2024 Polestar 2 Long Range Single Motor review: Better, but good enough?
More Videos
Published
2 years agoon
By
admin
Last week, a 2024 Polestar 2 was dropped off in front of my apartment in downtown Berlin — less than a kilometer from the center of Mitte, the most urbanized area of the German capital city. I’d never driven an EV in Germany before. Over 1000 kilometers later, including a lot of time on the speed limit-free Autobahn, I got pretty familiar with the latest version of the Polestar — a car I first drove almost three years ago.
2024 Polestar 2 (RWD, long range) driving experience
The 2024 Polestar 2 has some significant updates, and Scooter described them in our first drive back in 2023, which you should absolutely read. The short version is that the single-motor RWD long range edition I tested is probably the Polestar 2 you want unless you care about speed. Its 82 kWh battery is rated for 655 km on the very generous WLTP cycle, and it is one of the longest-range EVs on sale in Germany today. Charging is also uprated compared to earlier Polestar 2 models, with 205kW DC charging and a reasonable estimated 10-80% time of 28 minutes.

On the road, the Polestar 2’s excellent dynamics and relatively compact size made it feel nimble and placable, whether among the madness of Berlin construction works or the narrow village roads of Bavaria. The steering is direct, the suspension is planted without being punishing, and throttle response is excellent. The Polestar 2’s strong regenerative braking allows for true one-pedal driving, which is a genuine joy in a stop-and-go city like Berlin. Stops are super smooth, and I rarely ever found myself on the brake pedal. Overall, I give the Polestar 2 strong marks on driver experience — it’s a genuinely nice car to drive, one that feels like a natural extension of what your hands and feet are doing at the controls. This single-motor RWD model is not what you’d call fast, but it’s not slow, either. At 7.4 seconds to 100 km/h, it’s respectable, and the ample torque (490 nm) makes high-speed passing pretty effortless. With 220 kW of peak output, it certainly won’t melt your face off, but I never really wanted a lot more when using this car as transportation — it is definitely an adequate amount of power.

Visibility was my one big gripe when it came to driving experience. Parking the Polestar 2 is… not my favorite. The high beltline of the car and oddly small window openings mean you’re a captive of the car’s 360-degree camera view, which I found utterly overmatched in all but the best lighting conditions. No amount of wiping could keep the cameras clean during winter conditions, and the car’s aggressive backup auto-brake made me think I’d slammed into some unseen parking pylon on more than one occasion, giving me serious anxiety about placing the car during three-point turns. (Turning circle is not a strong point on the Polestar 2.) If you owned one, you’d probably turn off some of the parking nannies as you developed a sense of the car’s dimensions — they’re just too invasive, and I found the more I relied on them, the less confident I became.
Driving on the German Autobahn — where there is frequently no speed limit — the Polestar 2 was a pretty relaxing experience. Even with winter tires mounted, road noise wasn’t bad until you started getting above 130 km/h or so (that’s 80 MPH for Electrek’s American readers), and wind noise, even at very high speeds, was surprisingly tame. This RWD model tops out at 210 km/h (130 MPH), at which speed you will still probably be passed by a middle manager in an EQS. Germany! But at a more typical German cruising speed of 120 km/h, the Polestar 2 is comfortable, quiet, and stable. The driver automation aids are a mixed bag — the car applies braking too aggressively when using adaptive cruise, resulting in jarring deceleration. Acceleration is smoother. The steering assist mode is decent but only engaged for me under relatively ideal road conditions. All things being equal, I’d just prefer to work the till myself if using a system that disengages as frequently as this one. Driving in the snow, packed ice accumulated on the front of the car over longer distances. While the automatic cruise control still worked (there’s apparently a heating element on the radar module), the parking sensors required a bit of manual de-icing to function.

2024 Polestar 2 interior and technology
The Polestar 2 is a five-seat sedan — if the people in the back don’t mind being rather intimate with one another’s personal space and if the humans up front aren’t too tall. The rear seating in this car is tight. That’s not new information, and it’s not as though the 2024 model magically found some extra wheelbase hiding under the floor. Up front, I’ve heard some people describe the cabin as cramped, but to me, it just feels like a compact sports sedan; you’re down “in” the car, not on top of it. It’s certainly not like being in a Model 3, there’s no “airiness” to the Polestar 2’s interior. It’s more like a good ergonomic office chair than a recliner — it supportively cradles you. Some people like this (I, for one, do), some people don’t. It’s a pretty subjective experience. If you really like to keep a wide-leg position (Manspreading) while driving, the Polestar 2 may not be the car for you.

The driver’s seat was comfortable (including lumbar adjustment), but I noticed some serious bunching in the leather on the lower seat cushion with just 7500 km on the clock. That’s a bit disappointing. The manual tilt and telescope steering wheel made the ideal driving position easy to achieve, and even at my relatively bizarre setting (wheel pulled all the way in, maybe 75% lowered), the instrument binnacle was visually unobstructed. Solid ergonomics, Polestar. The seat heaters work pretty well (I didn’t test ventilation — it’s cold here), and the heated steering wheel is very effective. The wireless phone charger is terrible. I was lucky if it could even keep my iPhone 15 Pro at the same level of charge it’d start at, let alone add to the battery. Bring your USB-C cable. Cabin heating and defrosting seemed up to the challenge of a Berlin winter, melting light snow off the exterior glass, though I can’t speak for climates with true deep-freeze conditions.
The Android Automotive software powering the Polestar 2’s center display and instrument cluster is largely unchanged from when I first drove this car back in 2021, for better and for worse. On the upside, I love the sign-in and setup process of Android Automotive. So long as you have a Google account and a smartphone (yes, including an iPhone), setup takes under a minute. It is just so easy. If you want remote features (preheating, remote lock), though, you’ll need to set up and create a Polestar account separately. I do wish there was some kind of “all-in-one” way to handle that side of things, but I can understand this is a lot easier said than done. Google Maps routing with built-in charging planning works well, and I love that my recently viewed POIs across all my devices show up in the car’s map search — it feels like the future! Voice commands are probably solid if you speak German, but I’m not there yet, and trying to give German place names to a Google Assistant set to US English was not a good time. (This is a super unusual configuration unless you’re renting a car as a foreigner, so I don’t really consider it a negative. When set to German, the car understood place names just fine. I just didn’t understand the car.) I also loved how seamlessly the navigation displayed inside the instrument cluster, leaving the center display free for music, controls, and vehicle information.

I was less thrilled with the performance and responsiveness of the software. This was the first Android Automotive car, and it shows. The layout is so minimalist that it feels simplistic, and getting to a particular area of the interface is slow and tedious. Navigation is straight-up clunky. The use of space on the screen is highly inefficient, and the gestures to access things like the climate control interface require far too much of the driver’s attention to be used while in motion. Some decisions in the Automotive UI also just make no sense in retrospect — why on earth do I have a pull-down notification bar in a car? The discoverability of this feature is basically nonexistent. The app launcher layout also doesn’t strike me as very logical — switching between different music streaming or podcast apps, for example, is just way harder than it needs to be compared to Android Auto or CarPlay. The inconsistency of responsiveness and delays caused by poor performance also lead to a lot of double inputs or accidental presses. Despite having almost three years to iterate on the initial concept, the software in the Polestar 2 still feels very much like a first effort and one that’s not aging particularly well. I’d be very curious to see how they’ve evolved it in the Polestar 3 and Polestar 4 when they become available.
2024 Polestar 2 charging and range
The range boost and charging updates make the Polestar 2 much more competitive in the modern EV landscape. Considering I was entirely reliant on public DC charging infrastructure during my test period, I also got a pretty good sense of the car’s charging characteristics in cold weather. In my estimation, that 28-minute 10-80% claim is probably achievable under ideal circumstances, which is to say, ‘when it’s not zero degrees Celsius outside’. But using 250 kW Tesla Superchargers here in Germany, I did see the Polestar 2 draw 205 kW of charge input — once, briefly. During these cold conditions, my experience was more like 40-50 minutes to get the battery to 80%. (Granted, I was sitting in the car with the heater running. YMMV.)

Charging using Tesla’s Supercharger network here in Germany was gloriously unremarkable (remember, Tesla uses CCS in the EU) apart from one incident where the Tesla app repeatedly just told me “Lost connection to charger” no matter which pylon I chose. This site also had a number of pylons out of order. Other Superchargers (I used four other locations during the week) gave me zero problems. In Germany, as in many European countries, you generally want to use a charging network subscription to get the best prices on charging — the cost of going “out of network” can be exorbitant, with many DC stations charging €0.79 / kWh to non-subscribers. Networks, like eNBW or Tesla, offer monthly subscriptions that can cut this cost in half.

As for the range, I was hardly operating the car in “normal” driving conditions — these figures really only serve to illustrate the brutal effect of winter Autobahn driving. Traveling at 120 km/h (a pretty conservative cruising speed here in Germany) at 0C temperatures, I saw consumption of around 25 kWh / 100 km, compared to the 14.9-15.8 kWh / 100k km Polestar advertises based on the 2’s WLTP rating. Given the car’s surprisingly high 0.278 drag coefficient (worse than even the VW ID.5 crossover, at 0.26), I don’t think the Polestar 2 is a good choice if long highway drives are your typical mode of use, regardless of temperature. At lower speeds (50-80 km/h), efficiency improved dramatically (closer to 17-19 kWh / 100 km). As a suburban runabout, this car’s range is probably pretty respectable. But as it stands, for pure Autobahn range, the Polestar 2 will be lucky to get more than 350 km in winter, just above half of the delusional 655 km WLTP rating. In warmer conditions, I suspect you can manage over 400 km driving the way I did.
And, if you want to expedite your Autobahn journey? I don’t recommend it for any extended period unless you really like visiting public charging infrastructure. At 160 km/h (around 100 mph), the Polestar 2 was consuming an eye-popping 30 kWh / 100km. I don’t expect anyone to use the car this way, but I just wanted to know for the sake of, uh, thoroughness.
2024 Polestar 2: Electrek’s take
I was testing an EV under demanding circumstances — highest speeds, lowest temperatures, and exclusively using public charging. The Polestar 2 never let me down, even if it wasn’t necessarily the best tool for the kind of driving I was doing. The disappointing highway range is probably less of a headache in the summer, but I had to make two charging stops on what really should have been one-stop legs of my journey because the car was just shy of being able to make do with one. But that’s a wholly individual experience and one that was unique to my demands of the car.
On the more objective marks, the Polestar 2 is a challenging car to place in the broader EV landscape. It doesn’t offer the passenger space of even a Model 3, and it’s by no means a better value than one. The real-world efficiency is certainly decent if you aren’t doing a lot of highway driving. But if you care about saving money on the front end of your purchase, the Polestar 2 is not a cheap vehicle — as equipped, my test car was over €62,000 (options included napa leather, premium tech and stereo, and driver assistance packs). This RWD variant effectively competes with the BMW i4 eDrive40, at least on paper. I haven’t driven that car, so I’d be curious to see how it stacks up. But absent the competition, I have to wonder how much demand exists for a small EV luxury sedan that really can’t credibly claim to fit five passengers — at least not comfortably. The pressure coming from the crossover segment of the market is also hard to ignore here.

More concerning to me than any of the above is that the Polestar 2’s tech stack isn’t aging well. That would be my reason, personally, to avoid picking one up. The Intel processor powering this car’s infotainment system is a dog, and it just makes using the car clunkier and more unpleasant than it needs to be. Even when it debuted three years ago, this hardware was outdated. Today? I can’t imagine wanting to be stuck with this level of software performance for 3 or 4 more years. No thanks. That said, you could just use set your nav in the built-in Google Maps EV routing, plug in CarPlay for media, and avoid the Automotive experience for everything but dedicated vehicle controls. I suspect most folks will do this.
There’s still a lot to like with the Polestar 2. The upgraded Harmon Kardon stereo is genuinely excellent, and I say that as a pretty discerning listener (most modern car stereos seriously underwhelm me — the tuning on this HK setup is stellar). The look of the car is boldly Scandinavian, even if it may scream “fancy Volvo” at the end of the day. The driving dynamics are also quite good for a compact luxury sedan. Driving position is good (if narrow), the hatchback and lower trunk compartment offer lots of storage, and you get a usable frunk. This car turned heads when it launched, and many of the reasons behind that are still valid today.
I think Polestar’s real challenge is in convincing a potential customer that what it adds — effectively, a premium touch and driver-first dynamics — is meaningfully attractive compared to the obvious alternative (a Model 3/Y Long Range). While BMW may have a more price-analogous competitor to the Polestar 2, the kind of customer considering this car is far more likely cross-shopping with Tesla. This is a tech-first brand, not a traditional luxury automaker. And here in Europe, you have growing competition from Chinese brands like NIO’s ET5 and BYD’s Seal to consider in this space as well, where you’ll get far more performance and tech for less money.
In some ways, the 2024 Polestar 2 already feels like it needs an update to remain on the bleeding edge — and that’s not a great place for a just-updated car to be. It’s certainly a good car, but it’s one that’s becoming less competitive by the month. Unless Polestar starts considering some aggressive price reductions, I think the Polestar 2 runs a real risk of falling out of the electric sedan conversation. That’s too bad, because it’s a lovely vehicle in many ways. It’s just tricky to translate that charm into economic or utilitarian rationale.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
You may like
Environment
The “Anti Tesla” deal: Polestar 3 gets an $18,000 incentive offer for November
Published
5 hours agoon
November 9, 2025By
admin


Polestar may not yet be a household name, but these makers of objectively excellent, sporty EVs with Scandinavian sensibilities are doing everything they can to change that — including offering killer post-rebate deals set to take the fight to Tesla.
CarsDirect is reporting a MASSIVE $18,000 lease incentive on the sporty Polestar 3, which starts at around $67,500 for the Long Range Single Motor model and goes up to approximately $79,400 for the Long Range Dual Motor. For those of you like to see the math, that pencils out to ~25% discount from MSRP.
Nationally, the 2025 Polestar 3 features a $18,000 lease incentive. Customers who lease a 2025 Polestar 3 through Polestar Financial Services will receive the brand’s $18,000 Clean Vehicle Noncash Incentive. Customers who buy a 2025 Polestar 3 with cash or through standard financing can get $10,000 Polestar Clean Vehicle Incentive cash towards the purchase.
All Polestar 3 EVs currently offer 0% APR for up to 72 months on purchases plus a $7,500 financing bonus. This is the lowest rate we’ve seen since the vehicle’s launch, and it is now among the best 0% financing deals on an SUV.
The EV deals don’t stop there. Polestar is offering both lease and finance customers who happen Costco members can get another $1,000 off the Polestar 3, making the Swedish/Chinese crossover one of the most compelling new car deals in the business.
Polestar 3 | For the money

If you decide to take Polestar up on their offer, you’ll be getting a genuinely sporty five-seat entry-luxe SUV with a big battery and real, road trip-ready range.
Advertisement – scroll for more content
In the US the entry Polestar 3 Long-Range Single Motor (RWD) model starts at the previously-mentioned $67,500 MSRP (pre-rebate), and offers a 111 kWh battery pack good for an EPA-rated range of up to 350 miles. The top-shelf Performance-spec Polestar 3, meanwhile, offers an all-wheel-drive dual-motor setup that Polestar rates at 380 kW (~517 hp) that will launch you across suburbia with a 0–60 mph time in the 4 second range, albeit with slightly less range than the base model: “just” 275–315 mi, depending on wheels/trim.
The other thing a Polestar 3 offers is a bit of neutrality. Polestar hasn’t been shy about what it views as an “opportunity” to snatch up car buyers who want to distance themselves from Elon Musk and the political polarization that’s now associated with the Tesla brand.
The company’s CEO, German auto industry stalwart Michael Lohscheller, told Bloomberg, “For Germany, somebody outside of Germany endorsing right-wing political parties is a big thing. You want to know what I think about it? I think it’s totally unacceptable. Totally unacceptable. You just don’t do that. This is pure arrogance, and these things will not work.”
He’s hoping enough people agree to move the needle on Polestar sales in the US – and the first step to that is for consumers to get behind the wheel of this “masterfully tuned and sneaky-fast SUV,” and see if it’s a fit for them.
One thing is certain, though: at $18,000 less — the Polestar 3 is a lot more likely to be a fit for their budget than it was before! You can find out more about Polestar’s killer EV deals on the full range of Polestar models, from the 2 to the 4, below, then let us know what you think of the three-pointed star’s latest discount dash in the comments section at the bottom of the page.
SOURCE: CarsDirect; images via Polestar.

If you’re considering going solar, it’s always a good idea to get quotes from a few installers. To make sure you find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. It has hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high-quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use, and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and share your phone number with them.
Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisors to help you every step of the way. Get started here.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Environment
It’s not too late to get the 30% solar tax credit — unless you live in THESE states
Published
5 hours agoon
November 9, 2025By
admin


Just as we saw with EVs in September, there’s a broad, documented surge in demand for home solar tied to the 30% Federal tax credit expiring December 31st. And, while it’s still not too late for many Americans to go solar, contractors in North Carolina, Florida, and Arizona say their 2025 calendars are jammed.
Back in August, EnergySage noted a 205% year-over-year increase in homeowners actively working with solar installers, and observed an all-time high in solar customer inquiries immediately following the passage of the OBBA — a sentiment echoed by installers everywhere.
“When the Big Beautiful Bill passed, and they ended 25d, we signed up like 200 people in a couple weeks,” Bryce Bruncati, director of residential sales at 8MSolar in Raleigh, told WFAE in Charlotte. “So, all solar installers in North Carolina right now are booked through the year.”
In states like Arizona, installers are seeing a similar rush from residents hoping to sneak their systems in under the wire.
Advertisement – scroll for more content
“An average system might be around $25,000,” explains Tyler Carlyle, the owner of Bright Home Energy in Phoenix. “You start doing the math, 30% for federal tax credit, $1,000 from state, you’re talking $10,000 in savings by going solar now purchasing the system.”
But more demand means less supply, and running out of solar panels is only one of the issues slowing down lead times, which have been stretching from weeks to months recently, and whether you want to blame that on a lack of federal agents processing imports, a growing trade war limiting the amount of materials contractors can work with, or ongoing the ICE raids that are exacerbating a national construction labor shortage by illegally targeting hardworking Americans because of the color of their skin, the fact remains that many homeowners are eager to lock in the full 30% federal solar tax credit are finding installers short supply, and many installers are scrambling to install systems before the December deadline.
FOMO is real

As we recently discovered, taking advantage of tax credits and saving money are not the primary drivers for home solar adoption among Electrek readers. But while it’s obvious that Electrek readers are objectively better people, that doesn’t mean they don’t like saving money — and the window to do so on a home solar project is rapidly closing.
“Every month you wait puts your incentives at risk,” reads the copy at Florida Power Services. “The permitting process, equipment supply, and installer availability are already creating challenges for homeowners across Pinellas County.”
The site goes on to note that Pinellas County solar installation plan reviews are already delayed more than four weeks, and every week that passes adds to the backlog. “Your system could get stuck in permitting and never make it to installation before incentives expire,” reads the copy. “By starting early, you secure your place in line and give your project the best chance to be completed on time.”
Don’t lose hope, but don’t get stuck
While it may seem like it’s already too late (and, for some of you, it might be), don’t lose hope. Remember that under IRS Form 5695 for systems installed on existing homes, the credit is available in the tax year when the system is “placed in service,” but what exactly that means and whether interconnection or utility “permission to operate” (PTO) is strictly required to meet that “place in service” standard depends on various state and local rulings — and there seems to be plenty of wiggle room in there.
What’s more, I was able to find at least one private-letter IRS ruling said a solar project could qualify as “placed in service” even though utility interconnection (or, “tie-in”) was not yet complete, which could imply that there’s some wiggle room for eligibility baked in at the national level, as well.
As ever, I want to close this one out with a disclaimer and remind you that your favorite journalist (me, obviously) is not an attorney. Especially when it comes to big dollar stuff like this, connect with local experts who do this stuff every day, and maybe consult a tax professional, too, to be on the safe side.
Source links throughout article; featured image via UCF.

If you’re considering going solar, it’s always a good idea to get quotes from a few installers. To make sure you find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. It has hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high-quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use, and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and share your phone number with them.
Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisors to help you every step of the way. Get started here.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Environment
New U.S. nuclear power boom begins with old, still-unsolved problem: What to do with radioactive waste
Published
7 hours agoon
November 9, 2025By
admin

Castor containers for high-level radioactive waste.
Ina Fassbender | Afp | Getty Images
Nuclear power is back, largely due to the skyrocketing demand for electricity, including big tech’s hundreds of artificial intelligence data centers across the country and the reshoring of manufacturing. But it returns with an old and still-unsolved problem: storing all of the radioactive waste created as a byproduct of nuclear power generation.
In May, President Trump issued executive orders aimed at quadrupling the current nuclear output over the next 25 years by accelerating construction of both large conventional reactors and next-gen small modular reactors. Last week, the U.S. signed a deal with Westinghouse owners Cameco and Brookfield Asset Management to spend $80 billion to build nuclear plants across the country that could result in Westinghouse attempting to spinoff and IPO a stand-alone nuclear power company with the federal government as a shareholder.
There’s a growing consensus among governments, businesses and the public that the time is right for a nuclear power renaissance, and even if the ambitious build-out could take a decade or more and cost hundreds of billion of dollars, it will be an eventual boon to legacy and start-up nuclear energy companies, the AI-fixated wing of the tech industry and investors banking on their success.
But there are plenty of reasons to be skeptical. Only two nuclear power plants have been built since 1990 — more than $15 billion over budget and years behind schedule — and they went online in just the last two years. Almost all of the 94 reactors currently operating in 28 states, generating about 20% of the nation’s electricity, were built between 1967 and 1990. And though often unspoken, there’s the prickly issue that’s been grappled with ever since the first nuclear energy wave during the 1960s and ’70s: how to store, manage and dispose of radioactive waste, the toxic byproduct of harnessing uranium to generate electricity — and portions of which remain hazardous for millennia.
Solutions, employing old and new technologies, are under development by a number of private and public companies and in collaboration with the Department of Energy, which is required by law to accept and store spent nuclear fuel.
The most viable solution for permanently storing nuclear waste was first proffered back in 1957 by the National Academy of Sciences. Its report recommended burying the detritus in deep underground repositories (as opposed to the long-since-abandoned notion of blasting it into low-Earth orbit). It wasn’t until 1982, though, that Congress passed the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, assigning the DOE responsibility for finding such a site.
Five years later, lawmakers designated Yucca Mountain, a 6,700-foot promontory about 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas, Nevada, as the nation’s sole geological repository. Thus began a contentious, years-long saga — involving the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, legislators, lawyers, geologic experts, industry officials and local citizens — that delayed, defunded and ultimately mothballed the project in 2010.
Other nations have moved forward with the idea. Finland, for instance, is nearing completion of the world’s first permanent underground disposal site for its five reactors’ waste. Sweden has started construction on a similar project, and France, Canada and Switzerland are in the early stages of their subterranean disposal sites.
Workers inspect the Repository in ONKALO, a deep geological disposal underground facility, designed to safely store nuclear waste, on May 2, 2023, on the island of Eurajoki, western Finland.
Jonathan Nackstrand | Afp | Getty Images
An American startup, Deep Isolation Nuclear, is combining the underground burial concept with oil-and-gas fracking techniques. The methodology, called deep borehole disposal, is achieved by drilling 18-inch vertical tunnels thousands of feet below ground, then turning horizontal. Corrosion-resistant canisters — each 16 feet long, 15 inches in diameter and weighing 6,000 pounds — containing nuclear waste are forced down into the horizontal sections, stacked side-by-side and stored, conceivably, for thousands of years.
Deep Isolation foresees co-locating its boreholes at active and decommissioned nuclear plants, according to CEO Rod Baltzer. “Eighty percent look like they have good shale or granite formations nearby,” he said, referring to a geologic prerequisite. “That means we would not have to transport the waste” and the risk of highway or railway crashes unleashing radioactive material.
The company has received grants from the DOE’s Advanced Research Projects Agency for Energy program, Baltzer said, and in July closed a reverse merger transaction, an alternative to an IPO for going public. Through that deal, he said, “we raised money for a full-scale demonstration project [in Cameron, Texas]. It will probably be early 2027 by the time we get that fully implemented.”
Recycling radioactive waste for modular reactors
An entirely different, old-is-new-again technology, pioneered in the mid-1940s during the Manhattan Project, is gathering steam. It involves reprocessing spent fuel to extract uranium and other elements to create new fuel to power small modular reactors. The process is being explored by several startups, including Curio, Shine Technologies and Oklo. France has been utilizing reprocessed nuclear fuel at its vast network of reactors since the 1970s.
Oklo has gained attention among investors drawn to its two-pronged approach to nuclear energy. The company — which went public via a SPAC in 2024, after early-stage funding from OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, Peter Thiel’s venture capital firm and others — announced in September that it is earmarking $1.68 billion to build an advanced fuel reprocessing facility in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Concurrently, the company signed an agreement with the Tennessee Valley Authority “to explore how we can take used nuclear fuel sitting on its sites and convert it into fuel we can use in our reactors,” said a company spokeswoman.

That refers to the TVA’s three nuclear reactors — two in Tennessee, another in Alabama — as well as the other part of Oklo’s business model, which focuses on constructing SMRs. In September, the company broke ground in Idaho Falls, Idaho, on its Aurora fast reactor, a type of SMR that will use reprocessed nuclear fuel. “We’re working on [reprocessing] the fuel right now, so that we can turn on the plant around late 2027 or early 2028,” the Oklo spokeswoman said. The separate Oak Ridge facility, she said, is expected to begin producing fuel by the early 2030s.
Oklo exemplifies both the promise and the perplexity associated with the rebirth of nuclear power. On one hand is the attraction of repurposing nuclear waste and building dozens of SMRs to electrify AI data centers and factories. On the other hand, the company has no facilities in full operation, is awaiting final approval from the NRC for its Aurora reactor, and is producing no revenue. Oklo’s stock has risen nearly 429% this year, with a current market valuation of more than $16.5 billion, but share prices have fluctuated over the past month.
“It’s a high-risk name because it’s pre-revenue, and I anticipate that the company will need to provide more details around its Aurora reactor plans, as well as the [fuel reprocessing] program on the [November 11] earnings report call,” said Jed Dorsheimer, an energy industry analyst at William Blair in a late October interview. “But we haven’t changed our [outperform] rating on the name as of right now,” he added.
Performance of nuclear power company Oklo shares over the past one-year period.
In the meantime, more than 95,000 metric tons of spent nuclear fuel (about 10,000 tons is from weapons programs) sits temporarily stockpiled aboveground in special water-filled pools or dry casks at 79 sites in 39 states, while about 2,000 metric tons are being produced every year. That’s a lot of tonnage, but requires perspective. The Nuclear Energy Institute, the industry’s trade association, states that the entirety of spent fuel produced in the U.S. since the 1950s would cover a football field to a depth of about 12 yards.
But because the DOE, despite its mandate, still hasn’t found a permanent disposal facility for nuclear waste, taxpayers pay utilities up to $800 million every year in damages. Since 1998, the federal government has paid out $11.1 billion, and the tab is projected to reach as much as $44.5 billion in the future.
The DOE’s Department of Nuclear Energy has initiated several programs to address nuclear waste, including coordination with Deep Isolation and Oklo. The agency declined to comment on its efforts in this area, citing the federal government shutdown.
Debate over size of the radiation problem
Opponents to nuclear power cite the well-documented accidents at Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania (1979), Chernobyl in Ukraine (1986) and Fukushima in Japan (2011) — all three which resulted in radiation leaks, and, at Chernobyl and Fukushima, related deaths — as reasons enough to halt building new reactors. Following Fukushima, Japan, Germany and some other nations shut down or suspended operations. Japan has since restarted its nuclear energy program, and its new prime minister, Sanae Takaichi, is expected to accelerate it.
There’s also the viewpoint, related to climate change, that nuclear energy is a emissions-free power source — and unlike solar and wind runs 24/7/365 — that produces relatively manageable waste.
“If you walk up to recently discharged spent fuel and get really close to it, you’ll probably get a lethal dose of radiation,” said Allison Macfarlane, professor and director of the School of Public Policy and Global Affairs at the University of British Columbia, as well as the chair of the NRC from 2012–2014. “But is it this huge, massive problem? No, it’s solvable.” By comparison, she said, “we are under much graver threat from fossil fuel emissions than we are from nuclear waste.”
As far as nuclear waste, “we need to put [it] deep underground,” Macfarlane said.
That was the recommendation of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future, created by the Obama administration in 2010 after the Yucca Mountain project was defunded, on which she served. Macfarlane deems spent fuel reprocessing as far too expensive and a source of new waste streams, and dismisses deep borehole disposal as a “non-starter.”
“You think you’re going to be able to put waste packages down a hole and they’re not going to get stuck on the way?” she said.
Inside the north portal to a five-mile tunnel in Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas.
Las Vegas Review-journal | Tribune News Service | Getty Images
Macfarlane said that the Trump administration’s fast-tracking of new reactors is neither realistic nor achievable, but “I certainly would not support shutting down the operating reactors. I’m not anti-nuclear, but I’m practical.”
She added that while nuclear may not face the current intermittent production challenges of renewables, it is one of the most expensive forms of electricity production, especially compared to utility-scale solar, wind and natural gas.
Nonetheless, the rush to build new reactors — and generate even more waste — marches on alongside the data center boom. Google and NextEra Energy are teaming up to reopen Iowa’s Duane Arnold Energy Center, a nuclear plant that closed five years ago. Microsoft and Constellation Energy plan to restart the Three Mile Island Unit 1 reactor in 2028. And Meta has signed a 20-year power purchase agreement with Constellation and its Clinton, Illinois, nuclear facility.
Although no SMRs have been completed yet in the U.S., several projects are under development by companies including NuScale Power, Holtec International, Kairos Power and X-Energy, which has received backing from Amazon. The only SMR actually under construction is from Bill Gates’ co-founded TerraPower, in Kemmerer, Wyoming, which aims to be operational by the end of 2030.
Those long timelines alone should be a deterrent, said Tim Judson, executive director of the Nuclear Information Resource Service, a nonprofit advocate for a nuclear-free world. “It is fanciful to think that nuclear energy is going to be helpful in dealing with the increases in electricity demand from data centers,” he said, “because nuclear power plants take so long to build and the data centers are being built today.”
And then there’s the waste issue, Judson said. “I’m not sure that the tech industry has really thought through whether they want to be responsible for managing nuclear waste at their data center sites.”
But you can count Gates, the big tech billionaire who was backing nuclear even before the AI data center boom, as having not only thought about the waste problem, but dismissed it as major impediment. “The waste problems should not be a reason to not do nuclear,” Gates said in an interview with the German business publication Handelsblatt back in 2023. “The amount of waste involved … that’s not a reason not to do nuclear. … Say the U.S. was completely nuclear-powered — it’s a few rooms worth of total waste. So it’s not a gigantic thing,” Gates said.
Trending
-
Sports2 years agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports3 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Sports3 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment1 year agoHere are the best electric bikes you can buy at every price level in October 2024



