Industry Veterans Bringing Nuclear Propulsion to Commercial Shipping

What do a former CEO of Aker Arctic, one of Europe’s leading energy technology experts, and an experienced Finnish-American tech entrepreneur have in common? Over the past five years, they’ve independently arrived at the same solution for decarbonizing the global maritime industry: nuclear-powered ships.

Why Nuclear-Powered Ships?

The idea of nuclear-powered vessels isn’t new—at least not in the military realm. Today, more than 160 nuclear-powered ships navigate the world’s seas, including submarines, aircraft carriers, and icebreakers. Even when the safety record of these ships beat any other technology out there, why did it never become the mainstream solution for commercial ships?

NS Savannah was the first of a handful of civil merchant ships built from the late 1950s until the late 1980s.

The Economics Have Changed

The barriers to nuclear propulsion in civil ships weren’t related to the safety of the technology or the security of the low-enriched fuel used in the reactors—they were economic. Historically, the affordability of fossil fuels made alternatives like nuclear propulsion financially impractical for commercial shipping. But the landscape is shifting. The era of cheap fossil fuels is gradually ending, with global initiatives—led by the EU—targeting a complete phase-out of fossil fuels by 2050. Ambitious interim goals are pushing the shipping industry to adopt zero-emission technologies, or risk having their ships denied access to European ports and beyond. This explains why 3 of the top 10 shipowners have already reached out to us.

Why are these shipowners aiming for zero-emission targets already now? Well, here’s the catch: the average commercial ship has a lifespan of about 25 years. Choosing a truly zero-emission technology today ensures compliance for the entire lifetime of the ship, allowing it to hold its value and enabling better financing terms now and in the future. Additionally, the greenest shipowners could sell their emission permits to make them even more profitable compared to their competition. 

Shipowners Running Out of Options

The industry does not have a consensus on what the zero-emission technology of the future should be. Biofuels are often excluded from contention as they have a net negative environmental impact due to the amount of energy and land required to produce them. Hydrogen faces two key challenges: 1) Green hydrogen production infrastructure does not yet exist, and 2) liquefied hydrogen has proven too difficult to handle, even for formidable organizations such as NASA and SpaceX.

One solution to include shipping in the hydrogen economy would be to use green hydrogen to produce alternative fuels that are easier to handle, namely green ammonia and green methanol. Even if their production challenges were solved, these fuels would still remain prohibitively expensive. Especially the scalability of the production is an issue: even if all renewable energy sources were dedicated to producing these synthetic fuels, it still wouldn’t be enough to fully decarbonize shipping.

What about batteries? While batteries are a viable option for short-distance routes of less than 1,000 nautical miles, they fall short for long-haul voyages due to space and weight constraints. In essence, entire ships would need to be filled with batteries, even when accounting for substantial advancements in battery technology.

The Rise of Nuclear: From Wild Card to Front Runner

Partly due to these problems, the industry is looking for alternative solutions. Nuclear energy eliminates many of the production problems discussed above. However, by skipping one or two intermediate steps in producing green fuels with nuclear energy, a simpler approach would be to place the reactor directly on a ship. Shipowners have started to recognize this reality. In the race for decarbonization, nuclear propulsion has recently gained significant momentum. As shown in the chart below, interest among shipowners has surged by 150% over the past year.

ICS Maritime Barometer surveying maritime leaders’ perception of the most viable fuels and technologies for the 2030s.

Perhaps surprisingly, nuclear propulsion is suddenly emerging as one of the most viable solutions already for the next decade, well before the industry would have to fully decarbonize. Despite resistance from the fossil fuel sector and more conventional technology providers, the practicality and proven track record of nuclear propulsion positions it as a strong contender in the future mix of low and zero-emission solutions. This time, however, the negligible nuclear fuel costs compared to the alternative fuels are tipping the scales decisively in favor of nuclear propulsion.

Making Waves and Backed by Big Names

The Small Modular Reactor (SMR) technology is making waves in other industries as well. Tech giants like Google, Amazon, and Microsoft are investing heavily in SMR projects to power their data centers. This renewed interest in nuclear technology has led to unprecedented support for both traditional reactors and SMRs. The ripple effects extend beyond data centers, as SMRs are now being considered for industries ranging from district heating and industrial cooling to maritime solutions.

Enter SEATOM Technologies, a Finnish-American company leading the charge to bring nuclear propulsion to commercial shipping. Co-led by Roope Marttila, Consortium Lead for the government-backed R&D project N/S Finlandia, Reko-Antti Suojanen, former CEO of Aker Arctic, a company known for its nuclear icebreaker designs, and Professor Juhani Hyvärinen, former Chief Nuclear Officer of the Hanhikivi Nuclear Power Plant and a member of safety councils and committees of several other nuclear power plants. 

SEATOM's pragmatic yet innovative approach has caught the attention of international stakeholders. Marttila has been invited to talk about the topic around the world, including London earlier this year and Cambridge towards the end of the year, sharing the stage with prominent figures like the CEO of Core Power—a company that recently secured an additional $500 million to advance nuclear-powered cargo ships and floating power plant concepts.

SEATOM Co-founder Roope Marttila at the IAEA Conference on Small Modular Reactors in Vienna in October 2024

Addressing Safety Concerns

What about safety? It’s a valid question. While no energy source is entirely risk-free, nuclear is among the safest in terms of fatalities per terawatt-hour of energy produced. Beyond one significant incident, its safety record surpasses that of solar and wind energy installations, which also have their own negative environmental impact and occupational risks.

Contrast this with fossil fuels, which are responsible for an estimated 3–8 million premature deaths annually, primarily due to air pollution. The figure below, however, does not account for more indirect impacts such as population displacement and other environmental impacts caused by climate change.

The key indicators of external cost to the environment and public health of various energy sources. Modified from an original figure by Hannah Ritchie & Max Roser.

In Conclusion

When weighing safety, economics, and the laws of physics, the conclusion is inescapable: nuclear propulsion is one of the most viable—if not the most viable—solutions for decarbonizing shipping.

SEATOM Technologies, driven by its visionary founders and a growing team, is poised to play a pivotal role in this transformation. By introducing nuclear propulsion to the commercial maritime sector, SEATOM is setting a course toward a cleaner, more sustainable future for global shipping.