Back to News
Advertisement
Advertisement

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

38% Positive

Analyzed from 2073 words in the discussion.

Trending Topics

#gas#power#more#datacenters#building#years#dollars#why#https#tents

Discussion (79 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

jzymbalukabout 2 hours ago
The fact that these behemoths are being powered by gas generators is horrifying
code_biologistabout 2 hours ago
Your language is ambiguous — your horror is in reference to natural gas turbine generators (used at these installations) and not gasoline generators (like in a home context)?

Why the horror? I'd prefer the gas remain in the ground, but given the gassy production of US shale oil, I guess I'd rather it be used for this than just flared. I am frustrated that pollutant emissions aren't being policed, and also that the sudden turbine demand plus supply chain issues mean using aeroderivative turbines that are quite a bit less efficient than more complex combined cycle turbines.

https://www.energy.gov/hgeo/how-gas-turbine-power-plants-wor...

unknownfutureabout 1 hour ago
I'd prefer they use cheap and available renewables rather than accelerating climate change. But to each their own I guess.

(And to head it off at the pass: if that can't be done then this should be done at all)

mlyleabout 1 hour ago
We have plenty of fields producing just natural gas in the US. It is not merely a byproduct of oil production.

Only about 35 percent is “associated gas” production from oil production.

vel0cityabout 2 hours ago
> I guess I'd rather it be used for this than just flared

I doubt this is really reducing the rates of flaring and leaky wells. Its just additional demand.

The biggest problem I've seen is they tend to build these somewhat close to residential areas with generation on-site. Often these power generation centers aren't right next to residential areas due to both air and noise pollution. But governments are often seeming to turn a blind eye.

code_biologistabout 1 hour ago
Yes, the noise pollution is insane. Benn Jordan's YT video "Datacenters Behaving Like Acoustic Weapons" is an insightful, scary 30 min video covering the datacenter infrasound noise, and the nasty things infrasound does to people: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bP80DEAbuo
Karrot_Kreamabout 1 hour ago
The reason is because permitting and building a natgas generator is the easiest among the energy production methods in the US. Datacenters need to be close-ish to Internet Exchanges to be cost competitive when lighting up network capacity. Solar cells are expensive (Chinese tariffs or domestic production) and permitting is tough. Nuclear is still a permitting and cost nightmare. Wind requires a lot of land. Hydroelectric is considered an environmental dead end after the ecological effects of the Hoover Dam. Geothermal is still unproven. Transmission lines moving power between generation and consumption is a permitting nightmare.

In that world, natural gas just makes the most sense. The US hasn't build generation capacity in any meaningful way in decades. We've deindustrialized over time so it's been relatively okay, until a new form of industry (datacenters) starts putting pressure on the whole thing.

giancarlostoroabout 1 hour ago
It's not supposed to be permanent, but it also allows them to not waste time waiting on physical locations to be built. Given how highly competitive this all is, I'm not surprised at all.
pier25about 1 hour ago
Every time I do something that's not supposed to be permanent until I have time to implement a proper solution it lasts for years.
axus23 minutes ago
Temporarily using CO2 generators for the next 10 years
vel0cityabout 1 hour ago
There's nothing more permanent than a temporary solution.
bethekidyouwantabout 1 hour ago
How did you want to power them? You know the gas generators are the largest power generation source in the US right?
emsignabout 1 hour ago
How about not powering them at all.
Karrot_Kreamabout 1 hour ago
And what happens when something you politically approve of needs power?
bethekidyouwantabout 1 hour ago
Horrifying
scottlambabout 3 hours ago
Meta's first five buildings took between two and three years to build, but Williams is almost done building out 200 MW (additional) off-grid power plants in a year, and to match that they're putting their equipment in tents. That raises questions for me:

* Did they expect the next five buildings to also take between two and three years to build if done in the same manner? I'd hope it'd be significantly faster the second time because they've perfected the design, found good local contractors and suppliers, etc.

* How much of the time was the actual structure vs. all the stuff inside they still have to do with the tents?

* How long are they expecting to keep this? Are they anticipating extra problems like leaking roofs?

* What are the "off-grid power plants"? Is this basically a whole bunch of diesel or natural gas generators? [edit: oh, yes, "The site is also powered by 200 megawatts of modular gas turbines". I wonder if they're trucking in the fuel too.] If so, yuck.

bluGillabout 1 hour ago
I would guess the real problem is contractors are bottle-necked in good times, but not stupid enough to expand - knowing that bad times will come and they have to pay for all the expansion. (humans can be laid off, but you still need to make the payment on the bulldozer)
arjieabout 2 hours ago
The whole thing is like a video game: your construction and power are your limiting factors. We need to CONSTRUCT ADDITIONAL PYLONS and so on. It's interesting that this is such a limiter on the ground that SpaceX is pursuing AI satellites in space. Truly an incredible time to be alive.
bigyabai43 minutes ago
> this is such a limiter on the ground that SpaceX is pursuing AI satellites in space

What is your source for this claim? It sounds like conjecture to me.

Neither power nor construction is easier in space than it is on Earth. Higher power means higher heat dissipation, which means higher-cost satellites or downsized AI hardware. Construction is monumentally more expensive when you have to ship GPUs and their associated infrastructure away from the planet where they're manufactured.

SpaceX's orbital compute will not compete against any ground-based AI capacity. It will most likely be used for edge processing of Starlink sensor data, either as an SAR solution, multiband jamming apparatus, or any other SDR applications used at the orbital scale. There is no other justification that I am aware of that necessitates space-based AI inference. The commercial space-based AI line is a glaringly obvious coverup.

Karrot_Kream17 minutes ago
Elon has mentioned this in interviews and the S-2 for SpaceX calls out permitting challenges as a reason for moving to space. Elon being Elon, I don't really believe him but this is what he claims ag least.
WarmWashabout 1 hour ago
The only thing SpaceX is pursuing is dumb money.
emsignabout 1 hour ago
This is not a video game.
zeafoamrunabout 1 hour ago
It's literally factorio
kajman4 minutes ago
I'm surprised they haven't installed the autocannons yet.
slicktuxabout 2 hours ago
When I read the headline I imagined a huge tent with steel beam structure and professional grade covers with HVAC and concrete footprint.

Seems everyone else imagined a camping tent. Different backgrounds I guess.

Desconabout 1 hour ago
Those look like sprung structures's tents. They can get real fancy: https://www.sprung.com/
lokar20 minutes ago
Several gates at Santa Rosa airport are in a fancy tent. You don’t even notice at first.
Alex_L_Woodabout 1 hour ago
Yeah, my immediate picture was a blue hobo tent with some extenders sticking out of it.
luk212about 1 hour ago
So AI infrastructure buildout is starting to feel a lot like emergency industrial mobilization...

Also, building rapid temp shells plus nearby gas turbines paints a very different picture than the one conveyed by the "clean-energy" PR around hyperscale data centers.

akomtuabout 1 hour ago
This is what happens when people with big money succumb to AI psychosis.
sellmesoapabout 3 hours ago
Technology is getting too in tents for me. /former boy scout
jackyingerabout 3 hours ago
A desperate bid to get around data center bans: disguise them as homeless encampments
burnteabout 2 hours ago
It's easier to get datacenters approved than homeless housing projects.
Avicebronabout 3 hours ago
The real unlock, the homeless can shelter for warm next to the gpus, and they can recruit some for some fent if they need workers.

Heck, call it public housing and bringing jobs into the community.

MSFT_Edgingabout 1 hour ago
They'll be bulldozed and all those servers will lose their ids and medications.
expedition32about 2 hours ago
Microsoft had a neat trick here in the Netherlands: instead of opening a new site they decided to make a their existing site higher by adding a few floors.

Ofcourse that only works once the Dutch borg adapts!

bluGillabout 1 hour ago
While that is done, unless land is expensive (which it rarely is by enough) building out is a lot cheaper than building up.
trallnagabout 2 hours ago
Homeless encampments or mountaineering base camps
felooboolooomba24 minutes ago
>Inside the tents, AI chips, likely worth billions of dollars, will go about their business.

I wonder how the security is. It's just a matter of time until organized crime will start paying attention to this. Perhaps a bet for polymarket?

sorieusabout 1 hour ago
These datacenters have been under construction since at least June of 2025. You can see 1 building was already up in 2025 and the land was just farmland back in 9/13/2024. So this construction has been over 1 year in the making. Does this mean its construction slop? For reference colossus xAI datacenter was up and running in less than 7 months. I couldn't tell you at what capacity but this doesn't seem like quite the same story.

Edit For a little more context xAI colossus 2 looks to be an empty warehouse on 3/10/2025. By 12/2025 they had already either filled the warehouse or they couldn't use the space because they appear to built multiple structures outside for the datacenter.

For comparison again meta already had that datacenter there for a number of years and then over 2 years added those structures. In 9 months it appears Tesla built a datacenter into an existing building and added structures.

KaiserPro19 minutes ago
When I left at the start of 2025, they were already building the tent.

The difference between Meta and tesla is that meta has done it many times before and in loads of countries.

FerretFredabout 2 hours ago
As always, there are some very erudite comments here on HN, which is why I like the site so much. My erudite comment, or rather question, is this: why aren't these people using AI to solve all these problems? Surely it would be a good test of The Product and maybe it would give s[ck]eptics some food for thought?
Theodoresabout 1 hour ago
Why not ask someone that can do astrology to do your stock picks and sports bets for you?

You know and I know that The Product is at best nowt more than 'astrology'. The Product does do search engine things though, and it could be scaled down to fit in a phone or even a watch, to be good enough for 'the pub quiz' or for writing a gormless email.

As for the article, META does very little for the vastness of the corporation. They have gazillions of developers yet Facebook and Instagram are as boring as ever, Threads and the Metaverse are just lame and what else do they do, apart from serve ads?

vel0cityabout 2 hours ago
Microsoft had trialed datacenters in tents nearly 20 years ago. I remember hearing about their trials at some talks back in the day. Crazy to look back on the dates here, felt like it wasn't that long ago.

https://www.datacenterknowledge.com/hyperscalers/new-from-mi...

Advertisement
felooboolooomba22 minutes ago
Any data on how these tents cope in a storm?
frognumberabout 2 hours ago
Extreme competition

and

Safety

Are opposites.

christkvabout 3 hours ago
Just waiting for the first heist
bubblegumcrisisabout 1 hour ago
I'm waiting for the first drone attack.
christkv44 minutes ago
Nothing of importance would be lost. But think about the amount of USD in each rack.
commienekoabout 3 hours ago
"All this inference will be lost in time, like GPUs in rain."
josefritzishereabout 3 hours ago
This is madness. The polling is in and the public hates, positively hates AI. So of course the response is to do AI even more. https://newrepublic.com/article/209163/ai-industry-discoveri...
john_strinlaiabout 2 hours ago
there are polls where a sample of people say they hate ai. on the other hand, there are a billion+ weekly active users.

from a business perspective, which of those two statistics would you give more weight?

unknownfutureabout 1 hour ago
This is basically an argument about revealed preference, and these things are always more complicated than that:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revealed_preference

john_strinlaiabout 1 hour ago
revealed preference theory is typically applied to individuals or single decision-making units like a household, rather than worldwide aggregate market behavior.

in any case, its not really that complicated in this case.

- the ai companies have a billion active users and billions of dollars in revenue.

- a poll comes back with 30% of respondents saying they are angry about ai.

so, why do the ai companies keep doing ai things despite ~30% of people not liking ai? well, its because they are making billions of dollars in revenue from their billion users. from the ai company's perspective, it would be madness not to keep shoving ai everywhere.

HWR_14about 1 hour ago
People hate AI datacenters in their backyard. From a business perspective, I hope "obey the local zoning laws" is a fairly high priority.
bluGillabout 1 hour ago
I don't hate the data centers near me. However I do hate the tax incentives they were given. My local school district could really use those millions of dollars per year that someone decided we don't get.
righthandabout 2 hours ago
But a billion active users != number of US citizens that take on the burden of AI. So go build your AI on land where your customers are if they like it so much.
warkdarriorabout 1 hour ago
ChatGPT has 112M monthly active users in US, https://searchlab.nl/en/statistics/chatgpt-statistics-2026#g...

Is is OK for them to build datacenters in US?

bluefirebrandabout 2 hours ago
How many of those people are just feeling like they have a gun to their heads? Use the AI or become unemployed and unemployable?

"People use AI so this must be a revealed preference" is such a bad argument when people are feeling so precarious

john_strinlaiabout 2 hours ago
>How many of those people are just feeling like they have a gun to their heads? Use the AI or become unemployed and unemployable?

in the context of answering the implied question of the parent (everyone hates it so why do they keep doing it?), it does not matter at all.

platevoltageabout 2 hours ago
Yeah, and they're all willing participants. \s
john_strinlaiabout 2 hours ago
>Yeah, and they're all willing participants. \s

this does not matter from the business perspective.

microsoft does not care that your company forces you to use their products. google does not care that your school forces you to use their products. TSMC does not care that you are forced to use their products when purchasing ~any electronics. etc.

krigeabout 2 hours ago
Out of the two? Probably the polls. "Active users" is blatantly a weasel metric.
john_strinlaiabout 2 hours ago
odd choice, mind explaining it a bit more?

why should a company listen to a gallup poll of ~1,500 people over their own internal metrics?

do you think all types of companies should heed the advice of gallup polls over their own metrics, experience, and research?

Dlanvabout 3 hours ago
The public hates ai but also uses ai in mass quantities.

Capitalism abides by your dollars not your voice.

So people can decry ai all they want but if they keep using it, it won't go away.

Even then it's probable that AI is a big enough productivity boost for certain industries that even if no consumers used AI, businesses would still prop AI up enough for it to live on.

akomtu44 minutes ago
The public is forced to use AI at work and outside of work because the corpos are determined in inserting their AI everywhere. Then the people come back home and see that their energy bills have doubled because of AI datacenters. Of course people hate AI.
FabCHabout 2 hours ago
Capitalism abides by dollars only so long as force is not in play. When the Molotov cocktails start flying, dollars lose their grip.

Simone Weil had good theoretical and practical observations on force vs economy 100 years ago.

hcurtissabout 1 hour ago
Nah, dollars buy war machines. And for the first time in human history, we are on the precipice of projecting substantial ground force without the need for humans.
bell-cotabout 3 hours ago
You don't move up the Cyberdyne Systems org chart by caring what the stupid little meatbags think.
shimmanabout 3 hours ago
Yeah but the public is against progress. The public cries for material needs like medicare for all, universal childcare, a jobs program? These are all clearly foreign actors that want to prevent American progress on AI! They must be Chinese agents for all we know, what sort of American wants to provide healthcare for their family over proudly paying higher utility rates to ensure a new batch of tech bros become billionaires?