Would you choose gas generators or renewables for your data center?

Would you choose gas generators or renewables for your data center

- and your children?

Author name

A few months back, I was at a data center conference about net-zero data centers. The funny thing was that the conference never really got into the very complex topic of decarbonizing data centers beyond renewable back-up power and GoOs.

No one ever asked how power equipment and cooling equipment could reduce their data center companies' scope 3 emissions, about low-carbon construction materials, or the servers’ GHG emissions.

Gas generators the low-carbon option?

Instead, there was a strong focus on gas generators and how they could be a sustainable and very resilient option. The gas turbines could ensure shorter lead times and total control over power. This is probably true, but what is not true, according to someone who has lived most of her life in the Nordics, is that it is a way toward net-zero.

In the UK, according to a recent article by the Guardian, more than 100 data centers plan to burn gas to generate electricity. A recent article in Wired says that gas-powered data centers can emit more than entire countries – and this is only from 11 data center campuses in the US.

Data centers are increasingly using fossil gas to bridge the gap for grid connections. Sometimes, they even use sustainability as a justification, comparing it with what emissions would look like if they had used diesel instead.

Gas turbines may reduce lead times and increase energy autonomy. But they are not a credible path to net-zero. And yes, gas is less carbon intensive than diesel. A data center running on diesel would emit roughly 2.5 times more than one run entirely on gas. But we are trying to get away from fossil fuels, aren't we?

If you compare running a data center on gas or on the average grid mix in the US, the difference is pretty small. Running it on the average US power mix would only be some 4% lower than gas and ~62% lower than diesel.

However, in a Nordic setting, the difference is dramatic.

If you run it on Nordic electricity, the emissions would be

~1/8 of running it on US power
~1/9 of gas generators
~1/22 of diesel

Do we need more fossil or more renewables?

I am not saying we can build all data centers in the Nordics. But we do need to think carefully about what kind of energy additionality we choose: more renewables or more fossil fuels.

The US energy system does not need more fossil fuels; it needs more renewables (like in the Nordics).

Data centers are growing quickly, and it is tempting to cut lead times and become independent of power grids. But the world is already almost 1.5 degrees warmer than pre-industrial levels.

We need to build this new industry responsibly. Shortening lead times today cannot come at the cost of shortening the lives of future generations.

Calculations: US Power Mix 384g/kWh, Average carbon intensity across Sweden, Norway, Finland and Iceland electricity ~46 g/kWh.Adding more gas would increase emissions, while adding renewables would reduce the carbon intensity of the energy mix. But honestly, I think the energy solution with the greatest potential in the US is using the bodies more for transport.

Me in the US in one of the states with the most renewables in the grid - California. Adding more gas would increase emissions, while adding renewables would reduce the carbon intensity of the energy mix. But honestly, I think the energy solution with the greatest potential in the US is using the bodies more for transport.