A New Nuclear Age? Water, Regulations, and Safety Implications
May 21, 2026
by Malcolm Mitchell-Chablani*
In the wake of World War II, the United States, in an era of technological advancements and innovations, created its first commercial nuclear power plant. Interest in nuclear power waned in the late 1970s, however, following a slowdown in the country’s growing demand for electricity, increased construction costs, and concerns over nuclear safety that stalled construction of new nuclear power plants. Now, as the world attempts to transition from fossil fuels all while energy needs continue to grow in new sectors, such as artificial intelligence (AI), nuclear energy is returning to the stage.
Nuclear Power and its Effects on Water
Nuclear energy currently fulfills about twenty percent of the United States’ national energy needs. Nuclear energy generates electricity through a process called “nuclear fission,” which is the controlled splitting of fissile atoms, such as uranium. Heat from this process turns water into steam which then rotates turbines, generating electricity. This process produces energy without the harmful emissions typically associated with fossil fuel-powered plants such as carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxide, sulfur dioxide, particulate matter, and mercury. Although nuclear power produces negligible greenhouse gas emissions compared to fossil fuel-based energy generation, nuclear plants still use a large amount of water. Conservative estimates place the water consumption of nuclear plants at approximately 400 gallons of water per megawatt-hour (MWh) of energy produced. To put this into perspective, the average U.S. household consumes about ten megawatt-hours per year and—if it is served by nuclear power—4,000 gallons of indirect water use. To operate safely, nuclear power stations must maintain cooler temperatures than their fossil fuel counterparts. This results in a thermal efficiency rating in nuclear plants of around 30 percent, which is at the lower end of conventional power plants’ thermal energy efficiency spectrum. Despite this, nuclear power still has a comparatively low water consumption per unit of power when compared to fossil fuel energy sources, and as a result, even with poor thermal efficiency, its overall water usage is still comparable to that of oil and gas.
Consumptive water use is not the only concern; when natural bodies of water are used as cooling water for the plant, intakes can inadvertently kill aquatic life. Another disruption to aquatic life caused by nuclear power results from thermal discharge, which is when water used for cooling is returned to a body of water at a higher temperature. Thermal discharges from nuclear power plants can cause eutrophication and hypoxia dead zones, both of which are detrimental to the biodiversity of aquatic ecosystems. Lastly, a byproduct of the production of nuclear energy is the discharge of low levels of radioactive materials. Radioactive isotopes like tritium and strontium-90 are released regularly, at safe levels, into groundwater around nuclear power plants. The presence of these radioactive isotopes is heavily monitored, and the practice does not present a threat to the public, when implemented safely. Any miscalculation or unplanned release, however, could spell disaster for the groundwater around a nuclear plant.
Government Regulation & Plans for Nuclear Energy
Louisiana has long been a key player in the U.S. oil and gas industry and therefore the country’s energy supply. In furtherance of its central role to U.S. energy production, Louisiana has shown significant interest in advancing its nuclear energy capabilities. Currently, Louisiana derives 17.6 percent of its net electricity from nuclear energy. This comes from only two nuclear plants built in the state forty years ago, both of which rank among the most unsafe single-unit plants nationally. On April 8, 2025, Louisiana joined a lawsuit filed by Utah, Texas, and Best Energy which challenges federal regulations which “[subject] all nuclear reactors – regardless of size or risk profile – to the same licensing requirements.” Governor Landry said that joining the lawsuit “is part of [the] broader strategy to make Louisiana an energy leader in the 21st century.”
This lawsuit comes at a time when the federal government is already rewriting nuclear safety rules. This past winter the federal government—out of the public’s eye—changed nuclear safety regulations with the intention of making it easier to establish three new nuclear reactors in the United States by July 4, 2026. This included changes to groundwater rules specifically eliminating language that required extended consideration to use of groundwater. Language in the guidelines that established a requirement or strict standard, such as “must” or “prohibited,” for groundwater protections was removed. The proposal also removed the requirement to use the best available technology to protect water supplies from radioactive discharges. Finally, the most recent directive got rid of the ‘as low as reasonably achievable’ (ALARA) principles which require reactors to keep levels of radiation exposure below the legal limit whenever they can. These rollbacks on nuclear safety regulations are part of a broader—and frightening—trend of putting production before safety, which will surely have adverse effects on groundwater surrounding current and future nuclear power plants.
Looking Forward
Despite the risks to human health and the environment, the nuclear industry is moving in the right direction with innovative new technologies and solutions to mitigate health and environmental risks. New technologies such as devices that utilize sonar and high-definition cameras to identify and exclude aquatic life from nuclear plant water intakes are showing promising results. There are even more promising advancements in limiting consumption of water by nuclear plants. The nuclear industry is developing molten salt reactors that operate at higher temperatures, increasing the efficiency of the reactor and thus requiring less water per unit of power generated. Moreover, some nuclear energy companies have proposed the use of air-cooled condensers, which condense the steam produced by nuclear plants with cool air, in a way comparable to that of a car radiator and require little-to-no cooling water. This process, however, is not without its own share of problems as it uses more electricity, especially when the outdoor temperature is extremely hot. New developments in nuclear energy that can make the process cheaper, safer, and less intensive on the environment occur with remarkable frequency.
Conclusion
Nuclear power is too vital to America’s future clean energy goals to ignore and will likely play a growing role in a diversified energy portfolio that is less reliant on fossil fuels. Nuclear power is far from perfect; it still uses large amounts of water, poses inherent safety risks to the surrounding population, and has negative effects on the environment. Many of these negative externalities can be avoided—or at least mitigated—through technological and science-based solutions and effective regulatory oversight. If nuclear power is going to form a major part of America’s future energy portfolio, new and existing facilities must be stringently regulated to ensure public safety and environmental protection, constructed with the best available technologies, and operated consistent with nuclear safety and environmental regulations. Rolling back protections for the sake of profit does none of those things.
*Malcolm Mitchell-Chablani worked as a policy researcher with the Institute in the Spring of 2026. He will graduate from Tulane University with a degree in Philosophy in 2028.