The Aurora Sentinel reports that Buckley Space Force Base is slated to receive one of the Pentagon’s first portable nuclear microreactors by 2028 as part of a Department of Defense initiative aimed at making military installations less dependent on the civilian grid. The reactor, developed by Radiant Industries, would generate roughly one megawatt of electricity and operate independently from the commercial grid. In plain English: the military wants reliable power because national defense cannot run on vibes, subsidies, and a favorable wind forecast.
The article walks through both the promise and the concerns surrounding the project. Supporters say microreactors offer resilient, carbon-free baseload power with modern passive safety systems and durable TRISO fuel technology. Critics point to nuclear waste, accident risks, and Colorado’s long memory of Rocky Flats. Those are fair questions. Nuclear deserves hard scrutiny because it is nuclear. But treating every reactor like Chernobyl wearing a trench coat is not a serious energy policy either.
The Bullet Point Brief
- Buckley was selected for a Pentagon pilot program because military bases need uninterrupted power for national-security operations. Turns out “mission readiness” is easier with electricity.
- The microreactor would reportedly operate for years without refueling and include passive cooling systems designed to shut the reactor down safely without operator intervention. Engineering matters. Details matter. Hysteria does not.
- Environmental groups predictably oppose the project outright, while supporters argue modern nuclear technology is far safer than the public often assumes. Adults ask hard questions. Children wave signs.
- Aurora officials say they were not heavily involved in the planning process, and residents are already asking questions about safety, waste, emergency response, and oversight. Good. Transparency is not optional because the brochure says “resilient.”
- Colorado constantly says it wants clean energy, energy independence, and grid reliability. Well, this is the part where those goals stop being bumper stickers and start requiring grown-up tradeoffs.
My Bottom Line
This is one of the rare moments where Colorado is actually having an adult conversation about energy.
Not a performative one. Not a hashtag war. An actual discussion about reliable power, national security, infrastructure resilience, and modern nuclear technology.
And honestly? Good.
Buckley Space Force Base is not a yoga retreat. It is a military installation with critical missions tied directly to national defense. Serious facilities require serious electricity. They cannot operate on intermittent power sources and optimistic PowerPoint presentations about sustainability.
Now, to be crystal clear, nuclear deserves scrutiny. Safety matters. Waste disposal matters. Emergency planning matters. Oversight matters. Local notification matters. If a reactor is being placed near communities, then the public deserves straight answers and transparent communication, not polished bureaucratic language about “resiliency frameworks” and “stakeholder engagement.”
But the opposite extreme is equally unserious.
Too many people still react to the word “nuclear” like it is 1986 and somebody just yelled “Chernobyl” in a crowded movie theater. Modern microreactors are not Soviet-era concrete towers held together with cigarettes and bad decisions. The technology, safety systems, fuel design, and operational oversight are dramatically different.
That does not mean blind trust. It means evaluation.
Because here is the uncomfortable reality Colorado keeps dancing around: if you want carbon-free baseload power, military readiness, energy independence, grid resilience, AI infrastructure, electrification, and modern industrial capacity, nuclear has to be part of the conversation.
Not worshipped. Not feared. Evaluated.
And there is a deeper hypocrisy here worth mentioning. Colorado politicians love talking about “clean energy” right up until the clean energy source is powerful enough to actually run civilization consistently. Wind and solar have roles to play. Fine. But hospitals, military installations, data centers, water systems, and industrial infrastructure cannot simply cross their fingers and hope weather conditions remain emotionally supportive.
Reliable power is civilization. Period.
The Colorado I grew up in understood that westerners solve hard problems instead of panicking at them. We built reservoirs. We tunneled through mountains. We electrified remote places. We engineered solutions.
Now too much of modern politics treats engineering itself as morally suspicious unless it arrives wrapped in activist-approved packaging.
So ask the hard questions about Buckley’s reactor. Demand transparency. Demand safety planning. Demand accountability. But let engineers, operators, scientists, and reality guide the discussion instead of ideological ghost stories from the 1970s.
Adults build power systems. Children hold signs about them.
Source: The Aurora Sentinel
Share your thoughts...