|
|
|
|
|
by metalspot
8 days ago
|
|
You really have to look at energy/capita and how much energy is embedded in exports. The gross numbers are misleading. The US wasn't building new electrical generation capacity because it didn't need it and there was no market for it (caveats apply, but in a broad sense this is the major reason). Now that the market exists the question is how much can the US actually bring online and how rapidly, which is a real challenge after decades of degrowth politics used to justify slash and burn consumption of the industrial base. AI is really all about electricity. AI could be completely fake and yield zero value whatsoever and the US would do exactly what it is doing now because the AI bubble is what creates the market for building new electrical generation capacity, which is needed for re-industrialization. Also why our friends in UK/Europe/China are so busy pushing anti-AI propaganda to try to undermine this. |
|
You need to understand that the US added 40.3 GW of energy capacity in 2023. 70 to 80 represents a dramatic growth (nearly doubling) in new capacity.
Also China is just getting started. 8 out of the 12 nuclear power stations opening worldwide in 2027 are Chinese https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/current-and-fu...
If AI is "all about electricity" as you say then the US was barely ever in the running in the first place. There's no possible way the US could compete any time in the next 2 decades (putting aside a dramatic shakeup like war)
> Also why our friends in UK/Europe/China are so busy pushing anti-AI propaganda to try to undermine this.
Lol people make up the funniest theories when a political idea they don't like is gaining popularity. At least you didn't blame Russian bots