3 ms·
I figured that one was non-serious and just used as anchoring and to take the heat whilst other large ones were ok to go under the radar.
by scottyah 2mo ago
I figured that one was non-serious and just used as anchoring and to take the heat whilst other large ones were ok to go under the radar.
- cogman10 2mo agoIt's not the only GW datacenter planned [1]. AFAIK, a majority of these big datacenters are going to produce their power via natural gas turbines. I don't know of any that are actually planning on powering themselves via renewables or even nuclear power. The sub 100MW data centers are mostly relying on the grid, but even a number of them plan on having natural gas turbines. [1] https://cleanview.co/data-centers/us https://cleanview.co/data-centers/us
- jeffbee 2mo agoThe way to regulate that impact is with a wellhead severance tax, though. The whole fact of the data center is incidental.
- cogman10 2mo agoI agree, that'd be a great way to approach things. The problem is a lot of the regulators are instead looking at doing tax breaks for these data centers when they should be taxing them (and other businesses) for the externalities of the problems they'll cause.
- jeffbee 2mo agoA person who has never built anything before, who claims to be about to build the world's largest building, can be treated with some skepticism.