Nuclear energy is making a comeback, but it's not without its hurdles. The industry is experiencing a surge of interest, with investors pouring money into nuclear startups focused on smaller reactors. In late 2025 alone, these startups secured a staggering $1.1 billion in funding. This optimism stems from the hope that these smaller reactors can avoid the pitfalls of their larger predecessors. But is this a realistic expectation? Let's dive in.
Traditional nuclear power plants are colossal undertakings. Consider the newest reactors in the U.S., Vogtle 3 and 4 in Georgia. These giants require tens of thousands of tons of concrete, use fuel assemblies that are 14 feet tall, and generate over 1 gigawatt of electricity each. However, they also faced significant delays, running eight years behind schedule and exceeding their budget by over $20 billion.
These innovative nuclear startups are aiming to circumvent these issues by reducing reactor size. The idea is simple: need more power? Just add more reactors. They believe smaller reactors can be mass-produced, leading to cost reductions as companies refine their manufacturing processes.
But here's where it gets controversial... Experts are still assessing the extent of these potential benefits. Today's nuclear startups are banking on these advantages being substantial.
However, manufacturing isn't a walk in the park. Tesla's experience with the Model 3 production highlights the challenges, even within the established automotive industry. U.S. nuclear startups face an even steeper climb.
"I have a number of friends who work in supply chain for nuclear, and they can rattle off like five to ten materials that we just don’t make in the United States," says Milo Werner, a general partner at DCVC. "We have to buy them overseas. We’ve forgotten how to make them.”
Werner, with her experience at Tesla and FitBit, understands manufacturing complexities. She now co-founds the NextGen Industry Group, dedicated to promoting new technologies in manufacturing.
According to Werner, companies of any size face two main hurdles: capital and human capital. Fortunately, the nuclear industry is currently flush with investment. The second challenge, however, is more daunting.
"We haven’t really built any industrial facilities in 40 years in the United States," Werner notes. This has led to a loss of essential skills and experience.
And this is the part most people miss... The U.S. lacks a sufficient number of people experienced in both factory construction and operations. Werner emphasizes the need for a full staff of seasoned manufacturing professionals, from machine operators to CFOs.
On a positive note, Werner observes that many startups are building initial product versions near their technical teams. This trend is pulling manufacturing back to the U.S., fostering a cycle of improvement.
To maximize the benefits of mass manufacturing, startups should begin small and scale up. Modularity is crucial for investors, allowing companies to gather manufacturing data early on. This data can demonstrate improvement over time, reassuring investors.
But be warned... The advantages of mass manufacturing don't materialize overnight. While companies often forecast cost reductions based on manufacturing learning, the process can take longer than anticipated. Werner points out that it can take years, even a decade, to achieve these gains.
What are your thoughts on the future of nuclear energy? Do you believe smaller reactors are the answer? Share your opinions in the comments below!
Tim De Chant is a senior climate reporter at TechCrunch.
