Policy outcomes
How this issue is resolved shapes the rules voters live under.
The issue in plain English
Should the U.S. Expand Nuclear Power to Address Climate Change?
Nuclear power is the largest single source of carbon-free electricity in the United States, but the fleet is aging and new construction has proven slow and expensive. Supporters argue an expansion is essential to meeting climate goals, while critics question the cost, safety, and waste implications of betting on more reactors.
Why this matters
What the answer actually changes.
Representation
The arguments reveal who gets a stronger voice when the question is settled.
Trust
Whether the process feels fair influences how voters trust the outcome.
The arguments
Two sides of the debate.
The goal is not to decide for the voter. It is to make the strongest competing views easy to understand.
Supporters say
The case for expanding nuclear power
Proponents argue that deep decarbonization of the electricity sector is difficult without a large source of firm, low-carbon power. Nuclear plants run at a capacity factor of about 93%, far higher than wind or solar, and produce electricity around the clock regardless of weather. Lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions from nuclear are comparable to wind and lower than solar, and a single reactor site can supply gigawatts of power on a relatively small footprint. Supporters say new technologies, including small modular reactors and advanced designs cooled by gas, salt, or sodium, could reduce construction risk and shorten build times. They contend the IRA's tax credits and DOE demonstration funding will help scale these designs, preserve high-paying jobs at existing plants, and provide reliable power as coal units retire and electricity demand rises from data centers, manufacturing, and vehicle electrification.
Critics say
The case against expanding nuclear power
Critics point to the Vogtle project as evidence that new reactors are too slow and expensive to build at the pace climate goals require. They argue that wind, solar, batteries, and energy efficiency have fallen sharply in cost and can be deployed faster, and that subsidies directed to nuclear could deliver more emissions reductions if spent on renewables and grid upgrades. Opponents also raise safety and waste concerns. The United States has no permanent federal repository for spent nuclear fuel, which is stored on-site at reactors across the country. Skeptics cite the legacy of accidents at Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima, and question whether small modular reactors—most of which are not yet commercially operating in the U.S.—will prove economical at scale or address concerns about uranium supply chains and proliferation.
Key facts
Numbers behind the question.
18.6%
Share of U.S. electricity generated by nuclear in 2023
U.S. Energy Information Administration
~93%
Average capacity factor of U.S. nuclear reactors
U.S. Energy Information Administration
94 reactors
Commercial reactors operating at 54 plants in 28 states as of 2024
U.S. Energy Information Administration
>$17 billion
Cost overrun on the two new Vogtle reactors in Georgia
Georgia Public Service Commission filings
Context
Where U.S. nuclear power stands today
Ninety-four commercial reactors at 54 plants produced about 18.6% of U.S. electricity in 2023 and roughly 47% of the country's carbon-free power, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. The fleet is aging, with the average reactor about 42 years old, and only two new large reactors—Units 3 and 4 at Georgia's Plant Vogtle—have come online in recent decades, finishing about seven years late and more than $17 billion over the original $14 billion budget. Federal policy has shifted toward supporting the industry. The 2022 Inflation Reduction Act created production tax credits for existing reactors and new advanced designs, and the Department of Energy has funded demonstration projects for small modular reactors (SMRs). Several states have also extended licenses for existing plants or lifted prior moratoriums on new construction.
Continue exploring
Keep going.
Issue brief
Should the Electoral College Be Abolished?
Americans remain divided over whether to keep the constitutional system that has chosen presidents since 1789.
Issue brief
Did Reaganomics deliver on its promises?
Four decades on, the economic record of the Reagan era remains a contested benchmark in American policy debates.
Issue brief
Should Citizens United be overturned?
More than a decade after the Supreme Court reshaped campaign finance, Americans remain divided over whether the ruling should stand.
Issue brief
Should the federal minimum wage rise to $15 an hour?
Lawmakers and economists continue to debate whether more than doubling the $7.25 federal floor would lift workers out of poverty or cost jobs.