What does it take to deliver nuclear energy and small modular nuclear reactors?

Nuclear energy and small modular reactors (SMRs) are back in the headlines. And for good reason. Energy demands are still on the rise, fueled exponentially by the rapid evolution of the data center market demand for reliable, baseload power. Grid interconnect timelines, capacity, and distances can often form a key issue: How do we power these mission critical facilities “off grid”?

Data centers in particular are consuming electricity at unprecedented rates. In North America, data center power demand is projected to nearly double, from about 386 terawatt‑hours (TWh) in 2025 to roughly 755 TWh by 2030. These facilities operate around the clock and need power that is steady, predictable, and increasingly low‑carbon. SMRs are well positioned to meet those needs. Whether they succeed at scale, however, will depend less on reactor design and more on how these projects are executed

History shows how nuclear projects generally tend to overrun costs and schedules. That said, success is possible as demonstrated by the UAE’s Barakah Nuclear Power Plant and China’s 59 nuclear power plants. Elements of this are connected to the constant design change control and onsite constructability. From what we see across nuclear and large energy programs, execution is where most of the significant risks can materialize. The front-end licensing and siting decisions will often set the pace much earlier than people expect. Technology, research and development, and design itself, although important, form a smaller part of the overall schedule to success—oftentimes the critical path on a major nuclear program will show on the long-lead items (particularly N-stamped safety significant equipment) and the construction methodologies such as site clearance, nuclear slab pours, and services diversions. Nuclear-specific supply chains are still maturing, and higher-enriched or specialized fuel availability matters, particularly for Gen 4 advanced designs. As first‑of‑a‑kind projects, risk can quickly materialize when moving forward before front-end loaded designs, complete safety cases, and execution plans are fully aligned.

Coordination is another challenge. SMR programs bring together many stakeholders: owners, operators, regulators, technology vendors, engineers, constructors, and more. Without clear governance and decision‑making early on, complexity can escalate fast. Quality assurance, interface management, and constructability/commissioning readiness all need to be built in from the start. When they aren’t, delays tend to follow.

Over the next five to ten years, success will come down to whether the first SMRs are delivered on time at an acceptable cost, operate as intended, and make the next unit easier to build. That’s how SMRs move from promise to reality and earn a lasting place in the energy system.

Jag Singh, Stantec’s regional sector lead for clean generation, brings hands‑on experience delivering complex nuclear and energy programs. He's worked on some of the most technically complex and challenging projects in the world, as well as leading the team for a first-of-a-kind (FOAK) Gen 4 SMR vendor.

He can speak to:

• What first‑of‑a‑kind risk looks like in practice, and where it tends to appear first
• How licensing sequence and siting decisions shape schedules more than many expect
• What owners can do upfront to avoid interface challenges later, including governance, contracting, quality assurance, and commissioning readiness