Why AB305 deserves support

OPINION – As the California Assembly considers AB305, bipartisan legislation that could rewrite California’s energy future, the stakes could not be higher.

The bill would exempt small modular reactors (SMRs) from the state’s nuclear moratorium in an attempt to end California’s reliance on fossil gas and carve out a new path for an abundant, carbon-free energy future.

As a father raising my family near Diablo Canyon and the CEO of a company dedicated to advancing nuclear innovation through AI, I believe this moment represents California’s best opportunity to maintain its leadership in clean energy technology.

The state certainly needs power. Since 2010, residential bills have jumped over 75%, outpacing the national average increase of just 21%. That’s a real financial burden on California households.

Meanwhile, commercial and industrial ratepayers shoulder over $17.5 billion more in costs compared to out-of-state competitors. That means higher prices for California consumers and decreased competitiveness for our businesses.

And for the tech industry that drives much of California’s economy, risks of rising energy costs and a lack of clean, firm baseload power are an existential threat. New technologies like artificial intelligence require immense amounts of power. Analysts at Goldman Sachs predict AI applications would increase data center power demands by 167% through 2030 – and these facilities need reliability that cannot be met by intermittent energy.

California, the birthplace of AI innovation, risks losing these high-value industries to states with more affordable, reliable electricity.

SMRs represent a new approach to nuclear energy. Unlike traditional nuclear plants, SMRs can be manufactured in factories, transported to sites, and scaled to match specific needs. These reactors incorporate inherent safety features that significantly reduce risk profiles.

Simplified designs and modularity create significant savings that could make SMRs competitive while slashing carbon emissions. Their smaller footprint means an ability to site them where large plants won’t work, and they can scale incrementally as demand grows – perfect for pairing with renewables in hybrid systems.

Critics cite statistics about SMRs’ current capital costs, which run about 41% higher than large reactors. And the IEEFA says SMRs are currently too expensive, and too slow to build for an immediate energy transition. Indeed, there are major knowledge gaps in understanding their full lifecycle costs – particularly around operations, decommissioning, and the real economics of modular construction.

The questions and concerns are valid, but hypothetical. Until these new technologies deploy, there is no way to know whether they can achieve the economies of scale they promise. The only way to find out is to build them. In this, California can either lead or fall behind.

California now has the opportunity to join a nuclear renaissance already underway in states like Wyoming, Tennessee, and Texas. Both Tennessee and Texas are proposing to pour hundreds of millions to billions of dollars into their nuclear efforts. This is an economic opportunity other states refuse to ignore, and California can afford to do no less.

For communities across California, SMRs represent more than just power generation. They bring high-paying jobs, STEM education opportunities, stable tax revenue, and community resilience. In regions facing economic challenges, these facilities can serve as anchors of prosperity.

“I’ve introduced Assembly Bill 305 because our families in California want and need access to affordable and reliable electricity,” Assemblymember Joaquin Arambula told me. “In my district in the heart of the Central Valley, many families are struggling to make ends meet, whether it’s putting food on the table, paying the rent, or buying gas for the family car… We must offer other options to our residents as relief from the climbing costs of living.”

Critics often mischaracterize nuclear legislation, so let’s be clear about AB305. This bill does not automatically approve construction of any nuclear facility. Rather, it creates a regulatory framework that allows California to properly evaluate SMR opportunities.

The nuclear moratorium, enacted in 1976 during a different technological era, has served its purpose. Today’s SMRs represent a fundamentally different approach to nuclear energy that deserves fair consideration under modern safety and environmental standards.

California’s ambitious climate goals require honest assessment of our energy options. Despite world-leading investments in wind and solar, the state has been forced to increase natural gas generation during peak demand periods and continues importing power from neighboring states, including electricity produced by coal plants and nuclear plants.

The simple truth is that a diverse clean energy portfolio—including nuclear—represents our only realistic path to deep decarbonization while maintaining reliability.

Trey Lauderdale is CEO of Atomic Canyon, a California-based company developing AI systems for nuclear energy innovation.