This post follows my earlier post “Australia Needs to Learn from Germany’s $500 billion Mistake” ( based on renewable energy). It is important our politicians see that video as well as this one, so do what you can to get the message out.
Zoe Booth speaks with Gerard Holland, CEO of the Page Research Centre and founding member of the Alliance for Responsible Citizenship, about the hidden forces shaping Australia’s energy transition. Holland argues that foreign money, green-lobby astroturfing, and political restrictions are distorting Australia’s energy strategy. The conversation covers new research revealing more than $108 million in foreign-funded efforts to influence energy policy, the economics of renewables, nuclear power, and the growing cost-of-living crisis. They explore why the renewable transition is struggling to deliver cheap and reliable power, how subsidies shift costs onto lower-income households, and why Australia’s policy direction risks worsening strategic and economic vulnerabilities. This episode asks: Who benefits from keeping Australia nuclear-free and energy-dependent? What if net zero isn’t achievable through renewables alone? And what does this mean for Australia’s economic and national security future?
As I believe Jesus is returning with the glorified Saints to rule the nations with a rod of iron, maybe as early as 2035, poor decisions on energy supply will be quickly put right. Nuclear Fission or even Nuclear Fusion will be possibly on the table at that time. God has given us many prophetic scriptures on Jesus coming Millennial Kingdom you can prepare to rule and reign with Jesus by going to http://www.millennialkingdom.net
“He who overcomes, and he who keeps My deeds until the end, to him I will give authority over the nations; and he shall rule them with a rod of iron, as the vessels of the potter are broken to pieces, as I also have received authority from My Father” Revelation 2:26-27
Germany spent half a trillion dollars to become the world’s green energy superpower. Instead, they got the highest electricity prices in Europe, a dying industrial sector, and a grid that now relies on dirty coal to keep the lights on. How did the economic engine of Europe drive itself off a cliff? In this deep dive, we uncover the timeline of the Energiewende disaster. From the panic-induced shutdown of nuclear power plants to the fatal addiction to cheap Russian gas, we expose the policy failures that are forcing companies like BASF and Volkswagen to flee the country. Is this the end of “Made in Germany”? And what can the rest of the world learn from this expensive experiment?
Why doesn’t our current Minister for Climate Change and Energy in Australia, Chris Bowen learn from Germany’s $500 billion mistake?
This article is adapted from an article by Michael Robinson. He has spent more than four decades as an investigative journalist uncovering the story behind massive tech trends.
A massive energy crisis is here … and it’s all because of artificial intelligence. It is one of the reasons why solar and wind (intermittent renewables) are not adequate for maintaining supply. Nuclear is considered the best option to stabilise the energy mix.
On average, just one new AI data center currently requires the same amount of electricity as 750,000 homes. That’s more than the population of cities like Seattle, Detroit, and Denver.
Nearly 3,000 more of them are on the way. No wonder Tirias Research forecasts that, by 2028, data center power consumption will be 212 times what it was in 2023.
This boom in AI data centers will push America’s power grid to the brink. According to the New York Times, the world is “poised to add the equivalent of Japan’s annual electricity demand to grids each year” over the next decade.
It could bring AI screeching to a halt … Let alone affect regular people as utility bills skyrocket — even as they face planned blackouts to conserve energy … and prolonged outages because of creaky infrastructure.
Fortunately, Meta announced yesterday a request for proposals from nuclear power developers who would help the company add 1 to 4 gigawatts of electricity generating capacity in the U.S. According to Axios, Meta is willing to share costs early in the cycle and will commit to buying power once the reactors are up and running.
The hitch? Applicants have to move fast. Initial proposals are due February 7, 2025, and Meta wants the power plants to begin operation in the early 2030s.
Microsoft has signed a deal with one of the most infamous nuclear power facilities in the US as it looks for more ways to ensure the demand for AI computing is met.
The legacy of the Three Mile Island (TMI) nuclear plant has long been shaped by the 1979 Unit 2 meltdown, which had a profound effect on public perceptions of nuclear energy. What a lot of people don’t know is that Unit 1 was not only unaffected, but continued to operate safely and reliably for decades.
Now, in a major new step, Constellation has signed its largest power purchase agreement with Microsoft, leading to the planned restoration and restart of TMI Unit 1 under the name Crane Clean Energy Center (CCEC). The project is expected to bring 835 megawatts of carbon-free power to the grid, create 3,400 jobs, and contribute over $3 billion in taxes.
Considering this move in the USA it will be interesting to learn how Microsoft plans to power their new data centers in Australia.
Microsoft will invest A$5 billion ($3.2 billion) in Australia to expand its cloud computing and AI infrastructure over the next two years, in what the US company described as its largest investment in the country in four decades. Announced as part of Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s visit to the US this week, the investment will help Microsoft grow its data centers across Canberra, Sydney, and Melbourne by 45% – from 20 sites up to 29.
The following video shows that power constraints are the major problem facing Data Centre growth.
Article by Chris Kenny in The Australian, November, 16th 2024.
Anthony Albanese and Chris Bowen have long argued that renewable energy is the cheapest form of electricity. However, while tens of billions of dollars in subsidies and investments flow into renewables, prices keep going up. A reckoning must come, and it will be ugly.
Not only is Labor’s plan to reach its net-zero goal by switching the electricity grid to 90 percent renewable energy physically impossible (it has committed to get to 82 percent within 6 years), but the attempt is sending us a broke. At some stage, the facts will break through the delusion.
The unavoidable logic behind firming up a renewable energy grid makes additional costs unavoidable – a renewables grid demands two grids. You need to construct an expansive network of wind and solar generation plants, enough to cover about three times peak demand spread across vastly different microclimates in the hope that wind or sun will be available somewhere when you need it.
On Friday, the Coalition released estimates from Frontier Economics putting the total requited spend for the renewables transition at $642bn – that is $500bn more than Labor has estimated, and about five times what we have already spent. All of this must be recouped with profit, so our power price pain can only increase.
The catch with renewables is that they will always require backup, in effect another electricity grid, perhaps using much of the same transmission lines, but capable of generating peak demand without wind or solar. Most likely this backup grid would be powered by gas.
Once we know there is enough backup to supply peak demand, we can understand that the entirety of the renewable asset build is an additional and unnecessary energy cost we have chosen to impose on ourselves. It alienates land, increases complexity, and escalates costs without providing additional power, all so we can meet emissions reduction targets that other countries are not meeting, and which will make no discernible difference to global emissions or, therefore, the climate, anyway.
And whenever gas is needed to firm up the grid, the price the gas generators can charge will determine the cost of electricity. Two grids, a vast and inefficient renewable grid we could well do without, and an effective and reliable fossil-fuel grid are needed to guarantee the energy that underpins our society.
The lies being told on renewables costs have been brilliantly exposed by simple observations and arguments run by entrepreneur Dick Smith in an, until now, private debate with The Guardian Australia. Smith responded after The Guardian ran a piece slamming him for running “ill-informed claims” about renewable energy costs and practicality.
Smith does not contest the need to reduce emissions. His arguments are about whether renewables can power a modern economy and whether nuclear might not be a crucial part of the energy mix. In his letter, Smith says the underestimates from the CSIRO allow it to “falsely claim that renewables with storage is the cheapest form of energy”.
The electronics entrepreneur, adventurer, and environmentalist made a killer observation that exposes the ruse. “No doubt you have noticed all the wind and solar farms that exist around our country,” Smith wrote to The Guardian. “If the CSIRO claim that wind, solar, and storage is the cheapest form of energy is correct, these facilities would include batteries to supply power 24/7 – or at least for five hours. None of them do.”
This connects to a point I have made for a decade or more – instead of subsidising the installation of unreliable renewable energy, we should have made any subsidies or targets contingent on generators firming up their own supplies, either with batteries or dispatchable generation. Smith provides a clear explanation for why this is impossible: “That is, the cost of even limited storage results in solar and wind power being so expensive it is unaffordable.”
Dick Smith has also pointed out that when Broken Hill went dark last month because the main transmission line from Victoria was taken out in a storm, neither the nearby solar factory, wind farm, or big battery were able to keep the Silver City in power. He cites the real-world example of Lord Howe Island where despite a $12m grant for a renewables grid with storage, they have ended up with higher power prices and a reliance on diesel generators for 100 percent of their electricity at times.
This is just the reality. No developed country has even attempted to run on a 90 percent renewables model, and unless there is a watershed development in energy storage no country ever will – so what is Australia playing at?
A clue for a secure, prosperous, and clean energy future comes from our defense force—not the inane net-zero strategy but their plan to run nuclear-propelled submarines.
Instead of wasting government subsidies and burdening consumers with the investment costs of unproven renewable models and other “green energy superpowers” hyperbole like green hydrogen and pumped hydro, the time is ripe for nuclear power. It is dense power with a small land footprint that can use existing transmission infrastructure,
Remember the Whyalla wipeout? A decade or more on, it is still on the way with grave doubts about the future of the steelworks, delayed only by taxpayer subsidies and green energy posturing.
A steel manufacturing centre established with the advantage of cheap and reliable coal power is struggling again, as it awaits some kind of “green hydrogen” saviour. Yet a couple of hours up the road is one of the world’s largest uranium mines, and Whyalla and Port Augusta are linked to the national transmission grid because of the now-demolished coal-fired power plants in the region.
A nuclear power station near Port Augusta would buttress power supplies for Whyalla, South Australia and the national grid. Any excess power at times of low demand could be used for desalination or hydrogen production.
It is a much more logical and efficient solution, with proven technology, than our current renewables-plus-storage experiment. The only thing stopping the nuclear option is an honest and truthful appraisal of our options – and the political will.
Britain’s nuclear regulators have approved early designs for small modular reactors (SMRs) developed by Rolls-Royce SMR as a first step towards significantly expanding the UK’s nuclear power capabilities.
The firm is offering a different approach to delivering new nuclear power that is easier to scale and more affordable than building larger nuclear power plants.
It’s an approach that aims to deliver an entirely factory-built nuclear power plant that would be transported as modules and assembled on-site, radically reducing construction activity and making the SMRs a commodifiable product.
The previous government had an ambition to increase nuclear capacity in the UK from around 6GW to up to 24GW by 2050, as set out in the 2022 British energy security strategy.
The SMRs designed by Rolls-Royce will only provide around 470MWe of energy, but are significantly cheaper than major plants like the upcoming Hinkley Point C and Sizewell C.
The Environment Agency, Office for Nuclear Regulation and Natural Resources Wales confirmed that the firm has completed step 2 of a generic design assessment (GDA).
The GDA process assesses new nuclear power plant designs for deployment in the UK, demonstrating they can be built, operated and decommissioned in accordance with strict regulations on safety, security, safeguards and environmental protection.
Step 2 of the GDA began in April 2023, and since the design has now been approved, it can move onto step 3 which will entail more detailed scrutiny.
Saffron Price-Finnerty, the Environment Agency’s new reactors programme manager, said: “Our team of specialist assessors have worked diligently to assess hundreds of submissions and documents provided by Rolls-Royce SMR Limited and attended numerous technical meetings with the company.
“We have not currently identified any significant issues or concerns with the design and Rolls-Royce SMR Limited has been able to demonstrate that environmental protection and radioactive waste management are key areas of focus for its developing design.”
Rolls-Royce SMR said that today’s announcement puts it ahead of any other SMR manufacturer in Europe.
Helena Perry, Rolls-Royce SMR’s safety director, said: “The completion of step 2 of the GDA is the most important milestone to date in advancing deployment of Rolls-Royce SMRs in the UK.
“We have built fantastic momentum, and the team will move directly into step 3 of this rigorous independent assessment of our technology – ideally positioning us to deliver low-carbon nuclear power and support the UK transition to net zero.”
However, four companies, GE Hitachi, Holtec, Westinghouse (Canada), and Rolls Royce SMR have been shortlisted following two rounds of assessment by GBN, the government’s expert nuclear delivery body.
GBN will negotiate with all four before final tenders are submitted, with final decisions to be taken in the spring.
Each of the four designs was subject to a robust analysis to reach this stage. GBN has evaluated each technology, including aspects such as safety, deliverability, and their ability to support development of a fleet of SMRs. GBN considers the designs, each of which is proceeding through the UK’s regulatory process, are viable options for development. Subject to negotiations, GBN consider any one of these designs would be fit to use in the UK nuclear programme.
GBN’s Chair, Simon Bowen said, ‘This is a significant moment for the SMR programme. Our technical experts have assessed each design in detail and are very confident these SMRs could play a key role in the UK’s future energy.
Once again this news strengthens Peter Dutton’s proposal for Australia to include nuclear in our energy supply mix.
Trump started bringing production back to the USA during his first term. It has only accelerated in large part due to AI and Robotics and Trump’s efforts to make the USA energy independent by opening up fracking. Biden’s term has not helped but Trump will quickly resolve the energy supply problem.
The demands for new energy production are driven primarily by two massive trends that will certainly accelerate in the next four years.
There is a need for new AI factories – massive data centers – some of which will be on a gigawatt scale. It’s hard to imagine a data center facility that requires that much power, but that’s what is required to build artificial general intelligence (AGI), and it will be required to run thousands of AI applications. The capital expenditures for AI for Amazon, Microsoft, Alphabet, Oracle, Meta, and Apple for 2025 will be around $200 billion. That’s just six companies in one year.
This is a multitrillion-dollar trend that will unfold over the next decade. It’s unstoppable. And it needs gigawatts of electricity to fuel these technological advancements.
The second major trend is something I’ve referred to as The Great Recalibration. It’s a massive reversal of the multi-decade trend to move manufacturing offshore, primarily to Asia.
Economic policies that began in 2017 were a turning point for bringing manufacturing back onshore. The tide is coming back in and manufacturing in-country has become deeply popular again. And for good reason:
It creates jobs and opportunity
It improves supply chain security
It reduces overall CO₂ emissions by manufacturing close to end markets (i.e. less transportation and logistics are required)
These economic policies take a few years to kick in, and they tend to span administrations. It’s easy to see the impact in the chart below. Total manufacturing construction spending has more than tripled since January 2020.
Source: BlackRock
By May of this year, manufacturing construction spending has increased to around $234 billion annually. This isn’t a trend that will slow down. And the supply chain problems caused by the pandemic policies only accelerated this recalibration.
This recalibration wouldn’t be possible, however, without today’s advanced technology.
Robotics, artificial intelligence, and process automation are driving manufacturing costs down to levels that are near what can be produced in China, without the supply chain or intellectual property risks.
And of course, all of these new manufacturing plants, whether they be for cars, semiconductors, or bicycles, will require gigawatts of electricity to run. Preferably, carbon emission-free energy.
And that’s why the politics have shifted. Technology can and will save the day. That’s why energy policy and regulations are so critically important. Investment follows when there are reasonable regulations that provide a clear path toward commercialization in a short period. This has long been the issue with nuclear power regulations.
A New Energy Framework
Earlier this year, U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) gave Holtec International approval for a $1.52 billion loan guarantee to bring 800 megawatts of nuclear power back online by restarting the Palisades nuclear power plant in southwest Michigan. At the same time, the Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant in California received $1.1 billion from the program to enable its two nuclear reactors to stay in operation.
Based on the DOE’s estimates of needing an additional 200 gigawatts of new nuclear power in the next 25 years, the U.S. government just announced yesterday a new nuclear energy framework to bring online “200 GW of net new nuclear energy capacity by 2050.”
Bring online 35 gigawatts (GW) of new nuclear capacity by 2035
Ramp up to bringing on line 15 GW of new nuclear capacity by 2040
To put things in perspective, 1 GW of electricity is about half the output of the Hoover Dam. It’s enough to power roughly 750,000-850,000 homes. This new framework has a target of 200 GW, enough to power up to 170,000,000 homes with carbon emission-free electricity. But the increase in nuclear power production isn’t for homes, it’s for the new Data Centres needed for the AI revolution and manufacturing and infrastructure construction
With Vivek Ramaswamy and Elon Musk now officially assigned to head up the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), we can expect rapid progress on this front. Both are intelligent, evidence-based, and common-sense thinkers now charged with the mandate to reduce government waste, “slash excess regulations,” and bring an entrepreneurial approach to government.
Having built the most successful clean energy company in history, I know this will be a major focus for Musk. He deeply understands that fueling Tesla electric vehicles with electricity produced from coal, natural gas, and oil makes no sense at all.
With nuclear power, the dream of carbon emission-free ground transportation is possible.
Better yet, DOGE has already been given a deadline for its mission. The team is to conclude its work no later than July 4, 2026, the 250th anniversary of The Declaration of Independence.
My prediction – DOGE is going to hit the ground running in January and aggressively get things done. We’re in for some remarkable developments. And cheap, limitless, clean energy is the path to abundance.
The Australian Labour Party needs to realise that its current renewable energy policy will not be adequate and cost-effective for industry to be competitive. We need to bring more natural gas online and upgrade and maintain our coal-fired power stations until we can introduce the best nuclear options for each State. High-efficiency low-emissions (HELE) coal-fired power stations are proven to reduce both emissions and fuel costs by maximising the amount of power from the steam produced.
UK Energy Secretary Ed Miliband and US Deputy Secretary of Energy David Turk agreed to a plan to “help pool together billions of pounds worth of nuclear research and development – including the world’s leading academic institutions and nuclear innovators”.
The decision is an extension of the pro-nuclear agreement signed by 31 nations last year at COP28 to triple nuclear energy capacity globally by 2050 and aims to have new technology available by 2030.
This may be enough to give Dutton and the Liberal Party a chance to win the next election.
For developing economies, the availability of cost-effective, dispatchable baseload electricity is crucial for the growth of electricity-intensive industries that can drive economic progress and improve living standards. This is mandatory considering the amount of electricity needed for the latest technologies: AI, Blockchain, Quantum Computing, Data Centres etc.
This underscores the need to address the proverbial elephant in the room without the ideological haze of international climate agreements or theoretical doomsday hypotheses. Here and now, there is a real need to apply pragmatism and do what is sensible for a reliable electricity supply.
Older power plants should be refurbished in the interim to maintain supply stability. Investment in unreliable and unproven renewable electricity sources should be reconsidered, as they are ill-suited to meeting developing country’s long-term economic demands, particularly in the mining, manufacturing, and agricultural sectors. Furthermore, over-reliance on imported refined products could jeopardize developing country’s energy sovereignty and exacerbate balance of payments issues.
The future of electricity in developing countries needs to focus on efficient and effective technologies. These are Nuclear and High-Efficiency, Low-Emissions (HELE) coal-fired, and natural gas power stations.
Electricity in developing countries such as South Africa is a major necessity for business and associated development and is required for future economic growth.
Nuclear and HELE coal and gas represent the most viable options for providing the reliable, dispatchable baseload electricity needed to support the country’s industrial and economic development. Governments must focus on repairing the damage to investor confidence caused by ongoing electricity disruptions and ensure the introduction of adequate, competitively priced electricity supplies to sustain future growth.
Biblical prophecy indicates we are fast approaching the end of Satan’s rule over Earth and Jesus ushering in His Millennial Kingdom. The nation God established for His purposes, Israel with its Messiah, Jesus Christ, will finally rule the nations of the world.
No doubt we will be using Nuclear technology during this time. We are currently using nuclear fission but perhaps then we will use nuclear fusion which is capable of releasing much greater energy than nuclear fission.
The Bible gives us a lot of information about what is next on God’s agenda for planet Earth when Jesus and the glorified Saints will be ruling the nations with a rod of iron. Jesus Millennial Kingdom is a transition period prior to the second resurrection and Jesus White Throne judgement of believers that have died during Jesus Millennial reign and all unbelievers. It is only at the end of Jesus Millennial reign will this Cosmos be destroyed and God creates a new heaven and new Earth where only the righteous will dwell.
According to Bloomberg, China has more nuclear reactors under construction than any other country, having approved a dozen in each of the past two years. The nation is on track to become the world’s largest producer of nuclear energy by 2030, overtaking France and the United States. Moreover, it was the first country to connect a small modular nuclear reactor to its grid in the Shandong province.
The EAST fusion-research tokamak at the Chinese Academy of Science’s Institute of Plasma Physics (ASIPP) in Hefei, China.
China has approved five new nuclear power projects, adding 11 reactors with an estimated investment of 220 billion yuan ($30.79 billion), marking a new record in the country’s atomic energy expansion. The decision was taken at an executive meeting of the State Council, presided over by Premier Li Qiang on Monday, the state-run Xinhua news agency said. State-controlled Chinese business news outlet Jiemian said the reactors will be constructed across the provinces of Jiangsu, Shandong, Guangdong, Zhejiang, and Guangxi.
Jiemian estimates are based on the average cost of 20 billion yuan ($2.8 billion) per reactor. Typically, China completes such projects within five years of approval. Six of the reactors will be managed by subsidiaries of the state-owned China General Nuclear Power Group (CGN), with several expected to be third-generation Hualong One reactors.
The China National Nuclear Corporation (CNNC) will build three more reactors, while the State Power Investment Corporation (SPIC) will oversee the construction of two others. Both CNNC and SPIC are also publicly owned. Notably, the Xuwei project in Jiangsu, operated by CNNC, will include a fourth-generation gas-cooled reactor designed to supply both heat and electricity, featuring enhanced safety measures.
China connected its first commercial onshore small modular nuclear reactor to its power grid, making it the first country in the world to draw power from such a machine, a report from Bloomberg reveals. China Huaneng Group Co.‘s 200-megawatt unit 1 reactor at Shidao Bay is connected to the grid in the Shandong province.
As part of its energy security and emissions reduction strategy, China is heavily investing in nuclear power alongside renewable sources like wind and solar. Beijing aims to double nuclear energy’s share of the national energy mix from 5 percent to 10 percent by 2035. Dutton is correct in including it in Australia’s energy mix.
Alphabet’s Google is plugging into nuclear power for its artificial intelligence (AI) operations. The tech giant inked a deal with Kairos Power to purchase electricity from small modular reactors (SMRs).
The plan: Bring the first SMR online by 2030, with more to follow through 2035.
The bigger picture: This move highlights the surging energy demands of AI, with U.S. data center power consumption projected to triple between 2023 and 2030.
In a deal that marks the first corporate agreement to deploy multiple small modular reactors (SMRs) in the U.S., Kairos Power, and Google have signed a Master Plant Development Agreement to facilitate the development of a 500-MW fleet of molten salt nuclear reactors by 2035 to power Google’s data centers.
Momentum for a nuclear revival driven by data center power demand is already beginning to crop up. As POWER reported earlier this month, Microsoft and Constellation Energy committed $1.6 billion to restart the Unit 1 reactor of the shuttered Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania by 2028. The facility, known as the Crane Clean Energy Center, could supply Microsoft’s AI-driven data centers for at least 20 years. Amazon Web Services, similarly, last year bought a 960-MW data center campus powered by the 2,500-MW Susquehanna nuclear plant.
Also, the Strategic Capabilities Office of the US Department of Defense (DOD) has selected BWXT Advanced Technologies and X-energy LLC to develop a final design for a prototype mobile microreactor under the Project Pele initiative. The two teams have been selected through a preliminary design competition which began in April 2019. Three companies – BWX Technologies, Westinghouse Government Services, and X-energy – were selected last year to begin preliminary design work for a prototype reactor. One of the remaining two companies may be selected to build and demonstrate a prototype after a final design review early next year, and the completion of an environmental analysis under the US National Environmental Protection Act, DOD said.
Australia has realized the need for nuclear submarines, so we are committed to nuclear energy and need to develop expertise with small nuclear reactors. We have also had a nuclear reactor in Sydney since the 1950s without incident. Hence, it makes good business sense to bring nuclear energy into our energy mix as well.
The data centers that power AI technologies require such prodigious – and reliable – volumes of electricity, that tech giants like Amazon.com Inc. (AMZN) and Microsoft Corp. (MSFT) “rediscovered” nuclear power as an ideal energy source.
Microsoft and Constellation Energy, the utility that owns Three Mile Island, announced a new deal on September 20th that will lead to the restart of Unit 1 at the Three Mile Island Nuclear Generating Station. This will be the first time a nuclear reactor in the United States has been brought back online after being shut down.
The deal is for 20 years and is a power purchase agreement in which Microsoft will buy the power generated by Unit 1 for an estimated $110-$115 per megawatt hour in order to reliably power its Artificial Intelligence (AI) data center demand while meeting the companies clean energy goals. Unit one will reopen as the “Crane Clean Energy Center” by 2028 so long as the Nuclear Regulatory Commission approves the plan.
Amazon Web Services is paying as much as $650 million for a data center campus adjacent to a nuclear power plant in Pennsylvania. The cloud provider reportedly plans to build several data centers there, according to The Information.
The recent Amazon and Microsoft nuclear deals are not outliers. Earlier this month, Oracle Corp. (ORCL) Chairman and Co-founder Larry Ellison announced that his company had obtained “building permits for three nuclear reactors. These are small modular nuclear reactors to power the data center.
Along with this surprising announcement, Ellison also mentioned that some of the newest data centers under construction will require ten times more power than the typical facilities in operation today. Oracle, he said, is building an 800-megawatt data center that will have “acres of Nvidia GPU clusters” that will be used to train one of the world’s largest AI models.
For perspective, 800 MW is nearly identical to the entire power supply that Microsoft expects the Three Mile Island plant to produce once it reopens. In other words, one modern data center will need the entire output of one nuclear reactor.
In many important respects, nuclear energy has no equal, especially when it comes to powering data centers. Electricity that is intermittent, or susceptible to interruption, is electricity that could cause a big, expensive mess for data centers. Nukes prevent that problem. They can run continuously for long periods of time without needing maintenance or refueling.
Importantly, nukes also require a relatively small footprint, compared to renewable energy sources. Theoretically, a square plot of land, 22 miles long on each side, could accommodate enough nuclear reactors to power the entire United States.
Looks like Dutton may be onto a winner by bringing Nuclear Energy into our Power Mix. Because of the need for lots of land, batteries, digitalisation, and new infrastructure (grid upgrade and expansion) with wind, and solar the renewables option is more expensive and less reliable than Nuclear.
LIVING ETERNAL NOW 