Plutonium for Profit: Trump’s AI Energy Plan Endangers Security

The Trump administration is weighing plans to divert plutonium from U.S. nuclear weapons to fuel private reactors for AI data centers — a move critics warn could jeopardize national security and global safety.

The Trump administration is once again blurring the dangerous line between civilian energy policy and the U.S. nuclear weapons program. According to new reporting, the Department of Energy (DOE) is considering diverting plutonium from the nation’s nuclear weapons stockpile to fuel a new wave of nuclear reactors—reactors being pitched as a solution to the electricity demands of AI data centers.

At the heart of this plan is not surplus material alone, but plutonium pits—the highly radioactive cores of nuclear warheads. Internal DOE memos reveal that more than a fifth of the plutonium envisioned for this program would come directly from pits the Pentagon relies on to sustain its nuclear deterrent. This comes as DOE already struggles to meet Congress’s demands to build more pits for the next generation of U.S. missiles.

A New Nuclear Risk for AI’s Electricity Hunger

The push is being sold as a way to power the rapid expansion of artificial intelligence. Tech giants, desperate for “carbon-free” electricity, have aligned themselves with an administration eager to hand over public assets to private startups like Oklo. But this is not clean energy. Converting weapons plutonium for civilian use introduces massive security, safety, and economic risks.

Plutonium is far more radioactive than uranium and represents one of the greatest proliferation dangers on Earth. To dismantle pits and reprocess this material for reactors would take years, cost billions, and create new transport and storage vulnerabilities. Previous attempts—such as DOE’s failed plutonium-to-fuel project at Savannah River—collapsed under spiraling costs.

Watchdogs and Lawmakers Sound the Alarm

Democratic leaders in Congress, including Sen. Ed Markey and Reps. Don Beyer and John Garamendi, have condemned the proposal. In a September 10 letter, they warned that it “goes against long-standing, bipartisan U.S. nuclear security policy,” raises weapons proliferation concerns, and “may adversely affect the nation’s defense posture.”

Independent experts agree. Hans Kristensen of the Federation of American Scientists noted the DOE plan appears to be advancing without meaningful coordination with the Defense Department. “This is mainly a Department of Energy plan happening in collusion with the nuclear power industry,” he said.

A False Choice

The Trump administration frames this as a trade-off: weaken our nuclear arsenal to expand nuclear power. But in reality, it’s a false choice. We do not need to hollow out the weapons stockpile in order to feed plutonium into untested commercial reactors. Nor should communities bear the risks of plutonium transport and reprocessing when safe, renewable energy options already exist.

At its core, this proposal reveals a dangerous pattern: using national security assets to subsidize private industry. While DOE scrambles to make 80 pits per year to modernize warheads by 2030, the administration wants to simultaneously disassemble pits to meet tech sector electricity demand. This contradiction exposes the unseriousness of the plan—and the recklessness of tying nuclear weapons policy to Silicon Valley’s hunger for power.

The Peace Economy Alternative

The Peace Economy Project believes this is exactly the wrong path. Instead of funneling taxpayer resources into nuclear brinksmanship and plutonium-powered reactors, we should be:

• Investing in renewable energy infrastructure—solar, wind, and storage—that can meet data center demand safely.
• Demilitarizing plutonium stockpiles responsibly, not handing them over to private corporations.
• Redirecting billions from pit production and reactor subsidies into community needs like housing, healthcare, and education.
• Pursuing international agreements to prevent a new era of plutonium proliferation under the guise of “AI energy.”

AI may require electricity, but it does not require plutonium. This is a choice—and once again, the Trump administration is choosing corporate interests over public safety.

The United States halted weapons-grade plutonium production in 1992 for good reason. Restarting that cycle, even indirectly, puts us on a dangerous road. We cannot build a peace economy by turning bombs into business deals.