Global Nuclear Demand Reaches 10,000 Terawatt-Hours by 2035

Global electricity demand is expected to grow by more than 10,000 terawatt-hours by 2035, according to UN News. For context, that's equivalent to the total electricity consumption of every advanced economy on Earth today, added on top of current use.

The International Energy Agency reported that data center electricity demand grew by more than 75% between 2023 and 2024 alone. By 2030, data centers are projected to account for over 20% of electricity-demand growth in advanced economies.

Google and Other Tech Giants Push Nuclear

Manuel Greisinger, a senior manager at Google focused on AI, addressed the IAEA's December summit in Vienna, where policymakers, tech companies, and nuclear industry leaders gathered.

"We need clean, stable zero-carbon electricity that is available around the clock," Greisinger told attendees. "This is undoubtedly an extremely high threshold, and it is not achievable with wind and solar power alone."

Greisinger called nuclear "not only an option, but also an indispensable core component of the future energy structure."

The Scale of the Challenge

Anna Erickson, a nuclear engineering professor at Georgia Tech, said data center energy supply will need to triple by 2030 if the industry continues pursuing clean energy.

Erickson addressed the proposed restart of Three Mile Island Unit 1, backed by Microsoft's 20-year power purchase agreement, as a potential model for reviving existing nuclear infrastructure to meet AI demand. She noted real engineering challenges: aging infrastructure, updated regulatory standards, and digital control system upgrades. But she said it's achievable.

The U.S. currently operates 93 commercial nuclear reactors across 54 plants in 28 states, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. The most recent reactor to come online was Vogtle Unit 4 in Georgia on April 29, 2024, completing an 11-year expansion project.

That pipeline needs to accelerate.

Coal Re-Enters the Conversation

Coal is re-entering energy discussions among utilities and industry observers grappling with the scale of demand.

Jim Cramer said on CNBC's Mad Money that coal "is going to come back in a big way" if utilities can't fill the gap fast enough. Coal powered 50% of U.S. electricity in 2007. It's down to 15-17% today, but still generates between 173 and 190 gigawatts of capacity on the grid.

Cramer interviewed Kenny Young, CEO of Babcock & Wilcox, the 160-year-old engineering firm with a $2.7 billion project backlog. Young laid out the infrastructure gap: the U.S. may need 90 to 100 gigawatts of new energy if data center buildout continues at current pace.

Babcock & Wilcox completed a share offering of 10.8 million shares at $18.50 to fund expansion, after the stock rose from under $1 a year ago to over $21. The market is pricing in a significant buildout.

President Trump has called coal a national security asset. The Department of Energy under his administration is actively working to prevent coal plant closures. The grid math supporting the policy is straightforward, even if the environmental trade-offs are real.

The Gap Between Supply and Demand

Nuclear takes years to permit and build. The IAEA summit produced enthusiasm, not kilowatts. Meanwhile, AI energy demand is growing now, not in 2032.

The practical short-term solution isn't solar or wind. It's what's already on the grid and can keep running—which includes coal plants originally scheduled for retirement.

UN News focuses on the nuclear opportunity and largely ignores coal. Georgia Tech's coverage is solid on technical detail but light on political and market dynamics. CNBC gets the market angle but buries coal inside stock-picking content.

The Immediate Challenge

Your electricity bill is going up. The question is whether it increases while the grid stays reliable, or whether rolling blackouts become common because policymakers chose ideology over engineering reality.

Nuclear is the right long-term answer. But long-term doesn't keep the lights on tonight. The people making trillion-dollar AI bets understand this. The question is whether Washington does.