nuclear

nuclear microreactors made like Lego pieces

by

The artificial intelligence revolution has an Achilles heel that is not in the code, but in the networks. In this scenario of “energy hunger”, an Austin company called Aalo Atomics has decided that the solution is not to wait for the State to build infrastructure, but to manufacture its own nuclear reactors like someone making Lego pieces. A unique structure. If decades ago the message “Hello World” marked the beginning of the computer age, today the “Aalo World” aims to mark the beginning of the Second Atomic Age. According to a company press releaseAalo Atomics has begun construction of an experimental reactor, the Aalo-X, under the Department of Energy’s (DOE) Nuclear Reactor Pilot Program. The ambition is such that, as reported by NucNetthe company has already shipped the first five test modules (the Aalo-0 prototype) from its factory in Austin to the Idaho National Laboratory (INL). The goal is to have everything ready by July 4, 2026. The “Bring Your Own Energy” model. AI data centers have sparked a new business fever: the “bring your own energy”. Giants like Microsoft, Google or Amazon can no longer depend on an American electrical grid that, although should add 80GW of capacity per year, barely reaches 65GW due to bureaucracy and bottlenecks. This is where the star product comes in: the Aalo Pod. According to the company’s technical informationit is not an eternal “construction project”, but rather a mass-produced product. Each “Pod” will generate 50 MW and is designed to be adjacent to data centers. By not requiring external water sources for cooling – thanks to their air condensers – these plants can be located in arid or remote areas, directly feeding the servers without going through the saturated electrical grid. “Lego” engineering. The key to Aalo Atomics’ success lies in three pillars: Products, not projects. According to Matt LoszakCEO of Aalo Atomics, the historical mistake of the sector was to build each plant as a single civil work. His XMR concept (Extra Modular Reactor) allows parts to arrive on site as finished and tested blocks, ready to be connected. Sodium technology. Unlike conventional plants, sodium allows the reactor operates at atmospheric pressure. This eliminates the need for expensive, gigantic containment domes. To avoid incidents like the one at the Monju plant (Japan) in 1995, Aalo Atomics has developed double-walled steam generators and an AI-powered autonomous maintenance robot that remotely detects and seals leaks. Passive security. The design, led by Yasir Arafat (CTO of Aalo Atomics), uses a fuel that expands naturally if the temperature rises too high, stopping the reaction by physical laws, without the need for human intervention. An extensive collaboration network. Dubbed the “Aaloverse”, it has woven an ecosystem of 127 suppliers in 35 states that transcends the energy sector to integrate the current kings of silicon. Microsoft and NVIDIA not only appear as potential clients, but as technological partners for the development of a “digital super operator”. This artificial intelligence platform, supported by NVIDIA’s computational muscle and Azure tools, seeks to automate the enormous bureaucracy of nuclear permits and manage the reactor with a minimal human workforce, turning the plant into an autonomous system capable of predicting failures before they occur. For this digital vision to be translated into real energy, Aalo Atomics has resorted to the reliability of traditional heavy industry, closing alliances with giants such as Baker Hughes and Siemens for the supply of turbines and generators. This strategy, together with a historic contract with Urenco, accelerates its arrival on the market and guarantees enriched uranium for the Aalo-X reactor in 2026, breaking dependence on foreign supplies and shielding the energy sovereignty of future data centers. Towards a Second Atomic Age? Aalo Atomics faces a challenge that the industry considered impossible: going from the founding of the company to nuclear fission in less than three years. However, with $136 million in financing and the first hardware already on Idaho soil, doubt is giving way to expectation. If they manage to turn on Aalo-X in the summer of 2026, they will not only have built a reactor; They will have inaugurated a model where nuclear energy is as modular, scalable and private as the servers themselves that today try to decipher the future of humanity. The race is on and, for now, Idaho’s clock is ticking. Image | Aalo Atomics Xataka | The boom in companies developing SMR reactors is no coincidence: it is just what the military wanted

When nuclear energy orbited the Earth. The day a Soviet satellite with a reactor fell in Canada and unleashed a crisis

by

In the late 1970s, the idea that a nuclear reactor could fall from space ceased to be science fiction and became a real problem on the table of several governments. A Soviet satellite with a reactor on board It had lost control and was heading towards the Earth’s atmosphere, without anyone being able to specify where its remains would end up or what consequences the impact would have. In the midst of the Cold War, secrecy and urgency marked decisions. From there, questions arose that remain uncomfortable today: what was a nuclear reactor doing in orbit, why that risk was accepted, and what happens when technology escapes the script. As CBC points outOn January 24, 1978, the Soviet satellite Kosmos-954 re-entered the Earth’s atmosphere after weeks of tracking by American radars. No one knew with certainty where he would fall or in what state his remains would reach the ground. Eventually, fragments of the device were scattered over a vast region of northern Canada, from the Northwest Territories to areas that are now part of Nunavut and northern Alberta and Saskatchewan. What began as an orbital control problem suddenly became an international emergency with scientific, diplomatic and health implications. The day the Cold War left radioactive remains over Canada Kosmos-954 was neither a scientific satellite nor an isolated experimental mission, but one more piece of a Soviet military system designed to monitor the oceans. It was part of the US-A series, designed to locate large ships, especially American aircraft carriers, using radar. To power this system, which is very demanding in terms of energy consumption, the Soviet Union resorted to a compact nuclear reactor, a solution that allowed operate for long periods without depending on solar panels. That technical choice explains why the satellite had fissile material on board and why its loss generated so much concern. The technological heart of Kosmos-954 was a BES-5 reactor, known as “Buk”, developed specifically for Soviet military satellites. This type of reactor used uranium-235 and was designed to power the US-A system radar for the life of the satellite. The BBC estimates that 31 devices were launched with BES-5 for this family of satellites, and places the use of reactors in space until the end of the 1980s, with launches that continued until 1988. That history was not a clean line, according to the BBC: there were previous failures and accidents, including serious problems in one of the first flights in 1970 and the fall of another reactor into the Pacific Ocean after a launcher failure in 1973, in addition to the plan security plan contemplated moving the core into a waste orbit to prevent its return to Earth. Arctic Operational Histories explains that The signs that something was wrong came weeks before re-entry. Tracking systems detected that Kosmos-954 was progressively losing altitude, an anomaly that indicated a serious failure in its orbital control. The United States began to follow its trajectory with special attentionaware that the satellite had a nuclear reactor on board. The big unknown was not only when it would fall, but whether the Soviet security system would manage to separate the core and send it to a safe orbit before the device entered the atmosphere. When it was confirmed that the debris had fallen on Canadian territory, the problem took on a completely new dimension. Authorities knew the fragments were scattered over a vast, largely remote, snow-covered region, making any quick assessment difficult. The first measurements detected radiation in some points, although without a clear map of the contamination. Faced with this uncertainty, Canada had to quickly decide how to protect the population and how to locate potentially hazardous materials in an extreme environment. To confront an unprecedented situation, Canada turned to international cooperation. Operation Morning Light mobilized Canadian and American military personnel, scientists and technicians, many of them from units specialized in nuclear emergencies. From improvised bases in the north, flights equipped with sensors capable of detecting radiation from the air were organized. Each anomalous signal led to more detailed inspections, in a race against time marked by extreme cold and lack of infrastructure. As the search continued, it became clear that the contamination was more complex than expected. Not only visible fragments of the satellite appeared, but also much smaller radioactive particles, difficult to detect and remove. This forced the teams to take extreme precautions expand tracking areas. At the same time, delicate communication work began with the northern communities, who wanted to know what real risks existed for health, water and the fauna on which they depended. As the weeks passed, the operation narrowed its objectives. The official Morning Light phase lasted 84 days, although CBC describes the search effort as extending through most of 1978 and the search covering an area of ​​124,000 square kilometers. In this process, 66 kilograms of remains were recovered and Canada considered the immediate threat to the population and the environment contained. The economic cost was raised and Ottawa claimed 6.1 million dollars from the Soviet Union, which in 1981 agreed to pay half, opening an unusual diplomatic process for an incident of this type. The case of Kosmos-954 was not closed with the removal of the remains from the ground. In the months since, the incident reached international forums and fueled an uncomfortable debate about the use of nuclear power in space. Several countries demanded greater security guarantees and more transparency in programs that, until then, had been developed under strong secrecy. The episode served to reinforce the idea that space accidents do not understand borders and that their consequences could directly affect third countries. Images | Arctic Operational Histories In Xataka | Mars is left with one less line of coverage: NASA loses contact with its key orbital repeater

The US has joined the “party” of China, Russia and Japan in the Pacific: with its nuclear bombers

by

As if it were an air parade of an air force planetarythe sky of the Asia-Pacific has become a scene of military exhibitions that have rarely been seen outside of a major war conflict. It happens that these fireworks can lead with a single spark into something very different. The improvised aerial party. As we said, the sky of Asia is a tour de force where every time it hides lessand where you patrol, joint exercises and strategic flights function as political messages in broad daylight. Russia and China have been setting the pace with bombers and fighters over disputed seas, Japan responds by raising the profile of its air defense and, now, the United States has decided to join visibly to this choreography of power, incorporating its strategic bombers into a dynamic that reflects the extent to which the region has become one of the epicenters of global rivalry. Bombers Made in USA. The joint flight of two American B-52s with Japanese fighters over the Sea of ​​Japan represents a qualitative leap in the signal sent from Washington, not so much because of its technical novelty as because of its symbolic load. The presence of bombers capable of carry nuclear weapons escorted by Japanese F-35s and F-15s, publicly reinforces the idea that the alliance between both countries is not rhetorical, but operational, and that the United States is willing to support Tokyo with strategic assets at a time of maximum friction with Beijing. The background. This show of force does not arise in a vacuum, but in the midst of an accelerated deterioration of relations between China and Japan that we have been telling, fed by the statements from Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi on a possible conflict scenario around Taiwan. Beijing considers these words a direct provocation and has responded combining diplomatic pressure, economic threats and a notable increase in military activity near Japanese airspace and disputed islands, raising the risk of unwanted incidents. Russia enters the scene. The previous presence of russian bombers Flying alongside Chinese aircraft near Japan and South Korea adds an additional layer of complexity to the scenario, projecting an image of strategic coordination against US allies in the region. For Tokyo, these joint patrols are not routine exercises, but a clear sign of directed pressure, which explains why the Japanese response has involved reinforcing its coordination with Washington and unambiguously accept the presence of high-profile American assets. Washington balances muscle. Although the White House has tried to reduce the drama of these flights, pointing out that they were planned in advance, the regional context gives them meaning. hard to ignore. The United States tries to maintain a delicate balance: show military commitment to Japan and deter China without completely breaking the channels of dialogue with Beijing, especially at a time when Washington continues to seek commercial stability and avoid an open escalation in the Pacific. An increasingly charged sky. With fighters blocking radarsstrategic bombers crossing disputed seas and joint exercises Happening at an almost routine pace, the airspace of East Asia has become a board where each flight counts as a political statement. The explicit input of the United States in this aerial “party” confirms that the fight between China and Japan is no longer just bilateral, but a broader reflection of the competition between great powers, one in which bombers and fighters seem to speak louder (and clearer) than diplomatic communications. Image | Japan’s Ministry of Defense In Xataka | That Chinese and Russian bombers patrol together is not surprising. That they do it against Japan and South Korea has had an immediate response In Xataka | If the question is how far the tension between China and Japan has escalated, the answer is disturbing: they are targeting each other.

Drones have reached France’s nuclear submarines

by

What began more or less a year ago in a hesitant way has become a certainty: Europe has entered a new phase hybrid confrontationone where traditional lines of defense become insufficient in the face of a range of tactics that combine cheap technology, covert actors and deliberate strategy to saturate to the states with ambiguous threats. The last barrier that has been jumped is, perhaps, the most dangerous. Disturbing mutation. The recent drone flyover on the nuclear submarine base of Île Longue, in France, and the immediate declaration a few hours ago of the state of emergency in Lithuania due to balloons from Belarus, these are not isolated incidents but manifestations of a growing pattern which seeks to explore vulnerabilities, overwhelm alert systems and expose the fragility of European security. Both episodes show the extent to which hybrid warfare has ceased to be an abstraction and has become an operational reality that affects civil aviation, nuclear infrastructure and political stability on the eastern border of the European Union. Drones on nuclear deterrence. That five drones of unknown origin managed to lurk over the weekend on Île Longue, the most sensitive installation of the French deterrence apparatus, marked a turning point. This base houses the four nuclear ballistic submarines of the French Navy, the core of the capability “second blow” of the country. The military response It was immediate: deployment of units, electronic counterattacks using jammers and activation of the alert protocol for strategic installations. It turns out that no drone was neutralized nor identified to its operators, which increases the feeling, once again, of a threat that operates deliberately in the dark. France had already registered similar raidsbut the temporal coincidence with others in Europe and the systematic use of drones near bases with nuclear weapons reinforce the suspicion that these maneuvers seek to test response times, map defensive patterns and, above all, generate a climate of concern both among military officials and the population. Extra ball. Although the French prosecutor’s office insists that there is no evidence of foreign interference, strategic context points to more than just random flights: from Ireland to Denmark, passing through the Netherlands and Germany, anonymous raids on airports, air bases and reinforced security zones have proliferated, many of them documented by military authorities that do not rule out the hand of Moscow. A vulnerability and pressure of airspace. He episode in Irelandwhere several military-style drones appeared in the air corridor planned for the landing of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, raised even more alarm. The reason: Ireland lacks radars operational, it does not have solid protocols to classify aerial threats and has minimal capabilities to counter drones, a strategic void that was exposed in the face of a possible operation designed to highlight national weaknesses. On a continent where drones have already forced to close airports Repeatedly, the Irish incident fits into a sequence of actions that seek to demonstrate that any country, even one that is not militarily involved in the war, can be vulnerable. Irish experts they warn that, regardless of the authorship, the confusion generated and the inability to react clearly represent a victory for any actor seeking to erode European cohesion. An official inspects a balloon used to transport cigarettes, in an undated photo released by the Lithuanian State Border Guard Service Balloons from Belarus. In parallel, a few hours ago Lithuania was forced to declare the state of emergency due to the constant arrival of weather balloons from Belarus. At first glance, these devices seem harmless, mere carriers of contraband. But in logic of hybrid warfarewhat is important is not so much the sophistication of the medium but its ability to force a disproportionate state response. The balloons have invaded Lithuanian airspace, forcing to close repeatedly Vilnius airport and have introduced concrete risks for civil aviation, forcing authorities to mobilize civil, police and military resources. A war of attrition. For Lithuania, a country bordering both Belarus and the Russian enclave of Kaliningrad, these incidents are not perceived as minor events, but as part of an attrition strategy intended to saturate their surveillance capacity and underline their exposure. After months of drone incursions, cyberattacks and electronic warfare, Vilnius interprets balloons as another step in a calculated escalation that uses cheap means to obtain strategic effects. Signs and a more aggressive phase. If you also want, what connects drones on French nuclear submarines, unidentified devices over Ireland and smuggling balloons that force an entire country to activate a state of emergency is its strategic role: demonstrate that Europe can be destabilized with simple tools, difficult to attribute and capable of generating considerable psychological, economic and political costs. So far, each incident individually can be minimized, but together they paint a picture. simultaneous pressure map on European airspace, on critical infrastructure and on the institutional cohesion of the EU. France already speaks openly about a “hybrid confrontation”Denmark attributes some incidents to “hybrid threats” of probable Russian origin and the Baltic countries consider each action a destabilization test. The result is a Europe that recognize the dangerbut that is still far from a unified response capable of tackling a threat that thrives precisely on ambiguity, the proliferation of small incidents and the difficulty of proving direct responsibility. An unprecedented threshold. What does seem crystal clear is that these episodes as a whole reveal that Europe is crossing a threshold where conventional security is no longer enough. Russian hybrid warfare (or, at least, the widespread perception of its advance) is now manifesting itself in ways that disrupt civil lifecompromise nuclear assets and overwhelm state apparatuses where they are most vulnerable. The presence of drones on a base that houses the french nuclear deterrent and the need for Lithuania to activate extraordinary powers to stop improvised balloons are signs of the same trend: the adversary does not need spectacular victories to cause damage because it is enough to multiply ambiguous threats until stability is eroded. Perhaps that is why the big question has been on … Read more

We already have the world’s first fast neutron nuclear reactor. We are going to use it for AI data centers

by

The growth of artificial intelligence is driving global electricity demand to historical figures. The expansion of data centers, the advance of electrification and the industrial rebound are straining aging networks that are already suffering from saturation in multiple countries. In this scenario, the digital sector—a large consumer of electricity for the development of AI—faces a paradox: it needs much more energy, but it must do so without increasing its emissions. And there arises a proposal that until recently would have seemed like science fiction: data centers powered by a compact fast neutron nuclear reactor. The Stellaria–Equinix deal that no one saw coming. The French startup Stellaria, born from commissariat to the atomistic energy (CEA) and Schneider Electric, announced a pre-purchase agreement with Equinix, one of the largest global data center operators. According to the press releasethe agreement secures Equinix the first 500 MW of capacity of the Stellarium, the molten salt and fast neutron reactor that the company plans to deploy starting in 2035. This reserve is part of Equinix’s initiatives to diversify towards “alternative energies” applied to AI-ready data centers. Autonomy, zero carbon and waste management. It is a brief summary of the first reactor breed and burn intended to supply data centers. As explained by Stellariaoffers: Completely carbon-free and controllable energy, enough to make a data center autonomous. Underground design without exclusion zone, thanks to its operation at atmospheric pressure and its liquid core. Ultra-fast response to load variations, essential for generative AI. Virtually infinite regeneration of fuel, part of which can come from current waste from nuclear power plants. Multi-fuel capability, from uranium 235 and 238 to plutonium 239, MOX, minor actinides and thorium. For Equinix, this means solving one of its great challenges: operating with guaranteed clean energy 24/7 without depending on the grid. For Europe, it marks the entry into a new generation of ultra-compact reactors: the Stellarium occupies just four cubic meters. The technology behind the reactor. The Stellarium is a fourth-generation liquid chloride salt reactor, cooled by natural convection and equipped with four physical containment barriers. It operates on a closed fuel cycle, capable of maintaining fission for more than 20 years without recharging. Stellaria’s roadmap establishes that in 2029 there will be the first fission reaction and six years later a commercial deployment and delivery of the reactor to Equinix. According to the company, The energy density of this type of reactor is “70 million times higher than that of lithium-ion batteries”, which would allow a single Stellarium to supply a city of 400,000 inhabitants. As fusion progresses, fast fission arrives first. To understand why a fast neutron reactor comes to the world of AI before fusion, just compare the technological moment of each. The merger is making spectacular progress—such as the record of the French WEST reactorwhich maintained a stable plasma for 22 minutes, or the Wendelstein 7-Xwhich sustained a high-performance plasma for 43 seconds—but remains experimental. ITER will not be operational this decade and commercial prototypes will not arrive until well into the 2030s. Advanced fission, on the other hand, is much closer to the market. Reactors like Stellaria’s, with molten salt and fast neutrons, do not require the extreme conditions of fusion and can be deployed sooner. The company plans its first reaction in 2029 and a commercial deployment in 2035. The data centers of the future will no longer depend on the network. Equinix already operates more than 270 data centers in 77 metropolitan areas. In Europe they are powered by 100% renewables, but their future demand for AI will require a constant, carbon-free source that does not congest the electrical grid. According to Stellariathis agreement “lays the foundation for data centers with lifetime energy autonomy.” And, if the company meets its schedule, Europe will become the first region in the world where artificial intelligence is powered by compact reactors that recycle their own nuclear waste. The technological race between advanced fission and fusion is far from over, but, today, the first fast neutron reactor intended for AI does not come from ITER or an industrial giant: it comes from a French startup. Europe has just opened a door that could transform, at the same time, the future of energy and computing. Image | freepik and Stellaria Xataka | Google hit the red button when ChatGPT came upon it. Now it is OpenAI who has pressed it, according to WSJ

China is building a megastructure for deep-sea research. For whatever reason, resist nuclear bombs

by

China is building a mega thing. It doesn’t matter when you read this: the Asian giant always has a mega dam underwayhe highest bridge in the world either an impossible road in the bag. However, one of the country’s latest projects is not a mega-construction, but a floating artificial “island,” which can navigate and designed to be self-sufficient. Oh, and most importantly: prepared for the end of the world. The “island”. Waiting for it to receive a somewhat more “commercial” name, in a report by South China Morning Post They refer to the facility as the “Deep-Sea All-Wather Resident Floating Research Facility.” It is a name that is equivalent to “what do you want this station to do” and the answer is “yes,” and it is basically a mix between a research center, command center and nuclear bunker. It will be a semi-submersible platform with a 78,000 ton twin hull design and considerable dimensions: 138 meters long. 85 meters wide. Main deck 45 meters from the waterline. Long duration missions. The project specifications show that the platform is projected to house almost 240 people for four months without the need for any replenishment. In addition, it can sail at a speed of up to 15 knots and something that gives us a clue to its colossal ambition is that the engines allow a displacement comparable to that of the Fujian, the brand new Chinese aircraft carrier of 80,000 tons. Bomb proof (nuclear). If you’re thinking about a fortress that could be worthy of a Marvel movie, here’s the shot. The structure will resist waves up to nine meters high and category 17 typhoons, the highest for this type of cyclone. But the most striking thing is that it will have special armor to resist nuclear explosions. Instead of conventional steel armorthe walls of the complex will be built with a design that converts the powerful shock waves of a nuclear explosion into ones that the structure can assimilate. As a “dissipator” of the power of the wave, wow. To do this, they have resorted to a metamaterial which, when subjected to pressure, compresses, creating a denser and stronger structure than much thicker steel panels. According to simulations, its walls resist more pressure than those of a submarine and four times more than those of a conventional ship, but with a plate thickness of only 60 mm. Back.To withstand these long periods at sea, and as describe from Shanghai Jiao Tong University (SJTU) in an article in which they talk about the superstructure, the installation contains critical compartments that guarantee emergency power, but also backup for communications and a navigation center equally protected against nuclear explosions. China is taking leaps and bounds in its fleet Strategy. The SJTU describes it as a research center and, although the project has been described as “civilian”, its specifications make it comply with the Chinese military standard GJB 1060.1-1991 against nuclear explosions. Therefore, although it can be used for deep-sea research, it could also operate in areas where warships could not be accessed (such as waters near diplomatically sensitive countries or territories). This is something that does not frighten a China that does not hesitate to deploy its ships in disputed territoriesand from SCMP they point out that the installation could function as a resilient command center, a logistics center or a surveillance station that, in addition, is less invasive than a fixed structure built on land. It’s not that far away. Although we now know of its existence, this station has been on the drawing board for a decade and is expected to reach operational status in 2028. Once completed, we will be able to see what it is capable of and, above all, what use it is given. Because therein lies its importance as a research center to support the “blue economy” (extraction of deep sea resources, renewable energies and marine research), but also its military component. The photo, by the way, is not of a real structure, but of an interpretation of the SJTU. Images | SJTU, 中国新闻社 In Xataka | China is immersed in a nuclear revolution and needs industrial quantities of uranium. His solution: “fish” it in the sea

In 2011 Japan closed the largest nuclear power plant on the planet. Now he has decided to reopen it in the midst of the energy debate

by

The nuclear debate, which Japan thought closed, returns to the scene. The authorization of the governor of Niigata to reactivate Kashiwazaki-Kariwa, the largest atomic plant in the world, has set off alarms: citizen distrust, the shadow of Fukushima and doubts about whether TEPCO is the right company to lead the country’s new energy stage are emerging. A new nuclear revival? The Kashiwazaki-Kariwa plant, managed by Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO), has not produced a single kilowatt since 2012. The closure was a direct consequence of the 2011 tsunami and the three meltdowns from Fukushima Daiichia blow that left reactors with similar designs under suspicion. That technical coincidence was enough to keep its seven reactors on hold for more than ten years, despite the fact that the plant was essential for the electricity supply of northeastern Japan. According to Japan TimesHideyo Hanazumi has authorized a step-by-step reactivation that will start with reactor 6—one of the most recent and powerful—and that, later, will also include reactor 7. Altogether, the complex exceeds 8,000 MW of capacity, a figure that not only imposes: it maintains it as the largest nuclear facility on the planet. A significant change for the Japanese country. Kashiwazaki-Kariwa has gone from a technical project to a strategic move. As reported by the Financial TimesTokyo trusts that its reactivation will contribute to lowering the electricity bill and ensuring energy sources with fewer emissions, at a time complicated by the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the fall of the yen, which makes fossil fuel imports more expensive. Japan, which before Fukushima generated almost 30% of its electricity with atomic plants, fell to practically zero after the disaster. Since then 14 reactors have reopened and others await local or regulatory approvals. The government aims for nuclear energy to once again represent 20% of the mix in 2040. In addition, TEPCO would improve its annual accounts by around 100 billion yen thanks to the restart, according to Japan Forwardat a time when it continues to face enormous costs for the dismantling of Fukushima Daiichi. The reactivation process. The restart will begin with unit 6, which already has fuel loaded and will begin commercial operations before March of next year. To move forward, TEPCO must respond to the Government’s demands, which include updating all security systems and improving emergency evacuation plans. The process has not been easy. As detailed by Japan Timesthe plant passed safety reviews in 2017, but then suffered a veto from the Nuclear Regulatory Authority due to deficiencies in anti-terrorist measures, lifted in 2023. In addition, TEPCO had to incorporate biometric controls and correct security flaws after new internal incidents. Is there controversy? Yes, and a lot. According to a survey cited by the BBC50% of Niigata residents support the revival, while 47% oppose it. However, almost 70% express their concern because the person operating the plant is the same company that caused the accident. From Japan Times He adds that the rejection intensifies in some of the towns located within 30 kilometers of the plant, where the majority fear a new disaster or distrust the company. Another source of discomfort, also pointed out by this medium, is that the electricity generated is not used in Niigata, but in the Tokyo region. The political dimension is equally tense. Hanazumi, aware of the sensitivity of her decision, has announced that he will submit his continuity as governor to the vote of the prefectural assembly, the only body that can remove him. But there is something else at play. The reopening of Kashiwazaki-Kariwa is seen as a pillar to ensure the country’s energy security and avoid possible power outages in Tokyo. It would also allow reducing electricity rates that have increased notably since 2011. At the same time, Japan is not only restarting reactors: it is also is planning the construction of new plants with fourth generation reactors, which would mark a new chapter in the country’s energy policy. More than a return to the atom. The country that one day vowed not to depend on atomic energy again has ended up returning to it, driven by necessity, geopolitics and the urgency to decarbonize. It remains to be seen if this decision will also ignite the confidence of a citizenry that still carries the memory of Fukushima or if, on the contrary, the return to the atom will deepen a division that has been open for more than a decade. Although the governor’s approval is the decisive step, there are still procedures: the prefectural assembly must debate and vote on the decision in December, and the Japanese nuclear regulator must complete the formal procedures for reactivation. Image | IAEA Imagebank Xataka | In 2011, Japan promised itself not to bet on nuclear energy again. Until he met reality

Reopening nuclear power plants sounds very spectacular, but Google has a plan B in case it’s not enough: solar energy

by

Data centers for are insatiable monsters those who are responsible for them must feed. OpenAI, Meta, Microsoft, xAI, Anthropic and Google are burning money riding colossal data centers for training and management of artificial intelligence. But these installations are not expensive to set up: they are also expensive to maintain. They require a considerable amount of energy to functionand Google has just received a ‘shot’ of renewables. All thanks to a direct connection to the largest system in the United States. Renewables to power AI. Google and TotalEnergies have just signed a agreement of energy purchases for 15 years. The contract stipulates that the energy company will deliver 1.5 TWh of electricity from its Montpelier solar plant, in Ohio, to Google. The plant is still under construction and they estimate that it will have a capacity of 49 MW, but the most important thing is that it will be connected directly to the electricity system. PJM. It is the largest network operator in the United States. It covers 13 states and data centers are representing a relevant portion of the operator’s pie: in its last annual auction, the load of these facilities PJM capacity sale triggered at 7.3 billion dollars, 82% more. Astronomical needs. In the statement from TotalEnergies, the company that this agreement illustrates its ability to meet the growing energy demands of the major technology companies. The problem is that it is not enough. If we focus on Google, the consumption of its data centers was 30.8 million megawatt hours of electricity. The company has been focused on AI for years, but the recent ‘boom’ has made it double what its centers consumed in 2020 (14.4 million MWh). Currently, data centers are estimated to account for 95.8% of Google’s total electricity budget. But it’s not just Google: the International Energy Agency esteem that global data centers consumed 415 TWh last year, representing approximately 1.5% of global electricity consumption. It seems little put in percentage, but Spain consumed in 2024 231,808 GWh, or 231 TWh, in 2024. The data centers of a handful of companies alone consumed twice as much as an entire country. And the estimate is that this data center consumption will double by 2030, reaching 945 TWh. Renewables are not enough. Now, although renewables are a support for the total energy required by data centerssolar and wind power have two limitations: intermittency and variability. Generation depends on weather conditions and time of day, meaning it fluctuates dramatically even throughout the same day. This instability clashes head-on with the high reliability and availability requirements of data centers. These are installations that must operate continuously and cannot assume cuts or Unforeseeable drops in supplysince AI or cloud storage would suffer the consequences. These renewables require backup batteries, but it is complicated and expensive to have such a large number of batteries just to power data centers. Pulling the gas and looking at the nuclear. That’s where other sources come into play. On the one hand, nuclear. In October 2024, Google signed the world’s first corporate agreement to acquire nuclear energy from SMR reactors. The first will come into operation in 230 and it is expected that, together, they will be able to satisfy the technology company with 500 MW of capacity by 2035. On the other hand, natural gas. In October of this year, the Broadwing Energy Center project began, a new natural gas power plant that will have a capacity of 400 MW and is scheduled to come into play at the end of 2029. Decarbonization and pressure. And the big question is… doesn’t the use of gas for AI clash with the technology companies’ objectives of achieving decarbonization percentages for both 2030 and 2050? We have already seen that oil companies have been getting off the renewables bandwagon because they have seen that fossil fuels are still relevant in the technology industry, but in the case of Google, they rely on the fact that projects like the Broadwing Energy Center They will have CCS systems. This means that it will have carbon capture system that will be able to permanently “sequester” 90% of the emissions. It means burying the problem, literally, since the CO₂ will be stored a mile underground. In 2020, before the AI ​​boom, the company established the goal of operating with carbon-free energy 24 hours a day, seven days a week by 2030. It will be interesting to see how they plan to offset these emissions thanks to renewables, but the IAE estimates that the demand for data centers will not stop growing in the short term and that adds another problem: a increased pressure on the electrical grid which is added as another element to manage. Because the big underlying problem is that the demand for energy is growing at a faster rate than the capacity to generate new electricity, and it is something that has an impact on companies’ bills, but also in homes. Images | Unsplash, Google Data Center In Xataka | China does not have a spending problem with AI. What it has is a huge income gap compared to its main rival

The largest nuclear power plant in Europe has been connected to diesel generators for a month. It’s as encouraging as it sounds.

by

Europe is once again walking a nuclear tightrope. After more than three years of war, the largest atomic plant on the continent —the Ukrainian Zaporizhia plant— has gone from being an industrial symbol to becoming at a point of friction capable of triggering an emergency of continental reach. In parallel, other plants in the country operate at reduced power after attacks on the electrical grid. The situation is so unstable that the director of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Rafael Grossi, recently traveled to Kaliningrad, Russia, for emergency talks with the head of Rosatom, Alexey Likhachev, according to the Anadolu agency. It is a gesture that reflects the extent to which the risk is real. An attack that left two centers at minimum. According to a statement from the IAEAa military attack during the night of November 7 damaged an electrical substation critical to nuclear security. This incident left the Khmelnitsky and Rivne plants disconnected from one of their two 750 kilovolt lines and forced the electricity operator to order a power reduction in several of its reactors. Ten days later, one of the lines was still out of service and three reactors continued to operate at limited power. The agency emphasizes that these substations are essential nodes of the network: they allow the voltage levels that feed the security and cooling systems to be transformed and maintained. Without them, plants cannot guarantee safe operation. One month depending on diesel generators. The situation in Zaporizhzhia is even more critical. According to an opinion column by Najmedin Meshkati, professor of engineering and international relations published in the Financial Timesthe plant spent a full month without outside power after its two main lines were cut. During that time it survived solely on diesel generators, a resource that the industry considers strictly temporary: they are designed to run for around 24 hours, not for weeks. Technicians were only able to repair the lines under the protection of localized ceasefires negotiated by the IAEA, according to NucNet. Even so, one of the two restored lines was disconnected again on November 14 due to the activation of a protection system. Grossi summed it up like this: “The electrical situation at the plant remains extremely fragile.” The condition for a shut down reactor to remain safe. Although Zaporizhzhia’s six reactors have been on cold shutdown for more than three years, the plant requires a constant three to four megawatts to maintain cooling pumps and other essential systems, according to Meshkati. The professor emphasizes that even huge emergency batteries require external electricity to stay charged. It is a vicious circle: without the electrical grid, batteries are used, but without external electricity, these batteries cannot be recharged and, without both, the cooling systems fail. And without cooling the risk of nuclear fuel melting or overheating increases. The University of Southern California professor warns that this scenario reproduces the conditions that transformed Fukushima into a global disaster: “What turned an earthquake into a catastrophe was the total failure of the electrical system.” And he adds that, unlike 2011 in Japan, this time the risk comes from deliberate human action. A network reduced to its minimum expression. Before the war, according to the Kyiv Independentthe Zaporizhia plant was connected through ten power lines. Today it only has one or two operations and has lost all connection ten times since the beginning of the invasion. The IAEA itself has described the situation power plant as “extremely precarious” and “clearly not sustainable” when it depends for long periods on diesel generators. Short and medium term risks. The notices in the last report on Ukraine by the IAEA point in the same direction: the main danger is not a Chernobyl-type explosion, but a prolonged cooling failure. This scenario could cause overheating of the reactors in cold shutdown, damage to the spent fuel pools and a possible localized or regional radioactive release, with the consequent need to create an exclusion zone in the heart of agricultural Europe. For its part, according to Meshkatiadds two other relevant elements. On the one hand, it points out that a serious accident will exceed the economic impact of Fukushima, estimated at about $500 billion. An incident of that magnitude would affect agriculture, transport, supply chains and the European insurance market. On the other hand, he maintains that if Russia manages to consolidate the precedent that an occupying army can take control of a nuclear power plant and connect it to its own network, the global nuclear security architecture would be seriously compromised. It would be a precedent without equivalent since the creation of international standards that regulate the civil use of atomic energy. Is there a meeting point? The IAEA has acted as an intermediary between Moscow and kyiv on multiple occasions. According to the Anadolu agencyGrossi traveled to Kaliningrad to meet with Likhachev, director of Rosatom, in order to directly discuss the situation in Zaporizhzhia and the minimum conditions to guarantee nuclear safety. At the same time, the agency is trying to technically shore up the Ukrainian electrical system. According to their own statementshas so far coordinated 174 deliveries of essential equipment – ​​switches, electrical cabinets, radiation monitoring stations, vehicles and computer equipment – ​​worth more than 20.5 million euros, intended to sustain nuclear security in Ukraine during the war. Nuclear security supported by fragile cables Europe breathes thanks to a handful of cables repaired under fire and diesel generators that have already proven to be well beyond their limits. As the Financial Times explainsthe continent’s security depends on electricity continuing to arrive and on the parties respecting the fragile ceasefires needed to repair lines when they go down. Grossi summed it up with a mix of relief and alarm after the restoration of one of the lines: “It is a good day for nuclear security, although the situation remains highly precarious.” And the precarious thing, in this case, is that a new attack, a mechanical failure or a downed line is enough to bring … Read more

nuclear and the next war

by

The recent history of the Chinese Communist Party has entered in a phase in which internal discipline, political surveillance and a certain systematic distrust are already a structural part of the system, and in which Xi Jinping has been erected in absolute protagonist not only by institutional accumulation of titles, but by incessant use of the most feared mechanism in Chinese politics: the purge. The rise of fear. Over the last long decade, coinciding with his rule, China has experienced a continuous cycle of beheadings political and military that not only have not slowed down, but have acquired a new character. What initially seemed like a mechanism of consolidation against rivals and chiefs inherited from the past has transformed into a permanent processunpredictable and increasingly deep, capable of engulfing elite figures previously considered immovable. The visible absence of dozens of senior officials at the last plenary session of the Central Committee (deliberately leaked by official cameras by showing entire rows empty) graphically condensed This new normal: Xi rules through fear, and no one, not even his own protégés, can take his position for granted. The purge as an instrument. The current cycle of purges began since Xi came to power in 2012, but has reached an unprecedented scale as of 2023. Its scope covers almost all levels of the Party and, especially, the armed forces. Of the 376 members and alternates of the Central Committee elected in 2022, about 16% was absent from the 2024 plenary session, a proportion incompatible with chance or illness. many of them They occupied key positionsincluding generals who commanded units responsible for preparing an invasion of Taiwan or managing internal troop loyalty. A mechanism that does not stop. In parallel, corruption investigations have reached neuralgic points of the military apparatus: the second officer in command of the People’s Liberation Army fell for alleged crimes of illicit enrichment and for promoting alternative loyalty networks, and others were expelled for their role in appointments that they didn’t like to the leading nucleus. Even the Minister of Defense himself and his predecessor disappeared from the scene after brief periods in office. Each outing has been accompanied by an official silence which, far from weakening Xi’s image of power, reinforces it. His message is unequivocal: no position has intrinsic value, no career offers protection, no past loyalty guarantees indulgence. Loyalty as a criterion. The official narrative presents these purges as a crusade against endemic corruption which would have weakened Chinese war preparation and reduced the effectiveness of weapons systems. It is true that there are indications real cases of irregularities: serious errors in the construction of missile silos, bribery in promotions, diversion of funds and internal patronage networks that affected the rocket forcethe most critical body of the nuclear arsenal. But even when these deviations exist, The New York Times said that Xi’s logic goes beyond exemplary punishment. For him, corruption is both a problem operational as ideological. He perceives it as a fissure through which Western values, professionalizing tendencies that separate the army from the Party or autonomous power networks can leak. obedience His obsession with the Soviet precedent (the idea that the USSR fell because the Party lost control of the Army) fuels a permanent surveillance approach. Each purged officer is presented as a reminder that loyalty, understood as total obedience to Xi’s personal leadership, is the only guarantee of political survival. Hence, after more than a decade in power, when theoretically there should no longer be organized resistance in the Army, the purges not only continue, but that increase. The earthquake in Rocket Force. The most profound shock has been that affecting China’s nuclear arm. Since 2023, the Rocket Force has lost a large part of its leadership, which has caused confusion among analysts who considered this force the best protected strategic core in the country. The corruption investigation in the construction of silos and in the management of enormous budgets has coincided with the accelerated expansion of the Chinese nuclear arsenal, which aims to double the number of warheads by 2030. For Xi, any sign of corruption in this structure, no matter how small, constitutes an existential threat: If the arsenal does not guarantee deterrent credibility, China’s own strategy against the United States is destabilized. The laboratory expands. Paradoxically, this massive purge in the nuclear force coexists with a construction program of tunnels, silos and underground chambers in Lop Nurthe historic test center, which aims for greater technical preparation for low-throughput tests. China maintains that it respects the testing moratorium, but the pace of excavation, electrical installation and deep drilling suggests it is providing capabilities for a scenario in which advanced designs need to be validated in the event of a possible reactivation of North American tests. The impact on the army. The fall of commanders at all levels it has left key vacancies in the five theaters of operations and in the command structures of the Navy, the Land Force and the internal discipline bodies. The simultaneous disappearance of so many cadres has raised doubts about the real degree of preparation for a war, especially in the Taiwan Strait. From mid-2024, Chinese military activity around the island has been reducedwith fewer planes crossing the median line of the Strait and fewer incursions close to its airspace. Some analysts interpret this as an operational weakening due to to the command vacuum. Others point to strategic changes driven by surviving generals, who prefer to focus on substantive training and longer-range maneuvers in the Pacific. Extra ball. However, everyone agrees that the climate of suspicion and fear it discourages tactical initiative, a central element of modern warfare. The risk is twofold: a less effective force and, at the same time, the possibility that new massive promotions of very young commanders, without networks or brakes, generate a more aggressive and nationalist military culture. The dimension of the purges. The Diplomat told that the purges also raise a doubt: the possibility that these are no longer solely a … Read more

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.