East of Broken Bow | havin’funfarming - 1/29/2026 08:40
It seems that there are currently plans in the works for many data centres to be powered by modular nuclear reactors. It just raises a few questions.
How are they getting local approvals to install them? For many years now it seems the standard excuse for going green instead of nuclear has been blamed on a “not on my backyard” type of attitude from the public. These are being built on someone’s backyard. Is the public being asked if it’s ok now or are they just doing it anyway? If the public is approving it then why would anyone accept them to run data centres but not to keep the lights on in their own homes? That would seem to be an odd choice of priorities.
-----I read in the news that Bill Gates is behind building at least some of the new nuclear reactors. I'm pretty sure if you have enough money and are well enough connected, you could get approval too.
I imagine that they are being built relatively far away from major cities but the public is well aware that nuclear radiation and fallout can contaminate a large area. They could have been built in those same areas to supply energy for public consumption.
----To the credit of Bill Gates, they are using a new (or at least fairly new) Nuclear technology where you won't have to worry about fallout or contamination. If there is an issue, it defaults to 'cold', meaning it just shuts down. I think one way that Gates got approval is that (at least some of) the plants he wants to build will utilize current nuclear waste for fuel. Long story short, the plant will be fueled with existing nuclear waste, which will be used to produce electricity while at the same time reducing the radioactivity of the fuel (existing waste) rendering it to be 'safe' in a couple generations, instead of takiing centuries. This technology was developed in the USA some years ago, but they could not get approval to build any in the USA untl recently (when Gates decided to try). The irony is that other countries have similar plants operational as we speak.
Another question is why are they going nuclear and not all using solar and wind power with battery backups? The industries building these are at the leading edges of high tech and yet they seem to now be choosing nuclear energy over leading edge green energy sources. They have the resources and knowledge at their disposal to use the best of the best as far as current green tech goes. If companies like that aren’t choosing green energy sources then how does it make sense for the relatively low tech bulk energy suppliers of the general public to use green energy? I realize there are some data centres using green energy sources but there certainly seems to be an increasing trend toward nuclear instead of green and I am wondering what the cause and the justification of that trend is.
------simple reason: The wind/solar with battery backup are not nearly as cost effective. As of right now, that sort of setup is only getting put up where taxpayers are footing the bill. Someone like Bill Gates who is building both data centers and Nuke plants didn't get rich by doing things in a less cost effective way than the competition. When he is spending his own money, he wants the most reliable, cost effective source of power.
Does anyone know of plans to install any of these smaller modular nuclear reactors to supply the general public? For many years now during their development I have heard a lot of talk of how beneficial and practical using them for that purpose would be would be but now that they are beginning to be installed every one I hear of has been planned to power a data centre. Does anyone know of one being installed for supplying power for the public?
----I don't know, but I would hope so
The type of reactor I am referring to is often called a FAST reactor:
A quick AI overview:
Nuclear fast reactors and advanced designs like Newcleo's reactor are being developed to utilize nuclear waste as fuel, offering a sustainable solution for energy production.
Nuclear Fast Reactors
Nuclear fast reactors are designed to recycle nuclear waste, allowing for the extraction of additional energy from spent fuel. These reactors operate in a closed fuel cycle, meaning that the nuclear fuel is reused multiple times. This process significantly reduces the amount of high-level radioactive waste produced. For instance, one kilogram of nuclear waste can be recycled until all usable uranium is consumed, leaving only a small amount of waste that remains radioactive for a much shorter period (200 to 300 years) compared to traditional waste.
Here is a bit of reading on the subject:
https://www.iaea.org/bulletin/when-nuclear-waste-is-an-asset-not-a-b...
What if the high level nuclear waste generated by nuclear power plants could fuel a circular economy in the energy sector? Fast neutron reactors operating in a closed fuel cycle could make that happen.
Fast neutron reactors, which use neutrons that are not slowed by a moderator such as water to sustain the fission chain reaction, offer advantages over existing thermal nuclear reactors. When operated in a fully closed fuel cycle, in which nuclear fuel is recycled and reused, fast reactors have the potential to extract 60 to 70 times more energy from the same amount of natural uranium than thermal reactors, thereby significantly reducing the amount of high level radioactive waste.
“When using fast reactors in a closed fuel cycle, one kilogram of nuclear waste can be recycled multiple times until all the uranium is used and the actinides — which remain radioactive for thousands of years — are burned up. What then remains is about 30 grams of waste that will be radioactive for 200 to 300 years,” said Mikhail Chudakov, IAEA Deputy Director General and Head of the Department of Nuclear Energy.
|
Using nuclear for data centres