As highlighted in our most recent commentary, COP-29—held in Baku, Azerbajan—holds significant potential for concrete climate action, continuing the momentum built at COP-28, when a number of global initiatives aimed at accelerating the energy transition process were launched. Arguably, one of the most impactful efforts started last year was the Declaration to Triple Nuclear Energy, aimed at expanding the nuclear capacity three-fold by 2050, signed by 25 countries from across the globe. Interestingly enough, apart from the main nuclear technology suppliers and big nuclear power players (e.g. the United States, United Kingdom, Japan, France, South Korea), most of the remaining countries on the list are from Central and Eastern Europe, including the Black Sea Region.
The revival of interest in nuclear energy is closely tied to the energy security concerns triggered by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, which underscored the need for reliable, low-carbon energy sources. This shift has been accompanied by a notable change in political attitudes. Notably, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has evolved from expressing doubts about nuclear energy to hosting a Nuclear Energy Summit in Brussels and affirming the EU’s need for more nuclear power to achieve its climate ambitions. Simultaneously, global technology leaders are eyeing nuclear power investments and partnerships motivated by their increase AI-driven energy needs, with Amazon signing $500 million worth of investments into small modular reactors (SMRs), while Microsoft has decided to contribute to the reopening of the infamous Three Mile Island nuclear power plant, the site of the Level 5 nuclear accident in 1979.
The Case for Nuclear Energy
Replacing fossil fuel–based baseload generation is one of the key challenges in achieving net-zero emissions. While renewables play an indispensable role, their variability requires complementary solutions. Demand response, energy management systems, and digitalization can help, but these tools have scalability limits—especially with rising power demand fueled by economic growth, electrification, AI data centers, and hydrogen production. Nuclear energy provides a viable, emission-free alternative. With its high reliability and baseload generation capabilities, nuclear energy can complement renewables and ensure a stable, secure power supply. According to the International Energy Agency’s 2024 World Energy Report, nuclear power generation is forecasted to increase in any scenario, with utility-scale reactors in emerging markets and developing economies (including China) leading growth. Apart from the emission-neutral benefits, nuclear power also provides significant benefits to the energy security dimension of the energy trilemma: the balance between security of supply, affordability, and environmental protection. Considering its high load factor and baseload generation profile, nuclear power units ensure a high security of supply to domestic and regional energy systems. However, given the very limited number of nuclear technology providers, as well as a relatively high concentration in the uranium global market, the nuclear power supply chain security also has its challenges.
Despite its benefits, nuclear energy does present challenges, particularly in terms of cost and supply chain concentration. High upfront investment costs and long lead times often deter adoption. While the increasing costs are caused by various factors—including increased safety protocols, inflation of building materials, or high lead times for nuclear-specific components—nuclear electricity has an advantage often overlooked by most policymakers or end-users: its predictability. Once built, nuclear generation has low operational costs, making its electricity price predictable for decades (including for the extension of the license period), which is oftentimes critical, especially for long-term offtakers.
COP-29’s Transformative Developments
COP-29 in Baku advanced the nuclear conversation with several developments:
- Global Commitment to Growth: The commitment by 31 countries to triple nuclear capacity by 2050 is a collective acknowledgment of the role nuclear energy can play in achieving a low-carbon future. This ambitious goal involves not just expanding existing infrastructure but also investing in next-generation nuclear technologies like small modular reactors (SMRs) and advanced reactors. It shows that nuclear energy, long viewed as controversial due to safety and waste concerns, is being reframed as an essential tool for decarbonization. Over the last few years, SMRs have often taken the front page, with various designs, at different project stages, being considered for trials. Apart from their generation flexibility features, these solutions are seen as future-proof solutions given their adaptability to various energy needs and systems, as well as their modularity. However, to bring unitary costs down (thus reducing manufacturing costs from the first-of-a-kind to the nth-of-a-kind), streamlining the numerous current designs will be critical.
- Leadership from Major Economies: The United States’ roadmap to deploy 200 GW of nuclear power by 2050, including 35 GW by 2035, demonstrates leadership from a major emitter. This plan likely includes incentives for innovation, scaling up production, and addressing regulatory hurdles.
- Addressing Financial Barriers: Financing remains one of the most significant challenges to expanding nuclear energy. Delegates at COP-29 underscored the necessity of innovative financing mechanisms such as public-private partnerships, international funding, and government-backed guarantees. These approaches aim to mitigate the high upfront costs of nuclear projects, which can deter investment, especially in developing countries. By prioritizing accessibility, the conference also aligned nuclear energy expansion with goals of equity and global inclusion.
Azerbaijan’s strategic location at the crossroads of energy diplomacy added a unique dimension to COP-29. This applies to the nuclear power topic too, as Azerbaijan is the place where nuclear power geopolitics collide. To the north, Russia continues exporting nuclear technology, while Turkey to the south has partnered with Rosatom. In Eastern Europe, U.S. nuclear companies are forging partnerships, and the Middle East is increasingly exploring nuclear solutions, with the UAE’s Barakah plant serving as a regional model. Meanwhile, China’s ambitious plans position it as a global leader in nuclear energy deployment, in the decades to come.
Even if only aspirationally, COP-29 can serve as a bridging point, aiming to bring together more global players in the nuclear energy sector. At the very least, the nuclear power momentum that started at COP-28, in Dubai, has continued over the last two weeks at COP-29, in Baku. In the first few days of the 29th Conference of the Parties, six additional countries signed the Declaration, including Turkey, the most prominent absentee in the Black Sea region. Given the undeniable role of nuclear generation for coming closer to 2050 neutrality goals, while also ensuring a reliable and firm power energy, the nuclear impetus is expected to continue.
Looking Ahead to COP-30 in Brazil
The next Conference of the Parties, hosted by Brazil, may mark another milestone for nuclear energy. Latin America, with its seven operating nuclear reactors across Brazil, Argentina, and Mexico, has yet to fully embrace the Declaration. COP-30 could provide an opportunity for regional leaders to align with global efforts, potentially adding to the coalition of nations championing nuclear power. COP-29 firmly confirmed nuclear energy as a cornerstone of global climate strategies, transitioning it from a peripheral topic to a foundational solution. The conference reinforced the growing recognition of nuclear power’s ability to provide large-scale, low-carbon, and reliable electricity amidst rising energy demands and climate urgency. By building on this momentum, future COPs have the potential to drive even greater progress, ensuring that nuclear energy plays its essential role in achieving a green future.
Statements and views expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author and do not imply endorsement by Harvard University, the Harvard Kennedy School, or the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs.
