President Donald Trump’s executive orders aim to advance a nuclear renaissance but sidestep challenges around cost, safety, and scalability, risking the coalition needed for widespread deployment.
Late in May, President Donald Trump issued four executive orders intended to “usher in a nuclear renaissance,” ostensibly an encouraging development. However, several provisions within the orders are very likely to have the opposite effect of complicating a nuclear energy expansion that has been gathering momentum over the last several years.
A burst of nuclear technology innovation has contributed importantly to this brighter prospect for nuclear power, particularly the development of advanced versions of today’s predominant design and of next-generation technologies. Further, these reactor designs have increased deployment flexibility by featuring designs spanning sizes from a few to over a thousand megawatts and potentially introducing more efficient new manufacturing approaches based on increased modularity.
However, reviving support for a nuclear renaissance requires more than technological innovation. Key constituencies have come together despite historically divergent views. Many environmental groups and high-tech industries have swung to nuclear power in recent years because it is one of the few options for 24/7 carbon-free electricity, adding reliability to a decarbonized grid with substantial variable weather-dependent renewables. These characteristics are especially important now as electricity demand is poised to grow substantially for the first time in decades.
Many security experts support nuclear expansion only if the technology spreads without exacerbating nuclear weapons proliferation concerns—echoing President Eisenhower’s “Atoms for Peace” vision put forward in 1953. Polling also shows that the public’s perception of nuclear energy has grown over time. Improved regulation and new reactor designs that build in enhanced safety are party to that increased support.
A Narrow Window to Scale Nuclear Power
This convergence of interests has provided a propitious moment to see nuclear power scale in the years and decades ahead. The flip side is that, if this scaling is not captured soon, the opportunity to do so may again be lost for a considerable period. This alignment of interests risks being fractured by the president’s executive orders, which could slow or even stop nuclear expansion in the United States and the attendant opportunity to rebuild a domestic nuclear supply chain.
First, the executive orders would reduce the independence of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), which can ultimately impact the safety and security of operating reactors. Fixed deadlines are proposed for NRC decisions, and the use of federal sites is proposed, lowering compliance levels under the National Environmental Policy Act. Crucially, not a word is said about the importance of assuring reactor safety, an issue that might reawaken public opposition to nuclear power.
Of equal concern, the executive order on “Reinvigorating the Nuclear Industry Base” calls for evaluation of policies regarding reprocessing of irradiated fuel (that is, separation of irradiated fuel into its constituent chemical elements) and recycling of plutonium (a nuclear explosive material) in new fuels. The original US prohibition on domestic commercial reprocessing was announced by President Gerald Ford in 1976 and then became the centerpiece of President Jimmy Carter’s nonproliferation policy and the norm in many countries. Dissemination of reprocessing technology and introduction of plutonium fuels create significant security concerns by creating a marketplace for nuclear-weapons-usable material—the opposite of Eisenhower’s proposition.
Reprocessing Still Doesn’t Make Sense
There are other realities overlooked by the order: reprocessing and recycling are uneconomic compared with the continued use of uranium fuels, create more radioactive waste streams that are costly to manage, and add new difficulties for fuel fabrication. Even if the ambitious goal of tripling nuclear power globally by 2050 (as first espoused at the 2023 Conference of the Parties meeting in Dubai) is reached, it is unlikely to result in material uranium cost increases that would magically make reprocessing close to economic.
The remaining argument put forward by reprocessing proponents is that it will help manage the disposal of nuclear waste. The proposal that recycled waste can minimize the long-term challenges in waste management is seductive, but it carries little weight upon examination. The science in favor of direct geologic isolation of irradiated fuel bundles remains sound, and the fact is that no technical solution can ever remove the challenges of dealing with nuclear waste generated by nuclear fission—and that waste will still need geological isolation.
The Executive Orders Don’t Address the Cost Problem
Clearly, the president’s executive orders are problematic to many constituencies that have come to support significant nuclear power expansion. But equally problematic is the absence of guidance that would address the primary challenges to utilities and regulators considering new nuclear power plants. We’ve already mentioned the absence of any reference to nuclear safety. However, the elephant in the room is that the recent United States experience in building nuclear reactors is one of substantial cost and schedule overruns. There are reasons to think that the new generation of reactor technologies will master these challenges, especially after the learning benefits of a new wave of construction kick in. Nevertheless, this needs to be demonstrated before utilities and regulators, who serve ratepayers, can find it possible to approve new builds in the absence of a financial backstop against major cost overruns. Public-private partnerships that balance the risks to ratepayers and the needs of taxpayers will be essential for providing such backstops. There are many pathways to such backstops, and the president needs to put his weight behind the risk-sharing at the heart of a nuclear renaissance. Silence will not do the job.
Realizing a Nuclear Renaissance
The conclusion is that the nation and its political and corporate leadership should stay focused on the highest priority: scaling nuclear power, which would be helped most by reducing the unit cost of building nuclear power plants and by providing financial backstops for the initial stages of new construction. This will happen only when a number of reactors of the same design are built so that learnings can be incorporated, just as they are for any complex engineered facility. Politically, this scaling can happen only if the coalition of interests that has materialized recently can be sustained. The president’s executive orders, as written, risk the stability of that coalition.
The president and his administration would best serve their aspirations and the many benefits of nuclear energy scaling by remaining focused on a targeted strategy that will attract significant amounts of private capital.
About the Authors: Ernest Moniz and John Deutch
Secretary Ernest Moniz is the Cecil and Ida Green Professor Emeritus at MIT, Co-Chair and CEO of the Nuclear Threat Initiative, and former US Secretary of Energy.
John Deutch is Institute Professor Emeritus at MIT and a former US Undersecretary of Energy, Deputy Secretary of Defense, and Director of Central Intelligence.
Image: Vink Fan/Shutterstock
