This column by Arizona ˿����Ƶ of Commerce & Industry President and CEO Danny Seiden was in the Colorado Sun on July 16. The column comes in response to a recent����by Colorado River Commissioner Becky Mitchell regarding the ongoing water negotiations between and the responsibilities of the Upper and Lower Basin states.

Colorado’s water commissioner wants Arizona to make “hard decisions” on the Colorado River. That’s a curious thing to hear from a state that still hasn’t agreed to a single binding cut.

Becky Mitchell’s recent column in The Colorado Sun ( July 7) tells a story where the Upper Basin has quietly sacrificed for decades while Arizona, California and Nevada are only now waking up to reality. It’s a compelling narrative. It’s just missing most of the numbers — and facts — that matter.

Start with snowpack. Yes, Colorado had a brutal year. So did the rest of the West. Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, Wyoming and Colorado all set readings this year. Every state at this table is living through the same basin-wide crisis in real time. Colorado isn’t further along than the rest of us on this one.

Next, the claim that the Upper Basin has already been quietly cut by 1.3 million acre-feet a year for two decades. Call it what it is: automatic curtailment, not a negotiated commitment. When the water isn’t physically there, junior water rights get shut off under state priority systems that predate the 1922 Colorado River Compact by decades. Nobody negotiated that. Nobody signed anything. It happens whether Colorado agrees to it or not.

Compare that with what Arizona put on the table this year. In May, Arizona, California and Nevada through 2028. That includes 1.25 million acre-feet in binding reductions for both 2027 and 2028.

Arizona’s share alone would be 760,000 acre-feet, 61% of the total and the largest of any state. The Lower Basin proposal also includes at least 700,000 acre-feet in additional conservation on top of those reductions.

And that’s before you count the  outright back when the February talks were still alive. Every one of those numbers was real, specific and put in writing. Most of them either sit unanswered or were rejected outright by the Upper Basin states, Colorado included.

There’s a reason the numbers look so different, and it comes down to math, not sacrifice.

The Upper Basin has never built the storage and delivery infrastructure to use its full 7.5 million-acre-foot apportionment, even in good years. Mitchell notes that Upper Basin users took about 4 million acre-feet in 2021 while Lower Basin users took 11 million, and offers that up as proof of Upper Basin restraint and prudence. 

But promising to stay below half your allocation is easy when you were never on pace to use it in the first place. 

Arizona doesn’t have that option. Cities, tribes and farms across the Lower Basin depend on water we actually use, every year, close to our full apportionment. That’s why  to the Bureau of Reclamation already accounts for roughly 1.25 million acre-feet in evaporation and transit losses we used to get to write off. Colorado hasn’t put forward a comparable number for anything.

This kind of discipline isn’t new for Arizona. Our population has grown nearly 500% since 1957. Our economy has grown dramatically. Total water use hasn’t. According to the Arizona Department of Water Resources, . Groundwater management, conservation requirements, water banking and decades of hard policy choices did that. Colorado hasn’t made those same choices on its side of the river.

 said it plainly after the February talks collapsed: The Lower Basin’s position is firm and fair. Arizona’s own negotiator, Tom Buschatzke,: The Lower Basin has offered numerous good-faith compromises, and virtually all of them have been rejected. That pattern is a track record, not a difference of opinion.

Mitchell closes her piece by inviting Arizona to join Colorado in adapting to a changing river. We’d take that invitation more seriously from a state that had actually agreed to something. Until then, we’ll keep doing what we’ve been doing: showing up with real numbers, real cuts and a plan Colorado still hasn’t matched.

Danny Seiden is the president and CEO of the Arizona ˿����Ƶ of Commerce and Industry.

The post Opinion: Colorado water officials can’t demand a sacrifice they aren’t willing to make appeared first on ˿����Ƶ Business News.

The U.S. Forest Service earlier this month issued the Final Record of Decision (ROD) for the Hermosa Critical Minerals Project in Southern Arizona’s Patagonia Mountains, completing the federal environmental review required for portions of the project planned on National Forest land. The decision follows several years of environmental study, public input, tribal and interagency consultation. 

Project developer South32 says Hermosa could produce up to five federally designated critical minerals, including zinc, silver, and manganese. The project includes a broader land package with potential for additional polymetallic and copper mineralization, positioning it as a significant domestic source of minerals tied to energy, manufacturing and supply-chain needs. 

The decision paves the way for South32 to fully develop the project beyond its privately held land, including building ancillary infrastructure such as a primary access road, a secondary dry-stack tailings facility, and allowing utility UniSource Energy Services to build a portion of a 138-kV power line on Coronado National Forest land.  

Construction is already halfway complete on private land. It was the first mining project accepted into the federal FAST-41 permitting program, which is reserved for nationally significant infrastructure projects meeting rigorous criteria.  

“From the beginning, we designed Hermosa to be a different kind of mine, and the federal review process helped make it even better,” South32 Hermosa President Pat Risner said. “Years of agency review, Tribal consultation and community engagement strengthened environmental protections, informed project refinements and shaped a project that can transform the local economy. We are grateful to everyone who participated throughout the process and look forward to continuing that engagement as we move from construction and development into operations.” 

The Final ROD also represents an important milestone in the broader national conversation around domestic critical mineral development and permitting reform. Hermosa’s advancement under FAST-41 did not reduce the thoroughness of environmental review or limit public input. Rather, the process helped improve interagency coordination, transparency, and accountability across federal agencies while ensuring the project moved through permitting in a timely and disciplined manner.  

Danny Seiden, president and CEO of the Arizona ˿����Ƶ of Commerce & Industry, said the Hermosa project also demonstrates the value of a predictable and transparent permitting process. 

“South32’s Hermosa project represents the kind of investment Arizona needs to strengthen domestic supply chains, support critical minerals production, and create long-term jobs in Santa Cruz County and across the state,” he said. “It’s also a model for how permitting should work. Hermosa has gone through years of environmental review, public input, and interagency consultation, and the project remains on track under the federal permitting schedule. That’s the kind of predictable, transparent process Arizona needs more of if we want to lead in industries critical to our economy and national security.” 

Over the course of the review process, Hermosa underwent extensive federal environmental analysis and consultation including more than 120 days of formal public comment periods, coordination across six federal and state agencies and consultation with 12 Tribes with historic affiliation to the region. 

“If we’re serious about bringing supply chains back to America and reducing our dependence on foreign countries, we need to responsibly produce more critical minerals here at home. This is exactly what the Hermosa project is doing,” said U.S. Senator Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.). “This milestone shows we can move projects through an efficient permitting process to create good-paying jobs while strengthening our national security.” 

South32 conducted extensive baseline environmental studies and community engagement before permit applications were formally submitted, allowing project alternatives, water management approaches, access roads and mitigation measures to be shaped by stakeholder input early in the process. 

The Final ROD confirms that environmental protections, mitigation commitments, and adaptive management measures are integrated into the approved project. Throughout the review process, South32 refined Hermosa’s design in response to agency feedback, Tribal consultation and community input, including: 

• Redesign of the dry-stack tailings facility to avoid sensitive plant species;��
• Design of a Primary Access Road, necessary for expansion, to also reduce traffic impacts to Patagonia and outdoor recreation areas;��
• Surface and ground water quality and quantity monitoring beyond state level requirements;��
• Wildlife crossings and habitat protections;��
• Cultural resource avoidance measures; and��
• Operational refinements��are designed��to reduce emissions,��noise,��and surface disturbance.��

In total, South32 committed to more than 135 conservation, mitigation and monitoring measures developed in coordination with federal agencies, Tribes and local stakeholders. Many of those commitments will become federally enforceable components of the final Mine Plan of Operations, and associated management plans outlined in the Final ROD. 

“The Final Record of Decision for Hermosa is another important milestone for Nogales. It reflects years of collaboration to ensure the Hermosa project is developed in a way that balances economic opportunity with environmental stewardship,” said Nogales Mayor Jorge Maldonado. “South32 is making a long-term investment in the people and future of Nogales through investments like its remote operating center “Centro”. Hermosa has the potential to create new opportunities to support good-paying jobs and help ensure that more of our young people can build successful careers right here at home, and we appreciate South32’s commitment to developing Hermosa responsibly while creating opportunities for local families, students and businesses.” 

With a surface footprint of 750 acres and projected to use approximately 90% less water than other mines in the region, South32 designed Hermosa to minimize its environmental impact. Once in operation, Hermosa would help transform and grow the local economy and create up to 900 good-paying jobs during peak operations, and support investment across surrounding communities for decades to come. 

The post Hermosa��critical minerals mining project��reaches major federal permitting milestone�� appeared first on ˿����Ƶ Business News.

The Arizona ˿����Ƶ of Commerce & Industry has announced its endorsements for the July 21, 2026 primary election, backing a bipartisan group of candidates for the Arizona Legislature, Congress, and the Arizona Corporation Commission.

The endorsements, approved by the ˿����Ƶ’s board of directors following recommendations from its Political Affairs Committee, reflect what the organization describes as a continued focus on supporting candidates whose records and policy positions align with the ˿����Ƶ’s Business Agenda, an annual document that outlines the organization’s positions on various public policy issues.

“Good policy has helped make Arizona one of the most attractive places in the country to start, grow, or relocate a business,” ˿����Ƶ President and CEO Danny Seiden said. “The decisions made at the Capitol, in Congress, and at the Corporation Commission have real consequences for employers, workers, and communities across our state. Many of the candidates we’re endorsing have already demonstrated a strong commitment to protecting Arizona’s competitive advantage, and we’re confident this slate will bring the serious leadership and practical solutions needed to keep that momentum going.”

The ˿����Ƶ’s endorsements include candidates from both major political parties and span races across the state. Among those receiving the ˿����Ƶ’s backing are Republican legislative leaders and Democratic lawmakers, as well as U.S. Reps. Greg Stanton (D) and Juan Ciscomani (R).

The organization said incumbents were evaluated based on their voting records and their alignment with the ˿����Ƶ’s policy priorities. Candidates seeking offices they have not previously held were asked to complete questionnaires and participate in interviews with members of the ˿����Ƶ Political Affairs Committee before recommendations were forwarded to the board of directors for final approval.

The ˿����Ƶ’s endorsements come as Arizona prepares for a competitive election cycle that will determine the makeup of the Legislature and other key offices that influence the state’s economic climate.

The ˿����Ƶ also endorsed incumbent Arizona Corporation Commissioners Kevin Thompson and Nick Myers. The commission regulates utilities and oversees matters affecting energy reliability, infrastructure investment, and rates.

“Reliable, affordable energy is one of the most important issues in today’s economy,” ˿����Ƶ Executive Vice President Courtney Coolidge said. “Sustaining Arizona’s rapid growth means electing leaders who will work to ensure we have the energy mix and modern infrastructure that job creators demand.”

The organization said additional endorsements could be issued ahead of the general election, which culminates on Tuesday, Nov. 3.

The full list of endorsements can be found .

The post Arizona ˿����Ƶ announces bipartisan endorsements for 2026 primary election appeared first on ˿����Ƶ Business News.

As Arizona’s energy landscape undergoes rapid transformation—driven by surging data center investment, record summer peak demand, and an accelerating shift toward renewable generation—few companies are better positioned to speak to what that transition requires than Strata Clean Energy. A family-owned, fully integrated energy infrastructure firm, Strata has built a portfolio of more than 300 projects across 25 states, with a 5 GW development pipeline and nearly 2 GWh of battery storage either operating or under construction in Arizona alone. ˿����Ƶ Business News sat down with the Strata team to discuss how the company is helping utilities, large energy users, and the broader grid prepare for what comes next.

What is Strata Clean Energy and who are your customers?

Strata Clean Energy is a family-owned, fully integrated energy infrastructure company focused on developing, building, and operating large-scale solar and energy storage solutions across the United States. We also support power-first data center development in key data center markets by enabling faster, integrated power solutions.

What differentiates Strata is our ability to deliver energy projects from concept through long-term operations—all under one platform. Strata has developed and manages a portfolio of over 300 projects constructed and operating across 25 states, representing more than 6 gigawatts in commissioned projects.

We serve three primary customer groups: electric utilities, independent power producers, and increasingly, large energy users such as hyperscale data center operators. Across all of these partnerships, our role is the same—to provide high-quality, dependable energy infrastructure that supports long-term growth and grid reliability.

Can you share an overview of Strata Clean Energy’s footprint and projects in Arizona?

Arizona is one of the most important markets in the country for energy innovation and data center demand, and Strata has established a strong and growing presence in the state. Today, Strata has a 5 GW development pipeline of solar and storage projects in Arizona, in addition to the over 2 GWh of battery storage currently in operation or under construction.  Additionally, we have data center development pipeline approaching 2GW in the State.

We have been actively developing and constructing utility-scale solar and battery storage projects across Arizona, including multiple long-term partnerships with utilities to bring new capacity online. These energy storage projects are designed to deliver power during peak demand periods—helping stabilize the grid during Arizona’s most energy-intensive hours.

These projects are especially important in a region where summer peak demand continues to set new records and energy needs are increasing rapidly. Our work helps ensure that reliable, dispatchable energy is available when it matters most.

Our commitment to Arizona extends beyond energy delivery—we see our work as supporting the state’s continued economic growth by ensuring reliable, scalable power is available where and when it’s needed.

Can you explain what your vertically integrated model means in practice and how it differentiates your approach?

Strata’s vertically integrated model means we manage every stage of an energy project—from early site identification and permitting through engineering, construction, and long-term operations.

In practice, this approach allows us to move faster, reduce risk, and deliver more predictable outcomes for our partners. Because our teams are aligned across the full lifecycle, we’re able to optimize decision-making early in development—whether that’s interconnection strategy, equipment procurement, or construction sequencing.

This integration helps address today’s environment, where project timing and coordinated execution are increasingly important. While traditional energy projects can take many years to advance, a fully coordinated platform enables projects to move more quickly while maintaining high standards for safety, quality, and long-term performance.

Ultimately, our model is built around certainty, ensuring that projects are not only delivered efficiently, but continue to perform reliably through the life of the facility.

How does Strata Clean Energy collaborate with utility partners, particularly those serving Arizonans?

Collaboration with utilities is at the core of what we do. We work closely with our utility partners from the earliest stages of project development to align on long-term system needs, interconnection planning, and infrastructure investment. Our goal is to complement—not compete with—the utility planning process by bringing forward well-positioned projects and thoughtful solutions that help address emerging challenges. We apply this same collaboration framework whether we are advancing a solar, storage or data center project. We believe that collaboration with utilities and communities is the key to mutually beneficial outcomes.

Today, utilities across Arizona are managing a complex transition that includes rapid load growth and unprecedented demand. In some cases, large-load requests now exceed current peak demand levels on the system, requiring new creative approaches to planning and infrastructure development that add resiliency to the electrical system.

Strata supports this effort by developing projects that don’t just generate energy, but also contribute to overall grid stability and flexibility. Through the integration of technologies like battery storage, we help utilities manage peak demand, smooth variability, and improve system performance.

At its core, our partnership approach is about alignment: working together to deliver solutions that benefit customers, support long-term planning goals, and maintain the reliability that Arizonans depend on.

What role does Strata Clean Energy play in supporting a strong and reliable power grid in Arizona?

A reliable grid is the foundation for economic growth, especially in a state like Arizona where demand continues to increase.

Strata plays an important role by developing and delivering energy resources that are not only cost-effective, but also designed to enhance reliability. Our projects, particularly those that pair solar generation with battery storage, help ensure that energy is available when it is needed most, including during peak demand and periods of extreme heat.

Energy storage in particular is becoming a critical part of the solution, allowing utilities to shift energy from times of high production to times of highest demand.

We are also focused on how energy resources can contribute more broadly to grid performance. Modern energy systems require more than just power generation; they require flexibility, responsiveness, and stability.

In short, our role is to help build the next generation of energy infrastructure. One that supports continued growth while maintaining the high level of reliability that Arizona’s communities and businesses expect.

How is Strata Clean Energy positioning itself to support industries that require significant and reliable energy resources for years to come, such as AI and data centers?

Industries like AI and data centers are redefining energy demand. They require large amounts of power, delivered quickly, with exceptional reliability. In high-growth regions like Arizona, large-load demand can reach into the tens of gigawatts, creating both opportunity and complexity for the grid.

Strata is addressing this through a combination of long-term planning and innovative delivery models.

One key part of our approach is our “Bring Your Own Power” (BYOP) framework, which allows large energy users to accelerate access to power while still aligning with long-term grid solutions. BYOP is designed so data centers can function as grid assets—contributing new generation and supporting reliability as they scale. These approaches can meaningfully reduce time to initial power availability compared to traditional approaches, while transitioning into fully integrated, utility-supported infrastructure over time.

At the same time, we are developing sites in key data center markets with an emphasis on power planning and increased execution readiness. This approach is intended to improve speed and confidence for customers by helping create a more execution-ready path to long-term power availability.

Equally important is how these large energy users interact with the grid itself. At Strata, we believe the most successful projects are those that are intentionally designed to support the power system—not just add demand. By integrating solutions such as energy storage, coordinated generation, and flexible load strategies, data centers can play a positive role in strengthening overall system reliability.

This model benefits everyone involved. It enables faster deployment for companies investing in Arizona, supports utilities in managing growth responsibly, and helps ensure that rising demand does not place undue pressure on existing customers.

As Arizona continues to attract large-scale investment, Strata is focused on helping ensure that energy infrastructure keeps pace—supporting innovation, strengthening the grid, and enabling long-term economic development across the state.

The post Spotlight AZ: Strata Clean Energy appeared first on ˿����Ƶ Business News.

This��opinion��column��from Arizona��˿����Ƶ of Commerce & Industry President and CEO Danny Seiden��originally��appeared in the Yuma Sun.

There’s been plenty of coverage lately about Arizona preparing to defend its water rights on the Colorado River. And yes, we’ve hired a law firm. Hard to blame us.

What’s gotten less attention is the other side of this story: what’s actually happening at the negotiating table. The answer isn’t complicated. Arizona and other Lower Basin states have put real solutions on the table. Colorado and its Upper Basin partners have not.

Arizona’s chief water negotiator, ADWR Director Tom Buschatzke, was blunt after collapsed. Despite months of discussions, the Lower Basin states received one consistent message from the Upper Basin: there will be no firm commitment to reduce water use, no matter how bad the hydrology gets or how low the reservoirs fall.

That’s not a negotiating position. That’s a refusal to engage.

And the stakes are real. Snowpack across the West is at record lows, with just 2.3 million acre-feet of water expected to reach Lake Powell through July — about a third of normal. The river is under serious strain, and time is not on our side.

Arizona has responded accordingly. This year alone, we’ve already absorbed more than 500,000 acre-feet in cuts. We’ve invested in conservation, recharge, and long-term infrastructure. These aren’t easy decisions. They come with real economic tradeoffs.

But that’s what shared responsibility looks like.

Other Lower Basin states stepped up too. Arizona offered to reduce its allocation by 27%. California offered 10%. Nevada nearly 17%. All of it was rejected by Upper Basin states, with Colorado chief among them. They have continued to insist that additional cuts fall primarily on the Lower Basin.

That’s not a partner. That’s a free rider.

And it reflects a broader pattern in how Colorado approaches governing.

Credibility at the negotiating table doesn’t exist in a vacuum. It’s built or eroded by whether a state is willing to make hard calls, take responsibility, and lead when it matters. On that front, Colorado’s track record deserves scrutiny.

Over the past decade, Colorado has enacted more than 10,000 new regulatory mandates. Job growth has slowed dramatically. More residents are leaving the state, and nearly half of its business leaders say they’re planning to invest elsewhere.

Meanwhile, Arizona has stayed focused on building a competitive, growing economy.

from Common Sense Institute Arizona and the Arizona ˿����Ƶ Foundation found that if Arizona had followed Colorado’s policy path, we’d have 113,000 fewer workers and an economy $18.6 billion smaller.

Arizona made different choices. Those choices are reflected in how we’re showing up at the Colorado River table today.

None of this is to say Colorado doesn’t have rights to the river. It does. But rights come with responsibilities, especially when the system is under this level of stress. And especially when you’ve spent years sending the same message: the cuts are someone else’s problem.

The Colorado River supports 40 million people and an estimated $1.4 trillion in economic activity. A deal matters for Arizona, for the region, and for the country. But a deal that asks Lower Basin states to make deep, binding cuts while Upper Basin states make no firm commitments isn’t a solution. It’s an imbalance dressed up as compromise.

Governor Hobbs is right to push back. Arizona is right to keep every option on the table, including legal ones. And anyone who thinks we’re being unreasonable should read what Arizona’s negotiator said when the February deadline blew up: we cannot take on the task of saving this river system on our own.

Colorado has already done real damage to its own economy. We can’t let it drag ours down too. We won’t keep carrying their water.

Danny Seiden is the president and CEO of the Arizona ˿����Ƶ of Commerce & Industry.

The post We’ve carried the water. It’s time Colorado carries its weight. appeared first on ˿����Ƶ Business News.

Arizona and the nation face surging energy demand. AI, data centers, domestic reshoring, and economic growth are stretching our grid. Advanced nuclear reactors are ready to deliver the clean, reliable, and abundant power we need. But regulatory red tape and excessive public process threaten to stand in the way.

Today’s permitting system too often prioritizes procedure over outcomes, adding unnecessary steps that slow progress and derail major projects. Public input is essential, but the effort to democratize the process has gone too far. A vocal minority with no capital invested in a project can now block even the most widely supported proposals, weaponizing public comments, exploiting environmental reviews, and abusing land use appeals to drive up costs and deny critical permits.

No energy source is immune.

In Massachusetts, just a few dozen affluent homeowners derailed a major offshore wind project, Cape Wind, by filing 26 lawsuits and fighting it for nearly 16 years. Though they publicly supported renewable energy, they opposed this project because it threatened their property values and views, placing personal interests above their stated cause and exhausting every avenue until the project collapsed.

In Tennessee, residents who generally support fossil fuels opposed a new coal-fired power plant that the Tennessee Valley Authority proposed to meet rising demand. They mobilized against it and used local permitting objections to slow the project in the very community it was meant to serve.

Arizona has seen the same abuse. In southern Arizona, a small group of residents who otherwise support renewable energy repeatedly used the public process to delay SunZia, a critical high-voltage transmission line needed to deliver renewable power from New Mexico. For more than seven years, local activists opposed the clean energy project to stop it from being built in their backyards.

In Mohave County, NIMBYism cut across both energy types. First, residents demanded a countywide moratorium on new solar development. Then, when the local electric cooperative proposed a natural gas expansion to meet growing demand, many of the same residents turned against that project as well, flooding the planning and zoning process with protests and forcing the utility to find a new site.

This is why we struggle to build in America. What began as a good-faith effort to democratize permitting has devolved into endless procedural abuse. It no longer serves a modern economy. These objections are often less about environmental protection or responsible development than about protecting personal interests and stopping projects altogether, raising risks for developers while weakening our national economy and security.

Nowhere is that risk greater than with new nuclear reactors.

According to senior officials at the U.S. Department of Energy, the nuclear sector must navigate more regulatory steps than any other energy infrastructure sector in the nation, with at least 14 points of public input across federal, state, and local levels combined.

At the federal level, these include hearings, comment periods, challenges, and appeals on NEPA environmental impact statements, Nuclear Regulatory Commission license applications, and site suitability reviews for nuclear waste storage.

At the state level, they include hearings, interventions, and appeals before the Arizona Power Plant & Transmission Line Siting Committee, Corporation Commission, and Department of Environmental Quality for certificates of environmental compatibility and air and water quality permits.

At the local level, they include hearings, comments, and appeals involving decisions by planning and zoning commissions, boards of supervisors, and city councils on rezonings, special use permits, or general plan amendments.

Each step creates another opportunity for delay, opening the door to self-interested property owners, outside special-interest groups, anti-competitive business rivals, and even hostile foreign adversaries to block critical projects by adding time, cost, and legal risk, including nuclear projects that most Americans support.

Recent events show how steep the climb already is. When Arizona’s three largest electric utilities announced plans to explore a new nuclear plant, residents protested outside Tucson Electric Power’s headquarters, and that was before a site had even been selected.

Thoughtful public comment remains essential and can improve a project’s design or location. But providing endless points for delay and opposition is neither constructive nor democratic. It wastes time and does more to stall or kill projects than improve them. Given that advanced reactors are safer and smaller than older designs, the current process already offers more opportunities for public participation than most projects reasonably require.

If we want to usher in a new era of energy abundance, unleash economic prosperity, restore domestic manufacturing, and win the AI arms race against China, we must support rapid deployment of advanced nuclear technology and reevaluate the permitting system that now threatens American economic power and leadership.

As leaders, our goal should be simple: Everyone should have a voice, but no one should have a veto. Arizona can preserve democratic process while delivering decisive nuclear deployment. It’s time to support advanced reactors and eliminate the endless proceduralism standing in the way of America’s clean, prosperous, and abundant energy future.

Michael Carbone is a Republican member of the Arizona House of Representatives representing Legislative District 25 and serves as House Majority Leader. Follow him on X at @MichaelCarbone.

The post Endless proceduralism threatens American energy abundance appeared first on ˿����Ƶ Business News.

Amid ongoing concerns about the Colorado River, it is understandable that Arizonans would ask hard questions about water use from new industries, including data centers. Under different scenarios, the Central Arizona Water Conservation District has estimated reductions between 20 and 57 percent to municipal water entitlements, which could require some cities to rely on alternative supplies or banked water savings reserves.

But the fear of shortages shouldn’t stop state and local officials from viewing growth in context with the broader water picture. Our state has some of the toughest water laws in the nation. Arizona’s water managers are among the best in the country, and remarkably, Arizona uses less water today than it did in the 1950s, despite a population that has grown sevenfold and an economy that has expanded dramatically.

That record should give us confidence, not fear.

Given our strong track record for conservation, Arizona should continue welcoming responsible businesses, especially those with a demonstrated commitment to water conservation and stewardship. That includes data centers, which are becoming as essential to modern life as power lines, water systems, and fiber-optic networks.

Just as important, many modern data centers are being designed with water efficiency in mind.

Many hyperscale facilities use closed-loop cooling systems that require a one-time initial water fill and then use only minimal additional water beyond domestic needs. Others rely on dry cooling or similarly advanced methods that greatly reduce or eliminate traditional evaporative water use.

Arizona is already seeing this shift in practice.

CyrusOne uses air cooling and a closed-loop system at its Chandler campus, which largely eliminates ongoing evaporative water demand after the initial fill.

Google uses advanced dry-cooling technology at its Mesa data center to reduce long-term water use.

Meta uses a closed-loop, multi-pass system at its Mesa facility to recycle and recirculate water before discharge.

These examples make an important point: data center operators are not ignoring Arizona’s water realities. They are adapting to them.

That is not surprising. As the has noted, data centers have strong economic incentives to improve operational efficiency in both energy and water use. Conservation is not just good stewardship. It is also smart business. Data centers also provide critical revenues that are necessary to help fund the next tranche of major water conservation investments.

The construction of new digital infrastructure requires millions of dollars in new capital investment, which translates to assessed value, jobs, and secondary impacts that increase state and local revenues. A single 250 megawatt data center, for example, brings in nearly $45 million in annual real and business property taxes and pays over $15 million in sales taxes on its annual electric bill alone.

Arizona should absolutely position itself to take advantage of this investment and use it to fund the future water infrastructure projects for this state. No additional fees or surcharges are required.

Although the uncertainty on the Colorado River is real, our state’s largest cities and towns have the water they need to accommodate future growth, and they should continue to attract the latest and most cutting-edge industries to our state, especially those like data centers that are adopting the latest technology in water-efficient infrastructure.

Arizona has never succeeded by retreating from the future. Our state has long embraced innovation, growth, and responsible stewardship of limited resources. The next era of economic development will depend on technological infrastructure, and data centers will be part of that future.

Economic growth, technological advancement, and water stewardship do not have to be in conflict. Arizona can and should lead on all three.

Michael Carbone is a Republican member of the Arizona House of Representatives representing Legislative District 25 and serves as House Majority Leader. Follow him on X at @MichaelCarbone. Justin Wilmeth is a Republican member of the Arizona House of Representatives serving Legislative District 2 in North Phoenix and is Chairman of the House Committee on Artificial Intelligence & Innovation. Follow him on X at @JustinWilmethAZ.

The post Data centers use water responsibly appeared first on ˿����Ƶ Business News.

After World War II, the American West was transformed by a spirit of innovation and ambition. Nowhere was that more evident than in Phoenix. Once a modest desert outpost, the city grew rapidly thanks to breakthroughs in air conditioning, abundant electric power, and the optimism of the Atomic Age.

In 1954, Atomic Energy Commission Chairman Lewis Strauss captured that mood when he said, “Our children will enjoy in their homes electrical energy too cheap to meter.” It was a time when America thought big and viewed nuclear power as a symbol of progress.

That confidence helped give rise to the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station. Built in the 1980s despite doubts that a nuclear plant could succeed in the desert without a nearby river, Palo Verde turned that challenge into a strength. By using reclaimed wastewater for cooling, Arizona engineers made it a triumph of innovation and, for decades, the largest power producer in the nation. It remains proof that Arizona can turn bold ideas into reality.

That same spirit helped bring semiconductor giants like Motorola and Intel to Arizona, helping earn our state the nickname “Silicon Desert.” Just as Palo Verde proved nuclear energy could thrive in the desert, those companies proved Arizona could become a center for world-class technology and innovation. In this state, advanced energy and advanced industry have long gone hand in hand.

Today, Arizona stands at the front edge of another wave of growth, driven by artificial intelligence, semiconductor manufacturing, and the broader high-tech economy. Our business climate, competitive costs, and skilled workforce have made Arizona a magnet for investment. Companies such as TSMC, Amkor, ON Semiconductor, LG Energy Solution, Microchip Technology, ASM, and NXP have chosen Arizona as the place to invest billions in America’s future.

Their customers have followed. Google, Amazon, Microsoft, Apple, Meta, and other technology leaders need advanced chips to power massive digital infrastructure. Arizona is now one of the fastest-growing data center markets in the country. Companies including CyrusOne, QTS, Digital Realty, and Iron Mountain are expanding here, and Buckeye is planning the largest data center campus west of the Mississippi, a massive $20 billion data campus planned for up to 40 individual data centers and as much as 1.8 gigawatts of power demand.

As energy demand rises, Arizona must be ready to meet it. That means leading in the next generation of nuclear reactors, including small modular reactors, molten salt reactors, and microreactors, which offer the promise of clean, reliable, abundant power across the economy. Designed to be factory-built and scalable, they can reduce construction times, lower costs, and be deployed where they are needed most. Even technologies first demonstrated decades ago, like molten salt reactors, are drawing renewed interest as the country looks for dependable power sources that can support long-term growth.

That momentum is growing nationwide. In the past year alone, lawmakers in 19 states introduced more than 50 bills to advance new nuclear energy. Major technology companies, including Google, Amazon, Meta, and Microsoft, have also signed agreements to secure power from advanced reactor projects, and in some cases have invested directly in them.

National support is growing as well. Beginning in 2025, four presidential executive orders were issued to supercharge nuclear development, streamline licensing, encourage innovation, and set a goal of quadrupling America’s nuclear capacity by 2050. Another directive called for an SMR to be operational at a U.S. military base by 2028. That presents a real opportunity for Arizona, home to seven military installations.

Arizona is doing its part. Arizona State University has announced a strategic partnership with the U.S. Department of Energy to accelerate deployment of microreactors for data centers. The University of Arizona is conducting fusion research. Arizona’s three largest electric utilities are engaged in pre-site selection work for future nuclear development. Private investors, including Arizona Nuclear Ventures, are also backing new nuclear startups.

All of this reflects a simple reality: the public is ready. Polling shows about 72 percent of Americans, along with a majority of Arizonans, support new nuclear energy. That support crosses party lines. The reasons are clear. These technologies promise more reliable power, stronger economic growth, and new high-quality jobs.

Arizona is ready to lead. Palo Verde already showed the country what is possible. With advanced reactors, we can do it again by powering economic growth, strengthening national security, and securing a more reliable energy future.

As President Ronald Reagan said, “We must continue to lead the world in the development and use of safe, clean nuclear energy.”

Phoenix rose with the Atomic Age. Arizona can rise again by embracing the next generation of nuclear energy with the same ingenuity, ambition, and confidence that helped build our state in the first place.

Steve Montenegro is the Speaker of the Arizona House of Representatives and serves Legislative District 29 in the West Valley, Goodyear, and Surprise. Follow him on X at @SteveMontenegro. Michael Carbone is a Republican member of the Arizona House of Representatives representing Legislative District 25 and serves as House Majority Leader. Follow him on X at @MichaelCarbone.

The post Arizona is ready to lead the next nuclear energy revolution appeared first on ˿����Ƶ Business News.

As policymakers look for ways to meet rising energy demands with clean and reliable power, some anti-nuclear advocates argue that new nuclear plants should be dismissed because of historically high upfront costs and past construction delays.

But advanced nuclear technologies like small modular reactors (SMRs) promise to overcome those challenges and deliver clean, reliable, and abundant power through a simple but transformative model: factory-built fabrication, one-time design permits, and modular deployment.

Some traditional nuclear plants have seen major cost overruns. The proposed Marble Hill project in Indiana, for example, rose from $800 million to $2.8 billion before being canceled in 1983, while Vogtle Units 3 and 4 grew from about $14 billion to more than $30 billion and were delivered several years late. But nuclear is hardly unique.

Large, capital-intensive projects of all kinds can run over budget and behind schedule, including wind and solar. Virginia’s Coastal Offshore Wind project grew from $9.8 billion to $10.7 billion because of grid interconnection challenges. Wisconsin’s Koshkonong Solar Energy Center rose from $649 million to more than $900 million because of supply-chain issues and labor constraints. In Arizona, the Solana Generating Station fell three years behind schedule and cost millions more than expected because of construction missteps, equipment failures, and air-quality violations, locking ratepayers into electricity prices four times the market rate.

With nuclear, high costs and delays often stem from new safety requirements imposed after construction is underway and a permitting system that requires each plant to be custom-designed from the ground up, even when the technology is very similar to past projects.

At Vogtle, nearly 200 license amendments forced costly pauses and redesigns. Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station also saw costs increase in the 1980s after new safety requirements were imposed following the Three Mile Island accident. Those circumstances were outside the builders’ control, but they reflect the consequences of a system that treats each project as a one-of-a-kind, standalone facility. That prevents new plants from learning from past mistakes and capturing economies of scale through repetition.

Today’s new reactors are changing that. Instead of building massive, one-time projects, advanced reactors are pursuing smaller, modular, repeatable designs that can be approved once and deployed again and again without additional permits or redesigns. Once the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission certifies a design, modules can be mass-produced in centralized factories, shipped by truck, rail, or barge, and assembled on-site with far greater speed and predictability.

Developers are already moving in this direction.

Last Energy, which has signed power purchase agreements with industrial off-takers in the UK and Poland, plans to use modular factory fabrication and skid-mounted shipping to achieve roughly 24-month deployment timelines and repeatable cost reductions for its 20 MWe PWR-20 reactor.

Kairos Power, which is backed by Google and the U.S. Department of Energy, plans to use off-site module fabrication and factory-to-site construction methods to lower commercial build risk for its Hermes low-power demonstration reactor and future 140 MWe KP-FHR platform.

NuCube Energy, which is backed by Arizona Nuclear Ventures, plans to use ultra-small factory fabrication and truck-and-rail deployment for its roughly 1 to 20 MWe microreactor platform, allowing rapid field deployment and multi-unit scaling for remote or industrial users.

By standardizing designs, making units smaller, and allowing one-time design certifications, advanced nuclear offers a fundamentally different business model: off-the-shelf, factory-fabricated nuclear plants ready for deployment and able to benefit from the cost efficiencies of serial production. That reduces construction risk, increases delivery speed, and drives the kind of cost declines seen in other industries, where each successive unit becomes faster, cheaper, and more efficient than the last.

Even legacy nuclear showed those gains. Vogtle Unit 4 was completed at roughly 30% lower cost than Unit 3, and Palo Verde’s later units were built more efficiently than the first. Replication-driven cost declines are real, and nuclear is positioned to capture them.

There will be some growing pains. NuScale Power, for example, saw projected costs rise because of construction and supply expenses, ultimately leading to the project’s cancellation. But that reflects the reality of first-of-a-kind deployment, not a structural flaw. Each company is still proving a unique design, and none has yet had the opportunity to fully benefit from the serial factory production that should deliver the economies of scale SMRs promise.

Advanced nuclear is not repeating the mistakes of the past. It is solving them. With modularity at its core, it is positioned to deliver clean, reliable, and affordable power at the scale America needs.

Let’s not allow yesterday’s permitting and construction challenges to stand in the way of tomorrow’s advanced energy solutions. Let’s support small modular reactors and build a reliable, abundant energy future.

Michael Carbone is a Republican member of the Arizona House of Representatives representing Legislative District 25 and serves as House Majority Leader. Follow him on X at @MichaelCarbone. Michael Way is a Republican member of the Arizona House of Representatives serving Legislative District 15, which includes Mesa and Queen Creek in Maricopa County, and San Tan Valley in Pinal County. Follow him on X at @MichaelWayAZ.

The post Small modular reactors can help reduce the cost of nuclear appeared first on ˿����Ƶ Business News.

For generations, Arizona’s firefighters have answered the call, training to run toward danger, not away from it, and preparing for the worst, often with limited resources and information about evolving technologies.

As interest in new advanced nuclear reactors such as small modular reactors, or SMRs, grows, some are beginning to ask whether local fire departments are prepared because SMRs are smaller, more advanced, and could be deployed in more locations?

It’s a fair question. The idea of responding to a nuclear-related incident does raise legitimate questions. Many fire departments, particularly in rural areas, operate with limited budgets, rely on mutual aid agreements, and do not have the advanced hazmat or radiological certifications necessary to respond to a fire at a nuclear site.

Add to that the fact that Arizona has not built a new nuclear plant in more than 40 years, since Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station was constructed in the mid-1980s. Since then, entire generations have come and gone without ever having to think about the rigorous permitting requirements new nuclear plants must undergo to ensure public safety. And outside Maricopa County, most departments have never had to consider it at all.

But the evidence is clear: if a new SMR were sited in a rural county, no firefighter would be expected to walk into an unknown chemical or radiological hazard for which they were not prepared. 

SMRs are not the Cold War-era systems people associate with radioactive release or nuclear fallout. Advanced reactor designs like TerraPower’s Natrium reactor, X-energy’s Xe-100, and Oklo’s Aurora use passive safety features that make them effectively ‘meltdown-proof’ and ‘walk-away safe,’ virtually eliminating the risk of high-pressure explosions and radioactive plumes.

Nuclear facilities are among the most heavily regulated energy infrastructure in the county. Federal law requires every nuclear plant to maintain a fully dedicated, on-site fire brigade capable of handling fire, hazmat and radiological incidents independently.

10 CFR § 50.48 (Fire Protection), for example, requires plants to be equipped to respond to emergencies without relying on local jurisdictions. That’s why Palo Verde has its own on-site fire department with no mutual aid agreements with surrounding jurisdictions. It is not by choice. It is because federal law requires it, and federal law would require the same for new SMRs.

10 CFR Part 100 (Site Criteria) requires reactors to be located far from populated areas, at least 1.333 times the distance from the reactor site to the outer boundary of its low-population zone. Although this zone will be smaller for SMRs because they are inherently safer, locations will still be 3 to 5 miles or more beyond municipal boundaries.

10 CFR 50.47 (Emergency Planning Zone) makes clear that local jurisdictions participate in a purely supplemental off-site role, such as facilitating community coordination, evacuations, or sheltering in the event of an emergency. That demonstrates that local jurisdictions are not expected to enter plant operations or contaminated areas during an event, including for new SMRs.

In short, nuclear energy does not depend on local firefighters to manage complex on-site emergencies. It is designed, regulated and operated to be self-contained.

Arizona has a proven track record with nuclear energy. Palo Verde has safely powered our state for decades while supporting thousands of jobs and contributing billions to the economy.

Now, as we consider the deployment of new energy technologies, we have an opportunity to build on that success. Nuclear plants contribute millions annually in local tax revenue, which provides critical funding for local fire departments, including new fire trucks, upgraded fire stations, and state-of-the-art training facilities. They also provide hundreds of good-paying jobs, including for local fire departments and districts in rural areas.

With these new designs, Arizona’s fire departments and districts are being given an opportunity to benefit. Let’s take advantage of that.

The rules are in place. The technology is safe. And the benefits are real. Let’s move forward with confidence and ensure Arizona remains a leader in powering the future.

Michael Carbone is a Republican member of the Arizona House of Representatives representing Legislative District 25 and serves as House Majority Leader. Follow him on X at @MichaelCarbone. Representative Walt Blackman is a Republican member of the Arizona House of Representatives serving Legislative District 7 and is Chairman of the House Government Committee. Follow him on X at @BlackmanForAZ.

The post When it comes to safety, advanced nuclear stands apart appeared first on ˿����Ƶ Business News.