Listened to it. Max was not very respectful and did his usually top heavy spin such as nonsense saying that solar is going to be preferable to natural gas because it’s cheaper when it comes to powering data centers.
This claim falls apart the moment he skips over the difference between cheap energy and cheap 24/7 power.
Solar may have a low marginal cost per kWh, but data centers don’t buy “sunshine when available” they buy continuous, guaranteed uptime. When you include the massive overbuild and battery storage required to turn solar into firm power, it becomes more than twice as expensive as natural gas.
That’s not my opinion; that’s straight from S&P Global’s analysis of a Texas data center, which found a combined‑cycle gas plant costs $2.9B over 20 years, while solar storage costs $6.2B. So if the argument is “data centers choose the lowest‑cost fuel,” the math shows they clearly choose gas, not solar.
And the examples he cited (Texas and South Korea) actually undermine his point. Texas has some of the cheapest solar in North America, yet its data centers overwhelmingly rely on natural gas because it’s abundant, dispatchable, and stable. South Korea, meanwhile, has limited land for solar and some of the highest electricity prices in the OECD, relying heavily on LNG, coal, and nuclear (not solar) for baseload. Even with aggressive build‑out targets, Korea’s Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy projects that fossil fuels and nuclear will still supply the majority of electricity for decades, because the country has limited land, high population density, and extremely high reliability requirements for its industrial base. Solar growth in Korea is real but it’s mostly distributed rooftop and small‑scale installations, not the kind of utility‑scale solar farms needed to power data centers 24/7.