Call: 1-877-697-2926

Can Nuclear Fix the Big Data Center Power Problem?

The digital economy runs on computation, and computation consumes energy. As artificial intelligence, cloud computing, and hyperscale data facilities scale at unprecedented speed, so too does their demand for electricity. Global data traffic is expected to exceed 180 zettabytes by 2025 according to Statista, driven by everything from autonomous systems to enterprise analytics. Powering the servers behind that data deluge already accounts for a significant portion of global electricity use — with data centers alone consuming close to 1-1.5% of global power today, a number projected to rise sharply.

Meanwhile, fossil fuels dominate current energy mixes across major data markets, sparking concerns over sustainability, resiliency, and emissions. Alternative sources like solar and wind face intermittency issues; batteries bring trade-offs in scale and materials. Against this backdrop, nuclear energy has re-emerged as a potential game-changer — offering carbon-free baseload power with 90%+ capacity factors.

Can nuclear energy scale fast and flexibly enough to meet the sprawling demand of our digital future? This article examines the evolving power dynamics of the digital age and investigates whether nuclear — from traditional plants to next-gen modular reactors — can deliver the consistent, clean energy hyperscale data centers require.

The Power Problem: Explosive Growth in Data Center Demand

Soaring Energy Demand in the U.S. Data Center Industry

Between 2010 and 2022, U.S. data center electricity consumption doubled, rising from 76 terawatt-hours (TWh) to approximately 150 TWh. The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) forecasts this growth to accelerate dramatically. By 2030, data centers could consume up to 9% of total U.S. electricity, up from roughly 2.5% today. This projection places national data center power use between 260 and 390 TWh annually by the end of the decade.

Such demand isn't abstract—it’s already visible. Northern Virginia's Loudoun County, home to the world's highest concentration of data centers, is projected to need 5 GW of additional electricity over the next five years, according to Dominion Energy. That's the equivalent of powering over 3.75 million homes.

What’s Fueling This Growth?

Hyperscale, Hyperefficient—But Power-Hungry

Hyperscale data centers—generally defined as facilities exceeding 5,000 servers and spread over at least 10,000 square feet—consume between 20 and 100 MW each. A single campus can draw as much power as a medium-sized city. Meta’s campus in Sarpy, Nebraska, for instance, is expected to demand 1 GW when complete. Google and Microsoft have each secured over 2 GW in new capacity agreements to support their rapid scale-up in AI infrastructure.

Colocation providers, too, are facing power constraints. Companies like Equinix and Digital Realty report local grid saturation in regions such as Frankfurt, Singapore, and Northern Virginia—all key connectivity hubs. This constraint limits new construction and has already prompted moratoriums and slowdowns on new site approvals in places like Dublin and Amsterdam.

The Horizon: What Demand Looks Like in 2030 and Beyond

McKinsey & Company estimates that U.S. data center demand will grow at a 10% CAGR through 2030. That trajectory aligns with the International Energy Agency’s (IEA) global forecast: without intervention, total global data center energy consumption could hit over 1,000 TWh annually by 2030—comparable to Japan’s total electricity demand today.

This shift rewrites infrastructure assumptions. No longer a background burden, data centers are becoming priority consumers on the grid. The question isn’t whether demand will surge—it’s how to support it with sufficient, stable, low-carbon energy.

Carbon Emissions and the Pressure for Sustainable Power

Data Centers and Carbon Emissions: A Growing Tension

Global data center electricity consumption topped 240–340 terawatt-hours (TWh) in 2022, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA). That equates to roughly 1–1.3% of the world's total electricity use. What’s more significant—hyperscale facilities are expanding faster than grids can decarbonize, dragging emissions in the wrong direction.

Data centers require uninterrupted power 24/7. Unlike manufacturing facilities or residential buildings, they cannot throttle down without affecting operations. This always-on model results in continuous draw from the grid, much of which still depends on fossil fuels in many regions. According to the IEA, data transmission networks and data centers together emitted about 330 Mt CO₂eq in 2022—a figure that will climb unless major structural changes occur.

Corporate Sustainability Commitments from Tech Giants

Leading tech companies now lean heavily on sustainability performance to shape brand image, investor confidence, and long-term resilience. Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, and Meta have all pledged large-scale decarbonization efforts tied directly to their data operations:

These targets hinge on the transformation of energy sourcing strategies at scale. Green credits or offset schemes no longer suffice. Stakeholders expect direct, verifiable, real-time decarbonization.

Clean Electricity: The Backbone of Digital Infrastructure

Every kilobyte stored or processed transforms into heat and energy needs. That transformation, repeated millions of times per second across hyperscale facilities, only works sustainably when powered by carbon-free sources. Electricity accounts for upwards of 90% of operational emissions for most data centers. Shifting the source of that electricity from fossil to non-emitting sources eliminates the bulk of their climate impact.

Unlike transportation or manufacturing industries that involve non-electric fuel sources and material inputs, data centers are fundamentally constrained and enabled by electricity. Decarbonizing this single variable unlocks immediate and measurable climate gains. That’s why the transition to clean energy is not an add-on—it defines whether digital infrastructure can be built and operated at scale in a climate-resilient future.

Public and Regulatory Pressure to Decarbonize

Across jurisdictions, regulators are tightening decarbonization mandates. The European Union’s proposal for mandatory sustainability reporting under CSRD includes Scope 2 emissions, meaning data center operators must account for indirect electricity emissions. In the U.S., the SEC has finalized rule changes that require some level of climate risk disclosures for listed companies.

More than policy, public sentiment continues to prompt corporate action. In a 2023 Ipsos survey, over 70% of respondents in 29 countries supported government investment in clean energy and technologies to address climate concerns—even if it increased costs. For data center operators, inaction presents reputational exposure, potential future compliance costs, and competitive disadvantage.

Why Renewable Energy Alone Isn’t Enough

Intermittency Turns Reliability into a Moving Target

Solar panels don’t generate electricity at night. Wind turbines sit idle on calm days. While renewable energy sources like solar and wind can slash carbon emissions, their output pivots entirely on environmental conditions. Data centers, on the other hand, require uninterrupted power 24/7, operating with uptime targets of 99.999%—the so-called “five nines” of availability. Without steady generation, every fluctuation in sunlight or wind speed introduces risk to core operations.

Grid-scale batteries offer some buffering, but current technology can store only a limited number of hours of electricity. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, in 2022, the total utility-scale battery storage capacity in the U.S. was approximately 8.8 GW—less than 1% of total generating capacity. That gap widens dramatically under high-load, continuous-demand scenarios like data centers.

Location Matters—but Not Every Location Works

Renewables require space. Not just physical square footage, but specific geographies that optimize output. High-quality solar demands regions with consistently sunny days; efficient wind farms need steady air currents and wide-open land. Data centers, by contrast, often cluster in areas with robust fiber infrastructure, proximity to customers, and access to cooling resources. These siting priorities rarely align.

This creates a fundamental mismatch. For instance, a hyperscale facility in the Pacific Northwest might enjoy hydropower proximity, but a similar center in Virginia won’t get comparable results from solar or wind alone. In highly urbanized regions, installing large-scale renewable infrastructure is rarely feasible due to space and zoning constraints.

The Scalability Challenge: Land, Materials, and Build-Out Time

As demand for digital services surges, energy scalability becomes non-negotiable. Here's where renewables run into hard walls. Solar photovoltaic (PV) systems require about 3.5 to 10 acres per megawatt of capacity. Wind farms need even more—roughly 30 to 141 acres per MW, although not all of it is disturbed land.

These constraints compound when attempting to match the breakneck growth of hyperscale data infrastructure. Even aggressive investment can’t instantly translate into predictable, scalable power delivery.

Always-On Power Isn’t Optional

Data centers don’t operate on a best-effort basis. They demand base load power—predictable, unbroken energy supply capable of sustaining operations through hours, days, and seasonal variations. Intermittent sources can't guarantee this continuity without massive overcapacity or exorbitant storage investment.

Without a complementary, dispatchable source of power—something that outputs the same megawatts at 3 a.m. as it does at 3 p.m.—renewables alone cannot close the power reliability gap. This makes room in the energy conversation for generation sources that don’t blink when the sun sets or the wind stalls.

Bringing Nuclear Back Into the Conversation

The Case for Nuclear: Zero Emissions, Baseload Reliability, and Scalability

Nuclear power delivers electricity around the clock. Unlike wind and solar, nuclear generates a steady output regardless of weather or time of day. That consistency matters when powering hyperscale data centers expecting year-round uptime. Nuclear plants emit zero carbon during operation, aligning directly with emissions targets driving the tech industry’s decarbonization strategies.

In terms of grid stability, nuclear offers firm capacity without needing back-up storage or overbuilds. Each gigawatt-scale nuclear reactor provides a high and predictable load factor—typically above 90%, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA). Solar and wind, by contrast, average capacity factors of 24.4% and 35.4%, respectively (2022 figures). The disparity in output per unit of installed capacity defines nuclear’s critical edge.

The U.S. Nuclear Fleet: Backbone of the Low-Carbon Grid

As of 2024, the U.S. nuclear fleet consists of 93 commercial reactors with a combined capacity of roughly 95.8 gigawatts. These reactors supplied about 18.2% of total electricity generation in 2023, but they contributed 49% of all carbon-free power, according to the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI). The ongoing operation of these reactors prevents over 471 million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions annually—the equivalent of taking nearly 100 million cars off the road.

Nuclear energy operates as a national asset rather than a regional experiment. Plants are spread across 28 states, helping to stabilize regional grids during extreme weather and ensuring reliable power across seasons.

Energy Density and Utilization: Beyond Land and Storage Limitations

Nuclear wins on energy density. A single nuclear plant occupies a fraction of the land required by equivalent-capacity solar or wind installations. For example, a 1,000 MW nuclear plant typically requires one square mile; achieving the same reliable output from wind would demand more than 260 square miles, due to its lower capacity factor, according to analysis by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).

Battery storage can partially mitigate renewable intermittency, but not at grid scale and not economically. Daily utility-scale battery storage in the U.S. totaled just 10.8 gigawatt-hours by the end of 2022—enough to power data centers for mere minutes during peak conditions. Nuclear bypasses this problem by delivering continuous baseload energy without storage dependence.

Complementarity: Bridging Gaps, Not Replacing Solutions

Nuclear doesn’t compete with renewables—it completes them. Each energy source offers strengths tailored to different grid needs. Where wind and solar reduce fuel dependence and shine during peak sunlight or gusty periods, nuclear fills the valleys with uninterrupted power. Together, they form a balanced generation portfolio that can meet surging data center demands without destabilizing the grid.

Rather than forcing renewables to bear the full weight of decarbonizing hyperscale infrastructure, pairing them with nuclear yields a resilient, diversified, and low-carbon power strategy. Tech companies, grid operators, and policy architects seeking performance and sustainability cannot ignore nuclear’s proven contributions.

Small Modular Reactors (SMRs): A Game-Changer for Data Centers?

Redefining Power Delivery with SMRs

Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) offer a radically different approach to nuclear power, aligning more closely with the distributed energy needs of high-density digital infrastructure. Designed to generate up to 300 megawatts of electric power per unit—one-third or less the output of a traditional nuclear power plant—SMRs can supply localized, consistent baseload power with a fraction of the spatial and logistic demands.

Unlike legacy reactor designs built for utility-scale generation and often located far from end-use industries, SMRs are engineered for proximity and modularity. Their compact footprint, factory fabrication model, and passive safety systems make them particularly suited for integration with data centers, especially where traditional grid resources are strained or intermittent renewables fall short.

Co-Siting Opportunities and Compact Design

Space is at a premium for hyperscale data centers, particularly those near metropolitan or tech sector hubs where real estate is constrained. Here, the small land requirements of SMRs—typically between 5 to 15 acres—create viable paths for co-location.

By co-siting SMRs directly adjacent to or within the same campus as data centers, operators can reduce energy transmission losses, avoid grid bottlenecks, and stabilize power availability. This proximity also opens the door to integrating thermal management strategies, such as using SMRs' waste heat for on-site absorption cooling—further boosting overall system efficiency.

Technical Advantages: Design, Deployment, and Safety

Early Deployment: Projects in Motion

Several early-stage projects have moved from theory to application. NuScale Power’s VOYGR design, approved by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission in 2020, is the first SMR concept to pass full regulatory review in the United States. The Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems (UAMPS) plans to implement six VOYGR-77 modules at Idaho National Laboratory, targeting a total capacity of 462 megawatts—enough to power multiple hyperscale data centers.

In Canada, the Ontario Power Generation (OPG) and GE Hitachi partnership is advancing the BWRX-300 reactor project at the Darlington site. With targeted completion around 2028, this project will serve as a commercial baseline for SMR applications not only in the energy sector but also for industries demanding consistent high-density power—like AI data centers.

International traction continues as well. Poland’s Synthos and South Korea’s SMART reactor developers are aggressively pursuing SMR integration into industrial sites where traditional energy infrastructure lags behind demand spikes driven by digitization.

Are data giants watching these developments closely? Absolutely. And at this pace, SMRs will not remain pilots for long.

Co-Locating Nuclear Plants with Data Centers: Geographic Considerations

Balancing Location, Infrastructure, and Acceptance

Deploying nuclear energy as a backbone for big data requires more than reactor efficiency—it demands smart integration. Connecting a nuclear plant directly to a hyperscale data center introduces specific geographic and regulatory variables that shape feasibility from the ground up. This is not simply about picking an open field and pouring concrete. Precision siting determines operational success.

Proximity to Cooling Water

Nuclear reactors require vast amounts of water for cooling. A typical pressurized water reactor uses between 25,000 and 60,000 gallons per minute during operation. Even Small Modular Reactors (SMRs), though more efficient, still need sustained access to hydrologic resources. River-adjacent sites or coastal facilities naturally align with reactor requirements. Inland locations, unless on major waterways or paired with advanced air-cooling systems, face critical limitations.

Environmental Impact

Siting near ecologically sensitive areas increases permitting complexity and invites legal challenges. Aquatic ecosystems can be affected by thermal discharge, while land-apportioned developments (like buffer zones) constrain site design. Environmental Impact Statements (EIS), mandated under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), can take years to complete and often reshape initial plans. For data centers aiming to scale within narrow timeframes, this becomes a strategic filter early in site selection.

Regulatory Environment

Nuclear licensing is governed by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), but state involvement varies widely. Some states—like Illinois and South Carolina—already host multiple reactors and maintain regulatory frameworks that streamline additions. Others, such as West Virginia or Kentucky, have only recently repealed moratoriums or still wrestle with enabling legislation. Aligning with nuclear-friendly states cuts red tape and compresses deployment timelines.

Community Acceptance

Public sentiment directly influences permitting, expansion, and long-term operations. Communities with existing nuclear infrastructure generally show higher levels of acceptance. For instance, surveys conducted around the Palo Verde site in Arizona found over 70% local support for new nuclear development. Contrast that with regions where proposed plants have stalled due to sustained opposition, like the canceled Calvert Cliffs Unit 3 in Maryland. Hosting a data center employing hundreds may earn goodwill, but without clear communication and benefit frameworks, skepticism can derail entire projects.

U.S. Regions Best Positioned for Nuclear-Data Integration

Regions with little seismic activity or extreme climate volatility receive priority, too. Lower geological risk supports long-term plant viability and mitigates insurance costs—directly influencing total data center reliability.

Where you build matters. Not all states are equal partners in the nuclear-data conversation, and strategic alignment with region-specific assets accelerates ROI and infrastructure stability.

Why Tech Companies Stand to Gain from Nuclear-Powered Data Centers

Energy Reliability and Grid Independence

Unlike solar and wind, nuclear provides a continuous baseload of electricity—day and night, regardless of weather or season. Companies that operate data centers can bypass the volatility of local grids by tapping into a dedicated, nuclear-generated power source. This consistent supply removes the risk of blackouts and brownouts, which have escalated due to rising global electricity demand and aging grid infrastructure.

For multinational hyperscalers running mission-critical services, uninterrupted uptime remains non-negotiable. Nuclear-backed infrastructure supports that expectation with capacity factors consistently above 90%, according to data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA).

Long-Term Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) Stability

Utilities operating nuclear plants can offer PPAs with durations spanning 20–40 years. That scale of commitment allows data center operators to lock in rates and secure predictable operating costs decades into the future. In an industry where volatility in energy pricing directly impacts profitability, rate stability offers a strategic advantage.

Consider this: natural gas prices in the U.S. fluctuated more than 100% between 2020 and 2022, whereas nuclear fuel costs remained flat. By decoupling from fossil fuel markets, businesses gain insulation from future shocks and policy-driven carbon pricing.

Meeting ESG Targets with Low-Carbon, High-Capacity Energy

Nuclear power produces zero direct CO2 emissions. For companies publicly measuring Scope 2 emissions—those linked to purchased electricity—this makes nuclear a high-impact solution. In 2023, Microsoft's sustainability report identified electricity consumption as the largest contributor to its operational carbon footprint. Shifting to nuclear could radically alter that calculus.

As ESG reporting evolves from voluntary to mandatory in markets like the EU and California, nuclear co-location meets both compliance needs and investor expectations. Integrating nuclear into the energy mix directly supports science-based climate targets and 24/7 carbon-free electricity goals.

Brand Leverage: Sustainability Meets Innovation

Brands that run on nuclear can position themselves at the intersection of climate leadership and frontier thinking. Within the tech sector, which prizes disruption and visibility, aligning operations with advanced nuclear sends a powerful message: we don’t just reduce impact—we reimagine infrastructure.

Imagine a public-facing dashboard showing that every packet of data processed at a given facility is powered by stable, zero-carbon nuclear energy. This type of transparency translates energy sourcing into storytelling, tying backend decisions to customer-facing values. In an attention economy, that linkage boosts loyalty and shapes reputation.

The Cost Question: Is Nuclear Financially Feasible?

Capital Expenditure vs. Operational Cost

Building a nuclear power plant demands a large upfront capital investment. For utility-scale traditional nuclear, construction costs in the U.S. have ranged from $9 billion to over $30 billion, depending on project scope and delays. Small modular reactors (SMRs), however, are shaping up as comparatively more affordable. The NuScale SMR, for example, is targeting a cost of approximately $3,600 per kW, according to the U.S. Department of Energy. That places a 462 MW plant at an estimated $1.7 billion.

Operational costs shift the equation in nuclear's favor. Nuclear plants have among the lowest variable costs per MWh in the power sector. Once operational, they offer predictable, stable pricing. Unlike fossil-based generation, nuclear fuel price volatility is negligible. Uranium represents a small fraction of the total cost of electricity, contributing to long-term cost stability.

Comparison with Renewable + Storage Hybrids

Pairing solar or wind with energy storage offers a viable path to low-carbon electricity, but the full system costs quickly rise for high-reliability applications like data centers. According to Lazard’s 2023 Levelized Cost of Energy (LCOE) analysis, utility-scale solar ranges from $24 to $96 per MWh, while wind ranges from $24 to $75. However, when storage is added to achieve 24/7 reliability, the LCOE jumps dramatically—solar paired with 4-8 hour storage ranges between $120 and $245 per MWh.

In contrast, nuclear’s LCOE—estimated between $131 and $204 per MWh for new builds—looks more competitive when adjusted for reliability. Unlike intermittent renewables, nuclear offers baseload power without need for storage.

Economic Benefits Over Lifespan of the Plant

Nuclear infrastructure excels when evaluated over long time horizons. Plants built today are engineered with 60-year operational lifespans, extendable to 80 years with upgrades. Over decades, the fixed operating costs and high capacity factors—often above 90%—translate into amortized expenditures that reward initial investment. For companies with long-term infrastructure planning cycles, this financial predictability can be a decisive advantage.

Moreover, capacity utilization for nuclear remains consistently high. For example, in 2022, the average U.S. nuclear plant had a capacity factor of 92.7%, according to the Nuclear Energy Institute. In contrast, wind and solar clocked in at 35.4% and 24.4%, respectively. The higher utilization rate offsets the capital cost premium across the plant’s service life.

Role of Public-Private Partnerships and Federal Incentives in the U.S.

Subsidies, tax credits, and risk-sharing strategies are shifting the economics in favor of nuclear. The Inflation Reduction Act introduces a $15 per MWh production tax credit for existing reactors and extends potential investment tax credits to new advanced nuclear projects. Additionally, the Department of Energy’s Loan Programs Office has earmarked over $40 billion in loan authority, targeting nuclear among other clean energy technologies.

Joint ventures between tech companies and utilities or energy developers could further reshape cost structures. For instance, Microsoft has signaled interest in direct energy procurement from nuclear developers, potentially under long-term power purchase agreements (PPAs) that favor both sides. Forward-looking partnerships like these will influence capital flows and deployment timelines.

Put simply, the financial feasibility of nuclear for powering data centers depends less on initial sticker price and more on the long-term value proposition. When 24/7 reliability, land footprint, and carbon intensity enter the equation, nuclear demand from hyperscale operators starts to look less speculative and more strategic.

Regulatory Hurdles and Public Trust: Obstacles to Nuclear-Powered Data Centers

Navigating NRC Licensing and the Timeline Bottleneck

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) governs the licensing of both traditional and advanced nuclear technologies. Its process is detailed, intentionally cautious, and not known for speed. For conventional nuclear plants, the combined license (COL) process, which includes both construction and operation approvals, typically exceeds 42 months — and that’s after the application has been accepted. Between pre-application consultations, environmental impact assessments, public comment periods, and safety evaluations, companies can wait years before receiving final clearance.

Even small modular reactors (SMRs), despite their standardized designs and enhanced safety features, are not exempt from this regulatory drag. NuScale Power’s SMR design, the first to gain NRC approval in 2020, took nearly five years to clear the licensing path. This timeline could compress over time with growing institutional familiarity and regulatory streamlining, but for now, energy developers entering the field must anticipate long lead times as standard.

Engineering Out Risk: How Modern Nuclear Addresses Safety and Waste

Post-Fukushima, reactor safety designs have evolved significantly. SMRs today incorporate passive cooling systems, subterranean containment, and modularity to isolate potential failures. For example, NuScale’s VOYGR SMR can shut down and cool itself indefinitely without operator intervention or electrical power, minimizing meltdown risk under extreme scenarios.

On waste management, the volume from SMRs is expected to be lower on a per-megawatt basis than from historical light-water reactors — primarily due to higher fuel utilization. Dry cask storage and deep geological repositories, such as Finland’s Onkalo facility, offer long-term solutions, although the U.S. has yet to resolve its own high-level waste repository impasse since the suspension of the Yucca Mountain project in 2010.

Public Opinion Still Shadows the Industry

Fukushima and Chernobyl remain embedded in public consciousness. Even with modern reactor design improvements and better operational records in Western countries, a segment of the population continues to conflate nuclear power with catastrophe. According to a 2023 Pew Research report, only 57% of Americans favor expanding nuclear power, compared to 69% support for solar and 66% for wind. That sentiment impacts both policymakers and corporations looking to greenlight nuclear-backed projects.

Furthermore, nuclear’s association with militarization and long-lived radioactive waste intensifies mistrust, particularly in communities near proposed sites. Building nuclear infrastructure next to data centers — often located near population hubs due to latency demands — amplifies the social friction.

Reframing the Narrative: Communication Tactics That Work

Any brand or hyperscaler considering nuclear must treat public perception not as a soft marketing problem, but as a strategic operational lever. The companies that control the message — and demonstrate mastery over risk — will be the ones that get reactors built.

Powering Hyperscale Data: Real-World Developments

Microsoft, Google, and the Pursuit of Nuclear Solutions

In 2023, Microsoft signed a groundbreaking agreement with nuclear innovation firm TerraPraxis, reinforcing its exploration of advanced nuclear technologies to meet growing cloud infrastructure demands. This followed Microsoft’s earlier partnership with TerraPower, a company co-founded by Bill Gates, which is building a 345 MW Natrium reactor in Wyoming. This advanced reactor, paired with a molten salt energy storage system, is expected to offer flexible output—well-suited for integration with data center load profiles.

Meanwhile, Google has taken direct steps towards nuclear integration. In November 2023, Google’s parent company, Alphabet, invested in Oklo, a startup designing fast fission microreactors. The goal: to provide low-cost, always-on clean power for its hyperscale facilities. Oklo’s Aurora powerhouse, designed to generate 1.5 MW per unit, uses HALEU fuel and has a service life of over a decade without refueling.

Utility-Cloud Collaboration: Where Energy Meets Infrastructure

Energy utilities have started aligning with cloud hyperscalers to develop nuclear-enabled power generation specifically tailored for data centers. Constellation Energy, currently the largest operator of nuclear plants in the U.S., entered into strategic discussions with multiple tech giants to provide zero-carbon baseload power drawn from its existing fleet. Their Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station in Pennsylvania alone generates over 2,770 MW, which could support tens of high-density data campuses.

Similarly, Duke Energy is exploring how existing nuclear-based grids in North Carolina and South Carolina could be leveraged to bolster energy-intensive AI and cloud workloads, tapping into their nearly 11,000 MW of nuclear capacity.

SMR Pilots Targeting Next-Gen Data Infrastructure

Pilot projects involving Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) are moving from concept to reality. Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems (UAMPS) partnered with NuScale Power to develop an SMR project at the Idaho National Laboratory by the end of this decade. The proposed 462 MW plant—divided into six 77 MW modules—has attracted interest from public utilities and private tech partners alike.

In 2024, the Canadian province of Ontario launched the first data center-focused SMR feasibility study alongside Ontario Power Generation and global tech consultants. The goal: co-locate an SMR with a hyperscale compute center near Darlington, where Canada's first commercial SMR is already under construction.

Regional Commitments: States Making Nuclear Bets

These initiatives don’t project a distant future—they reflect active deployments, legislative support, and private-sector alignment already reshaping how hyperscale data centers will draw their next gigawatt.