Microsoft Looking to Use Nuclear Reactors to Power Its Data Centers::undefined

  • Nine@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    55
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    That’s … actually pretty neat.

    Makes a lot of sense given the amount of power needed to run a data centers like that. Definitely cleaner in the long run too.

    They’ll still need backup power/generators but they’ll need a lot less of them and they’ll mostly be needed for the nuclear parts.

    • tryptaminev 🇵🇸 🇺🇦 🇪🇺@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      They could just run renewables since they already need batteries as you said.

      Also i dont want incompetent people operating nuclear reactors. We saw what happened with that multiple times already and you still shouldnt eat boars in eastern Europe bc. auf radiation levels thanks to fucking Tschernobyl.

    • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      There is another thread stating it is because training AI takes a lot of energy. Any reason to boost nuclear plants is good to me.

      • Richard@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        16
        ·
        1 year ago

        Right, any reason to throw millions or billions of dollars at wasting enormous quantities of concrete and water and at generating highly toxic waste that will irradiate its environment for millennia, and at ripping apart landscapes to extract uranium is a good one to you, I wouldn’t have expected anything else.

    • Diplomjodler@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      The whole plan has only one minor flaw: It’ll never work. Building a nuclear power plant never was, never is and never will be economical. The current boom in nuclear grandiose announcements is nothing but a smokescreen. The purpose is to delay the adoption of renewable energy with lofty promises that will never come to fruition. Then we’d be forced to keep using fossil fuels, which is the end goal.

      • Earthwormjim91@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        You comment has one minor flaw.

        Small modular reactors are a thing now. NuScale has already had their VOYGR SMR plants approved for use in the US. Westinghouse has one that should be ready for sale in the next few years too.

        Large nuclear plants aren’t economical for profit generation right now, but SMRs definitely have the ability to be economical for huge power users like Microsoft.

        • Diplomjodler@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          The NRC approved the design, so now they can start building it. That is still a looong way off from having a working reactor. And all those companies are way behind their originally planned schedules. Which is my whole point. I’m not saying they might not get this stuff to work some day. I’m saying that it will take way too long to make any contribution to fighting climate change. We need to decarbonise now and and we have the technology to do it now.

          • Earthwormjim91@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            That’s got nothing to do with Microsoft though. Their reactor wouldn’t be used to power other people, only their own data centers.

            They currently buy that from the grid, and they don’t really have any control over the source of that electricity generation. We should absolutely be pushing the power generators to go with renewables, but Microsoft isn’t a generator. They’re a customer like you or me.

            They’re looking at moving to small reactors eventually because of the cost of buying from the grid, not for the environment.

            • Diplomjodler@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              It would still be far cheaper to deploy the same kind of capacity in renewables. Whoever came up with this brilliant plan can’t do basic math.

              • Earthwormjim91@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Probably not because they would need to buy MUCH more land to do it.

                SMRs are so much more compact per MW. The one from NuScale that is approved already can do 924MW in 0.05 square miles. To do the same capacity with wind would take 94 square miles and 17 square miles for solar.

                Buying 17 square miles of land close enough to just one of their data centers would cost billions, on top of the cost of paying for the panels and installation.

                The whole point of them looking at these at all is because they do not want to purchase from the grid.