Nuclear power is having a renaissance. Here's what consultants say about the industry's future.
Between the meltdown of a nuclear reactor at Three Mile Island, explosions in Chernobyl, and an earthquake-powered disaster at Fukushima, the one thing people seemed to agree on was that nuclear was a dirty, if not dangerous, word.
But times have changed, new insights and new data have emerged, and what once seemed unethical has been rebranded as clean, in every sense.
The nuclear energy renaissance — fueled by Big Tech investment, a more favorable legislative climate, and shifting public opinion — hinges on a change in perspective: Nuclear energy has the potential to be one of the cleanest and most reliable forms of energy on Earth.
But the construction of nuclear reactors in the United States — where nuclear accounted for 19% of electricity generated in 2023, according to the US Energy Information Administration — is lagging compared to efforts in China and elsewhere, according to the Boston Consulting Group.
That's part of why consulting firms are searching for ways for nuclear energy companies to cut costs, improve efficiencies, and remove the obstacles holding up progress.
Public sentiment is still a headwind
There are 94 nuclear reactors in the United States, according to the Nuclear Energy Institute. And tech giants are investing considerably to bring new ones online.
Last October, Amazon invested $500 million in X-Energy, a developer of small nuclear reactors and fuel. Around the same time, Google said it would purchase nuclear energy from Kairos Power, a California-based company developing small modular reactors. The month before, Constellation Energy struck a deal with Microsoft to provide the tech giant with nuclear power for the next two decades by resurrecting part of the Three Mile Island nuclear plant in Pennsylvania.
The Trump administration is also working to jumpstart nuclear reactor construction, building on Biden's ADVANCE Act last year, which sought to remove regulatory hurdles. Trump issued four executive orders on Friday to accelerate the development of the domestic nuclear energy industry, touching on areas from fuel cycle development to reactor construction, testing, and licensing, to workforce training.
However, hurdles persist.
"Growth in nuclear power is projected to be almost flat to 2050 due to more stringent regulatory requirements than for other low-carbon energy sources, negative public perception, perceived safety issues, supply chain constraints, and uncertainty around waste disposal," McKinsey & Company wrote in its 2024 Global Energy Perspective.
Some of the persisting negative sentiment can be attributed to concerns about how the radioactive waste that nuclear reactors generate will be stored. The federal government once planned to direct all waste to Yucca Mountain in Nevada, but lawmakers and the public objected.
There are also lingering concerns about the government's capacity to mitigate nuclear disasters and nuclear power's association with nuclear weapons proliferation.
There is hope, however. In 2024, three-quarters of respondents, out of a sample of 3.5 million people used by Bisconti Research, said they favored the use of nuclear energy for electricity, up from about half in the 1980s and 1990s.
The efficiency of construction
Large-scale nuclear reactors require a significant investment in time and money. They necessitate significant upfront capital and require long construction windows that are often beset by delays, cost issues, and regulatory hurdles.
BCG says that the "simpler the design, the better." The firm said the optimal design should follow "a 'design-for-manufacturing' approach, which has delivered compelling results in other industries such as aerospace and defense."
The goal, according to BCG, should be to standardize the components and material needed for construction, along with reducing the number of construction steps to promote "modularity," the firm said. That applies to both large-scale and small-scale reactors, Benjamin Vannier, managing director and partner at BCG, told BI by email. The AP1000, a large-scale pressurized water reactor, is an example of a reactor designed for modular construction, he added.
Modularity is perhaps the biggest trend in nuclear right now. There are a number of small modular reactor companies, like Oklo, which was until recently chaired by OpenAI CEO Sam Altman; TerraPower, which is backed by Bill Gates; and X-Energy, which Amazon invested $500 million in last year. These more compact nuclear reactors are designed to be built in factories and then shipped to sites for installation and are, therefore, easier to standardize for production.
The economics of scaling
Nuclear fission, which produces energy by splitting uranium atoms, releases almost no greenhouse gas emissions. Many AI executives consider nuclear fission the only reliable way to power their data centers.
Tech leaders are also excited by recent advances in fusion technology, which involves combining two atomic nuclei to release energy and is considered safer than fission. Type One Energy, funded by Gates, published research in March that shows there are no scientific barriers left to making commercial fusion a reality.
However, nuclear power remains only a "medium-term solution," McKinsey said in a 2024 report on data centers and power. "The timeline to scale nuclear so it can achieve rapid, repeated deployment is nearly a decade, while constraints on data center power are appearing today."
It added, "The early economics of nuclear are challenging compared with other energy options, and implementing various technologies to try to reduce its costs may or may not work."
While power plants are relatively cheap to run in the long term and can last as long as 60 years, they require considerable upfront investment.
In a report published in 2017, the World Nuclear Association said that nuclear plants are strongly influenced by capital cost, which accounts for at least 60% of their total levelized cost of electricity, which is essentially a measure of a plant's economic efficiency. It is calculated by dividing the total cost to build and operate a power plant over its lifetime by the total electricity output.
Generative AI may help improve efficiencies on the operating side. Rafee Tarafdar, the chief technology officer of Infosys, a global consulting firm, told BI that the firm is helping companies integrate AI into their plans.
"One proof of value that we built is: How do we use all the logs, all the sensors that come from all these machines in order to triage, predict failures, and help resolve issues much earlier," he said, in reference to the work the firm did with a large US energy company.
The consensus among consulting firms is that solving early construction bottlenecks is key to scaling nuclear energy as a viable power source for AI and beyond.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


New York Post
4 minutes ago
- New York Post
Trump moving closer to decision on making weed less criminal in eyes of federal government: sources
It isn't quite the ruckus involving the Jeffrey Epstein docs, but there is a quieter, more important conflict inside Trump world over weed — namely whether the president should legalize it and just how legal it should be, The Post has learned And according to my sources, Trump is in a compromising mood. He appears to be moving closer to making a decision in the coming weeks to make weed something less criminal in the eyes of the federal government. Advertisement Trump is ready, several MAGA pro-pot sources tell me, to make a decision on at least reclassifying weed as a so-called Schedule III drug, putting it on par with semi-controlled substances like anabolic steroids. Not to get too far into the proverbial weeds, but Pot Inc. wants marijuana reclassified so it's not being lumped in with hard drugs like heroin — and it's a drama these pages first covered in late April. That way this booming business continues to grow with access to the banking system as cultural norms continue to shift and the majority of Americans see pot as no more dangerous than booze. Tax revenues would flow into federal coffers as the industry expands. Trump appears to be moving closer to making a decision in the coming weeks to make weed something less criminal in the eyes of the federal government. AFP via Getty Images There are headwinds. Many MAGA types believe pot is leading to cultural rot. Breeding a population of stoners isn't good for the country since the pot today is far stronger than the joints Cheech & Chong rolled years ago. Advertisement Trump barely drinks and personally hates anything that dulls the senses. He's a law-and-order guy — witness his takeover of DC policing over quality-of-life issues, including the persistent smell of pot almost everywhere you walk. That said, the president seems to be leaning toward a compromise on federal legalization, including allowing for medical use based on evidence of its efficacy in severe pain relief. He's also said to be compelled by the business and the political argument of going soft on pot. He's done that before, doing his famous 180 on crypto for votes during the 2024 election and delivering with deregulation that is propelling the blockchain industry. Advertisement There are an estimated 17 million-plus Americans who use pot regularly, and Trump understands math. The pot lobby could help in key races as the midterms approach. MAGA loyalist Matt Gaetz, the former Florida congressman and Trump's initial pick for attorney general, is one who believes embracing pot would further expand Trump's base among working-class people of all races, where pot u sage is most prevalent. 'President Trump would cement [these voters] for Republicans for 25 years by 'rescheduling' marijuana,' Gaetz said. 'Obama always wanted to do it but didn't have the balls.' Gaetz added that Biden with his 'autopen presidency' was too busy destroying the country to care. 'This is yet another opportunity for Trump to notch a generational win where Ob- ama and Joe Biden failed.' Advertisement Longtime hedge fund trader Marc Cohodes is even more adamant about legalizing marijuana. He is both an investor in Pot Inc. and a medical user after shoulder surgery. 'If he totally legalizes, Trump will totally destroy the Democratic Party,' Cohodes tells me. 'Polls show that most Americans want this legalized. Trump will turn the GOP into the people's party.' Trump's options include totally 'declassifying' pot, making it 100% legal in the eyes of federal law. He could also 'reschedule' pot as a 'Schedule III' controlled substance, along the lines of anabolic steroids and other drugs that the feds have modestly blessed for specific medical-related uses. If he does nothing, pot would r emain a Schedule I drug, where the federal government views it as a highly controlled substance. Up to $60 billion annually The various distinctions matter for the pot industry, which is estimated to rake in between $40 billion and $60 billion a year. While marijuana is fully legal or decriminalized in most states, without the federal government taking it off the Schedule I list it can't be 'banked.' Wall Street shies away from underwriting the stock of any company that in Pot Inc. parlance 'touches the plant.' If Wall Street can begin underwriting pot stocks, financing US-based growers, for example, Pot Inc. could grow exponentially. Still, legalization skeptics on Trump's team will have a say. New Drug Enforcement Administration chief Terry Cole is a veteran at an agency with a long anti-pot bias. Advertisement Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the head of the Department of Health and H uman Services, has spoken about decriminalizing weed but also how there are negative health effects from consuming the 'high-potency' stuff. Many critics say today's bud has hallucinogenic effects, and could be a gateway to more dangerous stuff like opioids. That's why Gaetz thinks Trump won't go for full legalization and allow it only for medical use. Ditto for longtime Trump political guru Roger Stone. 'I don't think he ever completely de-schedules it, which is what I would do,' Stone tells me. Advertisement Cohodes says not going all the way would be a mistake. First, banking for Pot Inc. would remain difficult if it is only re- scheduled. Plus, making it totally legal could help decimate a major source of income for the various drug cartels. It would be age-restricted by the government. 'By eliminating prohibition, illegal cartels get removed because legal businesses not currently banked become bankable,' Cohodes said.


Boston Globe
4 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Once again, Trump sends soldiers to do police officers' jobs
Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up It's clear that he intends to keep sending troops into American cities. But Americans can't let that become the new normal. Advertisement There ought to be bipartisan pushback. After all, Republicans used to be the first to object to federal interference in local affairs. Indeed, it should not have to be said how dangerous this is: Federalized police takeovers of cities are hallmarks of autocracies. When leaders cannot govern by democratic means, they turn to force to bend citizens to their will. And, as is often the case in backsliding democracies, they falsely claim to be acting for people's own good. Advertisement 'Our capital city has been overtaken by violent gangs and bloodthirsty criminals, roving mobs of wild youth, drugged-out maniacs, and homeless people, and we're not going to let it happen anymore,' Trump said at His words are not backed up by data. Among other things, he cited 2023 crime statistics from the city, which did experience a post-pandemic crime surge. But since then, violent crime has plummeted in the city. Even if the district really were the dystopian hellscape Trump describes, though, it is wrong to think the military could fix it. Crime is a complicated, multifaceted problem, not something that can be solved with Humvees. Trump, though, was not deterred by facts. 'I'm officially invoking Section 740 of the District of Columbia Home Rule Act, you know what that is, and placing the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department under direct federal control,' Trump said. Trump's announced plan is, at least in part, of debatable legality. Because of D.C.'s unique status as the nation's capital, the president and Congress do have powers there that they lack elsewhere. Still, the law Trump cited does not allow the president to commandeer local law enforcement in Washington, as he seemed to imply. The Home Rule Act, which established D.C.'s local government, gives the president no local law enforcement powers at all, meaning he cannot direct local police to conduct patrols, detain people, or arrest them. What the law does allow is for the president to direct the local police, under Section 740, if 'special conditions of an emergency nature exist which require the use of the Metropolitan Police force for federal purposes .' The law also caps the amount of time such emergency declaration can last to 48 hours, which can be extended to 30 days if Congress is properly notified of the action. Advertisement 'In other words,' borrow the [Washington police] for his own priorities; but he can't control how they discharge their other duties.' This is something Trump could have done, for example, on Jan. 6, 2021 during the violent siege of the US Capitol building to allow seamless coordination of local and federal law enforcement to assist Capitol Police in stemming the violence. But in that emergency, he chose not to. Something else the president has done in D.C. this week that he didn't do during the Jan. 6 attack is to mobilize the D.C. National Guard. Unlike in states, where governors direct the National Guard, the D.C. National Guard reports directly to the president, who reportedly deployed The federal government also has some powers to deploy agents from other agencies, such as the US Park Police, the Department of Homeland Security, and ICE, but the law limits some of those agency's powers based on jurisdiction and subject matter. For example, ICE agents can only conduct civil immigration enforcement, they cannot conduct an arrest for suspected carjacking or any other local criminal action, and Park Police only have jurisdiction on federal land. Whether all law enforcement officials are staying within legal and constitutional lines is yet to be determined. In California, where a trial is underway to determine if the administration violated the law with its deployment of the National Guard to Los Angeles, it will take months if not years for the matter to make its way through the courts. The same will be true with the latest gambit in D.C. Advertisement But in the meantime, the president and other administration officials have the The president is taking advantage of the fact that he can implement legally and constitutionally dubious actions before courts have time to vet and stop them. But leaders, including Republicans who have long called for limited government, should decry this and do what they can to stop this autocratic move. Whether it is part of a cynical play to the the GOP's base ahead of midterm elections, or part of a deeper plan, as outlined by the White House earlier this year to ' Editorials represent the views of the Boston Globe Editorial Board. Follow us


Bloomberg
5 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
America's Lawyerly Society Can Learn From China's Engineers
Welcome back to The Forecast from Bloomberg Weekend, where we help you think about the future — from next week to next decade. This week we're looking at a new book comparing the US and China. Plus, with the Fed's Jackson Hole meeting coming up, we're checking in on prediction markets tracking the next Fed chair. You can read Bloomberg News' coverage of the Trump-Putin summit here and here.