The Defense Department is pouring resources into a classified nuclear ambition: a mobile microreactor small enough to fit in a shipping container, designed to power troops in remote combat zones without the sound and visibility of diesel generators. BWXT installed the reactor core for Project Pele at its Innovation Campus in Lynchburg, Virginia, marking a critical threshold in the four-year effort since the Pentagon's Strategic Capabilities Office selected the company in 2022.
The project reflects a broader military pivot toward nuclear power—one that raises urgent questions about transparency, civilian oversight, and who bears the risks of technological experiments conducted in the name of national security. The Pentagon frames small reactors as a practical solution to wartime logistics, but the initiative advances with minimal public scrutiny and no clear regulatory framework for deployment.
The Mission and the Machinery
Pele, named for the Hawaiian goddess of volcanoes and fire, is designed to produce 1.5 megawatts of continuous electricity. The system will travel to Idaho National Laboratory next year, where it faces three years of fueling, testing, and operation. Workers broke ground at that site in 2024, and work is progressing on schedule. Charles Graves, director of government microreactors at BWXT, told Axios the team has moved beyond the theoretical phase. "We are, truly, into the fabrication and assembly cycle," he said. "There is a huge difference between looking at a paper reactor and getting to a point like this."
Military planners see a straightforward appeal: the reactor eliminates repeated diesel resupply runs that consume resources and expose troop positions. Kate Kelly, president of BWXT Advanced Technologies, described the engineering challenge in stark terms. "The problem for Pele that we are trying to solve is: produce as much power as you can out of a module that can still fit within that shipping container constraint," she told Axios. BWXT manufactures the tri-structural isotropic fuel that powers Pele, creating a vertically integrated supply chain that concentrates both profit and control within a single defense contractor.
Pele isn't the Pentagon's only nuclear bet. BWXT is also developing a second project, Janus, under which it will build and operate BANR—a high-temperature, gas-cooled reactor at Fort Campbell, Kentucky. These parallel efforts suggest the Defense Department sees nuclear microreactors as a cornerstone of future military infrastructure.
The Civilian Oversight Vacuum
Project Pele has advanced with remarkably little public debate. Work is concentrated at a fenced-off facility along the James River, roughly three hours southwest of Washington. Northrop Grumman, Rolls-Royce LibertyWorks, and Torch Technologies contribute to the project, creating a web of private contractors managing technology with profound public implications.
Kelly stressed that "the industry can't afford a mishap," acknowledging the stakes. Civilian nuclear projects operate under strict Nuclear Regulatory Commission oversight; military nuclear development, however, occupies a different legal and political space. There's no requirement for public hearings, environmental impact statements, or community input—the safeguards that protect civilians when nuclear power serves commercial electricity.
The risks aren't merely hypothetical. Small, mobile reactors bring novel challenges: secure transportation, field maintenance by military personnel without civilian nuclear expertise, disposal of radioactive materials in remote locations, and possible accidents in hostile environments where conventional safety protocols may break down.
Growing Public Interest, Unanswered Questions
Nuclear energy is enjoying a rhetorical revival. A Gallup poll conducted in March found growing support among average Americans. The White House, Pentagon, Silicon Valley, and defense contractors in El Segundo are all signaling enthusiasm. Kelly observed that "the scope of opportunities in nuclear is just bigger than it has been."
But opportunity for whom? Calling nuclear power inevitable progress obscures who gains and who bears the costs: defense contractors win contracts, the Pentagon gains tactical advantages, and people living downwind or downstream from these systems assume the risks. Idaho National Laboratory's three-year testing window will produce data about Pele's performance. But will the public see that data? Will independent safety reviews take place, and will communities near deployment sites have any voice in decisions affecting their security? Those questions remain unanswered.
Graves said the move from "paper reactor" to hardware represents genuine progress. It does. But progress toward what, and at whose expense? Those questions deserve as much attention as the engineering achievements themselves.
Why This Matters:
Project Pele exemplifies a growing trend: critical technological decisions made within military and corporate structures with minimal democratic input. The Pentagon is investing billions in nuclear infrastructure designed to operate outside civilian regulatory frameworks. This concentration of power and secrecy matters because it shapes how major risks are distributed. Those who benefit—defense contractors and military planners—are insulated from consequences. Those who bear risks—surrounding communities and future generations managing radioactive waste—aren't consulted. As nuclear technology becomes more dispersed and mobile, the case for transparency and accountability grows stronger, not weaker. The question isn't whether nuclear power has a role in America's future, but whether Pentagon officials and corporate partners should make those decisions alone, or whether civilian oversight and public participation should shape how this powerful technology is deployed.