Alex Gimarc: Nuclear renaissance in Alaska, Part 2: Energy sources

By ALEX GIMARC

Nov. 14, 2026 – Before discussing energy possibilities, we need to at least mention how a reactor is used to generate energy. At its most basic, a reactor is a heat engine. The process of fission splits a heavy atom, releasing energy in the form of photons (light), chunks of the split atom, and various radioactive particles. All of these are radioactive at some level, just like everything else we encounter in the physical world.

The heat released is generally used to boil some sort of fluid that spins turbines connected to generators. Here in the Railbelt, Chugach uses a combined cycle that spins turbines with burned natural gas and captures some of the waste heat to turn water into steam to spin additional turbines. Hydroelectric facilities like Eklutna and Bradley Lake spin turbines with flowing water.

Using a heat engine to generate electricity is not particularly efficient, as you must capture the heat, apply it to whatever fluid you are using, and discard what you don’t use. A good rule of thumb is that a power reactor uses about two-thirds of its heat to generate electricity. This is the difference between the energy ratings MWe (electric) and MWt (thermal).

The new Eielson reactor is rated at 5 MWe, though it will generate 60 MWt. Some percentage of the excess heat will be used to heat the base. Buildings at Elmendorf here in Anchorage were heated by steam tunnels 35 years ago, so this is not a new idea.

While there are not yet any commercial Generation IV small modular reactors operating in the U.S., multiple programs across multiple agencies are working to develop, build, and operate them.

How many are we talking about? The Department of Energy (DOE) awarded $94 million to eight companies in May. It previously awarded $400 million for two other projects. DOE selected nine vendors to fast-track reactor designs outside national labs.

The Army selected five vendors and locations for five reactors on military bases. A total of $2.2 billion was awarded. The Army aims to expand that to 20 reactors at 20 installations.

The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) is looking at up to six reactors. Microsoft is pursuing an existing reactor restart, and Google is pursuing at least one reactor. Both Microsoft and Google plan to use reactors to power data centers.

From this list, we have at least 40 planned microreactors in process — more if the regulators and lawyers stay out of the way.

What are the costs? They are highly variable and, as usual, highly dependent on the regulatory and legal environment. The first ones will be expensive, at 14–41 cents per kilowatt-hour. Those costs are expected to drop to 5–8 cents per kilowatt-hour as designs stabilize and the production line cranks up.

In contrast, Chugach currently charges residential customers around 23 cents per kilowatt-hour in the Railbelt. Electricity costs are even worse in the Bush, with diesel generation running somewhere between 50 and 150 cents per kilowatt-hour. And that was before the recent spike in diesel prices.

Clearly, bringing some number of microreactors into the Bush would be an attractive energy solution for communities and mines, at least locally and perhaps for neighboring villages near the installations. The most important question is: What problem are you trying to solve?

Here in the Railbelt, energy use is divided into roughly thirds: electricity, heating (natural gas), and vehicular fuel (diesel and gasoline). Those percentages differ in the Bush, mainly because electricity requires some sort of distribution after generation.

But whatever you end up with, you must figure out how to transmit whatever you generate over some distance to smaller, more remote villages. And that transmission and distribution network must be affordable, even in the expensive energy marketplace of the Bush.

Numbers here are important, as there are perhaps eight regional hubs in the Bush: Bethel, Nome, Kotzebue, Dillingham, Utqiagvik, King Salmon, Kodiak, and Unalaska/Dutch Harbor. Surrounding them are up to 280 villages.

While there is no way to deploy 280 microreactors, eight of them might be doable, especially if they can somehow feed energy into some number of the surrounding villages. There are also six mines in the Interior, with Pebble being a potential seventh. Not counting Coast Guard bases, we have JBER, Clear, Fort Wainwright, and Fort Greely as additional military installations for possible reactors.

Affordable distribution of whatever is generated is critical. We probably can’t transmit it directly as electricity, as transmission and distribution lines run $100,000–$2 million per mile. There is no way anyone can afford that, which moves you smartly away from direct electrical transmission — or even steam pipes — unless you are a Nikola Tesla fan.

How else can we transmit energy? Liquid fuels are probably the best vehicle: propane and diesel. The distribution network already exists, and everyone who handles these fuels knows how to deal with them, as does the customer base. Tap into that network first and, at the very least, learn how to use it.

A second option would be distributing food: vegetables and fish. This takes you immediately to local aquaculture and hydroponics. Every mile these products don’t have to travel from Anchorage or the Lower 48 will eventually lower their direct cost to consumers, making on-site production a critical, albeit long-term, goal.

This is not a bit flip or an all-or-nothing approach. Anything you can produce locally should lower long-term costs, meaning you approach the solution incrementally, step by step.

You won’t reach your goal of an autonomous community on Day One, but you can most certainly figure out how to get closer over time. Getting closer, as long as you can figure out how to affordably get there, is better than where we are today: importing everything into isolated communities, mines, or military bases. Any progress is infinitely better than not making an attempt.

How do we start moving energy, vehicular fuel, and food from imports to local production? How do we apply whatever a reactor can supply to solve that problem?

I wonder if anyone has looked into that. Turns out they have, which we will discuss in the next column on this topic.

Alex Gimarc has lived in Anchorage since retiring from the military in 1997. His interests include science and technology, the environment, energy, economics, military affairs, fishing, and disability policy. His weekly column, “Interesting Items,” is a summary of news stories with substantive Alaska-themed topics. He is a former small-business owner and information technology professional.

Alex Gimarc: Nuclear renaissance in Alaska – a history