Google has acquired Crusoe's data center site in southeast Wyoming
crusoe.ai
crusoe.ai
> Data center upstart Crusoe is being pushed aside at an artificial intelligence campus it was developing in Wyoming after failing to lock in customers including Alphabet Inc.’s Google, according to people familiar with the situation. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-11-06/google-ta...
Problems with Crusoe were already brewing back in June:
> The developer [Crusoe] known for giant AI buildouts announced that it had “paused” its plan to build a data center that would draw enough electricity to power a city the size of Denver. In reality, Crusoe is being pressured to leave the project, after Google had raised concerns about the costs and timetable under Crusoe’s watch, some of the people said, asking not to be identified because the information isn’t public. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-06-11/crusoe-pu...
Crusoe was previously a bitcoin mining operation that pivoted to building AI data centers around 2024. They don't have decades of experience building data centers.
It seems Google disagreed with how Crusoe was running the project and decided it would be better to own everything itself, so it acquired the project.
And Google isn’t?
People, even on this startup forum, prefer Google to startups nowadays
lmao, yeah, they'll fuck off to florida after failed lobbying against popular opinion
They're a trust. Trusts are banned for a reason. They destroy a country from within
> Crusoe Energy: Acts as the lead developer for the flagship 1.2 GW Abilene, Texas campus ("Project Ludicrous"), as part of Project Stargate, managing the execution, co-financing, and design of the data halls.
Didn't stop CoreWeave. They very successfully pivoted from crypto to data centers.
I wonder where they get that number from? Google mentions a 702 MW fuel cell development, which from what I can tell will be able to generate be between 1/4 to half of Denver's energy usage, depending on duty cycle?
It’s just greediness unhinged by lack of policies. And the voters have finally had a say.
Each of these people made a choice about how they were going to affect the environment. The vast majority "voted" to use fossil fuels.
These people will yell and complain about anything and everything destroying the Earth, but then when it's their turn?
"We just couldn't figure out how to make the extra 30 minute charge stop on our annual vacation work..."
As an individual, your impact is minor. The problem is that there are hundreds of millions of vehicles on the road.
This is a pretty typical coordination problem where people are reluctant to make personal sacrifices when they know others will not make similar sacrifices which are necessary to achieve the goal.
Turns out everyone's a selfless hero at the dinner table or in the comment section, but few are on the ground.
It's not unreasonable to be frustrated by people's hypocrisy.
Up until two years ago, we very explicitly subsidized electric cars. And for the past six-plus months we've caused oil/gas prices to double.
In any case: is it worth spending a little more money (maybe?) to save the world from climate change? Or isn't it?
I think you’ll have better luck by arguing the economics and cost predictability. Not everyplace has a natural gas field next door, and in those places you’ll have a compelling argument.
But I’m not entirely convinced that all of the anti-data center voter backlash was about the physical infrastructure and power usage. I think a large fraction was general anti AI sentiment. And you’ll have a much harder time getting people who hate all AI to think putting a datacenter powered by anything is a good idea.
People don’t want these in their backyard but also care about lot about their energy costs.
>I think a large fraction was general anti AI sentiment
Agree and I still dont have time to dig out how we got to here. All of a sudden AI is like Anti-Christ or Nuclear Reactor.
A little off topic, but I began to explore the "truth" of various religions from the perspective of an adherent and... the news isn't good.
If there is a compelling case for AI to be the anti-Christ, that's probably one of them.
Global shipping uses the equivalent energy of a Hiroshima bomb every two minutes - that's about 4000TWh over the course of a year.
ALL data centre use, worldwide, totals 490TWh - that's inclusive of AI data centres.
AI data centre use - 155 TWh.
All data centre use, worldwide, accounts for less than 0.5% of CO2 emissions.
This is "use paper straws to save the whales" territory.
It keeps surprising me that Trump got elected as politician on the promise of introducing new taxes. Tariffs. Republicans at the midterms seemed very surprised that extra taxes affected their election chances negatively. I mean you wouldn't believe it but it's pretty clear who is the pro-tax party now, isn't it?
I mean you couldn't make this up. You'd almost think Trump is like some sort of llama, or perhaps a Russian camel (do those exist?) spitting in the face of his voters, kicking them in the balls to get elected. And it worked.
Twice.
What is the problem with a few thousand terrawatt-hours if it allows politicians to get paid?
WILL SOMEONE think of the politicians?
Or the NIMBYs
The thing is a lot of the opposition is simply anti AI so it doesn’t matter where you put them.
Win win!
The Mechartels
Dont forget that the US is attacking the energy supply from both sides. Oil, wind, etc. Yes to all.
Exactly the same reason the US uses a huge amount of natural gas for producing electricity: it is their most abundant, accessible, and cheap domestic fossil fuel.
The US was doing a "yes to all" approach, and it still somewhat is due to market forces, but the federal government is trying hard to but the brakes on the solar and wind parts of that, and also trying hard to encourage more fossil fuel use.