Google reportedly nears a $1 billion Constellation nuclear deal days after Amazon's 690 MW contract

Bloomberg's figure is "$1 billion or more", sourced to people familiar with the matter ^[1], and on its own it fits deals of very different sizes. Take Amazon's terms as the template: 690 MW for 20 years ^[8], with the reactor running every hour of every year. The plant would deliver about 120.9 million megawatt-hours over that term, and $1 billion spread across them comes to about $8.27 per megawatt-hour ^[21]. Put the same $1 billion on a 96 MW block, the size of Google's Georgia agreement ^[2], over the same 20 years and the figure becomes about $59.46 ^[22]. The gap between the two is the ratio of the volumes, roughly seven to one ^[18]. Duration, megawatts and source plants are not public ^[7]. Constellation declined to comment, and Google could not be reached ^[5].

Constellation's own history gives a second comparison. In January 2025 it announced a $1 billion deal to supply federal agencies through the General Services Administration over ten years ^[13], about $100 million a year ^[19]. Crypto Briefing describes that deal as a record ^[13]. Google's reported floor matches it ^[1].

Suppose Google's power comes from an operating plant named in the contract, as Calvert Cliffs is in Amazon's ^[8]. Then Google is buying from the same pool of existing reactor output as its rivals. Amazon, Google, Meta and Microsoft already hold roughly 8.5 GW of it ^[14], and Amazon's one contract is about 8% of that ^[20]. Suppose instead the money pays for added megawatts. Then Google is doing what it has done so far: the Georgia agreement adds capacity at Vogtle and Hatch ^[2], and the NextEra deal restarts a plant in Iowa ^[10]. A third outcome is that the deal changes or slips, since the account rests on unnamed people ^[1].

I think the first outcome is the likelier one, because Google's add-capacity route has produced small increments that are still pending. Its Georgia block is about a seventh of what Amazon took from one plant run by the largest US nuclear operator ^{[18] [6]}, and it still needs regulatory approval ^[2]. Crypto Briefing argues that Google's interest here is scale and reliability, since its current nuclear partners sell smaller increments ^[15]. It also notes that Google has mostly bought nuclear power elsewhere ^[12]. The counter-case is in the price. Over 20 years, $1 billion buys a 96 MW block at about $59 a megawatt-hour ^[22]. If so, Google is still buying in pieces near 100 MW, just from a bigger seller.

AI data centers need power around the clock ^[3]. A power purchase agreement locks a buyer into electricity from a specific source on agreed terms for years ^[16], and Amazon's runs for 20 ^[8]. For the buyer, that is a cost fixed for two decades. For the seller, it is the basis for spending: Constellation expects the Amazon contract to unlock more than $3 billion of infrastructure investment in Maryland ^[9]. A Google contract that names an operating plant and a volume near Amazon's would support the view that hyperscalers now compete for a limited stock of existing nuclear output. A volume near 96 MW, or money aimed at uprates, would count against it ^[2].