Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Kyle Hodgson's avatar

Also, as a holder of TSE:T, fingers crossed that they can get their act together......

Kyle Hodgson's avatar

"It is the most coherent case any Canadian government has made for hosting the buildout."

Yes, assuming you can get turbines (and continue to ignore the rising costs of climate change).

CCGT, or even Brayton cycle plants are as rare as hens teeth these days thanks to data centre build-outs elsewhere. source: https://www.enverus.com/blog/the-queue-before-the-queue-gevs-backlog-extends-to-2031/

I'm not anti natgas, it has a place for peak shaving and backup, and it is cleaner than coal - but the backlog is real. Ironically, we'd be better off building out batteries, solar and wind, where the returns would likely be even higher.

It turns out data center load use can be noisy (source: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2407.21783); and spinning mass generators (natgas, nuclear, hydro) aren't particularly good at handling that. So, batteries are a good investment not only for backup but also for peak shaving. GPUs can be hitting the battery as a buffer meaning that actual generation doesn't need to try to follow all the ups and downs, instead it has a nice smooth load of the battery charging itself as needed.

So, all in all, agree with the argument! But maybe not for the reasons Alberta politicians might want.

No posts

Ready for more?