Massachusetts Ecosystem

Massachusetts’ academic strength in nuclear science and engineering is reinforced by unusually scarce physical infrastructure. Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and UMass Lowell operate two of the roughly 30 research and test reactors currently regulated by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) nationwide, most of which are located at universities. Both facilities support hands-on education and NRC-licensed reactor operator training in addition to research, giving Massachusetts a capability available in relatively few states.

This foundation extends beyond reactor operations. Radiation science and health physics programs connect students to careers in hospitals and medical facilities, research laboratories, radiation safety programs, and other users of radioactive materials. Regional nuclear operations and decommissioning also provide practical pathways through facilities such as Millstone and Seabrook and companies engaged in radiation protection, decommissioning, and nuclear services. Massachusetts itself retains several sites in decommissioning or long-term stewardship, including Pilgrim, while firms such as RSCS/Allied Power (RSCS) / Allied Power connect the region to a broader national nuclear-services market.

Experiential Infrastructure for Advanced Nuclear and Fusion Workforce Development

Advanced nuclear and fusion require a workforce much broader than nuclear engineers and physicists. National nuclear workforce assessments consistently identify needs spanning project development, construction, manufacturing, operations, maintenance, radiation protection, skilled trades, and eventual decommissioning and waste management.

Massachusetts starts with considerable capacity from which to build. The Commonwealth’s 2025 Special Commission on the Fossil Fuel Workforce estimated approximately 161,000 energy-related jobs in Massachusetts, while the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (MassCEC) reported approximately 115,300 clean-energy workers. The state also has nearly 10,000 active registered apprentices, supported by a mature network of union, employer, vocational, community-college, and state workforce programs. These capabilities reflect a much longer Massachusetts tradition of building technically demanding industries—from manufacturing and defense to major infrastructure, biotechnology and today’s climate-tech economy. That experience matters because advanced nuclear and fusion will require many of the same underlying capabilities, supplemented by nuclear-specific standards, safety culture, quality assurance, radiation protection, and operating requirements.

Workforce Across the Nuclear and Fusion Lifecycle

Energy affordability has become one of the defining considerations in long-term energy planning. For Massachusetts, affordable energy extends beyond household utility bills; it directly influences economic competitiveness, business investment, technology commercialization, and the Commonwealth's ability to sustain leadership in research, biotechnology, climate technology, artificial intelligence, advanced manufacturing, and other energy-intensive industries. As electricity assumes a larger role in transportation, buildings, and industry, maintaining an affordable, reliable, and resilient energy system becomes increasingly important to both economic growth and long-term decarbonization.

Massachusetts consistently ranks among the states with the highest retail electricity prices in the continental United States. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, Massachusetts residential electricity prices in 2024 (the most recent finalized data) averaged 29.35¢ / kilowatt-hour (kWh), compared with a national average of 16.48¢/kWh. Commercial and industrial electricity prices similarly exceeded national averages, reflecting the combined effects of wholesale electricity markets, transmission and distribution investments, regional fuel markets, infrastructure constraints, and public policy programs. While these investments have supported one of the nation's cleanest and most reliable electric systems, they also reinforce the importance of evaluating future energy pathways that maintain affordability while supporting continued economic growth

Massachusetts has built much of its innovation economy by converting research into companies, products, and industries. That progression is particularly visible in life sciences and, increasingly, climatetech, where university research is connected to incubators and accelerators, public and private capital, demonstration opportunities, manufacturing, and customers. The Commonwealth’s climatetech now includes more than 10,500 businesses and 163,000 workers and contributes approximately $17.3 billion directly to state economic output. The relevant question for advanced nuclear and fusion is whether this established commercialization machinery can be extended to technologies with longer development timelines, different regulatory requirements, larger capital needs, and greater dependence on physical demonstration.

Four foundations are particularly important to that progression: institutions, infrastructure, financing, and projects. Massachusetts is comparatively strong in the first three. Universities and research institutions generate technology and talent; organizations such as The Engine and Greentown Labs support company formation and growth; and MassCEC, MassTech, MassVentures, and other state institutions provide mechanisms for innovation, workforce, infrastructure, investment, and economic development. Massachusetts’ life-sciences experience provides an additional model for sustained state support of a highly regulated, research-intensive industry. The issue is not whether these institutions exist, but how effectively their missions, programs, and investment tools extend to advanced nuclear and fusion—and where the characteristics of these sectors require different approaches.

Foundations for Research-to-Demonstration-to-Commercialization Readiness

The economic opportunity associated with advanced nuclear and fusion extends well beyond the companies that design reactors. Commercial deployment requires a broad industrial base capable of producing components, materials, instrumentation, electrical systems, controls, specialized equipment, and supporting services over decades of construction and operation. Chapter 3 showed that many emerging reactor designs are explicitly pursuing greater factory fabrication, modular construction, digital engineering, and standardized components as a means of improving quality and reducing construction time and project risk. If these deployment models succeed, a larger share of nuclear economic activity could occur away from the reactor site and within regional and national supply chains.

This creates an opportunity that aligns with Massachusetts’ existing industrial strengths. The Commonwealth no longer has the heavy nuclear manufacturing footprint associated with the earlier U.S. nuclear build-out, but it retains substantial capabilities in precision manufacturing, robotics and automation, instrumentation and controls, sensors, advanced materials, electronics, computing, aerospace and defense, and specialized engineering, distributed across roughly 7,700 industrial companies and a manufacturing workforce of more than 250,000 statewide. A network of regional chambers of commerce and manufacturing coalitions—including groups such as the Middlesex 3 Coalition, recently designated an Advanced Manufacturing TechHub, and the South Shore Chamber of Commerce—already connects many of these firms to workforce, technology, and market-access resources, and could serve as a channel for identifying companies with transferable nuclear and fusion capabilities. Many of these capabilities serve industries with demanding requirements for quality, reliability, traceability, and performance. The relevant question is therefore not whether Massachusetts can manufacture an entire reactor, but which portions of the emerging nuclear and fusion value chain match capabilities the Commonwealth already performs competitively.

The opportunity is therefore not to recreate the nuclear industrial base of the twentieth century. It is to determine where Massachusetts’ twenty-first-century strengths—advanced manufacturing, automation, digital technologies, materials, instrumentation, and specialized engineering—can enter the emerging nuclear and fusion value chain. Doing so would create economic opportunities independent of where individual reactors are ultimately located while strengthening the industrial capabilities that Massachusetts and the region would need if future energy analysis supports deployment closer to home.

Massachusetts Advanced Nuclear and Fusion Supply-Chain Opportunity

Massachusetts’ ability to capture economic value from advanced nuclear and fusion will depend on more than the capabilities described in the preceding sections. Companies deciding where to locate research, manufacturing, demonstration, and commercial activities also look for evidence that a state intends to support an industry over the time horizon required for investment. That signal is created not by a single incentive, but by the cumulative effect of public policy, executive leadership, regulatory clarity, research and workforce investment, and direct engagement with industry. Together, these actions indicate whether an industry is welcome, understood, and likely to have a durable place in a state’s economic and energy strategy.

Massachusetts has begun to send such signals. The Commonwealth initiated this Roadmap, joined the six-state New England governors’ statement recognizing a potential role for nuclear energy in the region’s future, and participates as an observer in National Association of State Energy Officials' (NASEO) Advanced Nuclear First Mover Initiative. These actions matter, but companies making long-lived investment decisions also look for consistency between policy statements and the statutory and economic environment in which projects would develop. Massachusetts’ existing nuclear statutes were written under substantially different technological, market, and policy conditions, while the treatment of nuclear within state clean-energy policies can affect how developers and investors perceive its future role.

1. Build public readiness through credible information and engagement
2. Strengthen the pathway from research to demonstration and commercialization
3. Create market signals strong enough to mobilize people and capital
4. Convert adjacent strengths into nuclear and fusion capabilities
5. Build selectively in Massachusetts and leverage the regional and national network
6. Connect ecosystem readiness to the need for firm clean energy