Microsoft, Google, and Amazon are driving a historic shift in nuclear energy policy by pursuing direct power purchase agreements with existing reactors and investing in small modular reactor (SMR) development. Microsoft signed a deal to restart Three Mile Island Unit 1, Pennsylvania's shuttered reactor, by 2028, while Google has secured agreements with various nuclear operators to supply power for AI data centers. These commitments reflect the staggering energy demands of large language models and training infrastructure—current US data centers consume roughly 17 gigawatts annually, with AI workloads projected to double or triple that figure within five years. The technology sector's appetite for reliable, carbon-free baseload power has created rare political alignment. Both Democratic and Republican lawmakers now view nuclear expansion as essential climate infrastructure, with the Biden administration fast-tracking NRC licensing processes and several states introducing nuclear tax incentives.

This renaissance obscures a critical infrastructure gap: the United States still has no permanent solution for nuclear waste. The Yucca Mountain repository, designated in 1987, remains politically gridlocked after $15 billion in development costs. Approximately 88,000 metric tons of high-level radioactive waste currently sit in temporary storage pools and dry casks at reactor sites nationwide. While small modular reactors generate smaller waste volumes per unit—a potential advantage for distributed deployment at data centers—they still produce long-lived isotopes requiring secure disposition for millennia. The NRC and Department of Energy have accelerated interim storage approvals, but no pathway exists for permanent geological sequestration. Regulators argue that current temporary solutions are safe indefinitely, yet leaving waste at reactor sites contradicts the industry's pitch for expanded nuclear deployment.

Policymakers face sequential decisions that will determine whether nuclear expansion proceeds responsibly. The immediate choice involves licensing velocity: fast-tracking new reactor permits versus conditioning new builds on waste management progress. Congress must decide whether to revive Yucca Mountain, fund alternative repository sites, or accelerate advanced fuel recycling technologies that reduce waste volumes. States are beginning to condition nuclear incentives on waste accountability measures. Without addressing these policy questions, tech companies' nuclear commitments risk repeating the cycle of the past four decades—building capacity while deferring waste problems to future administrations. Industry leaders acknowledge the stakes: Microsoft's nuclear deals explicitly reference meeting emissions targets by 2030, leaving little room for regulatory delays. The convergence of AI energy demand and nuclear revival creates a policy window, but only if waste management stops being treated as a separate problem.