Because solar on the roof won’t even be noticable against their power footprint. Given current practices, each square foot of a datacenter would need about 1,000 times more square footage worth of solar.

But (as I'm sure you realize) this would mean every watt from on-premises solar could get put to use immediately, no batteries, no power-grid buy-back schemes. Making those solar panels an unusually good investment.

Unless they're not planning to keep it running for very long.

It smells un-serious, somehow.

Even if it's nowhere near a majority of the power, I'm surprised passive cooling from solar plus some electricity isn't worthwhile enough to be universal. It's a small impact, but also cheap enough it'll pay for itself, and many orders of magnitude more efficient than trying to get a datacenter into space, and figure out how to cool it

Just like vaccines, some things need to be done in scale to reach their true effectiveness.

That one facility will always be as net negative for the grid. But with panels on all the other buildings in the area that aren't a power sap, it would be significantly better.

We're getting to the point where roof top solar is relatively cheap and worth the effort. I mean, there's fucking fields near me that they clear cut and put ground based solar panels on, and it was profitable enough for the farmers to lease the land, and the company that owns the panels to get their nut. And a lot of those field based panel arrays are equivalent to, if not smaller than the massive Amazon warehouses we have nearby.

If large corporations pay their fucking taxes and did their fair share of infrastructure investment we wouldn't even be having a conversation about global warming or about where we're going to get energy for fucking stupid worthless data centers. The energy is in the fucking sky it's free goddamn giant nuclear reactor you just need to put panels on top of shit to harvest it.