The growing demand for reliable, low-carbon energy and advances in nuclear technology are fueling renewed interest in nuclear power. This shift could reshape energy production in Missouri and across the nation.
In a recent Q&A from Missouri S&T, James D. Sterling, founding dean of Missouri S&T’s Kummer College, sat down with Joshua Schlegel, associate professor and associate chair of nuclear engineering and radiation science, to discuss why nuclear power is making a comeback and what its resurgence means for the future of energy.
Sterling: Why is there so much renewed interest in nuclear power today?
Schlegel: Demand. For a long time, electricity growth in developed nations was predicted to be mostly flat. With the expansion of artificial intelligence (AI) and data centers, we are faced with a sudden need for large amounts of electricity that need to run 24/7. Given the needs of these systems and the current science behind climate change, nuclear energy makes a lot of sense.
I think one of the biggest shifts recently has been the behind-the-meter power purchase agreements pairing AI data centers with reactors. Normally, a power plant sells electricity to the grid operator for wholesale cost—say about $25 per MW-hour. The grid operator then sells that power to the data center for its retail cost, typically about $60 to $80 per MW-hour.
The difference is the cost to operate the transmission and distribution infrastructure that gets power from A to B. By building the data center next to the power source, they can sign a power purchase agreement to buy power around $40 per MW-hour. This is a very simplified example, but these agreements allow the data center to reduce their costs and the power plant to increase their revenue.
Sterling: We also hear a lot about small modular reactors. Why are they important?
Schlegel: Yes, the nuclear power industry is anticipating a big change with the arrival of small modular reactors. Many of the first commercial reactors would today be considered small modular reactors. For reference, Shippingport, the first commercial reactor, was only 60 MW.
For decades, the trend in nuclear power has been to build bigger plants. While those large facilities are needed, a 1.5-GW plant can cost billions of dollars, a price tag only the largest electric utilities can manage. Many of the coal plants slated for replacement generate just 400 to 500 MW, making a plant of that size less practical from an infrastructure standpoint.
Sterling: Can you tell us about some particular price indicator suggesting that this enthusiasm is more than a fad?
Schlegel: You’re seeing concrete investments in nuclear construction for the first time in a long while—not just from major electric utilities, but from smaller companies as well.
Ontario Power Generation has awarded the first of four planned contracts for GE Hitachi’s small modular reactor at Darlington in Ontario, Canada, and the BWRX-300 is being considered for projects at Clinch River, Tennessee, as well as in Poland, Hungary, and the UK.
TerraPower is building a Natrium reactor in Kemmerer, Wyoming. Abilene Christian University is constructing a molten-salt research reactor and numerous other campuses—including both the University of Missouri and S&T—are beginning their own reactor projects. Long Mott Energy has submitted a construction permit application for X-energy’s Xe-100 reactor. NuScale is planning to install 1 GW of capacity at sites in Ohio and Pennsylvania to support data centers.
People have talked about the potential of next-generation nuclear power for a long time, but in the last couple of years, we’ve seen that come to life.
We’re excited about this momentum and the enrollment increases, which reflects growing public awareness that nuclear power is a growing industry.
Small modular reactors generate less power—typically 30 to 300 MW, depending on the design—but they also cost significantly less to build. That lower investment reduces the barrier to entry and makes nuclear energy more accessible.