As the global shipping industry stares down the barrel of its decarbonisation gun, a propulsion technology that had fallen out of favour is making a return. According to a white paper released by DNV, nuclear propulsion is today no longer a “distant prospect” but a “real option” that could fundamentally reshape the commercial maritime fleet.

While shipping serves as the indispensable “backbone to world trade”, according to DNV senior principal researcher and report co-author Ole Christen Reistad, it is under mounting pressure from “proactive regulations” and ambitious environmental targets. In this high-stakes environment, DNV argues that every viable pathway must be scrutinised, “including those previously deemed improbable”.

According to Reistad, nuclear power offers a unique value proposition: the promise of “virtually emission-free power” paired with “stable, predictable energy costs” and an “enhanced operational flexibility” that traditional alternative fuels struggle to match.

But despite its current momentum, the path forward is paved with historical lessons. It has been over four decades since a civilian maritime nuclear facility was commissioned. Early pioneers like the Savannah, Otto Hahn, and Mutsu proved technical feasibility but failed to achieve commercial scale. These first-generation vessels relied on pressurised water reactors (PWRs), which DNV notes “required extensive monitoring and active safety systems”, demanding “large, highly skilled crew” complements that inflated operational costs.

The modern vision for maritime nuclear power is starkly different, leaning heavily on the rise of small modular reactors (SMRs), low pressure systems and Generation IV technologies.

These new designs prioritise “passive safety systems and minimal crew requirements”. Unlike their predecessors, these reactors are designed to be “compact and designed for infrequent refuelling”, ideally aligning with standard drydocking schedules every five or more years to “minimise impacts on ship availability”, Reistad said.

Regulatory nexus

The transition to nuclear is as much a bureaucratic challenge as a technical one. DNV emphasises that “assurance is not simply a safeguard—it is an enabler of progress”. The maritime sector has a distinct advantage over land-based nuclear industries: a long-established system of classification societies that provides a “coherent and internationally recognised assurance structure”. This system is uniquely positioned to bridge the gap between fragmented national regulations and the global nature of shipping, DNV said.

Success, however, hinges on “public confidence and international oversight”. The regulatory landscape for nuclear-powered vessels will likely “exceed what the maritime industry is accustomed to”, requiring unprecedented co-ordination between the International Maritime Organization (IMO) and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Key to this is the development of a “predictable and internationally accepted regulatory framework” that addresses everything from spent fuel management to cybersecurity measures against piracy or sabotage.

The DNV report includes an analysis of business models necessary to support nuclear’s resurgence.

Traditional ship ownership models may be ill-suited for the complexities of nuclear technology, the class society said.

Instead, it suggests a shift toward “servitisation,” similar to the “Power-by-the-Hour” contracts used in the aviation industry. Under this model, a specialised “solution provider” would deliver “power services on a mobile platform”, retaining responsibility for the entire fuel cycle, including fuel production, reactor integration, and the final disposal of waste products.
This model addresses one of the primary hurdles for shipowners: the “high-risk potential” and specialised competence required to manage nuclear material. By centralising ownership, leasing, crew size, and supply-chain management with a dedicated provider, the industry can leverage “standardisation and mass production” to drive down costs, according to DNV.

Bottom line

The commercial viability of maritime nuclear propulsion is ultimately a numbers game. DNV’s case studies reveal that “nuclear can outperform other technologies” under both high and low fuel price scenarios, provided certain capital expenditure (CAPEX) targets are met.

If the world moves toward full decarbonisation by 2050, a reactor cost below $18,000/kW “could be competitive” against expensive carbon-neutral fuels. In a less aggressive regulatory environment, reactor costs would need to drop below $8,000/kW to remain viable. These figures suggest that while “nuclear propulsion and its supporting infrastructure are not yet commercially viable”, the gap is closing as the cost of conventional fuels rises with carbon taxes.

Beyond simple fuel savings, nuclear power offers operational advantages that are often overlooked, DNV says.

Because nuclear fuel costs are “low compared to CAPEX”, higher speeds—which are currently penalised under greenhouse gas regulations for conventional ships—become “economically viable”. This could fundamentally alter global supply chains, allowing larger vessels to move faster without increasing their carbon footprint.

That said, the return of nuclear power to the maritime stage is not without its “inherent risks”, DNV says. Its ultimate adoption will depend on our “collective ability to manage its risks, earn public trust, and establish robust assurance frameworks”. However, the DNV report makes it clear: with strategic investment and international collaboration, nuclear energy could move from an improbable dream to the “cornerstone of the maritime energy transition”.

Reistad concludes that nuclear propulsion represents both a “formidable challenge and a transformative opportunity” to deliver safe, efficient, and zero-emission propulsion for the global fleet.
Source: Baltic Exchange