Connect with us

Energy

The grid is the ‘most complicated machine’ ever built, and AI is stressing it out

Published

4 minute read

News release from The Deep View

 At the beginning of the year, the International Energy Agency (IEA) found that, in 2022, data centers consumed around 460 terawatt-hours (TWh) of energy, or around 3% of global electricity use. The IEA further predicted that this number will likely more than double to around 1,000 TWh by 2026 — roughly the equivalent of Japan — due, at least in part, to the energy demands of artificial intelligence.
Many of the massive investments being made around the world in AI have to do with building more data centers, even as existing data centers are consuming more energy than ever before. What this means for carbon emissions is complicated (since it depends on the cleanliness of the grid at each data center location), but today, we’re talking about the grid.
  • There have been plenty of reports in recent months regarding the ways in which this data center expansion is stressing our grid.
What’s going on here is that, driven by spiking data center demand, electricity demand is currently experiencing a prolonged surge. Mariko McDonagh Meier, the chief revenue officer for energy storage developer Convergent, told me that this is significant, as energy demand had been relatively flat for the past 20+ years. 
  • This was due to increasingly energy-efficient technology, which compensated for increases in electrical usage.
  • “That’s where things are really shifting as data centers move toward AI, they just need so much more computing power it’s going to look very different,” she said.
The details: Grid operators, according to Meier, have the basic charge of ensuring the grid is reliable. This means managing electricity supply and demand in real-time. If a massive machine — or data center — comes online and its accompanying demand hasn’t been properly accounted for, it could “break a lot of stuff.”
The reality, according to Meier, is that “the grid is the most complicated machine that’s ever been built, truly, because it is an interconnected machine.” The reason behind this interconnection has to do with built-in fail-safes; local problems can be solved by drawing on power from other places. This enhances the reliability of each interconnected grid (the U.S. and Canadian power grids, for example, are connected at 37 different points for this very reason).
The result of this interconnection — coupled with a lack of storage capabilities built into the grid — is that the grid has to be constantly balanced. This data center-driven increase then poses a significant challenge to grid operators, resulting additionally in delays for new data centers to come online.
In order to meet this surging demand, and in order to keep the grid reliable, the retirement dates of environmentally damaging coal plants are being pushed back in the U.S.
  • “You can’t replace the fossil plants fast enough to meet the demand,” Joe Craft, CEO of Alliance Resource Partners, one of the largest U.S. coal producers, told the FT. “In order to be a first mover on AI, we’re going to need to embrace maintaining what we have.”
  • Globally, 69.5 gigawatts of new coal capacity came online in 2023, compared to just 21.1 GW that were retired, according to Global Energy Monitor (this is largely due to China).
A big solution to this rather complex mess, according to Meier, involves solar plus storage tech (something that Convergent offers). Depending on the size of the solar array in question, the combination can be enough to power a data center, perhaps with a minimal connection to the grid — the result is cheaper, sustainable energy production that doesn’t impact grid reliability.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Economy

Ottawa’s emissions cap will impose massive costs with virtually no benefit

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Julio Mejía and Elmira Aliakbari

The resulting reduction in global GHG emissions would amount to a mere four-tenths of one per cent (i.e. 0.004 per cent) with virtually no impact on the climate or any detectable environmental, health or safety benefits.

Last year, when the Trudeau government said it would cap greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) from the oil and gas sector at 35 to 38 per cent below 2019 levels by 2030, it claimed the cap will not affect oil and gas production.

But a report by Deloitte, a leading audit and consulting firm, found that the cap (which would go into effect in 2026) will in fact curtail production, destroy jobs and cost the Canadian economy billions of dollars. Under Trudeau’s cap, Canada must curtail oil production by 626,000 barrels per day by 2030 or by approximately 10.0 per cent of the expected production—and curtail gas production by approximately 12.0 per cent.

According to the report’s estimates, Alberta will be hit hardest, with 3.6 per cent less investment, almost 70,000 fewer jobs, and a 4.5 per cent decrease in the province’s economic output (i.e. GDP) by 2040. Ontario will lose more than 15,000 jobs and $2.3 billion from its economy by 2040. And Quebec will lose more than 3,000 jobs and $0.4 billion from its economy during the same period.

Overall, the whole country will experience an economic loss equivalent to 1.0 per cent of GDP, translating into lower wages, the loss of nearly 113,000 jobs and a 1.3 per cent reduction in government tax revenues. Canada’s real GDP growth in 2023 was a paltry 1.1 per cent, so a 1 per cent reduction would be a significant economic loss.

Deloitte’s findings echo previous studies on the effects of Ottawa’s cap. According to a recent economic analysis by the Conference Board of Canada, the cap could reduce Canada’s GDP by up to $1 trillion between 2030 and 2040, eliminate up to 151,000 jobs by 2030, reduce federal government revenue by up to $151 billion between 2030 and 2040, and reduce Alberta government revenue by up to $127 billion over the same period.

Similarly, another recent study published by the Fraser Institute found that an emissions cap on the oil and gas sector would inevitably reduce production and exports, leading to at least $45 billion in lost economic activity in 2030 alone, accompanied by a substantial drop in government revenue.

Crucially, the huge economic cost to Canadians will come without any discernable environmental benefits. Even if Canada were to entirely shut down its oil and gas sector by 2030, thus eliminating all GHG emissions from the sector, the resulting reduction in global GHG emissions would amount to a mere four-tenths of one per cent (i.e. 0.004 per cent) with virtually no impact on the climate or any detectable environmental, health or safety benefits.

Given the sustained demand for fossil fuels, constraining oil and gas production and exports in Canada would merely shift production to other regions, potentially to countries with lower environmental and human rights standards such as Iran, Russia and Venezuela.

The Trudeau government’s proposed GHG cap will severely damage Canada’s economy for virtually no environmental benefit. The government should scrap the cap and prioritize the economic wellbeing of Canadians over policies that only bring pain with no gain.

Continue Reading

Economy

Scrap the second carbon tax: Taxpayers Federation

Published on

Author: Franco Terrazzano

The Canadian Taxpayers Federation is calling on the federal government to scrap its second carbon tax following the release of government documents showing it will cost the Canadian economy $9 billion by 2030.

“This is another government report that shows carbon taxes are a big drag on the economy that Canadians can’t afford,” said Franco Terrazzano, CTF Federal Director. “The second carbon tax alone will cost average families hundreds and even thousands of dollars.”

The second carbon tax is embedded within federal fuel regulations, which took effect July 1, 2023.

The regulations require producers to reduce the carbon content of their fuels. If they can’t meet the requirements, they must purchase credits, increasing costs that are passed onto Canadians purchasing gasoline or diesel.

According to government documents, in 2030, the second carbon tax “will result in an overall GDP decrease of up to $9 billion.”

The documents were tabled by Environment and Climate Change Canada in the House of Commons in response to an order paper question filed by Conservative MP John Barlow (Foothills).

Previous analysis from Environment and Climate Change Canada shows the first carbon tax (including industrial) will cost the Canadian economy $30 billion by 2030.

The Parliamentary Budget Officer estimated the second carbon tax will cost the average household between $384 and $1,157 in 2030 depending on the province.

“Canada’s own emissions are not large enough to materially impact climate change,” according to the PBO report.

The PBO also estimated the second carbon tax will increase the price of gasoline by up to 17 cents per litre and the price of diesel up to 16 cents per litre by 2030.

“Prime Minister Justin Trudeau can make life more affordable and help our economy by scrapping his carbon taxes,” Terrazzano said.

Continue Reading

Trending

X