The U.S. nuclear sector just received another strong signal of federal backing.
On February 21, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) finalized a $303 million Technology Investment Agreement with Kairos Power to advance its Hermes demonstration reactor in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. The deal supports the company’s selection under the Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program (ARDP), first announced in December 2020.
But this is not a traditional federal grant. Instead, DOE structured the agreement as a performance-based, fixed-price milestone contract. Kairos will only receive payments once it achieves clearly defined technical milestones.
This funding model was previously used by the Department of Defense and NASA’s Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) program. It aims to accelerate innovation while protecting public funds. Now, DOE is applying that same discipline to advanced nuclear technology.

Hermes: The First Gen IV Reactor Approved in Decades
At the center of the agreement is Hermes — a low-power demonstration reactor based on Kairos Power’s fluoride salt-cooled high-temperature reactor (KP-FHR) design.

In December 2023, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) granted Hermes a construction permit. That approval marked a historic milestone. Hermes became the first non-light-water reactor approved for construction in the United States in more than 50 years. It is also the first Generation IV reactor cleared for building.
The reactor is expected to be operational in 2027. While it will not generate commercial electricity, it serves a critical role. Hermes will demonstrate Kairos Power’s ability to safely deliver low-cost nuclear heat and operate a fully integrated advanced nuclear system.
Its design combines two established technologies that originated in Oak Ridge: TRISO-coated particle fuel and Flibe molten fluoride salt coolant. Together, these systems enhance safety and simplify operations.
The molten salt coolant improves heat transfer and stability, while TRISO fuel provides strong containment of radioactive materials. The result is a reactor design that emphasizes inherent safety without relying on overly complex backup systems.
Significantly, Hermes represents Kairos Power’s first nuclear build, and it acts as a stepping stone toward commercial deployment.
Mike Laufer, Kairos Power co-founder and CEO, said:
“With the use of fixed-price milestone payments, this innovative contract provides real benefits to both Kairos Power and DOE to ensure the successful completion of the Hermes reactor. It allows us to remain focused on achieving the most important goals of the project while retaining agility and flexibility to move quickly as we learn key lessons through our iterative development approach.”
Risk Reduction and Private Capital Alignment
The DOE’s investment complements significant private funding already committed by Kairos Power. Since its ARDP selection, the company has built extensive testing facilities and manufacturing infrastructure to support its Engineering Test Unit series. It has also advanced its fuel development and molten salt coolant systems.
Unlike traditional large-scale nuclear projects that often suffer cost overruns, Kairos is pursuing an iterative development pathway. This approach allows the company to test, refine, and improve reactor components before full commercial rollout.
Fuel manufacturing plays a key role in that strategy. Kairos Power is working in partnership with Los Alamos National Laboratory to produce fuel for Hermes. Through its Low Enriched Fuel Fabrication Facility (LEFFF), the company aims to control quality, reduce delays, and manage costs more effectively.
Vertical integration is central to its business model. By managing more of the supply chain internally, Kairos hopes to deliver greater cost certainty for future commercial reactors — an area where traditional nuclear projects have struggled.
Key Features

Nuclear’s Return to the Energy Spotlight
The Hermes agreement comes at a time when nuclear energy is regaining political and investor attention.
Federal policy has shifted in favor of accelerating the development of next-generation reactors. In 2025, the U.S. administration introduced measures to shorten licensing timelines and rebuild domestic nuclear fuel supply chains. The Department of Energy has articulated an ambitious goal: expand U.S. nuclear capacity from roughly 100 gigawatts in 2024 to 400 gigawatts by 2050.
Programs such as the Energy Dominance Financing initiative aim to provide additional support for nuclear infrastructure. Once built, reactors can operate for up to 80 years, making them long-term strategic assets.
At the same time, electricity demand is rising. According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), U.S. electricity demand grew 2.8% in 2024 and another 2.1% in 2025. The country is projected to add more than 420 terawatt-hours of new demand over the next five years.

Data centers are driving much of that growth. The rapid expansion of artificial intelligence and cloud computing infrastructure could account for nearly half of total demand growth through 2030.
This dynamic is reshaping energy investment decisions. Technology companies require reliable, always-on power. However, they must also meet emissions reduction targets. Nuclear energy provides steady, low-carbon electricity, making it increasingly attractive for both policymakers and corporate buyers.
Small Reactors, Big Strategic Impact
Small modular and advanced reactors are the keys to this renewed momentum. Compared to traditional gigawatt-scale plants, smaller reactors offer shorter construction timelines and lower upfront capital requirements. Developers can deploy them incrementally, reducing financial risk and improving flexibility.
Hermes, although it is a demonstration project, it represents a critical validation step. If successful, it could pave the way for commercial-scale KP-FHR reactors that supply industrial heat and electricity at competitive costs.
Dr. Kathryn Huff, Assistant Secretary, Office of Nuclear Energy, made an important statement, noting:
“The Hermes reactor is an important step toward realizing advanced nuclear energy’s role in ushering forward the nation’s clean energy transition. Partnerships like this one play a significant role in making advanced nuclear technology commercially competitive.”
For investors, this shift signals opportunity. Supportive government policy, rising electricity demand, AI-driven load growth, and decarbonization commitments are converging. Nuclear power, once viewed as a legacy industry, is re-emerging as a strategic solution.

A Measured Step Toward a Nuclear Renaissance
The DOE-Kairos agreement does not guarantee success. Advanced reactor development remains technically complex and capital-intensive. However, the deal’s structure reflects lessons learned from past nuclear projects.
By tying federal funding to performance milestones, DOE is promoting accountability. By combining public and private capital, the government is reducing financial risk while accelerating innovation.
Hermes now stands as one of the most closely watched advanced reactor projects in the United States. If Kairos delivers on schedule, the project could mark a turning point. Not just for one company but for the broader U.S. nuclear renaissance that policymakers increasingly envision.
In a world of rising electricity demand and tightening climate targets, advanced nuclear energy is inevitably essential. And with Hermes moving forward, it is becoming tangible infrastructure.
The post DOE’s $303M Bet on Kairos Power Signals America’s Advanced Nuclear Push appeared first on Carbon Credits.
Carbon Footprint
Finding Nature Based Solutions in Your Supply Chain
Carbon Footprint
How Climate Change Is Raising the Cost of Living
Americans are paying more for insurance, electricity, taxes, and home repairs every year. What many people may not realize is that climate change is already one of the drivers behind those rising costs.
For many households, climate change is no longer just an environmental issue. It is becoming a cost-of-living issue. While climate impacts like melting glaciers and shrinking polar ice can feel distant from everyday life, the financial effects are already showing up in monthly budgets across the country.
Today, a larger share of household income is consumed by fixed costs such as housing, insurance, utilities, and healthcare. (3) Climate change and climate inaction are adding pressure to many of those expenses through higher disaster recovery costs, rising energy demand, infrastructure repairs, and increased insurance risk.
The goal of this article is to help connect climate change to the everyday financial realities people already experience. Regardless of where someone stands on climate policy, it is important to recognize that climate change is already increasing costs for households, businesses, and taxpayers across the United States.
More conservative estimates indicate that the average household has experienced an increase of about $400 per year from observed climate change, while less conservative estimates suggest an increase of $900.(1) Those in more disaster-prone regions of the country face disproportionate costs, with some households experiencing climate-related costs averaging $1,300 per year.(1) Another study found that climate adaptation costs driven by climate change have already consumed over 3% of personal income in the U.S. since 2015.(9) By the end of the century, housing units could spend an additional $5,600 on adaptation costs.(1)
Whether we realize it or not, Americans are already paying for climate change through higher insurance premiums, energy costs, taxes, and infrastructure repairs. These growing expenses are often referred to as climate adaptation costs.
Without meaningful climate action, these costs are expected to continue rising. Choosing not to invest in climate action is also choosing to spend more on climate adaptation.
Here are a few ways climate change is already increasing the cost of living:
- Higher insurance costs from more frequent and severe storms
- Higher energy use during longer and hotter summers
- Higher electricity rates tied to storm recovery and grid upgrades
- Higher government spending and taxpayer-funded disaster recovery costs
The real debate is not whether climate change costs money. Americans are already paying for it. The question is where we want those costs to go. Should we invest more in climate action to help reduce future climate adaptation costs, or continue paying growing recovery and adaptation expenses in everyday life?
How Climate Change Is Increasing Insurance Costs
There is one industry that closely tracks the financial impact of natural disasters: insurance. Insurance companies are focused on assessing risk, estimating damages, and collecting enough revenue to cover losses and remain financially stable.
Comparing the 20-year periods 1980–1999 and 2000–2019, climate-related disasters increased 83% globally from 3,656 events to 6,681 events. The average time between billion-dollar disasters dropped from 82 days during the 1980s to 16 days during the last 10 years, and in 2025 the average time between disasters fell to just 10 days. (6)
According to the reinsurance firm Munich Re, total economic losses from natural disasters in 2024 exceeded $320 billion globally, nearly 40% higher than the decade-long annual average. Average annual inflation-adjusted costs more than quadrupled from $22.6 billion per year in the 1980s to $102 billion per year in the 2010s. Costs increased further to an average of $153.2 billion annually during 2020–2024, representing another 50% increase over the 2010s. (6)
In the United States, billion-dollar weather and climate disasters have also increased significantly. The average number of billion-dollar disasters per year has grown from roughly three annually during the 1980s to 19 annually over the last decade. In 2023 and 2024, the U.S. recorded 28 and 27 billion-dollar disasters respectively, both setting new records. (6)
The growing impact of climate change is one reason insurance costs continue to rise. “There are two things that drive insurance loss costs, which is the frequency of events and how much they cost,” said Robert Passmore, assistant vice president of personal lines at the Property Casualty Insurers Association of America. “So, as these events become more frequent, that’s definitely going to have an impact.” (8)
After adjusting for inflation, insurance costs have steadily increased over time. From 2000 to 2020, insurance costs consistently grew faster than the Consumer Price Index due to rising rebuilding costs and weather-related losses.(3) Between 2020 and 2023 alone, the average home insurance premium increased from $75 to $360 due to climate change impacts, with disaster-prone regions experiencing especially steep increases.(1) Since 2015, homeowners in some regions affected by more extreme weather have seen home insurance costs increased by nearly 57%.(1) Some insurers have also limited or stopped offering coverage in high-risk areas.(7)
For many families, rising insurance costs are no longer occasional financial burdens. They are becoming recurring monthly expenses tied directly to growing climate risk.
How Rising Temperatures Increase Household Energy Costs

The financial impacts of climate change extend beyond insurance. Rising temperatures are also changing how much energy Americans use and how utilities plan for future electricity demand.
Between 1950 and 2010, per capita electricity use increased 10-fold, though usage has flattened or slightly declined since 2012 due to more efficient appliances and LED lighting. (3) A significant share of increased energy demand comes from cooling needs associated with higher temperatures.
Over the last 20 years, the United States has experienced increasing Cooling Degree Days (CDD) and decreasing Heating Degree Days (HDD). Nearly all counties have become warmer over the past three decades, with some areas experiencing several hundred additional cooling degree days, equivalent to roughly one additional degree of warmth on most days. (1) This trend reflects a warming climate where air conditioning demand is increasing while heating demand generally declines. (4)
As temperatures continue rising, households are expected to spend more on cooling than they save on heating. The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) projects that by 2050, national Heating Degree Days will be 11% lower while Cooling Degree Days will be 28% higher than 2021 levels. Cooling demand is projected to rise 2.5 times faster than heating demand declines. (5)
These projections come from energy and infrastructure experts planning for future electricity demand and grid capacity needs. Utilities and grid operators are already preparing for higher peak summer electricity loads caused by rising temperatures. (5)
Longer and hotter summers also affect how homes and buildings are designed. Buildings constructed for past climate conditions may require upgrades such as larger air conditioning systems, stronger insulation, and improved ventilation to remain comfortable and energy efficient in the future. (10)
For many households, this means higher monthly utility bills and potentially higher long-term home improvement costs as temperatures continue to rise.
How Climate Change Affects Electricity Rates
On an inflation-adjusted basis, average U.S. residential electricity rates are slightly lower today than they were 50 years ago. (2) However, climate-related damage to utility infrastructure is creating new upward pressure on electricity costs.
Electric utilities rely heavily on above-ground poles, wires, transformers, and substations that can be damaged by hurricanes, storms, floods, and wildfires. Repairing and upgrading this infrastructure often requires substantial investment.
As a result, utilities are increasing electricity rates in response to wildfire and hurricane events to fund infrastructure repairs and future mitigation efforts. (1) The average cumulative increase in per-household electricity expenditures due to climate-related price changes is approximately $30. (1)
While this increase may appear modest today, utility costs are expected to rise further as climate-related infrastructure damage becomes more frequent and severe.
How Climate Disasters Increase Government Spending and Taxes
Extreme weather events also damage public infrastructure, including roads, schools, bridges, airports, water systems, and emergency services infrastructure. Recovery and rebuilding costs are often funded through taxpayer dollars at the federal, state, and local levels.
The average annual government cost tied to climate-related disaster recovery is estimated at nearly $142 per household. (1) States that frequently experience hurricanes, wildfires, tornadoes, or flooding can face even higher public recovery costs.
These expenses affect taxpayers whether they personally experience a disaster or not. Climate-related recovery spending can increase pressure on public budgets, emergency management systems, and infrastructure funding nationwide.
Reducing Climate Costs Through Climate Action
While this article focuses on the growing financial costs associated with climate change, the issue is not only about money for many people. It is also about recognizing our environmental impact and taking responsibility for reducing it in order to help preserve a healthy planet for future generations.
While individuals alone cannot solve climate change, collective action can help reduce future climate adaptation costs over time.
For those interested in taking action, there are three important steps:
- Estimate your carbon footprint to better understand the emissions connected to your lifestyle and activities.
- Create a plan to gradually reduce emissions through energy efficiency, cleaner technologies, and more sustainable choices.
- Address remaining emissions by supporting verified carbon reduction projects through carbon credits.
Carbon credits are one of the most cost-effective tools available for climate action because they help fund projects that generate verified emission reductions at scale. Supporting global emission reduction efforts can help reduce the long-term impacts and costs associated with climate change.
Visit Terrapass to learn more about carbon footprints, carbon credits, and climate action solutions.
The post How Climate Change Is Raising the Cost of Living appeared first on Terrapass.
Carbon Footprint
Carbon credit project stewardship: what happens after credit issuance
A carbon credit purchase is not a transaction that closes at issuance. The credit may be retired, the certificate filed, and the reporting box ticked. But on the ground, in the forest, in the field, and in the community, the work continues. It endures for years. In many cases, for decades.
![]()
-
Climate Change9 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases9 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Renewable Energy7 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
-
Greenhouse Gases10 months ago
嘉宾来稿:探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测

