It was almost a year ago, in November 2025, when we first calculated that the AI supercycle was facing a huge problem: namely, a power shortfall of (at least) 44 nuclear power plants, or GW or energy, by 2028.A Huge Problem For The AI Revolution: A Power Shortfall Of 44 Nuclear Power Plants By 2028 https://t.co/2ciiUudp8T
— zerohedge (@zerohedge) November 12, 2025Fast forward to last week when we made another stunning discovery: the reason why Texas Gov Abbott froze the rollout of new data centers in his state is because the number of interconnection requests facing ERCOT had risen to a mindblowing 474 GW (of which 90% were data centers), when the state's highest ever power demand just hit 91GW. Needless to say, this will never happen in (maybe) a hundred years, but it does prompt the question we have been asking for years: where will the energy come from.How mathematically impossible is the energy math behind the data center rollout? Just Texas alone is facing 474GW of interconnection requests (ERCOT), of which 90% is data centers. Which is why gov Abbott froze rollout of new data centers in Texas.
For context, ERCOT all-time… pic.twitter.com/sdl26FPmwL
— zerohedge (@zerohedge) August 8, 2026Well, as it turns out, the answer is nowhere. According to new projections from Wood Mackenzie, zmore than two-thirds of the electricity sought for the artificial intelligence boom in the US isn't likely to materialize due to "phantom" projects and long-shot pitches.The consultancy, which was inspired by not only our recent use of the term "bragawatts", but the Bernstein report it came from (link here for pro subs) which reached the same conclusion...Think it's just about tokens? Think again: the next AI crisis is real compute vs "bragawatts"
