FROM THE EDITOR
dominance
US nuclear energy
In its push for nuclear dominance, the US has all the key ingredients in place. Can support from the executive and legislature help the private sector drive a new era for nuclear power both at home and overseas?
espite some initial confusion it is now clear that the Trump administration has bold ambitions for the nuclear sector. Setting out the goal of becoming a global nuclear powerhouse and signing off on a raft of executive orders to back it up, Trump has established
clear intent to flex American energy muscle
and achieve dominance in nuclear power. However, while the direction of travel is clear – a 400 GW goal for US nuclear capacity by 2050 – question marks still nonetheless hang over what can be achieved with executive orders alone. New analysis identifies some of the many challenges the nation faces in achieving this policy goal.
Noting that a strong domestic nuclear industry will support national security interests as well as strategic, technological, and economic interests, the report – from the Working Group on U.S. Nuclear Energy Dominance, chaired by Todd Abrajano, President and CEO of the US Nuclear Industry Council (USNIC) – argues, not unreasonably, that to establish nuclear energy dominance, the US must export reactors and related technology globally. The foundation for international success is domestic success though, and the US should therefore build nuclear reactors within its home market too. This in itself is a complex undertaking and cannot reasonably be achieved by the private sector without strong government policy support. Like many such reports before it, the document finds that the federal government should therefore pursue a structured, whole-of-government approach to promoting nuclear energy. As much as possible, the analysis says, the goal must be to secure a stable, long-term policy environment for private sector investment in nuclear. Picking up on a couple of additional perennial issues,
the document also states that expediting licensing and permitting is necessary, but that inadequate staffing at the government agencies that regulate and support nuclear
energy will prevent that from happening. Turning to the supply chain, the report also identifies the need for a large additional workforce and a secure, reliable, and affordable supply of nuclear fuel. While most within the nuclear industry could easily
draw the same conclusions without a second’s thought, in recognising the issues the analysis also sets out more than 30 specific recommendations. These conclusions aim to serve as a detailed road map to reinvigorate nuclear energy, encourage new build, improve financing, and secure the supply chain, including through expanded domestic manufacturing capabilities. Again, these conclusions are largely predictable. However, given the report also concludes that the
nuclear energy sector is foundational for both US national security as well as its geopolitical and economic influence, the role of the nuclear industry can be considered in a rather different light. This reach of influence is in addition to the small matter of its role in reliably providing large volumes of low-carbon electrical energy. It is these wider functions that push nuclear exports up the political agenda and with them the secondary drivers for the creation of a robust domestic industry after decades of stagnation. And, as the report makes clear, even with appropriate market-based policies, the private sector alone cannot provide everything needed to secure US interests in the global nuclear area. Effective federal policy support is therefore vital if the nuclear energy sector is to serve as an engine for US export growth and as a core element of the national energy strategy. Fortunately, nuclear power is clearly enjoying bipartisan support in both the upper and lower houses and, crucially, backing from the executive branch. Indeed, this analysis correctly concludes that for the US, presidential leadership and clear presidential priority setting are critical in developing a successful nuclear policy. It seems then that all the key ingredients are in place for nuclear to develop as a major opportunity for the US – and the same lessons could surely be learned by other nations looking to simultaneously build an export industry and a robust domestic energy supply. The central message is this potential can only be realised if the government plays its part. In contrast with many policy initiatives of the past, that means building supportive frameworks for the long-term, rather than for Trump’s – or any politician’s – remaining term. ■
David Appleyard
www.neimagazine.com | September 2025 | 3
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45
