Two decades ago Oregon enjoyed an abundance of cheap hydroelectric power. Now our state is faced with power shortages caused by increasing demands of data centers and Artificial Intelligence (AI), currently consuming more than 10% of Oregon’s power. By 2030 data centers are projected to double their energy consumption.
How did Oregon get into this energy crisis, and what are the best solutions?
Since 2006 Google, Amazon, Apple and Meta have built large data centers in Crook, Morrow, Umatilla and Wasco Counties. These high tech companies have been attracted by inexpensive electric power, readily available land in enterprise zones, and no state sales tax. The net worth of Amazon, Google (Alphabet), Apple and Meta is $9.89 trillion. That's approximately the combined gross domestic product of the three richest countries in Europe (Germany, France and UK). With assets such as this, these high tech companies are considering investing in nuclear energy.
There is increasing talk of building small modular nuclear reactors, or SMRs, in the Pacific Northwest. Currently six bills to promote nuclear energy have been introduced in the Oregon Legislature, and several in Washington State. But nuclear reactors have always depended on government (taxpayer) funding to extract and enrich uranium, to subsidize construction costs, to clean up radioactive waste, and to indemnify reactors against radioactive leaks and meltdowns.
In addition to being extraordinarily expensive, nuclear reactors have other issues:
- SMRs are an unproven entity since none have been built in the U.S.
- Nuclear power is notorious for cost overruns and years of delays. The typical time for
planning and construction of a nuclear plant is 10-15 years. - Despite the myth that SMRs can fit into your living room, SMRs are hardly small, typically measuring 76 ft in height and 15 ft in diameter.
- A permanent repository for radioactive waste does not exist in the U.S.
- Uranium mining is usually done on Indigenous lands, exposing workers and communities downwind to ionizing radiation causing cancer.
- SMRs are touted as “clean energy” by the nuclear industry, not contributing to greenhouse gases. But the reality is that uranium mining, the construction of reactors, transportation of equipment and fuel, and site prep all require large amounts of energy supplied by fossil fuels. Nuclear energy is dirty and toxic.
- 12 states have laws that restrict the construction of new nuclear power facilities, effectively banning new nuclear reactors in their states. For example, a 1980 Oregon referendum banned the building of a commercial nuclear power plant in the state unless a high level nuclear waste repository has been federally licensed, and only if a proposed nuclear power plant receives statewide voter approval.
- X-energy’s proposed SMR uses HALEU (High-Assay Low-Enriched Uranium) reactor fuel that is more highly enriched at 5-20% uranium-235 (U-235) than current light water reactors that use 3-5% enriched U-235. This is a potential risk if X-energy reactor fuel falls into the hands of terrorists or rogue states intent on building nuclear weapons.
- Nuclear reactors are at risk of malfunction and radiation leaks, which may lead to disasters, such as at Three Mile Island (1979), Chernobyl (1986) and Fukushima (2011).
- Radiation risks make nuclear reactors uninsurable except by national governments.
- Nuclear technology to generate electricity is an important step in the development of nuclear weapons. According to a 2017 report by former U.S. Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz, civilian nuclear power is an “essential enabler” of U.S. national security, blending the research and funding of nuclear reactors (Derpartment of Energy) and nuclear bombs (Department of Defense).
- Climate disruption cannot wait 10-15 years for the development and construction of new nuclear reactors. Time is running out on our climate as we have witnessed with wildfires, heat domes, severe storms, flooding, droughts, rising sea levels, and migration of people from the global south.
Green energy, especially solar and wind, are growing rapidly, accounting for 14.1% of electricity nationally and 19% of electricity in Oregon (2023 figures). Wind and solar power can ramp up far more quickly and economically than nuclear power. Major improvements in battery storage are encouraging and will continue to be a key factor in realizing our future energy goals.
Other hopeful signs are on the horizon: China claims that their version of AI uses significantly less energy than AI developed in the US; time will tell. Energy conservation can be more effectively marketed to the public, including use of LED bulbs, switching from gas to electric appliances, and use of mass transit and electric cars/bicycles/scooters. Tax rebates for home insulation, double-paned windows, heat pumps, and solar panels are effective incentives to save energy and reduce the use of fossil fuels.
Let us not make the mistake of thinking that nuclear reactors are a panacea for our energy needs. They are not, and we will pay a high price if we choose to go nuclear.