View / The US nuclear push requires more urgent execution at scale

The US is entering a new chapter in nuclear energy, driven by a simple reality: The shifting fundamentals of power demand have made it a necessity.

Data centers, advanced manufacturing, electrification of transport and buildings, and industrial reshoring are driving sustained load growth. After decades of flat demand, electricity is once again central to economic strategy. The question before us is clear: Can we deliver reliable, affordable, carbon-free baseload power at the scale, speed, and discipline this new economy demands?

One of the most encouraging signals comes from something Washington rarely delivers: continuity.

The Obama administration provided the loan for the first new construction of a US nuclear power plant in decades (a loan that was later upsized under the first Trump administration). The Biden administration accelerated advanced nuclear demonstration projects, provided the financing to restart a decommissioned nuclear power plant, led the first global agreement to triple peaceful nuclear energy capacity, and oversaw the long-overdue completion of the Vogtle nuclear plant in Georgia. The current Trump administration has built on that foundation by accelerating domestic fuel security efforts, advancing high-assay low-enriched uranium production, supporting efforts to streamline Nuclear Regulatory Commission processes, and reinforcing public-private partnerships to move advanced reactors from demonstration toward commercialization.

Energy infrastructure does not operate on political cycles. It operates on multi-decade investment horizons. Major energy transitions succeed when policy direction is durable and industry can plan with confidence. That kind of continuity gives utilities, manufacturers, and investors the clarity required to commit capital and build capacity at scale. Few areas of US energy policy align national security, industrial policy, and decarbonization so directly. That alignment has made nuclear one of the rare domains where the direction of travel has proven durable across recent administrations.

Policy has moved. Capital commitments have been signaled. The missing ingredient now is execution at scale. Too many projects remain announcements rather than deployments. While there is still more that can be done to get government action aligned with the speed of the private sector, this moment will be lost if the private sector treats policy support as a zero-sum game or as a safety net, rather than a call to build.

There is now growing bipartisan recognition that the US will need two complementary engines of nuclear growth.

First, large, standardized reactors where scale and repetition drive down cost and improve delivery. The experience at Vogtle was difficult, expensive, and slow, but it generated hard-earned lessons about project management, construction sequencing, and the advantages of building the same design repeatedly rather than reinventing it each time. If demand continues to rise, disciplined fleets over one-off projects will determine whether large-scale nuclear succeeds.

Second is advanced and modular reactors designed to serve emerging industrial needs. High-temperature reactors capable of delivering both electricity and process heat are particularly important for heavy industries like steel, chemicals, and advanced manufacturing, where deep decarbonization requires more than simply plugging into the grid. Companies like Westinghouse, GE Vernova, X-energy, and others are working to move from demonstration to repeatable production and deployment (Galvanize holds a financial stake in GE Vernova and X-energy). The shift from prototype to industrialization will be the true test of progress.

There is also a new force shaping this cycle that did not exist in prior eras: hyperscalers as market makers. Large technology companies are shaping long-duration demand, inking substantial offtake agreements, and in some cases signing creative deals effectively absorbing higher upfront costs to ensure reliability and shield consumers from volatility. That kind of demand certainty can help anchor investment in firm, clean capacity.

But a durable nuclear expansion will be determined by fundamentals.

Fuel security is one of them. The US remains strategically vulnerable in uranium enrichment, a chokepoint where global capacity is concentrated, and some advanced reactors will require commercial-scale production of fuel that is not yet fully built out domestically. Many of the fastest growing economies in the world are going nuclear, with or without America. If we hope to look after our security and non-proliferation priorities, much more of the fuel for these reactors should be American. Aligning fuel supply with reactor ambition is an essential step toward long-term energy security.

The industrial base is another. The Department of Energy’s Advanced Nuclear Liftoff analysis is clear about what scale entails: expanded enrichment and fuel fabrication, growth in large-component manufacturing such as reactor pressure vessels, and a substantial workforce expansion. None of that can be improvised.

At the same time, nuclear must be understood within the broader energy system. Solar, wind, and storage will continue to dominate near-term additions because they are fast and extremely cost-competitive, with gas also continuing to play a role. It is imperative that the U.S. permit and build renewables as fast as possible in the years ahead. As we move into the 2030s, firm clean capacity will become increasingly important alongside rapid renewable deployment. But firm power must complement — not crowd out — fast, low-cost renewables and distributed resources that can be built today. Geothermal, long-duration storage, and nuclear each have roles to play. What matters is that the system delivers reliability, affordability, and sustainability together.

This is not a uniquely American debate: Around the world, countries are reassessing nuclear as part of their decarbonization strategies. Energy security, climate responsibility, and economic competitiveness are now inseparable — as countries such as Germany have learned the hard way after an ill-advised nuclear phaseout.

A nuclear resurgence, while not inevitable, is increasingly realistic. Demand is real. Capital is engaged. Bipartisan support is durable. And the enabling foundations are receiving overdue attention.

This is a bipartisan objective and both parties have provided a myriad of assistance, including expansive tax credits, massive cheap loans,strategic grants, and supply chain assistance. We now need the industry to put their proverbial oars in the water and row together with common cause.

If approached with seriousness and long-term commitment, nuclear energy can strengthen American competitiveness, lessen future climate volatility, and anchor a more secure and resilient energy system for decades to come.