The US-UK nuclear pact isn’t just another energy agreement—it’s a potential game-changer for maritime decarbonisation, and the industry is taking notice. While the deal’s language remains aspirational and investments are still in the announcement phase, the ripple effects could reshape shipping’s energy landscape.
The Atlantic Partnership for Advanced Nuclear Energy, signed by UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer and US President Donald Trump, aims to streamline regulatory approvals for nuclear projects, including Small Modular Reactors (SMRs). By allowing mutual recognition of safety assessments, the pact could slash approval times from up to four years to around two. This isn’t just about land-based plants—it’s a direct shot across the bow of maritime’s regulatory inertia.
For years, nuclear maritime advocates have been shouting into the wind. Now, they’re being heard. “Eighteen months ago we would not be having this conversation, but now nuclear is a mainstream agenda item in maritime,” said Mark Tipping, Lloyd’s Register’s nuclear specialist and a board member of the Nuclear Energy Maritime Organisation. The pact’s explicit mention of “civil maritime applications” and a potential UK-US nuclear shipping corridor signals a policy shift that could accelerate private investment.
DP World’s £80m deal with Last Energy to build a micro-nuclear plant at London Gateway is a tangible step. Slated for 2030, the project underscores how quickly the sector is moving. “This agreement between two leading nuclear and maritime nations recognises the economic benefit of civil maritime nuclear and that 2025 is the year it begins to go mainstream,” said Mikal Bøe, CEO of Core Power. The question is no longer *if* nuclear maritime will take off, but *how fast*.
The economics are still murky, and the regulatory path is far from smooth. But the US-UK pact is a catalyst—one that could force other nations to adapt or fall behind. China’s shipbuilding dominance is built on cheap, scalable production. If the West can leverage nuclear to cut fuel costs and emissions, it could disrupt that model. “There is a moment coming up, probably later this year, where new nuclear policies and this latest political leadership come together to create a unique competitive advantage,” Bøe said. The race is on.
The International Maritime Organization (IMO) and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) are working on frameworks, but harmonisation is likely years away. In the meantime, bilateral agreements like the US-UK pact will drive progress. “Underneath the surface of these bilateral agreements, there are significant moves to create the conditions to accelerate nuclear for maritime,” Bøe added.
Insurance remains a wild card. Nuclear-powered ships introduce new risks—reactor financing, fuel handling, and end-of-life disposal—that insurers are still grappling with. “We can’t price that risk until we can define it,” said Mike Salthouse, head of external affairs at NorthStandard. But the industry is adapting. If the US-UK pact can provide regulatory clarity, insurers may follow.
The timeline for the first floating nuclear assets is still debated. Tipping predicts deployment by 2032, while Bøe suggests it could be sooner. Either way, the momentum is undeniable. The question now is whether governments and investors can keep up with the pace of innovation—or if they’ll be left behind.