U.S. Plans $80 Billion Nuclear Power Expansion

The United States is set to begin its most aggressive new nuclear power program since the 1970s. As part of its most expensive nuclear deal, the Trump administration launched partnership to create at least $80 billion new large nuclear reactors and chose Westinghouse Electric Company and its co-owners, Brookfield Asset Management and Cameco, for this work.

The money will go towards building the AP1000, a type of pressurized water reactor developed by Westinghouse that can generate about 1,110 megawatts of electricity. These are the same reactors as at the third and fourth power units of the nuclear power plant. Vogtle Nuclear Power Plant in Georgia, which in 2023 and 2024 was seven years behind schedule and cost more than twice as much as expected – about $35 billion per pair. Along the way, Westinghouse, based in Cranberry Township, Pennsylvania, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.

Executives of investor-owned companies know that if they offered to participate in similar projects on the same commercial terms, they would be fired immediately. As a result, the private sector in the United States is unwilling to take on the financial risk inherent in building new reactors.

The $80 billion deal with the federal government represents the best opportunity in recent memory for the U.S. nuclear industry to undertake a large-scale construction program. But ambition does not guarantee successful execution. The delays and cost overruns that plagued Vogtle's project pose a real threat to the next wave of reactors.

Optimization AP1000 Reactor construction

How might the next AP1000 set be different? On the other hand, supplying multiple copies of the same reactor should create conditions for sustainable cost reduction. Vogtle Unit 3 was the first AP1000 built. in the United States, and the lessons learned from this resulted in Vogtle Unit 4 costing 30 percent less than Unit 3. (There are currently six AP1000s operating outside the United States, with another 14 under construction, according to Westinghouse).

In the United States, there is a bipartisan effort to streamline regulatory procedures to ensure that future projects are not delayed by the same problems that plagued Vogtle. Accelerating deployment of versatile, modern nuclear energy for Clean Energy (PRELIMINARY) Law The law, signed by former US President Joe Biden in 2024, includes a number of measures aimed at improving processes at Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRK).

The last nuclear reactors to be built in the United States—Vogtle Units 3 and 4 in Waynesboro, Georgia—were completed seven years behind schedule and cost more than twice as much as expected.Georgia Power Co.

This included a mandatory change to the NRC's mission statement, which set the goal of “ensuring the safe and secure use and deployment of civilian forces.” nuclear energy This was a symbol of Congress' intent to encourage the commission to support nuclear development.

In May President Trump built on this legislation with four decrees intended for speed up reactor licensing and accelerate the development of nuclear power – a concept that has yet to be tested in practice. In November, the NRC published rules outlining how it plans to implement the presidential decree. The changes are aimed at eliminating redundant and duplicative rules.

One of Trump's executive orders included a number of provisions designed to help build the US nuclear workforce, but it is clear that this will not be easy. The momentum gained in training skilled workers during construction in Vogtl is already fading. With no other active new reactor projects in the United States to begin immediately, many of the people who worked there likely moved on to other sectors, such as liquefied fuel production. natural gas (LNG) plants.

Around the time construction at Vogtle was wrapping up, many industry employers were already reporting difficulty finding needed personnel, according to 2025 DOE data. US Energy and Employment Report. Surveyed in 2024, 22 percent of nuclear construction employers said it was “very difficult” to hire the workers they needed, and 63 percent said it was “somewhat difficult.” In the nuclear industry, 63 percent of employers said it was “very difficult” to hire employees.

If reactor construction does start to pick up steam, there is obviously a danger that these numbers will rise.

So how many reactors can $80 billion buy? Assuming an average AP1000 cost of $16 billion (slightly less than Vogtle), and factoring in cost savings from economies of scale and learning by doing, the plan would mean five new reactors. This would represent an increase of about 5.7 percent in total U.S. nuclear power generation capacity if all reactors currently in operation remain operational.

Full details of the $80 billion deal, including the precise allocation of funding and risk allocation, were not specified. However, Westinghouse co-owner Brookfield said the partnership includes profit-sharing arrangements that would provide some benefit to the US government if the initiative is successful.

Washington Post reported that once the US signs final contracts for $80 billion worth of new reactors, it will be entitled to 20 percent of all Westinghouse revenues in excess of $17.5 billion. And if Westinghouse's valuation exceeds $30 billion, the administration could seek a public offering. If this happens, the government will receive 20 percent of the shares.

Enriched Uranus is loaded onto the Vogtle Unit 4 installation.Georgia Power Co.

The Japanese government also plays a key role. Within US-Japan trade deal worth $550 billion In July, when the strike occurred, the Japanese government promised large-scale investment in US energy, including nuclear. Japanese companies, including Mitsubishi Heavy industry, Toshiba Group and IHI Corp. interested in investing up to $100 billion in the US to support the construction of new AP1000 and small modular reactors (SMR), the two governments said.

The deal with Westinghouse supports a number of the administration's goals, including opportunities for artificial intelligence and investment and job creation in the American manufacturing sector. The AP1000's focus also allows for reliance on US-made fuel, strengthening energy security. (Many of designs for SMRwhich have generated considerable excitement around the world use high grade low enriched uranium (HALEU) fuel, which is not currently produced on a large scale in the United States).

US Nuclear Energy Investments

Recently, other steps have been taken to create additional nuclear capacity in the United States. Santee CooperThe South Carolina company has announced plans to complete construction of two AP1000 reactors that were abandoned in 2017. Venture Capital Summer Playground in Jenkinsville, South Carolina.

Separately, Google announced in October deal with NextEra Energy reopen a 615-megawatt nuclear power plant in Iowa. The Duane Arnold Energy Center closed in 2020 and the goal is to have it back online by the first quarter of 2029. Google agreed to buy a share of the plant's output for 25 years.

Construction of two AP1000 reactors at the VC Summer nuclear site in Jenkinsville, South Carolina, was halted in 2017 due to delays and cost overruns. Project managers were charged with fraud. Chuck Burton/AP

But the plans announced so far pale in comparison to the Trump administration's nuclear ambitions. Earlier this year, Trump set a goal to increase 300 gigawatts of nuclear power by 2050, up from 100 GW today. This would mean much stronger growth than Wood McKenzie's current projections, which show a nearly doubling of U.S. nuclear generation capacity to about 190 GW in 2050.

The Trump administration's main driver of interest in nuclear energy is its ambitions. artificial intelligence. Chris Wright, the US Secretary of Energy, described the race to develop advanced artificial intelligence as Manhattan Project our time, critically important for national securityand depends on a sharp increase in electricity production. Speaking at the Council on Foreign Relations in September, Wright promised: “We are doing everything possible to facilitate construction electricity production and data centers in our country.”

One of the hallmarks of the Trump administration has been its willingness to intervene in markets to achieve its policy goals. Its nuclear strategy is an example of this approach. In many ways, the Trump administration is acting like an energy company: using its financial power and ability to join forces to negotiate an agreement that spans the entire nuclear value chain.

Throughout the history of nuclear energy, the industry has worked closely with governments. But the federal government actually taking a commercial position in developing new reactors would be a first for the United States. In the first wave of reactor construction in the United States in the 1970s, federal government support was limited to R&D, uranium mining and enrichment, and compensating operators for the risk of nuclear accidents.

Before partial deregulation In the U.S. electricity markets that emerged in the 1990s, utilities could build nuclear power plants with confidence that the costs could be recovered from customers, even if they were well over budget. With many key markets now at least partially deregulated, nuclear project developers will need other types of guarantees to secure financing and move forward.

The first new plants from the $80 billion deal will come online within a few years of Trump leaving office. But they could play an important role in increasing US electricity supply and developing advanced artificial intelligence for decades to come.