Google Goes Nuclear
The term “AI spring” describes a period of ongoing development in artificial intelligence fields, which began in the early 2010s, and surged to new heights in the beginning of the 2020s. This was brought on by the introduction, and rapid embrace, of generative AI. These artificial-intelligence systems function by utilizing pre-existing data to generate unique content. Perhaps most famous among them is Open AI’s ChatGPT, an early demo of which was released on November 30th, 2022. Within five days, it had attracted over one million users. As of November 6th, 2024, it had 250 million weekly active users. Between ChatGPT and the plethora of other generative AI systems that were, over the past few years, implemented into seemingly every website, an estimated 41% of Americans now use generative AI every day. This surge in generative AI has hiked the energy demands of tech companies to unforeseen levels, which will continue to skyrocket as development continues, causing tech companies to search for other avenues of power.
As global leaders in technology, Google and other Silicon Valley giants have long been scrutinized for their massive energy consumption. In a bold step towards clean energy innovation, Google has announced its decision to purchase seven Small Module Reactors (SMRs) from California-based Kairos Power, in what Google’s senior director, Michael Terrel, described as the “world’s first deal” between a major tech company and nuclear energy provider.
“The grid needs new electricity sources to support AI technologies,” stated Terrel, regarding Google’s decision to partner with Kairos Power. “This agreement helps accelerate a new technology to meet energy needs cleanly and reliably, and unlock the full potential of AI for everyone.”
Historically, nuclear power has been associated with large-scale, high-cost reactors that require substantial infrastructure. However, recent advancements in nuclear technology, specifically the development of SMRs, has begun to change that narrative. SMRs are compact, flexible nuclear reactors that are safer, quicker to build, and require lower initial capital investments. The six SMRs that Google purchased will become a powerful component of their strategy to achieve their ambitious goal of becoming carbon-free by 2030. The timeline of this commitment may, however, have to be delayed; deployment of the reactors will span from 2030 to 2035, upon which they will produce 500 megawatts of power.
Can Google Rely on This Power Alone?
Amazon and Microsoft have made similar promises. The former aims to match 100% of the electricity consumed by their operations with renewable energy, while the latter is attempting to become carbon negative by 2030. While both companies have launched a number of strategies to achieve their goals, both have made steps to embrace Nuclear Energy. On October 17th, Amazon made a deal with U.S. firm X-energy to utilize their nuclear reactors to power their data centers. Meanwhile, Microsoft will begin to source energy from Pennsylvania’s Three Mile Island, the site of a partial nuclear reactor meltdown in 1979. With one of its original two reactors still functional, the site continued to operate until it was retired in 2019. Microsoft will leverage the potential of nuclear energy from this location by building SMRs on the site’s nuclear infrastructure, which could mark the beginning of other companies doing the same, and repurposing antiquated nuclear energy sites, instead of letting them go unused.
SMRs, being the newest iteration of nuclear energy technology, are powerful, yet smaller, safer and more flexible than traditional reactors. They are also modular, which means they can be manufactured off-site and then assembled on location, reducing both construction time and cost, while increasing the possibilities as to where they can be implemented. This enables energy infrastructure to be scaled in line with demand, which is ideal for massive tech companies like Google, which operate on a global scale. SMRs also offer enhanced safety features that can potentially be sited close to data centers, reducing transmission losses and improving energy efficiency.
However, long-held concerns surrounding the safety of nuclear power—brought on by past technological failings, the most notable occurring in Chernobyl and Fukushima—have been voiced in the wake of Google’s decision, proving to be as pervasive as they were in decades prior. Additionally, the question of nuclear waste disposal remains a critical issue, with long-term storage solutions still in development. As Google moves forward with its nuclear ambitions, it will have to work with stakeholders and communities to assuage public concern and communicate safety protocols. As more tech companies begin to utilize nuclear power, there will, furthermore, have to be a concerted effort on the part of governments to develop policies that ensure the safety of their citizens and local ecosystems by ensuring safe nuclear waste disposal.
Ultimately, Google’s foray into nuclear energy is not merely a business decision, but a statement that could catalyze shifts across the tech industry. As other companies in the industry increase their data and AI capabilities, energy consumption across the sector is projected to grow exponentially. Utilizing clean energy to fulfill these continuously increasing energy needs is paramount. And, due to its ability to generate massive amounts of energy at one time—a capability unmatched by other avenues of clean energy—nuclear energy is, currently, the most feasible replacement of fossil fuels. By partnering with Kairos Power, Google is challenging long-held cultural biases against the energy source, and preconceived notions about the energy options available to large-scale enterprises, a landmark move which highlights nuclear power as viable and essential for companies with significant, continuous energy needs moving forward.
Image courtesy of Nikon Corporation via Unsplash, ©2020. Some rights reserved.
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the wider St. Andrews Foreign Affairs Review team.
