Without seeing actual power flow modeling for the lines attached to these data centers no one on the planet can accurately weigh the expense of these customers.
You can't 8760 where and when overloads happen elsewhere, unplanned downtime can't be identified in (or out of) the ISO, you can't forcast demand, you can't plan pre-purchasing of power before it's on demand. You can't speculate on if reconductoring could save money, or remove overloads.
You want to look at rate increases as the core driver. So much so you dump it on replies to others comments.
Too many variables are opaque for me to have a discussion about what is the 'largest' factor when each item on the above list could represent 10 million to 8 billion+ in cost.
But I can tell you I won't be convinced that new large loads, and who approved them are not a contributing factor because no one has "proven" it in real time. That's the kind of logical falacy that results in dismissal of real issues.
If you want to pretend the only source of information on this subject is the linked article I'm sure you can find many users here to debate within your arbitrary parameters.
Same goes for proof, which I'm sure would exclude power flow models if they were available for said debate.
Edit: We can agree the article is not comprehensive, and doesn't have data PJM and utilities have not published.
Agreed, this is a difficult topic to simplify. "The grid can handle it" is almost always a * statement.
Can it handle it today?
What about next year with the approved interconnects? What about in 2030?
Does "handle it" include summer load or just average, what if temps are 5 degrees hotter than power models ran?
What if PJM can't solve it's high priority overloads this year?
People want to talk about the grid as a binary system vs what it really is.
If serving those 37 customers forces choices that increase risk or cost for real customers (citizens, critical infrastructure like hospitals), it's a bad deal.
It seems like power utilities are optimized to solve problems, and serving these 37 customers can be framed as a solvable problem more easily than "Keeping the grid affordable and reliable" can.
Obviously there are not easy solutions here. Has Mullvad considered offering to buy out Daniel's shares?
The mission statement that Mullvad has promised it's users does (did) come with a duty of care.
In my eyes that mission statement is compromised, it either dies here and Mullvad is just another product financing political parties by proxy, or something is done.
I hope you find a way to protect Mullvad from actions that are counter to your mission statements.
We seem to agree that what replaced religion (for profit social media) is not a basis for a strong society, or fulfilling lives. Religion seems like a close 2nd worst option though.
If you end up trying it please share your findings!
I've basically been putting this kind of gear in my cart, and then deciding I dont want to manage more than the 2 3090s, 4090 and a5000 I have now, then I take the PLX out of my cart.
Seeing you have the cards already it could be a good fit!
What pcie version are you running? Normally I would not mention one of these, but you have already invested in all the cards, and it could free up some space if any of your lanes being used now are 3.0.
If you can afford the 16 (pcie 3) lanes, you could get a PLX ("PCIe Gen3 PLX Packet switch X16 - x8x8x8x8" on ebay for like $300) and get 4 of your cards up to x8.
"there are more than a dozen different types of diabetes" this feels like an ai synopsis that any human would have critiqued, but since ai said it, it made it in.
I'm not a doctor, but I've never heard of more than 5 "types" from endocrinologists in the past 20+ years.
You can't 8760 where and when overloads happen elsewhere, unplanned downtime can't be identified in (or out of) the ISO, you can't forcast demand, you can't plan pre-purchasing of power before it's on demand. You can't speculate on if reconductoring could save money, or remove overloads.
You want to look at rate increases as the core driver. So much so you dump it on replies to others comments. Too many variables are opaque for me to have a discussion about what is the 'largest' factor when each item on the above list could represent 10 million to 8 billion+ in cost.
But I can tell you I won't be convinced that new large loads, and who approved them are not a contributing factor because no one has "proven" it in real time. That's the kind of logical falacy that results in dismissal of real issues.