2 ms·

Data centers are scarcely more than four walls, AC and a shit ton of equipment inside. By the time you finish building one power plant, 700 data centers have al

by erxam 8mo ago

Data centers are scarcely more than four walls, AC and a shit ton of equipment inside. By the time you finish building one power plant, 700 data centers have already popped up.

dyauspitr 8mo ago
Okay then that’s the new normal. Build out more generation. Do what China is doing with literally 100% redundancy from the baseload. Data centers are also not decentralized like you’re saying, the vast majority of these are large facilities that take significant time and resources to build. Around 50 were built last year and between 80-100 are under construction right now, not 700 overnight. With about 6 GW consumption or about 24 GW of solar if you consider 25% operation time. The US installs about 30 GW of solar per year currently so you can offset that pretty easily with just one year of just solar power buildout. We need to step up our game- China is building out 300 GW of solar every year.
- erxam 8mo ago
  700 was an exaggeration for dramatic effect, but 50 built in one year is still an astounding number. > Do what China is doing The massive build-up they have is mostly renewables. Surely, you see the problems with that, right? Georgia is a red state, so it's political suicide to even hint at proposing that. Don't even mention nuclear, Vogtle took three thousand years to get somewhere. There's also the very important question of what benefit it will bring to the people living (and voting) nearby. A datacenter isn't exactly a massive job centre. I very much doubt they pay any significant taxes. The utilities companies get a fat paycheck and that's about it.
  - philipkglass 8mo ago
    The massive build-up they have is mostly renewables. Surely, you see the problems with that, right? Georgia is a red state, so it's political suicide to even hint at proposing that. Large scale solar power generation has more than doubled in Georgia since 2020: https://www.eia.gov/electricity/data/browser/#/topic/0?agg=1,0,2&fuel=004&geo=0000000g&sec=o3g&freq=A&start=2001&end=2024&ctype=linechart&ltype=pin&rtype=s&pin=&rse=0&maptype=0 https://www.eia.gov/electricity/data/browser/#/topic/0?agg=1... Georgia is ranked 7th in the US for solar power capacity: https://seia.org/solar-state-by-state/ https://seia.org/solar-state-by-state/ Texas is number 2, behind only California. Solar power is popular in sunny states even if they're "red," though the most heated political rhetoric doesn't reflect that.
    - deleted 8mo ago
      [deleted]
    - erxam 8mo ago
      Huh, I didn't realize how far the build up had gone. Your second link is interesting, though, because it shows solar in Georgia took a nosedive in 2025. I've got a feeling that that year's data is much more representative of what it will look like in the next two or three decades than any historical trend might be.
    - jackdawipper 8mo ago
      I still really dont see how solar or wind power the future needs at all. surely nuclear is the only solution longer time. obviously it has to be made safe but why are wasting so much time and money on solar and wind that are demonstably not good for the environments they go into. at scale that is going to be felt because no, actually deserts are not "just empty spaces doing nothing" they have a huge knock on effect when changed either life within them, or how they feed the surrounding non-desert environments. Why is nuclear still the bogeyman when the sun is a nuclear event. cut out the middle man. surely.
      - dyauspitr 8mo ago
        There’s movement around nuclear but it takes 10-15 years to build one plant and that’s for plants that are already tested. 15-20 for something new or experimental. Even China with all its rapid construction can’t build one in less than 8. We’re not offsetting anything with nuclear anytime soon. Solar plants take 3-6 months to get up and running. A combination of solar/renewables with nuclear is the best strategy over the long term.

by erxam 8mo ago

Data centers are scarcely more than four walls, AC and a shit ton of equipment inside. By the time you finish building one power plant, 700 data centers have already popped up.

dyauspitr 8mo ago

Okay then that’s the new normal. Build out more generation. Do what China is doing with literally 100% redundancy from the baseload. Data centers are also not decentralized like you’re saying, the vast majority of these are large facilities that take significant time and resources to build. Around 50 were built last year and between 80-100 are under construction right now, not 700 overnight. With about 6 GW consumption or about 24 GW of solar if you consider 25% operation time. The US installs about 30 GW of solar per year currently so you can offset that pretty easily with just one year of just solar power buildout. We need to step up our game- China is building out 300 GW of solar every year.

erxam 8mo ago
700 was an exaggeration for dramatic effect, but 50 built in one year is still an astounding number. > Do what China is doing The massive build-up they have is mostly renewables. Surely, you see the problems with that, right? Georgia is a red state, so it's political suicide to even hint at proposing that. Don't even mention nuclear, Vogtle took three thousand years to get somewhere. There's also the very important question of what benefit it will bring to the people living (and voting) nearby. A datacenter isn't exactly a massive job centre. I very much doubt they pay any significant taxes. The utilities companies get a fat paycheck and that's about it.
- philipkglass 8mo ago
  The massive build-up they have is mostly renewables. Surely, you see the problems with that, right? Georgia is a red state, so it's political suicide to even hint at proposing that. Large scale solar power generation has more than doubled in Georgia since 2020: https://www.eia.gov/electricity/data/browser/#/topic/0?agg=1,0,2&fuel=004&geo=0000000g&sec=o3g&freq=A&start=2001&end=2024&ctype=linechart&ltype=pin&rtype=s&pin=&rse=0&maptype=0 https://www.eia.gov/electricity/data/browser/#/topic/0?agg=1... Georgia is ranked 7th in the US for solar power capacity: https://seia.org/solar-state-by-state/ https://seia.org/solar-state-by-state/ Texas is number 2, behind only California. Solar power is popular in sunny states even if they're "red," though the most heated political rhetoric doesn't reflect that.
  - deleted 8mo ago
    [deleted]
  - erxam 8mo ago
    Huh, I didn't realize how far the build up had gone. Your second link is interesting, though, because it shows solar in Georgia took a nosedive in 2025. I've got a feeling that that year's data is much more representative of what it will look like in the next two or three decades than any historical trend might be.
  - jackdawipper 8mo ago
    I still really dont see how solar or wind power the future needs at all. surely nuclear is the only solution longer time. obviously it has to be made safe but why are wasting so much time and money on solar and wind that are demonstably not good for the environments they go into. at scale that is going to be felt because no, actually deserts are not "just empty spaces doing nothing" they have a huge knock on effect when changed either life within them, or how they feed the surrounding non-desert environments. Why is nuclear still the bogeyman when the sun is a nuclear event. cut out the middle man. surely.
    - dyauspitr 8mo ago
      There’s movement around nuclear but it takes 10-15 years to build one plant and that’s for plants that are already tested. 15-20 for something new or experimental. Even China with all its rapid construction can’t build one in less than 8. We’re not offsetting anything with nuclear anytime soon. Solar plants take 3-6 months to get up and running. A combination of solar/renewables with nuclear is the best strategy over the long term.