As the United States looks to expand nuclear power to meet soaring electricity demand, a less visible constraint is moving into focus: uranium fuel.
While policy momentum and private investment are flowing toward both existing plants and next-generation reactors, the supply chain that delivers uranium fuel is strained, geopolitically exposed, and slow to scale.
Recent industry discussions highlight that without swift action, fuel availability could limit the pace and security of America’s nuclear power growth.
Rising electricity demand fuels nuclear ambitions
The push for nuclear energy is driven by structural shifts in the US economy. The rise of energy-intensive AI data centres, the reshoring of manufacturing, and the electrification of transportation and buildings are creating unprecedented demand for reliable, always-on power.
Nuclear energy, with its low-carbon footprint and consistent output, is increasingly seen as a solution capable of meeting these needs.
However, expanding nuclear power isn’t just about building reactors – it also requires a robust supply of uranium fuel, which recent analyses suggest is far from guaranteed.
Insights from the nuclear fuel cycle roundtable
Recently, over 100 leaders from the nuclear fuel sector, including utility executives, reactor designers, government regulators, and industry experts, convened in Arlington, Virginia, for the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Roundtable.
Organised by Stanford University’s STEER initiative, part of the Precourt Institute for Energy and SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, the meeting examined barriers to uranium fuel production and explored strategies to strengthen the supply chain.
The findings highlight both immediate and long-term challenges for uranium fuel. The roundtable emphasised that while investment interest in nuclear reactors is high, fuel supply constraints could undermine these ambitions.
The fragile global uranium fuel supply chain
Producing uranium fuel involves four major steps: mining uranium ore, converting it into a gaseous form for enrichment, increasing the concentration of fissile U-235, and fabricating fuel rods for reactors.
Each stage presents vulnerabilities:
- Mining: Four countries dominate global uranium production: Kazakhstan, Namibia, Australia, and Canada. The US produces only a small fraction due to higher costs and lower-grade ore. While mining risks are mitigated by friendly partners, reliance on foreign sources creates strategic exposure. Kazakhstan, the largest producer, is also pursuing autonomy from Russia and China, creating potential opportunities for US engagement.
- Conversion: Only five facilities worldwide convert mined uranium into gas for enrichment. Market volatility has led to repeated shutdowns and capacity uncertainty, shrinking global stockpiles. Without long-term contracts guaranteeing demand, suppliers are reluctant to expand.
- Enrichment: Almost half of global enrichment capacity is in Russia. Before the US ban on Russian uranium imports in 2024, about 30% of US-enriched uranium came from Russia, highlighting a significant geopolitical risk. This concentration raises concerns over national security and long-term reliability.
- Fabrication: The US is self-sufficient in producing ceramic fuel pellets and assembling fuel rods, but experts at the roundtable stressed that national and economic security would benefit from domestic capability across all supply chain stages.
Policy actions and investment hurdles
Government initiatives are beginning to address these vulnerabilities. Recently, the Department of Energy awarded $2.7bn in contracts to domestic enrichment companies for conventional and advanced reactors. These investments signal growing recognition of uranium fuel as a strategic priority.
Yet challenges persist. Utilities are hesitant to commit to long-term fuel contracts at current high prices, while suppliers cannot justify new facilities without guaranteed demand.
Roundtable participants suggested that government entities could act as buyers of last resort, ensuring revenue certainty and unlocking private investment.
Geopolitical uncertainty also complicates planning. Waivers or workarounds could weaken the effectiveness of the US ban on Russian enriched uranium, and investors remain concerned about the long-term durability of such policies.
Next-generation reactors amplify fuel pressures
The rise of advanced nuclear reactors – often referred to as Gen IV – adds another layer of complexity.
These reactors require higher levels of uranium enrichment, meaning each ton of fuel requires significantly more mined and processed uranium than conventional reactors.
While advanced fuels produce electricity longer, initial demand could strain mining, conversion, and enrichment capacity, potentially driving up costs for existing reactors.
New fuel forms also bring technical hurdles. Limited commercial experience and low initial fabrication yields could increase costs, while access to test reactors remains scarce. Currently, only one operating Gen IV reactor exists worldwide, in China.
Standardising fuel specifications and closer coordination between reactor designers and manufacturers could help accelerate the learning curve and reduce early inefficiencies.
Strengthening uranium fuel security
The Nuclear Fuel Cycle Roundtable concluded that reducing technological, economic, and policy uncertainty is essential to secure uranium fuel for both conventional and advanced reactors.
Key strategies include:
- Coordinating international partnerships and fuel standards
- Clarifying and enforcing geopolitical policies, including import bans
- Investing in research and development for cost-effective fuel manufacturing
- Aligning public and private stakeholders to support long-term capacity expansion
Uranium fuel, once a background concern, is now central to the success of the US nuclear power renaissance.
Ensuring a reliable supply is critical to expanding nuclear energy safely, affordably, and at the pace required to meet the country’s growing electricity needs.
