Closing the Nuclear Fuel Cycle for Security

For decades, spent nuclear fuel (SNF) has been viewed as a dangerous waste product requiring indefinite, almost infinitely long storage. Molten salt reactors challenge that notion by using SNF and surplus thorium as fuel, rather than as waste. These reactors start with high-assay low-enriched uranium (HALEU) to kickstart fission and then breed uranium-233 from thorium mixed into the liquid fuel salt. The result is a self-sustaining reaction that consumes long-lived radioactive elements in SNF. This closed fuel cycle means we can dramatically reduce our stockpiles of nuclear waste while generating both electricity and other energy products, including abundant process heat for industrial applications. Several U.S. companies are already developing such designs. For example, Elysium Industries’ Molten Chloride Salt Fast Reactor is designed to run on spent nuclear fuel, and Flibe Energy’s Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor is built around the thorium–U-233 fuel cycle. Turning what was once considered “waste” into energy makes our grid more secure by providing a domestic, essentially inexhaustible fuel supply. It also addresses a nuclear security concern: less accumulated spent fuel means less material for would-be proliferators or dirty bomb makers to target.

Crucially, these advanced reactors rely on HALEU fuel (uranium enriched ~15–20%), a resource the U.S. is now working to produce domestically after historically relying on foreign suppliers. By investing in HALEU production and molten salt reactor deployment, America can regain nuclear leadership. This has explicit national security value – as evidenced by recent Congressional efforts such as the Thorium Energy Security Act of 2022, which aimed to preserve valuable uranium-233 for future reactor fuel instead of disposing of it. The bill’s sponsor noted that thorium and U-233 are “vital to our national security” and warned that China has leapt ahead by developing thorium reactors based on U.S. research. Indeed, China’s first thorium MSR went online in 2021, signaling a race the U.S. cannot ignore. Advanced reactors that burn our nuclear waste and abundant thorium would give the United States a secure energy advantage while mitigating the long-term waste liability that has plagued nuclear power’s reputation.

Distributed Fuel Production and Infrastructure Resilience

In parallel with revolutionizing electricity, Inflection Point reactors can revolutionize the availability of liquid transportation fuels. Small modular reactors (SMRs) sited alongside plasma gasification plants offer a way to produce gasoline, diesel, or jet fuel from local garbage.

Today, America’s transportation fuel supply chain has a glaring vulnerability: we depend on a few large refineries, many along the Gulf Coast, running at near-full capacity. This centralized concentrated infrastructure is not only a bottleneck contributing to high fuel costs. It is also a ripe target for terrorism, drone attack, or natural disasters. A single hurricane or coordinated attack can knock out a major refinery and disrupt fuel supplies nationwide. Policymakers have long recognized that loss of refining capacity poses a homeland security risk, increasing reliance on long supply lines and imports. Distributed MSW (Municipal Solid Waste/Plasma Gasification hubs powered by advanced reactors would change that calculus for the better. This integrated approach of using MSW and SNF (Spent Nuclear Fuel - Nuclear Waste) is deemed an Inflection Point Technology because it is the point where we turn the corner and start producing distributive carbon-negative energy. By converting municipal solid waste into synthetic fuels on-site across the country, we would decentralize transportation fuel production and build inherent resilience into our fuel network. Significantly, no single point of failure could cripple our transportation sector.

Plasma gasification is the key enabling technology. It uses an electrical arc to super-heat trash – everything from household waste and plastics to industrial sludge – into a syngas (synthesis gas) of hydrogen and carbon monoxide. With further processing, syngas can be catalytically converted into drop-in liquid fuels or chemicals. This is not science fiction; the U.S. military has experimented with plasma waste-to-energy units at bases to reduce fuel convoy needs and eliminate burn pits. A single plasma gasifier can process tons of garbage a day, vaporizing even hazardous materials and rendering most byproducts inert. The process generates usable gases and solids: the syngas can be synthesized into liquid transportation fuels, while the leftover vitrified slag can be used as construction aggregate. Coupling this with a large or small modular reactor creates a virtuous cycle: the reactor provides carbon-free heat and electric power for the plasma gasifier and fuel synthesis, while the trash fed into the gasifier provides a marketable product (fuels) and a service (waste disposal).

The national security benefits are manifold. First, the existence of local waste-fuel plants would alleviate strain on our aging refineries. America hasn’t built a new major refinery in decades, and total capacity has even declined due to closures. We are forced to import refined petroleum in some regions, a dependence that mirrors crude oil reliance of the past. Experts have likened importing gasoline or diesel to a strategic risk on par with importing crude oil. By producing fuel locally from trash, we reduce the pressure on big refineries and pipelines, which are vulnerable to accidents and attacks. During a 2012 Congressional hearing, officials noted that hurricanes Katrina and Rita exposed how fragile our Gulf Coast refining hub truly was – a few strikes to critical facilities can send shockwaves through the economy. Terror groups like Al Qaeda have explicitly identified oil infrastructure as targets. A distributed network of many small waste-fuel plants makes an orchestrated attack far less damaging, since fuel production is not concentrated in a handful of giant facilities.

Second, this approach would improve fuel security for the U.S. military and essential services. In a conflict scenario, an adversary could attempt to cut off fuel logistics. But if every region’s municipal waste can be turned into usable diesel or jet fuel on the spot, our military and emergency responders will become much harder to immobilize. Even in peacetime, reducing fuel transportation needs saves money and lives (as the Pentagon learned painfully in Iraq and Afghanistan, where fuel convoys were targets). Our domestic infrastructure would similarly benefit from having fuel generation closer to the end users.

Finally, co-locating reactors with fuel synthesis helps share the security burden. Nuclear sites must be guarded and hardened, which is costly – but if one site produces electricity, potable water, and liquid fuel, the overhead is spread across multiple revenue streams. This makes the overall enterprise much more economically viable. In essence, we’d be turning today’s security expense into tomorrow’s economic advantage by consolidating critical manufacturing within the protective envelope of a nuclear facility.

Ultra-Clean Fuels and Environmental Gains

Beyond security, there’s an environmental opportunity here that traditional green technologies have barely dreamed of: cleaning up some of the dirtiest forms of pollution. The fuels produced by plasma gasification are synthetically made and can be ultra-clean. For example, diesel or jet fuel made from pure syngas has near-zero sulfur content and low aromatic impurities. This matters because the maritime and heavy transport sectors currently rely on very dirty fuels, especially bunker oil – the tarlike residue of crude refining that powers most cargo ships. Bunker fuel has extremely high sulfur levels (thousands of times higher than road diesel). The result is that shipping is a top source of sulfur oxide and particulate pollution globally. Studies have noted that a single large container ship emits as much sulfur oxide as millions of cars running on ultra-low-sulfur fuel. While regulations are pushing the shipping industry toward cleaner fuels now, the current baseline is abysmally low. Shockingly, the heavy oil burned by a few thousand ships contributes more smog and soot than all the gasoline cars in the United States combined, which is a true indictment of the status quo.

By supplying clean substitute fuels (or hydrogen/ammonia) for transportation, nuclear-powered plasma gasification plants would reduce emissions far more than an equivalent effort in wind or solar. Every gallon of synthetic diesel that displaces a gallon of bunker fuel yields an outsized environmental win. This could even accelerate a shift in the maritime sector – if clean fuel becomes abundant, shipping companies may opt for new fuel or even electrification or onboard microreactors, shedding their image as global polluters. In the interim, using waste-to-fuel for ships and heavy trucks cuts sulfur, particulate, and CO₂ emissions dramatically. This is a climate strategy and a public health strategy in one.

Crucially, plasma gasification tackles the elimination of pollution that renewables cannot. Solar panels and wind turbines generate electricity but do nothing positive about our garbage or about liquid fuel needs for aircraft and ships, and their decommissioning at the end of their useful life only adds to the problem, because of the need to rid ourselves of their specialized infrastructure, much of which is being added to our landfills, which are already under strain.

In addition, plastic waste is filling our oceans, and wind and solar can offer no solution to the problem. So instead of dumping trash into land or sea, we can feed it into gasifiers. The trash problem turns into an energy solution, cleaning the environment more deeply than wind and solar ever could. This highlights that baseload advanced reactors with integrated fuel production can solve whole categories of environmental harm that intermittent renewables leave unaddressed or have actually exacerbated. Carbon-free electricity, cleaner air from better fuels, and less ocean plastic – it’s a win-win-win scenario.

Revitalizing Rare Earth Supply Chains

National security isn’t just about bombs and bullets; it’s also about supply chains for critical materials. One glaring vulnerability today is America’s multi-industry dependence on foreign rare earth elements (REEs) – the metals essential for smartphones, electric vehicle motors, wind turbines, advanced weapons, and many other products. China currently dominates global rare earth mining and processing, controlling around 85–90% of supply. How did we get here?

Part of the story traces back to U.S. environmental policies in the late 20th century that inadvertently handed China this monopoly. Rare earth ores often contain thorium and uranium mixed in the ore body. Starting around 1980, U.S. regulators and the International Atomic Energy Agency applied strict rules to any mine tailings with more than 0.05% thorium or uranium content. They classified such tailings as “source material,” meaning they had to be managed as low-level radioactive waste under Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) licenses. This well-intentioned safety measure had a perverse effect: it made extracting rare earths in the U.S. prohibitively expensive. Mining companies could no longer afford to process REE-rich ores because they would be left with slightly radioactive thorium byproduct, which by law could not simply be put back in the ground or reused – it had to be isolated and disposed of at high cost.

Facing liability and expense, U.S. operators chose to shut down or avoid rare earth production. In some cases, valuable REE-rich tailings were literally buried to avoid the NRC regulations. America’s flagship rare earth mine in Mountain Pass, California suffered repeated compliance issues (including a thorium-laced wastewater spill) and closed in the 1990s. By the early 2000s, the U.S. had ceded the entire industry to China.

Meanwhile, China exploited the opportunity. Chinese rare earth mines often had lower thorium levels to begin with, and China was not enforcing such strict standards in the 1980s. Through the 1990s, China ramped up REE output without the burden of “thorium waste” rules, to the point that Western mines could not compete on cost. By the time international regulations caught up, China had already locked in its global market share. The result is a strategic vulnerability: the U.S. military’s precision-guided munitions, radars, and jet engines depend on magnets and components made from Chinese-sourced rare earths. Our clean energy goals likewise depend on Chinese supply chains for wind turbine generators, solar panels, car batteries, and electric car motors. This is an unacceptable situation for a superpower.

Inflection Point reactor technology offers a way out. If we deploy reactors that use thorium and uranium byproducts as fuel, we change the economics of rare earth mining. Rather than treating thorium as an expensive waste to be isolated, miners could pay a nominal fee for their thorium (and uranium) to be used by reactor operators as an input. What was a liability becomes a co-product.

Consider a mining company extracting rare earths and handing over the associated thorium to a molten salt reactor program, where the material is dissolved into a liquid salt and used to generate power and valuable isotopes. This would not only make U.S. rare earth ventures more cost-competitive, but it would also ensure a steady domestic supply of both rare earths and reactor fuel. Some experts have pointed out that the U.S. possesses plentiful rare earth reserves in states like Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming, often bound up with thorium. With advanced reactors online, we can resume mining those resources with confidence that the byproducts will be put to productive use.

Policymakers must revisit and modernize NRC rules so that thorium-bearing ores are regulated in a pragmatic way that encourages safe reuse in energy production, rather than forcing expensively self-destructive blanket disposal. The endgame is twofold: secure the supply chain for strategic minerals and expand the fuel base for next-generation reactors. America’s tech industry and defense industrial base would no longer be at the mercy of foreign suppliers. We would, quite literally, fuel our high-tech manufacturing revival using the refuse of our old mines.

Co-Product Isotopes for Medicine and Industry

Another often overlooked benefit of advanced reactors – especially those like MSRs that use liquid fuel – is the production of valuable isotopes as a byproduct of normal operation. Traditional solid-fueled reactors are not optimized for isotope harvesting; extracting medical isotopes from a running light-water reactor is difficult and expensive, and dedicated production reactors have been few and far between. The U.S. has historically relied on overseas facilities for critical medical isotopes like molybdenum-99 (which decays to technetium-99m, used in ~40,000 medical scans daily in the U.S.). This dependence became acute in past years when aging reactors in Canada and Europe faced outages, causing isotope shortages in the United States. Although the U.S. government and private sector are investing in domestic Mo-99 production, we are still not self-sufficient. The National Academy of Sciences noted that the United States, which consumes about half of the world’s Mo-99, had no domestic production for decades and is only now catching up. This is a strategic vulnerability not only for healthcare, but also for research and industrial applications.

A molten salt reactor can turn this vulnerability into strength. As fission proceeds in an MSR, fission product isotopes continuously form in the liquid fuel. Unlike a solid-fuel reactor, an MSR can be designed to chemically separate and siphon off specific isotopes while in operation. For example, gaseous fission products like xenon and krypton bubble out and can be captured; among those off-gases is xenon-135, which decays to Cesium-135, but also can capture isotopes such as tritium or others, depending on the coolant.

More importantly, molybdenum-99 itself can be chemically separated from the fuel salt at regular intervals. Oak Ridge National Laboratory researchers have been studying how an MSR could produce Mo-99 as part of its routine operation. The ability to do online fuel processing means an MSR could generate a constant domestic supply of Mo-99 (and thus technetium-99m for diagnostics) without a dedicated isotope reactor or reliance on foreign sources. This is exactly the kind of innovation that marries civilian needs with national security, reducing dependency on imports for life-saving medical materials.

Beyond medical isotopes, consider isotopes needed for space exploration and defense. Plutonium-238 is the only source of power for deep space probes which operate so distant from the sun that solar power is inadequate for their needs. Without plutonium-238, there can be no deep space exploration. Some military equipment also requires this isotope.

Plutonium-238 is produced in specialized reactors by irradiating neptunium-237. After a long hiatus, the U.S. has begun a limited Pu-238 production program. An advanced reactor park could be leveraged to produce Pu-238 as well as other niche isotopes by inserting targets into the reactor or employing spare neutrons. Isotopes like cobalt-60 (used for cancer therapy and sterilization) or iridium-192 (for industrial radiography) could be cultivated. Even stable isotopes critical for semiconductor manufacturing – such as isotopically pure silicon-28 or enriched boron-11 – could benefit from a robust nuclear infrastructure that includes enrichment facilities and research reactors, because a strong nuclear sector also tends to drive advancement in isotope separation technologies. In short, regaining leadership in nuclear technology would pour over into leadership in the isotope supply arena.

The key point is that an Inflection Point reactor with fluid fuel acts as a multi-product system, as it outputs electricity, yields a large amount of usable heat for plasma gasification of waste into transportation fuels and for other industrial processes, and can be tapped to provide medical and other isotopes such as Mo-99 as a byproduct. This improves the economics of the reactor by means of extra revenue from the sale of isotopes, and it fortifies national security by localizing and distributing the supply of materials crucial to medicine and technology.

The U.S. is already moving in this direction. For example, new high-flux research reactors and particle accelerators for isotope production are being supported by the DOE – but an operational power-generating MSR would take it to the next level by making isotope production a routine part of energy generation. Our hospitals, our chip fabricators, and our defense labs would all reap the benefits.

Climate Resilience and Global Stability

Energy and water are inextricably linked to national security, not only within our borders but also globally. Climate change, whether of natural or man-made causation, or a combination of both, is now recognized by the U.S. security establishment as a “threat multiplier” that exacerbates droughts, food shortages, and instability. As changing temperatures and shifting weather patterns contribute to water scarcity, especially in already arid regions, the risk of conflict and humanitarian crises grows. We have seen how prolonged drought in the Middle East and Africa has fueled unrest, extremist movements, and mass migrations of populations. The National Security Council and Department of Defense have warned that a changing climate accelerates instability and can trigger resource wars if we do not intervene. In this context, nuclear-powered desalination could be a game-changer for domestic stability, global peace, and U.S. foreign policy influence.

Turning Point reactors can be paired with desalination plants (using either reverse osmosis, forward osmosis, or thermal distillation) to provide abundant fresh water in water-stressed regions, as well as the electric energy needed for pumping and distribution of the fresh water produced. Nuclear reactors are well-suited to this role because they can produce massive heat and electricity around the clock, driving desalination and distribution at scale.

By greening deserts and stabilizing water supplies, we can alleviate one of the root causes of conflict. For example, consider Nigeria – now Africa’s most populous nation with over 200 million people – which struggles with regional drought and inadequate infrastructure. Less than 10% of Nigerians in cities have access to piped clean water, and creation of deserts in the north has contributed to poverty and insurgency. It is no surprise that great powers like China and Russia have shown interest in “helping” nations like Nigeria develop their resources; such efforts often come with strings attached that can realign a country’s geopolitical loyalties. The United States, armed with superior advanced reactor and desalination technology, has an opportunity to offer a better partnership.

Consider deploying small factory-built reactors to coastal or lakeside African locations to produce both electricity and millions of gallons of fresh water per day. This would boost agriculture, health, and economic development – undercutting the desperation on which extremist groups prey. If America leads this effort, perhaps via public-private partnerships or an international development initiative, we could strengthen alliances and stabilize regions without military intervention. Providing energy and water solves fundamental problems that foster goodwill and peace. A country like Nigeria could see its massive youth population become an asset rather than a source of unrest, if provided energy for industry and water for farming. Likewise, other arid nations in the Middle East or South Asia could benefit from reactor-driven desalination to mitigate the risks of mass migration and conflict over dwindling resources. Such projects directly support U.S. national security by creating a more stable world less likely to erupt in crises that demand an American response. In the words of a United Nations report, “increased water stress can cause social unrest and spark conflicts”un.org – so increasing water availability is a tangible peace-building measure.

At home, nuclear-powered desalination could protect our own drought-prone states. In California and the Southwest, long-term drought threatens cities and agriculture. Rather than building fossil-fueled desalination (which adds to carbon emissions), states could employ advanced SMRs to secure their water supplies sustainably, i.e., without using carbon-based fuels with their attendant disadvantages of supply, expense, and pollution. This enhances U.S. resilience against climate change impacts. When wildfires and heatwaves strike, having decentralized distributive power and water from nuclear plants can keep communities habitable and reduce strain on the grid, for instance by providing local electricity for pumping and treating water.

Additionally, one could examine the tremendous potential that arid lands in the southwest and America's immigration problem could address. By desalinating Gulf of California or Pacific Ocean waters and piping potable drinking water and water for irrigation to our southwestern states, we can create massive opportunities to go head-to-head with China with reasonable labor costs due to the personal productivity of each American worker, whether native-born or legal immigrant, and because of low-cost electricity, especially in the arid American southwest.

When water and electricity are brought to a place where there is only desert, jobs and a super abundance of economic opportunities will be available for property owners, for industry and agriculture, and for workers. The potential isn't just big, it is earth-shaking. The next Dubai of the world could be in Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada, Utah, California, or Colorado due to the tremendous opportunities made possible by abundant and affordable electricity and water.

Policy at a Turning Point

Bringing these threads together, it is clear that advanced reactors and integrated waste-to-fuel systems represent an inflection point in technology – one that could pivot the United States toward greater security and prosperity. Realizing this vision will require forward-thinking policies and legal frameworks. Congressional and state legislative members and committees, and federal and state regulatory agencies, should begin laying the groundwork now. This means creating state legislation to:

• Permit states to carry out nuclear research, and for creating state research authorities for investment in nuclear technologies, which federal law already allows

• Increase funding for advanced reactor demonstrations and fuel cycle research

• Greatly streamline licensing for novel reactor designs, and cancel or revise outdated rules (such as those treating all thorium as waste) that needlessly increase expense and hinder innovation

• Incentivize public-private projects to pair reactors with industrial processes such as desalination and fuel synthesis, and foundational materials manufacturing such as steel and aluminum production which require massive amounts of energy, both electricity and process heat, which MSRs provide in abundance

• Train a new generation of nuclear and chemical engineers and technicians to build and operate these new systems safely

The benefits of following this path are too great to ignore, and the liabilities of allowing other nations to beat the United States to the punch are frighteningly clear. We can neutralize the threat of nuclear waste by using it as fuel. We can secure our energy independence by tapping fuels that we once considered liabilities. We can shield our critical infrastructure by diversifying and localizing fuel production. We can clean our environment by drastically cutting pollution sources on land and at sea. We can reclaim supply chains for materials and isotopes critical to our economy and defense. Most importantly, we can reduce our cost of manufacturing by about 50 percent.

And we can project stability abroad through clean technology rather than by force. Each of these goals addresses a facet of national security – military, economic, or environmental security – and together they form a robust strategy for American renewal.

It is often said that the nation that leads in new energy technologies will lead the 21st century. The United States has a tradition of rising to such challenges, from the Manhattan Project to the Apollo program. Today’s challenge is subtler but just as significant: to leap ahead in energy innovation before rivals define the rules, manufacture the machines, control all sales and use, and drive the United States from the market. Advanced molten salt reactors, combined with synergistic technologies like plasma gasification and desalination, provide the U.S. a chance to solve multiple strategic problems in one stroke.

However, should we fail lead on this, our overseas competitors/adversaries will replace the United States as the arbiter of world-wide energy production and industry. Our failure to act would lead to a national economic and security disaster.

This is a call to action for lawmakers, industry leaders, and the public. We must embrace these Inflection Point technologies with the urgency they deserve. In doing so, we will light a path to a safer, cleaner, and more secure future – one where American leadership is reinforced by the very energy that powers our civilization.

References:

1. Gattie, D. & Hewitt, M. (2023). “National Security as a Value-Added Proposition for Advanced Nuclear Reactors: A U.S. Focus.” Energies, 16(17). (Discusses leveraging advanced reactors for energy security and policy changes needed) mdpi.com

2. Idaho Strategic Resources. (May 27, 2022). Press Release: “Idaho Strategic Resources Endorses the Thorium Energy Security Act of 2022.” (Quotes Sen. Tuberville on thorium reactors and national security) idahostrategic.com idahostrategic.com

3. Mamula, N. (2019). “America’s Rare Earth Ultimatum: A Solution to Rare Earth Market Failure.” Capital Research Center – Green Watch. (Details how 1980s regulations on thorium-bearing mine tailings shut down U.S. rare earth production, handing dominance to China) capitalresearch.org capitalresearch.org

4. U.S. House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence. (March 19, 2012). Field Hearing: “The Implications of Refinery Closures for U.S. Homeland Security and Critical Infrastructure.” (Opening statements highlighting security risks of refinery losses and vulnerability to terrorist attacks)govinfo.govgovinfo.gov

5. Knickerbocker, M. (Oct 23, 2023). “Trashing Energy Needs: A Case for Expanded Plasma Gasification Use by the US Military.” The Defense Post (Commentary). (Explains plasma gasification of waste, existing uses in Navy/Air Force, and energy security benefits) thedefensepost.com thedefensepost.com

6. CE Delft. (March 2018). “The basic facts. How do the emissions of ships and cars really compare?” (Fact-checking maritime vs automobile emissions; notes one large ship can emit as much SOx as 50 million cars) cedelft.eu

7. United Nations (UNFCCC). (2020). Report on Climate Change and Security. (Describes climate change as a “threat multiplier” that exacerbates resource conflicts; e.g., Darfur drought and conflict link) education.cfr.org education.cfr.org

8. White House (Obama Administration). (2015). “National Security Implications of a Changing Climate.” (States that climate change will accelerate instability and exacerbate tensions over water and food) obamawhitehouse.archives.gov

9. Council on Foreign Relations – CFR Education. (2022). “How Climate Change Threatens National Security.” (Highlights connections between climate-induced water scarcity and conflict, and lists vulnerable countries) education.cfr.org

10. CFR Africa in Transition. (2021). “Home to Over Half the Population, Nigeria’s Cities Continue to Boom.” (Notes that <10% of Nigerians have piped water, illustrating infrastructure challenges amid population growth) cfr.org

11. Oak Ridge National Laboratory. (2023). “Molybdenum-99 from Molten Salt Reactors as a Source of Technetium-99m for Nuclear Medicine.” Nuclear Technology, 209(6). (Explores using MSRs to produce medical isotopes like Mo-99 as part of normal operations) ornl.gov

12. Health Imaging / Triad Isotopes. (2021). “Why is the US still dependent on foreign medical isotope production?” (Describes U.S. efforts to establish domestic Mo-99 supply and current shortfalls) pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov