Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2608.08170

Beyond the Grid: Cost, Carbon, and Capital Requirements of On-Site Power Technologies for AI Data Centers

Eliseo Curcio
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Interconnection queues, not electricity prices, now govern where data centers can be built, and the standard levelized-cost comparison answers a question no developer faces: it assumes a load profile, freezes the grid price while modeling the demand that moves it, and quotes busbar costs a facility cannot buy. This paper evaluates nine on-site supply technologies against a delivered grid whose price is endogenous to projected data-center demand, on a complete-site basis that retains standby charges, with measured GPU training load, delivered fuel prices, production-pathway carbon, and statutory 45V and 48E incentive mechanics. Nothing beats the wire: gas combined cycle produces at 47 USD/MWh but costs about 114 USD per megawatt-hour of complete site energy against a 92 USD grid; four-hour storage is physically capped near 18 percent of annual energy and, charged at the margin, dirtier than the grid; hydrogen from grid-priced power fails on cost and carbon together. An investment inversion converts these findings into capital terms: conversion-hardware learning buys nothing, because free hardware still exceeds the grid for every low-carbon arm, while global electrolyser deployment on sited sub-20 USD/MWh power brings PEM hydrogen power to about 2.2 times the grid at 300 billion USD and 1.9 times at 1 trillion USD (2.7 and 2.3 for the hydrogen engine), with a carbon reduction of roughly 85 percent (6.8-fold) against grid-power production. Grid parity is not purchasable at any budget. On-site supply is an access and depth product; most current investment targets the wrong term.

Explore related subjects

econ.EMeess.IV

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Eliseo Curcio. 2026-08-08. Beyond the Grid: Cost, Carbon, and Capital Requirements of On-Site Power Technologies for AI Data Centers. https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.08170

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Evidence Aggregation for Treatment Choice

Consider a planner who has limited knowledge of the policy's causal impact on a certain local population of interest due to a lack of data, but does have access to the publicized intervention studies performed for similar policies on different populations. How should the planner make use of and aggregate this existing evidence to make her policy decision? Following Manski (2020; Towards Credible Patient-Centered Meta-Analysis, \textit{Epidemiology}), we formulate the planner's problem as a statistical decision problem with a social welfare objective, and solve for an optimal aggregation rule under the minimax-regret criterion. We investigate the analytical properties, computational feasibility, and welfare regret performance of this rule. We apply the minimax regret decision rule to decide whether to enact an active labor market policy based on 14 randomized control trial studies.

econ.EM↗
arXiv2026

Beta-Sorted Portfolios

Beta-sorted portfolios---portfolios comprised of assets with similar covariation with selected risk factors---are a popular tool in empirical finance to analyze models of (conditional) expected returns. Despite their widespread use, little is known of their econometric properties in contrast to comparable procedures such as two-pass regressions. We formally investigate the properties of beta-sorted portfolio returns by casting the procedure as a two-step nonparametric estimator with a nonparametric first step and a beta-adaptive portfolio construction. Our framework rationalizes the well-known estimation algorithm with precise economic and statistical assumptions on the general data-generating process. We provide conditions which ensure valid estimation and inference allowing for a range of hypotheses of interest in financial applications. We show that the rate of convergence of the estimator changes depending on the value of beta. We demonstrate that valid inference depends critically on the object of interest and discuss drawbacks of the widely used Fama-MacBeth variance estimator. To address these limitations, we propose a new variance estimator. We demonstrate the usefulness of our theoretical results in two empirical applications, including one in which we introduce a novel risk factor that captures the business credit cycle and show that it predicts both the cross-sectional and time-series behavior of U.S. stock returns.

econ.EM↗
arXiv2026

Difference-in-Differences with Unpoolable Data

Difference-in-differences (DID) is commonly used to estimate treatment effects but is infeasible in settings where data are unpoolable due to privacy concerns or legal restrictions on data sharing, particularly across jurisdictions. In this study, we identify and relax the assumption of data poolability in DID estimation. We propose an innovative approach to estimate DID with unpoolable data (UN-DID) which can accommodate covariates, multiple groups, and staggered adoption. Through analytical proofs and Monte Carlo simulations, we show that UN-DID and conventional DID estimates of the average treatment effect and standard errors are equal and unbiased in settings without covariates. With covariates, both methods produce estimates that are unbiased, equivalent, and converge to the true value. The estimates differ slightly but the statistical inference and substantive conclusions remain the same. Two empirical examples with real-world data further underscore UN-DID's utility. The UN-DID method allows the estimation of cross-jurisdictional treatment effects with unpoolable data, enabling better counterfactuals to be used and new research questions to be answered.

econ.EM↗