For 2025 the grid carbon intensity in Texas was 363gCO2eq/kWh, while it was 22gCO2eq/kWh in Sweden, so 16,5x more in Texas. Right now it's 427 in Texas vs. 50 in Finland ie. 8,54x more, like in the article (yes I looked the wrong country at first).
The reason is half of Texas electricity production is still fossil fuels (gas & coal) while mostly hydro, nuclear and wind in Sweden. So it's not really about ai, the models or the hardware. Fossil fuels make CO2, that's it.
A surprisingly large amount of the water usage attributed to datacenters is also from fossil fuel based electricity generation.
Like 2/3rds or 4/5ths of it on a fossil heavy grid.
Oh. We should probably stop using them then.
And in EU, they just were able to lobby all this information to be classified.
Chat GPT output; do take with a grain of salt.
TX generated 4x the absolute solar electricity as Sweden and 5x per person in the last 12 months.
What was the purpose of this comment? It's obviously irrelevant, as it's only considering one type of low-carbon electricity.
When the state is a full 30 degrees of latitude southern than Sweden, with consistent sun throughout the year, yeah, it will generate more energy through solar.
What's the point you're making?