The Nuclear Comeback

Nuclear energy has long been the underdog of the clean energy world—always in the conversation but never quite the star. But with Google and Amazon recently jumping into the world of small modular reactors (SMRs), nuclear is gearing up for a big comeback. These tech giants, always a few steps ahead, are moving beyond solar and wind to power their massive data centers and AI operations. The message is clear: SMRs could be the game-changer that nuclear energy has been waiting for.

Why the sudden interest? While renewables have done wonders for the energy landscape, they come with a pretty big drawback: the sun doesn’t always shine, and the wind doesn’t always blow. Right now, natural gas often fills this gap, providing reliable baseload power. But natural gas is still a fossil fuel, and the battery storage is limited by current technology.

This is where SMRs step in, offering consistent, carbon-free baseload power without the emissions of natural gas or the storage limitations of BESS. As the demand for 24/7 reliable power grows, especially in tech, SMRs are becoming an attractive alternative that could complement both renewables and storage. This moment could be the turning point that the nuclear industry has been waiting for—one that repositions nuclear energy as a key player in the energy transition world.

1. What Are SMRs?

So, what exactly are small modular reactors, and how are they different from the giant nuclear plants we’re used to? Picture this: traditional nuclear reactors are like massive cruise ships—they’re powerful, but they take years to build, cost billions of dollars, and require a huge crew to run. SMRs, on the other hand, are like sleek speedboats—smaller, faster to build, and much more flexible. You don’t need to build an entire fleet to get moving—just one, and you can always add more when you need them.

Here’s what sets SMRs apart:

• Size and Flexibility: Traditional reactors churn out over 1,000 MW of power, but they take a decade to build. SMRs? They produce 50 to 300 MW per unit, meaning you can deploy them much quicker. It’s like starting with a kayak and adding more boats as you go, instead of launching a massive cruise ship from the get-go.
• Modular Construction: SMRs are built in factories, shipped in pieces, and assembled on-site, which cuts down on construction time and cost. It’s like building a car in a factory rather than assembling it piece by piece in your garage.
• Safety Features: SMRs come equipped with advanced passive safety systems, which allow them to shut down automatically in case of a malfunction. Unlike older reactors, which require complex cooling systems, SMRs can cool themselves without human intervention—making them much safer.

The beauty of SMRs is their scalability. Need more power? Just add another module. They can also be placed close to where energy is needed, like near cities or factories, so you don’t lose energy in long-distance transmission. They’re the perfect complement to renewables, stepping in when the wind’s taking a break or the sun’s hiding behind clouds.

2. The Journey So Far: Why Has SMR Development Been Slow?

If SMRs are such a great idea, why have they been cruising along in the slow lane? Well, it’s been a bumpy ride, thanks to high costs, strict regulations, and a bit of a PR problem.

• High Costs: Building a traditional nuclear reactor can set you back $10 billion, and while SMRs are cheaper, they’re still more expensive than wind or solar. And let’s face it—most investors have been more excited about low-cost renewables than expensive nuclear projects. SMRs also face high costs due to first-of-a-kind (FOAK) deployments, where early projects tend to carry heavy capital costs.
• Regulatory Barriers: Nuclear energy is one of the most tightly regulated industries, and for good reason. Navigating the regulatory landscape takes time and involves extensive reviews to ensure safety and compliance. For example, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) process in the U.S. can add years to development timelines as they review every element of a new SMR design for approval.
• Public Perception: Thanks to Chernobyl and Fukushima, the word “nuclear” tends to make people uneasy. Even though SMRs are much safer, convincing people that they’re not about to build a reactor in their backyard has been a tough sell.

Despite these hurdles, SMRs are gaining momentum. The U.S. DOE's Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program (ARDP) has allocated over $3.2 billion in funding to support SMR projects, helping companies like Kairos Power and X-energy accelerate development. Now, with corporate giants like Google and Amazon betting on SMRs, we’re going to see significant industry support and adoption, and it’s clear that nuclear is coming back into the spotlight.

3. The Cost Question: How SMRs compare against others?

When it comes to energy, Levelized Cost of Energy (LCOE) is the big number everyone’s watching. It’s a measure of the average cost to generate electricity over the lifetime of a plant. So, how do SMRs compare to other energy sources, and what’s keeping their LCOE higher for now?

Current LCOE for SMRs: Early estimates place the LCOE for SMRs at $90-$140 per MWh, which is significantly higher than solar ($20-$40 per MWh) and onshore wind ($30-$50 per MWh). However, SMRs provide consistent, reliable baseload power—something that wind and solar can’t offer on their own without pricey storage solutions. Natural gas currently fills that role in many regions, with an LCOE of $40-$80 per MWh, but it comes with emissions that SMRs avoid. The graph below shows an indicative trend of how the LCOE might evolve over the next 10 years. Of course, these are high-level aggregates, and the actual LCOE can vary significantly depending on project specifics, reactor technology, and geographic location.

By 2035, expectations are strong that the LCOE for SMRs could drop closer to $50 per MWh, making them much more competitive with renewables. With mass production, regulatory streamlining, and improved supply chains, SMRs will likely see their costs decrease significantly over the next decade, positioning them as a key player in the future energy mix.

Key Factors Keeping LCOE High:

• First-of-a-kind (FOAK) Costs: As with any new technology, the first units are expensive to build. Early SMR projects are carrying high capital costs due to lack of mass production, complex regulatory processes, and supply chain constraints.
• Nuclear Regulatory Compliance: The lengthy and expensive approval process contributes significantly to SMR costs. Meeting stringent safety standards is necessary but adds to the financial burden.
• Limited Supply Chain: Since SMR technology is still emerging, the supply chain is not yet optimized. Key components like reactor vessels and nuclear fuel are in limited production, keeping prices high.

What Will Drive Costs Down?

• Mass Production: Once SMRs move beyond first-of-a-kind projects, the economics of scale will kick in. As more units are manufactured, costs will drop—similar to the cost reductions seen in solar and wind technology over the past decade.
• Streamlined Regulation: Governments and regulatory bodies are recognizing the need to speed up the approval process for SMRs. In the U.S., the NRC is working on design certifications that could allow multiple units to be built without the need for lengthy individual reviews.
• Technological Advancements: Ongoing research and development will improve the design and efficiency of SMRs, driving down the costs of key components.

4. Future Outlook: Why SMRs Will Continue to Grow

Looking ahead, I’m confident that SMRs are going to play a key role in the clean energy transition. Here’s why:

• Rising Energy Demand: With industries like AI and data centers growing at lightning speed, the need for reliable, 24/7 power is only going to increase. SMRs are perfectly positioned to meet this demand while providing a carbon-free alternative to natural gas.
• Government Support: Programs like the ARDP in the U.S. are pushing SMR development forward. More governments are realizing that to hit net-zero targets, they’ll need nuclear energy in the mix—and SMRs are the best bet.
• Cost Reductions: As SMRs become more widespread and move into mass production, costs will come down. It’s like buying in bulk at Costco—once you scale up, the price per unit drops.
• Public Acceptance: With Google and Amazon investing in SMRs, the technology is getting a much-needed image makeover. As more people see the benefits and safety of SMRs, the public’s nuclear fears will start to fade.

The writing’s on the wall: SMRs are set to become a cornerstone of the future energy mix. They offer the reliability of nuclear power with the flexibility and scalability needed to balance the grid and reduce reliance on natural gas.

Like what you’ve read? Subscribe to The PowerBrief for more insights on the energy industry’s biggest trends and challenges.