IAEA Launches ATLAS to Bring Nuclear Power Back to Civilian Shipping as IMO Targets New Rules by 2030

Nuclear-powered merchant shipping moved a significant step closer to becoming an organized international industry on August 26 when the International Atomic Energy Agency launched ATLAS, Atomic Technologies Licensed for Applications at Sea, in Washington. The initiative brings nuclear regulators, maritime authorities, classification societies, shipowners, ports, reactor developers and governments into one framework for the first time specifically to address civilian nuclear-powered ships and floating nuclear power plants. Around 600 participants from more than 50 countries are attending the two-day launch, while more than two dozen governments signed the accompanying joint statement. Six ATLAS project groups will now begin work on safety standards, maritime law, classification, safeguards, security and the practical deployment infrastructure needed to take reactors from concepts into ships. The timing is important because the IMO is simultaneously rewriting its 1981 Code of Safety for Nuclear Merchant Ships, with the current work plan targeting a revised Nuclear Code and amendments to SOLAS Chapter VIII in 2030. The IAEA says advances in reactor design, fuel and maritime engineering mean some commercial maritime nuclear concepts could potentially be ready for deployment during the 2030s.

Maritime Nuclear Watch · August 27, 2026

Operator Impact Snapshot

The biggest change is not a new reactor design. It is the beginning of a coordinated international attempt to create rules allowing nuclear-powered commercial ships to be licensed, classified, insured and accepted by ports.

IAEA ATLAS LAUNCHED
50+ Countries
represented at Washington forum

Around 600 participants are connecting governments, ports, shipowners, nuclear companies and regulators.

Implementation STARTING
6 Groups
dedicated ATLAS workstreams

Safety, law, classification, safeguards, security and the deployment roadmap are being addressed separately.

Current IMO Rules OUTDATED
1981
existing Nuclear Merchant Ship Code

SOLAS Chapter VIII still points to a framework written decades before today's advanced SMR concepts.

IMO Regulatory Target WATCH
2030
target for revised Nuclear Code

IMO's current work plan targets completion and adoption of an updated Nuclear Code and SOLAS changes.

Potential Deployment EARLY STAGE
2030s
earliest window cited by IAEA

Some maritime nuclear designs could potentially reach deployment during the next decade if regulatory and commercial barriers are resolved.

Global Trade by Sea ~80%
Share of world trade carried by maritime transport.
Seaborne Growth ~2% / Year
IAEA estimate for continuing maritime trade growth.
Operating Attraction Long Endurance
High energy density could reduce dependence on frequent vessel refuelling.
Historical Marker NS Savannah
Reactor operation began more than six decades before the ATLAS launch.
Regulation · Classification · Security · Infrastructure

The Six Problems ATLAS Has to Solve

Each project group addresses a different barrier between today's reactor concepts and a merchant vessel that can routinely trade between international ports.

Scroll sideways for the complete ATLAS framework ← →
ATLAS Project Group Problem Being Addressed Direct Maritime Question Current Industry Signal Near-Term Work
GROUP 1
International Safety Codes & Standards
Nuclear standards and maritime safety rules were developed largely in separate regulatory systems. Which rules govern collision protection, grounding, reactor containment, emergency systems, fire, flooding and ship accidents? IMO's Nuclear Merchant Ship Code dates from 1981 and is now being revised alongside SOLAS Chapter VIII. Inventory existing IAEA and IMO requirements, identify gaps and recommend revisions and harmonization.
GROUP 3
Maritime Classification
Class approval and nuclear licensing use different standards, terminology and inspection systems. Who certifies the reactor-to-hull interface, shielding, electrical systems, propulsion train and safety-critical structures? Lloyd's Register and ABS have already issued approvals in principle for several Korean nuclear-powered ship concepts. Compare design assessment and inspection practices and develop common classification interfaces.
GROUP 4
IAEA Safeguards
Traditional nuclear safeguards were designed primarily around fixed land facilities. How does the IAEA maintain knowledge of nuclear material aboard a vessel moving between countries? Mobile reactors create new questions around inspector access, international movements and cross-jurisdiction verification. Develop deployment scenarios, gap assessments and Safeguards-by-Design recommendations.
GROUP 5
Nuclear Security
Ships are mobile assets exposed to cyber threats, criminal activity and physical attack in ways land reactors generally are not. Which physical protection, cyber, crew-trustworthiness, emergency and contingency measures should follow the ship globally? ATLAS says nuclear-powered ships require dedicated security guidance beyond frameworks developed for conventional nuclear installations. Review current security instruments and identify requirements requiring clarification or new guidance.
GROUP 6
Technology, Infrastructure & Fuel Cycle
Even a fully licensed reactor is unusable without shipyards, ports, fuel services and lifecycle infrastructure. Where is a ship fuelled, serviced, refuelled, defuelled and eventually decommissioned? Ports and governments are already beginning site-specific nuclear-readiness studies. Develop deployment roadmaps covering technology readiness, logistics, fuel cycle, refuelling, relocation and decommissioning.
Signs the Market Is Already Moving
Port Readiness Rotterdam
Lloyd's Register, the Port of Rotterdam, CORE POWER and A.P. Moller - Maersk studied the feasibility of nuclear-powered feeder-ship port calls.
U.S. Port Programs Long Beach + Corpus Christi
MARAD agreements are examining SMRs, microgrids and infrastructure capable of supporting future nuclear-powered vessels.
Nuclear PCTC Hyundai / Glovis / KAERI
A molten-salt-reactor car-carrier concept received Lloyd's Register Approval in Principle during Posidonia 2026.
Nuclear Boxship 15,000 TEU Concept
A Korean concept using two molten-salt reactor units received ABS Approval in Principle in July.
Floating Nuclear Samsung Heavy Industries
SHI and Sargent & Lundy are developing a technology-agnostic floating SMR platform aimed at future deployment and licensing.
U.S. Merchant Shipping MARAD Framework
A new cooperation framework with CORE POWER is addressing ports, workforce, fuel, insurance, finance and lifecycle infrastructure.
Ship Universe Maritime Nuclear Tool

Nuclear Propulsion Fuel-Avoidance & Break-Even CAPEX Analyzer

Estimate how much conventional bunker and carbon cost a reactor-powered vessel could avoid, then test how much incremental nuclear capital cost those operating savings could economically support.

Fuel Dependency Potentially Eliminated
Operational Emissions Potentially Near Zero
Primary Risk Reactor CAPEX
Regulatory Window 2030+
Vessel Scenario
mt/day
days
$/mt
$/tCO₂
Enter the effective carbon value applicable to the vessel's trade.
tCO₂/mt
$M
User assumption. Reliable commercial reactor-system pricing is not yet established.
$M/year
$M/year
$M/year
Optional value from higher sustained speed, more voyages or additional cargo productivity.
years
%
$M
Modeled as a cost occurring at the end of the entered vessel life.
Annual Fuel Avoided 28,000 mt conventional daily burn × annual sea days
Annual Bunker Cost Avoided $19.6M modeled conventional fuel expenditure
Annual Carbon Cost Avoided $8.72M conventional emissions × entered carbon value
Net Annual Operating Advantage $18.3M fuel + carbon + productivity minus modeled nuclear recurring costs
Simple CAPEX Payback 24.6 yrs incremental nuclear CAPEX divided by annual operating advantage
Project NPV -$239M discounted operating benefits minus CAPEX and decommissioning reserve
Annual Economic Drivers
Compare the major annual costs and benefits feeding the break-even calculation.
Bunker Avoidance
$19.6M
Carbon Avoidance
$8.72M
Nuclear Recurring Cost
$15.0M
Productivity Benefit
$5.0M
Discounted Break-Even $211M
Approximate maximum incremental nuclear CAPEX supported by the entered operating assumptions while producing an NPV of zero.
Break-Even Bunker $1,259/mt
Annual CO₂ Avoided 87,192t
PV Operating Benefit $227M
Discounted Decom. $6.6M
Planning model: This calculator is not a quotation for a maritime reactor. Commercial reactor CAPEX, nuclear fuel arrangements, crew requirements, insurance, port fees, security costs and decommissioning structures remain uncertain and will differ greatly by technology and jurisdiction. The tool assumes the entered conventional fuel burn is avoided and does not model backup generators or lifecycle emissions. It also excludes reactor downtime, refuelling outages, financing structure, classification costs, nuclear liability premiums, shipyard modifications and cargo-space effects. All vessel presets are illustrative.
Feedback Welcome

We welcome your feedback, suggestions, corrections, and ideas for enhancements.

Please click here to get in touch
By the ShipUniverse Editorial Team — About Us | Contact