Welcome back: In the past decade, both Democratic and Republican administrations have sought to revive the nuclear industry, in part because  the power source emits no planet-warming greenhouse gases. Last year, Congress passed by overwhelming bipartisan majorities the Advance Act to boost nuclear technology. Three Mile Island is reopening.

But cost remains a headwind. Wind, solar and natural gas powered electricity have gotten steadily cheaper in part because efficiency-improving innovations can be introduced virtually at will.

By contrast, “anything that goes into a reactor that’s safety relevant has to be nuclear-certified with incredibly strict quality control,” said Ted Nordhaus, founder of the Breakthrough Institute, who has written extensively on nuclear power. This slows deployment and innovation.

While deregulation gets less attention than tariffs or tax cuts, it may be more powerful: Unlike tariffs it doesn’t help some industries at the expense of others and unlike tax cuts, it’s mostly free.

Read on for more on this story and other sustainability news.

What level of radiation may a U.S. nuclear power plant emit? “As low as reasonably achievable,” the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has long declared. It bases this on the assumption that there is no safe level of exposure to radiation, the WSJ's Greg Ip writes.

This assumption—called “linear no-threshold” or LNT—isn’t rigorously supported by science. There is little consensus that radiation at extremely low levels is harmful.

Yet the persistence of the standard is one reason why nuclear power plants cost so much and take so long to build. Between 1954 and 1978 in the U.S., 133 reactors were approved for construction, according to the White House. Since then, just a handful have been approved. There are lots of reasons, but a culture of caution at the NRC, created in 1975, and reinforced by the partial meltdown at Three Mile Island in 1979, is certainly one.

To revitalize the industry, the Trump administration issued an executive order in May ordering a wholesale review and revision of the NRC’s rules and guidelines, including “linear no-threshold” and “as low as reasonably achievable.” The NRC is hosting a public meeting next week to review those latter standards.

• The Audacious Reboot of America’s Nuclear Energy Program
• Trump Wants to Expand Nuclear Power. It Won’t Be Easy.
• What Do You Do With All the Radioactive Waste?

An executive order issued by President Trump last week has created fresh uncertainties for renewable-energy investors, only days after the passage of his tax-and-spending bill encouraged developers to start new projects within the next year, WSJ Pro's Luis Garcia reports.

Trump has ordered a harder look at so-called safe-harbor rules that enable developers to lock in tax credits once their projects reach certain milestones. He has called for guidelines “to ensure that policies concerning the ‘beginning of construction’ are not circumvented.” 

Developers have long followed established safe-harbor rules. These require them to have spent at least 5% of the project’s total cost, typically with the purchase of critical equipment, or have completed substantial physical work to lock in tax benefits.

Major changes in these rules could hinder developers’ ability to meet safe-harbor deadlines. Requiring them to pay a much higher share of project costs up front would stall most projects about to start construction today, as their economics would no longer make sense without the tax credits, said Brian Dunn, president and chief operating officer of Summit Ridge Energy, one of the largest U.S. solar developers. He called such a possibility “catastrophic,” noting that wind and solar are expected to account for about 60% of new power generation coming online in the U.S. in coming years.

• Renewable Energy’s Winners and Losers in the Megabill
• Clean Energy Is Under Attack Even Where It’s Booming
• Climate Startups Are Now Talking About Jet Fighters

Shoppers in the U.S. and Canada are walking away from purchases in stores over worries about unsustainable packaging and concerns about plastics, according to a survey, WSJ Pro Sustainable Business's Yusuf Khan writes.

The research, conducted by sustainability consulting firm Aura, found 37% of consumers surveyed across the two countries had decided against buying something because it was unsustainably packaged. The figure rose to 42% for European consumers.

The survey found that 80% of all respondents said brands and retailers were using too much packaging, though only 57% of the North American respondents saw a direct link between packaging waste and climate change. That percentage was “significantly higher” in Europe, the survey said.

The United Nations Environment Program estimated in 2021 that 400 million metric tons of plastic are produced annually. Concerns around chemicals and plastic in food packaging have been growing in recent years, but companies have been slow to address these worries.

• Beverage and Snack Giants Defend Sustainable-Packaging Plans
• When Consumers Prefer Simple Packaging—and When They Don’t
• Companies Kick the Plastic Can Down the Road (Again)

Tell me what you think: Send me your feedback and suggestions at perry.cleveland-peck@wsj.com or reply to any newsletter. If you were forwarded this newsletter, you can sign up here.

• The best EV deals now are on the used market. (WSJ)
   
• HSBC exits banks’ climate coalition abandoned by Wall Street. (Bloomberg)
   
• Google-backed coalition to help scale ocean, rock carbon removals. (Reuters)
   
• Shell, Accenture and Amex GBT launch blockchain platform to scale green jet fuel. (ESG News)
   
• Do we have to take climate risks into our own hands now? Why DIY disaster preparation matters more than ever. (Vox)
   
• Wildfires close Grand Canyon’s North Rim. (WSJ)
   
• China “building 74% of all current solar and wind projects.” (FT)

WSJ Pro Sustainable Business gives you an inside look at how companies are tackling sustainability. Send comments to bureau chief Perry Cleveland-Peck at perry.cleveland-peck@wsj.com and reporters Clara Hudson at clara.hudson@wsj.com and Yusuf Khan at yusuf.khan@wsj.com. Follow us on LinkedIn at wsjperry, clara-hudson and yusuf_khan.