The Sizewell A and B nuclear power stations, operated by Electricite de France SA (EDF), in Sizewell, UK, on Friday, Jan. 26, 2024. Photographer: Chris Ratcliffe/Bloomberg via Getty Images
Bloomberg | Bloomberg | Getty Images
LONDON — Surging power demand has reignited interest in nuclear energy, but vast capital requirements and an uncertain political and regulatory climate raise questions about the sector’s fiscal capacity.
AI and data centers are the “canary in the coal mine,” World Nuclear Association Director General Sama Bilbao y León told CNBC ahead of the conference. “We are finally recognizing that the demand of electricity and energy in general is only going to increase. But the reality is that all sectors of the economy are going to need more electricity.”
In addition to AI, applications range from nuclear energy for the metallurgical industry, which is looking to electrify as fast as possible, to the chemical, maritime and shipping sectors, León said.
The question of how to meet the world’s growing power needs took center stage as chief executives of the world’s biggest uranium and nuclear energy firms, experts and investors gathered for the annual World Nuclear Association (WNA) symposium at the Royal Lancaster London hotel last week.
Opening remarks from Dr Sama Bilbao y León, director general of the World Nuclear Association, at the 2025 conference.
World Nuclear Association
Kicking off discussions at the conference, Leon told attendees in her welcoming speech that the event is a “working summit” looking to move past mere conversation.
Investments in the nuclear value chain through 2025 are projected to increase to $2.2 trillion, according to Morgan Stanley estimates, up from a 2024 forecast of $1.5 trillion. That level of investment raises questions over the role of government, banks and other financial players in providing sufficient fiscal capacity.
Investment challenges
Nuclear energy is said to provide a more reliable, 24/7 energy source compared to renewables, which can be more intermittent. The development of small modular reactors (SMRs) provides a more scalable power solution due to their size. According to the IEA, the payback period of a SMR investment is half the usual 20 to 30-year period for larger scale projects.
But SMRs have yet to reach the commercial stage, and most planned projects won’t come online until 2030. While a significant amount of money is being pledged, there have been no new large-scale nuclear projects in the U.S. in the last 15 years.
“The first positive story with respect to the financial sector with regards to nuclear, is that they are open to financing nuclear,” Mahesh Goenka, founder of market and commercial advisory firm Old Economy, told CNBC on the sidelines of WNA. “That was not the story a few years ago when a lot of banks didn’t want to touch nuclear projects. That has changed. The question now remains, do they have the risk appetite to finance nuclear projects?”
Challenges include over-running budgets, the late delivery of projects due to long construction lead times, the technical complexity of initiatives and difficulties obtaining licenses.
Goenka compared the West to China, where financial institutions are happy to finance nuclear projects because they can be delivered on time and on budget — leading to better margins than on other infrastructure projects. Meanwhile, the West has not built many new reactors in a very long time, so the learning rate is not quite there yet, he said.
Nearly all of the nuclear generating capacity in the U.S. comes from reactors built between 1967 and 1990, with no new constructions until 2013 when work started on the Vogtle units in Georgia. Meanwhile, the last plant to be built in the U.K. was Sizewell B, which started operating in 1995.
Nuclear investments are “inherently political projects,” said Mark Muldowney, managing director of energy, resources and infrastructure at BNP Paribas. He noted that, while clients are much more receptive to the investments, uncertainty over cost and build time remains.
“We are many years away from the situation in which techniques like project finance can be used by themselves to finance large nuclear [projects],” he said during a panel discussion.
“It’s not going to be the contractors, even if they were willing to, and by and large they aren’t, they will be bankrupted by some of the risks that sit with these projects. So it’s either going to be a government, or it’s going to be the electricity consumers of that country, and in some places that could be intermediated by utilities.”
Government backstop still required
Nuclear power plants are among the most capital intensive assets. The U.K., for example, has greenlit the construction of a massive two-reactor nuclear power station on the Suffolk coast that will generate 3.2 gigawatts of electricity — enough, the government says, to provide power for the equivalent of 6 million homes. But costs of the majority government-owned project have jumped to £38 billion, exceeding an initial target of £20 billion.
Trevor Myburgh, senior executive in corporate finance advisory at Eskom, stressed that the private sector cannot be a “silver bullet” and solve the problem of financing nuclear energy.
Public private partnerships are going to be “crucial” in the development of nuclear, particularly in any emerging economy, Myburgh said during a panel discussion on Wednesday.
While some European countries such as Switzerland — which currently has a ban on the construction of any new nuclear plants but has drafted legislation to lift this motion — and Germany remain adverse to nuclear energy, other governments such as those of the U.K., France, and the U.S. have leaned into the energy source.
Earlier this year, U.S. President Donald Trump signed a number of executive orders designed to fast track the development of nuclear reactors and quadruple nuclear generating capacity by 2025.
Such actions from Trump’s administration have put positive nuclear energy policies “on steroids,” said Uranium Royalty Corp CEO Scott Melbye.
“What we’re seeing are really concrete measures being taken by this administration to spur not only the building of small modular reactors, advanced reactors and large reactors, but [also] in the fuel cycle,” Melbye told WNA attendees.
Investor Arfa Karani noted the growing interest from the investor community to find opportunities with startups, particularly those that supply nuclear-adjacent tech.
The U.K. government, in particular has adopted a more “hands-on” approach in helping founders understand how to invest in clean tech, she said.
“The regulation has to figure itself out. It’s no longer a question of, where do we get the capital from? ….because now suddenly it’s become a matter of national security and global power and global dominance,” she told CNBC, adding that commitment Stateside to funding AI and nuclear has meant that “all the insolvable problems suddenly becomes solvable which is very exciting for nuclear.”
Daimler Truck AG CEO Karin Rådström hopped on LinkedIn today and dropped some absolutely wild pro-hydrogen talking points, using words like “emotional” and “inspiring” while making some pretty heady claims about the viability and economics of hydrogen. The rant is doubly embarrassing for another reason: the company’s hydrogen trucks are more than 100 million miles behind Volvo’s electric semis.
UPDATE 22NOV2025: Daimler just delivered five new hydrogen semis for trials.
While it might be hard to imagine why a company as seemingly smart as Daimler Truck AG continues to invest in hydrogen when study after study has shut down its viability as a transport fuel, it makes sense when you consider that the Kuwait Investment Authority (KIA) holds approximately 5% of Daimler and parent company Mercedes’ shares.
That’s not a trivial stake. Indeed, 5% is enough to make KIA one of the few actors with both the access and the motivation to shape conversations about Daimler’s long-term technology bets, and as a major oil-producing country whose economy would undoubtedly take a hit if oil demand plummeted, any future fuel that’s measured molecules instead of electrons isn’t just a concept for the Kuwaiti economy: it’s a lifeline.
In that context, the push to make hydrogen seem like an attractive decarbonization option makes more sense. So, instead of giving Daimler’s hydrogen propaganda team yet another platform to try and convince people that hydrogen might make for a viable transport fuel eventually by giving five Mercedes-Benz GenH2 semi trucks to its customers at Hornbach, Reber Logistik, Teva Germany with its brand ratiopharm, Rhenus, and DHL Supply Chain, I’m just going to re-post Daimler CEO Karin Rådström’s comments from Hydrogen Week.
For some reason – posts about hydrogen always stir up emotions. I think hydrogen (not “instead of” but “in parallel to” electric) plays a role in the decarbonization of heavy duty transport in Europe for three reasons:
If we would go “electric only” we need to get the electric grid to a level where we can build enough charging stations for the 6 million trucks in Europe. It will take many years and be incredibly expensive. A hydrogen infrastructure in parallel will be less expensive and you don’t need a grid connection to build it, putting 2000 H2 stations in Europe is relatively easy.
Europe will rely on import of energy, and it could be transported into Europe from North Africa and Middle East as liquid hydrogen. Better to use that directly as fuel than to make electricity out of it.
Some use cases of our customers are better suited for fuel cells than electric trucks – the fuel cell truck will allow higher payload and longer ranges.
At European Hydrogen Week, I saw firsthand the energy and ambition behind Europe’s net-zero goals. It’s inspiring—but also a wake-up call. We’re not moving fast enough.
What we need:
Large-scale hydrogen production and transport to Europe
A robust refueling network that goes beyond AFIR
And real political support to make it happen – we need smart, efficient regulation that clears the path instead of adding hurdles.
To show what’s possible, we brought our Mercedes-Benz GenH2 to Brussels. From the end of 2026, we’ll deploy a small series of 100 fuel cell trucks to customers.
Let’s build the infrastructure, the momentum, and the partnerships to make zero-emission transport a reality. 🚛 and let’s try to avoid some of the mistakes that we see now while scaling up electric. And let’s stop the debate about “either or”. We need both.
Daimler CEO at European Hydrogen Week; via LinkedIn.
At the risk of sounding “emotional,” Rådström’s claims that building a hydrogen infrastructure in parallel will be less expensive than building an electrical infrastructure, and that “you don’t need a grid connection to build it,” are objectively false.
Next, the claim that, “Europe will rely on import of energy, and it could be transported into Europe from North Africa and Middle East as liquid hydrogen” (emphasis mine), is similarly dubious – especially when faced with the fact that, in 2023, wind and solar already supplied about 27–30% of EU electricity.
Unless, of course, Mercedes’ solid-state batteries don’t work (and she would know more about that than I would, as a mere blogger).
Electrek’s Take
Via Mahle.
As you can imagine, the Karin Rådström post generated quite a few comments at the Electrek watercooler. “Insane to claim that building hydrogen stations would be cheaper than building chargers,” said one fellow writer. “I’m fine with hydrogen for long haul heavy duty, but lying to get us there is idiotic.”
Another comment I liked said, “(Rådström) says that chargers need to be on the grid – you already have a grid, and it’s everywhere!”
At the end of the day, I have to echo the words of one of Mercedes’ storied engineering partners and OEM suppliers, Mahle, whose Chairman, Arnd Franz, who that building out a hydrogen infrastructure won’t be possible without “blue” H made from fossil fuels as recently as last April, and maybe that’s what this is all about: fossil fuel vehicles are where Daimler makes its biggest profits (for now), and muddying the waters and playing up this idea that we’re in some sort of “messy middle” transition makes it just easy enough for a reluctant fleet manager to say, “maybe next time” when it comes to EVs.
We, and the planet, will suffer for such cowardice – but maybe that’s too much malicious intent to ascribe to Ms. Rådström. Maybe this is just a simple “Hanlon’s razor” scenario and there’s nothing much else to read into it.
Let us know what you think of Rådström’s pro-hydrogen comments, and whether or not Daimler’s shareholders should be concerned about the quality of the research behind their CEO’s public posts, in the comments section at the bottom of the page.
SOURCE | IMAGES: Karin Rådström, via LinkedIn.
If you drive an electric vehicle, make charging at home fast, safe, and convenient with a Level 2 charger installed by Qmerit.As the nation’s most trusted EV charger installation network, Qmerit connects you with licensed, background-checked electricians who specialize in EV charging. You’ll get a quick online estimate, upfront pricing, and installation backed by Qmerit’s nationwide quality guarantee. Their pros follow the highest safety standards so you can plug in at home with total peace of mind.
Audi embraced its future in China with the launch of a new Chinese market electric sub-brand called AUDI that ditched the iconic “four rings” logo in favor of four capital letters – but one thing this latest concept hasn’t ditched is the brand’s traditionally teutonic long-roof design language.
Co-developed with Audi’s Chinese production partner, SAIC, the all-new AUDI E SUV concept is based on the PPE (Premium Platform Electric) skateboard, and is only the second model introduced by the company’s domestic sub-brand — which was all-new itself just one year ago.
“The AUDI E SUV concept celebrates the new AUDI brand’s first anniversary following the E concept’s debut in Guangzhou (2024),” said Fermín Soneira, CEO of the Audi and SAIC cooperation, at the E SUV’s unveiling. “It showcases an unmistakable AUDI design language that gives the SUV a prestigious, progressive stance — with no compromise between sporty aesthetics and interior roominess or versatility. This concept embodies our vision for premium electric mobility by fusing Audi’s engineering heritage with digital innovation to fulfill our commitment in China.”
As a vehicle, the AUDI E SUV concept promises to handle “like an Audi,” and is powered by a pair of electric motors good for a combined 500 kW (~670 hp), good enough to get the big crossover from 0-100 km/h (62 mph) in about five seconds. Those efficient motors are fed electrons by a 109 kWh battery riding on AUDI’s 800V Advanced Digital Platform system architecture, and can allegedly add 320 km (~200 miles) of range in under 10 minutes at a high-powered DC fast charging station.
Advertisement – scroll for more content
If you’re a fan of self-driving tech, the AUDI 360 Driving Assist System is the AUDI E SUV concept is for you, with features that, “enable a relaxed and safe driving experience – on highways, in dense city traffic, and during assisted parking.”
If you’re considering going solar, it’s always a good idea to get quotes from a few installers. To make sure you find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. It has hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high-quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use, and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and share your phone number with them.
Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisors to help you every step of the way. Get started here.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.
Unless they have vivid memories of guys like Nigel Mansell, Fernando Alonso, and Sebastian Vettel driving the wheels off a screaming, Renault-powered Formula 1 car, it’s tough to get an American to care about a new Renault — but Nissan’s renewed willingness to work with its old partners means we may yet get the new Trafic E-Tech here. (!)
And, in case you’re thinking Renault just got lucky with the styling, you can stop thinking that. The official press release rambles on and on (and on) about the Trafic E-Tech’s styling, going in depth into such apparently mundane topics as the quality of the grain on the new Trafic E-Tech van’s black plastic bumpers:
The front bumper comprises a large section with a black grained finish. Each constituent part was the focus of extensive design work, in order to showcase the overall appearance while avoiding a bulky look. The black grained plastic of the lower bumper section features a laser pattern, similar to Scenic E-Tech electric. This attention to finish is a signature of the new Renault design language.
RENAULT
Nearly every paragraph of the release is like this. Here’s a section about the shape of the van’s windshield that reads, “the futuristic style of Trafic can also be seen in its visor-like windscreen, made up of the windscreen itself and the two side windows.”
Advertisement – scroll for more content
The van’s designers care, in other words — they care so freakin’ much about this niche product that they probably doodle it, idly, in the margins of their notebooks when they’re supposed to be listening in whatever staff meeting they just got dragged into. And that level of caring made me think of a once-and-future Renault partner who could use that level of caring in its North American product line.
Nissan used to care so much about its product, in fact, that it once did something that seems unthinkable in today’s modular-construction, Ultium electric-skateboard-platform EV age. And what made that “something” all the more astonishing was that they didn’t do this for the six-figure GT-R or some 370Z halo car – they did it for the Cube.
That decision speaks to an absolutely massive commitment. A commitment to build two sets of stampings, two sets of expensive window shapes, two sets of stuff I probably haven’t even considered, and it was all done for what? To eliminate a blind spot?
Can you imagine the amount of sheer, epic, truckloads of f*cks you would have to give in order to sit in a boardroom and argue that your company should spend millions of dollars in tooling and certification and assembly line re-jiggering because someone, somewhere else, might have a bit of a blind spot when they look over their right shoulder? (!)
Heck, they wouldn’t have to do much more than change the logo on the front and make the infotainment graphics red and white instead of gray and yellow and they’d be there.
And that new-age Nissan Quest based on the Renault Trafic? It would offer up to 280 miles of European cycle range and motivate itself around US roads with a ~200 hp (150 kW) electric motor pushing out 345 Nm (~255 lb-ft) of off-the line grunt — which isn’t too far off Nissan’s last V8-powered van offering!
Great styling, plenty of room, peppy performance, and zero emissions? I’d take a look at it, for sure — and, since there aren’t any other electric van options in the US*, I think a lot of other people would, too.
NOTE: I know the Tesla Model X is basically an electric minivan, but a) the bros hate it when you call their Model X a minivan, and b) the doors are stupid.
If you’re considering going solar, it’s always a good idea to get quotes from a few installers. To make sure you find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. It has hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high-quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use, and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and share your phone number with them.
Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisors to help you every step of the way. Get started here.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.