Energy security is not just about power generation, it’s about controlling the systems behind it

The future will run on electricity. Artificial intelligence, transportation, industry, and everyday consumption are becoming increasingly electricity-dependent. In an AI-driven economy, reliable electricity is a strategic asset, and true energy sovereignty depends not only on generating power but also on controlling the systems that produce it.

Global electricity demand continues to rise, and India's growth trajectory is likely to resemble China's as industrialisation accelerates. While solar and wind power will play a major role, their intermittent nature means they cannot alone provide the stable baseload power required by a modern economy. Nuclear energy offers a clean and reliable complement to renewables.

China's scale is its strategy

China has recognized this reality and acted decisively. It currently operates more than 60 nuclear reactors and has 36 more under construction, representing over half of all reactors being built globally.

Nuclear capacity in operation and under construction in selected regions, 2025

Source: Global Energy Review, 2026

Beyond scale, China's real achievement is control. It has moved away from dependence on foreign reactor designs and developed its own third-generation reactor, the Hualong One. Nearly 90% of its components are now manufactured domestically.

This reflects a deliberate industrial strategy. By creating a large domestic market and guaranteeing demand, China has enabled its companies to invest, scale production, reduce costs, and build technological capability. The same approach that helped China dominate solar panels, batteries, and electric vehicles is now being applied to nuclear power.

The hidden risk of dependence
A nuclear power plant is not a one-time purchase; it is a commitment that lasts for six decades or more. Throughout its lifetime, it requires specialized components, software updates, maintenance services, and replacement parts.

When these critical inputs are controlled externally, long-term dependence follows. In today's fragmented geopolitical environment, leverage is often exercised through supply chains rather than tariffs. Export controls on semiconductors and other advanced technologies demonstrate how access to critical inputs can be restricted. Similar vulnerabilities exist in sectors such as aviation, where operators depend on foreign manufacturers for engines, maintenance, and spare parts.

Nuclear power is no different. Reactors rely on highly specialized equipment that must be serviced and replaced over decades. If these components are sourced from foreign suppliers, the operating country remains dependent throughout the plant's lifecycle. Recent restrictions on the export of certain nuclear components to China illustrate that even the nuclear sector is not immune to geopolitical pressures.

Energy security, therefore, is not just about generating electricity-it is about controlling the systems that generate it.

India's ambition and its gap
India has set an ambitious target of reaching 100 GW of nuclear capacity by 2047. However, ambition alone is not strategy.

The key difference between India and China is that China is building nuclear capacity and domestic capability simultaneously. India risks focusing primarily on capacity. India's indigenous reactor programs, including the Pressurized Heavy Water Reactor (PHWR), represent significant achievements. Yet true control extends beyond reactor design. It includes ownership of critical technologies, domestic manufacturing capability, and lifecycle services.

Many Indian companies possess the technical ability to participate in nuclear manufacturing. What they often lack is predictable demand and long-term policy support. Procurement systems frequently favor established global suppliers, making it difficult for domestic firms to achieve scale and competitiveness.

What India must do differently
India needs a more coordinated industrial strategy. A fleet-based approach that builds multiple reactors simultaneously can create predictable demand and encourage domestic investment.

Localization efforts should focus on components that are critical to long-term control rather than pursuing blanket indigenization. Policy must also address ownership and control of key technologies, not merely manufacturing.

The Prototype Fast Breeder Reactor (PFBR) provides an important lesson. Because India had to develop a fully domestic ecosystem, Indian firms successfully designed and delivered complex systems for a large-scale reactor. This demonstrates that the capability already exists when strategic necessity aligns with policy support.

The objective should be to build Indian-owned and controlled nuclear supply chains that can compete globally, reduce strategic dependence, and strengthen energy security. Over time, this could enable Indian companies to participate in international nuclear projects and emerge as global competitors. India's challenge is not whether it can build nuclear power plants. It is whether it can build and control the ecosystem behind them.

Dr. Aishwary Kant Gupta is an Associate Fellow and Economist at the Pahlé India Foundation.