Well, if McKinsey said it🤷. Look, I'm pretty bullish datacenters but this is clearly nonsense. I don't even doubt that there is 83GW of demand, there very well may be. What there will not be is 83GW supply to meet that demand.
McKinsey upped their data center forecast: now expect "83GW is up from ~56GW in from the prior September 2023 modeling. Overall McKinsey now forecasts US data center energy consumption in terawatt hours (TWh) rising to 606TWh in 2030, representing 12% of total US power demand. Critically this is up from ~400TWh in the September 2023 modeling refresh. This is relative to 147TWh in 2023 and 4% of overall US power demand."
Demand is the key unblock for tech deployment. Always has been. Pull is always better than a push
demand-pull ftw?
"Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro is urging the PJM Interconnection to quickly develop a fast-track process to review interconnection requests for shovel-ready generation such as Constellation Energy’s 835-MW unit 1 at the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant."
utilitydive.com/news/fast-tr…
👇 This. AI demand creates a platform for accelerating deployment of technologies that otherwise would take a decade or more to achieve commercialization. Add to the list, reconductoring, LDES, superconducting transmission, DLR...
i've been going on and on about this, but basically, AI flips electricity on its head.
previously, nearly half the cost of electricity to the consumer was allocated towards distributing it where (and when) you want it.
AI data centers want upwards of hundreds of megawatts of power in one place, most of the time. (and for training they don't care about latency)
The most constrained thing isn't even the energy itself -- there's a surplus during the solar peak -- it's often the sheer availability & the interconnection. It now can take multiple years to get a grid interconnect to draw power of this magnitude, if the location can even handle it.
The capital cost of the power infrastructure is just a tiny fraction (like 3%!) of the capex of the compute, and even just the depreciation of the compute exceeds the cost of even premium power.
Hence, AI hyperscalers and those that aspire to be in their class are traveling to where the power is, are building where power has been (and there's legacy transmission to support it, like old nuclear plants) and are getting into the business of actually building powerplants and reactors.
Utilities and transmission and distribution companies, interconnection queues, all are used to react much slower -- over many years -- unlike the top technology companies, now vying to compete at the highest levels of AI performance.
Since ~99% of energy technologies previously died withering while waiting for utilities to consider them bankable, this represents an extremely fertile, attractive new state of play if you're bringing a new energy technology to market (💁🏻♀️🔆).
Whereas before you'd have to brave what was once called a "green valley of death", now you have teracap companies like microsoft bidding on:
- Conventional, large nuclear fission
- Small modular nuclear reactors
- Engineered Geothermal
- Fusion!
- Stirling Engines 😬
- Who knows what else
- Maybe you, Anon!
Even Tesla is standing up gas generator arrays to burn fossil fuels for their AI power supply. Shit is getting real
Unsolicited advice to SMR developers, don't make them look expensive, it's not going to help your cause 🤦♂️
🇨🇿🇬🇧#CzechRepublic: Rolls Royce Chosen To Develop First #SMRs In Partnership With CEZ
#UK company wins bid among seven candidates
#NuclearEnergy #NuclearPower #CEZ #RollsRoyce
nucnet.org/news/rolls-royce-…
look, I don’t have a dog in this fight anymore. But sometimes it feels like people taking shots at the companies that have done more to accelerate the deployment of renewable energy is like yelling at someone at a farmers market as to why they’re not growing their own tomatoes.
Nice to see the FT take on the potential "emissions gaming" from Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) by big tech firms.
"The basic fact is you can be solar powered all night long with today’s accounting, and that’s absurd."
ft.com/content/2d6fc319-2165…
Big day for Cloverleaf! wsj.com/articles/sandbrook-a…
Great thread on the @BloombergNEF EV report, but this one really got me 🤣. H2 passenger vehicles are the classic case of you can do something, but why should you?
Replying to @colinmckerrache
8. Hydrogen fuel cell car sales: down and out. Sales are falling for two years now. The market is now concentrated in South Korea due to very generous incentives.
More Ferraris were sold than fuel cell cars last year.
Let’s stop talking about this.
What John said 👍
Government likes to wait until crisis to act. That risks being a disaster for the electric grid as it faces 4 simultaneous challenges: growing load, more intermittent resource, need to lower emissions, and pressure on rates.
The grid is showing cracks on reliability and meeting demand today. The only way to solve the challenge is to build a lot of generation and transmission. But constraints on permitting and siting restrict that pace.
It takes 2-4 years to add most generation and up to 8 years to build transmission. We need to change the trajectory of development starting now to avoid risk of the grid breaking later this decade.
It's why federal permitting reform this year is so important. Bipartisan talks have resulted in the framework of a good bill. The challenge is whether Congress can legislate before a crisis emerges in an area that is increasingly political. It better.
Rep. Casten is exactly right. While utilities are motivated to grow rate base vs utilize the existing system more efficiently, there is also a growing realization that demand growth for electricity creates an enormous economic development opportunity.
Utilities that adopt grid enhancing technologies will be better positioned to respond to the time to market imperative of customers and lock in future load growth. It's not GETs or more rate base. It's GETs=>growth=>future rate base. @LineVisionCo
Brian Janous retweeted
7 out of the 10 largest companies in the world by market cap are very electricity-dependent, and one is a major US electricity producer. We have entered the electricity era.
Meta energy team has been hard at work! Love hearing the tech leadership talking about these issues. I recall talking to a MS exec years ago about transmission challenges and he said, you know, I never thought in my entire career I would be thinking about this topic.
Zuck talking about AI load, transmission, nukes, and permitting… xitter.cf/ThomasHochman/status/1…
Brian Janous retweeted
Data center energy use is spiking around the world as AI workloads soar. Are concerns over AI’s power demand justified? How is this contributing to the growing hunger for electricity? And what technologies and grid management techniques can address it? latitudemedia.com/events/tra…
There is zero carbon benefit from siting a datacenter next to an operating nuclear plant.
Thanks for coming to my TED talk.
Brian Janous retweeted
Some thoughts on power & and AI data centers:
1) Tech giants care about SPEED TO MARKET. ANY power > CLEAN power in that order. They also care about sustainability targets and will still pursue them but will not forego tech targets in name of sustainability targets.
This has to be a joke, right @RiotPlatforms? If so, 🤣nice one. If not, please add part two to this video where you go stand on top of the flue of the nearest gas plant.




















