Tbf nuclear power plants have a capacity factor of more than 90%. Sure you still need a backup (like the grid), but 90% of the time not having to use the grid is a huge amount.
Yes, but even 90% is completely insufficient for a datacenter, and you would have to substitute power for days or weeks (during refueling/maintenance), which makes backup systems unsuitable for the task.
Taking this approach would also basically lock your datacenter power use to the exact output power of the reactor, preventing you from scaling either side of the setup freely.
I think looking at moves like this from a power perspective is wrong, and I strongly believe that this is just minimum effort hedging against increasing CO2 costs (both monetary and reputational), i.e. greenwashing.
Comments
Tbf nuclear power plants have a capacity factor of more than 90%. Sure you still need a backup (like the grid), but 90% of the time not having to use the grid is a huge amount.
https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/what-generation-capacity
Yes, but even 90% is completely insufficient for a datacenter, and you would have to substitute power for days or weeks (during refueling/maintenance), which makes backup systems unsuitable for the task.
Taking this approach would also basically lock your datacenter power use to the exact output power of the reactor, preventing you from scaling either side of the setup freely.
I think looking at moves like this from a power perspective is wrong, and I strongly believe that this is just minimum effort hedging against increasing CO2 costs (both monetary and reputational), i.e. greenwashing.