While political and social momentum behind a major expansion of nuclear power builds there is nonetheless a rather large elephant in the room – where’s the money? Nuclear power has long been characterised as a technology that can only be built at scale with the help of state backing. While that may not mean direct financing of construction, it is clear that even where reactor developments are privately funded they are underpinned by the state somewhere along the line, backed by tax-payer indemnified long-term power purchase agreements for example or extended preferential loan agreements.
For critics, this fact has long been employed as an ace to trump any prospective nuclear project no matter how attractive and desirable it may be. Indeed, it might be expected that the financing challenge emerges as the primary excuse to continue the fight against nuclear as the remaining technical issues, such as long-term high level waste management for example, are resolved and delivered. This argument of last resort is particularly galling as nuclear power plants are operating reliably and safely for longer and longer. The cost of electricity from a nuclear plant operating for 60, 80 or maybe ultimately even a century or more is dirt cheap when compared with, say, a wind farm that may only operate for 20 years and produces a miniscule fraction of the energy in comparison. Right now though, after the global pandemic, the 2008 financial crash and other pressing needs for limited resources, government coffers the world over are looking pretty spartan. That reality may be expected to curb the prospects for tripling nuclear capacity over the next few decades with the massive scales of investment that implies.
The picture may not be a gloomy as it first appears though. On the sidelines of the recent CERAWeek 2025 event in Houston, a cross-industry group of large energy users signed a pledge supporting the three times goal. Signatories to the agreement reads like a roster of the wealthiest corporate entities that have existed. Digital giants like Amazon, Google, Meta joined heavy industrials like Dow and Occidental in recognising the role of nuclear in helping achieve global goals for enhanced energy resiliency and security, and continuous firm clean energy supply. Indeed, the agreement explicitly emphasised that large energy users depend on the availability of abundant energy for their success and that nuclear energy can provide that energy round the clock, independently of the weather, the season or the location. Signatories further agreed that, perhaps uniquely, there is a significant role for nuclear across a wide range of economic activity, including the technology sector, increased electrification, the provision of high temperature industrial process heat, hydrogen production, district heating and the production of synthetic fuels. Of course, the agreement acknowledges the important role of governments in supporting nuclear investment, noting that by ensuring nuclear has equal access to finance, governments can enable nuclear capacity deployment at scale worldwide. The industrials and techies also applaude those governments which have signed the declaration to triple nuclear capacity and thank them for their commitment to mobilise nuclear investment alongise the development and construction of new nuclear reactors, including SMRs and advanced reactors.
As an aspirational agreement this latest declaration clearly isn’t the whole solution to nuclear finance, but as a statement of intent it speaks volumes. The signatories represent a huge slice of long-term energy demand and a ready-made customer base ripe for nuclear deployment. It’s a vital link in the value chain. In fact so vital that nuclear finance may yet turn out to be less of challenge than the industry has ever been given credit for.
