Is nuclear the way to power our 100GW AI factories?
No nuclear probably isn’t the answer. Well at least not the full answer. It’s a partial answer. With caveats of course. I’m not here to tell you Amazon, Google, Microsoft and Meta are wrong. But I sort of am?
I’m skeptical of timeline and cost. While I’m out here talking about scaling to 10GW and then 100GW datacentres by 2030ish. NuScale have been plugging away for 15 years and despite receiving design approval from US regulators, recently cancelled it’s first project because of a lack of interest from customers. If it ever gets off the ground it won’t be before 2030.
Cost is really the ball game. While NuScale's levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) ranges from $89-135/MWh, beating traditional nuclear power's $110-160/MWh, it remains significantly more expensive than alternatives like combined cycle gas at $45-70/MWh and solar plus storage at $30-60/MWh. And the truth is these prices keep going up whilst the cost of solar/wind/batteries keep going down. The arrows are all pointing in the wrong direction.
That said, nuclear and SMRs likely have a significant role to play because data centers require "six nines" reliability (99.9999% uptime), and nuclear offers an unmatched combination of reliability, location flexibility, and energy security that makes it an ideal baseload power source. Unlike gas plants, nuclear facilities can store years worth of fuel on-site, eliminating supply chain vulnerabilities. While solar and wind will likely provide cheaper supplementary power, nuclear could serve as the backbone of a hybrid power solution that delivers the unwavering reliability that AI infrastructure demands.
Obviously this is just SMRs in the context of serving datacentres. Nuclear and SMRs have a much larger role in decarbonising the economy, especially in replacing gas plants for baseload energy. This broader decarbonization mission involves providing reliable power for industrial processes, district heating, and general grid stability where the economics and timeline constraints might be less demanding than AI infrastructure needs. Countries like Poland, which must replace 23GW of coal capacity while maintaining grid stability, or the Czech Republic's plan for 4GW of SMR capacity by 2040, demonstrate the broader market for SMR technology. In these applications, SMRs can compete more effectively with alternatives because they're solving different problems - grid stability, energy security, and industrial decarbonization - rather than racing to meet the explosive growth of AI power demand. The timeline mismatch that makes SMRs challenging for data centers becomes less problematic when planning long-term grid transitions, and the higher costs might be more acceptable when weighed against the full system value of reliable, carbon-free baseload power.
Small Modular Reactors represent a reimagining of nuclear power plant architecture, operating within the broader $340 billion nuclear power generation market. The core innovation lies in the modular design philosophy, which shifts construction from site-based to factory-based manufacturing. These systems typically generate between 10 and 300 MWe, though some designs push toward 400 MWe while maintaining modular characteristics.
The technical architecture varies significantly across designs. Light Water Reactor (LWR) based SMRs, currently the most mature variant, utilize proven PWR technology scaled down and modified for modular construction. These systems typically operate at pressures of 15-16 MPa and temperatures around 315°C, achieving thermal efficiencies of 30-35%. Advanced designs incorporate enhanced passive safety features, including natural circulation cooling that eliminates the need for primary coolant pumps.
Non-LWR designs present more radical innovations. Molten salt reactors operate at atmospheric pressure with coolant temperatures exceeding 600°C, enabling thermal efficiencies above 45%. High-temperature gas-cooled reactors, using helium as coolant, can reach temperatures of 750°C, making them suitable for industrial process heat applications. Sodium-fast reactors operate at low pressure with coolant temperatures around 500°C, offering enhanced fuel efficiency through closed fuel cycles.
The nuclear power market currently comprises 32% of zero-carbon electricity generation globally. SMRs position themselves as a scalable alternative to both traditional nuclear plants and combined cycle gas turbines for baseload power generation. Their reduced size and enhanced load-following capabilities also make them suitable for grid stabilization alongside renewable energy sources.
| Reactor Type | Cost ($/kWe) | Efficiency | Fuel Cycle | Timeline | Pros | Cons |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pressurised Water Reactors (PWR) | 3,000-5,000 | 30-35% | Enriched uranium (3-5%) | Near-term (5-10 years) | Proven technology, regulatory familiarity | Higher pressure operation, complex systems |
| Sodium-Cooled Fast Reactors | 4,000-6,000 | 40-45% | Can use spent fuel, depleted uranium | Mid-term (10-15 years) | Efficient fuel use, waste reduction | Sodium reactivity, less regulatory experience |
| Molten Salt Reactors | 3,500-5,500 | 45-50% | Various, including thorium | Mid to long-term (15-20 years) | High efficiency, flexible fuel options | Less mature technology, corrosion challenges |
| High-Temperature Gas-Cooled Reactors | 4,000-6,000 | 45-50% | TRISO fuel (enriched uranium) | Mid-term (10-15 years) | High temperature applications, robust fuel | Higher enrichment needs, less regulatory experience |
| Fast Reactors (Other Coolants) | 4,500-6,500 | 40-45% | Can use various fuel types | Long-term (15-20+ years) | Efficient fuel use, waste reduction | Less mature technology, unique material challenges |
| Heat Pipe Reactors | 6,000-10,000 | 30-35% | HALEU | Near to mid-term (5-15 years) | Highly portable, minimal operator needs | Higher costs, limited output |
| Fluoride Salt-Cooled | 4,000-6,000 | 45-50% | TRISO fuel | Mid-term (10-15 years) | Combined HTGR fuel reliability with MSR efficiency | Salt chemistry management, newer design |
Current technical maturity varies significantly by design type and manufacturer.
Pressurized Water Reactors (PWR) Most mature SMR technology with extensive operational history. Multiple vendors have designs in late-stage licensing, including NuScale's approved design. Manufacturing supply chains are well-established for major components. Testing facilities and operational procedures are standardized. Key technical challenges focus on cost reduction rather than fundamental technology development.
Key Players: