Advanced nuclear reactors could expand U.S. nuclear energy beyond electricity generation into transportation by supplying heat and power for hydrogen and synthetic hydrocarbon fuel production. We evaluated nuclear-enabled hydrogen for fuel cell electric vehicles (FCEVs) and nuclear-derived electro-fuels (e-fuels) for internal combustion engine vehicles (ICEVs) and hybrid vehicles across selected light-, medium-, and heavy-duty classes. Economic performance was assessed using total cost of ownership (TCO), and environmental performance was evaluated using life-cycle emissions. We then estimated carbon abatement costs for alternative fuel/vehicle pathways relative to conventional gasoline and diesel systems. Our findings indicate that conventional ICEVs fueled by gasoline or diesel generally remain the lowest-cost options in 2035. For small sport utility vehicles (SUVs), however, hybrid vehicles using nuclear-based e-fuels and battery electric vehicles (BEVs) with home charging increase TCO modestly relative to gasoline vehicles, while e-fuels achieve the lowest emissions among the alternatives. In long-haul trucking, hydrogen and e-fuels show potential, with marginal TCO increases relative to conventional systems and relatively low abatement costs. Although hydrogen and e-fuels produced with advanced nuclear reactors remain relatively expensive, continued advances in reactors, electrolysis, and fuel synthesis, together with scale economies, could improve competitiveness, diversify transportation fuel options, and reduce emissions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Baek et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: