- cross-posted to:
- fuck_ai@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- fuck_ai@lemmy.world
cross-posted from: https://piefed.social/c/fuck_ai@lemmy.world/p/2430150/europes-ai-demand-could-set-off-nuclear-energy-boom-says-jp-morgan
The EU’s goal of ramping up data centre capacity is already driving more investment in nuclear energy projects as the bloc seeks to decarbonise and secure energy security at the same time, says the global investment firm.
You must log in or # to comment.
Doubtful. AI needs power now, not in ten years. The fastest way to build power stations now is to use renewables.
There is more than enough space for solar and wind farms to power all this AI data center bullshit, so no.
It would also be cheaper. Batteries included.
Theoretically true but pratically false.
For some stupid reasons (primary NIMBY syndrome) people do not want solar and/or wind farm near their houses.And the problem with solar and wind is that it is not assured that they produce when you need it.
Not that they should not be used, everything that reduce the oil needs are good, but you really cannot base everything on them unless you are able to build a single grid for Europe since stastically speaking in a continent there will always be some places that generate more than needed when other places are not generating enough for whatever reason.I can kind of see why some NIMBYs don’t want wind turbines near their homes (don’t get me wrong, it’s still bullshit), but why would anyone complain about solar?
Ask my neighbour – she thinks my planned balcony power station is an eyesore… And it spreads dirt, which then ends up on her balcony…
And it spreads dirt, which then ends up on her balcony…
Ah, the dirty photons it reflects. This technical issue is easy to solve: Call a priest and let it sprinkle the panels with holy water.
The question is whether that will help, because she’s Catholic and I come from a Protestant family…
I can kind of see why some NIMBYs don’t want wind turbines near their homes (don’t get me wrong, it’s still bullshit)
Well, I would understand if the wind turbines is built in their garden, I honestly would not want it. But it do not make any sense when they don’t want wind turbines 20/30 miles offshore.
but why would anyone complain about solar?
I honestly don’t know, I only see this happen.
For example near my city a planned solar farm project is on the verge of being halted due to an appeal by a residents’ committee over some legal technicality stemming from the fact that there is a commercial premises nearby and that this would transform an agricultural area (which is not actually in use) into an energy-generation site.And yet these are the very same committees that complain when the power cuts out in summer because too many air-conditioners are running…
I think that in the end these committees just want to stop things just because… now they target solar and wind farms and new subway and trains lines, before they targeted cellular towers (only to then to protest because they were not able to use their phone) and in the future they will target something else.
Make those farms community owned. Problem solved. It’s what we do a lot in northern Germany.
It is a way, but here people is happier to just stop new infrastructures (solar/wind farm, new rail lines, new public transportation routes and so on) and then to protest because the problems these new infrastructures should solve (or alleviate) are not solved, if not make worse.
All these news aren’t AI enthusiasm.
But plain information warfare.
We are atacked from both sides.
If they think nuclear energy is the best solution, the AI and data centre companies should just fund and build them themselves. The truth is that no nuclear power plant is ever build without public funds and/or guarantees. They are only ever profitable because of subsidies
Hey JP Morgan, I can talk absolutely fucking drivel as well, where’s my highly paid analyst job?
Ah yeah… makes totally sense when Europe Had to shut down several Nuclear power plants, AS the water level was too Low and cooling wasn’t provided anymore.
who’s demand is it?
Probably JP Morgan’s demand to justify some investments in nuclear.
Didn’t the last European nuclear plant take 14 years or more to build, not to mention the cost? On the plus side: maybe in 14 years memory is finally affordable again.
I don’t think so! Too much speaks against nuclear energy.
Most of all: costs
Don’t worry, the general public pay for the costs while big companies reap the profits. I would hope that this is ‘/s’ but sadly it isn’t.
It will have to be seen whether the EU sees a nuclear boom, but globally we will see this I am afraid. The two countries leading the AI race at the moment definitely will: The U.S. government has reaffirmed nuclear power as a key pillar of its long-term clean energy strategy a year or so ago, with the revival previously retired reactors and extensions of aging ones.
And China has joined a pledge to triple global nuclear energy capacity by 2050 which stemmed from the 2023 UN Climate Change Conference in Dubai, also known as COP28,
… The installed [nuclear] capacity has been growing at a remarkable rate in China, the future home of just under half of the world’s nuclear reactors currently under construction … [China’s nuclear] capacity addition should accelerate [by 2030, according to China’s current five-year plan], as the State Council has been approving 10 or more new reactor units annually since 2022 …
The U.S. government has reaffirmed nuclear power as a key pillar of its long-term clean energy strategy a year or so ago, with the revival previously retired reactors and extensions of aging ones.
Under president Jimmy Carter, who had had a job in nuclear safety in the navy or so, a nuclear meltdown of the Three Mile Island power plant in Harrisburg was barely stopped. Actually, the core did melt down because of a lack of cooling - it just didn’t went slightly critical as in Fukushima. It might have been only twenty minutes away.
I am pretty sure the present orange in chief can oversee a muchbetter, much bigger, MAGNIFICIENT meltdown.
but globally we will see this I am afraid.
Yeah, that’s what the brain rot they drown you in is telling. In reality you can look up additions to electric grids globally. It’s renewables with everything else basically a rounding error.
PS: the thing about China a good example. Look up their actual capacities. It’s a joke compared to everything else they are building. Tripling nearly nothing is still irrelevant but for pro-nuclear propaganda, which 9 out of 10 times is just a diversion to slow down renewables so our fossil overlords can make some more money a few more years.
(for reference: China’s production capacities are at about 4% nuclear, 40% renewable; globally ~700GW in power plants were build in 2025, 85% of those solar, wind or hydro power)
China itself has obliged to increase nuclear power, and fossil fuels will increase by 10% by the end of this decade. This is according to the Chinese government’s own plan. Coal will rise by the end of the decade, according to China’s official numbers.
It’s not just a ‘rounding error’ as you say, its’ just that China is heavily dependent on fossil fuels and nuclear. This won’t likely change in the long-term. We need to produce these renewables here in Europe where environmental social standards are much a higher.
Yeah, that’s what the brain rot they drown you in is telling.
Thank you for this statement.
its’ just that China is heavily dependent on fossil fuels and nuclear.
On fossil fuels? Yes, specifically a lot of coal. On nuclear? No. I already told you that nuclear is only providing 4% of the produced electricity. And any planned increase is outpaced by the renewable upbuild, so the share of nuclear will actually go down even when the total capacity goes slightly up.
