U.S. Nuclear Capacity Expansion Market: $57B Investment Outlook Across Uprates, SMRs & Restarts (2025-2035)

U.S. Nuclear Capacity Expansion Market Presents an Estimated $57 Billion Investment Opportunity Through 2035 - and the Most Capital-Efficient Pathway is the Least Studied

The U.S. nuclear capacity expansion market represents an estimated $57 billion investment opportunity through 2035, as the industry enters its first multi-pathway expansion cycle in four decades. This report provides a comprehensive head-to-head comparative analysis of the three primary pathways driving near-term capacity additions - nuclear fleet uprating, reactor restarts, and small modular reactors (SMRs) - with additional coverage of new large reactor construction as longer-term context. Each pathway is evaluated by cost per kilowatt, timeline to operation, regulatory readiness, and evidence quality.

This analysis reveals a systematic evidence asymmetry at the heart of nuclear investment decisions: the NREL Annual Technology Baseline incorporates 35 bottom-up cost estimations for advanced reactor designs despite zero completed U.S. commercial SMR projects, while nuclear uprate costs remain largely unstudied despite 172 NRC-approved projects adding 8 GW to the grid over five decades. The analysis finds that fleet uprating delivers 39-50% of projected near-term capacity additions at under a quarter of total capital expenditure - a 2-4x capital efficiency advantage over SMR deployment at current projected costs.

The report sizes the market across three scenarios (conservative: $24-34B / 7 GW; base: $45-70B / 12 GW; optimistic: $72-123B / 18 GW) using triangulated methodology: bottom-up from announced projects and NRC pipeline data, top-down from federal targets including Executive Order 14302’s 5 GW uprate directive, and cross-referenced against Reuters Events/Bloomberg Intelligence and IEA projections. Segmentation covers pathway type, buyer category (hyperscalers, regulated utilities, competitive generators, independent developers), and deployment timeline.

Companies analyzed include Constellation Energy, Vistra Corp, Meta Platforms, Alva Energy, TerraPower, Oklo, NuScale Power, GE Vernova Hitachi Nuclear Energy, Westinghouse Electric, Holtec International, TVA, and NextEra Energy. The report includes 10 charts and figures, 8 data tables, 12 company profiles, and a detailed methodology appendix grading evidence from completed projects through unvalidated company claims.

Report Highlights:

• The Evidence Asymmetry Distorts Capital Allocation: The NREL Annual Technology Baseline incorporates 35 bottom-up cost estimates for new nuclear reactor designs; no comparable systematic study of nuclear uprate costs exists in the open literature. Yet NRC records show 172 completed uprates adding 8 GW to the U.S. grid - equivalent to eight large reactors - over five decades. Capital allocators currently have more analytical support for the pathway with zero U.S. commercial completions (SMRs) than for the pathway with 172 completed projects (uprates).
• Uprates Deliver Outsized Capacity at a Fraction of the Cost: Fleet uprating is projected to deliver 39-50% of near-term U.S. nuclear capacity additions while consuming under a quarter of total pathway capital expenditure. At demonstrated uprate costs, uprating requires 2-4x less capital per megawatt than SMR deployment at current projected FOAK costs.
• Nuclear Expansion Costs Span a 20x Range by Pathway: U.S. nuclear capacity expansion costs span a roughly 20x range depending on pathway and project type - from low-cost measurement uncertainty recapture uprates to first-of-a-kind SMR deployments. The cost spectrum reveals distinct tiers that do not align with current narrative assumptions about which pathways are “expensive” and which are “cheap.” The report disaggregates cost benchmarks for completed uprates, announced restarts, and SMR projects by evidence tier.
• Hyperscaler Dual-Path Procurement Confirms the Portfolio Framework: Meta’s January 2026 nuclear procurement - simultaneously contracting for existing reactor capacity, fleet uprates across three plants, and SMRs from two developers - is, based on available data, the largest multi-pathway nuclear capacity commitment by a single corporate buyer in U.S. history. This dual-path approach confirms that sophisticated buyers treat nuclear expansion as a portfolio allocation problem.
• Federal Uprate Targets Face an NRC Implementation Bottleneck: Executive Order 14302 (May 2025) directs DOE to facilitate 5 GW of nuclear power uprates by 2030 - but NRC resource constraints may bottleneck execution. Over 70% of reactor licensees plan to submit uprate applications, and the review queue could push 1-2 GW of targeted uprate capacity into the 2030s.
• Optimal Allocation is Time-Sequenced Across Pathways: Uprates and restarts are projected to account for over 75% of U.S. nuclear capacity additions through 2028, declining to approximately 50% by 2032 as initial SMR demonstrations reach commercial operation. The report provides a framework for allocating capital across proven and emerging pathways based on deployment horizon.

This report will provide answers to the following questions:

• What is the total addressable investment across U.S. nuclear capacity expansion pathways through 2035, and how does capital expenditure break down by pathway?
• How do uprate costs per kilowatt compare to reactor restarts and SMR deployments at current projected prices - and what is the evidence quality behind each estimate?
• Which nuclear expansion pathway delivers the most capacity per dollar of capital invested, and over what timeline?
• What does the NRC review bottleneck mean for the feasibility of federal uprate targets by 2030?
• How are hyperscaler buyers like Meta structuring nuclear procurement across multiple pathways, and what does this signal about institutional capital allocation?
• Where should investors with different deployment horizons allocate capital across proven and emerging nuclear pathways?

This research is invaluable for:

• Energy and utilities equity research analysts
• Institutional investors and portfolio managers evaluating nuclear exposure
• Corporate energy procurement leads (hyperscalers, industrials)
• Utility executives and nuclear fleet strategy teams
• Private equity and infrastructure fund managers
• Nuclear OEM and developer business development teams
• Energy policy analysts and regulatory strategists
• Due diligence teams assessing nuclear project investments