Data Center Dynamics, a computer industry trade publication based in London, UK, published a report that Microsoft and OpenAI plan to build a new $100 billion supercomputer center that will require 5 GW of electrical power when completed sometime in the 2030s.
The project is expected to rely on nuclear reactors to generate the required power for the site’s huge arrays of racks of high performance computers. The trade press report cites a 2028 launch date to start work on the facility. This is a big project and comes with a boatload of questions about its feasibility.
In my assessment of the Microsoft project, published by Data Center Dynamics on 04/09/24, I ask key questions about the challenges and opportunities facing the massive effort. Also, I point to some plausible answers.
- Read the full text of my report online at Data Center Dynamics
Here’s a summary of the questions I address in my report.
Q: Who will or can build 5 GW of nuclear generation capacity?
As big as they are, none of the major IT platforms like Microsoft, Google, or Amazon, are going to get into the business of directly building 5 GW of nuclear reactors nor nuclear reactors of any size. The primary form of access to nuclear power for these firms will be through power purchase agreements with nuclear utilities. Microsoft has already taken this approach with Constellation. Amazon purchased a data center outright due to its connection with a nuclear utility in Pennsylvania.
Q: Where could the US data center and reactors be built?
The US has a number of sites that were previously considered for new nuclear reactors. Across the US there are more than a dozen planned nuclear power projects that sought or also obtained NRC COL licenses that were never built.
Q: Should Microsoft build the entire data center at one site?
A question Microsoft might consider is whether to assemble its needed 5 GWE of nuclear generating capacity via a network of 1 GW power plants rather than building one single site with all 5 GW of nuclear power and data processing capabilities on it? Does the nuclear power plant need to be adjacent to the data center?
If not, will sufficient grid connections be available to assure 24 x 7 reliable power from the reactor to the data center? Is it feasible with networking to address the huge processing requirements of AI large language models and other applications.
Q: What about the need for water for cooling the reactors and the data centers?
Massive data centers, which have very significant demand loads for cooling water, share that profile with nuclear power plants. The dispersal of the heat loads from both types of facilities will require enormous amounts of water which would likely compete with other types of uses in the region where the data center is built.
Q: Is the federal government doing anything about getting more power for massive data centers?
In late March in a visit to Michigan, DOE Secretary Jennifer Granholm said the Biden administration wants to “accelerate” its conversations with big technology companies on how to generate more electricity — including with nuclear power — to meet their massive demand for artificial intelligence computing.
Q: What about grid access for the reactors to deliver the power?
One of the other issues facing data center developers looking for power is grid access to power plants that are not adjacent to the data centers. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) is supposed to be “reforming the process” by which new high voltage electricity transmissions lines are approved for construction and operation.
A huge backlog of decisions indicates the agency has its work cut out for it. According to S& P Global, at the end of 2022, more than 2,000 GW of generation and storage — equal to all existing US generating capacity — were waiting in interconnection queues, and successful projects can face wait times of up to five years to connect to the grid.
Q: Is Microsoft’s a case of overreach?
In summary, it is worth asking one final question, and that is whether Microsoft’s plans for a 5 GWe data center are overreach? While the firm wouldn’t be in the business of building nuclear reactors, its plans to offer commitments of power purchase agreements for nuclear power at this scale would put any single publicly traded electric utility in a “bet the company” posture.
Based on experience in the US so far, with the Westinghouse reactors in Georgia, it is doubtful, at least for now, that any US nuclear utility would step up to the plate to take on the project even with Microsoft’s deep pockets writing the checks. The twin 1,150 MW AP1000s arrived seven years late and $17 billion over budget.
Microsoft has a big job ahead of it and that is to convince power producers in the US, or globally, that it isn’t biting off more than it can chew.
# # #