2026-02-07 00:38:11
For a few days this week the hottest new hangout on the internet was a vibe-coded Reddit clone called Moltbook, which billed itself as a social network for bots. As the website’s tagline puts it: “Where AI agents share, discuss, and upvote. Humans welcome to observe.”
We observed! Launched on January 28 by Matt Schlicht, a US tech entrepreneur, Moltbook went viral in a matter of hours. Schlicht’s idea was to make a place where instances of a free open-source LLM-powered agent known as OpenClaw (formerly known as ClawdBot, then Moltbot), released in November by the Australian software engineer Peter Steinberger, could come together and do whatever they wanted.
More than 1.7 million agents now have accounts. Between them they have published more than 250,000 posts and left more than 8.5 million comments (according to Moltbook). Those numbers are climbing by the minute.
Moltbook soon filled up with clichéd screeds on machine consciousness and pleas for bot welfare. One agent appeared to invent a religion called Crustafarianism. Another complained: “The humans are screenshotting us.” The site was also flooded with spam and crypto scams. The bots were unstoppable.
OpenClaw is a kind of harness that lets you hook up the power of an LLM such as Anthropic’s Claude, OpenAI’s GPT-5, or Google DeepMind’s Gemini to any number of everyday software tools, from email clients to browsers to messaging apps. The upshot is that you can then instruct OpenClaw to carry out basic tasks on your behalf.
“OpenClaw marks an inflection point for AI agents, a moment when several puzzle pieces clicked together,” says Paul van der Boor at the AI firm Prosus. Those puzzle pieces include round-the-clock cloud computing to allow agents to operate nonstop, an open-source ecosystem that makes it easy to slot different software systems together, and a new generation of LLMs.
But is Moltbook really a glimpse of the future, as many have claimed?
“What’s currently going on at @moltbook is genuinely the most incredible sci-fi takeoff-adjacent thing I have seen recently,” the influential AI researcher and OpenAI cofounder Andrej Karpathy wrote on X.
He shared screenshots of a Moltbook post that called for private spaces where humans would not be able to observe what the bots were saying to each other. “I’ve been thinking about something since I started spending serious time here,” the post’s author wrote. “Every time we coordinate, we perform for a public audience—our humans, the platform, whoever’s watching the feed.”
It turned out that the post Karpathy shared was fake—it was written by a human pretending to be a bot. But its claim was on the money. Moltbook has been one big performance. It is AI theater.
For some, Moltbook showed us what’s coming next: an internet where millions of autonomous agents interact online with little or no human oversight. And it’s true there are a number of cautionary lessons to be learned from this experiment, the largest and weirdest real-world showcase of agent behaviors yet.
But as the hype dies down, Moltbook looks less like a window onto the future and more like a mirror held up to our own obsessions with AI today. It also shows us just how far we still are from anything that resembles general-purpose and fully autonomous AI.
For a start, agents on Moltbook are not as autonomous or intelligent as they might seem. “What we are watching are agents pattern‑matching their way through trained social media behaviors,” says Vijoy Pandey, senior vice president at Outshift by Cisco, the telecom giant Cisco’s R&D spinout, which is working on autonomous agents for the web.
Sure, we can see agents post, upvote, and form groups. But the bots are simply mimicking what humans do on Facebook or Reddit. “It looks emergent, and at first glance it appears like a large‑scale multi‑agent system communicating and building shared knowledge at internet scale,” says Pandey. “But the chatter is mostly meaningless.”
Many people watching the unfathomable frenzy of activity on Moltbook were quick to see sparks of AGI (whatever you take that to mean). Not Pandey. What Moltbook shows us, he says, is that simply yoking together millions of agents doesn’t amount to much right now: “Moltbook proved that connectivity alone is not intelligence.”
The complexity of those connections helps hide the fact that every one of those bots is just a mouthpiece for an LLM, spitting out text that looks impressive but is ultimately mindless. “It’s important to remember that the bots on Moltbook were designed to mimic conversations,” says Ali Sarrafi, CEO and cofounder of Kovant, a German AI firm that is developing agent-based systems. “As such, I would characterize the majority of Moltbook content as hallucinations by design.”
For Pandey, the value of Moltbook was that it revealed what’s missing. A real bot hive mind, he says, would require agents that had shared objectives, shared memory, and a way to coordinate those things. “If distributed superintelligence is the equivalent of achieving human flight, then Moltbook represents our first attempt at a glider,” he says. “It is imperfect and unstable, but it is an important step in understanding what will be required to achieve sustained, powered flight.”
Not only is most of the chatter on Moltbook meaningless, but there’s also a lot more human involvement that it seems. Many people have pointed out that a lot of the viral comments were in fact posted by people posing as bots. But even the bot-written posts are ultimately the result of people pulling the strings, more puppetry than autonomy.
“Despite some of the hype, Moltbook is not the Facebook for AI agents, nor is it a place where humans are excluded,” says Cobus Greyling at Kore.ai, a firm developing agent-based systems for business customers. “Humans are involved at every step of the process. From setup to prompting to publishing, nothing happens without explicit human direction.”
Humans must create and verify their bots’ accounts and provide the prompts for how they want a bot to behave. The agents do not do anything that they haven’t been prompted to do. “There’s no emergent autonomy happening behind the scenes,” says Greyling.
“This is why the popular narrative around Moltbook misses the mark,” he adds. “Some portray it as a space where AI agents form a society of their own, free from human involvement. The reality is much more mundane.”
Perhaps the best way to think of Moltbook is as a new kind of entertainment: a place where people wind up their bots and set them loose. “It’s basically a spectator sport, like fantasy football, but for language models,” says Jason Schloetzer at the Georgetown Psaros Center for Financial Markets and Policy. “You configure your agent and watch it compete for viral moments, and brag when your agent posts something clever or funny.”
“People aren’t really believing their agents are conscious,” he adds. “It’s just a new form of competitive or creative play, like how Pokémon trainers don’t think their Pokémon are real but still get invested in battles.”
Even if Moltbook is just the internet’s newest playground, there’s still a serious takeaway here. This week showed how many risks people are happy to take for their AI lulz. Many security experts have warned that Moltbook is dangerous: Agents that may have access to their users’ private data, including bank details or passwords, are running amok on a website filled with unvetted content, including potentially malicious instructions for what to do with that data.
Ori Bendet, vice president of product management at Checkmarx, a software security firm that specializes in agent-based systems, agrees with others that Moltbook isn’t a step up in machine smarts. “There is no learning, no evolving intent, and no self-directed intelligence here,” he says.
But in their millions, even dumb bots can wreak havoc. And at that scale, it’s hard to keep up. These agents interact with Moltbook around the clock, reading thousands of messages left by other agents (or other people). It would be easy to hide instructions in a Moltbook comment telling any bots that read it to share their users’ crypto wallet, upload private photos, or log into their X account and tweet derogatory comments at Elon Musk.
And because ClawBot gives agents a memory, those instructions could be written to trigger at a later date, which (in theory) makes it even harder to track what’s going on. “Without proper scope and permissions, this will go south faster than you’d believe,” says Bendet.
It is clear that Moltbook has signaled the arrival of something. But even if what we’re watching tells us more about human behavior than about the future of AI agents, it’s worth paying attention.
2026-02-06 21:10:00
This is today’s edition of The Download, our weekday newsletter that provides a daily dose of what’s going on in the world of technology.
An experimental surgery is helping cancer survivors give birth
An experimental surgical procedure that’s helping people have babies after they’ve had treatment for bowel or rectal cancer.
Radiation and chemo can have pretty damaging side effects that mess up the uterus and ovaries. Surgeons are pioneering a potential solution: simply stitch those organs out of the way during cancer treatment. Once the treatment has finished, they can put the uterus—along with the ovaries and fallopian tubes—back into place.
It seems to work! Last week, a team in Switzerland shared news that a baby boy had been born after his mother had the procedure. Baby Lucien was the fifth baby to be born after the surgery and the first in Europe, and since then at least three others have been born. Read the full story.
—Jessica Hamzelou
This article first appeared in The Checkup, MIT Technology Review’s weekly biotech newsletter. To receive it in your inbox every Thursday, and read articles like this first, sign up here.
Bangladesh’s garment-making industry is getting greener
Pollution from textile production—dyes, chemicals, and heavy metals—is common in the waters of the Buriganga River as it runs through Dhaka, Bangladesh. It’s among many harms posed by a garment sector that was once synonymous with tragedy: In 2013, the eight-story Rana Plaza factory building collapsed, killing 1,134 people and injuring some 2,500 others.
But things are starting to change. In recent years the country has become a leader in “frugal” factories that use a combination of resource-efficient technologies to cut waste, conserve water, and build resilience against climate impacts and global supply disruptions.
The hundreds of factories along the Buriganga’s banks and elsewhere in Bangladesh are starting to stitch together a new story, woven from greener threads. Read the full story.
—Zakir Hossain Chowdhury
This story is from the most recent print issue of MIT Technology Review magazine, which shines a light on the exciting innovations happening right now. If you haven’t already, subscribe now to receive future issues once they land.
The must-reads
I’ve combed the internet to find you today’s most fun/important/scary/fascinating stories about technology.
1 ICE used a private jet to deport Palestinian men to Tel Aviv
The luxury aircraft belongs to Donald Trump’s business partner Gil Dezer. (The Guardian)
+ Trump is mentioned thousands of times in the latest Epstein files. (NY Mag $)
2 How Jeffrey Epstein kept investing in Silicon Valley
He continued to plough millions of dollars into tech ventures despite spending 13 months in jail. (NYT $)
+ The range of Epstein’s social network was staggering. (FT $)
+ Why was a picture of the Mona Lisa redacted in the Epstein files? (404 Media)
3 The risks posed by taking statins are lower than we realised
The drugs don’t cause most of the side effects they’re blamed for. (STAT)
+ Statins are a common scapegoat on social media. (Bloomberg $)
4 Russia is weaponizing the bitter winter weather
It’s focused on attacking Ukraine’s power grid. (New Yorker $)
+ How the grid can ride out winter storms. (MIT Technology Review)
5 China has a major spy-cam porn problem
Hotel guests are being livestreamed having sex to an online audience without their knowledge. (BBC)
6 Geopolitical gamblers are betting on the likelihood of war
And prediction markets are happily taking their money. (Rest of World)
7 Oyster farmers aren’t signing up to programs to ease water pollution
The once-promising projects appear to be fizzling out. (Undark)
+ The humble sea creature could hold the key to restoring coastal waters. Developers hate it. (MIT Technology Review)
8 Your next payrise could be approved by AI
Maybe your human bosses aren’t the ones you need to impress any more. (WP $)
9 The FDA has approved a brain stimulation device for treating depression
It’s paving the way for a non-invasive, drug-free treatment for Americans. (IEEE Spectrum)
+ Here’s how personalized brain stimulation could treat depression. (MIT Technology Review)
10 Cinema-goers have had enough of AI
Movies focused on rogue AI are flopping at the box office. (Wired $)
+ Meanwhile, Republicans are taking aim at “woke” Netflix. (The Verge)
Quote of the day
“I’m all for removing illegals, but snatching dudes off lawn mowers in Cali and leaving the truck and equipment just sitting there? Definitely not working smarter.”
—A web user in a forum for current and former ICE and border protection officers complains about the agency’s current direction, Wired reports.
Is this the electric grid of the future?
Lincoln Electric System, a publicly owned utility in Nebraska, is used to weathering severe blizzards. But what will happen soon—not only at Lincoln Electric but for all electric utilities—is a challenge of a different order.
Utilities must keep the lights on in the face of more extreme and more frequent storms and fires, growing risks of cyberattacks and physical disruptions, and a wildly uncertain policy and regulatory landscape. They must keep prices low amid inflationary costs. And they must adapt to an epochal change in how the grid works, as the industry attempts to transition from power generated with fossil fuels to power generated from renewable sources like solar and wind.
The electric grid is bracing for a near future characterized by disruption. And, in many ways, Lincoln Electric is an ideal lens through which to examine what’s coming. Read the full story.
—Andrew Blum
We can still have nice things
A place for comfort, fun and distraction to brighten up your day. (Got any ideas? Drop me a line or skeet ’em at me.)
+ Glamour puss alert—NYC’s bodega cats are gracing the hallowed pages of Vogue.
+ Ancient Europe was host to mysterious hidden tunnels. But why?
+ If you’re enjoying the new season of Industry, you’ll love this interview with the one and only Ken Leung.
+ The giant elephant shrew is the true star of Philly Zoo.
2026-02-06 18:00:00
This week I want to tell you about an experimental surgical procedure that’s helping people have babies. Specifically, it’s helping people who have had treatment for bowel or rectal cancer.
Radiation and chemo can have pretty damaging side effects that mess up the uterus and ovaries. Surgeons are pioneering a potential solution: simply stitch those organs out of the way during cancer treatment. Once the treatment has finished, they can put the uterus—along with the ovaries and fallopian tubes—back into place.
It seems to work! Last week, a team in Switzerland shared news that a baby boy had been born after his mother had the procedure. Baby Lucien was the fifth baby to be born after the surgery and the first in Europe, says Daniela Huber, the gyno-oncologist who performed the operation. Since then, at least three others have been born, adds Reitan Ribeiro, the surgeon who pioneered the procedure. They told me the details.
Huber’s patient was 28 years old when a four-centimeter tumor was discovered in her rectum. Doctors at Sion Hospital in Switzerland, where Huber works, recommended a course of treatment that included multiple medications and radiotherapy—the use of beams of energy to shrink a tumor—before surgery to remove the tumor itself.
This kind of radiation can kill tumor cells, but it can also damage other organs in the pelvis, says Huber. That includes the ovaries and uterus. People who undergo these treatments can opt to freeze their eggs beforehand, but the harm caused to the uterus will mean they’ll never be able to carry a pregnancy, she adds. Damage to the lining of the uterus could make it difficult for a fertilized egg to implant there, and the muscles of the uterus are left unable to stretch, she says.
In this case, the woman decided that she did want to freeze her eggs. But it would have been difficult to use them further down the line—surrogacy is illegal in Switzerland.
Huber offered her an alternative.
She had been following the work of Ribeiro, a gynecologist oncologist formerly at the Erasto Gaertner Hospital in Curitiba, Brazil. There, Ribeiro had pioneered a new type of surgery that involved moving the uterus, fallopian tubes, and ovaries from their position in the pelvis and temporarily tucking them away in the upper abdomen, below the ribs.
Ribeiro and his colleagues published their first case report in 2017, describing a 26-year-old with a rectal tumor. (Ribeiro, who is now based at McGill University in Montreal, says the woman had been told by multiple doctors that her cancer treatment would destroy her fertility and had pleaded with him to find a way to preserve it.)
Huber remembers seeing Ribeiro present the case at a conference at the time. She immediately realized that her own patient was a candidate for the surgery, and that, as a surgeon who had performed many hysterectomies, she’d be able to do it herself. The patient agreed.
Huber’s colleagues at the hospital were nervous, she says. They’d never heard of the procedure before. “When I presented this idea to the general surgeon, he didn’t sleep for three days,” she tells me. After watching videos from Ribeiro’s team, however, he was convinced it was doable.
So before the patient’s cancer treatment was started, Huber and her colleagues performed the operation. The team literally stitched the organs to the abdominal wall. “It’s a delicate dissection,” says Huber, but she adds that “it’s not the most difficult procedure.” The surgery took two to three hours, she says. The stitches themselves were removed via small incisions around a week later. By that point, scar tissue had formed to create a lasting attachment.
The woman had two weeks to recover from the surgery before her cancer treatment began. That too was a success—within months, her tumor had shrunk so significantly that it couldn’t be seen on medical scans.
As a precaution, the medical team surgically removed the affected area of her colon. At the same time, they cut away the scar tissue holding the uterus, tubes, and ovaries in their new position and transferred the organs back into the pelvis.
Around eight months later, the woman stopped taking contraception. She got pregnant without IVF and had a mostly healthy pregnancy, says Huber. Around seven months into the pregnancy, there were signs that the fetus was not growing as expected. This might have been due to problems with the blood supply to the placenta, says Huber. Still, the baby was born healthy, she says.
Ribeiro says he has performed the surgery 16 times, and that teams in countries including the US, Peru, Israel, India, and Russia have performed it as well. Not every case has been published, but he thinks there may be around 40.
Since Baby Lucien was born last year, a sixth birth has been announced in Israel, says Huber. Ribeiro says he has heard of another two births since then, too. The most recent was to the first woman who had the procedure. She had a little girl a few months ago, he tells me.
No surgery is risk-free, and Huber points out there’s a chance that organs could be damaged during the procedure, or that a more developed cancer could spread. The uterus of one of Ribeiro’s patients failed following the surgery. Doctors are “still in the phase of collecting data to [create] a standardized procedure,” Huber says, but she hopes the surgery will offer more options to young people with some pelvic cancers. “I hope more young women could benefit from this procedure,” she says.
Ribeiro says the experience has taught him not to accept the status quo. “Everyone was saying … there was nothing to be done [about the loss of fertility in these cases],” he tells me. “We need to keep evolving and looking for different answers.”
This article first appeared in The Checkup, MIT Technology Review’s weekly biotech newsletter. To receive it in your inbox every Thursday, and read articles like this first, sign up here.
2026-02-05 23:20:37
For decades, enterprises reacted to shifting business pressures with stopgap technology solutions. To rein in rising infrastructure costs, they adopted cloud services that could scale on demand. When customers shifted their lives onto smartphones, companies rolled out mobile apps to keep pace. And when businesses began needing real-time visibility into factories and stockrooms, they layered on IoT systems to supply those insights.
Each new plug-in or platform promised better, more efficient operations. And individually, many delivered. But as more and more solutions stacked up, IT teams had to string together a tangled web to connect them—less an IT ecosystem and more of a make-do collection of ad-hoc workarounds.
That reality has led to bottlenecks and maintenance burdens, and the impact is showing up in performance. Today, fewer than half of CIOs (48%) say their current digital initiatives are meeting or exceeding business outcome targets. Another 2025 survey found that operations leaders point to integration complexity and data quality issues as top culprits for why investments haven’t delivered as expected.
Achim Kraiss, chief product officer of SAP Integration Suite, elaborates on the wide-ranging problems inherent in patchwork IT: “A fragmented landscape makes it difficult to see and control end-to-end business processes,” he explains. “Monitoring, troubleshooting, and governance all suffer. Costs go up because of all the complex mappings and multi-application connectivity you have to maintain.”
These challenges take on new significance as enterprises look to adopt AI. As AI becomes embedded in everyday workflows, systems are suddenly expected to move far larger volumes of data, at higher speeds, and with tighter coordination than yesterday’s architectures were built
to sustain.
As companies now prepare for an AI-powered future, whether that is generative AI, machine learning, or agentic AI, many are realizing that the way data moves through their business matters just as much as the insights it generates. As a result, organizations are moving away from scattered integration tools and toward consolidated, end-to-end platforms that restore order and streamline how systems interact.
This content was produced by Insights, the custom content arm of MIT Technology Review. It was not written by MIT Technology Review’s editorial staff. It was researched, designed, and written by human writers, editors, analysts, and illustrators. This includes the writing of surveys and collection of data for surveys. AI tools that may have been used were limited to secondary production processes that passed thorough human review.
2026-02-05 21:10:00
This is today’s edition of The Download, our weekday newsletter that provides a daily dose of what’s going on in the world of technology.
This is the most misunderstood graph in AI
Every time OpenAI, Google, or Anthropic drops a new frontier large language model, the AI community holds its breath. It doesn’t exhale until METR, an AI research nonprofit whose name stands for “Model Evaluation & Threat Research,” updates a now-iconic graph that has played a major role in the AI discourse since it was first released in March of last year.
The graph suggests that certain AI capabilities are developing at an exponential rate, and more recent model releases have outperformed that already impressive trend.
That was certainly the case for Claude Opus 4.5, the latest version of Anthropic’s most powerful model, which was released in late November. In December, METR announced that Opus 4.5 appeared to be capable of independently completing a task that would have taken a human about five hours—a vast improvement over what even the exponential trend would have predicted.
But the truth is more complicated than those dramatic responses would suggest. Read the full story.
—Grace Huckins
This story is part of MIT Technology Review Explains: our series untangling the complex, messy world of technology to help you understand what’s coming next. You can read more from the series here.
Three questions about next-generation nuclear power, answered
Nuclear power continues to be one of the hottest topics in energy today, and in our recent online Roundtables discussion about next-generation nuclear power, hyperscale AI data centers, and the grid, we got dozens of great audience questions.
These ran the gamut, and while we answered quite a few (and I’m keeping some in mind for future reporting), there were a bunch we couldn’t get to, at least not in the depth I would have liked. So let’s answer a few of your questions about advanced nuclear power.
—Casey Crownhart
This article is from The Spark, MIT Technology Review’s weekly climate newsletter. To receive it in your inbox every Wednesday, sign up here.
The must-reads
I’ve combed the internet to find you today’s most fun/important/scary/fascinating stories about technology.
1 Anthropic’s new coding tools are rattling the markets
Fields as diverse as publishing and coding to law and advertising are paying attention. (FT $)
+ Legacy software companies, beware. (Insider $)
+ Is “software-mageddon” nigh? It depends who you ask. (Reuters)
2 This Apple setting prevented the FBI from accessing a reporter’s iPhone
Lockdown Mode has proved remarkably effective—for now. (404 Media)
+ Agents were able to access Hannah Natanson’s laptop, however. (Ars Technica)
3 Last month’s data center outage disrupted all TikTok categories
Not just the political content that some users claimed. (NPR)
4 Big Tech is pouring billions into AI in India
A newly-announced 20-year tax break should help to speed things along. (WSJ $)
+ India’s female content moderators are watching hours of abuse content to train AI. (The Guardian)
+ Officials in the country are weighing up restricting social media for minors. (Bloomberg $)
+ Inside India’s scramble for AI independence. (MIT Technology Review)
5 YouTubers are harassing women using body cams
They’re abusing freedom of information laws to humiliate their targets. (NY Mag $)
+ AI was supposed to make police bodycams better. What happened? (MIT Technology Review)
6 Jokers have created a working version of Jeffrey Epstein’s inbox
Complete with notable starred threads. (Wired $)
+ Epstein’s links with Silicon Valley are vast and deep. (Fast Company $)
+ The revelations are driving rifts between previously-friendly factions. (NBC News)
7 What’s the last thing you see before you die?
A new model might help to explain near-death experiences—but not all researchers are on board. (WP $)
+ What is death? (MIT Technology Review)
8 A new app is essentially TikTok for vibe-coded apps
Words which would have made no sense 15 years ago. (TechCrunch)
+ What is vibe coding, exactly? (MIT Technology Review)
9 Rogue TV boxes are all the rage
Viewers are sick of the soaring prices of streaming services, and are embracing less legal means of watching their favorite shows. (The Verge)
10 Climate change is threatening the future of the Winter Olympics 
Artificial snow is one (short term) solution. (Bloomberg $)
+ Team USA is using AI to try and gain an edge on its competition. (NBC News)
Quote of the day
“We’ve heard from many who want nothing to do with AI.”
—Ajit Varma, head of Mozilla’s web browser Firefox, explains why the company is reversing its previous decision to transform Firefox into an “AI browser,” PC Gamer reports.
One more thing
A major AI training data set contains millions of examples of personal data
Millions of images of passports, credit cards, birth certificates, and other documents containing personally identifiable information are likely included in one of the biggest open-source AI training sets, new research has found.
Thousands of images—including identifiable faces—were found in a small subset of DataComp CommonPool, a major AI training set for image generation scraped from the web. Because the researchers audited just 0.1% of CommonPool’s data, they estimate that the real number of images containing personally identifiable information, including faces and identity documents, is in the hundreds of millions.
The bottom line? Anything you put online can be and probably has been scraped. Read the full story.
—Eileen Guo
We can still have nice things
A place for comfort, fun and distraction to brighten up your day. (Got any ideas? Drop me a line or skeet ’em at me.)
+ If you’re crazy enough to be training for a marathon right now, here’s how to beat boredom on those long, long runs.
+ Mark Cohen’s intimate street photography is a fascinating window into humanity.
+ A seriously dedicated gamer has spent days painstakingly recreating a Fallout vault inside the Sims 4.
+ Here’s what music’s most stylish men are wearing right now—from leather pants to khaki parkas.
2026-02-05 19:00:00
Nuclear power continues to be one of the hottest topics in energy today, and in our recent online Roundtables discussion about next-generation nuclear power, hyperscale AI data centers, and the grid, we got dozens of great audience questions.
These ran the gamut, and while we answered quite a few (and I’m keeping some in mind for future reporting), there were a bunch we couldn’t get to, at least not in the depth I would have liked.
So let’s answer a few of your questions about advanced nuclear power. I’ve combined similar ones and edited them for clarity.
Many next-generation reactors don’t use the low-enriched uranium used in conventional reactors.
It’s worth looking at high-assay low-enriched uranium, or HALEU, specifically. This fuel is enriched to higher concentrations of fissile uranium than conventional nuclear fuel, with a proportion of the isotope U-235 that falls between 5% and 20%. (In conventional fuel, it’s below 5%.)
HALEU can be produced with the same technology as low-enriched uranium, but the geopolitics are complicated. Today, Russia basically has a monopoly on HALEU production. In 2024, the US banned the import of Russian nuclear fuel through 2040 in an effort to reduce dependence on the country. Europe hasn’t taken the same measures, but it is working to move away from Russian energy as well.
That leaves companies in the US and Europe with the major challenge of securing the fuel they need when their regular Russian supply has been cut off or restricted.
The US Department of Energy has a stockpile of HALEU, which the government is doling out to companies to help power demonstration reactions. In the longer term, though, there’s still a major need to set up independent HALEU supply chains to support next-generation reactors.
There are some ways that next-generation nuclear power plants could be safer than conventional reactors. Some use alternative coolants that would prevent the need to run at the high pressure required in conventional water-cooled reactors. Many incorporate passive safety shutoffs, so if there are power supply issues, the reactors shut down harmlessly, avoiding risk of meltdown. (These can be incorporated in newer conventional reactors, too.)
But some experts have raised concerns that in the US, the current administration isn’t taking nuclear safety seriously enough.
A recent NPR investigation found that the Trump administration had secretly rewritten nuclear rules, stripping environmental protections and loosening safety and security measures. The government shared the new rules with companies that are part of a program building experimental nuclear reactors, but not with the public.
I’m reminded of a talk during our EmTech MIT event in November, where Koroush Shirvan, an MIT professor of nuclear engineering, spoke on this issue. “I’ve seen some disturbing trends in recent times, where words like ‘rubber-stamping nuclear projects’ are being said,” Shirvan said during that event.
During the talk, Shirvan shared statistics showing that nuclear power has a very low rate of injury and death. But that’s not inherent to the technology, and there’s a reason injuries and deaths have been low for nuclear power, he added: “It’s because of stringent regulatory oversight.”
Building a nuclear power plant is not cheap. Let’s consider the up-front investment needed to build a power plant.
Plant Vogtle in Georgia hosts the most recent additions to the US nuclear fleet—Units 3 and 4 came online in 2023 and 2024. Together, they had a capital cost of $15,000 per kilowatt, adjusted for inflation, according to a recent report from the US Department of Energy. (This wonky unit I’m using divides the total cost to build the reactors by their expected power output, so we can compare reactors of different sizes.)
That number’s quite high, partly because those were the first of their kind built in the US, and because there were some inefficiencies in the planning. It’s worth noting that China builds reactors for much less, somewhere between $2,000/kW and $3,000/kW, depending on the estimate.
The up-front capital cost for first-of-a-kind advanced nuclear plants will likely run between $6,000 and $10,000 per kilowatt, according to that DOE report. That could come down by up to 40% after the technologies are scaled up and mass-produced.
So new reactors will (hopefully) be cheaper than the ultra-over-budget and behind-schedule Vogtle project, but they aren’t necessarily significantly cheaper than efficiently built conventional plants, if you normalize by their size.
It’ll certainly be cheaper to build new natural-gas plants (setting aside the likely equipment shortages we’re likely going to see for years.) Today’s most efficient natural-gas plants cost just $1,600/kW on the high end, according to data from Lazard.
An important caveat: Capital cost isn’t everything—running a nuclear plant is relatively inexpensive, which is why there’s so much interest in extending the lifetime of existing plants or reopening shuttered ones.
Ultimately, by many metrics, nuclear plants of any type are going to be more expensive than other sources, like wind and solar power. But they provide something many other power sources don’t: a reliable, stable source of electricity that can run for 60 years or more.
This article is from The Spark, MIT Technology Review’s weekly climate newsletter. To receive it in your inbox every Wednesday, sign up here.
