As the global race to power AI, cloud computing, and 24/7 digital infrastructure accelerates, major technology companies are reevaluating how they secure long-term, carbon-free electricity. Among the emerging solutions, nuclear power—long considered too expensive, slow, or politically fraught—has found new relevance. Specifically, small modular reactors (SMRs) are beginning to reshape how zero-carbon baseload power could be delivered in the years ahead.
We see this resurgence as a targeted response to a new class of energy buyers focused on reliability, carbon-free attributes, and controllability.
The New Demand Paradigm: Digital, Relentless, and Zero-Carbon
Tech companies are among the most active players reshaping electricity markets today. With hyperscale data centers operating 24/7, and growing internal and external pressure to meet net-zero emissions goals, these firms are increasingly bypassing conventional procurement models.
Modernized SMRs are uniquely aligned with these requirements:
- Round-the-clock availability: Unlike solar or wind, nuclear provides steady baseload output with a ~95% capacity factor.
- High ELCC: In PJM and other markets, nuclear has the highest Effective Load Carrying Capability, indicating it contributes the most to resource adequacy.
- Scalability for industrial campuses: Modular designs promise siting flexibility near demand centers, potentially simplifying grid integration.
This alignment explains why companies like Google, Amazon, Microsoft, and Meta are actively exploring or contracting for nuclear-backed supply.
Why “Small” Doesn’t Mean Simple
The emerging conversation around modular nuclear often distinguishes between micro reactors (typically 20 MW or less of thermal energy) and small modular reactors (~300 MW). While micro reactors capture imagination with the vision of powering remote communities or defense installations with small nuclear reactors, the commercial reality tells a different story.
In our project development experience at Tangibl, micro-scale nuclear incurs similar overhead and regulatory drag as larger projects, but with far less impact on system-level adequacy. For utility-scale developers and large commercial offtakers, bigger is generally better, assuming the design benefits of modularity (e.g., factory construction, replicability) are realized and financing is structured to account for the asset’s capital intensity and long lead times.
This is where modular nuclear differs from solar or wind: non-recourse project finance remains elusive, with most deals still relying on utility balance sheets, ratepayer backstops or state/federal subsidies.
Pathways to Incremental Nuclear Capacity
Nuclear is available as an incremental resource through three different avenues: existing capacity or uprates of operating plants, return of recently retired plants, and development of new “greenfield” plants.
- Existing Plants
Many nuclear units can undergo uprates, increasing output with modest capital upgrades. Meta secured a long-term Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) for the entire output of Constellation’s Clinton nuclear plant in Illinois.
- Restart of Recently Retired Units
Holtec International is restarting the Palisades plant in Michigan with the help of state grants and significant loan guarantees from the U.S. Department of Energy. However, it lacks a PPA providing further revenue certainty beyond the Mid-Continent Independent System Operator (MISO) markets. Constellation also struck a deal with Microsoft to restart the undamaged Unit 1 reactor at Three Mile Island.
3. Greenfield Projects with New Technology
Google has entered into an agreement with Elementl to develop three new nuclear projects at sites not yet identified using unspecified, but presumably new, technologies. Talen Energy struck a deal with Amazon to power a data center adjacent to the Susquehanna nuclear plant in Pennsylvania. This has triggered an ongoing regulatory battle over its interconnection at the plant relative to the PJM transmission grid.
Each of these strategies reflects different trade-offs in siting, contracting, and regulatory pathways, but they clearly illustrate that nuclear power is no longer off the table.
Legacy Lessons: Plant Vogtle and the Risk of Scale
Any discussion of new nuclear must grapple with the shadow of Plant Vogtle, the last nuclear plant built in the U.S. It came online in Georgia after over a decade of delays and at a final cost nearing $33 billion. Vogtle’s challenges were systemic and were aggravated by its being the first plant operating under the NRC’s new 10 CFR Part 52 combined construction and operating licensing process. Cost overruns exposed the risk of fixed-cost, ratepayer-backed financing, schedule delays undermined confidence in megaproject execution, and its vertically integrated utility model relied heavily on balance sheet financing that most developers cannot replicate.
These legacy issues are what modularity promises to solve, but those promises have yet to be fully tested in the field.
Financing Realities: Nuclear Is Not Yet Plug-and-Play
Despite a clear alignment with long-term power needs, SMRs face persistent obstacles in project finance:
- Lack of ramping flexibility (nuclear units typically operate best at constant output) makes them less compatible with grid-following needs, complicating integration.
- Non-recourse finance structures—common for renewables—are largely unavailable due to technology risk and long build times.
- Investor appetite is still limited by the lack of demonstration projects and unknown regulatory timelines.
This makes balance sheet financing or sovereign-backed credit the only viable path forward for now, a reality that puts SMRs squarely in the domain of the largest utilities, tech companies, or public-private partnerships.
What Comes Next?
While still early in the adoption curve, SMRs and other nuclear innovations are clearly gaining traction among energy-intensive, carbon-constrained buyers. If the first generation of projects, like those under development with Google, Amazon, and Microsoft, can prove out cost, reliability, and regulatory predictability, they may unlock a new chapter in clean, firm power.
At Tangibl, we’re watching closely as nuclear transitions from a legacy liability to a strategic asset. We advise investors, developers, and offtakers on how to evaluate risk, structure long-duration supply agreements, and understand where nuclear fits within a diversified capacity plan.