Texas grid flags risks as data centers, crypto sites fail voltage tests • Hacker News Board

Re: Texas grid flags risks as data centers, crypto sites fail voltage tests

#61

Post by manarth » Mon, Jun 08, 2026, 6:47 AM UTC

TOMDM wrote: post #37

threwrfaway wrote: post #26

For those who dont know why this is important: The loads are slowing down the generators that are burning a well metered amount of fuel to stay at 60Hz. This is a delicate balance since the phase angle must also be spot on. If a generator and the local line disagree on f, phase or V, you have a short circuit. If you lose a large amount of load, your generator will spin up with the excess fuel until the control system…

Would demanding that large spikey users of energy like data centers implement some sort of demand ramping/isolation from the grid in the form of a massive capacitor bank or flywheel generator between them and the grid help reduce the risk here?

The data centres aren't inherently spikey, in general use their consumption is reasonably predictable.

However, if a DC detects that the _grid_ is wobbly (voltage or frequency deviations) the DC will disconnect without warning, and switch to its batteries and generators.

The grid complains because it's suddenly lost hundreds of MW of load. For the DC to have isolation capability, it would need a load-sink which can consume roughly the same power as the DC in normal operation, and can take in that load at a moment's notice.

It's a hard problem to solve, and probably better managed at grid-level than DC-level.

Re: Texas grid flags risks as data centers, crypto sites fail voltage tests

#62

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Jun 08, 2026, 6:48 AM UTC

wyldfire wrote: post #38

threwrfaway wrote: post #26

For those who dont know why this is important: The loads are slowing down the generators that are burning a well metered amount of fuel to stay at 60Hz. This is a delicate balance since the phase angle must also be spot on. If a generator and the local line disagree on f, phase or V, you have a short circuit. If you lose a large amount of load, your generator will spin up with the excess fuel until the control system…

Some of us in Texas are all too familiar with the problem of balancing load with generation, the risk of a cascade failure causing a slow restart. During winter storm Uri, they did a duty cycle where we only had power available for ~6-12 hours at a time on the days it was available. This was apparently to avoid that very problem. So far as I know, the obvious mitigations like winterizing NG generation and/or peering…

[deleted]

Re: Texas grid flags risks as data centers, crypto sites fail voltage tests

#63

Post by hippich » Mon, Jun 08, 2026, 6:52 AM UTC

threwrfaway wrote: post #26

For those who dont know why this is important: The loads are slowing down the generators that are burning a well metered amount of fuel to stay at 60Hz. This is a delicate balance since the phase angle must also be spot on. If a generator and the local line disagree on f, phase or V, you have a short circuit. If you lose a large amount of load, your generator will spin up with the excess fuel until the control system…

When you say "short circuit" - is this when wires get hit and make and burn, or this is reference to some other stuff?

Re: Texas grid flags risks as data centers, crypto sites fail voltage tests

#64

Post by bob1029 » Mon, Jun 08, 2026, 7:07 AM UTC

phil21 wrote: post #41

threwrfaway wrote: post #15

How about an across the board $1/W hook up fee for new customers? Thats about the price of installed capacity per watt. New house with 200 A panel an assumed 30% utilization rate? $3600. New data center with 80% utilization rates at 100MW? $80 million dollars. New 10 GW data center? That'll be $8 billion. It's outrageous that I'm paying an extra fee to export energy to a neighboring state to power a datacenter.

> It's outrageous that I'm paying an extra fee to export energy to a neighboring state to power a datacenter. I don’t find anything outrageous whatsoever about building out transmission to strengthen regional interconnections. Lord knows we are decades behind the curve on this. If AI datacenters are what finally lets us maybe start to get a tiny bit ahead of the game I’m all for it. When the bubble pops there will fi…

> MISO

As a retail electricity customer, I vastly prefer whatever is going on in their operational context.

I live 10 miles from the "border" between ERCOT and MISO and I've got a lot of experience with both, particularly in disaster scenarios. ERCOT is a total shitshow when it comes to the edges. The fuel mix in MISO is pretty terrible for the environment, but it is also unbelievably reliable. The Mississippi River is not to be underestimated in its logistical impacts. The price of natural gas drives the daily fuel mix proportions, but it doesn't affect the available base capacity and its financial status (fully amortized for over a generation). If natural gas gets expensive in ercot and the wind isn't blowing, there isn't anything else to give. MISO has 2-3x the coal and nuclear capacity that ERCOT does.

Re: Texas grid flags risks as data centers, crypto sites fail voltage tests

#65

Post by flopbob » Mon, Jun 08, 2026, 7:09 AM UTC

gblargg wrote: post #58

threwrfaway wrote: post #26

For those who dont know why this is important: The loads are slowing down the generators that are burning a well metered amount of fuel to stay at 60Hz. This is a delicate balance since the phase angle must also be spot on. If a generator and the local line disagree on f, phase or V, you have a short circuit. If you lose a large amount of load, your generator will spin up with the excess fuel until the control system…

The ELI5 version is you're arm-wrestling someone and they suddenly let their arm go limp, so your arm slams down on the table since you can't react that fast.

To build on this analogy, tug of war fits a bit better. Nothing dramatic happens if one person let go, but if half of one team just let loose at the same time without communication, bad things happen.

Re: Texas grid flags risks as data centers, crypto sites fail voltage tests

#66

Post by jampekka » Mon, Jun 08, 2026, 7:15 AM UTC

threwrfaway wrote: post #26

For those who dont know why this is important: The loads are slowing down the generators that are burning a well metered amount of fuel to stay at 60Hz. This is a delicate balance since the phase angle must also be spot on. If a generator and the local line disagree on f, phase or V, you have a short circuit. If you lose a large amount of load, your generator will spin up with the excess fuel until the control system…

> Contrary to belief, renewables, or generally speaking DC, makes things this stability problem worse.

Is there such belief? My feel is that anybody to whom electrical grid stability has even crossed their minds know this.

Re: Texas grid flags risks as data centers, crypto sites fail voltage tests

#67

Post by LadyCailin » Mon, Jun 08, 2026, 7:20 AM UTC

wyldfire wrote: post #38

threwrfaway wrote: post #26

For those who dont know why this is important: The loads are slowing down the generators that are burning a well metered amount of fuel to stay at 60Hz. This is a delicate balance since the phase angle must also be spot on. If a generator and the local line disagree on f, phase or V, you have a short circuit. If you lose a large amount of load, your generator will spin up with the excess fuel until the control system…

Some of us in Texas are all too familiar with the problem of balancing load with generation, the risk of a cascade failure causing a slow restart. During winter storm Uri, they did a duty cycle where we only had power available for ~6-12 hours at a time on the days it was available. This was apparently to avoid that very problem. So far as I know, the obvious mitigations like winterizing NG generation and/or peering…

[flagged]

Re: Texas grid flags risks as data centers, crypto sites fail voltage tests

#68

Post by TOMDM » Mon, Jun 08, 2026, 7:21 AM UTC

manarth wrote: post #61

TOMDM wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would demanding that large spikey users of energy like data centers implement some sort of demand ramping/isolation from the grid in the form of a massive capacitor bank or flywheel generator between them and the grid help reduce the risk here?

The data centres aren't inherently spikey, in general use their consumption is reasonably predictable. However, if a DC detects that the _grid_ is wobbly (voltage or frequency deviations) the DC will disconnect without warning, and switch to its batteries and generators. The grid complains because it's suddenly lost hundreds of MW of load. For the DC to have isolation capability, it would need a load-sink which can c…

My intuition is that there would be a fairly stable base load, but doing something like switching on a new training run of a frontier model would be incredibly spiky, thousands of GPUs going from somewhat idle to 100% in seconds.

Re: Texas grid flags risks as data centers, crypto sites fail voltage tests

#69

Post by alexey-salmin » Mon, Jun 08, 2026, 7:40 AM UTC

jillesvangurp wrote: post #57

threwrfaway wrote: post #26

For those who dont know why this is important: The loads are slowing down the generators that are burning a well metered amount of fuel to stay at 60Hz. This is a delicate balance since the phase angle must also be spot on. If a generator and the local line disagree on f, phase or V, you have a short circuit. If you lose a large amount of load, your generator will spin up with the excess fuel until the control system…

Grid forming batteries and inverters are a thing. They can control the frequency on the grid. Just a matter of getting the right equipment. The nice thing with data centers is that they are somewhat flexible. It's not a constant load. Data center operators can choose to reduce load. And if properly engineered, they could do so automatically based on signals from the grid. The issue with outdated grids is that it reli…

> The issue with outdated grids is that it relies on technology (spinning mass) that's at this point a century old. Which makes it brittle against outages like you describe. The solution is not more spinning mass but batteries and renewables to take the place of that spinning mass. A battery can respond to oscillations in milliseconds. If you then add flexible load that can spin up/down based on the amount of available power, you gain a lot of stability.

Why the spinning mass technology being "century old" (more like "millennia old" but anyways) is a problem somehow? The Newton's First Law didn't change much in the time that has passed.

Anyone who tried to "respond to oscillations in milliseconds" knows how hard that problem is because the force you apply is integrated twice before it takes effect. Try stabilizing a swing by pushing it's forward when it's behind the equilibrium point and pushing it backward when it's ahead of it. Now imagine a grid of swings connected by rubber bands and a distributed system of independent actors responding to oscillations. There are much more ways in which this system can diverge rather then converge.

Time may prove me wrong, but the arguments like "spinning mass is old therefore should be replaced" certainly won't.

Re: Texas grid flags risks as data centers, crypto sites fail voltage tests

#70

Post by askvictor » Mon, Jun 08, 2026, 7:59 AM UTC

HWR_14 wrote: post #27

threwrfaway wrote: post #15

How about an across the board $1/W hook up fee for new customers? Thats about the price of installed capacity per watt. New house with 200 A panel an assumed 30% utilization rate? $3600. New data center with 80% utilization rates at 100MW? $80 million dollars. New 10 GW data center? That'll be $8 billion. It's outrageous that I'm paying an extra fee to export energy to a neighboring state to power a datacenter.

Texas has an independent energy grid, so are not exporting energy to them.

Yes, although, with enough datacentres, it starts to get linked to other grids via data i.e. it starts 'exporting' its energy via compute