In the ongoing great power competition between the United States and communist China, nuclear power is emerging as a critical battleground to secure the energy resources necessary to build the economy of the future.
With the advent of new technologies like artificial intelligence, the U.S. and China, along with the rest of the developed world, now face an increase in power demand unseen since the Industrial Revolution. The electricity demand for data centers alone is forecasted to grow by up to 75 percent over the next five years, while overall global power needs are expected to increase by roughly 15-18 percent in that same time span according to the International Energy Agency (IEA).
To meet this demand, both China and the United States are turning to nuclear energy. But both countries face hurdles to ramp up their nuclear capacities. China’s socialist economic system is stifling innovation, while liberal preoccupation with wind and solar and ideological opposition to nuclear is hampering progress in the United States.
Chinese President Xi Jinping clearly understands the importance of nuclear energy and made it a focus of his remarks at the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation earlier this month. He spoke specifically about creating a “forum on the peaceful use of nuclear energy,” building “thirty joint laboratories” with African nations and creating “engineering technology academies” for nuclear power.
Chinese Premier Li Qiang subsequently revealed more details of China’s nuclear expansion plans, announcing that Beijing would also be investing $31 billion in 11 new reactors at home.
At first glance, China’s nuclear energy activities might look like a major economic breakthrough, but closer examination reveals a somewhat different reality.
Professor of Physics and Mathematics Jin Zhong, who supervised nuclear energy policy at China’s National Energy Administration until the mid-1990s when he defected to the West, told me that “Beijing owed details on how many initiated projects were marked successful.” As he explained, Beijing has a habit of unveiling many projects to great fanfare but failing to follow through on completing them.
Zhong pointed specifically to an announcement back in 2016 when the state-owned Nuclear Power Technology Corporation claimed that 60 new nuclear plants with a $570 billion budget were to be constructed over the next ten years. “A decade has almost passed,” said Professor Jin, “and it seems not even half of it was achieved.”
“The socialist system is inherently ineffective, including Chinese socialism,” he continued, adding that bureaucracy and ideology are always the main issues. “It usually takes years for Beijing to make a decision on projects like a nuclear plant.”
As Zhong also explained, endemic corruption in the Chinese government and the failures of China’s communist economic model have created persistent threats of blackouts for decades, while millions of rural Chinese citizens are still literally living in the dark. As late as the turn of the century, as many as 70 million people in China were forced to rely on liquid gas lamps, heaters, and even candles in some circumstances. “Many Westerners wouldn’t believe it, but many Chinese villagers still live in caves,” Zhong said. “The disparities in living conditions are massive.”
Zixuan Hai, a professor of physics, told me that he does not expect China to be a leader in nuclear energy “anytime soon.” As he sees it, China is still largely powering its economy with “slightly modernized French technology from the 1980s.”
Both Zhong and Hai said they believe it is “improbable” that China’s nuclear energy capacity will increase by 176 gigawatts in the next few years as the IEA has suggested. Neither believed that China was capable of becoming an energy hub under its current leadership.
While that is good news for the United States, America faces its own challenges in expanding its nuclear power capacity. According to a recent report from the Oak Ridge Institute, the number of students graduating with degrees in atomic engineering has now declined to the lowest point in a decade. Nuclear facilities and research outfits are also struggling to find employees with requisite graduate degrees and experience.
While professing a desire to invest in nuclear power, the Biden-Harris administration has also hampered the progress of existing nuclear projects through a sea of red tape and increased regulatory compliance costs. NuScale Power canceled a small modular reactor (SMR) project last November due to profitability reasons. TerraPower, led by Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates, recently started building a nuclear power plant in Wyoming but faces red tape delays in the review process before construction can begin.
The United States could see a turnaround in nuclear with a change in leadership this November. Former President Donald Trump was an early champion of SMR technology, which many experts believe is the future of the industry. He has pledged to “unleash energy production from all sources, including nuclear, to immediately slash inflation and power American homes, cars, and factories with reliable, abundant, and affordable energy” if he becomes president again.
Traditional energy sources such as coal and natural gas will continue to play an important role in fueling the economies of both China and the United States. But which nation most effectively bolsters its nuclear capacity in the years ahead may well determine who has the economic edge for decades to come.
Ben Solis is the pen name of an international affairs journalist, historian, and researcher.
Reality check: While China may have “only” built 28 or 29 nuclear operational reactors for power generation in the last decade, the United States, in that same time frame, has only managed to construct a grand total of 2. Yes, just 2. So based on the expected need for additional electricity between now and 2050, which is currently estimated from multiple reliable sources as being 4x to 5x what we generate and use today, which of the two countries stands a better chance of meeting those needs to support their respective country.
One major advantage that the Chinese have over us and NOT discussed at all in the article is the highly skilled and specialized pool of labor to both build and safely operate this growing fleet of nuclear facilities. Most of our labor force trained in the nuclear sector has either already aged out (retired) or are on the verge of doing so, because the left in this country has been so effective in suppressing the nuclear industry in this country for the past 50 years. So even if say Trump got elected and gave the green light tomorrow to start a massive ramp up in say SMRs or large-scale nuclear power plants to support our growing energy needs, we simply don’t have the highly skilled labor pool to build it out with any great speed at this point. That would take years to build up the knowledge base and labor force to simply equal what the Chinese have already in place. In other words, we would be playing catch-up just to be able to meet what the Chinese can do today. Cleaning up the many messes that the left has done to this country with their policies will take time, as you don’t undo 50 years of bad U.S. nuclear energy with a snap of the fingers. I trust Trump can get the ball rolling, but it will be up the American people to STOP electing Democrats in the future, who just want to cripple this nation at every turn.
So, while I agree with the two Chinese professors quoted in the article that China’s communist bureaucracy is a hinderance to meeting the goals laid out by President Xi (communism is decision by committee on steroids), the reality is the United States is equally crippled by an intentional agenda fueled by massive amounts of “red tape”, a massive federal government bureaucracy dedicated to suppressing nuclear and ONLY championing wind and solar, no matter how impractical and costly such projects might be, and constant fear-mongering from environmentalists, who would prefer mankind be reduced to small villages slowly dying from the elements.
I completely agree that both coal and especially natural gas will play a major role in energy generation for our country well into the next century. Coal will continue to be mined and shipped to other countries that still use it as a cheap means of power generation. Coal for power generation has already been killed in this country, so it is NOT a factor in terms of any coal-fired power plants being built in this country. Natural gas will make up at least 50 to 60 percent of power generation in this country for decades to come, despite what the ludicrous left keeps screaming about achieving net zero by 2050. That date was literally just picked out of the air as a date that was sufficiently far out in the future, that it might seem plausible to average person. There is no scientific foundation on the left, as to how to achieve their targets. Just like the climate change hoax of the past 50 years in this country, every time we start to get close to one of their “end of the world” dates, the left comes out with a new date that extends the end of the world for another decade or two, as they keep up their endless fearmongering to get more money.
One last item you may not be aware of. It is projected that we will need approximately 1,000 new AI data centers in this country by mid-century. Already people want a power plant located next to or very near each data center to ensure consistent, reliable power. So that should scream SMR to anyone who understands how much energy we’re taking about for each AI data center.
The comments about the Chinese capabilities regarding nuclear power by Professor of Physics and Mathematics Jin Zhong and Prof. Of Physics Zixuan Hai help to understand the reality of what is and what Chinese government says it is . And what has been going on here in the United States appears to be an easier situation to correct than the situation in China. I reckon it could be said that the nuclear energy development here , compared to crossing a river, has the approach that not having either a bridge or a ferry is somehow a sensible way to think about the situation. Intelligent people ,who understand the seriousness of being able to provide energy needs in the future should be thinking about building a bridge and a ferry in order to get the United States nuclear capability at least in a state of readiness if conflict with Communist China should happen and. nuclear energy would be needed to provide for the industrial needs that would enhance the defense capabilities — to maintain freedom here in America. As for the people who are knowledgeable of what is required , training in that field should start real soon – like tomorrow . If new leadership is in the picture in November then doing what needs to be done with this issue will get underway without bureaucratic delay. Republican leadership will be the way to have a common sense approach the issue.
I have been watching some of these solar panel farms being set up on farm land near where I live. The thought that my mind goes to is ‘ how much land that should be used for growing crops to feed our families in future years is going to waste’. And also we need the land for our beef and dairy ranchers. And I also know that the land will be needed for housing too at some point.
“A prosperous China is good for America!”- John Kerry. TG he was never POTUS… Now stop Kumala from it too!
Countries like China have little to do with environmental responsibility and a nuclear disaster is almost guaranteed especially given the costs to put in the necessary safeguards. The United States on the other hand is anti-infrastructure/energy at every turn. No nuclear melt downs when you don’t build them, but relying on existing sources isn’t going end well.
CUT regulation s & boost reactor production
Automate more CUT Costs, permit times alone can Help