When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.
Meta’s nuclear power deals mark a decisive shift in how the company fuels its data centres. The company signed three agreements to secure nuclear electricity at scale. It partnered with Oklo, TerraPower, and Vistra. Each deal targets reliability, scale, and long-term supply. Moreover, Meta requires constant power to expand its data centre operations. Nuclear energy offers steady output across day and night. As a result, Meta prioritized sources that avoid grid volatility. Existing reactors deliver immediate capacity.
Read Also: India Grok Order Forces Rapid Platform Changes
Meanwhile, startups promise future supply through smaller reactors. Together, the mix balances speed and ambition. Meta issued a request for proposals in late 2024. It is expected to reach up to four gigawatts by the early 2030s. The response shaped today’s announcements. Importantly, much power will flow through the PJM grid. That network already hosts many data centres. Therefore, Meta aims to secure capacity early. These Meta nuclear power deals show urgency, not experimentation. They anchor infrastructure planning for the next decade.
Meta Nuclear Power Deals Lean on Existing Reactors First
The Vistra agreement anchors the fastest impact among Meta nuclear power deals. Meta will purchase 2.1 gigawatts from two Ohio plants. The Perry and Davis-Besse reactors already operate today. Consequently, Meta gains dependable baseload electricity without construction delays. Vistra will also expand capacity at those plants. In addition, it will upgrade Beaver Valley in Pennsylvania. Those upgrades add 433 megawatts by the early 2030s. This approach lowers risk and cost. Existing nuclear plants supply some of the cheapest grid power.
Therefore, Meta locked in long-term value with a 20-year contract. The deal reduces exposure to fuel price swings. It also avoids congestion risks on saturated grids. While growth continues, Meta needs certainty. Vistra provides that certainty now. In newsroom terms, this deal does the heavy lifting. It covers near-term demand while other projects mature. Thus, Meta nuclear power deals begin with pragmatism.
The Role of Small Reactor Startups
Oklo and TerraPower represent the forward-looking side of Meta nuclear power deals. Both companies develop small modular reactors. These designs aim for factory-style production. In theory, repetition cuts costs over time. Oklo plans to deliver 1.2 gigawatts to Meta. It targets the initial supply around 2030. However, regulatory approval remains a hurdle. Oklo still seeks clearance from U.S. nuclear regulators. If approved, it would build reactors in Pike County, Ohio. Each Aurora unit produces 75 megawatts. Therefore, Oklo must make more than a dozen units.
TerraPower follows a different path. It designed a sodium-cooled reactor with energy storage. The system stores heat for later use. As a result, it can respond to demand swings. TerraPower aims to supply power by 2032. Its first two reactors would deliver 690 megawatts. Meta also holds rights for more units. These Meta nuclear power deals give startups credibility and demand.
Meta Nuclear Power: Grid Pressure and Scale
Behind Meta’s nuclear power deals sits a broader grid problem. Data centres consume enormous amounts of electricity. Moving forward, they run nonstop and tolerate few interruptions. Traditional grids struggle with that profile. Renewable sources fluctuate by nature. Nuclear power fills the gap with steady output. The PJM grid clearly illustrates the challenge. It spans 13 states and hosts dense data centre clusters.
Read Also: How Agrovesto is Digitizing Nigeria’s Smallholder Farmers in Nigeria
Interconnection queues are already facing congestion. Consequently, companies seek direct power agreements. Meta chose nuclear to bypass uncertainty. Moreover, regulators increasingly scrutinize new grid connections. Long-term nuclear contracts reduce approval risks. They also support regional grid stability. Meta’s approach mirrors peers across the tech sector. The industry now competes for baseload power. Startups benefit from guaranteed buyers. Utilities benefit from stable revenue. Consumers benefit from reduced grid stress. Thus, Meta nuclear power deals reflect system-wide pressure, not isolated strategy.
Cost Increment and Timing Questions
Despite momentum, Meta’s nuclear power deals still face open questions. Costs for small reactors remain uncertain. TerraPower targets $50 to $60 per megawatt-hour. Oklo targets $80 to $130. These figures apply to later units, not first builds. In addition, early reactors often cost more. Delays also remain possible. Regulatory reviews can extend timelines. Supply chains can slow construction.
However, Meta knowingly accepts those risks. It diversified its partners to spread exposure. It also locked in cheap power from existing plants. Financial terms remain undisclosed. Still, the intent appears clear. Meta prioritizes reliability over short-term savings. It plans infrastructure for decades, not quarters. In that sense, Meta’s nuclear power deals signal maturity. They treat energy as a core strategy. For data centres, power equals uptime. And uptime drives the business.
