Amazon is taking a bold step toward the next frontier of clean energy. In Washington state, the company is helping to build one of the United States’ first small modular reactor (SMR) facilities. This innovative nuclear energy project could redefine how big tech powers artificial intelligence (AI), cloud computing, and data centers.
The upcoming Cascade Advanced Energy Facility will be one of the first commercial SMR sites in the U.S. Developed by Energy Northwest and X-energy, this project represents a major milestone in the shift toward reliable, carbon-free energy for a rapidly digitizing world.
Bob Schuetz, CEO of Energy Northwest, said,
“Today marks a pivotal step forward in bringing this transformative project to life. We are proud to be at the forefront of deploying advanced nuclear technology in the region—driving next-generation solutions that strengthen energy security and position the Pacific Northwest as a clean energy leader.”
Cascade: The Nuclear Powerhouse Behind Amazon’s Digital Future
Amazon’s data centers are the digital backbone of modern life—running AI models, streaming services, and e-commerce systems that demand massive amounts of electricity. As power needs grow, traditional renewable sources like solar and wind alone can’t always meet 24/7 demand. That’s where nuclear energy steps in.
- The Cascade facility, located near Richland, Washington, will produce up to 960 megawatts (MW) of clean electricity using X-energy’s Xe-100 advanced reactor design.
The project will start with four SMRs generating 320 MW, with expansion plans for up to 12 units. Construction is expected to begin before 2030, with operations commencing in the early 2030s.
Kara Hurst, Chief Sustainability Officer, Amazon, commented:
“Seeing these renderings is truly inspiring, and a reminder that innovation and sustainability go hand in hand. This project isn’t just about new technology; it’s about creating a reliable source of carbon-free energy that will support our growing digital world. I’m excited about the potential of SMRs and the positive impact they will have on both the environment and local communities.”
Here’s a snapshot of the project site:
SMRs: A Smaller, Safer, and Scalable Future
SMRs represent the next evolution in nuclear energy. They’re designed to be smaller, safer, and faster to deploy than conventional reactors. The modular layout allows facilities like Cascade to scale as demand grows—making it a perfect match for AI-powered data centers that require continuous, high-capacity electricity.
Xe-100 Advanced Reactor Features
Each Xe-100 reactor will use a High-Temperature Gas-cooled Reactor (HTGR) and advanced fuel, improving safety and efficiency. The design minimizes the risk of overheating and eliminates the need for large water-cooling systems, which are standard in older nuclear plants.
Key advantages include:
- 80 MW per reactor module with a 60-year design life.
- Modular construction allows components to be built off-site and transported via rail or road.
- Continuous online refueling, reducing downtime, and increasing efficiency.
- Walk-away safe design with passive safety systems that eliminate the risk of overheating.
- Fuel that cannot melt, further enhancing safety.
Unlike traditional gigawatt-scale reactors that occupy vast tracts of land, Cascade’s compact design will fit on a few city blocks. Each SMR is modular, which means parts can be factory-built and assembled on-site, reducing costs and construction time.
The environmental advantage is clear: SMRs provide round-the-clock, carbon-free electricity without the intermittency challenges of solar or wind. This makes them a critical piece of the clean energy puzzle for tech-driven economies.
According to J. Clay Sell, CEO of X-energy, said
“The support of Amazon has enabled us to accelerate progress on our technology, grow our team, and position the Cascade Advanced Energy Facility at the forefront of energy innovation.”
Jobs, Training, and Local Benefits
Once the Cascade project is complete, the facility will create over 1,000 construction jobs and more than 100 permanent positions in nuclear operations, engineering, and technical maintenance.
To build a skilled local workforce, Columbia Basin College in Pasco, Washington, is developing an Energy Learning Center with a sophisticated Xe-100 control room simulator. Think of it as a flight simulator for nuclear operators.
The press release also revealed that the simulator will train future plant operators, engineers, and technicians in collaboration with Washington State University Tri-Cities and is set to open in late 2025.
This initiative, funded by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), provides students with hands-on experience in advanced nuclear technology—bridging the gap between classroom learning and real-world careers.
Amazon’s Growing Nuclear Portfolio
Amazon’s investment in Cascade is part of a broader strategy to diversify its clean energy sources. The company has already invested billions of dollars in carbon-free technologies, including nuclear power, through its Climate Pledge Fund.
This fund supports companies developing scalable solutions to decarbonize energy systems. Amazon’s capital investment in X-energy is expected to help bring over 5 gigawatts (GW) of new nuclear capacity to the U.S. grid by 2039—enough to power 3.8 million homes.
- In another move, Amazon signed agreements with South Korea’s Doosan Enerbility and Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power Co. to accelerate SMR deployment in the U.S. These partnerships are part of Amazon’s long-term strategy to integrate advanced nuclear into its clean energy mix.
- The company also teamed up with Talen Energy in Pennsylvania to develop a data center next to an existing nuclear plant, further securing access to reliable carbon-free power for its expanding cloud infrastructure.
Clean Energy Beyond Renewables
Amazon is the world’s largest corporate purchaser of renewable energy, with over 600 clean energy projects operating globally. It had already reached 100% renewable electricity worldwide—seven years ahead of its 2030 goal.
However, as AI and cloud energy demands soar, renewables alone won’t suffice. Amazon’s focus on nuclear underscores a key point: the data-driven future needs constant, scalable, carbon-free power.
According to a DNV report, AI-focused data centers could require 10 times more power over the next five years. Meeting that demand will require a mix of renewables, nuclear, and other carbon-free technologies.
Amazon’s approach is clear: continue expanding renewable energy while also investing in stable, long-duration power sources like SMRs that can provide consistent baseload power. Nuclear energy complements renewables by filling the gaps when solar and wind output fluctuate.
Building the Energy Infrastructure of Tomorrow
The International Energy Agency (IEA) reported that global energy demand grew 2.2% in 2024, outpacing the decade’s average. Industrial activity now drives nearly 40% of global electricity use, and the rise of digital services and AI compounds this demand.
Amazon’s nuclear investments aim to meet this target. The Cascade project will not only add clean power to the regional grid but also strengthen the U.S. energy infrastructure and reduce reliance on fossil fuels.
Beyond decarbonization, these efforts create economic opportunities for local communities through job creation, tax revenue, and the establishment of a clean energy supply chain in the Pacific Northwest.
Thus, from renewables to nuclear, Amazon’s energy strategy is redefining what it means for technology companies to lead in climate action. As the Cascade facility takes shape, it could become a model for how advanced nuclear energy powers the next phase of the global clean energy transition—fueling both innovation and sustainability, one reactor at a time.
- READ MORE: IAEA Predicts Doubling Nuclear Capacity by 2050—SMRs and Reactor Life Extensions Lead the Way
The post Amazon and Cascade SMRs: Redefining America’s Clean Energy for AI and Cloud Computing appeared first on Carbon Credits.
For most businesses, the emissions that matter most sit outside their own walls. Scope 3 emissions, everything generated across your value chain, from the suppliers who make your inputs to the customers who use your products, typically make up the majority of a company’s total carbon footprint. Under the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), those value-chain emissions now have to be measured and disclosed with a rigour that spend-based estimates alone struggle to satisfy. This guide sets out how to improve Scope 3 data accuracy for CSRD: the calculation methods open to you, how to move from estimates to verified supplier data, and how to govern that data so it holds up to audit.
A carbon credit is a commitment that extends well into the future. The tonne of CO₂ compensated for today from a nature-based carbon project must remain out of the atmosphere for good, which means the forest behind the credit has to remain standing long after the transaction is complete. For any buyer, this raises a defining question: What ensures that the forest endures?
What replaced the cheap REDD credit on the boardroom slide deck, and why procurement is leading the rewrite.
Three years ago, a corporate slide showing a portfolio of cheap REDD+ credits could carry a board meeting. The number was big, the price was low, and the press release wrote itself. Today, that same slide gets sent back with questions. The questions are uncomfortable, the answers are unclear, and your general counsel is suddenly in the room.
Conventional carbon offsets are not dead. The voluntary carbon market retired 202 million tonnes in 2025, and the Morgan Stanley Institute for Sustainable Investing survey published in January 2026 confirmed that interest from corporate buyers remains substantial. What changed is the credibility threshold. The integrity floor has risen, the disclosure scrutiny has tightened, and the buyer profile has shifted. This article tracks what changed, what sophisticated buyers now ask before signing, and what serious corporates are putting on the board slide instead.
What boards used to buy, and why it stopped working
The 2020 to 2022 model was simple: buy a large tranche of avoidance credits at low single-digit prices, retire them against the company footprint, announce the carbon-neutral claim, and move on. Most of those credits came from REDD+ projects, renewable energy installations in countries where the renewable energy was already economic, or methane projects with thin documentation.
Several things broke that model. Academic research published in 2023, including a widely cited Science paper, found that the majority of REDD+ credits issued under the most common methodologies did not represent additional reductions when tested against rigorous counterfactuals. The Voluntary Carbon Markets Integrity Initiative published its Claims Code of Practice, which sets requirements for what companies can credibly claim from credit use. The European Union finalised its Green Claims Directive, restricting how companies can describe products as climate-neutral. France’s Décret 2022-539 already restricts carbon neutrality advertising. California’s AB 1305 imposes disclosure requirements on any company making net-zero or carbon-neutral claims while doing business in the state.
The collective effect: the cheap credit no longer buys the announcement, and the announcement now carries litigation risk.
The integrity reset: ICVCM, VCMI, and what changed
The Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market published the Core Carbon Principles in 2023 and began assessing methodologies against them in 2024. The first methodologies received the CCP label later that year. The point of the label is to give corporate buyers a defensible quality screen they can cite in disclosure.
The Voluntary Carbon Markets Integrity Initiative complements this on the demand side. Its Claims Code of Practice defines what a buyer can say (Silver, Gold, or Platinum claims, with associated requirements) based on the quality of credits used and the underlying decarbonisation strategy. Together, CCP and VCMI build a quality stack: CCP on the supply, VCMI on the claim, with the science-based target sitting underneath both.
The reset is not a ban on offsets. It is a ratchet. Credits that meet the new bar continue to clear; credits that do not, do not. The Morgan Stanley survey found that 61% of current buyers like the CCP label concept but that supply of labelled credits remains limited. That supply constraint is now visible in pricing.
What sophisticated buyers ask before they sign
The questions on the procurement scorecard have changed. A 2022 buyer might have asked about price, vintage, and project type. A 2026 buyer asks five different questions before any of those.
- What does the counterfactual look like, and who validated it.
- What is the permanence regime, and what is the buffer pool exposure.
- What is the leakage risk, and how is it mitigated.
- What rating has the project received from the independent ratings agencies (Sylvera, BeZero, Calyx Global), and what was the rationale.
- What is the documentation discipline that survives an audit four years from now when the procurement team that signed the contract has moved on.
If the vendor cannot answer those five questions on a first call, the conversation ends. Conversely, if the vendor can answer them with documented specificity, the conversation often expands beyond a single transaction toward a multi-year engagement.
Where this leaves your near-term commitments
You probably have near-term commitments that pre-date the integrity reset. Public targets to be carbon neutral by 2025 or 2030. Product-level claims that ran in last year’s marketing. Disclosed reduction trajectories that assumed continued access to cheap credits.
You have three workable paths. The first is to re-baseline your strategy, replacing the most exposed credits with higher-quality alternatives and adjusting the public language to match what you can defend. The second is to shift the underlying spend from offsetting outside your value chain to investing inside your value chain, where reductions count against Scope 3 directly and the audit trail is cleaner. The third is to keep the strategy and absorb the risk, which is increasingly the most expensive option once you price in litigation, restatement, and reputational exposure.
Most serious buyers are choosing the second path. It moves the carbon spend from a compliance cost to a procurement and resilience investment, and it removes the central failure point of the legacy model: the disconnect between where the emissions occurred and where the reductions sat. Nature-based supply chain investments, structured under the GHG Protocol Land Sector and Removals Standard and aligned to the SBTi FLAG Guidance, are the asset class that fits this brief. They generate inventory-grade reductions, they produce audit-grade documentation, and they survive the new claim restrictions because the carbon math sits inside the value chain that the disclosure already covers.
If you are reassessing a carbon strategy under the new integrity bar, or rebuilding a board narrative that has to survive a more skeptical audience, the carbon and sustainability experts at Carbon Credit Capital can help. The Dual-Value Model gives you a defensible alternative to legacy offset purchases, with the documentation and operational integration that survives the procurement scorecard and the audit. Schedule a consultation.
-
Climate Change11 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases11 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Renewable Energy9 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year ago
嘉宾来稿：探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测