You’re aware that the wind isn’t always blowing, and the sun isn’t always shining, right?
It’s critical to understand the difference between MC and TNG. You should learn about them before going off on people. It’s clear you don’t understand how the energy grid works.
LCOS for batteries at this point is low enough to make even “the sun isn’t shining and the wind isn’t blowing” renewables viable.
If renewables are so poor a choice for power, why are they being built in such massive quantities even in places that hate renewables?
Maybe if you understood how the world worked better, you wouldn’t get so focused on arguing about what used to be possible and instead focus on what is possible now.
Instead, you’re arguing to not build datacenters in Alberta and instead have them in the US because… renewables aren’t always available?
You’re in this thread hoping that paradigm shifts in battery tech, AB building refineries, and using what you incorrectly assumed is 10GW of unused headroom in the power grid, all for ai compute facilities.
I’m not sure why you’re gunning so hard for ai compute facilities to be built in Alberta specifically, and your unsophisticated understanding of the way energy works makes it hard to take your position seriously.
What do you mean paradigm shift? BC is literally building 5 grid-scale batteries right now. This isn’t future tech, it’s something that can be purchased and installed today.
I’m arguing for them in Alberta for the same reason Alberta is arguing for pipelines to be built through BC. They’re going to be built somewhere, may as well get the benefits of having them here.
It’s not an incorrect assumption. There are far more datacenters being built now than ever before, despite the news about specific locations blocking them. There are still plenty going ahead.
A) “across an entire province” is only 5 locations
B) The currently largest active grid scale battery is 3.2GWh, in California. There are projects in planning or under construction to reach up to 40GWh. Again, this is solved tech that you can buy and build today. If you’re going to drop a few billion on datacenters, there’s not really anything stopping you from dropping a few billion more on solar/wind and batteries. Microsoft is dropping massive money on a Nuclear fusion plant in Washington state that’s already under construction.
I said 10GW generation not capacity, pay attention.
How does that invalidate the fact that there is 10-12 GW of spare capacity above peak demand already built?
Or that there was 1.4GW of capacity installed in 2024 that could be used to power this kind of data center?
How are your arguments in any way actual arguments against building this?
You’re aware that the wind isn’t always blowing, and the sun isn’t always shining, right?
It’s critical to understand the difference between MC and TNG. You should learn about them before going off on people. It’s clear you don’t understand how the energy grid works.
I can throw acronyms around too.
LCOS for batteries at this point is low enough to make even “the sun isn’t shining and the wind isn’t blowing” renewables viable.
If renewables are so poor a choice for power, why are they being built in such massive quantities even in places that hate renewables?
Maybe if you understood how the world worked better, you wouldn’t get so focused on arguing about what used to be possible and instead focus on what is possible now.
Instead, you’re arguing to not build datacenters in Alberta and instead have them in the US because… renewables aren’t always available?
You’re in this thread hoping that paradigm shifts in battery tech, AB building refineries, and using what you incorrectly assumed is 10GW of unused headroom in the power grid, all for ai compute facilities.
I’m not sure why you’re gunning so hard for ai compute facilities to be built in Alberta specifically, and your unsophisticated understanding of the way energy works makes it hard to take your position seriously.
What do you mean paradigm shift? BC is literally building 5 grid-scale batteries right now. This isn’t future tech, it’s something that can be purchased and installed today.
I’m arguing for them in Alberta for the same reason Alberta is arguing for pipelines to be built through BC. They’re going to be built somewhere, may as well get the benefits of having them here.
This is also an incorrect assumption, and a premise that people and municipalities all over North America are rejecting. What do you make of that?
It’s not an incorrect assumption. There are far more datacenters being built now than ever before, despite the news about specific locations blocking them. There are still plenty going ahead.
500 megawatts across an entire province to be built out over the course of a few years.
I can’t understand where your optimism comes from.
A) “across an entire province” is only 5 locations B) The currently largest active grid scale battery is 3.2GWh, in California. There are projects in planning or under construction to reach up to 40GWh. Again, this is solved tech that you can buy and build today. If you’re going to drop a few billion on datacenters, there’s not really anything stopping you from dropping a few billion more on solar/wind and batteries. Microsoft is dropping massive money on a Nuclear fusion plant in Washington state that’s already under construction.