replacement cost profit, which adjusts for one-time items and fluctuations in the market value of inventories. Net income plunged 86% to $55 million.

Last year there were media reports that British oil giant Shell was in talks to buy rival BP. Shell denied the reports at the time.

The search for a new chair is underway, BP said Tuesday. Shares of BP Plc slid nearly 5% in midday trading on the NYSE.

View All Listings

ENERGYCAPITALHTX EMAILS ARE AWESOME