Nuclear Energy Revival: Risk, Resilience and the Talent Revolution

Nuclear Energy Revival: Risk, Resilience and the Talent Revolution
December 10, 2025 14 mins

Nuclear Energy Revival: Risk, Resilience and the Talent Revolution

Nuclear Energy Revival: Risk, Resilience and the Talent Revolution

Nuclear is a critical pillar of the energy transition, addressing the dual challenges of decarbonization and surging demand. Success will hinge on managing risks across new generation technologies, regulatory shifts, financial model changes, supply chain challenges — and the acute war for talent.

Key Takeaways
  1. Future nuclear growth necessitates a coordinated three-track strategy: Extend life of existing reactors to meet near-term load growth, deploy next-gen GW-scale units to expand long-term baseload capacity, and industrialize small and advanced modular reactors.
  2. A demographic shift looms over the nuclear industry as retirements rise, creating acute skill gaps. Strategic workforce planning is key to meet expansion goals and secure expertise for operations, construction and manufacturing.
  3. Integrated risk management embedded throughout the project lifecycle — supported by expert risk advisors and engineers — is critical to mitigate construction risks, enhance operational performance, and maintain both stakeholder and investor confidence.

The nuclear resurgence is underway — fueled by energy security concerns, net-zero ambitions, and unprecedented power demands from data centers and other energy-intensive infrastructure. Today, around 70 reactors are under construction globally,and investment in small modular reactors (SMRs) is accelerating. The industry is poised for record generation and transformative growth by 2050 — the deadline set by COP28 to triple nuclear capacity.

Despite momentum, headwinds remain. Nuclear’s global energy share has dropped to 9%, marking the lowest point in 40 years.2 By contrast, solar and wind are being added at rates more than a hundred times faster than nuclear capacity.3 Fleet aging is a critical operational and financial issue amid exponential load growth: Two-thirds of reactors worldwide are now older than 31 years and 48 net reactor units have come offline since 2005.4

Careful planning, proactive risk management and strategic investment are some of the essentials to help manage the sector’s challenges:

  • With fleets aging, the risk of wear-out failures rises per the expectant “bathtub curve” — unless proactively managed.
  • Challenging the first-of-a-kind (FOAK) default fallacy is important to secure the insurability and bankability of SMRs.
  • Before fuel loading can begin, stakeholders in the construction phase must align on risk allocation, indemnities and insurance.
  • People remain at the heart of nuclear’s progress — but with an aging workforce, tight supply of skilled candidates and intense competition, talent pipelines risk running dry as demand surges.

Nuclear development is more urgent with energy security under threat. Recent geopolitical shocks, such as the spike in gas and electricity prices after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, exposed the fragility of energy systems reliant on limited sources. Scaling nuclear power offers a pathway to greater market stability and long-term energy resilience.

Below, we provide a blueprint to manage risk and enable progress in nuclear investments across four pillars: SMR industrialization, life extension, project delivery, and workforce retention and attraction.

165%

Annual data center demand is expected to reach 945 terawatt hours by 2030 — a 165% increase and equivalent to Japan’s total electricity consumption today.

Source: International Energy Agency

Quote icon

This is the most promising period for nuclear development in the past 25 years. A significant shift in public perception that nuclear power is a reliable, zero-emissions solution has been a critical step to meet energy security and greenhouse gas reduction goals.

Brian DeBruin
Managing Director, Natural Resources/Power & Renewables, United States

Trend 1: Challenge the FOAK Fallacy in SMRs

SMRs can replace decommissioned coal stations and serve a broad spectrum of users — from isolated communities to industrial hubs — making them ideal for decarbonization and brownfield deployment. Their modular architecture enables phased deployment, aligning capital expenditure with near-term load forecasts to reduce upfront financial risk. But to realize their full potential, developers must prioritize repeatability, standardization and proactive risk management.

  Large Reactors Large Reactors (Advanced) Small Modular Reactors Microreactors
Timeline Since 1950s (current fleet) Deployed recently In development In development
Footprint (km2) 6 Varies 0.2 <0.004
Electrical Capacity (MW) 1,000+ 400-1,400 20-300 <20
EPZ (km) 16 0.24-16 0.311 <0.311
Coolant Water Water, gas, metal, salt Water, gas, metal, salt Water, gas, metal, salt
Control Approach Active Mostly passive Mostly passive Mostly passive
End Products Electricity, heat Electricity, heat, steam Electricity, heat, steam Electricity, heat, steam
Applications Base load electrical power Base load, demand response, industrial electricity, industrial processes such as hydrogen production Base load, demand response, industrial electricity, industrial processes such as hydrogen production Power for remote locations, mobile backup power, maritime shipping, mining, military, disaster relief, hydrogen production
Customers Large utilities Mostly large utilities with some associated industries Utilities, municipalities, industry Military, municipalities, industry
Cost Range $5-9 billion Mixed $800 million-3 billion $49-86 million
Scalability Adding new reactors is difficult Mixed Designed to add new reactors as demand increases Designed to add new reactors as demand increases

Source: The Energy Transition Institute

Only a handful of SMRs are operational today — in Russia and China — while progress on new-build construction projects is gaining traction in the U.S., Canada and Argentina. Limited operational track records, alongside high capital costs, the volume of competing designs and regulatory uncertainty, continue to challenge insurability and investor confidence. To be widely deployed, small and advanced modular reactors must achieve a competitive levelized cost of electricity — estimates vary from $60/MWh to $140/MWh. Achieving this will depend on standardization and serial factory manufacturing.

Many view SMR projects as FOAK by default, but this is not always accurate. A significant number of leading SMR programs adapt proven Gen III and Gen III+ reactor designs with lower output to reduce technological and execution risk. Using established operational data and regulatory precedents helps streamline deployment and accelerate project maturity.

Even the classification of Sodium-Cooled Fast Reactors (SFRs) as FOAK belies their historical context. In the U.S., SFR technology dates back to the Experimental Breeder Reactor II (1964–1994) and the Fast Flux Test Facility (1982–1992). France, Russia and Japan have also operated SFR prototypes for decades. While the concept isn’t new, SFRs have yet to be deployed commercially at scale.

Comprehensive insurable risk breakdowns conducted in collaboration with consultants and engineering teams can help secure design insurability and accelerate deployment.

Quote icon

Nuclear continues to face risk capital constraints, so it’s crucial to rethink traditional solutions. Simultaneously, there is a surge of interest from new carriers exploring entry into the class. This has the potential to diversify risk capital sources and reshape the market’s competitive dynamics.

Sam Beaver
Power Leader, Global Broking Center
What good looks like:
  1. Integrate risk consulting early in the design process to secure insurability and lower operational insurance costs through loss prevention best practice, backed by site analytics.
  2. Identify and close coverage gaps through thoughtful design features, and the integration of redundancy and contractual risk-sharing mechanisms.
  3. Adopt a standardized bill of materials and building information modeling (BIM) to provide insurers with evidence of proven processes and predictable outcomes.
  4. Strengthen supply chain resilience by partnering with suppliers using robust quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) telemetry.
  5. Prepare for operational complexities with proactive risk financing for in-transit modules and staged commissioning across multi-module sites.

Trend 2: Extend Existing Assets Safely to Meet Near-Term Exponential Load Growth

Extending the life of existing nuclear energy assets is a relatively fast and cost-effective way to maintain clean baseload power. Refurbishments like retubing, heavy-component replacement and digital instrumentation upgrades can add 30-35 years to reactor lifespans, doubling their value and avoiding the emissions and costs of new builds.

But nuclear life extension can introduce risks. For example, the permanent closure of the Crystal River and San Onofre plants in the U.S. in 2013 was linked to structural and equipment issues.

Updated safety guidance, regulatory reforms and financial incentives are part of a recent push to support long-term operation (LTO) of nuclear power plants in the U.S., Japan and Europe. Nuclear stakeholders can secure LTO through periodic safety reviews, probabilistic risk assessments and surveillance techniques.

What good looks like:
  1. Use fleet-level risk registers to monitor vulnerabilities, like corrosion, embrittlement and fatigue, and integrate probabilistic risk assessments to guide maintenance and investment decisions.
  2. Prioritize long-term asset integrity over short-term savings, as deferred maintenance can lead to costly failures and premature shutdowns.
  3. Transition from manual, preventive maintenance to technology-enabled predictive approaches using digital twins, AI and machine learning tools, supported by scalable platforms and risk-informed scheduling.
  4. Ensure that validated data, sensor fidelity and predictive accuracy meet regulatory and operational thresholds for safe decision making.
  5. Draw on global portfolio insights and best practices from your insurance broker’s risk engineers.

67%

Around 67% of the world’s nuclear reactors are over 30 years old.

Source: International Atomic Energy Agency

Aging doesn’t mean obsolete. With the right mix of engineering, policy and digital innovation, the global nuclear fleet can remain a cornerstone of clean energy for decades to come.

Trend 3: Strengthen Project Delivery Before Fuel Loading

Building new nuclear projects remains a formidable challenge. High capital costs, complex and shifting regulations, supply chain disruptions and skilled labor shortages complicate delivery, while securing licensing can slow project inception.5

Aligning risk allocation, indemnities and insurance can lay the groundwork for successful construction — important as most value is lost (or won) before fuel loading.

What good looks like:
  1. Map critical nuclear shipments and their associated legal frameworks (e.g., international conventions, national laws and terms of shipping) that will determine cargo transit liabilities.
  2. Clearly define testing and commissioning (T&C) phases, custody transfer points and phased acceptance to avoid gaps in insurance and liability.
  3. Align construction all risks, erection all risks, advance loss of profit and nuclear property/liability coverage for seamless protection.
  4. Strengthen T&C clauses by including specifics on defect responsibility, performance thresholds and custody transfer. Link contractual milestones to insurance transitions to prevent coverage gaps during handover.
  5. Address unique risks like insuring staged modules while others are operational.
  6. Manage factory-to-site transit exposures and phased commissioning with tailored insurance solutions.
  7. Review standard exclusions and use bespoke endorsements to cover extended or complex testing phases.
  8. Use digital twins, 4D BIM and AI-driven scheduling to improve construction predictability.
  9. Apply QA/QC telemetry and lessons from multi-unit builds to replicate success and manage staggered schedules efficiently.

Trend 4: Prime the Talent Pipeline for Growth

Technology only scales with people — but in nuclear, a retirement bulge and recruitment bottlenecks threaten growth. “The energy sector as a whole has been suffering from the effects of the 'great crew change.' A lot of key technical talent is retiring and there isn’t a sufficient level of replacement in the adjacent generations,” explains Joanna Stacke, Aon's Energy & Natural Resources Sector Head, Talent Solutions, North America.

  • 50%

    of French nuclear workers may be retirement-eligible by 2030, though 100,000 new hires will be needed in the next decade.

    Source: Damona

  • 40%

    of the American nuclear workforce is expected to become eligible for retirement within the next decade.

    Source: U.S. Department of Energy

  • 44%

    of the UK civil and defence nuclear workforce is aged 30-49 and 36% is over 50.

    Source: ECITB

  • 30%

    of Canada’s nuclear workforce is aged 50 and above, signaling a looming retirement wave.

    Source: Canadian Nuclear Association

The “silver tsunami” looms over the sector, which has a proportion of workers approaching retirement than both the wider energy workforce and national averages. Attracting new talent is increasingly competitive, with nuclear energy vying against technology and finance for top recruits. Yet Big Tech’s investment in nuclear to power artificial intelligence (AI) platforms is also helping to reshape the sector’s public image, making it more appealing to younger professionals.

Talent cultivation initiatives, like Destination Nuclear in the United Kingdom and the Nuclear Reactor Safety Training and Workforce Development Program in the U.S., aim to build the next generation of nuclear professionals — with safety top-of-mind. Mentorship, knowledge transfer and frameworks from the International Atomic Energy Agency and World Association of Nuclear Operators remain vital, alongside strategies to keep organizations’ talent engines running — and growing.

Quote icon

The nuclear energy workforce is at a generational crossroads — and the attraction and retention of talent is paramount. Organizations must both retain their seasoned workers, providing programs to pass on their knowledge, and attract younger generations.

Sam Beaver
Power Leader, Global Broking Center
What good looks like:
  1. Offer competitive compensation, build strong organizational culture and provide flexibility. For example, segmenting the workforce to offer more targeted pay (e.g. differentiated variable pay) can support recruitment and retention.
  2. Review or design and implement a clear philosophy and governance structure for compensation and benefits. Complete benchmarking to sense check alignment while considering talent pool benchmarks and pay transparency requirements.
  3. Review and consider the employee perspective and approach to total rewards communication and benefits choice.
  4. Develop and implement a well-structured employee wellbeing program.
  5. Participate in industry groups to network and learn more.
  6. Partner with academic institutions to create pipelines for new talent and ensure skills remain current.
  7. Reskill or upskill talent from adjacent energy industries, such as oil and gas and other forms of power generation.
  8. Pair experienced workers with newer employees to capture and share valuable knowledge before retirement.
Quote icon

A well-structured and thoughtful approach to reward philosophy and governance, including global benefits and compensation, alongside communications, is essential and will have a positive impact on the employee value proposition.

Simon Thompson
Human Capital Industry Leader, Natural Resources, Europe, the Middle East and Africa

Turn Nuclear Ambition into Bankable Delivery

Expert guidance is key to cutting through the regulatory, risk and insurance maze in nuclear. Aon’s global industry experience helps clients take their projects from concept through construction to full operation efficiently.

The Aon Advantage in Nuclear Energy Risk Management

Aon’s Thought Leaders

Sam Beaver
Power Leader, Global Broking Center

Brian DeBruin
Managing Director, Natural Resources/Power & Renewables, United States

Barbara Gutierrez
Senior Vice President, Natural Resources/Power & Renewables, United States

Brian Hearst
Managing Director, Data Center & Life Sciences Builders Risk Leader, North America

Charles Philpott
Global Natural Resources Leader, Enterprise Client Group

Mark Potter
Natural Resources Leader, United Kingdom

Nora Sherman
Director, Executive Compensation Solutions, United Kingdom

Joanna Stacke
Energy & Natural Resources Sector Head, Talent Solutions, North America

Simon Thompson
Human Capital Head of Industry Practice, Europe, the Middle East and Africa

Paul Young
Commercial Risk Industry Specialties Leader, Europe, the Middle East and Africa

General Disclaimer

This document is not intended to address any specific situation or to provide legal, regulatory, financial, or other advice. While care has been taken in the production of this document, Aon does not warrant, represent or guarantee the accuracy, adequacy, completeness or fitness for any purpose of the document or any part of it and can accept no liability for any loss incurred in any way by any person who may rely on it. Any recipient shall be responsible for the use to which it puts this document. This document has been compiled using information available to us up to its date of publication and is subject to any qualifications made in the document.

Terms of Use

The contents herein may not be reproduced, reused, reprinted or redistributed without the expressed written consent of Aon, unless otherwise authorized by Aon. To use information contained herein, please write to our team.

More Like This

View All
Subscribe CTA Banner