Is the endgame of the AI era nuclear power? Microsoft and Google are aggressively buying nuclear electricity, and small modular reactors have become Wall Street’s new favorite.

```

Nuclear energy is undergoing a rare revival in the United States.

The massive power demand from artificial intelligence data centers is directing the attention of tech giants toward a field once considered a sunset industry—nuclear energy. Microsoft and Google have successively signed nuclear power purchase agreements lasting decades, the Trump administration has pledged over $80 billion to support new reactor construction, and set a goal: to expand America's nuclear installed capacity to 400 gigawatts by 2050, four times the current scale. This wave of revival is reshaping the U.S. energy landscape and spawning a batch of startups centered on small modular reactors (SMRs), attracting wide bets from tech giants to Wall Street capital.

However, the return of nuclear energy is not achieved overnight. From regulatory approval to fuel supply, from engineering construction to talent reserves, the nuclear industry still faces deep structural challenges. The industry generally expects that SMRs will not be able to connect to the grid on a large scale until the early 2030s at the earliest, and whether the promised costs can be fulfilled by then remains unknown.

Data Centers Ignite Nuclear Energy Demand

The core driving force behind this wave of nuclear revival is the nearly unlimited demand for electricity from AI infrastructure.

According to the Electric Power Research Institute's forecast, under a high-growth scenario, the share of data centers in U.S. electricity consumption could rise from about 5% currently to 17% by 2030. This scale of demand far exceeds the flexibility of the existing power grid.

While natural gas power generation is the preferred supporting option for data center expansion, gas turbine supply is tight, delivery cycles last for years, and prices keep rising. Although solar and wind will dominate new power installations in the U.S. this year, their intermittent nature means they cannot alone meet the around-the-clock power needs of data centers and must be paired with large-scale storage systems.

Nuclear energy thus stands out. It is one of the few energy forms that can provide all-day, zero-carbon electricity, aligning perfectly with tech companies' clean energy goals. Meanwhile, public acceptance of nuclear is also rebounding—a Pew Research Center survey shows that in 2025, 59% of American adults support expanding nuclear energy use, a significant increase from 43% a decade ago.

Microsoft and Google Snap up Nuclear Power, Old Plants Revitalize

The tech giants' power purchase agreements are directly driving the revival of several shutdown nuclear plants.

Microsoft signed a 20-year power purchase agreement with Constellation Energy Corp., which is planning to restart Pennsylvania's Three Mile Island nuclear plant, aiming to resume operations in 2027. The plant's first unit was shut down in 2019 due to lack of economic competitiveness, while the other unit was permanently closed following a partial core meltdown accident nearly fifty years ago.

Google reached a 25-year power supply deal with NextEra Energy Inc., which plans to restart the Duane Arnold nuclear station in Iowa by 2029. In addition, Meta Platforms Inc. has signed agreements with Oklo Inc. and TerraPower LLC for nuclear power to supply its AI data centers.

At the governmental level, Holtec International Corp. is restarting the Palisades nuclear station in Michigan, supported by state and federal funding, expected to be completed within this year.

Currently, the U.S. operates 94 nuclear plants in 28 states, with about 90% of the reactors built in the 1970s and 1980s; only three new units have begun operations this century. The most recently completed two—Vogtle Units 3 and 4 in Georgia—were delayed seven years and ultimately cost more than twice the original budget, a cautionary example that still restrains industry investment.

Trump Administration Bets on Nuclear, Regulatory Reform Amid Controversy

The Trump administration has made nuclear energy a strategic pillar and launched a series of policy tools.

On the funding side, the government announced over $80 billion last year to support reactor construction designed by Westinghouse Electric Co., including the AP1000 model used for the Vogtle project. By reusing the same supply chain across multiple projects, it hopes to achieve scale-driven cost reductions.

On regulation, Trump signed an executive order in May last year requiring the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to cut approval cycles for new construction and operating licenses to 18 months, only half the previously required time. The government criticized the NRC for being overly conservative; after Trump demanded a review of radiation limits, the agency plans to revise its longstanding guidelines. This deregulatory move has raised widespread concerns regarding nuclear safety.

On technology incubation, the Department of Energy launched a reactor pilot program last year, selecting 11 projects for participation, including two from Oklo Inc., backed by Sam Altman. The plan aims for at least three advanced reactor designs to achieve “criticality”—the reactor can sustain a controlled fission reaction and stably release energy—by July 4, 2026. According to the DOE, Antares Nuclear Inc., Valar Atomics Inc., Aalo Atomics, and Deployable Energy (outside the program) all reached this milestone before the deadline. However, criticality is only the technical validation stage, and commercial operation is still a considerable distance away.

SMR: Hopes and Uncertainties of Next-generation Nuclear Technology

Small modular reactors are considered the core vehicle for nuclear revival, but their commercialization prospects remain full of uncertainty.

Unlike traditional large reactors, which usually exceed 1,000 megawatts capacity, SMRs typically have less than 300 megawatts per unit and can be deployed individually or in clusters, offering greater flexibility. Supporters argue SMRs use passive safety designs, with some models using molten salt or liquid metals instead of water as coolants and relying on gravity and other natural processes to prevent overheating, thereby reducing dependence on electric pumps and manual intervention, and increasing safety.

In construction mode, SMRs are designed for factory prefabrication and onsite assembly; standardized production theoretically shortens construction periods and lowers cost via scale effects, potentially avoiding traditional nuclear projects’ frequent delays and overruns. The prerequisite for this cost advantage is sufficient market demand to support mass production.

Currently, among dozens of SMR projects under development in the U.S., only a few have obtained regulatory approval. NuScale Power Corp. has received NRC design certification; Bill Gates-backed TerraPower LLC has permission to build a commercial reactor in Wyoming, but no SMR company has yet received an actual operating license.

The industry generally expects SMRs will begin connecting to the grid gradually in the early 2030s, with the initial batch being costly pioneer systems. Even so, tech companies' enthusiasm has not waned—they not only sign power purchase agreements but directly invest in SMR startups.

Nuclear Fusion: A Distant Future, Attracts Massive Capital All the Same

Beyond fission technology, nuclear fusion is also entering the vision of tech giants.

While fission releases energy by splitting heavy atoms like uranium, fusion produces energy by combining light atoms into heavier elements, theoretically offering nearly unlimited clean energy and no long-lived radioactive waste. However, how to achieve controllable commercial fusion on Earth remains an unsolved problem.

According to Bloomberg, private capital investment in American fusion has exceeded $10 billion. Google has invested in Commonwealth Fusion Systems and signed an agreement to purchase electricity from the company’s first commercial plant. However, commercial fusion systems may still be a decade or longer away.

Uranium Supply: The Hidden Risk to Nuclear Revival

The large-scale expansion of nuclear energy faces a rarely discussed but crucial bottleneck—fuel supply.

According to U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) data, the U.S. faces a widening uranium supply gap, with most required enriched uranium relying on imports. In 2024, Russia is still the largest supplier of nuclear fuel to U.S. plants, accounting for about one-fifth. As the U.S. bans uranium imports from Russia citing the war in Ukraine, some companies have received waivers, but these exemptions expire in 2028, making the establishment of alternative supply chains urgent.

Currently, the U.S. has only one commercial-scale uranium enrichment facility, operated by Urenco Ltd., a British-Dutch-German joint venture. The company announced in June it plans to increase capacity at its New Mexico plant by nearly 50%.

Even more challenging, many SMRs require fuel that is not regular nuclear fuel but high-assay low-enriched uranium (HALEU) with uranium-235 concentrations as high as 20%, currently only commercially produced in two countries. In January, the Trump administration awarded a combined $1.8 billion to Peter Thiel-backed startup General Matter and a Centrus Energy Corp. subsidiary to establish domestic HALEU production capability, but the timeline for building up this supply chain from scratch lags behind nuclear’s expansion schedule.

Risk Disclosure and DisclaimerThe market carries risks, invest cautiously. This article does not constitute personal investment advice and does not take into account the individual investment objectives, financial situation or needs of users. Users should consider whether any opinions, viewpoints, or conclusions in this article fit their specific circumstances. Investments made accordingly are at your own risk. ```