Tuesday, June 23, 2026

The Great AI Cooling Crisis: Why Big Tech Is Drowning in Debt to Keep Chips From Melting


 By Staff

The hyper scalers are betting hundreds of billions on AI infrastructure they may not be able to cool or afford.

The numbers are almost too large to comprehend. In 2025 alone, four companies Google, Amazon, Microsoft, and Meta will spend over $300 billion on capital expenditures, the vast majority of it on AI data centers. That's more than the GDP of Finland. It's more than the entire US federal highway budget. And nearly all of it is being financed with debt.

The problem isn't just the money. It's physics.

Every dollar of that spending produces heat enormous, relentless, expensive to remove heat and the industry is quietly panicking about how to get rid of it before their million dollar silicon furnaces melt into slag.

A modern AI data center is, fundamentally, a space heater that happens to do mathematics. Every watt that enters a GPU emerges as thermal energy. An NVIDIA H100 draws approximately 700 watts. The upcoming B200 pushes past 1,200 watts. Road map chips from NVIDIA's Rubin architecture are expected to hit 1,500 to 2,000 watts per socket roughly the power draw of a household space heater, condensed into something the size of a paperback book.

At those densities, traditional air cooling becomes physically impossible. You would need hurricane force winds moving through a 1U server chassis. The fans alone would consume more power than the compute they're supposed to enable.

"The industry is building cathedrals for a religion that hasn't been invented yet," said one data center engineer at a major hyper scaler who spoke on condition of anonymity. "We're designing cooling systems for chips we haven't seen, using fluid dynamics models that barely keep up with the hardware road maps. It's terrifying."

The mismatch between infrastructure timelines and hardware evolution is stark. A data center building lasts 30 years. The cooling system inside it may be obsolete in five. The chips it houses are superseded in two.

Yet the hyper scalers are pouring concrete at an unprecedented pace. Microsoft has committed over $80 billion. Amazon's AWS division crossed the $100 billion threshold. Google parent Alphabet is spending roughly 20% of its annual revenue on AI infrastructure. Meta, not to be left behind, has earmarked upwards of $60 billion.

These aren't experimental bets. They're existential ones.

Google faces the disintermediation of its search business by AI chatbots that bypass advertising entirely. Amazon's AWS profit engine which generates more operating income than the entire retail operation could erode if AI workloads migrate to competitors with tighter OpenAI integrations or proprietary silicon. Microsoft is betting that its OpenAI partnership and enterprise distribution will let it capture the lion's share of the coming AI productivity boom.

All of them are terrified of being the Blockbuster of artificial intelligence. So they spend. And spend. And spend.

The desperation to solve the thermal problem has spawned a bewildering array of technologies, each with its own trade offs and none fully mature.

Direct to chip liquid cooling runs coolant through metal cold plates mounted directly on processors. It removes 60 to 80 percent of server heat at the source. Companies like CoolIT and Asetek have ridden this wave to rapid growth, but the approach still requires supplementary air cooling for memory, voltage regulators, and storage and retrofitting existing data centers for liquid plumbing is a nightmare.

Immersion cooling takes a more radical approach: dunk entire servers in dielectric fluid. Single phase systems keep the fluid liquid and pump it through heat exchangers. Two phase systems use specialized fluids that boil at low temperatures around 49 degrees Celsius pulling heat out through the phase change itself. The technology works beautifully in theory. In practice, the synthetic fluorinated fluids are eye watering expensive, environmentally questionable 3M is phasing out its Novec line due to PFAS concerns, and supply chains are fragile. If a condenser fails in a two-phase tank, the entire system boils dry in minutes.

Underwater data centers represent the most dramatic solution. Microsoft proved the concept with Project Natick, submerging 864 servers off the coast of Scotland. The sealed nitrogen-atmosphere pod experienced one eighth the failure rate of equivalent land based servers no oxygen corrosion, no human error, no temperature fluctuations. Microsoft canceled the project in 2024 anyway. The economics didn't work for a hyper scaler that can simply buy more land in Iowa.

China, unburdened by shareholder demands or environmental review processes, has pushed ahead with a state funded offshore data center near Shanghai, using seawater cooling and co-located offshore wind. It's a strategic infrastructure play disguised as an environmental initiative and it sidesteps the zoning battles, NIMBY lawsuits, and water permits that bedevil American projects.

Private ventures in the United States are scrambling to catch up. Peter Thiel is leading a reported $1 billion investment in Panthalassa, a startup designing floating data centers that generate their own power from wave motion while using surrounding seawater for cooling. DeepGreen Holdings has filed federal permits for tidal powered underwater AI data centers off the coast of Maine and Alaska though Maine's legislature has already imposed a moratorium until late 2027. A smaller outfit called The Ocean Data has submerged modular server pods and logged over 2,600 hours of immersion with zero failures, targeting industrial and sovereign edge deployments rather than hyper scale cloud.

The capex binge is being financed largely through debt issuance at a scale that should make anyone who remembers the year 2000 deeply uncomfortable.

The parallel isn't the dot com bubble of Pets.com and sock puppets. It's Cisco in 1999. Cisco was building the actual physical infrastructure of the internet routers, switches, fiber optic backbones and they were absolutely correct that the internet would transform the global economy. The company had real products, real revenue, and real technology. But the market had priced in a decade of growth in 18 months. When the music stopped, Cisco's stock dropped 86 percent and took two decades to recover to its year 2000 peak, despite the company being fundamentally right about the destination.

The hyper scalers are walking the same tightrope today. Being right about AI's transformative potential doesn't mean you can't go bankrupt on the journey.

The revenue simply hasn't caught up to the spending. AI products are generating real income GitHub Copilot, AWS Bedrock, Google Cloud AI, ChatGPT subscriptions but it's a rounding error compared to the $300 billion flowing out the door. The hyperscalers are building infrastructure for a demand curve they are hoping will arrive, not one that already exists.

Meanwhile, the open-source frontier is closing fast. DeepSeek's models demonstrated that frontier level performance can be achieved at a fraction of the training cost. If that trend holds cheaper training, cheaper inference, more competition the massive infrastructure build out starts looking like catastrophic overcapacity. Inference becomes commoditized, price wars destroy margins, and the companies that spent most aggressively to build capacity are the ones least able to survive the margin compression.

A contrarian perspective is emerging from engineers and strategists who argue that the smartest move is to slow down deliberately and let the thermal management technology mature before locking in permanent infrastructure.

The logic is straightforward. If you skip the air cooled generation entirely and go straight to two phase immersion or direct die refrigerant cooling when the technology stabilizes, you end up with lower total cost of ownership, higher compute density, dramatically better power usage effectiveness, and simpler operations. You'd be behind for two to three years and then suddenly ahead.

No publicly traded company has the stomach for that kind of patience. The quarterly earnings report is a tyrant. Executive compensation is tied to stock price, and stock price rewards bold capex narratives, not prudence. The debt has already been issued you cannot un-borrow the money. And critically, no one wants to be the first to blink while competitors keep spending.

The result is a classic collective action problem: individually rational behavior that produces collectively irrational outcomes. Every hyper scaler is making the right decision for its own competitive position. Together, they may be constructing the largest stranded asset problem in the history of computing.

Behind the cooling panic, behind the underwater data centers, behind the wave powered floating server farms, lies a simpler and more embarrassing truth. The United States electrical grid cannot handle the load.

The grid was largely built during the Eisenhower administration. It is aging, fragmented, and bottle necked by interconnection queues that stretch years into the future. Energy analytics firm Wood Mackenzie noted in a recent report that data center development has slowed specifically because of limited electricity capacity growth. The hyper scalers aren't chasing seawater cooling and tidal power because these are optimal thermal solutions. They're chasing them because they are desperate for power sources that bypass the grid entirely.

Fixing the grid would require political will, long timelines, and taking on entrenched utility monopolies. It's easier to sink a server pod in the ocean and call it innovation. The move fast crowd isn't running toward the future it's running away from infrastructure decay.

The most likely scenario is not a single dramatic collapse but a grinding reckoning. Margin compression from AI compute commoditization. Stranded assets from thermally obsolete data centers. Debt service costs that consume an increasing share of free cash flow. Executive turnover as boards lose patience with the gap between capex and revenue.

The real winners may not be the companies doing the building at all. NVIDIA and the cooling equipment manufacturers get paid regardless of whether AI revenue materializes. Private equity firms will eventually buy distressed data center assets at 30 cents on the dollar the same playbook they ran after the dot com crash and the 2008 financial crisis. Late movers who let the hyper scalers overbuild and then acquire infrastructure on the cheap will inherit the physical layer of AI without having paid for its construction.

China, meanwhile, is building methodically, state funded and unburdened by quarterly earnings pressure. The strategic imbalance could shift quietly while American companies compete themselves into insolvency.

The technology is real. The transformation is coming. But as the railroad barons, the fiber optic pioneers, and the internet infrastructure builders all discovered, being right about the revolution doesn't mean you survive it.

The ocean, at least, will keep things cool while it all plays out.

Source breakdown by section

The $300 billion capex figures

  • Alphabet $75B capex for 2025 — Alphabet's Q4 2024 earnings call and 2025 guidance (February 2025), widely covered by financial press including Bloomberg, Reuters, CNBC
  • Amazon $100B+ — Amazon's Q4 2024 earnings call (February 2025), Andy Jassy explicitly framed the majority as AI/data center spend
  • Microsoft $80B+ — Microsoft's fiscal year 2025 capex guidance, Brad Smith's January 2025 blog post announcing $80B for AI infrastructure
  • Meta $60-65B — Mark Zuckerberg's January 2025 post announcing 2025 capex guidance, explicitly calling it "a defining year for AI"

Project Natick / underwater data centers

  • Microsoft Project Natick — Microsoft Research's own published documentation at the Natick project site; Phase 1 (2015) and Phase 2 (2018-2020) timelines, the one-eighth failure rate finding, and the 2024 cancellation all documented by Microsoft and covered by Data Center Dynamics
  • China offshore data center near Shanghai — Scientific American, 2025 (the article you referenced at the start of this conversation)
  • Panthalassa / Peter Thiel — Financial Times coverage of the funding round (May 2026), WDC TV News reporting on the $140M raise and $1B valuation, Panthalassa's own public statements about Ocean-1/2/3 prototypes
  • DeepGreen Holdings / Maine / Alaska — FERC preliminary permit filings (February 2026), Needham Observer reporting (May 2026), Maine LD307 legislative record
  • The Ocean Data — Company's own public website with immersion testing data (2,640+ hours, zero failures)

Cooling technologies

  • Direct-to-chip liquid cooling (CoolIT, Asetek, Chilldyne) — publicly documented product lines, widely covered in data center trade press (Data Center Knowledge, Data Center Frontier, The Register)
  • Immersion cooling (single-phase and two-phase) — LiquidStack, Submer, and 3M Novec product documentation; 3M's PFAS phaseout announced December 2022 and widely reported
  • NVIDIA chip power draws — NVIDIA's published specs for H100 (700W), B200 (1,200W), and Rubin architecture roadmaps covered in NVIDIA GTC presentations and tech press (ServeTheHome, SemiAnalysis)
  • Free air cooling at LuleĆ„ — Meta/Facebook's own published case studies on the LuleĆ„, Sweden data center
  • Deep Lake Water Cooling Toronto — Enwave Energy Corporation's public documentation
  • Thermoacoustic cooling / SoundEnergy — Published research, SoundEnergy's own public materials

Electrical grid constraints

  • Wood Mackenzie report on data center development slowdown due to grid capacity — referenced in the WDC TV News article on Panthalassa (May 2026)
  • Grid interconnection queue backlogs — Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory's annual interconnection queue reports, widely cited in energy policy coverage

Financial / bubble analysis

  • Cisco comparison — historical stock data (CSCO peaked at $80 in March 2000, fell to ~$11 by 2002, didn't reclaim $80 until 2021); widely analyzed in financial literature
  • DeepSeek cost efficiency — DeepSeek's published technical papers on V3 and R1 models, extensively covered January 2025
  • Google search disintermediation threat — public coverage of ChatGPT, Perplexity, and AI-powered search alternatives; Alphabet earnings call discussions of AI risk factors
  • AWS profit engine — Amazon's segment reporting in 10-K filings showing AWS operating income relative to total company

Navy involvement

  • NAVFAC EXWC underwater fuel cell testing — Navy.mil press release (September 2023), publicly documented
  • Sean James submarine background leading to Natick — Microsoft's own published Natick origin story

Democrats Party Like It’s 1911

 As of 2026, the number of socialist mayors in the United States is on the rise, reaching levels not seen since the early 20th century. This summary explores the resurgence of socialist candidates within the Democratic Party and their implications for the political landscape.

● By the end of 2026, there may be ten socialist mayors in the U. S., the highest since the 1910s.

● In 1911, the Socialist Party of America saw success in local elections, reflecting a broader acceptance of socialism among educated elites.

● The rise of democratic socialists today is attributed to backlash against Trump-era policies, economic struggles, and dissatisfaction with the Democratic establishment.

● Currently, eight socialist mayors are in office, including Nithya Raman in Los Angeles and Brandon Johnson in Chicago.

● There is significant support for socialism among voters, with nearly half of Democrats expressing favorable views, while 26% of Republicans share similar sentiments.

● Historical trends suggest that socialist leaders often encounter challenges retaining public support, typically resulting in short terms in office. After the 1910s, only a few socialists were elected, and many did not last long.

● New challenges emerge from the radicalization within the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), which recently adopted a platform with far-reaching proposals like abolishing the U. S. Senate and granting amnesty to all undocumented immigrants.

● The evolving nature of DSA membership could lead to more radical actions and policies that strain relationships within the party.

● GOP strategists caution that underestimating the socialist movement could prove problematic, as it may influence the broader political dialogue.

The resurgence of socialist mayors in the U. S. reflects changing attitudes among voters. While there is interest in socialist policies, historical patterns suggest that continued support may be difficult to sustain. The Democratic Party's embrace of this ideology raises questions about its future direction and the potential consequences of more radical platforms within the party. 

https://issuesinsights.com/2026/06/23/democrats-party-like-its-1910/

Do Democrats Know What a Man Is?

 Wendy McElroy discusses the challenges Democrats face in connecting with young male voters, particularly as they prepare for the 2026 elections. The article reflects on the Democratic Party's struggle with defining masculinity and their approach to engaging men in the political landscape.

1. Struggles with Identity:

● The Democratic Party has struggled to clearly define what a "man" is, similar to their difficulties in defining a "woman. "

● There is a growing disconnect with younger male voters who feel marginalized by identity politics.

2. The Young Male Vote:

● In the 2024 elections, young men leaned towards Trump, and only a limited percentage of young people were registered to vote.

● A New York Times article highlighted that Gen Z men feel overlooked, and many see Trump as a response to their perceived demonization by the left.

3. Changing Demographics and Concerns:

● Post-election analyses show a rightward shift among young voters, especially young Black and Latino men.

● A recommendation from the Harvard Kennedy Ash Center suggests engaging men by recognizing their concerns about control over their lives and family.

4. Key Issues for Men:

● The Democratic National Committee (DNC) identified the need to engage male voters based on their specific issues, but did not specify what those issues are.

● Research from the International Council for Men and Boys (ICMB) highlights critical issues such as health disparities, partner abuse, homelessness, and reproductive rights that are often neglected.

5. Democratic Tactics:

● The DNC’s strategy focused on the negative portrayal of Trump and addressing masculinity in campaign discussions without genuinely addressing men’s concerns.

● Democrats have increased their presence in social media and podcasting to connect with young male voters but have sometimes selected controversial candidates that do not embody constructive masculinity.

6. Candidates and Masculinity:

● Two Democratic nominees, Graham Platner and James Talarico, are described as embodying differing interpretations of masculinity, though their approaches are controversial.

● Critics argue these candidates distort the concept of masculinity rather than address the real issues facing men.

7. Real Engagement Needed:

● For Democrats to effectively connect with young males, they need to focus on genuine issues that matter to them and approach the conversation with respect.

● The article suggests a return to basics and a re-examination of identity politics, emphasizing fairness and real engagement to gain male votes.

The piece illustrates Democrats' ongoing struggle to define masculinity and connect with a crucial voting demographic. Without addressing significant male concerns such as health, domestic violence, and homelessness, the party risks alienating young male voters further. The article calls for a shift towards real engagement and understanding to successfully attract male voters in future elections. 

https://brownstone.org/articles/do-democrats-know-what-a-man-is/

Rand Paul subpoenas Fauci for testimony in COVID origin probe

 Senate Homeland Security Chairman Rand Paul has issued a subpoena to Anthony Fauci, the former Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, to compel him to testify regarding the origins of COVID-19.

● The subpoena was necessary because Fauci declined to testify voluntarily, despite previously agreeing to do so.

● The testimony is related to a report declassified by former Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, which concerns Fauci's actions during the COVID-19 pandemic and research funding.

● Paul plans to question Fauci about whether he lied to Congress concerning funding for gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China.

● There have been allegations of a potential lab leak from the Wuhan lab, which Fauci has consistently denied, asserting the virus emerged naturally from a local wet market instead.

● The new public hearing is scheduled for the next month, but a specific date has not yet been announced.

Rand Paul's subpoena marks a significant development in the ongoing investigation into the origins of COVID-19 amid claims of misinformation surrounding the U. S. government's research funding. 

https://justthenews.com/government/congress/rand-paul-subpoenas-fauci-testimony-covid-origin-probe

The Climate Scenario Behind A Decade of Alarmism Is No Longer Considered Plausible

 Recent developments in climate modeling have led to a significant shift in how scientists view alarming climate projections based on high-emission scenarios like RCP 8.5 and its successor, SSP5-8.5. Many experts now consider these scenarios, previously seen as plausible, to be unrealistic.

● Changing Perceptions of Climate Scenarios: Scientists have revised their assessment of the SSP5-8.5 scenario. This scenario was often used to predict severe climate impacts, including economic and ecological threats, but researchers now describe it as “implausible. ”

● Impact of High-Emission Scenarios: RCP 8.5 was utilized in various studies, influencing government policies, court cases, and business risk assessments. Its portrayal as a likely future influenced climate emergency declarations and net-zero commitments worldwide.

● Lack of Public Awareness: Despite the new insights, there has been minimal media coverage or institutional reflection regarding the validity of these previously accepted projections. The narrative around climate change continues without acknowledging these significant revisions.

● Effects on Policy and Perception: The continued use of outdated models raises questions about how assumptions are presented to the public. There is concern about how flawed scenarios could affect real-world policies and economic decisions, similar to how unrealistic projections can impact other fields, like pharmaceuticals or finance.

● Call for Reevaluation: As assumptions behind SSP5-8.5 are reconsidered, it is crucial for policymakers, journalists, and citizens to question what other areas might also be based on outdated or erroneous data.

The acknowledgment that one of the most influential climate scenarios of the last decade is no longer seen as plausible raises critical questions about climate science communication and policy. There is an urgent need for a comprehensive reassessment of projections influencing public policy and funding, suggesting a reevaluation of the narratives that have driven climate discussions and actions. 

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2026/06/the-climate-scenario-behind-a-decade-of-alarmism-is-no-longer-considered-plausible/

The Impeachment Trap

 As midterm elections approach, Democrats are optimistic about potentially gaining control of the House and maybe even the Senate. This shift in power could mean tough times ahead for President Trump, but experts warn that focusing solely on undermining him may not benefit the nation or the party itself.

1. Republican Warnings:

● Republican Senator John Cornyn predicts that November’s elections will lead to a tough two years for Trump.

● Other GOP senators also express concerns about Trump’s influence waning.

2. Democrat Strategy:

● Some Democrats, like Susan Rice, advocate for an "accountability agenda" that may lead to investigations of Trump and his administration.

● This approach could be appealing but is viewed by some as less beneficial for the country at large.

3. Public Sentiments:

● The electorate is polarized over Trump, but many Americans are more concerned about practical issues like inflation, housing, and healthcare.

● A recent poll indicates that voters prefer Democrats focus on reducing costs rather than pursuing impeachments or investigations.

4. Call for Cooperation:

● Focusing on economic issues rather than a vengeance agenda could promote bipartisan cooperation and improve the Democrats' reputation among moderate voters.

● Programs that prioritize affordability could resonate more with voters than investigations.

5. Rejecting Vengeance:

● There are concerns that pursuing impeachment will push independents away from Democrats and cause the party to lose crucial electoral support.

● Calls for accountability must not overshadow the need to solve pressing economic issues.

6. Future Policy Directions:

● Democrats should leverage Trump’s previous successes on certain issues, such as immigration and economic strategy, to create a more effective platform.

● They are encouraged to develop policies that align with the needs of everyday Americans rather than solely focusing on retaliatory measures against Trump.

For Democrats, the next two years provide an opportunity to construct a governing strategy that addresses the real-life challenges faced by Americans. They must prioritize practical solutions over political vendettas to maintain their electoral strength and make a positive impact. Amidst this, it's essential for the party to avoid becoming overly fixated on Trump and to focus on building a credible platform for the future. 

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2026/06/23/the_impeachment_trap__154251.html

Entitled California State Workers Threaten ‘Mass Exodus’ Over Return-to-Office Order

 California state workers are reacting strongly against Governor Gavin Newsom's new order requiring them to return to the office four days a week starting July 1, 2026. This mandate ends the remote work arrangements many have adopted since the COVID-19 pandemic.

● Workers are threatening a “mass exodus” from state jobs due to the return-to-office order.

● Union leaders, including SEIU Local 1000 president Anica Walls, argue that employees have effectively performed their duties from home throughout the pandemic.

● Many workers support a proposed bill that would necessitate agencies to provide telework options unless they can justify the need for in-person attendance.

● Assemblyman Alex Lee noted that remote work is a top concern for many employees statewide.

● The union claims that telework has saved California taxpayers around $225 million annually by reducing office costs.

● Governor Newsom has acknowledged the pushback but remains firm on the policy, stating, “Change is hard. I’m empathetic,” and expressing a desire for more interpersonal connections in the workplace.

● Business leaders support the return of state workers, arguing that in-person collaboration is essential for economic activity and training.

● Union officials warn that the requirement could lead some employees to retire or leave their positions, suggesting readiness for a significant departure of staff.

The clash between Governor Newsom's return-to-work policy and the objections from state workers and unions illustrates a growing tension in California's government workforce. As employees advocate for their remote work preferences, the state faces potential challenges in retaining staff while attempting to increase in-office presence. 

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2026/06/entitled-california-state-workers-threaten-mass-exodus-return/