BOISE, Idaho -- The U.S. Senate has passed a massive infrastructure bill, and buried within the package is $12 billion for the nuclear industry, but critics said the money would be better spent elsewhere.

Half of the money is reserved for nuclear facilities under threat of shutting down due to economic factors. The other half is for research and development, such as on the small modular nuclear reactor model being built in Idaho.

Tim Judson, executive director of the Nuclear Information and Resource Service, said the industry as a whole is struggling, with even the Idaho project being scaled back.

"By propping up the existing reactors and preventing them from being replaced with renewable energy, the nuclear industry's essentially trying to keep sort of a foothold in the energy system until they can try to ram some of these new reactor projects like the one in Idaho through, if it ever happens," Judson asserted.

He hopes the U.S. House makes changes to the investments in nuclear. The industry and some environmental groups have touted nuclear energy as an alternative to fossil fuels as the country moves toward clean energy sources.

Judson noted it is a big deal many nuclear power plants need a bailout, adding it is as if nuclear companies are holding cities and states hostage.

"It's been this kind of perpetual process of a power plant's closure being announced, the company demanding a bailout, the state not knowing what else to do, so it gives the bailout," Judson recounted. "And this federal subsidy is going to be the same thing. There's no planning procedure included in this legislation."

He argued there needs to be more consideration about what to do with old power plants and aging infrastructure.

Judson pointed out another bill in Congress could provide up to $50 billion in subsidies for the industry over the next decade.

According to his organization's research, it will not mean any new jobs and the money would be more beneficially spent on electricity projects such as renewables, transmission systems and battery storage.

"If you spent that $50 billion on those things, it would create more than 60,000 new jobs," Judson emphasized. "And that's more than four times the number of workers that are employed at these nuclear plants that would get bailed out."

Radioactive soil in Australia is being excavated and shipped to a waste disposal facility in Idaho.

The soil was polluted from a carbolic acid plant and uranium refinery that operated a century ago and is located in a suburb of Sydney.

The low-level radioactive waste will go to US Ecology's Grand View site in southwest Idaho. The news has been a relief for Australian residents living on the soil, but has raised a concern among some in the Gem State.

Tami Thatcher is a nuclear safety consultant for Environmental Defense Institute and former nuclear safety analyst at Idaho National Laboratory.

"Whenever you become aware of how radioactive waste is shipped from around the country and from around the world to Idaho, it's kind of alarming," said Thatcher.

Excavation of the contaminated soil began in September and is expected to take 18 to 24 months. It totals about 1,900 tons.

A spokesperson for US Ecology says the soil and debris are contaminated with a very low level of naturally occurring radioactive material but fall well below the established criteria in the company's Idaho permit.

Thatcher said there have been concerns about US Ecology's Grand View operations. In 2018, an explosion at the site killed one person and injured three others.

"They've never admitted where the waste came from," said Thatcher. "What type of waste it was and why it is - when they mixed their magnesium oxide to neutralize the waste - it blew sky high."

An investigation into the explosion found there was "non-conforming waste" included in material that was not supposed to be part of the waste stream.

US Ecology is the only commercial hazardous waste landfill operating to Idaho. According to the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality, the facility received nearly 110,000 tons of waste in 2020, 96% of which came from outside the state or country.

To modernize the industry, nuclear power is making the transition toward smaller reactors. But a report from Taxpayers for Common Sense claims federal subsidies to help the industry along are a losing bet.

According to the group, the Department of Energy has spent more than $1.2 billion on small modular reactors, and could spend another $5.5 billion over the next decade to develop and demonstrate the new design.

Michael Maragos, senior policy analyst of energy and natural resources with Taxpayers for Common Sense, said there are a slew of supports for the nuclear industry up and down the supply chain.

"But the nuclear power industry is, by and large, struggling," said Maragos. "So there's this large dichotomy between what policymakers have hoped would happen through all of the various costly incentives and what is actually happening on the ground."

Part of the push to develop new technology in the nuclear industry is an effort to decarbonize power grids. Nuclear power is seen as a key source of clean energy in this transition.

The company NuScale Power is developing its small modular reactor technology at Idaho National Laboratory and has received federal investments. The Department of Energy did not respond to a request for comment before the deadline for this story.

The Idaho National Laboratory will be the site of the Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems's Carbon Free Power Project. Current plans for the project consist of 12 small reactors that supply power to cities in six states, including Idaho.

However, Maragos noted that appetite could be waning for this project, which is targeting 2029 to go operational. Salmon River Electric in Challis has pulled out of the project and Idaho Falls has halved its commitment.

"We already see a number of towns that are supposedly going to be the ones benefiting from this brand-spanking new type of nuclear reactor shying away from the project," said Maragos. "And the reason is simple. It's going to cost a lot, probably more than we're expecting now, and ratepayers are going to be on the hook."

Maragos said the rate of federal subsidies for nuclear is unsustainable, noting money to transition the country to a cleaner economy would be better spent on technology such as solar and wind, which are cheaper to deploy.

"Nuclear power may provide some benefits in a world where we're trying to limit emissions from our power sector," said Maragos. "But those benefits are not worth the tremendous cost and risk that policymakers are asking ratepayers and taxpayers to bear."

BOISE, Idaho -- Hundreds of groups have signed a letter opposing nuclear subsidies in Congress's infrastructure and budget reconciliation bills.

The letter pointed to more than $50 billion in investments in nuclear power, including propping up aging plants.

Leigh Ford, executive director of the Snake River Alliance in Boise, said it would take away from movements toward climate, economic and environmental justice.

"Our concern is the amount of money that goes to nuclear research, development and old reactors when a lot of that money could go to renewable," Ford argued. "It's faster and cheaper, and bailing out old corrupt industries is not in our best interest right now."

Ford said subsidies are only predicted to go toward eight companies in as many states. Part of the money for research will likely go to small reactor technology being studied at the Idaho National Laboratory.

Supporters say nuclear power is an emissions-free technology integral to the transition toward cleaner energy sources.

Ford countered money for nuclear energy would be better spent on the installation of renewables such as solar.

"Solar is really fast, as opposed to nuclear," Ford contended. "It takes decades for nuclear. And another bad thing about nuclear is that one generation can use the power, while several generations have to guard and store and treat the waste."

Some of the more than 240 organizations that signed the letter include Food and Water Watch, Indigenous Environmental Network, the League of Women Voters and Physicians for Social Responsibility.