Sustainability Atlas
Clean Energy·12 min read··...

Data story: key signals in Advanced nuclear (SMRs & Gen IV)

The 5–8 KPIs that matter, benchmark ranges, and what the data suggests next. Focus on licensing, FOAK-to-NOAK cost curves, and supply chain readiness.

The 5–8 KPIs that matter, benchmark ranges, and what the data suggests next. Focus on licensing, FOAK-to-NOAK cost curves, and supply chain readiness.

In 2024, global private investment in advanced nuclear companies surpassed the combined value of such deals over the preceding fifteen years, according to the Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA). By February 2025, the NEA's SMR Dashboard tracked 74 distinct reactor designs under active development across 15 countries, with 51 designs already in pre-licensing or licensing processes. Perhaps most striking: the number of SMR designs with secured funding commitments increased by 81% between 2024 and 2025. This inflection point—driven by AI data center demand, corporate net-zero commitments, and unprecedented government support totaling over $6.2 billion in U.S. federal investment alone—signals that advanced nuclear has crossed from speculative technology to deployment-ready infrastructure.

Why It Matters

The global energy transition faces a fundamental constraint: intermittent renewable sources cannot alone provide the 24/7 baseload power demanded by modern grids, industrial processes, and the exponentially growing fleet of AI data centers. The International Energy Agency projects electricity demand from data centers alone could double by 2030, requiring firm, carbon-free generation that solar and wind cannot reliably deliver.

Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) and Generation IV designs address this gap through several structural advantages. Their modular construction enables factory fabrication and standardized deployment, theoretically reducing the multi-decade timelines and chronic cost overruns that have plagued conventional gigawatt-scale nuclear projects. SMRs typically generate between 50 and 300 megawatts of electrical output—small enough to replace retiring coal plants on existing grid infrastructure, yet large enough to power industrial facilities or municipal systems.

Generation IV reactors represent a parallel technological frontier, incorporating passive safety systems, higher operating temperatures (enabling industrial heat applications and hydrogen production), and in some designs, the ability to consume spent fuel from legacy reactors. China's HTR-PM became the world's first Gen IV reactor to achieve commercial operation in 2024, demonstrating that these concepts have matured beyond laboratory prototypes.

For procurement professionals and sustainability officers, understanding the key performance indicators (KPIs) in this space is essential for evaluating power purchase agreements, assessing vendor credibility, and aligning capital expenditures with decarbonization timelines.

Key Concepts

First-of-a-Kind (FOAK) vs. Nth-of-a-Kind (NOAK) Economics

The economics of advanced nuclear hinge on the transition from FOAK to NOAK deployment. FOAK projects carry substantial risk premiums—regulatory uncertainty, first-mover supply chain costs, and extended construction schedules. Current FOAK SMR levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) estimates range from $89 to $218 per megawatt-hour depending on design type, with light-water SMRs averaging approximately $89.60/MWh and pressurized water reactor designs reaching $218/MWh for initial units (ScienceDirect, 2023).

The industry's value proposition depends on achieving NOAK cost curves through serial production. Projections suggest that after multiple units are deployed, costs could decline 40-60% to the $60-80/MWh range—competitive with natural gas combined-cycle plants in many markets. However, these projections remain unproven at scale.

Licensing and Regulatory Pathways

Regulatory approval represents the critical path for most SMR projects. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has certified only one SMR design to date—NuScale's 77 MWe module, which received Standard Design Approval in June 2025. Other designs, including GE Vernova's BWRX-300 and TerraPower's Natrium sodium-cooled fast reactor, remain in various stages of the licensing process.

The September 2025 U.S.-UK Atlantic Partnership established joint safety assessments and synchronized approval processes, signaling that international regulatory harmonization could accelerate deployment by reducing duplicative review requirements.

Fuel Supply Chain Readiness

Advanced reactors increasingly require High-Assay Low-Enriched Uranium (HALEU), enriched to 5-20% uranium-235 compared to the 3-5% used in conventional reactors. As of 2024, Russia controlled approximately 40% of global uranium enrichment capacity, creating supply chain vulnerabilities that prompted $2.72 billion in U.S. federal investment for domestic HALEU production through the Inflation Reduction Act and supplemental appropriations.

Sector-Specific KPI Benchmarks

The following table presents critical KPIs for evaluating SMR and Gen IV projects, with benchmark ranges derived from industry analyses and regulatory filings:

KPIMetricFOAK RangeNOAK TargetData Source
Levelized Cost of Electricity$/MWh$80-218$60-80INL Literature Review 2024
Overnight Capital Cost$/kW$3,985-4,844<$3,500NuScale SEC Filings
Construction DurationMonths60-8436-48NEA SMR Dashboard 2025
Capacity Factor%85-90%>92%World Nuclear Association
Licensing TimelineYears4-102-4NRC Advanced Reactor Data
HALEU Fuel AvailabilityMT/yearLimited>50 MT by 2030DOE Fuel Cycle Estimates
Module Fabrication RateUnits/year1-26-12Industry Projections
Grid Interconnection QueueMonths24-48<18FERC Data

What's Working

Regulatory Innovation and Design Certification

The NRC's approval of NuScale's uprated 77 MWe design in June 2025—ahead of schedule—demonstrates that regulators can adapt traditional frameworks to novel reactor architectures. Kairos Power's Hermes reactor received the first NRC construction permit for a non-light-water reactor in over 50 years in July 2024, with ground-breaking following immediately.

Corporate Power Purchase Agreements

Technology companies facing sustainability mandates and surging electricity demand have emerged as anchor customers. Amazon committed over $500 million to SMR development in 2024, including a partnership with Energy Northwest for up to 960 MW of capacity. Google signed agreements with Kairos Power targeting 500 MW by 2030. Microsoft contracted for the restart of Three Mile Island's undamaged Unit 1 reactor. These offtake commitments provide revenue certainty that enables project financing.

International Deployment Momentum

Ontario Power Generation began construction on the Western world's first commercial SMR at the Darlington site in May 2025, utilizing GE Vernova's BWRX-300 design with a target completion date of late 2029. The UK announced a £2.5 billion package in June 2025 to accelerate SMR deployment, selecting Rolls-Royce SMR for the Wylfa site in Wales.

What's Not Working

Cost Escalation and Project Cancellations

NuScale's Carbon Free Power Project with Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems—once the flagship U.S. SMR demonstration—was terminated in November 2023 after projected costs escalated from $5.3 billion to $9.3 billion, a 75% increase. The collapse underscored that modular construction does not automatically deliver cost discipline, and that FOAK projects remain vulnerable to supply chain constraints and inflationary pressures.

Financing Gaps and Subsidy Dependence

Current SMR economics depend heavily on federal subsidies. The $89/MWh LCOE cited for NuScale projects includes approximately $30/MWh in Inflation Reduction Act production tax credits and over $1.4 billion in prior DOE cost-sharing. Without these supports, estimated costs would exceed $120/MWh, significantly above natural gas and renewable alternatives. Private capital remains cautious absent proven operating history.

HALEU Supply Chain Bottlenecks

Despite substantial federal investment, domestic HALEU production capacity remains insufficient for projected demand. Most advanced reactor designs cannot proceed to fuel loading without secured HALEU contracts, creating a potential bottleneck for projects targeting late-2020s deployment. The commitment to eliminate Russian nuclear fuel by 2028 adds urgency but also supply risk.

Key Players

Established Leaders

NuScale Power (Portland, Oregon): The only company with NRC-certified SMR designs, NuScale has secured partnerships with TVA and ENTRA1 Energy targeting 6 GW of deployment across the Tennessee Valley region by 2030. Despite the UAMPS project cancellation, the company reported $21.4 million in revenue in H1 2025 from Romania engineering services.

GE Vernova (GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy): Developer of the BWRX-300, a 300 MWe light-water SMR that leverages proven boiling water reactor technology. The design is under construction at Darlington, Canada, with additional projects in Poland, Estonia, and Tennessee receiving DOE funding.

Rolls-Royce SMR (UK): Backed by £210 million in UK government funding, Rolls-Royce SMR is developing a 470 MWe pressurized water reactor design optimized for factory fabrication and UK grid conditions. Selected for the Wylfa site deployment with BWXT contracted for steam generator design.

Emerging Startups

Kairos Power (Alameda, California): Developer of fluoride salt-cooled, high-temperature reactor technology. The 35 MWt Hermes demonstration reactor began construction in July 2024 at Oak Ridge, Tennessee, with operational targets of 2027. Google's 500 MW purchase agreement provides commercial validation.

TerraPower (Bellevue, Washington): Backed by Bill Gates, TerraPower is developing the Natrium sodium-cooled fast reactor with over $2 billion in DOE funding. The 345 MWe demonstration plant in Wyoming targets late-2020s operation and features integrated molten salt energy storage.

X-energy (Rockville, Maryland): Developer of the Xe-100 high-temperature gas-cooled pebble-bed reactor. Amazon's investment through the Climate Pledge Fund and partnership for Washington state deployment positions X-energy among the most commercially advanced Gen IV developers.

Key Investors and Funders

U.S. Department of Energy: The Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program (ARDP) has committed over $3 billion to SMR and Gen IV demonstrations, including $800 million announced in December 2025 for TVA and Holtec first-mover projects.

UK Government: £2.5 billion commitment announced June 2025, plus equity stakes in Rolls-Royce SMR and site designation for the Wylfa project.

Breakthrough Energy Ventures: Bill Gates' climate fund has invested in TerraPower, TAE Technologies, and other advanced nuclear ventures, providing patient capital for pre-commercial development.

Examples

  1. Ontario Power Generation - BWRX-300 Darlington: Construction began in May 2025 on a CAD $20.9 billion (approximately $15 billion USD) project for four 300 MW reactors at the existing Darlington nuclear site. The project leverages Ontario's established nuclear regulatory framework, existing grid infrastructure, and skilled workforce. First power is targeted for late 2029, making it the potential first commercial SMR in the Western world.

  2. TVA Clinch River SMR Project: The Tennessee Valley Authority filed a construction permit application in May 2025 for a GE Vernova BWRX-300 at the Clinch River site in Tennessee. The project received $400 million in DOE funding and exemplifies the strategy of siting SMRs at locations with prior nuclear licensing experience to accelerate deployment.

  3. Kairos Power Hermes Demonstration: This 35 MWt non-power demonstration reactor in Oak Ridge, Tennessee broke ground in July 2024 as the first NRC-approved Gen IV reactor construction in the United States. Using TRISO pebble fuel and fluoride salt coolant, the project serves as a licensing and operational proving ground before Kairos scales to commercial units under its Google partnership.

Action Checklist

  • Evaluate FOAK vs. NOAK timelines when assessing vendor proposals; require transparent cost escalation provisions in contracts
  • Verify HALEU fuel supply commitments are contractually secured before committing to advanced reactor power purchase agreements
  • Assess grid interconnection queue positions for proposed project sites; delays of 24-48 months are common and can strand capital
  • Review regulatory status and licensing timeline projections; prioritize vendors with certified or near-certified designs
  • Model subsidy phase-out scenarios; current LCOE estimates typically assume IRA tax credits that may not persist
  • Engage supply chain due diligence on component fabrication capacity; most SMR vendors lack proven manufacturing partners at scale
  • Consider hybrid PPA structures that include industrial heat or hydrogen offtake to improve project economics

FAQ

Q: How do SMR costs compare to renewable energy with storage? A: Current SMR LCOE estimates of $80-100/MWh (subsidized) are higher than utility-scale solar ($30-40/MWh) or wind ($25-35/MWh), but lower than solar-plus-4-hour-storage systems in some configurations. The comparison depends critically on capacity factor requirements: SMRs offer 90%+ availability versus 25-35% for renewables, making them economically competitive for baseload applications where continuous output is valued.

Q: What are the realistic deployment timelines for SMRs? A: For countries with established nuclear regulatory frameworks, the NEA estimates 4-5 years from licensing to operation for FOAK projects and up to 5 years for NOAK units. The first commercial SMRs in North America and Europe are expected between 2029 and 2031. Newcomer countries without nuclear infrastructure should anticipate 7-10 year timelines.

Q: How do Gen IV reactors differ from SMRs? A: The categories overlap but are distinct. SMRs refer to reactor size (under 300 MWe with modular construction); Gen IV refers to technology generation (advanced coolants, fuels, and safety systems). Some designs are both—like Kairos Power's fluoride salt-cooled reactor—while others are SMR-scale but use conventional light-water technology (like NuScale). Gen IV designs typically offer higher temperatures, improved waste characteristics, and passive safety, but are generally earlier in licensing.

Q: What are the key supply chain risks for advanced nuclear procurement? A: Three primary risks dominate: (1) HALEU fuel availability, with limited non-Russian supply before 2028; (2) specialized component fabrication, with few qualified vendors for reactor pressure vessels, steam generators, and control systems; and (3) skilled workforce constraints, as experienced nuclear construction trades remain scarce after decades of limited new-build activity.

Q: How should procurement teams evaluate SMR vendor financial stability? A: Focus on backlog, contracted revenue, and balance sheet strength. Many SMR developers are pre-revenue companies burning cash while awaiting commercial deployment. NuScale, for example, reported net losses of $49.3 million in H1 2025 despite being the most advanced U.S. vendor. Require parent company guarantees, performance bonds, or other credit support for long-term commitments.

Sources

Topics

advancednucleargrid reliabilitybenchmark KPIsCfDstandardspermitting

Related Articles