Elsewhere in the United States, major AI developers and Big Tech firms are turning to nuclear energy for long-term electricity agreements. As it is a carbon-free energy technology, nuclear power helps AI companies stick to emissions reduction goals while also securing reliable base-load power.

However, in California, the tech industry is not able to explore that option.

Since 1976, California has barred the licensing and construction of nuclear reactors until the federal government establishes a permanent solution for radioactive waste disposal. While companies can explore nuclear projects, new reactors cannot be built.

Lifting the moratorium could open the state to billions of dollars’ worth of investments, letting it participate in the nuclear energy revival across the U.S., with advanced nuclear developers moving to build small modular reactors and microreactors in both blue- and red-leaning states.

Becerra has not indicated whether he wants California to play a role in that nuclear renaissance. In contrast, his Republican opponent, Steve Hilton, has said he favors building new plants. But whether Becerra would break with his party’s historic skepticism of nuclear power is an open question.

Where does Becerra stand on nuclear energy? 

Becerra, who has been the attorney general of California and secretary of health and human services under former President Joe Biden, has steered clear of a full endorsement of nuclear energy.

Democrats, particularly those in California, have traditionally been resistant to the idea of building nuclear power plants out of concerns regarding public health, radioactive waste, and the risk of earthquakes in the state.

“There is a fear here that, you know, nuclear power is a disaster waiting to happen, and I don’t think that I don’t think that fear has dissipated in the public consciousness,” Garry South, a veteran Democratic strategist in California, told the Washington Examiner.

“I think that any viable candidate for governor would be relatively foolish, I think, to, as part of their energy policy, to start talking about how we want to commission more nuclear power plants,” he continued.

South, who has managed four gubernatorial campaigns in California, explained that as nuclear energy has been pushed out of the state, it is no longer a common topic of conversation.

At the time the moratorium was put in place in the 1970s, California had two operating nuclear power plants, with a third under construction. But costs associated with operating and addressing equipment failures rose, and anti-nuclear sentiments grew, causing the Rancho Seco and San Onofre nuclear facilities to close permanently in 1989 and 2012, respectively.

The state now only has one active nuclear power plant: Diablo Canyon, located in San Luis Obispo County, about 100 miles north of Santa Barbara. It produces around 10% of the state’s total electricity demand.

The plant’s two reactors were originally scheduled to shut down in 2024 and 2025, but state lawmakers extended operations through 2030 due to their significant contribution to the local grid.

In early April of this year, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission approved a license renewal request from Diablo Canyon, allowing the facility to run through 2045. The plan still needs approval from the state legislature and the governor.

Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA), who backed the first extension to 2030, is leaving that decision up to his successor.

Extending the plant’s operations would send a major signal that the new governor would support the development of nuclear power, helping meet rising energy demands and the state’s ambitious climate goals.

During a May debate ahead of the California primary, several gubernatorial candidates were asked if they would support extending Diablo Canyon’s life span. All of the candidates, Republican and Democratic, indicated they would support the extension. But Becerra added a caveat.

“Yes, but safety first,” he said.

That remark represents one of the few indications Becerra has given about his approach to nuclear power more generally.

Ryan Pickering, an energy developer and nuclear power advocate based in California, told the Washington Examiner that the invocation of safety could signal an overall approach that would be at odds with the rapid development of nuclear energy.

“We have to move past nuclear fear — backed by recent data on safety records, used fuel storage and recycling, and climate and economic benefits,” he said.

More broadly, Becerra has not highlighted nuclear power as part of his energy strategy. Instead, the Democrat has focused his campaign policies on affordability and decarbonization.

South said Becerra is on safe ground, politically, in favoring renewable energy sources.

“To most Californians, you know, the future is alternative energy,” he said. “It’s not nuclear.”

Earlier this month, Becerra announced what he called a “power hour” initiative to give lower-income families two hours of free electricity each day.

This would primarily lean on excess electricity produced by solar, though Pickering said nuclear energy should be utilized as well.

“Definitely keep Diablo open for that,” he said. “That’ll help.”

Becerra served in the House of Representatives from 1993 to 2017. While in Congress, he voted against the Energy Policy Act of 2005, which was designed to promote the construction of nuclear reactors during then-President George W. Bush’s administration.

When asked for clarification on his views regarding nuclear energy in California, Becerra’s campaign pointed to his public comments that expressed support for extending Diablo Canyon’s operations in a safe manner.

Where does Steve Hilton stand on nuclear energy?

Becerra is facing off against Steve Hilton, a British-born political strategist and top adviser to former British Prime Minister David Cameron.

Hilton is aiming to become the first Republican governor of California since Arnold Schwarzenegger and has touted nuclear energy during his campaign.

As part of his energy policy, the former Fox News host has called for the repeal of solar and wind subsidies in the state, instead prioritizing “affordable, reliable energy.”

“Allow natural gas, nuclear, and consumer-driven rooftop solar to compete on a level playing field, free from government mandates that tilt the market,” his campaign website reads.

Hilton has also called for planning for utilizing nuclear energy in the “long term,” in social media posts.

Like Becerra, Hilton voiced his support for extending the life span of the Diablo Canyon Power Plant if elected governor, though the Republican took his support a step further.

“Yes, extend it and build new ones,” he said.

Decisions the next governor will face

The first decision facing the next governor of California will be whether to extend Diablo Canyon’s operating lifespan.

While both Becerra and Hilton have indicated support for this, it is not clear if either would do this on Day 1 as governor. They should not wait too long though, South said.

“My advice to any governor, and I’ve advised a couple of them, is to not let these things lag,” he told the Washington Examiner.

He reflected on the tenure of former Gov. Gray Davis, who was recalled from office in 2003. South, who managed the Democrat’s gubernatorial campaigns, explained that Davis was ousted in a large part due to the California electricity crisis in the early 2000s.

“It wasn’t his fault,” South said. “He had nothing to do with the botched electricity deregulation scheme that was pushed for and signed by his Republican predecessor. But because the ill effects occurred on his watch, he was recalled from office because of it, and that is a precedent that any future governor of California is going to have to look at with respect to what they do with the Diablo Canyon.”

The next governor will also likely face pressure from the state legislature to open a pathway for future nuclear reactors.

In February, the Washington Examiner was the first to report that Democratic State Assemblywoman Lisa Calderon, who represents parts of southeastern Los Angeles County and the San Gabriel Valley, would introduce a bill to amend the state’s long-standing moratorium on nuclear power.

The original bill sought to update the moratorium to clarify that it no longer applied to advanced reactors licensed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in the last 20 years, meaning developers would be able to build small modular reactors and microreactors.

“This is a valuable study for the world because it’s an opportunity to model combining solar storage and nuclear to see if it actually works and provides a real benefit because we have so much,” Pickering said. “We have more solar and storage than almost anywhere in the world, and we’re going to get to model how that interacts with nuclear, and that would provide real benefit.”

Over the last six months, that bill has been amended several times, transforming into a piece of legislation that would require additional research supporting the development of nuclear energy in California.

If signed into law, the bill would require the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission to prepare a study on the role of advanced nuclear technologies for supporting critical infrastructure, meeting electricity demands, and achieving the state’s ambitious climate goals of achieving “net-zero” by 2045 — meaning the amount of emissions released into the atmosphere is no greater than the amount being removed.

The bill, which now has nine additional Democratic and Republican co-sponsors, advanced out of the state Assembly in May and awaits a vote in the state Senate.

If passed, it could hit the governor’s desk ahead of the November election. Though if that occurs, Newsom may very well punt a decision on signing it to his successor, as he has done with Diablo Canyon.

The third and most consequential decision the next governor will likely face in the next few years will be whether to lift the state’s moratorium on nuclear power entirely.

Several Democratic states have already done so in the last year to meet surging demand, including Illinois and New Jersey.

South said he is not convinced a Democratic governor such as Becerra would make it a priority, as California has pushed for the development of renewables at a faster rate than those other states.

“To some degree, it depends clearly on how much alternative energy comes online between now and 2030,” he said. “I think any governor, any Democratic governor, is going to just like Newsom has, [and] is going to push alternative energy over and above nuclear power, and that includes whether or not Diablo Canyon is decommissioned.”

Pickering, on the other hand, expressed hope that the bipartisan support in the state’s legislature will encourage the next administration to explore, at the very least, revising the moratorium.

NEARLY 50-YEAR-OLD LAW HAMSTRINGS NUCLEAR ENERGY IN CALIFORNIA

“I think the moratorium is on its way out, no matter what, or a certain subject to be updated at least, to allow for new nuclear, no matter what,” Pickering said.

“It’s on that track. … I’m just glad that both have highlighted that Diablo is valuable,” Pickering said. “And if Diablo is valuable, certainly more nuclear would be valuable as well.”