Microsoft Plans to Build Nuclear-Powered Data Centers

[AleksandarK]

Data center infrastructure is a complex matter. It requires shelter, cooling, and dedicated power generators that keep the servers running at full capacity and uptime. However, as these data centers can consume MegaWatts of power, it is becoming increasingly more work for hyperscalers like Meta, Google, Amazon, Microsoft, and others to ensure proper power supply to their data centers. Today, according to the job listing by Microsoft, we learn that the Redmond giant is preparing its infrastructure for nuclear power to reduce data centers' dependency on the outside grid. According to the job listing, Microsoft is seeking a "Principal Program Manager, Nuclear Technology, who will be responsible for maturing and implementing a global Small Modular Reactor (SMR) and microreactor energy strategy."

The SMR and microreactor systems are smaller-scale than traditional nuclear reactors that many power plants are using today and are more manageable due to their sheer size. The power plants based on the aforementioned technology can reside right next to the data center. We are sure that Microsoft had calculated the return on investment (ROI) of creating its power grid, as its electricity consumption will only increase in the coming years as the infrastructure expands. P. Todd Noe, director of nuclear technologies engineering at Microsoft, shared a note regarding the listing, stating: "This is not just a job, it is a challenge. By joining us, you will be part of a global movement that is transforming the way we produce and consume energy. You will also have the chance to grow your skills, advance your career, and make an impact on millions of lives." Below, you can see an example SMR from NuScale.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site | Source

 

[Hyderz]

im no energy expert but wouldn't it take alot to cool the data center and the nuclear reactor?
if it does proceed lets hope they not build it in earthquake prone zone

 

[TGTF]

will M$ be in charge of the SMR operations or take advantage of its power output ??
if its the latter...... "sure", but I am honestly worried if its the former !!!

 

[BlaezaLite]

All those jokes are now coming true...

 

[Space Lynx]

im no energy expert but wouldn't it take alot to cool the data center and the nuclear reactor?
if it does proceed lets hope they not build it in earthquake prone zone

M$ puts its data centers in lakes/rivers/the sea now from what I understand, free cooling.

Microsoft finds underwater datacenters are reliable, practical and use energy sustainably - Source

Microsoft retrieved the Northern Isles underwater datacenter from the seafloor off Scotland's Orkney Islands. Project Natick is proving the concept of underwater datacenters is feasible as well as logistically, environmentally and economically practical.

news.microsoft.com

 

[Vayra86]

What could possibly go wrong right, if we let datacenters avoid the general usage capacity of the power grid and all the climate-oriented limitations we impose there?

At least they're all about the environment eh...

 

[Deleted member 185088]

We should focus on nuclear power by building more nuclear power plant at least till we find a better source of power.

 

[FoulOnWhite]

We should focus on nuclear power by building more nuclear power plant at least till we find a better source of power.

Shame it was so badly demonised. At this time it is the cleanest form of energy, and as long as it is managed correctly is perfectly safe.

 

[Jism]

We should focus on nuclear power by building more nuclear power plant at least till we find a better source of power.

Sure.

And at some point you need to store nuclear waste, which is radioactive for the next 30 to 60 years. Where do you store it you think?

And is MS paying for disposal of that nuclear waste too? Or do we just pass it through the enviroment?

 

[FoulOnWhite]

Sure.

And at some point you need to store nuclear waste, which is radioactive for the next 30 to 60 years. Where do you store it you think?

And is MS paying for disposal of that nuclear waste too? Or do we just pass it through the enviroment?

Does nuclear waste cause or have caused more of a problem to us than fossil fuels?

 

[DeathtoGnomes]

AI has gone nuclear...

Next milestone is Heat-16.

 

[bug]

Sure.

And at some point you need to store nuclear waste, which is radioactive for the next 30 to 60 years. Where do you store it you think?

And is MS paying for disposal of that nuclear waste too? Or do we just pass it through the enviroment?

Yes, but even that is not new matter gone radioactive, it's the leftovers from the initial radioactive bars.
Plus, this is about SMRs, which use very little fissionable material. Ok, they don't output that much power either...

Whatever we get from renewables, is unsteady. If you have to have a backup for renewable, SMRs are just about the best candidate.

 

[kabarsa]

Sure.

And at some point you need to store nuclear waste, which is radioactive for the next 30 to 60 years. Where do you store it you think?

And is MS paying for disposal of that nuclear waste too? Or do we just pass it through the enviroment?

Waste can be reused ideally, there is a push for a long running idea to complete the nuclear fuel cycle, Rosatom tries to do it for some time and there is a progress. In the long run it should allow much better fuel availability to nuclear power plants

Beloyarsk BN-800 fast reactor running on MOX

Unit 4 of Beloyarsk nuclear power plant with a BN-800 fast reactor has been connected to the grid and resumed operations after being fully loaded with uranium-plutonium mixed oxide fuel.;

world-nuclear-news.org

MOX fuel tests for VVER reactors under way

Testing has begun on VVER-type fuel elements with uranium-plutonium mixed-oxide fuel in the MIR research reactor. Based on the results of irradiation and tests, scientists "intend to substantiate the efficiency and safety of MOX fuel operation in VVER reactors".;

world-nuclear-news.org

https://rosatom.ru/en/press-centre/news/rosatom-starts-construction-of-unique-power-unit-with-brest-od-300-fast-neutron-reactor/

 

[LabRat 891]

I will eat my damned hat
If AI/MI mass-infrastructure is what makes the mini/micro nuclear power concept
real.

It's been shelved tech for decades, and is literal 'boomer bait' for investments scams.

I mean, it does make sense, though...

 

[Fourstaff]

So which one gets subsidised in this setup? Is it the datacenter is too expensive therefore cheap nuclear power to make it viable, or is it that nuclear power is too expensive and needs cheap datacenter to justify? Otherwise we might as well do it independently ...

 

[Deleted member 185088]

Sure.

And at some point you need to store nuclear waste, which is radioactive for the next 30 to 60 years. Where do you store it you think?

And is MS paying for disposal of that nuclear waste too? Or do we just pass it through the enviroment?

Nuclear power isn't perfect, but it's by far the best source of energy we have (excluding geothermal). As for nuclear waste it's a non problem, the amounts are so tiny and when stored properly (by governments not private companies) don't represent any issue.

 

[Wirko]

All those jokes are now coming true...

You mean jokes about reactor control running on an operating system that has blue screens hidden inside?

 

[Chrispy_]

These small reactors are pretty cool, in use at quite a few locations globally now.

So much (up to 60%) of the energy generated at power stations is lost in transmission. If you put the generation on site, you already get something like a 250% efficiency advantage simply by not having to transmit energy across the county/state/region...

 

[bug]

These small reactors are pretty cool, in use at quite a few locations globally now.

So much (up to 60%) of the energy generated at power stations is lost in transmission. If you put the generation on site, you already get something like a 250% efficiency advantage simply by not having to transmit energy across the county/state/region...

You could do that, but then you'd be distributing fissionable uranium all over the place. Plus, the inefficiency come from transforming heat into electricity, it has little to do with the length of the lines after that.
The main advantage of SMRs, as I see it, is they don't use much fuel. Even in the case of a meltdown, they can't go Chernobyl.

 

[SOAREVERSOR]

You could do that, but then you'd be distributing fissionable uranium all over the place. Plus, the inefficiency come from transforming heat into electricity, it has little to do with the length of the lines after that.
The main advantage of SMRs, as I see it, is they don't use much fuel. Even in the case of a meltdown, they can't go Chernobyl.

Chernobyl was a freak accident. A perfect combination of a bad reactor design and Soviet dumbfuckery. Even then Chernobyl killed less people than stuff like hydro damn failures do. There's also the issue when you look at fossil fuel plants not only is global warming an issue but they spew toxins that kill people all over the place constantly.

When you compare nuclear to other options it's amazingly clean and safe.

 

[Jacky_BEL]

Let them build one at their HQ first.

 

[Kaleid]

Nuclear power isn't perfect, but it's by far the best source of energy we have (excluding geothermal). As for nuclear waste it's a non problem, the amounts are so tiny and when stored properly (by governments not private companies) don't represent any issue.

Very few countries have this figured out though

14 juni 2023 — Finland is on the verge of becoming the first nation to bury spent nuclear fuel rods deep underground for the long term.

 

[Vayra86]

Sure.

And at some point you need to store nuclear waste, which is radioactive for the next 30 to 60 years. Where do you store it you think?

And is MS paying for disposal of that nuclear waste too? Or do we just pass it through the enviroment?

The art of preservation - COVRA N.V.

www.covra.nl

Its not a new thing, disposal of radioactive waste is pretty clean - you store it.

 

[Jacky_BEL]

Nuclear power isn't perfect, but it's by far the best source of energy we have (excluding geothermal). As for nuclear waste it's a non problem, the amounts are so tiny and when stored properly (by governments not private companies) don't represent any issue.

How does nuclear waste suddenly become tiny?
If you are going to distribute power generation , but have equal total power generation , then you will need the same amount of nuclear fuel and have the same amount of waste.

“All told, when it comes to nuclear waste, SMRs are roughly comparable with conventional pressurized water reactors, with potential benefits and weaknesses depending on which aspects you are trying to design for,” Kim said. “Overall, there appear to be no additional major challenges to the management of SMR nuclear wastes compared to the commercial-scale large LWR wastes.”

Argonne releases small modular reactor waste analysis report

 

[vandaminator]

Sure.

And at some point you need to store nuclear waste, which is radioactive for the next 30 to 60 years. Where do you store it you think?

And is MS paying for disposal of that nuclear waste too? Or do we just pass it through the enviroment?

They send it to poor countries, and now its their problem.