New nuclear
in Illinois
A government affairs plan to build Blue Energy plants: the legislature, the ICC, and everyone in between.
Where AI helped, and where it did not
Copilot, on BIPA background
I was unfamiliar with BIPA, so I asked Copilot why the bill came about. I like to know the impetus behind any proposal.
Claude, on this site
Built this presentation from my talking points: layout, figures, and styling. It also gathered public sources for the Illinois context slide.
The thinking
The strategy, the recommendations, and every example from my own work. Ask me about any of it.
How I will walk through this
My general approach first. Then the specific legislative and regulatory questions, with real examples from my own work along the way.
Interrupt me any time. Questions in real time are welcome.
Illinois, in one slide
Three sites, one strategic investor, and four policy fronts moving at once.
- Moratorium
- Lifted. Repeal signed January 2026. Governor's goal: at least 2 GW of new nuclear.
- Constellation
- Owns all 11 Illinois reactors and is a strategic investor in Blue Energy. Plans uprates; new units only at existing stations.
- ICC
- First-ever IRP. Year-long docket opens in November. Chair aligned with the Governor.
- Power Act
- Bring Your Own New Clean Capacity and Energy for data centers, plus water use rules.
- BIPA
- Biometric liability that keeps hyperscalers cautious about Illinois.
- CEJA
- Gas phaseout by 2045. Amendments could surface in the fall veto session.
Sources in appendix. Site details from the case prompt.
How I approach this work
Keep these three in mind as we get specific.
Not just lawmakers and commissioners
Landowners, community members, and non-energy groups need to have our backs.
Fly-by-night development sours people. That is what leads to NIMBYism.
Never ask a stranger
We should never be asking someone for something if we have not previously met.
Partner whenever possible
Utilities carry real weight in states. Constellation already has a stake in Blue Energy and in new nuclear. No need to reinvent the wheel if their GA effort can help carry us.
I like to have a partner whenever possible. The weirder the better.
Three outcomes. Three different fights.
| Outcome, in priority order | Who is fighting | My approach |
|---|---|---|
| a Power Act counts advanced nuclear | The bill's clean energy advocates built its supply plans around new renewables and storage | Define clean without being technology prescriptive. Credit accredited capacity. |
| b BIPA rollback | Trial lawyers against data centers, labor, and generators | Reform, not repeal. Lead a new coalition through an emerging-industries lens. |
| c CEJA gas phaseout extension | The environmental lobby against generators, labor, and supply realists | Offramps for reliability and affordability, not a fight over the deadline. |
And if all three fail, there is still a path. That comes after the ICC.
I have run this play before
My portfolio includes the largest cogeneration site in the United States, once the largest in the world. It sells power and steam.
2023. The first Democratic trifecta in 40 years proposes 100% renewable by 2035. That would have forced our early retirement.
The groundwork was already there. Lawmakers had toured the site. Locals were proud to have us.
We worked it together. Legislators, offtakers like Dow and Corteva, the firefighters, and our commercial team in the room.
From renewable to clean
We changed the definition and helped write it without being technology prescriptive.
A specific carve-out
The most flexibility of any generator in the state, with offramps for reliability and affordability. It made our power the most valuable to utilities, so they signed PPAs with us.
I can advocate for policy all day long. If it is not technically feasible, it is not good policy.
Get nuclear inside the definition
The Power Act is the Michigan fight in a new form. The question is what counts as clean.
- As introduced
- Data centers must bring new clean capacity and energy, framed around renewables and battery storage.
- The carrot
- Faster interconnection and firm service for data centers that do.
- Lawmakers see the site and the scale before we ask for anything.
- Commercial is in the room, so every ask is technically feasible.
- Write the definition around outcomes, not technologies.
- A clean, firm supply makes us the obvious partner for a data center that has to bring its own.
Reform, not repeal
If we went for rollback
Start with Rep. Ugaste and Sen. Cunningham, who backed the 2024 amendment. Chambers of Commerce help. No organized group exists for rollback, so we would have to lead one.
Why I would not
- There is a clear opening for targeted reform. The law dates to 2008 and was amended in 2024.
- Think about the worst-case read. BIPA was written to build consumer confidence in a new technology. Nuclear has its own confidence campaign ahead. Blue Energy should not look like it is dismantling a consumer protection.
A coalition for strategic reform is the better approach.
Make it about emerging industries
National security and economic development. Two budding industries looking to grow in Illinois.
Powering the quantum state. Quantum companies, universities, and organized labor advocating through an economic development lens. Northrop Grumman's large Illinois campus brings the national security voice.
Clean molecules. SAF producers use SMR steam and hydrogen to cut the carbon intensity of jet fuel, like Dow at my Michigan site. That brings United Airlines' GA team into the mix.
Ask for offramps, not a new deadline
My read on the IRP. It will show Illinois does not have enough generation coming online for current demand, let alone large-load and data center scenarios.
Frame it like Michigan. Extension options triggered by reliability or affordability concerns. Never "we can't meet this deadline."
Get creative with partners. GE Vernova makes the BWRX-300 and dual-fuel turbines. Could a hydrogen-capable unit qualify under the phaseout and run past 2045? Or exempt bridge technology that is explicitly bridging to clean power.
Sell the need, not the project.
This is Illinois's first IRP. It is the litmus test for every one after it. Shape the process, and our two to three projects fit the answer.
Illinois will have an X MW accredited-capacity deficiency in Northern Illinois beginning in 2030 under plausible data-center load scenarios. That deficiency requires a resource capable of providing Y MW during the highest-risk hours while satisfying Illinois's statutory emissions trajectory.
Be top of mind before the docket opens
Shape the inputs
- Site visits, even if it is just land
- Stakeholder workshops
- Scenario-development discussions
- Data input requests
Work the record
- Participate formally in support of state procurement of long-term nuclear supply contracts.
- No direct contact with Commissioners once the docket opens. The relationships have to exist before November.
- Many voices for and against nuclear will be in the docket. Ours should already be familiar.
We met with no ask. A year later, he referred us by name.
There is still a path
Other states have tools Illinois does not. Advocate for them in tandem, or instead if the legislative goals fail.
Grant funding appropriations
A regulatory environment that streamlines permitting
Financial incentives like ERCs and other credit mechanisms
What I am building now: a regional trading regime for emission reduction credits under the Clean Air Act, for nonattainment zones. SMRs operating outside nonattainment areas could sell their ERCs into that network.
How I run it
| Resource | Why |
|---|---|
| In-state lobbyist Required | Gets meetings where we have no relationship. Worth it, rather than going it alone. |
| Chamber of Commerce Nice to have | Useful participation, but not a requirement. |
When we do have an ask, they already know us as a trusted stakeholder.
Three times this worked
The clean energy plan
A tech-neutral definition and a plant-specific carve-out kept the largest cogen site in the US running.
First Solar and Sen. Tillis
We partnered with First Solar to lobby Sen. Tillis, who became one of the only Republicans to vote against OBBBA.
Rep. Gosar and the tax committee
An intro meeting with no ask turned into our panel on how the state should tax SMRs.
Known before we need them
Early, local, and in unusual company. That is how Blue Energy builds in Illinois, and in the next state after it.
Press A for appendix · ? for controls
What Blue Energy asked
As a resource-limited startup, how do we participate to secure a favorable path for new nuclear and hyperscaler offtake, protect against impediments, and build or join a winning coalition? What resources are required?
How do we position for the IRP before the docket opens and during a year-long formal process, with no direct Commissioner contact once it opens?
A unified campaign from the Governor to local officials, business, labor, and environmental NGOs, with the adjacent RTOs in view. Internal teams, external partners, and how to measure success.
Sources for the context slides
- ExchangeMonitor, Jul 30 2026: ICC notice of inquiry responses from Constellation, Blue Energy, and NANO Nuclear; moratorium repeal; 2 GW goal.
- World Nuclear News: Constellation Technology Ventures' strategic investment in Blue Energy.
- Illinois Clean Jobs Coalition, Feb 11 2026: Power Act introduction and BYONCCE.
- Prairie Rivers Network: BYONCCE framed around new renewables and battery storage.
- ILGA, SB 2979 bill status: the 2024 BIPA amendment, sponsored by Sen. Cunningham.
- ILGA, Rep. Dan Ugaste: sponsor of HB 2838, BIPA security purposes.