President Donald Trump has set an ambitious target to increase nuclear power production in the United States fourfold by 2050, a goal that would require a dramatic expansion of nuclear capacity far beyond the current pace. Achieving this expansion would mean constructing roughly 100 times more nuclear capacity in the next 25 years than was developed in the previous quarter-century.
Recent federal actions may bring the country incrementally closer to that objective, reflecting the administration’s focus on advanced nuclear technologies. These smaller, modular reactor designs are viewed by some as a more cost-effective and quicker-to-deploy alternative to traditional large-scale reactors, which have historically been expensive and time-consuming to build.
In the past several weeks, four nuclear projects reached an important milestone known as criticality—the point in which a nuclear reactor sustains a stable fission reaction. This achievement was part of a government challenge set forth in an executive order issued last May, which called on developers of advanced reactors to hit this mark by July 4 of this year. While criticality is a fundamental physics test for nuclear reactors, experts caution that the recent progress largely reflects eased regulatory requirements rather than scientific breakthroughs. Koroush Shirvan, associate professor of nuclear science and engineering at MIT, noted that some companies succeeded using older designs and materials, indicating the technology is still in early stages of development.
The Trump administration has also pursued policy changes aimed at lowering barriers for nuclear development. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has proposed an overhaul of radiation safety regulations, potentially reducing construction costs and simplifying approval processes for new plants. Additionally, the Energy Department announced plans to offer up to $17.5 billion in low-cost loans to support utilities in building large-scale nuclear reactors. A key feature of this program is encouraging utilities to place bulk orders for critical components, such as reactor vessels, to cut manufacturing lead times.
Despite these initiatives, significant challenges remain. Large nuclear plants in the U.S. have faced considerable delays and cost overruns in recent decades, with the only two new reactors completed in the last 15 years totaling $35 billion—double initial estimates. It remains unclear if utilities will be willing to commit to new projects even with government-backed financial support.
While some climate experts and policymakers advocate nuclear power as a low-emissions energy source vital to reducing carbon outputs, others highlight its high costs and potential safety risks as obstacles. Josh Freed, senior vice president for energy and climate at the research group Third Way, expressed skepticism about the administration’s approach, suggesting that the focus has prioritized publicity over concrete progress.
Nonetheless, Freed acknowledged that nuclear energy has benefited from relatively consistent federal support across multiple administrations, a level of policy stability that few other energy sectors have seen. Whether this backing ultimately translates into a significant expansion of nuclear power remains to be seen as the industry navigates technological, regulatory, and economic hurdles.