Public perception of nuclear power is skewed by highly visible but rare disasters. A data-driven risk analysis reveals it is one of the safest energy sources. Fossil fuels, through constant air pollution, cause millions of deaths annually, making them orders of magnitude more dangerous.

Related Insights

The growing support for nuclear power is compared to the rapid sentiment shift on gay marriage, driven by younger generations. As older activists, whose opposition was rooted in Cold War-era fears of nuclear weapons, fade away, a new generation sees nuclear energy as a key climate solution, creating a much more favorable political environment.

While solar panels are inexpensive, the total system cost to achieve 100% reliable, 24/7 coverage is massive. These "hidden costs"—enormous battery storage, transmission build-outs, and grid complexity—make the final price of a full solution comparable to nuclear. This is why hyperscalers are actively pursuing nuclear for their data centers.

The massive energy consumption of AI has made tech giants the most powerful force advocating for new power sources. Their commercial pressure is finally overcoming decades of regulatory inertia around nuclear energy, driving rapid development and deployment of new reactor technologies to meet their insatiable demand.

Standard metrics like the Air Quality Index (AQI) are abstract and fail to motivate change. Economist Michael Greenstone created the Air Quality Life Index (AQLI), which translates pollution into a tangible, personal metric—years of life expectancy lost—making the data hard to ignore and spurring action.

The key driver for military adoption of micro-reactors isn't cost savings, but eliminating the vulnerability of fuel supply chains. Fuel logistics accounted for 50% of casualties in Afghanistan. This frames the product's value around mission assurance and risk reduction, a more compelling proposition than simple energy provision.

Poorer countries, unburdened by legacy fossil fuel infrastructure, have a unique advantage. They can bypass the dirty development path of wealthy nations and build their energy systems directly on cheaper, more efficient renewable technologies, potentially achieving energy security and economic growth faster.

Contrary to expectations, surging power demand from data centers and semiconductor manufacturing in Japan and South Korea is not boosting LNG imports. Instead, national policies are prioritizing renewables and nuclear to meet this new demand, effectively capping growth for natural gas in these key established markets.

Regulating technology based on anticipating *potential* future harms, rather than known ones, is a dangerous path. This 'precautionary principle,' common in Europe, stifles breakthrough innovation. If applied historically, it would have blocked transformative technologies like the automobile or even nuclear power, which has a better safety record than oil.

Contrary to popular belief, the NRC is no longer an insurmountable barrier. Recent bipartisan legislation under both Biden and Trump has modernized the agency, changing its mandate beyond pure safety and setting 18-month decision deadlines. The political climate for licensing new reactors has dramatically improved in just the last few years.

Temasek views the energy transition not as a binary switch from brown to green, but as a gradual progression through many intermediate shades. This pragmatic approach justifies investing in transitional fuels like LNG and advanced technologies like nuclear fusion, acknowledging the need for energy security and affordability.