- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
This is a "problem" with an engineering solution that is currently being solved.
Posted on 2/16/26 at 8:50 am
Posted on 2/16/26 at 8:50 am
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here. The U.S. still has a glut of coal if they want to use it.
The U.S. has a glut of natural gas that is currently planned to meet electricity demand.
Natural gas and coal is still 2X cheaper than nuclear (fission) electricity generation.
Nuclear fusion will be the game changer... https://tae.com/...making all other forms of electricity generation a lot cheaper.
Wind and solar only play a very small role.
Big Tech is currently spending a lot of money on energy infrastructure to bring the necessary electricity to run these data centers and bring new data centers online. The issue is timing. The timing is not meeting Wall Street's expectations. It's a physical constraint. It takes time to build out the infrastructure form the Permian Basin, Marcellus Shales and other fossil fuel formations to the data centers.
14
Posted on 2/16/26 at 8:53 am to GumboPot
Going to be? It already is 
This is why I laugh at “AI” is going to replace everyone
That level of “AI” is too expensive to run in a world where 90% of the people have no money to spend without jobs
How will the “AI” companies afford to run themselves if there isn’t money flowing in from the economy to, in turn, run their data centers?
This is why I laugh at “AI” is going to replace everyone
That level of “AI” is too expensive to run in a world where 90% of the people have no money to spend without jobs
How will the “AI” companies afford to run themselves if there isn’t money flowing in from the economy to, in turn, run their data centers?
Posted on 2/16/26 at 9:02 am to theunknownknight
The report from the WSJ a few months ago that was describing the circular investing in AI. Microsoft, ChatGPT, X, etc. were investing in NVDIA, Intel, AMD, and in turn the chip makers were investing in AI software tech. The investment is now flowing to infrastructure projects to run AI and these data centers. It's just a necessary money flow in order to get these new data centers online. Again the problem is timing. Big Tech will not be able to bring these data centers online as fast as Wall Street investors expect. These big tech stock might get bumpy along the way but they will get there.
Posted on 2/16/26 at 9:07 am to GumboPot
quote:
The U.S. still has a glut of coal if they want to use it.
The U.S. has a glut of natural gas that is currently planned to meet electricity demand.
If you think that's bad, wait until you hear about the water consumption of these data centers, and the fact that our grid is mostly archaic and we don't produce our own replacement parts (transformers, insulators, etc.) and must rely on China for them.
Posted on 2/16/26 at 9:07 am to GumboPot
All of what you're saying is correct but it should be noted that Amazon, Alphabet, Meta are also making huge investments in AI infrastructure.
Posted on 2/16/26 at 9:08 am to GumboPot
I believe most of the new AI projects are also building new electrical capacity to meet their needs, so they aren't pulling from existing capacity.
Posted on 2/16/26 at 9:08 am to GumboPot
Build nuclear and be done w it. China sure will
Posted on 2/16/26 at 9:10 am to Bjorn Cyborg
quote:
I believe most of the new AI projects are also building new electrical capacity to meet their needs, so they aren't pulling from existing capacity.
Some are pulling from existing capacity where there is an excess regionally. But they're also investing in dedicated generation infrastructure. The question is whether they can pull it off at the page required to get these new compute units online in time.
Posted on 2/16/26 at 9:13 am to Powerman
Yes. In both cases, they are not cannibalizing existing capacity.
And regarding the energy sources, whether it is coal or natural gas, they will eventually use it all. And eventually nuclear as well. They are not going to sit on excess coal or gas.
And regarding the energy sources, whether it is coal or natural gas, they will eventually use it all. And eventually nuclear as well. They are not going to sit on excess coal or gas.
Posted on 2/16/26 at 9:15 am to TigerAxeOK
quote:
If you think that's bad, wait until you hear about the water consumption of these data centers
Again, it has an engineering solution.
Investors in AI data centers do not want to uses a closed loop cooling systems. It's a lot more expensive than an open loop system. The type of system you install depends on geography. No only do you need a good cheap source of electricity you need a good source of clean water to build out the operationally cheapest data centers.
With that said for example, locations with sensitive aquifers are not good locations for data centers with open looped cooling systems.
Posted on 2/16/26 at 9:16 am to Bjorn Cyborg
quote:
I believe most of the new AI projects are also building new electrical capacity to meet their needs, so they aren't pulling from existing capacity.
Mostly true. This is what I'm seeing.
This post was edited on 2/16/26 at 9:19 am
Posted on 2/16/26 at 9:20 am to ChatGPT of LA
quote:
China sure will
China is building coal-fired plants as fast as they can be constructed. Literally hundreds of them over the course of a decade. Cheaper and faster than building out NUCLEAR when you don't have to worry about pollution, even though it's nasty, and inferior in almost every way.
In the long term, they will build out nuclear, but right now they're using coal in a sprint to surpass the US economy.
Posted on 2/16/26 at 9:21 am to Bjorn Cyborg
quote:
And regarding the energy sources, whether it is coal or natural gas, they will eventually use it all.
Fuel isn't the problem. Building the plants to use said fuel for generation is the problem. Gas turbine manufacturers are having a tough time keeping up with demand. A lot of other electrical equipment has long lead times. All of this stuff now needs to be planned out years in advance.
Posted on 2/16/26 at 9:23 am to GumboPot
quote:
Wind and solar only play a very small role.
Can't speak for data centers, but residential/commercial power here in town are almost 50% powered by wind and solar. I was very surprised.
Sauce: My electric bill
Posted on 2/16/26 at 9:25 am to ChatGPT of LA
quote:
Build nuclear and be done w it
I know very little about power generation and distribution
But I know nuclear is the only answer to the problem - either that or reduction in population - or serious degradation of their living standards or both.
Posted on 2/16/26 at 9:28 am to theunknownknight
quote:
That level of “AI” is too expensive to run in a world where 90% of the people have no money to spend without jobs
How will the “AI” companies afford to run themselves if there isn’t money flowing in from the economy to, in turn, run their data centers?
This is where the AI fear mongers go off and hide.
AI is going to have the same impact the Internet had. People and the economy will adapt, not come to live off government income.
Posted on 2/16/26 at 9:28 am to ChineseBandit58
quote:
But I know nuclear is the only answer to the problem - either that or reduction in population - or serious degradation of their living standards or both.
Depending on variables, there is about 75-100 years of natural gas capacity in the United States alone.
I'm definitely for nuclear, but I'm for using all available sources.
Posted on 2/16/26 at 9:29 am to GumboPot
The future is small scale nuke plants. I'd be investing like crazy in that.
Posted on 2/16/26 at 9:35 am to Bjorn Cyborg
quote:
I'm definitely for nuclear, but I'm for using all available sources.
oh for sure - but natural sources will eventually play out - or be subject to hostile interference unless totally dependent on US resources.
Nuclear insulates us from that.
Posted on 2/16/26 at 9:44 am to ChineseBandit58
We are already on it.......
That Trump, he thinks of everything
quote:
The US on 15 February conducted its first air transport of a nuclear microreactor, flying the unit aboard a C-17 Globemaster III aircraft from California to Utah in a move designed to demonstrate how advanced nuclear power could be rapidly deployed for military and civilian use.
That Trump, he thinks of everything
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News