nuclear-news

Trump’s shipping race with Xi goes nuclear

Backing from Washington should help address regulatory challenges as well as insurance issues, which represent one of the main hurdles to expanding nuclear propulsion beyond military submarines, aircraft carriers and a handful of Russian icebreakers.

US bets uranium-powered British vessels can challenge China’s maritime dominance

Christopher Jasper, Transport industry editor, 29 August 2026

Donald Trump has opened up a new battleground in his trade war with Beijing, and a British start-up building nuclear-powered ships has found itself on the front line.

A US effort to challenge China’s dominance in shipping by building a fleet of nuclear-fuelled vessels is being led by UK-based Core Power.

The start-up, which has 100 employees and moved to London from Singapore in 2020, says it is unique outside Russia and China in having the expertise to integrate reactors with commercial ships, and the White House seems to agree.

Mikal Bøe, the Norwegian founder and chief of Core Power, flew to Washington last week to sign a seven-year pact with the US Maritime Administration…………….

The deal aims to deliver a fleet of zero-emission vessels that travel at 30 knots, or twice the pace of today’s ships, which typically sail slowly to conserve fuel.

They would be assembled in a multibillion-dollar nuclear yard operated by Core Power in the US. Work is slated to commence by 2028, with the first deliveries in 2033.

Trump hopes the plan can revive American shipbuilding and provide a ready market for a nuclear industry.

While China is developing its own maritime nuclear propulsion, the sector is one of the few in which the US is confident it has a major lead.

Onboard reactors heat water to create steam, which generates electricity to drive the engines, providing a permanent source of power and “free speed”, Bøe said…………

The deal aims to deliver a fleet of zero-emission vessels that travel at 30 knots, or twice the pace of today’s ships, which typically sail slowly to conserve fuel.

While the nuclear vessels would cost around $700m (£515m), compared with up to $250m for a large merchant ship, their speed would let them complete far more journeys………………..

Establishing the business case for nuclear power over traditional engines will open up a market to replace 8,000 ships over the next 25 years, Bøe estimates……

Bøe said the Trump administration had been instrumental in accelerating its plans……………

Core Power plans to announce a supplier of nuclear reactors for its ships as early as next month, with BWX Technologies viewed as the frontrunner.

The company is already partnered with BWX – which helped develop the first nuclear submarine in the 1950s – on plans for floating nuclear power plants to supply coastal industrial complexes.

A decision on the location for its nuclear shipyard will follow in the next six months.

A facility capable of producing three vessels a year would have construction costs of about $3bn, increasing to $15bn to churn out ships for the global market………………….

Backing from Washington should help address regulatory challenges as well as insurance issues, which represent one of the main hurdles to expanding nuclear propulsion beyond military submarines, aircraft carriers and a handful of Russian icebreakers.

Whereas shipping lines today require coverage for damage to their vessels, the loss of cargoes and injuries to employees, the new ships will need a new level of insurance against nuclear incidents.

‘The talk of the industry’

Britain’s dominance of the maritime insurance industry could see it play a key role in establishing an insurance regime.

The Technology Prosperity Deal signed by Trump and Sir Keir Starmer last year included a commitment to explore civil nuclear applications at sea and the establishment of a UK-US corridor, which could form the basis of a maritime nuclear insurance zone…………..

Core Power has $200m in financing and will seek to raise a further $600m next year. While existing investors are mostly shipbuilders and owners, the next round will seek to bring in private equity, venture capital and energy companies.

It has also agreed an alliance with authorities in Corpus Christi, Texas, a major US port, to lay out plans for new infrastructure that will be needed for nuclear-propelled tankers.

Mr Bøe said the door was also “wide open” for Britain to become involved in the sector.

Establishing the business case for nuclear power over traditional engines will open up a market to replace 8,000 ships over the next 25 years, Bøe estimates.

He said the first ships could operate on transatlantic routes and that Washington was open to allies – including Britain – becoming involved in the project, although ships were unlikely to be built here.

Advertisement

Bøe said the Trump administration had been instrumental in accelerating its plans.

“The pace at which both nuclear reactors and maritime policy and an action plan to build back shipbuilding capacity have been developed is remarkable,” he said.

“You cannot compete with Beijing on its own terms, we cannot outbid them. But we can put these two things together and establish the world’s first programme for civil maritime nuclear propulsion which creates a whole new adventure and competes with China.”

Core Power plans to announce a supplier of nuclear reactors for its ships as early as next month, with BWX Technologies viewed as the frontrunner.

The company is already partnered with BWX – which helped develop the first nuclear submarine in the 1950s – on plans for floating nuclear power plants to supply coastal industrial complexes.

Advertisement

A decision on the location for its nuclear shipyard will follow in the next six months.

A facility capable of producing three vessels a year would have construction costs of about $3bn, increasing to $15bn to churn out ships for the global market.

The hulls for the ships will be built in Japan or South Korea and floated to the US to be fitted with reactors and engines. The same yard will undertake maintenance and midlife refuelling once supplies of uranium are spent.

Backing from Washington should help address regulatory challenges as well as insurance issues, which represent one of the main hurdles to expanding nuclear propulsion beyond military submarines, aircraft carriers and a handful of Russian icebreakers.

Whereas shipping lines today require coverage for damage to their vessels, the loss of cargoes and injuries to employees, the new ships will need a new level of insurance against nuclear incidents.

September 3, 2026 - Posted by Christina Macpherson | technology, USA