Why a group of Utah lawmakers visited this nuclear lab

A contingent of Utah lawmakers, university presidents and key policymakers recently flew into Idaho Falls for a daylong visit to learn about the future of energy in a Western grid straining under pressure from growing demand.
It was a long, grueling day and a whirlwind tour of the nation’s premier U.S. Department of Energy facility engaged with a primary focus on nuclear energy. At the remote site, called the Idaho National Laboratory, some of the nation’s most important research plays out to help the United States develop viable carbon free options in the energy space.
Think of energy supply. Manufacturing. Real options to cut emissions in far away countries while the military conducts operations while not relying on diesel generation. Even think of your own electric vehicle battery and if it performs under pressure with cold temperatures or searing heat. Hydrogen capabilities. Linking solar and wind and putting next generation nuclear reactors under the most intense pressure with extreme conditions.
All this takes place in just a few-hours drive north on I-15 from Salt Lake City and just west of Idaho Falls, where researchers were the first in the nation to turn on a light bulb using nuclear energy.
Microreactors. Energy Systems Laboratory. The Gateway for Accelerated Innovation in Nuclear, or GAIN. The fuel cycle, enrichment and reprocessing. It was a lot to take in, even for a pair of Utah lawmakers that have been studying the energy sector for decades.
Both Rep. Carl Albrecht, R-Richfield, and Rep. Colin Jack, R-St. George, each with backgrounds in the energy industry, say they see a grim future for energy across Utah and the rest of the nation unless improvements are made.
The lawmakers say without future investment, they fear the western United States will fall the way of the Midwest, which has rolling blackouts and severe power interruptions.
Albrecht and Jack say there is so much interest for data centers and AI facilities in the state, Utah will not meet the energy demand with its existing grid.
“We’ve had requests for more power for data centers than the whole state of Utah uses, and so there’s got to be more resources built. And you know, even though we’ve got a lot of coal and natural gas, those are short-term things. I think eventually we got to cross that bridge and go to nuclear,” said Albrecht, who chairs the legislature’s House Public Utilities, Technology and Energy Committee.
“There’s more demand for energy than what is coming in.”
Laura Nelson served as Utah Gov. Gary Herbert’s energy adviser and helped shape policy to guide the state into a future increasingly complicated by complex regulatory hurdles for coal-fired power plants and the use of natural gas.
She now serves as the regional engagement lead for Utah on behalf of the Idaho National Laboratory in a role designed to inform and present innovation options for the Beehive State.
To be clear, INL and the suite of other research laboratories under the U.S. Department of Energy are not engaged in policy, but act as test beds and innovation to put technology to the test and see if it works.
Nelson said the visit by the Utah group was fruitful and she believes they walked away with information that can help guide the state to an energy future with more options.
“We can really serve as that objective, trusted source of information. So certainly, the tours are a great starting point, and then the conversation can continue,” she said. “I think their understanding of our capabilities was enhanced.”
But critics have raised concern over costs to ratepayers, the disposal of waste and the overall viability of this next generation nuclear technology — even in a world where base load carbon-free energy is needed
Albrecht said the Western grid is on the “razor’s edge” in terms of surplus energy.
“So right now, we are kinda on the short end of the stick,” he said, in terms of new energy development.
Jack said the answer is nuclear, despite its critics, and frankly he is worried about the continued electrification of the United States.
“Besides my 37 years working in America, before I started being a legislator, I spent 30 years moonlighting as a consultant for international projects, and I’ve done 30 years to 30 different countries, and I can tell you that the difference electrification makes in developing countries is huge, and America does not want to go back to being without electrification.”
For him it is a matter of practicality and getting an edge on competing countries such as China.
“So I question what is, you know, if you’re worried about carbon dioxide, and if you are not anti-human, then nuclear” is needed.