You typically blend it with a depleted or natural uranium stock, and you can achieve halo equivalent performance at about somewhere between 10% and 13% plutonium content, depending on the load, maybe plus up a little bit, depending on the exact characteristics of the material. So that is still in development and progress, and we'll keep folks updated as that comes along. With respect to the work we did out at Los Alamos, so that was one of the things that we were excited about. That was partnering with the lab to take an assembly, a critical assembly critical for the first time. We did it in a fast reactor system, which was pretty cool for us to do back in December. And we also ran it through various reactivity feedbacks. We didn't just take it at effectively zero power critical. We did put up to about, from the calculations, about two kilowatts or so of power into the system and we're able to heat it up and then watch the reactivity feedbacks come in and work. Between being a fast system and being a plutonium system with a uranium reflector, it moves quick, but it also demonstrates the incredibly strong reactivity feedback coefficients, particularly the thermal expansion coefficient as well as some of the Doppler effects, to be a very tightly coupled, very responsive system where we were able to heat it up until it turned itself basically off by thermal expansion. And then even going into maximum reactivity insertion at those temperatures, we could not turn it back on. So a great validation point. The thing that was shocking to me was how fast, like when I say shocking to me, I've been around fast reactors, I've been involved in fast reactors in the past, but this thing just went so quick and so fast to come like to to basically be so responsive it was like a perfectly tuned and engineered you know sports car to the max um with respect to how quickly it would ramp but also how quickly it would stabilize um so uh you know that was that was a key thing so the reactivity feedback coefficients um the overall behavior all those things that we did the power maneuvers uh all those things that we went through and that you know came out um you know, generally in the expected ranges, I'd say is what we, you know, calculated. It's great to get higher fidelity and great to come in with that. But you're right to know, you know, between being a fast system, so you have a very short neutron generation timeline or lifetime, and then on top of that, having a pretty low delay neutron fraction compared to EG35, you know, it's a quickly resolving system, but that gives you great, like, great, you know, frankly, stability and very tight responses in the system i think i was uh debriefing the team on the way back from those experiments and said it was i think like that driving that system is is you know i've never driven one but it feels like it's probably like the equivalent of going into an f1 car nothing gets really like faster and more more responsive than than that system um everything else we build afterwards uh and every other kind of system would be a lot more i would call it uh pedestrian but it was pretty cool to see those kind of dynamics and great validation of the inherent feedback effects in a small fast system like that.

Good deal. I really appreciate all the detail.

Yeah, I love that one. Thank you.

Your next question comes from the line of George Gianaricus with Canaccord Genuity. George, your line is open.

Please go ahead. hi everyone good morning and thank you for taking my questions um can you maybe please provide an update on the radioisotope production roadmap at groves you know which specific isotopes are you're prioritizing for initial production and when do you anticipate recognizing first revenue thank you yeah i'll start with what we did at groves uh which is really important um you know it's it is a full-scale isotope reactor um that said we're going to be going through all the various like operational commissioning and everything else all the way out for a bit um you know as we are positioning ourselves uh you know generally speaking the key thing we got out of this was was execution right we got an execution repetition down of building a real full reactor this wasn't something we put in a national lab it wasn't something we put at subscale it was the full scale full civil construction right we went full excavation we went 60 feet deep we put you You know, we built this like we will build our future isotope reactors with the ability to take direct lessons learned and iterate on them. So kind of showing, you know, I think one of the things that we try to do is and focus on iterating at scale and not subscale. So that was a big win for us with this plant. And in so doing, got to, you know, turn on a full civil reactor in under a year, which is pretty awesome. That said, to get to the point on the isotope production. It's going to depend on a couple of factors, but we anticipate, you know, sort of in the next year, like in about 12 months or so, we'll get through all those different capabilities and we'll start producing some R&D quantities of material. And then in parallel, ramping up our next isotope projects that would be producing at more scale. On top of that, we also have additional isotope opportunities that are not in reactor. and we're you know we have our Idaho radiochemistry lab that is NRC licensed and is is able to be working with various quantities of material and we continue to sort of operate there and scale up there and so there's opportunities on sort of the isotope recovery and refinement side that are independent of the reactor and then the reactor adds a ton of value into those so those are things we're actively moving into and embarking upon but those are kind of the timelines for how we're seeing in reactor production with the opportunity and the potential possibly for some production of basically by refining existing inventories, recovering and purifying of other isotopes that are in either stranded sources or similar kind of, you know, I would say media that we can take out and package into product through that lab that we, you know, have the potential to possibly be producing before, you know, inside of that 12 month window. And Craig, I don't know if you want to add anything else on the details.

Yeah, George, just, you know, I think we think the first revenue coming out of the isotope business will more likely be from the lab facility in Idaho as opposed to groves. And as we noted in the material, we've got commercial discussions ongoing with several companies around potential offtake. And revenue, though, from that is more likely to come in the first part of next year, just given how we kind of see the timing of all those pieces. Thanks, everyone.

Your next question comes from the line of Joseph Osha with Guggenheim. Joseph, your line is open. Please go ahead.

Thanks. Thanks for taking my question. To return to the fuel question, I just want to make sure I understand. I mean, you've got the initial couple of loads for EINEL from EBR. Is the plan to go to the blended plutonium after that, or is Centris going to come online before that? but I just want to make sure I understand the order of operations here. Thank you.

Both. This is the key thing that's really important for us. We're really uniquely positioned between having, you know, access, you know, basically line of sight and partnerships on the centrist on the halo side from commercial production, add in the government materials from the EBR2 fuel, and then add into that the plutonium fuel. We're uniquely positioned to be able to use a multivariate fuel strategy and then add on top of that, you know, recycling when we turn that online to provide kind of this enduring effective, you know, fuel capability. That's the key thing. We are versatile in what we can take as fuel. That means we can take a diverse set, you know, a diverse mix of fuels. And that's super important because that gives us a lot of fuel independence. A lot. I think this is one of the most severely underestimated things that we're doing as a company is that we have that ability to have and use all of the sources that we can tap into and that we get access to and we're investing in developing that capability set to be able to do that but that's innately a unique characteristic of a fast reactor uh and and we're designing for that right and so it's really a blended mix um the plan and the goal is to be able to take and receive all the different fuel sources we have that stretches the fuel resources we have while we spin up recycling capabilities while we support enrichment expansion uh and And that's how we see this all come together with respect to being able to fuel these things. So to put it in summary, first reactor from EBR2 recovered material scale-up is supported by blended plutonium fuel as a bridging fuel to ramp with the uranium enrichment scale-up. That then goes on, right? And for a very, very long time, our use of enriched uranium, and then at the end of the day, recycling, which can sort of offset the need for everything because of its ability to extend the resource so tremendously. so then you have the recycling that bolts on on the back side of that so it's a three-pronged approach that's um an enduring advantage that you can't really touch and just to zoom out to like the hundred thousandth of you react fast reactors with recycling like what we're developing have the potential to tap in and own resources and reserves of heavy metals on this planet empower the entire planet's energy needs for billions of years right the first principles the physics support that that's why that was something people wanted to do that's why we're doing it.

And Joseph, just to add to Jake's question, because we're, you know, progressing more than one fuel pathway, that optimization of kind of which fuel is going to come next in the pecking order is actually something that we keep up to date, but it's, we keep up to date because we keep pushing on more commercial opportunities to make sure that for us, fuel is not a constraint, it's an opportunity.

And thank you. And just, I would assume that we get maybe a little more detail once we know what the allocation of plutonium is going to look like from the DOE because that certainly gives you sense. Correct. And can you remind me, and I'll go away in just a minute, what the expected timing is on that allocation?

That timing is really being not dictated by Oklo, so I would not want to throw out a date because it's really not under our control. But, you know, I guess the flippant answer is we're closer than we were.

Okay, great. Thank you very much.

Your next question comes from the line of Ryan Finkst with B. Riley Securities. Ryan, your line is open. Please go ahead.

Thanks for taking my question and congrats on the criticality milestone. I wanted to ask about the nuclear lifestyle and innovation campuses and what that program could do for a project like the Advanced Fuel Center in Tennessee in terms of bringing in capital or other resources.

Yeah, I mean, I think what we see with that is the, you know, I would say full-throated support of moving forward into a much more, I would say, effective and constructive and scalable solution on sort of, you know, nuclear fuel, frankly, life cycle management. What that means is, you know, I think the approaches of the past have not exactly scaled the best in any form of execution, namely Yucca Mountain. And so the idea here is to open up different disposition pathways that also capture innovations in the technology front. Again, this is probably another part, like this specific piece of what's happening. I should say this. The INLIC initiative is also probably one of the more widely underappreciated sort of efforts at the policy level that has incredible potential impacts on the, frankly, future of energy for the world, especially in the United States. Because what it's doing is saying, hey, let's get communities who want to take this material and see the upside of being able to host a combined ecosystem on the lifecycle side for used fuel coming in, recycling being a cornerstone piece of that. Disposing waste through more innovative methods like boreholes, which are far more capital efficient, scalable, and just better than mine repositories in most all regards. And then advanced fuel fabrication that can take the recycled material, the ecosystem that bolts on to isotopes from recycled material, the fuel from the fabrication of recycled fuel into basically fast reactors, and then the power that comes from it, to then support other parts of the nuclear ecosystem and other industry, right? Because you start creating these kind of energy super campuses or super regional campuses that happen because of what happens there. You know, that's a tremendous thing to be able to tap into. If you think about the used fuel inventories in the United States today, it's more than four Saudi Arabia's equivalent of oil energy, right, in terms of content. I mean, it's almost the entire world's energy supplies that we know of in terms of known oil reserves. And so these states, If you get three states that get this, they're getting more than one Saudi Arabia of energy content they get to basically have in-house, in-state. And then every year, they would get replenished by about a Norway worth of energy, right? Like, that's incredible. And I don't mean annual production. I'm talking about known total oil reserves equivalent, right? This is what they would have. So the economic implications are tremendous. There are a number of things that will flow from this at the capital level, right? And a lot of that's being pursued and developed. but it's a whole government approach to say hey how do we manage this and solve for this um and uh and the fact that you had 20 i think it was 26 states step up and say hey we're uh we're interested in taking this material i mean that was incredible uh and then clearly shows that it was competitive and the five that have been down selected are clearly the ones that are gonna sort of sort of raise their hand and show we're we're eager to be partners here so um we're We're very excited about it for Oklo because of the opportunity to play in that ecosystem. If you think about the key enablers there, it's recycling. It's reactors to use recycled fuel. It's the opportunities to monetize and sell the co-products of recycling. I mean, that's what we do. So we're very excited about this. And I think it's a tremendous move to sort of unleash the ecosystem around, frankly, advanced nuclear and nuclear innovation.

Great. I appreciate it, guys.

Your next question comes from Brian Lee with Goldman Sachs. Brian, your line is open. Please go ahead.

Thanks for taking the questions. Maybe just a two-part question. Be curious if you could provide a bit more detail on, you know, what exactly is being pulled forward with the higher CapEx budget this year and any way to quantify the pull forward in terms of, you know, whether it's quarters or months that you are accelerating the plan.

And then, you know, secondarily, pretty big step up in OPEX here this quarter, both R&D and G&A. uh can you kind of walk us through that well how to think about the opex growth for for the balance of the year thanks guys yeah brian i'll take both of those i think um in terms of the capital spend it's and pull forward you know it's not just dedicated to one business but you know a good portion of that is related um to the um project at idaho national labs so um or our iml and it's really around just wanting to make sure that we've got long lead time procurement spend in place and activity in place, and also making sure that we've got things in place for the interconnection to the grid. And it's less about bringing forward the timeline because 2028 is still the targeted go-live, but it's more about creating more assurance for that and making sure that long lead time items don't impact the critical path for those projects. In terms of the OPEX, Ben, I think we are growing headcount. And I'd say most of that growth, though, is not for functional growth. It's really for engineering and technical growth. Part of what drove a little bit of that higher OPEX, and I think I said this at the time of the initial guidance, is when you're doing a first-of-a-kind project, there's always a little bit of accounting interrogation in terms of what needs to be capitalized versus what needs to be expensed. And it just ends up that we're just needing to expense a few more items in the quarter, given just given the nature of the spend. But really, all of this is about project delivery, project assurance, and just making sure that we can hit the critical path. And for Aurora Our INL is not just hitting the critical path on the powerhouse itself, but, you know, we're also in good situation to start equipment delivery and installation at the Aurora fuel fabrication facility that Ryan Webster and team lead so that we can start fabricating fuel for that first powerhouse that will go live in 2028.

Okay, that's great. Appreciate all the call there. I'll pass it on.

Your next question comes from the line of Christopher Souther with Truist. Christopher, your line is open. Please go ahead.

Congrats on the progress here, and thanks for taking my question. Can you give us a sense as to how the all-in spend at Aurora INL is shaking out with Hewitt? Just any kind of update around the costs that you expect for that first-of-a-kind project would be very helpful. And then I know we're getting EBR2 fuel from the DOE there, but are we able to secure the full fuel for the 75 megawatt operating level? I wasn't sure if that was updated yet.

Yeah, I'll start in inverse order on the fuel, then head to Greg for the cost part um so uh yeah between what we've we're working with with centrist uh and additional additionally what we're you know seeing evolving on the plutonium side we feel quite confident in having all the fuel we need for that plant to run at full power without any changes in course yeah and in terms of cost we're not yet providing full guides on that parcel because we're still narrowing in on what total cost for the project is going to be with kewitt as well as looking at What will be the glide path of not just cost for the Idaho project, but the future projects that more likely than not for power will take place in the Ohio campus as we narrow in on those numbers through the rest of this year? You know, when we've got a more tight number to provide to the market, we'll do that then.

Got it. OK, that makes sense. And then you had called that at the beginning of the call. partner capital opportunities. I just wanted to get a sense, you know, as you're looking at the different, you know, business lines here, you know, historically, you've talked about on the side, some partner opportunities. But on the powerhouse side, you know, is that an area where you're having more active discussions? Or is it still, you know, just kind of reiterating the optionality over time within the business model? I was curious if there was an emphasis there intentionally.

Yeah, I'd say if you look at the power side of the customer bit of your question, you know, it's really around, you know, we've already had the Meta payment, we've had the Equinix payment. And so it does feel like those discussions are a little bit more advanced. But what, you know, Jake talked earlier about the Inlet campuses, and what excites me about that, maybe with my oil and gas background, is this as an opportunity to create new energy corridors across the United States, and those are other ways that, you know, people could invest at the asset and project level in our business. So, you know, in terms of the third leg of the stool, our isotopes business, that's probably where we're at most of the early days in terms of what a customer investment in the business could look like.

We have brought on in the quarter a person by the name of Ray Wang, who's our business unit leader for that business, and I know it's one of things that's very high on ray's radar screen as well okay that's helpful thanks guys thanks your next question comes from the line of jeremy tonit with jp morgan jeremy your line is open please go ahead hi good morning congratulations on criticality thank you it was pretty cool I just wanted to see, I guess, you've successfully been using M&A as a tool to bulk up, I guess, the supply chain. And just wondering, along those lines, are there any other areas you think that would be of interest to you and that would make sense to kind of pursue more?

I won't go deep into the things we are looking at, but we do continue to look. I think it's things that would still be in the scale of ARMAC and CEI, but it really is about, you know, when we look at building out asset deployment capability in the firm, you know, you can do that by hiring staff, so building the capability internally, you know, or you can go and buy it. And I think when we see those buying opportunities, it's real around the strength of the team and the capability that we can bring in-house. And we're really pleased with, you know, what we did in that regard in the quarter and looking at it as an accelerator. I think if there's one thing that people can take away from this call, it's like, you know, we are putting assets on the ground. We've successfully gone critical. And now we're really just looking at more that we can do to provide assurance around asset deployment for all three businesses. So if we see an opportunity to scale that capability, you know, at the right price point, you know, then we've got the capital to do that and we'll look to execute on those opportunities.

Great. Thank you for that. And then maybe just, you know, given the progress that you've had, just wondering if this has impacted, I guess, the pace or the tone of commercial conversations as far as offtake is concerned.

I would say that, you know, every time we do something, it creates, you know, more credibility, and it does, you know, help those conversations.

Got it. Thank you.

Your next question comes from the line of Rini Singh with Bank of America. Rini, your line is open. Please go ahead.

Thanks for taking a question. I guess just focusing on the customer landscape, as you're kind of looking at these milestones hit and customers are kind of looking at the regulatory, the fueling side and the actual execution and cost side of things, how like what out of those out of those like buckets what's kind of giving them the most confidence in moving forward and kind of what what do you think are the the pathway to watch essentially from here in those buckets yeah Renny you know when I talk about the business it does feel like we've got in a sense unconstrained demand so how do we unconstrained the supply for that and I think it kind of you know and I think I've always talked about you know there's

regulatory, deconstraining, there is fuel, there's procurement construction, and then making sure we've got the capital. It's almost like, though, I think it depends on the customer, I think, and their level of education. I think some, you know, are looking more to the regulatory pathway and the regulatory acceleration. Others are looking to fuel. But I think if you look at everything we're doing, you know, we're working to deconstrain the system across all those parameters so we can meet that demand. I'll also say that, you know, the customers who are, you know, the more they come up the learning curve, though, I think the more they recognize the importance of fuel and our fuel diversification strategy really does resonate with them.

Okay, that makes sense. Thanks so much. Really appreciate it.

Your next question comes from the line of Derek Soderbergh with Cantor Fitzgerald. Derek, your line is open. Please go ahead.

Yeah, good morning, everyone. Just one question for me around interconnection. I was wondering if you could provide a status update on the specific PJM interconnection applications required for the near-term deployment roadmap. Can you guys talk about where you sit in the interconnection queue and broadly, do you see any potential setbacks just given some of the interconnection challenges and backlog?

You know, we are participating in the interconnection process and have more than one opportunity, I guess, on the docket with PGM, along with others. And really, you know, to come to a bit of your question, what's the watch point? It's just the turnaround time on that and just making sure that we're staying on top of it. Mike Donahue, who we brought in over a year ago, and his team are leading that effort. And I think they bring a lot of depth of expertise. But, you know, it is an important watch point, which is why we are, I think, on top of it and making sure that we're not counting on just one avenue or one path to put power on the grid in that area.

Great. Thanks, guys.

Your next question comes from the line of Jed Dorsheimer with William Blair. Jed, your line is open. Please go ahead.

Hey, thanks, guys. Thanks for coming in. Just a, Jake, question for you on the down-selection process. So I guess two-part. First is, you know, historically in markets like this, we've seen sort of a down-selection to, you know, two or three designs. Do you think that, you know, advanced reactors will go through that same process? And then secondly, you know, tech is classically losing the politics, you know, while having the policy around data centers. I'm just curious how you see, you know, the nuclear industry, you know, classically lost a similar battle around the technology that set us back, you know, 30 years. I'm curious, you know, what your thoughts might be on, you know, how to resolve the pitchforks that have come out around data centers, which are based, you know, not on facts, but on more emotions and feelings.

Yeah, it's great questions. I appreciate it. I think what I see is, you know, the opportunity in the market space here is incredibly large. And I think there's kind of, when I think about the industry, there's a tale of a couple sort of cities. You know, you kind of have the legacy approach that's going to has a track record behind pieces, but has some significant, I would say, cost floors based on sort of the ways things have been done and not necessarily leaning into more modernized ways of, well, frankly, of everything needed to deliver nuclear plants. It's, I mean, look, we just built our first nuclear reactor and, you know, by all the metrics, we can, we can research it's, it's at a world record and the fastest fully privately built reactor ever. Because we can do things better and differently, right? We're leaning into that as an, as not just Oaklow, but as an industry. So the opportunity space is just amazingly cool. That said, so you, so, so you have that, right? So, so I guess what I'm trying to say is that naturally to me is going to create a more vibrant ecosystem and you have different applications and opportunities and different need sets across the space from really small micro reactors that serve niche applications and opportunities to scalable small to mid-sized reactors that have unique deployment opportunities to the very large reactors that build off of strong legacies. I think you're going to see multiple players in each of those spaces too in the near to midterm scale up and go not to mention different fuel cycle strategies uh and and different you know not just electric output energy products in other words heat and so it's pretty attractive right and i think one thing that's often forgotten is on the on the heat side um one of the key things there is like you know all really all types of reactors can deliver useful heat for product heat um the vast majority of product heat is well served under 200 degrees centigrade which which all reactors can deliver to now there's some niche applications that get above 400 degrees centigrade you know we can we We can deliver between 400 and 450 comfortably. We can get a little bit higher in time. But that serves the vast majority of reachable opportunities there. And then you have like a big island of heat needs that are well over 1,000 degrees, which frankly, the cost to deliver nuclear heat into with all the materials and requirements you need just to me doesn't make any sense compared to electrifying it or making different heat carriers, whether that be, you know, synthetic hydrocarbons or hydrogen or whatever So long story short, you know, the heat market as well is going to drive and see different applications of different types. So I actually think it's going to be a pretty vibrant ecosystem. Now, over time, well, sorry, vibrant ecosystem. What's in common with all those is they all produce used fuel. What are we doing? The ability to recycle, right? So this gives us a huge opportunity to support everything, not just our reactors, but everything that gets built. And then that producing fuel helps us make our reactors and other reactors that can use this material most efficiently, even more economically scalable, which ultimately to me does converge at some long form of scale towards fast reactors and recycling because of the inherent benefits that recycling and fast reactors have so over long time scales i'm talking about century plus time scales i think physics will drive that convergence um additionally i think then on the other side of things with respect you know to i think the data center side and what we're seeing you know interestingly where we uh where we built the gross reactor in texas there's a lot of concern you see a lot of you know no data center signs a lot of excitement and enthusiasm about what we're doing, which is cool. And some result of, you know, partial results of intentionality and how we've engaged and worked with folks here. But I think what we're also observing is that the data center community and the hyperscalers have had their heads kind of low and they need to stand up and start telling the story about what's really going on here. You know, and I think we're finding them starting to do that. And I'm also seeing that we're seeing a very aggressively shortened cycle around the perception gaps. I think there's policy dynamics and there's community engagement that can really go a long way that people are now, I think, waking up to and catching up there, which is great on the hyperscalar deployment side. But I also think that we see, to me, still one of the great unlocks on nuclear was, as silly as it sounds, the internet, which people were fed misinformation and disinformation actively by anti-nuclear groups for decades. And that poisoned the well for a while until folks started to have open access to information where they could actually look up stuff and realize, oh, nuclear's cool, right? And a lot of the gateway to that was advanced nuclear. And then people realized, well, actually all nuclear is really cool and they'd been kind of misinformed and misdirected. And now I think we see, I think there's a similar dynamic that's going to be emerging in the data center side, but they have to take advantage of the moment to do that. And they have to get in front of it, play catch up and get in front of it in different areas. And there are different communities that really want them, that understand them. And they just need to tell the story of like, hey, actually, a lot of, you know, next generation systems are very, very low water usage. You know, all these other things that kind of make a big difference in terms of how people actually perceive them and lean into that. So, you know, that's my view and my optimism on that front. But we're seeing that firsthand, right, where we're active and where we're building and developing, especially in Ohio. where folks are really stepping up and saying, okay, we need to change how we talk about this and we need to engage the community and we need to have people understand what these things really are. And we're seeing those movements start to catch and take hold. But there's some work to do, right? There's definitely some work to do. But I also think that some of the high-level news coverage on some of this is a little more focused in the more, you know, towards the negative. It's more sensationalized than I think what we're seeing on the ground in some places.

Thanks for that, caller.

Appreciate it. your next question comes from the line of max hopkins with clsa max your line is open please go ahead all right thank you um i just wanted to ask you know on the nvidia microsoft's partnerships obviously ai is now permeating everywhere um is there a specific function and of oklahoma's strategy that you think is going to benefit most from putting ai into the into the strategy and how fast can that accelerate time to commercialization?

Yeah, I think, I mean, there's a lot there and it's easy to point to, you know, AI is everywhere and everyone's using it for every single thing. And I would argue, you know, there's the administrative usage, which does help on things. But on the actual design analysis, data processing side. It is, it is, I personally think hard to overstate how effective and how, how like significant the impacts are going to be. So, you know, there's kind of two major things we talked about here. There's our partnership with Los Alamos and NVIDIA, which is, you know, applying state-of-the-art expertise from Los Alamos, almost state-of-the-art compute from NVIDIA and state-of-the-art, you know, intent and practical application and fabrication expertise from Oklo into, into a combined sort of ecosystem and model to modernize how we look at, manage and treat they're sorry designed to accommodate uh and fabricate fuel uh from plutonium inventories and that matters a lot because you know taking the material and putting it into a fabricable form there's losses losses and inefficiencies there's also dynamics around fuel performance uh and there's a lot of data out there that has been in different circles and pots but never really aggregated in a way that you couldn't do you let me rephrase this you just can't do quite is effectively without AI, frankly. That makes a big difference in accelerating the usability and expanding the usability of different materials there and extending the resource. That's cool. Very exciting piece of what we're doing. Additionally, there's Prometheus, part of the Project Genesis efforts, which is broadly unlocking agentic AI design capabilities at risk of using all the buzzwords, but literally building out AI design agents to you know frankly expand and accelerate the entire design characterization space the analysis space the uncertainty quantification space all of that translates to um you know high performing designs sooner and more margin recovery sooner in designs that allow you to get more power from each you know system so in other words what that translates to is lower cost of dollars to get to more power extracted per capital investment of the plants. That is happening in real time. We're seeing it because we're accelerating some of those reactor design workflows by, I mean, it's incredible, right? We're doing work that would take weeks to, I mean, months or several months getting it done in less than a day, right? We're getting it done in hours. And we're seeing that on top of that, we're also finding a lot of applications that are going to play out in other parts of the technology system and stack we used it to help us um accelerate commissioning the groves reactor with the control systems we had we were able to use it in a couple different applications where we were able to bring in ai for supporting out like you know the future iterations on the control platform that groves gives us to move more quickly on and update that into potential applications to accelerate and improve performance you know on growth what your growth to aurora whatever comes after all these kind of plants so like it's going to be very exciting to see how this comes forward and we're i don't even think we're in the early innings we're not even in like the warm-up period or maybe we're basically in warm-ups right now but uh it's hard to overstate the benefits and the super sort of acceleration that it gives the design engineers uh and then how you can automate that translation into documentation uh with such high quality like it's incredible and documentation is such a key thing for all this so it's pretty exciting it's not just it's not just buzzwords it's not just the usage of it it's actually being impactful. And I think in some of these industries like this, some of these impacts might be some of the largest that there are.

You know, and Jake, it's further down the road, but when I think about Oklo having a fleet of powerhouses, having multiple radio isotope facilities, and all of the plant operating data that is going to come out of that, and the optimization around that is also, I know it's further down the road, but it's really cool to think about what artificial intelligence can do in that space as well.

I appreciate the clarity and congratulations and all the progress. It's very exciting. Thank you.

Your next question comes from the line of Sharif El-Meghrabi with BTIG. Sharif, your line is open. Please go ahead.

Hi, thanks and good morning.

I apologize if I missed that earlier in the call, but at a high level, since you can achieve HALU equivalent performance by blending plutonium with LEU, um curious why that isn't a long-term answer to reactor power given that fuel that's available today yeah i mean so a couple things um one yes you can achieve that performance in fact plutonium is an even better fuel but plutonium is a limited inventory and that's not something that uh makes a lot of sense to get out of the game of producing more fuel of given kind of like the cost and focus of production of just that material but when you extrapolate transuranic bearing material that's produced from recycling gives a somewhat similar performance and that's why we go to that but this is why the mix is so important right like the amount of plutonium material is sizable supports a couple gigawatt up to potentially a couple gigawatts depending on on allocations um uh that's a great bridging fuel to then transition to halo and then also to recycling right and so that's why this multi-pronged strategy makes sense both from a scalability perspective but also a temporal cadence perspective um but yeah like it's a tremendous resource and to be honest this is what the first tranche is there's more of this kind of material and similar material that might be deemed an excess in inventory that internationally countries may want to get rid of because they look at it as a liability that could open the door for significantly more of that of that plutonium material to be used as an expanded bridge fuel it's pretty attractive but the terminal state to me for for nuclear is ultimately fast directors and recycling with transuranic brain fuel out of the recycling side because again that that gives you but at a lower cost very you know basically a commensurate type performance but at also a nearly like practically i would say almost limitless uh source of material because of the ability to tap into the known heavy metal reserves we have on the planet got it jake Thanks for cleaning that up.

Yes.

Your final question comes from the line of Craig Shear with TUI. Craig, your line is open. Please go ahead.

Thanks so much for fitting me in. You know, data centers are obviously the most exciting opportunity, but there's plenty of off-grid and industrial heat applications for SMRs. And your Alaska Air Force deployment, base deployment, certainly looks to be more environmentally focused than power focused. I wonder if you could elaborate. You kind of already alluded to the 400, 450 degrees centigrade run rate, but maybe you could discuss a little more the comparison and contrast between Aurora powerhouses, potential thermal integration and output versus some of your SMR peers with high-temperature gas-cooled designs running on triso fuel.

Yeah, I mean, so I think this is one of the key things is a huge amount of the process that we see in the markets is very well serviced below 450. The marginal increase in market opportunities above, you know, that to like 600, 650 are present, I'll say, but pretty like marginal at best, they're pretty small. And then getting to temperatures then like above that, there's not a lot of exciting things until you get above 850 000 centigrade and then above that there's some interesting opportunities especially when you get closer to 1200 1400 there's i mean there's no economically viable way to to move heat at those temperatures at those distances i mean the materials you would need are incredibly expensive and vastly like underdeveloped um just doesn't make sense compared to converting the energy into different forms but you can use that heat um i mean since you You know, if you can do so much with sub 400, 450 C heat, that's where so much of the market is. And at the end of the day, like, it's about what are the effective costs of getting to those points. So, you know, one of the arguments and one of the tech, like, if you think about the history of nuclear, a lot of the, a lot of the technology development that happened was centered around articulated research and development market potentials and opportunities and needs. And one of the justifying reasons to support some of these higher temperature operations was sort of the, well, you could open up these other kind of niche heat opportunities if you get slightly above the normal temperature ranges. But even above like 550, right, somewhere between 500 and 600 C, and in sodium reactor you can't extend to that point in terms of process heat output. There's probably a little more technology work to get there, but I think most of the metallurgists would feel comfortable there. But once you get above that, you start having to go to super alloys that are just cost prohibitive to transport heat at different distances. So at the end of the day, you're basically going to collapse like most things into non-light water reactors are going to deliver heat economically all about the same temperature, whether it's sodium, whether it's lead, whether it's salt, whether it's gas. And fuel type just won't matter as much though. But at the end of the day, right, it'll take a little time to get there. And in the meantime, you can serve and do it quite cost effectively at those lower temperature levels. and given the inherent and innate benefits of, you know, like pressurized water in terms of power density and then, you know, sodium in terms of even better power density when it heats your output and you conserve it in those markets, this has some pretty sizable advantages and the sort of diminishing marginal opportunity set to go to higher temperatures just isn't quite, you know, it's just not quite as justified, I guess. So I think at the end of the day, you're going to see some opportunities and applications because that's what the R&D narrative was for a long time. But the reality is most of those markets are serving that size. And I think what we see is a lot of those customers are excited about the opportunity to get heat for a number of different industrial applications. And the art of the possible is still radically underexplored there because most, I would say, are industrial entities that are, I would call them eager to be market followers, but not first customers. And so, you know, part of what we're excited about is, you know, on the data center side, there's actually some opportunities, including some of the things we announced last year with Vertiv in terms of being able to do heat and power kind of, well, basically heat-driven cooling systems. And then also what we're doing with the Air Force, like a lot of this lines up pretty attractively for a pretty cool outlook for heat applications for sodium systems that are quite compelling. thank you we have reached the end of our q a session i will now turn the call back to jake dewitt ceo for closing remarks yeah thank you thank you everyone for joining us today um it's been an exciting uh last quarter exciting couple days for us turning on our first reactor i think one of the cool things is just going back to sum this up what we've proven is execution and turning on a full asset and we did it the entire stack, if you will. We did the full stack. A big differentiation between what we did and what was otherwise done in the reactor pilot program was we built a full nuclear reactor with full civil excavation, with full construction. We didn't just put a slab on the ground and put a kind of a loose fabric building up or a steel tent building up. We didn't go into another laboratory and do it the same way in those areas. We thought we can see a lot of value in doing that. And we think that there's reasons why we did work similar to that, including the plutonium work we did out at Nevada. But for us, we wanted to go and learn at scale. And that's what we saw the reactor pilot program enabling us to do. Build a full-scale reactor. Do the full civil construction. Build it so it was repeatable. Buy everything or make everything ourselves based on what we needed to do. Learn then how to scale that forward so that we can you know build on this experience that learn and do it better the next time and also set up the capability with all of our own in-house operators to to to actually commission the facility to start it up and to operate it ourselves we're the only company that did all of those things and that was what was really exciting about this experience uh was we were able to do all of that internally and now we have the blueprints to go to the next to do it again and again and again and we know what it takes to do that right because we've done it now and the delta between what we do here versus the next one is relatively small because it's just incorporating lessons learned uh and that's a huge huge huge advantage for us now that we can say and and sort of stand up and say okay we as a company have now designed and built and commissioned and turned on a full-scale reactor that now we can repeat right again and again and again and then carry those lessons over into the things that are not as directly the same so things like aurora on the power side same thing with commissioning and sending up nuclear facilities that have complexity to them like fuel fabrication and recycling so we're proving out execution and executing at scale and iterating at scale which is which has always been an important thing for us to move quickly um so we're very excited about that very proud of the team for how what it took to get here especially over the last few days and really excited we were able to celebrate that and now we're eager to move on to what's next. So thank you all for joining us today and I appreciate the time.

This concludes today's call. Thank you for attending. You may now disconnect.