sign up log in
Want to go ad-free? Find out how, here.

Earl Bardsley questions the appetite for 'littering the landscape' with windfarms and solar panels to maintain AI data centres established via contracts facing little public scrutiny

Public Policy / opinion
Earl Bardsley questions the appetite for 'littering the landscape' with windfarms and solar panels to maintain AI data centres established via contracts facing little public scrutiny
wind
Photo by Waldemar Brandt on Unsplash.

By Earl Bardsley*

The water and energy demand of coming AI data centres in New Zealand is presently getting considerable attention.

The supply of cooling water for the centres is actually a distraction because it is just a matter of having suitable locations.

Singapore-based Datagrid’s AI data centre near Invercargill obtained consent for up to 600 cubic metres of groundwater per day for cooling purposes. This has since switched to rainwater supply.

In comparison, every day about 40 million cubic metres of cold water passes by any point on the Clutha River below Roxburgh. This could provide cooling for multiple AI data centres along the river, just as the Waikato River provides cooling water for the Huntly power station now.

The real issue is about energy.

The already-consented Datagrid AI data centre will by itself amount to more than 4% of the country’s electricity use.

It will not take many such centres to have a major impact. A recent statement by Datagrid in the Otago Daily Times (July 31) identifies Southland and the South Island as having “huge potential in relation to being a data centre hub attracting international tenants”.

Given this rapid development and potential impact, the Green Party has called for a temporary moratorium for data centre consents.

In contrast, both Megan Woods and Simeon Brown seem relatively unconcerned. They see potential for economic advantage, subject to requiring AI data centres to fund their own renewable generation.

However, those interested in setting up AI data centres will not build large and expensive power projects like major river dams or geothermal plants. Nor would they be willing to wait years before those projects are consented and completed.

This means that most of their power supply will come from new wind and solar farms.

The intermittency problem

Wind and solar provide intermittent generation. Electricity output flickers over a range of timescales like the proverbial candle in the wind.

Intermittency can’t be offset by adding more intermittency. Any number of solar panels still generate no power at night. Any number of wind farms still generate minimal power when an anticyclone extends over the country.

It is misleading to reference new wind and solar generation presently under construction as being built faster than Think Big. There is a world of difference between having more flickering power and the stable generation from the Clyde Dam on the Clutha River.

Intermittent power by itself is junk electricity, at least from the viewpoint of a large electricity user with constant power demand like an aluminium smelter. The flickering power must first have its low points filled (firmed) with additional electricity coming in from stable generation elsewhere.

For example, Contact’s Southland Wind Farm will provide a component of the power to enable restart of the fourth potline at the Tiwai Point smelter. In addition, there must also be a supply of firming power from somewhere for times when the wind farm electricity output falls short of the potline’s required 50 megawatts.

Compared to an aluminium smelter, an AI data centre has some flexibility against intermittency by varying its power demand. However, this flexibility is restricted.

A recent journal article reviewed large-scale data centre operation with renewable power, concluding that the degree of flexibility is strongly limited by internal service duties and uncertain operating conditions.

This limited flexibility means that firming power is still going to be needed for New Zealand AI data centres. They can’t simply ramp operations up and down in sync with fluctuating power supply.

There are presently only limited sources of green firming power. Grid batteries last only a few hours at full discharge. Geothermal power is baseload and can’t be ramped up when required. There are no pumped storage schemes in New Zealand yet. That leaves just firming from existing hydro generation.

No energy ring-fencing

Any hydro firming for AI data centres means that they must extract a component of their power from the existing New Zealand electricity system, regardless of any new wind or solar farms.

That is, AI data centres cannot use their own wind or solar power to isolate themselves from the New Zealand electricity system. Their firming requirements translate to some amount of decline in hydro lake levels.

The electricity question for AI data centres is therefore not where their power is coming from, but rather where their firming power is coming from.

On the other hand, there could also be energy-positive periods where the new wind and solar farms will generate in excess of AI data centre needs. The opposite effect then applies and hydro lakes rise.

The question is whether the overall sum will end up positive or negative.

That is, an energy measure of the value (or lack of value) of AI data centres in New Zealand is whether their net effect is to create higher or lower hydro lake levels. This is particularly relevant for dry winters.

Higher lake levels mean a net energy gain to the country from the new intermittent renewable generation motivated by the data centres. A tendency towards lower levels means higher electricity prices and increased risk of dry winter impacts.

There appears to be no guidelines or information relating to power supply agreements for AI data centres. A key aspect is whether their power demand can be reduced over extended periods in dry winters as part of the supply agreements.

Environmental impact

Aside from the question of energy gains or losses, there is also the broader issue of the New Zealand environment.

Southland has been here before. The flow of the once-mighty Waiau River along the Fiordland margin has been massively reduced to enable Manapouri power for the Tiwai Point aluminium smelter. Was this environmental loss worth the national economic gain?

Do we really want to make long-term legal commitments to littering the landscape with windfarms and solar panels to maintain AI data centres set up under contracts that have no public scrutiny?


*Earl Bardsley is Research Associate at the University of Waikato School of Science. He is the original proposer of the idea of pumped storage at Lake Onslow in Central Otago, as an alternative to burning coal and gas in dry years when hydro lakes are low. Bardsley spoke about the Lake Onslow idea in an episode of the Of Interest podcast in 2022.

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment

Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.

22 Comments

"The electricity question for AI data centres is therefore not where their power is coming from, but rather where their firming power is coming from."

That is also the question for intermittent electricity projects. Any solar or wind energy produced at midday today was effectively worthless and a drain on grid stability.

em6.co.nz

Up
2

I don't think the net contribution of wind and solar projects "earmarked" or developed for a datacenter by generators through PPA's is particularly interesting. If the price of electricity is above the cost to bring more generation to market then someone will build it.

It's also a very complex co-optimisation problem which is hard to anticipate as outsiders. If for example Datagrid did agree to a large dry year demand response contract like Tiwai has, the market response would probably be to run lower average lake levels, and in-effect source some of the additional energy for the project from the decreased spill of water, wind and sun. With no net change for security of supply, but a gain to system efficiency.

If we are concerned about security of supply, we can just increase the value of lost load and the scarcity price cap. Retailers would need to purchase more hedges. Large consumers do the same or are incentivised to have more demand response. Better funding for fuel stockpiles, higher average lake levels, more spill more waste, funded by all consumers. Such is the price of resilience.

Up
0

Not in a de-growing, feed-backing world, it isn't. 

 

Up
1

what isn't?

Up
1

In NZ wouldn't intermittent electricity allow us to use hydro less and replenish the lakes? 

Up
1

if it was one system, but if I am a generator and I own only hydro, I make no money by holding back water on a windy/sunny day, especially if the dam is full and significant rain is coming, I am just going to spill the rain for $0

Up
0

But if the dam is not full and no significant rain is coming, you'd be silly to spill for $0 when you can sell that energy later. 

Up
1

yes i spill and generate , rain despresses wind and solar outputs

Their is no incentive to work as a team at 80% hydro we already have a massive battery

 

Up
2

100% correct. In theory you price most of your hydro generation based on what you think the value of your stored water is. There are some caveats about consent requirements forcing you to release some water etc.

If a bunch of zero marginal cost solar and wind come online, offering their generation to the market at $0.01/MWh, then they are offsetting the offer stack, moving the marginal generator down. Someone who would have been dispatched before, isn't. Almost always that generator is going to be hydro in New Zealand.

Up
0

Earl makes some interesting points, but does he realise that this very article was possible because of data centres, so are our futile comments.

Up
4

He does (generally) specify AI data centres

Up
1

Maybe this article was AI generated...

We will need AI data centres too, otherwise we will fall even further behind other countries in terms of productivity.

Up
0

Sorry, remind me what they produce again.

Up
2

Low grade heat. 

Almost everything ends that way

Up
1

Are you saying  that this article is impossible without data centres? 

Up
0

That is what Yvill is implying - and he's wrong. 

The data centres we currently use, are often overseas and predominantly fossil-energised. But they exist. 

The mega-slurpers envisaged don't exist, and like all businesses will try and socialise the losses while privatising the profits. And - as Earl points out - one of the socialised costs is the environment we need to stay alive. 

 

Up
2

The persistence with the LNG terminal int he name of dry year generation issues, is starting to reek of corruption. I am starting to suspect that it is in fact being shoved down our throats, and taking from our wallets, to socialise the cost of excessive power use of future AI data centers.

Consider the risk of a dry year issue being compounded if the lakes are more persistently lower to satisfy increased demand, therefore a fossil derived baseload buffer would be needed, usually Huntly. Huntly however, may not have the capacity to satisfy demand if we have a few more AI data centers here operating 24/7. The dots connect on this theory so far, and the current govt trying to ram it through under the publics nose may indicate they want this signed and confirmed as going ahead before a future govt can put a stop to it.

Up
4

'every day about 40 million cubic metres of cold water passes by any point on the Clutha River below Roxburgh. This could provide cooling for multiple AI data centres along the river, just as the Waikato River provides cooling water for the Huntly power station now.'

Heating river water has consequences- it lowers the solubility of oxygen dissolved in water. If the river is already too hot during summer dry periods and extra heat is added to the water there likely will be additional fish deaths and a massive increase in algae growth, some likely toxic algae.

Up
2

Any data centre should generate electricity with a small module nuclear energy plant funded by them for them only.  No angst about unreliable wind/ solar farms blighting the landscape. They would not use the  hydro power generated from the National Grid. If Switzerland/Netherlands etc can use nuclear energy why are we not at least considering this? Yes there is waste but technology is far superior than the hysterical " ban the bomb" days.

Up
1

So take the energy now, but put the load on our children. And theirs. And theirs. And theirs. And theirs. And theirs. And theirs. And theirs. And theirs. And theirs. And theirs. And theirs. And theirs. And theirs. And theirs. And a few hundred more generations. 

I'd call that the ultimate definition of selfish. 

Two other points; the word 'hysterical' gives away that you have a pre-bias - never the best approach. 

Secondly, if there is no data centre, there's no need to load all those future generations with the waste-containment cost, is there?

 

Up
2

I wonder what the NPV of a dollar in 300 years is

Up
0

Good article - right on the money. The government thinks people are stupid enough to believe that if we build enough Solar and wind farms we can continue to accept more foreign-owned data centres on to our power grid. Why should we put at risk our reliable and constant firming power to support these AI generating monsters?

Up
1