TRISO-X Completes Vertical Construction Of TX-1 Fuel Fabrication Facility
The title of this post, is the same as that of this news item from X-energy.
These two bullet-points act as sub-headings.
Completion of vertical construction marks major milestone for first-in-the-nation commercial scale advanced nuclear fuel fabrication facility
Project advances into interior buildout, fuel fabrication equipment installation and construction of supporting facilities
These two paragraphs add more detail.
TRISO-X, LLC (“TRISO-X” or the “Company”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of X-Energy, Inc. (Nasdaq: XE) (“X-energy”), today announced the completion of vertical construction at TX-1, its first-in-the-nation advanced nuclear fuel fabrication facility in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. The milestone completes the primary building structure of the 214,000-square-foot facility and enables the project to advance fully into its next phase of construction, including interior buildout, installation of fuel fabrication equipment and continued construction of supporting facilities.
“Completing vertical construction is a major milestone for TX-1 and another tangible demonstration of the progress our team is making in Oak Ridge,” said Joel Duling, President of TRISO-X. “We are moving from constructing the core and shell of the facility to building out the interior utilities, installing manufacturing equipment, and constructing key support capabilities. Every milestone brings us closer to establishing a new domestic source of advanced nuclear fuel and supporting the deployment of the next generation of American nuclear reactors.”
Note.
- Oak Ridge is one of the United States premier nuclear facilities.
- It would be like building a similar facility for specialist nuclear reactor fuel at Harwell in the UK.
This is without doubt a very professional start to the X-energy programme.
I also feel that the fourth paragraph has important information.
Once operational, TX-1 is expected to produce approximately 700,000 TRISO-X fuel pebbles annually, equivalent to 5 metric tons of uranium (“MTU”), with capacity to provide fuel for up to 11 Xe-100 reactors. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (“NRC”) granted TRISO-X a 40-year Special Nuclear Material License for the facility earlier this year, the first-ever NRC Category 2 fuel fabrication license issued for the processing of high-assay low-enriched uranium. TX-1 is expected to be the first new commercial-scale advanced U.S. nuclear fuel fabrication facility built in more than 50 years.
Note.
- TX-1 will be able to support eleven Xe-100 reactors.
- Four Xe-100 reactors will be built initially at Dow’s Seadrift site.
- In Hartlepool Nuclear Reactor Moves To UK Regulatory Assessment, I said that Hartlepool will eventually be a 12-pack site.
I can envisage a fuel strategy based on TX-1, which is something like this.
TX-1 will provide the TRISO fuel for the four reactors at Dow’s Seadrift site.
TX-1 will provide the TRISO fuel for the initial reactor or reactors at a new site like Hartlepool, or for other licensees like Amazon or North Western.
TX-1 will be cloned as necessary to create TX-2, TX-3, TX-4 etc. as more Xe-100 reactors are built.
I am sure, that there is relevant expertise to make TRISO-X fuel pebbles safely in Japan, Korea and the UK of the known partners of X-energy.
The Wikipedia entry for the Dragon reactor finishes with these three paragraphs.
The choice of helium coolant was made after a long debate within the UKAEA between proponents of helium and carbon dioxide, with helium ultimately selected. Groundbreaking occurred in 1960. It operated from 1965 to 1976, and is generally considered extremely successful.
Dragon’s construction was followed by similar work in the US, leading ultimately to the much larger Fort Saint Vrain Nuclear Power Plant. This suffered from a number of problems due to corrosion and the customer soured on the design. Contracts for similar models in the US that were being signed were cancelled, and although Dragon suffered none of these issues, no orders were forthcoming in Europe either. By this time the market had largely standardized on the pressurized water reactor (PWR) for the large buildout that occurred during the 1970s and 80s, and the decision was made to shut down Dragon.
As of 2023, Dragon is being decommissioned.
Note.
- It appears only two reactors using TRISO fuel have been constructed.
- The 20 MW Dragon reactor was extremely successful.
- The 330 MW Fort Saint Vrain reactor had corrosion problems.
- Both reactors used helium gas as a coolant.
- The Wikipedia entry for the Fort Saint Vrain reactor details the corrosion problems.
- According to Google AI fuel for Fort Saint Vrain was fabricated at the General Atomic Fuel Fabrication Facility in San Diego, California.
- According to Google AI fuel for the Dragon reactor was fabricated on-site at Winfrith.
After writing these seven points, I have concluded that TRISO-fueled helium-cooled nuclear reactor designs better suited to small reactors?
What does Google AI think?
I asked Google AI “Are TRISO-fueled helium-cooled nuclear reactor designs better suited to small reactors?” and received this reply.
TRISO-fueled, helium-cooled reactor designs are exceptionally well-suited for small and micro-modular reactor applications because their physical properties scale down efficiently to provide inherent safety and high-temperature operation.
Why They Suit Small Reactors
Inherent Safety (Walk-Away Safe): Each TRISO fuel particle acts as its own tiny containment system, capable of withstanding extreme temperatures (well over 1,600°C) without melting or releasing radioactive fission products. In a small reactor design, the high surface-area-to-volume ratio allows residual decay heat to dissipate passively through the reactor vessel walls, meaning the reactor cannot suffer a catastrophic meltdown even if active cooling completely fails.
Simplified Helium Cooling: Helium is chemically inert and does not absorb neutrons or become radioactive. In smaller reactor configurations, helium’s single-phase gas state eliminates the high-pressure water loops and massive containment structures required by traditional large light-water reactors.
High-Temperature Process Heat: Because helium can operate at very high temperatures without boiling off, small TRISO-gas systems can deliver high-grade industrial heat (useful for chemical plants or hydrogen production) alongside electricity.
Compact Footprint: Small modular reactor (SMR) and microreactor developers (such as X-energy and Ultra Safe Nuclear Corporation) leverage these traits to design factory-fabricated units that can be transported and sited near urban or off-grid industrial locations.
Key Challenges
Power Density and Size: Helium has a lower volumetric heat capacity than water, meaning gas-cooled cores can be physically bulkier per megawatt than water-cooled equivalents, placing a premium on optimizing core geometry for micro-scales.
Supply Chain and Cost: High-Assay Low-Enriched Uranium (HALEU) and specialized TRISO manufacturing face immature supply chains and higher first-of-a-kind costs.
The more I read about X-energy’s technology, the more I like it.
With Federal Funding Windfall, X-energy Advances Small Nuclear Reactor
The title of this post, is the same as this article on Canary Media.
This is the sub-heading.
The Amazon-backed firm is aiming to build up to 144 of its novel Xe-100 reactors as the U.S. government seeks to revitalize an industry beset by rising costs
These three initial paragraphs add more detail.
The federal government has thrown its weight into reviving America’s long-stagnant nuclear industry, and X-energy’s first-of-a-kind reactor project is among the biggest beneficiaries so far.
The U.S. Department of Energy last month said it would award $1 billion to X-energy, an Amazon-backed advanced nuclear startup working to bring four novel 80-megawatt electric reactors online at a Dow Chemical facility in Seadrift, Texas, in the early 2030s.
The award nearly doubles the federal government’s commitment to X-energy, following a $1.2 billion investment in early 2021. Both tranches were structured as 50-50 cost-sharing agreements under the DOE’s Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program, launched in 2020 to commercialize next-generation nuclear technologies.
Note.
- It looks like X-energy are well-funded.
- It also looks like they have received funding under two different presidents.
- I like Dow’s concept of using nuclear to power a chemical complex, which needs both lots of electricity and heat.
- If they build 144 reactors, this will be twelve of the 12-pack power station, that they have said they will build at Hartlepool and I wrote about in Hartlepool Nuclear Reactor Moves To UK Regulatory Assessment.
The next phase would appear to be up to the regulators.
The article on Canary Media is well worth giving a full read.
These are some important highlights.
Dow Seem Enthusiastic And Would Be An Ideal First Customer
In any large project the first customer is always important.
- Dow seem to fit the part well.
- I also suspect, that as Dow turned over around $40 billion in fiscal year 2025, they know what they want.
Even in nuclear power, the customer is generally right.
Has X-energy Found Any Customers For The Xe-100?
I asked Google AI, this question and received this answer.
Yes, X-energy has secured major commercial customers and strategic partners for the Xe-100 reactor.
Key Customers and Partners
Dow: Partnering to deploy an Xe-100 four-pack plant at the Seadrift chemicals manufacturing site in Texas to provide low-carbon heat and power.
Amazon: Bankrolling and collaborating on up to 12 Xe-100 units via Energy Northwest in Washington state, alongside broader clean energy scaling for AI infrastructure.
Centrica: Partnering in the UK to deploy a potential fleet of up to 6 GW (10 to 20 reactors), targeting the Hartlepool site.
Energy Northwest: A Washington public power utility working collaboratively on project deployment frameworks.
Note.
When, the four partners, of which I was one, started to develop the Artemis project management system, the salesman of the four, did a survey of who might buy.
A proportion of these became valuable clients.
As X-energy also has a world-class engineering partner from Japan and Korea, I feel that they have done their preparation thoroughly.
Where Is The TRISO Fuel To Be Made?
According to the Canary Media article, it will be made near Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee.
- This could be handy for support.
- It could ease recruiting some of the staff with the right experience.
- There may also be useful sub-contractors in the area, with the right experience and certification.
The location is an excellent one.
Has Centrica Been Recruited Because They Are British?
According to its Wikipedia entry, the Dragon reactor, which used TRISO fuel, was generally considered extremely successful.
So by inviting Centrica to be involved, will X-energy be able to get access to the British files concerning the details of the Dragon reactor?
Their interpretation may be the difference between success and failure of the project.
I wouldn’t be surprised that there is a very trustworthy and knowledgeable network of very elderly British nuclear engineers, who enjoy meeting in pubs, with only the best real ales.
A Quick Visit To Hartlepool – 19th September 2026
I went to Hartlepool today from King’s Cross station.
These were my objectives.
- Assess Grand Central Trains current offering.
- See how Hartlepool station has improved since my last visit.
- Take some pictures of Hartlepool Nuclear Power Station.
These are some pictures I took.
Note.
Here are my thoughts on my objectives.
Grand Central Trains And Their Class 180 Trains
This is a summary of my journey from King’s Cross and Hartlepool.
- The journey took eight minutes under three hours and we arrived thirteen minutes late.
- The train was four minutes early at the Newark Crossing, one minute early at Doncaster and on-time at York. Was this good driving or was the driver having assistance from the digital signalling?
- Delays seemed to build up after York.
There was no trolley, so I didn’t have any refreshment.
This is a summary of my journey from Hartlepool and King’s Cross.
- The journey took seven minutes over three hours and we arrived one minute late.
- The train was two minutes late at York and Doncaster and a minute late at the Newark Crossing.
- As the train ran smoothly into King’s Cross, was it using the digital signalling, as I observed in Did My InterCity225 From Leeds Arrive Like An Airliner In King’s Cross?
- At King’s Cross we shared Platform 4, with a five-car Azuma, which shows the advantage of splitting the platforms into a and b.
There was again no trolley, but the buffet was in the next car.
Six Hours In A Class 180 Train Was Not Good For Me
I have not felt well today and I blame six hours in Class 180 trains yesterday.
I used to feel like this, after a ride in a Class 390 train, but since they have been fitted with better air-conditioning, I have not had a problem.
Hopefully, the Class 820 trains will be better.
Hartlepool Nuclear Reactor Moves To UK Regulatory Assessment
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on the Northern Echo.
This is the sub-heading.
Plans for a new generation of nuclear power stations moved closer after the Government approved the next regulatory stage for an advanced reactor planned for Hartlepool
These two paragraphs add more details.
The approval follows a partnership between X-energy and Centrica to build a new generation of UK nuclear power stations using Xe-100 Advanced Modular Reactors, starting in Hartlepool.
On the partnership’s first anniversary, the Government directed regulators to begin assessing X-energy’s Xe-100 reactor under the Generic Design Assessment, a major step towards commercial licensing in the UK.
This Google Map shows the area around the current Hartlepool Nuclear Power Station.
Note.
- Hartlepool Nuclear Power Station is indicated by the red arrow.
- Hartlepool serves as a major industrial, manufacturing, and logistics hub supporting offshore wind farms rather than a landing point for their electricity grid connections.
- Full details of the current nuclear power station is given in its Wikipedia entry, but here’s a summary.
- It is an Advanced Gas-Cooled Reactor, which uses carbon dioxide for cooling.
- It was commissioned in 1983.
- It is scheduled to be closed in 2030.
- It produces 1,185 MW of electricity.
- The current site has rail access from the Durham Coast Line.
Nothing is said in the article about the capacity or the timescale for building the new power station.
What Will Be The Capacity Of X-energy’s New Nuclear Power Station At Hartlepool?
I took a quick look with Google AI and received this answer.
AI Overview
X-energy’s planned new nuclear power station at Hartlepool is proposed to have a capacity of up to 960 megawatts (MW), using a 12-unit deployment of its Xe-100 advanced modular reactors.
Project Details
Technology: X-energy Xe-100 high-temperature, gas-cooled small modular reactor (each individual unit generates 80 MW of electricity).
Configuration: A 12-reactor plant (“12-pack” multi-unit layout).
Location: Adjacent to the existing Hartlepool Power Station in Teesside, northeast England.
Timeline: First electricity generation is targeted for the mid-2030s, following the scheduled closure of the current operating plant.
That was an excellent answer, that gave me all I needed.
Hartlepool’s Rail Links
This OpenRailwayMap shows the Durham Coast Line and the rail links to the current Hartlepool Nuclear Power Station.
Note.
- The orange track going North-South across the map is the Durham Coast Line between Newcastle and Middlesbrough.
- Hartlepool station is indicated by the blue arrow.
- A rail connection goes East from the Durham Coast Line to the Port of Hartlepool and the current Hartlepool Nuclear Power Station, which I believe is the big square building by the black line.
- Hartlepool station is served by six trains per day (tpd) to and from London King’s Cross, with five tpd on Sundays.
- All London services are operated by open access operator Grand Central Trains, who have new Hitachi Class 820 tri-mode trains on order for delivery in 2028.
Current timings are a few minutes over three hours, but I suspect that the new Hitachi trains could do the trip very close to three hours.
Centrica, X-energy Advance Nuclear Plans As UK Regulators To Begin Design Review For Xe-100
The title of this post, is the same as that of this press release from Centrica.
This is the sub-heading.
On the one-year anniversary of the Centrica X-energy partnership being signed, the UK Government has directed regulators to accept the X-energy Xe-100 Advanced Modular reactor into the Generic Design Assessment, marking a significant step toward UK commercial licensing.
Under their partnership, the companies intend to deploy up to 6 GW of new nuclear capacity in the UK (10-20 Xe-100 power stations depending on size of each installation)
These first two paragraphs add some details.
Centrica and X‑Energy, Inc., a leading developer of advanced nuclear reactors and fuel technology, today announced that X‑energy’s Xe‑100 Generation IV advanced Small Modular Reactor (“SMR”) has been accepted into the United Kingdom’s Generic Design Assessment (“GDA”) process.
GDA acceptance formally triggers the process of assessing the design’s acceptability for deployment and operation ahead of the technical and environmental evaluations required for site‑specific licensing and permitting. The assessment is expected to take approximately three years and will be administered by the UK Office for Nuclear Regulation (“ONR”), the Environment Agency (EA), and Natural Resources Wales
To learn more, I asked Google AI for what it knows on the Xe-100 reactor and I received this.
The Xe-100 is an advanced Generation IV high-temperature gas-cooled pebble-bed small modular nuclear reactor developed by the American company X-energy.
Key Specifications & Design
Power Output: Generates about 80 megawatts of electricity (MWe) or 200 MW thermal per unit, and can be scaled up into a four-pack configuration yielding 320 MW.
Cooling System: Uses inert helium gas instead of water to remove heat from the core, reaching operating temperatures above 750°C.
Fuel Type: Runs on proprietary TRISO-X fuel pebbles, where each billiard-ball-sized pebble contains roughly 18,000 microscopic TRISO fuel particles that act as individual containment vessels.
Note.
- 320 MW may seem small, but you have to remember Sizewell A was two 210 MW Magnox reactors and it operated for forty years.
- I like the choice of helium for a coolant. Especially, as the gas is widely used for cooling superconducting magnets, so there must be plenty of expertise.
- Helium is also present in the atmosphere at 5.2 parts per million.
- I also like the concept of the fuel pebbles.
These are some of my questions.
Where Was TRISO Fuel Developed?
The Wikipedia entry for TRISO Fuel has a History section, which starts with this paragraph.
Coated-particle ceramic fuels were initially developed in the United Kingdom as part of the Dragon reactor project. During the development of the Dragon reactor, its designers became concerned by the need to purge gaseous fission products from the reactor core and their potential migration to other parts of the reactor This concern led to the choice of coated-particle fuel, where the fuel would be formed from small particles of uranium then coated with pyrolytic carbon. The inclusion of silicon carbide as a diffusion barrier was first suggested by D. T. Livey in 1961, in order to better retain fission products.
Note.
- The United States and Germany made contributions to the development of TRISO fuel.
- the first commercial reactor to use TRISO, was the 330 MWe Fort Saint Vrain Nuclear Power Plant
- The experimental High Temperature Test Reactor in Japan, constructed in 1998, uses prismatic UO2 TRISO fuel.
- Japan has the only TRISO-fueled reactor in commercial operation.
- Oak Ridge National Laboratory in the United States, developed the process used to make TRISO fuel.
The Wikipedia entry for the Dragon reactor is worth a read.
These are the first two paragraphs of its Wikipedia entry.
Dragon was an experimental high temperature gas-cooled reactor at Winfrith in Dorset, England, operated by the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA). Its purpose was to test fuel and materials for the European High Temperature Reactor programme, which was exploring the use of tristructural-isotropic (TRISO) fuel and gas cooling for future high-efficiency reactor designs. The project was built and managed as an Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development/Nuclear Energy Agency international project. In total, 13 countries were involved in its design and operation during the project lifetime.
Originally conceived as a small research reactor, during the design phase it grew larger. The choice of helium coolant was made after a long debate within the UKAEA between proponents of helium and carbon dioxide, with helium ultimately selected. Groundbreaking occurred in 1960. It operated from 1965 to 1976, and is generally considered extremely successful.
Who Are The Technology Partners Of X-energy?
I had to ask Google AI this question and received this reply.
X-energy works with major technology, industrial, and energy partners to develop and deploy its advanced small modular nuclear reactors (SMRs) and TRISO-based fuel technology.
Key Technology and Strategic Partners
Amazon and AWS: A primary investor (through the Climate Pledge Fund) and customer, Amazon collaborates with X-energy on scaling nuclear energy for data centers and AI infrastructure. X-energy, Amazon Web Services (AWS), NVIDIA, and Idaho National Laboratory are founding members of Project Prometheus to apply AI to advanced nuclear deployment.
NVIDIA: A founding partner in Project Prometheus alongside AWS and Idaho National Laboratory, helping integrate AI accelerators and tools into nuclear design and operations.
Doosan Enerbility & Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power (KHNP): South Korean industrial partners collaborating to support multi-gigawatt deployments of Xe-100 reactors and manufacture key components.
Energy Northwest: A utility partner working on X-energy’s first-of-a-kind project development in Washington state.
Dow Inc.: Partnered with X-energy to deploy an initial four-unit Xe-100 plant at Dow’s Seadrift chemical manufacturing site in Texas.
Centrica: Partnered through a Joint Development Agreement to deploy Advanced Modular Reactors and pursue up to 6 gigawatts of new nuclear capacity in the United Kingdom.
IHI Corporation: Partnered to expand U.S.-Japan supply chain collaboration and commercial-scale manufacturing for reactor components.
Oak Ridge National Laboratory: Collaborates with X-energy’s fuel subsidiary, TRISO-X, on advanced nuclear fuel research.
Note.
- There are companies and organisations here from Korea, Japan, the US and the UK.
- Do Amazon and Centrica see an Xe-100 reactor as a reliable way of powering a data centre without a grid connection?
- The Korean and Japanese companies would be ideal to ensure the quality of reactor and other key compoonents.
- Chemical manufacturing sites use a lot of electricity and Dow’s contribution could define a widespread use of the Xe-100.
- Oak Ridge have been a client of mine in the past and like AWRE in England, I would trust their nuclear technology.
I also believe that if you put these companies in a joint venture, you’ll get out more ideas than you expect.
Who Are The Financial Partners Of X-energy?
I had to ask Google AI this question and received this reply.
Amazon & Climate Pledge Fund: Led major funding rounds (including a $500 million investment in 2024 and ongoing backing) and holds a significant stake in the company.
Jane Street: Led X-energy’s oversubscribed $700 million Series D financing round.
Ares Management: Provided financial backing and funds across multiple investment rounds alongside special purpose acquisition sponsorships.
Emerson Collective: Participated as a key venture capital backer across multiple funding rounds.
NGP Energy Capital Management: Contributed significant capital through multiple financing stages.
Segra Capital Management: Acted as an ongoing financial participant in major capital raises.
Other Investors: Includes ARK Invest, Point72, Galvanize, Ken Griffin (Citadel founder), XTX Ventures, Reaves Asset Management, and the University of Michigan.
Note that like the technology, the finance comes from a wide variety of sources.
This all sounds like a good positive start.
Will Centrica, X-energy Be Going For A Multi-Country Design Review For Xe-100?
There are four major countries with extensive nuclear power experience, with stakes in the Xe-100; Japan, Korea, the US and the UK.
There is also Oak Ridge in the US, which appears to be supplying the concept of the fuel.
If this group can’t convince the regulators in these four countries, that they have a safe and viable project, then they shouldn’t be in business.
Conclusion
It’s now mainly up to the regulators.
Unfortunately, you get stories with titles like this article on the BBC, which have a title of Green Party Leader Criticises Nuclear Reactor Plan.
Sizewell B Nuclear Plant To Get Life Extension
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on Energy Live News.
This is the sub-heading.
Power station was slated to close in 2035 but could have its life extended by two decades
These two paragraphs add detail to the story.
EDF and Centrica are preparing to invest around £800 million to keep Sizewell B generating for another 20 years, according to reports.
The Suffolk nuclear plant is currently due to close in 2035 but the companies are in talks with the UK Government over a deal that could extend operations to 2055.
These are also some facts from Wikipedia and other sources.
- Sizewell B was commissioned in 1995.
- It has a capacity of 1.2 GW.
- It provides three percent of the UK’s power.
- According to Google AI, Sizewell B has had an excellent safety record.
- Sizewell A is the only UK nuclear power plant that I have visited and I was very impressed how they managed the annual shutdowns.
Incidentally, according to Google AI, Sizewell A generated electricity for forty years and only had one alarming problem during decommissioning.
How Many Similar Nuclear Plants Are There In The World Like Sizewell B?
I have to ask this question, as when you are running old machines of any type, the more operational examples you have the better.
I asked Google AI and received this answer.
Sizewell B is the UK’s only commercial Pressurized Water Reactor (PWR). Its nuclear core is based on the Westinghouse 4-loop SNUPPS (Standardized Nuclear Unit Power Plant System). While hundreds of PWRs operate worldwide, only two exact global clones share this foundational design, alongside heavily adapted reactors.
The Exact SNUPPS Clones (2 in the world)
Sizewell B’s “nuclear island” is fundamentally based on the SNUPPS model developed in the 1970s.
Only two other plants share this exact base design:
Callaway Nuclear Generating Station (Missouri, USA)
Wolf Creek Generating Station (Kansas, USA)
Note: While Sizewell B utilizes this base architecture, it features significant UK-specific modifications, such as heavily diversified safety systems and an Emergency Boration System.
Similar 4-Loop Westinghouse PWRs
If you are looking at the broader Westinghouse 4-loop PWR family—the wider technological class that Sizewell B belongs to—there are dozens of similar reactors spread across the globe.
These operate in countries like the United States, France, South Korea, and China.
I have been over four PWRs of various makes in the United States and only one gave me any cause for concern.
My training at ICI taught me, that if you have a complicated and possibly dangerous plant or factory, you must keep it tidy, as that lowers the risk of accidents.
This nuclear power plant was the most untidy industrial plant I’d ever seen. Since I visited in the 1980s, it has been decommissioned and demolished.
Would I Be Happy To See Sizewell B Carry On Generating?
Obviously, I’d be guided by the various authorities and information from around the world.
But Sizewell has the Leiston factor. Leiston is the nearest town to the Sizewell site.
This is a paragraph from Leiston’s Wikipedia entry.
Leiston thrived in the late 19th and early 20th centuries as a manufacturing town, dominated by Richard Garrett & Sons, owners of Leiston Works, which boasted the world’s first flow assembly line, for the manufacture of portable steam engines. The firm also made steam tractors and a huge variety of cast and machined metal products, including munitions during both world wars. The works closed in 1981 and the site was reused as a mixture of housing, flats and industrial sites. The Long Shop Museum, showing the history, vehicles and products of the works, remains as a heritage tourist attraction.
Did the engineering heritage of the area contribute to the good safety records of the first two Sizewell nuclear power stations?
I also lived near the nuclear site at Sizewell for thirty years and the feeling of Suffolk people about the power stations is more one of pride, rather than fear.
Could Paddington And Minehead Be Within Range Of Hitachi Battery-Electric Intercity Trains?
I am prompted to ask this question, by an article in today’s Telegraph, which is entitled The New British Rail Services Reversing The Damage Of Beeching’s Axe.
Line 8. is given as the West Somerset Railway between London and Minehead?
This paragraph describes the idea.
As with the Severn Valley Railway (SVR) to Bewdley, the West Somerset Railway (WSR) looks like it could one day host mainline trains and connect communities along the route with destinations such as Taunton and Bristol. Like the SVR, the WSR is a very long and well-staffed heritage line with a long history (50 years, in fact, and it was one of Britain’s first heritage lines following its Beeching closure). Running to Minehead and Dunster, you don’t need me to tell you that this is a beautiful part of the world with numerous castles and beaches, and Exmoor National Park next door.
Note.
- The author doesn’t mention London services in the text.
- Batteries are not mentioned either.
- Minehead will be only about twenty miles from Hinckley Point C nuclear power station.
Is it feasible?
What Is The Battery Range Of An Hitachi Intercity Tri-Mode Battery Train?
In The Data Sheet For Hitachi Battery Electric Trains, I came to these conclusions.
- The battery pack has a capacity of 750 kWh.
- A five-car train needs three battery-packs to travel 100 miles.
- A nine-car train needs five battery-packs to travel 100 miles.
- The maximum range of a five-car train with three batteries is 117 miles.
- The maximum range of a nine-car train with five batteries is 121 miles.
As battery technology gets better, these distances will increase.
What Is The Distance Between Minehead And Taunton?
I shall be using 24.8 miles, which I have calculated from figures given in the Wikipedia entry for the West Somerset Railway.
What is The Distance Between Paddington And Taunton Via Newbury?
I shall be using 142.6 miles, which I have calculated from figures given in RealTimeTrains.
What Is The Maximum Range From Paddington Via Newbury Of An Hitachi Intercity Tri-Mode Battery Train?
Consider.
- The electrification runs between Paddington and Newbury.
- The distance between Paddington and Newbury is 53 miles, according to RealTimeTrains.
- Paddington and Taunton is almost 30 miles shorter by Newbury, than via Bath.
This Google Map shows Taunton station.
Taunton station looks spacious with numerous platforms and a hotel.
I believe that a five-car Hitachi Intercity train leaving Newbury with three full batteries could travel as far as 53+117 or 170 miles from Paddington.
Could A Hitachi Intercity Five-Car Train Reach Taunton?
This would mean that Taunton would be in range as it is only 142.6 miles.
The train would need to be recharged before returning to London.
Could A Hitachi Intercity Five-Car Train Reach Minehead?
But it could also have enough power in the batteries to reach Minehead, which is only a further 24.8 miles or 167.4 miles in total.
As with Taunton, the train would need to be recharged before returning to London.
Options For Charging Trains That Are Returning To London
This OpenRailwayMap shows the tracks through Taunton.
Note.
- Taunton station is indicated by the blue arrow.
- Running East-West across the map and through Taunton station, is the Reading-Taunton Line.
- Running more North-South across the map and through Taunton station, is the ~Bristol-Exeter Line.
- The two lines split going East at Cogload junction.
- Taunton station and Cogload junction are about 4.5 miles apart.
- Trains typically take about six minutes between the two places.
I believe there are three options for charging the trains.
Option 1 – Charge In Minehead Station
This would be possible, but as not all trains go to Minehead station, it probably wouldn’t be very practical.
Option 2 – Charge In Taunton Station
This would be possible, especially as most trains seem to call in Taunton station.
Option 3 – Electrify Between West Of Taunton Station And East Of Cogload Junction
Consider.
- The length of the electrification could be as long as is necessary.
- Trains would charge their batteries at line speed.
- Pantographs would be raised and lowered at line speed.
- Trains would not have to call at Taunton station.
- Trains could charge their batteries on both routes.
- Trains could charge their batteries in both directions.
I believe this could be the most efficient way to charge trains through Taunton.
Onward From Taunton
If the electrification through Taunton could be made long enough, so trains left the station with a full battery, the following would be possible.
- Going South trains should go past Plymouth.
- Going towards Newbury, trains should have enough in the batteries to reach Newbury and electrification for London.
- Going towards Chippenham, which is 63 miles away, trains should have enough in the batteries to reach Chippenham and electrification for London.
- Going towards Bristol Temple Meads, which is 44.8 miles away, trains should have enough in the batteries to reach Bristol Temple Meads.
Could A Feeder Network Of Local Trains Be Developed For HS2 At Lancaster Station?
Lancaster station is one of the less important stations that will be served by High Speed Two.
I visited in May 2025 and afterwards wrote Lancaster Station – 23rd May 2025.
This OpenRailwayMap shows the railway network around Lancaster.
Note.
- The red track on the East side of the map is the electrified West Coast Main Line.
- The location of Lancaster station is indicated by a blue arrow.
- Morecambe, where the Eden Project North is being developed and the important port of Heysham are on the coast to the West of Lancaster.
- Oxenholme station is towards the North-East corner of the map, on the main line.
- The Windermere branch connects to the main line at Oxenholme station.
- HS2 will use the West Coast Main Line and call at Lancaster and Oxenholme.
North of Oxenholme, HS2 calls at Penrith and Carlisle, before going on to Glasgow and Scotland.
West of the main line, the map is dominated by the waters of Morecambe Bay, which in recent decades has produced a lot of our gas, but is now transitioning to an area, that will produce a few gigawatts of wind power.
North of Morecambe Bay, there is the Lake District, with the shipbuilding at Barrow and the nuclear waste processing at Sellafield on the coast.
It is an important area of England, where there is a lot going on!
Tying it all together is the yellow ribbon of the Cumbrian Coast Line, which connects Carnforth and Carlisle on an hourly basis.
- The service calls at Grange-over-Sands, Barrow-in-Furness, Millom, Ravenglass, Drigg, Seascale, Sellafield, St Bees, Whitehaven, Workington, Maryport, Aspatria, Wigton and other places.
- Four services a day link Carlisle and Lancaster stations.
- Carlisle and Lancaster stations are 120.5 miles apart via the coast and according to Google AI, the journey takes between three and three-and-a-half hours.
- In From Barrow-in-Furness To Ravenglass, From Ravenglass to Sellafield and From Sellafield To Carlisle, there are some images, that give a flavour of the route.
This is a route, that is worth decarbonising.
Consider.
- There is a couple of gigawatt of wind power in the bay to charge any batteries with green electricity or make green hydrogen.
- There is a project called BARROW GREEN HYDROGEN, which is located in Barrow-in-Furness.
- Both hydrogen and battery-powered trains could handle the hundred and twenty miles of the Cumbrian Coast Line.
- A zero-carbon train running silently round the Lake District could be a tourist attraction in its own right.
- Hydrogen-powered buses could provide the local transport.
Given the scenery and the closeness to the Lake District and High Speed Two, I suspect that major train manufacturers like Alstom, CAF and Siemens will be keen to bid.
EU Nuclear Push Opens Door For More Pink Hydrogen
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on H2-View.
These four paragraphs introduce the article.
The European Commission has given a renewed push to nuclear development, which may open the door for more pink hydrogen.
Direct, large-scale pink hydrogen production in Europe is currently very limited, as the industry is still in its pilot and policy-alignment phase. Over 95% of European hydrogen is still produced from fossil fuels, primarily through steam methane reforming.
Speaking at the Nuclear Energy Summit, President Ursula von der Leyen pledged €200m to support private investment in nuclear technologies and unveiled a new European strategy for small modular reactors with the aim that they are operational by the early 2030s. Funding will come from the Emissions Trading System.
“After years of declining investment, we need more to turn the tide,” she said.
It is certainly an article worth giving a good read, as it is a view from the very top.
Cummins To Cease New Electrolyser Activity Amid Worsening Market
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on Renewables Now.
These are the first three paragraphs.
Cummins Inc has decided to stop new commercial activity in the electrolysers space following a strategic review of the segment launched last year, citing deteriorating market conditions and weakening customer demand.
The decision is linked to USD 458 million (EUR 388.4m) of charges for the full-year 2025 related to the electrolyser business within the company’s zero-emission technologies arm, Accelera, of which USD 415 million were non-cash charges.
The company noted that it will continue to fulfil existing customer commitments before winding down new commercial activity in the segment.
Although, I am in favour of using hydrogen as a fuel, I recognise, that traditional electrolysis is not the most efficient process.
These methods are more efficient.
HiiROC
- HiiROC use a process, that they call Thermal Plasma Electrolysis to split any hydrocarbon gas into hydrogen and carbon black.
- HiiROC originated in the University of Hull.
- Typical gases that can be used are chemical plant off-gas, biomethane and methane.
- I like the ability to use chemical plant off-gas, as some of this is particularly nasty and HiiROC may offer safe disposal.
But the big advantage is that the HiiROC process is five times more energy efficient than traditional electrolysis.
The carbon black is no useless by-product, but has several valuable uses in its own right, which are detailed in its Wikipedia entry.
These two paragraphs from Wikipedia, give a summary of the more common uses of carbon black.
The most common use (70%) of carbon black is as a reinforcing phase in automobile tires. Carbon black also helps conduct heat away from the tread and belt area of the tire, reducing thermal damage and increasing tire life. Its low cost makes it a common addition to cathodes and anodes and is considered a safe replacement to lithium metal in lithium-ion batteries. About 20% of world production goes into belts, hoses, and other non-tire rubber goods. The remaining 10% use of carbon black comes from pigment in inks, coatings, and plastics, as well as being used as a conductive additive in lithium-ion batteries.
Carbon black is added to polypropylene because it absorbs ultraviolet radiation, which otherwise causes the material to degrade. Carbon black particles are also employed in some radar absorbent materials, in photocopier and laser printer toner, and in other inks and paints. The high tinting strength and stability of carbon black has also provided use in coloring of resins and films. Carbon black has been used in various applications for electronics. A good conductor of electricity, carbon black is used as a filler mixed in plastics, elastomer, films, adhesives, and paints. It is used as an antistatic additive agent in automobile fuel caps and pipes.
It can also be used as a soil improver in agriculture.
HiiROC would appear to be five times more energy efficient than traditional electrolysis.
I would also rate the range of their investors as a particular strength.
Google AI lists these companies as investors.
HiiROC, a UK-based developer of plasma torch technology for “turquoise” hydrogen production, is backed by a consortium of industrial and strategic investors. Key investors include Centrica, Melrose Industries, Hyundai Motor Company, Kia, HydrogenOne Capital, CEMEX Ventures, Wintershall Dea, and VNG.
Note.
- CEMEX must be going to decarbonise cement making.
- Melrose describe themselves as an industry-leading aerospace technology provider.
- Will we be seeing hydrogen cars from Korean manufacturers?
- Wintershall Dea is Europe’s leading independent gas and oil company.
HiiROC has an impressive list of investors.
Bloom Energy
I wrote about Bloom Energy’s process in Westinghouse And Bloom Energy To Team Up For Pink Hydrogen.
This method also looks promising.
- Westinghouse Electric Company is an American builder of nuclear power stations.
- Bloom Energy Corporation make a solid-oxide electrolyser.
- Pink hydrogen is green hydrogen produced using nuclear power.
It uses electrolysis at a higher temperature, which speeds it up.
Desert Bloom
This is an Australian process, that I wrote about in 10GW Green Hydrogen Project Aims To Electrolyze Water Drawn From Desert Air.
Conclusion
You can understand, why Cummins are getting jumpy!
But you have to remember that when I worked in a hydrogen plant in the 1960s, the hydrogen was an unwanted by-product and it was mixed with coal gas and sent down the power station to raise steam, so that it could be used to do something useful.
