Yes, I don't think there is an absolutely necessary relationship between nuclear power and EM cats, though my suspicion is that standard naval generators may have significant difficulty in providing the necessary electrical power on demand for sustained EM cat discharges. You'd almost certainly have to have to separate power generation from ship propulsion, necessitating additional space and weight reserves for these dedicated generators. A single EMALS for example requires a maximum of 60MW, using up enough juice to power 12,000 homes. By comparison, a QC-280 gas turbine puts out 28MW, less than half what is needed to power an EMALS. So in a conventional triple EM cat PLAN carrier, in addition to all the GTs needed for propulsion, you would also need at least 6 additional GTs dedicated solely to catapult launch. Compare that to a standard Nimitz A4W reactor rated at 550 MW; and there's two of them per Nimitz carrier.
The EM cat uses 60 MW during seconds while QC-280 can provide 28 MW continuously. So you need an energy storage device, either homopolar generator or super capacitor, between the two. UK wouldn't be installing extra gas turbines if it found the billions to fit EMALS into its carriers.
This is not the Type_001A-Thread.
That's a good point. So then would 2 extra GT's be sufficient to provide launch capabilities for all cats sequentially without need for capacitors? I imagine with the proper cabling you can simply provide juice to the catapults one at a time and then immediately switch to the next one.
The 60MW figure for EMALS is all over the internet.