America’s Three Mile Island nuclear energy plant, the site of a high-profile accident that discouraged nuclear power development in the US for decades, is preparing to reopen as Microsoft looks for ways to satisfy its growing energy needs.

The tech giant said it had signed a 20-year deal to purchase power from the Pennsylvania plant, which would reopen in 2028 after improvements.

The agreement is intended to provide the company with a clean source of energy as power-hungry data centres for artificial intelligence (AI) expand.

The plan will now go to regulators for approval.

The owner of the plant, Constellation Energy, said the reactor it planned to restart was adjacent to, but “fully independent” of the unit that had been involved in the 1979 accident, the worst in US history.

It caused no injuries or deaths but it provoked widespread fear and mistrust among the US public.

But nuclear power is the subject of renewed interest as concerns about climate change grow – and companies face increased energy needs tied to advances in artificial intelligence.

In a statement announcing the deal, Constellation boss Joe Dominguez said nuclear plants were the “only energy sources” that could consistently deliver an abundance of carbon-free energy.

“Before it was prematurely shuttered due to poor economics, this plant was among the safest and most reliable nuclear plants on the grid, and we look forward to bringing it back with a new name and a renewed mission,” he said.

Microsoft called it a “milestone” in its efforts to “help decarbonize the grid”.

On 28 March, 1979, a combination of mechanical failure and human error led to a partial meltdown at the nuclear power plant in central Pennsylvania.

The accident occurred about 04:00 in the Three Mile Island plant’s second unit.

The plant’s Unit 1 – which would reopen under the Microsoft deal – continued to generate power until closing in 2019.

Its owner at the time, Exelon, which spun out Constellation as an independent business in 2022, said the low cost of natural gas extraction had made nuclear-generated electricity unprofitable.

Constellation said it would invest $1.6bn (£1.2bn) to upgrade the facility, which it would seek approval to operate through 2054.

Reopening the plant would create 3,400 direct and indirect jobs and add more than 800 megawatts of carbon-free electricity to the grid, generating billions of dollars in taxes and other economic activity, according to a study by The Brattle Group cited by Constellation.

Local media reported earlier this month that word of its possible revival had drawn some protesters.

Microsoft is not the only tech company that is turning to nuclear power as its energy needs expand.

Earlier this year, Amazon also signed a deal which involves purchasing nuclear energy to power a data centre. Those plans are now under scrutiny by regulators.

In this Weekend Essay, Amanda Newman Smith shares a personal story highlighting the importance of excellent customer service, especially when dealing with vulnerable clients. She contrasts negative experiences with a paint company and a clock supplier against a positive resolution with NatWest bank when assisting her elderly mother. This episode underscores the significance of empathy, clear communication, and proactive problem-solving in building trust and loyalty.

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

Roula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.

The US derivatives watchdog has finalised the first federal guidelines for unregulated carbon offsets, as the Biden administration seeks to standardise a disorderly market in a bid to tackle climate change. 

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission adopted measures announced on Friday that ask exchanges to validate carbon offset derivatives, which base their prices on those of financial instruments bought by companies to offset emissions.

Treasury secretary Janet Yellen issued a statement on Friday praising the new guidelines as a means to “promote the integrity of carbon credits and enable greater liquidity and price transparency”.

The unregulated market for carbon credits is estimated to grow to $100bn by 2030, up from $2bn this year, according to Morgan Stanley. But the voluntary carbon derivatives market has languished, with only a handful of contracts attracting substantial trading volume due to concerns about credibility.

“We actually have a legal responsibility to ensure the health and transparency of both the derivative side, but also the underlying cash market,” CFTC chair Rostin Behnam told the Financial Times.

The guidelines, which were initially proposed in December, seek to crack down on manipulation and price distortions by pushing exchanges to ensure that voluntary carbon credit derivatives comply with CFTC regulation as well as US law. 

“With any project that has the scale that the carbon market is seeking, you’re going to have error rates, you’re going to have bad actors,” Behnam said. 

The CFTC voted 4-1 in favour of adopting the guidelines, with Summer Mersinger, one of the agency’s two Republican commissioners, voting against.

Boosting the reputation of carbon markets has been a political priority for the administration of US President Joe Biden, which sees carbon credits as a way to lure more private sector money into renewable energy and conservation.

While the credits have been initially popular among companies, they have also attracted criticism for failing to deliver the carbon removals they promise.

Earlier this summer, Treasury secretary Janet Yellen unveiled guidelines for developers selling credits, and for the companies buying them to offset emissions. Former US climate envoy John Kerry has also thrown his weight behind carbon credit markets, launching a state department-led initiative in 2022 aimed at decarbonising regional power sectors.

Despite the political momentum behind efforts to develop voluntary carbon markets, Behnam cautioned that the energy transition would “take decades”.

“This notion that we’re going to be able to just transition to renewables in the near future and not rely on carbon-based energy sources . . . it’s not reality, right?” said Behnam. “The transition is going to take time.”

The guidance puts the onus on exchanges registered with the agency to ensure the integrity of voluntary carbon credit derivatives.

Exchanges should consider whether a contract ensures that a project creates emission reductions that would not occur without it. They should also seek to ensure there is no “double-counting”, which occurs when multiple carbon credits are backed by the same trees, for example.

The guidance “will help professionalise and scale voluntary carbon markets,” said Mark Carney, the UN special envoy on climate action and finance and former Bank of England governor. “Other global regulators should now follow the CFTC’s lead.”

Guidance is not the same as regulation, a more powerful tool. But “it was pretty clear that a guidance document would be the best starting point . . . and one that would get support from a broad coalition of stakeholders”, Behnam said.

For years, the unregulated carbon market has suffered from greenwashing concerns, and the guidelines come as the market has narrowed. Derivatives exchange CME Group on August 30 said it would delist one of its futures products for emissions offsets that was launched only two years ago.

Recent surveys of carbon credit users have found worries about carbon offsets’ credibility has discouraged businesses from buying them, MSCI said in a September 19 report.

Climate Capital

Where climate change meets business, markets and politics. Explore the FT’s coverage here.

Are you curious about the FT’s environmental sustainability commitments? Find out more about our science-based targets here

I’ve always got a DIY project going on at home, so I’m a bit of a nerd when it comes to paint. There’s a textured paint that looks like stone, which I bought a while back to revamp my fireplace. This paint is fantastic, but pretty expensive. So when the company I ordered if from threw in the recommended natural bristle brush as a freebie, I was happy.

But when the paint arrived, there was no brush. Thinking it had been overlooked, I called the firm. I got through to one of the business owners who told me they’d run out. Fair enough, but it would have been nice to have been told. A simple ‘out of stock’ on the dispatch note would have done.

The free brush offer was also still listed on the website but when I pointed this out to the owner, she became defensive. This was just a small family-run business, I was told. The technology used to run the website couldn’t update these things automatically and they couldn’t afford an upgrade. They didn’t have the time to update these things manually either.

I love small businesses and I understand they don’t have it easy, but all this put me off as a customer. I tried to explain how this hadn’t created a good impression on me, a first-time customer, but it fell on deaf ears. I haven’t used this company since.

My experience with another small firm – an online business from which I’d ordered a glass clock – was so different. The owner had been let down on this by her European suppliers and was so apologetic and friendly that I was happy to wait for my order. I waited three months but in the end it needed to be cancelled due to the ongoing supply issues. I was disappointed, of course, but I was offered a discount on anything else I wanted from the website.

I mention those two contrasting experiences because of an experience I had recently while trying to help my mum with her banking. My mum is a younger pensioner and though still in the active retirement phase, she does have a few health issues that clip her wings. Like the hip pinning she had several years ago after slipping on some leaves. Walking long distances has got harder and she doesn’t drive.

When it comes to financial matters, the big problem is that my mum has never been comfortable talking on the phone about ‘official’ things. She gets nervous about what to say and doesn’t know how best to put things. And because she’s focusing on that, she doesn’t always take in what’s being said to her.

My dad used to deal with all that stuff and when he died, I started stepping in as I realised my mum needed a bit of help.

Requesting a new debit card for my mum from NatWest to replace one that had worn out should have been quick and easy. With mum and I both in the same room, GDPR should have been no problem to navigate. But everything about this call was painful and it took about 40 minutes.

My mum had lost her glasses and struggled when NatWest’s customer services agent insisted she read out her debit card number herself, as that was the required procedure. To tick that box, I had to read the number out to my mum, who then repeated it down the phone to the agent.

Then the agent discovered my mum’s phone number was out of date on the system and without that, she said there was nothing she could do. It was only when I asked whether the agent was aware of the Consumer Duty – to which I got no answer – and NatWest’s responsibilities towards vulnerable clients that we were passed to the over-60s helpline.

The agent there was brilliant but was still unable to send my mum a new debit card due to the out-of-date phone number. For that, mum was to visit a branch with some ID. It wasn’t ideal – the local branch has permanently closed and I’ve already explained mum’s difficulty with longer distances. Mum would potentially be left without access to cash because her debit card was unreliable. But at least we knew what to do.

When I got home, I decided to tell NatWest what had happened in an email. I was worried how my mum would have fared if she hadn’t had someone with financial services knowledge to speak up and get transferred to the over-60s helpline.

At this point, I have to give credit to NatWest. They swiftly apologised and started to investigate. Neil Wainwright, the firm’s customer protection manager, was amazing. He spoke to mum and me to get everything sorted without mum having to get to a physical branch. NatWest also gave mum some cash as a goodwill gesture and if we need anything else we just need to ask.

I told NatWest I was writing about our experience and asked for a response. A spokesman told me its staff are trained to recognise the differing needs of customers including vulnerabilities that may be present. “They have access to supportive guidance on how to help and can refer to the specialist teams we have available to support customers with more complex needs,” he said.

Customers can also tell the bank about any support they need through “Banking My Way”, a free service that can be used within its mobile app, online banking or by speaking to a member of staff.

But after listening back to our calls, NatWest acknowledged it let us down. “We had several opportunities throughout the discussion to give you both a better experience, including a missed opportunity to handover the call to Neil’s team,” the spokesman said. “As a result of your email we have arranged additional training to be given to the colleagues involved.”

All of us get it wrong sometimes – it’s the care and effort we take to put things right that really counts.

Stay informed with free updates

Simply sign up to the Sovereign bonds myFT Digest — delivered directly to your inbox.

India has given the Maldives a bailout that will help the island nation avoid an unprecedented sovereign default on an Islamic form of debt next month.

India’s biggest state-owned bank agreed to lend another $50mn to the Maldives, India’s high commission in the country said in a statement late on Thursday, days before the archipelago is due to pay a roughly $25mn coupon on an Islamic sukuk.

Sukuk follow Islamic principles in shunning traditional interest payments and instead offer creditors a share of profit from an underlying financial instrument.

No government has ever skipped a sukuk payment, but investors have grown concerned in recent weeks that the Maldives would break new ground in a market tapped by countries including Egypt, Pakistan, South Africa and the UK.

Heavy borrowing for infrastructure projects has plunged the Maldives deep into a foreign exchange crisis despite a recovery in tourism to the island paradise.

The Maldivian sukuk traded at about 78 cents in the dollar on Friday, a recovery from a low of 70 cents after Fitch Ratings downgraded the country’s credit rating deep into junk territory this month.

The State Bank of India, which had previously lent the Maldives $50mn, also rolled over a short-term bond in May, underlining how the archipelago is relying on stop-gap rescues by New Delhi while the government of President Mohamed Muizzu looks for a lasting solution to the crisis.

The country still has to find a way to repay more than $500mn in debt next year, and $1bn in 2026, when the $500mn sukuk will come due.

The loan from the SBI, which has taken the form of rolling over a one-year treasury bill, is bigger than the Maldives’ net international reserves as of last month. 

These dwindled to $48mn, out of gross reserves of $470mn, as the country faces high debt repayment bills and keeps up the rufiyaa currency’s peg to the dollar. India is one of the country’s biggest creditors, alongside China.

“These subscriptions have been made at the special request of the government of the Maldives as emergency financial assistance,” the Indian high commission said. The new T-bill would carry no interest payments, it added.

Muizzu campaigned for the Maldivian presidency last year on a pledge to reduce Indian influence in the archipelago, leading to an early spat with the government of Narendra Modi.

But the two countries have rebuilt ties as the Maldivian financial crisis has deepened. Muizzu’s office has said that he plans to visit Modi in New Delhi soon.

The government has said that it is also seeking a $400mn currency swap arrangement with India through a south Asian regional body.

This month the Chinese central bank said it had signed a memorandum of understanding with the Maldives to facilitate the settlement of trade in local currencies, in another sign of support.

Ever since Labour stormed to victory in the general election, it has been making the case it has inherited a sluggish economy and a set of public finances in tatters.

Now, the latest GDP figures for the UK suggest the former isn’t strictly true, while the latter is arguably being used to lay the groundwork for potentially unpopular tax rises to be announced at the upcoming Budget in October in order to bolster those public finances.

Already Labour has tightened the belt with various allowances either being scrapped or put under consultation. This has led to much speculation about what could be next, with inheritance tax (IHT) being touted as one area ripe for raiding.

Removing this relief could raise £1.1bn in the current tax year, with this rising to £1.6bn by the end of the decade

In particular, some are suggesting business relief on AIM shares should be removed to help raise revenue. Currently, if you hold investments in qualifying AIM companies for at least two years before you pass away, the assets are passed on free of IHT.

The Institute for Fiscal Studies estimates removing this relief could raise £1.1bn in the current tax year, with this rising to £1.6bn by the end of the decade. Not a huge amount and won’t help too much in addressing the chancellor’s £22bn ‘black hole’ but sizeable nonetheless.

That said, in the lead up to the election and soon after, Labour made economic growth a priority. Given AIM’s bias towards UK small- and medium-sized growth companies, removing the IHT benefits would somewhat go against this.

Firstly, any changes would likely be consulted on, giving people time to shift strategies and move assets away from AIM and into other investments or vehicles for mitigating IHT.

Over the past 29 years, more than £135bn has been raised by over 4,000 companies on AIM

This would have the subsequent effect of dragging share prices of these growth companies lower and eroding value in the UK stock market – hardly a positive incentive at a time when UK capital markets are already under intense pressure.

AIM has been a fantastic proving ground for a number of companies and there are a number of success stories, despite recent performance struggles. Over the past 29 years, more than £135bn has been raised by over 4,000 companies on AIM. It may be home to small-caps, but it has been a mighty contributor to UK GDP growth, innovation and employment over the years.

You have companies such as Breedon Group, a construction company based in Leicestershire, which listed on AIM in 2010 before moving to the main market last year. There are household names, such as Jet2 and YouGov, which have flown the flag for AIM over the years. Meanwhile, we are seeing a spate of acquisitions of AIM companies as private equity and corporates recognise their value at what are fairly depressed levels.

Any removal of investor incentives could harm these companies providing popular and vital services but which remain at an early stage in their growth.

Quality companies, regardless of their size, have enduring characteristics

We are also at a juncture in markets where small-cap stocks have a great opportunity to outperform. Rate cuts are beginning to be implemented, inflation is seemingly under control and AIM is coming off a tough couple of years. The companies of the future need to be nurtured, and while not every company in AIM benefits from an IHT premium, the whole market will be hit indiscriminately as a result of any changes.

Given investing is for the long term, and business relief comes in after just two years, it reasons that a number of people are not invested in AIM solely for the purpose of mitigating an IHT bill. It is important the government remembers that when deciding its next steps.

For advisers and investors with exposure to AIM, the best thing to do right now is keep calm and carry on. AIM has its IHT benefits and these will not be taken away overnight, but careful planning will still be needed to mitigate the tax implications for clients.

Let’s hope the government agrees and gets behind its own growth agenda

Most importantly, though, investing in AIM should not be considered solely as an IHT play. It remains an exciting and intriguing investment opportunity, particularly for clients with longer time horizons, giving them access to quality and well known companies that have the potential to grow and perhaps join the main market one day.

Quality companies, regardless of their size, have enduring characteristics. AIM is home to a number of these companies, so it is important growth is not stifled but embraced. Let’s hope the government agrees and gets behind its own growth agenda.

Amisha Chohan is head of small-cap strategy at Quilter Cheviot