This is just a rehash of the map already available at datacentermap.com (it’s literally cited as their source). Not sure what KXAN is adding here.
Also worth noting that a very loose definition of data center is used here that doesn’t fit the current colloquial usage of the term. One of the “data centers” listed in the middle of Austin, for example, is barely the size of a house and is actually just the switching infrastructure for a radio tower. Not every dot on this map is an energy-guzzling hyperscaler boogie man.
Government exists to serve corporations not individuals in this country. They can pretend these are confidential and have various cover to not release info as a result.
Why is that a pipe dream? It’s BTM for at least one of the sites you are talking about. The only constraint, which is real, is availability of turbines but other than a delayed timeline i am not sure what’s a pipe dream.
are you off by a K? from the article - 'As of early August, ERCOT was considering more than 474 gigawatts of requests to connect to the Texas electric grid, about 90% of which came from data center projects.'
This is just a rehash of the map already available at datacentermap.com (it’s literally cited as their source). Not sure what KXAN is adding here.
Also worth noting that a very loose definition of data center is used here that doesn’t fit the current colloquial usage of the term. One of the “data centers” listed in the middle of Austin, for example, is barely the size of a house and is actually just the switching infrastructure for a radio tower. Not every dot on this map is an energy-guzzling hyperscaler boogie man.
I much prefer the KXAN presentation of the data and the map layer styles.
Did this claim to be a 'hyperscaler' map?
And here's a map of major water users in Texas: https://golfcoursebrowser.com/
How can locations be labeled secret (for 29 data centers)? Aren't there hearings or filings for proposed data centers?
Government exists to serve corporations not individuals in this country. They can pretend these are confidential and have various cover to not release info as a result.
Some of these are pipe dreams. A Microsoft datacenter at 2.5MW, another at 2MW. There's no way they're going to get generation capacity for that load.
Why is that a pipe dream? It’s BTM for at least one of the sites you are talking about. The only constraint, which is real, is availability of turbines but other than a delayed timeline i am not sure what’s a pipe dream.
2.5 MW / 2 MW are tiny. I think you are confused.
are you off by a K? from the article - 'As of early August, ERCOT was considering more than 474 gigawatts of requests to connect to the Texas electric grid, about 90% of which came from data center projects.'