Dhara P., ELR Staffer, Class of 2028

Fossil fuels continue to dominate the world’s energy use and greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions. Climate experts warn that if fossil fuels continue to dominate the energy market, we could experience catastrophic climate outcomes beyond sea level rise, extreme heatwaves, or the elimination of critical species; entire regions of the planet may become entirely uninhabitable. One of the main goals outlined in the Paris Agreement is to limit global temperature from climbing 1.5 to 2°C by 2050. To achieve this goal, the 194 parties to the Paris Agreement must decrease GHG emissions by 50% or more. Nuclear energy plays a key role in reducing and eliminating human-caused carbon dioxide—known as decarbonization—and transitioning away from fossil fuels.

Nuclear power contributes to over 20% of low-carbon electricity generation worldwide and about 9% of the world’s total energy generation. The United States leads the world’s nuclear electricity generation, with 94 commercial, large-scale nuclear reactors in operation as of February 2025. 

While large-scale reactors are widely reliable for the energy grid, they also consume large amounts of water for cooling, require regular radioactive waste management, and warrant complex decommissioning and remediation if the site shuts down. Traditional large-scale reactors are static assets; many large reactors are strategically located in areas with adequate demand for clean energy, grid capacity, and physical space to accommodate the size of the reactor(s). 

With the increasing demand for clean energy and the availability of nuclear power across a variety of economies, government-funded research and development, combined with private investment, have led to the development of small modular reactors (SMRs). The ADVANCE Act, signed into law in July 2024, requires the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to reduce licensing fee burdens, increase staffing for efficient reviews, and leverage the Department of Energy to incentivize prototype development. 

SMRs are designed for areas with smaller grids, water insecurity, and limited acreage that cannot fit traditional large reactors. SMRs generally use less water from communities than traditional large reactors, which underscores their need in communities that experience water shortages. Though SMRs boast a smaller water-use footprint, a Stanford study showed that SMRs may produce higher volumes of radioactive waste per unit of energy generated than large reactors. 

SMRs may fill the gap for communities that have difficulty accessing nuclear power from traditional large reactors. SMRs, as the name suggests, are modular: they can be shipped from the manufacturer to the site and subsequently installed without the lengthy construction logistics required for large reactors. SMRs have lower total project costs than large reactors, though the cost per kilowatt of energy is higher. Thus, SMRs are considered more affordable, efficient, customizable, and mobile compared to traditional large reactors. Industries reliant on fossil fuels may leverage SMRs by integrating them with other renewable sources or with fossil fuels, optimizing energy production and making it easier for them to move towards cleaner energy sustainably. 

However, gaps in the implementation of SMRs persist. Environmental justice scholars argue that, though SMRs offer many benefits, there are still energy justice blind spots to address. Federal governments or large corporations typically drive policies and shape SMR design. The federal government primarily oversees SMR implementation through policy agendas and regulations on construction, operations, and design certificates. As a product of this “top-down” approach, systemically marginalized groups–like indigenous communities– often remain excluded from energy conversations, especially those about renewable energy. When governments and corporations exclude these communities from the conversation, they fail to acknowledge the sidelining of their cultures and rights. 

Furthermore, marginalized communities have historically disproportionately borne the environmental and health risks from nearby radioactive waste disposal sites and uranium mining without equitable access to the energy generated. Integrating SMRs without community input sparks apprehension about resource control and community consent. Unlike traditional nuclear power plants, which require around-the-clock staff, SMR plants require less staff for maintenance and operations. SMRs present concerns that switching from traditional power plants to SMRs would reduce demand for local employment opportunities. 

Though SMRs may have a smaller environmental footprint and lower start-up costs than traditional large reactors, concerns are rising that reducing the financial risk to deploy these reactors, coupled with complex regulations and safety standards, will overwhelm regulators and cause them to overlook the negative effects these reactors have on communities in the name of energy efficiency, leading to fragmented accountability. 

Whether it is a traditional nuclear power plant or an SMR, implementers should focus on creating jobs locally, promoting equitable community consent and resource control through community engagement, and providing loans or grants to projects that prioritize serving marginalized communities. While SMRs offer a promising avenue for decarbonization, energy justice principles should guide the design, deployment, and operation.