You’re out of free articles.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
Sign In or Create an Account.
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Welcome to Heatmap
Thank you for registering with Heatmap. Climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our lives, a force reshaping our economy, our politics, and our culture. We hope to be your trusted, friendly, and insightful guide to that transformation. Please enjoy your free articles. You can check your profile here .
subscribe to get Unlimited access
Offer for a Heatmap News Unlimited Access subscription; please note that your subscription will renew automatically unless you cancel prior to renewal. Cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. We will let you know in advance of any price changes. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.
Subscribe to get unlimited Access
Hey, you are out of free articles but you are only a few clicks away from full access. Subscribe below and take advantage of our introductory offer.
subscribe to get Unlimited access
Offer for a Heatmap News Unlimited Access subscription; please note that your subscription will renew automatically unless you cancel prior to renewal. Cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. We will let you know in advance of any price changes. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.
Create Your Account
Please Enter Your Password
Forgot your password?
Please enter the email address you use for your account so we can send you a link to reset your password:
CoreWeave signed a deal for a new facility in New Jersey, behind-the-meter power on the side.

The cloud computing company CoreWeave announced Monday that it is leasing a former medical research facility and turning it into a data center. Along with it comes a 25-megawatt power plant that once provided power and steam directly to the former Merck headquarters in Kenilworth, New Jersey, but began to sell more and more power to the grid, the plant’s owner said in a filing with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. In 2023, the facility was purchased by Onyx, a real estate firm, and Machine Investment Group, with the intention to market the site to another life sciences or biotechnology company.
Then the AI revolution happened.
CoreWeave, which started as a miner of cryptocurrency, is now raising and spending billions of dollars to acquire and install the chips necessary to train and run artificial intelligence systems for companies that rent out access to them. According to the deal announcement, the company plans to pour $1.2 billion of investment into the 280,000 square foot facility, along with electrical upgrades from the utility PSE&G and investments from Onyx. The power plant will stop serving the grid and go “behind the meter,” the plant’s owner Atlantic Power said in a letter to PJM Interconnection, the regional electricity market, in September.
The deal confirms that when it comes to power, data centers will take what they can get — and that the long timelines necessary to bring on new power in much of the country may end up benefiting existing owners of generation, especially natural gas.
Data centers require both large amounts of power — sometimes 100 megawatts or more — and the ability to surge up and down quickly. “Renewable power generation is well placed to capture mounting demand from data centers and AI in the long term,” analysts at BNEF wrote in a report in September, “but time constraints for grid interconnection and intermittency issues could support natural gas-fired output.”
Goldman Sachs analysts expect data center power demand to rise from about 3% of the U.S. total to 8% by 2030, with growth running at 15% annually. They assume that capacity will be met mostly by natural gas, but actually finding — let alone building — new natural gas generation is a challenge.
“The hyperscalers are evolving from single data centers dependent on 60 to 100 megawatts to starting to look at multiple gigawatt-size data center parks that support a number of data centers in one location,” GE Vernova chief executive Scott Strazik said on a recent earnings call with analysts.
Building a new natural gas plant on the grid — and especially the transmission infrastructure to serve it — can be a prospect well beyond the build-it-now timelines of big technology companies with a desperate need for computing power.
“Thanks to 10-year delays in permitting for new transmission lines and connecting generation capacity to the grid, the most viable near-term option is behind-the-meter,” Tim Fist and Arnab Datta wrote in a report for the Institute for Progress, a technology and science policy think tank. In other words, one way to get around grid interconnection and intermittency issues is to have your own power plant.
“The economics of developing the power on site don't really hurt the data center economics that much. These things are just really profitable,” Carson Kearl, an analyst at Enverus, told me.
Some data centers have developed their own natural gas generation on site, such as XAi’s cluster in Memphis, Tennessee, which is powered by gas generators.
CoreWeave, meanwhile, is one of the most talked-about and well-funded companies in cloud computing, with access to a huge number of chips made by Nvidia, the leading designer of high-end processors, and which is also an investor in CoreWeave. But the chips can only perform when they’re powered, turning the data center business into a hunt for electricity wherever it can be found.
“Access to reliable power could be a roadblock towards the timely buildout” for a data center, Francois Poirier, the chief executive of TC Energy, the Canadian pipeline company, told analysts on an earnings call in August. “We’re seeing a shift in siting preferences from regions where big telecom infrastructure is in place to regions where energy and supply infrastructure is in place.”
CoreWeave, PSE&G, Onyx, and Atlantic Power’s owner, I Squared Capital, did not respond to requests for comment.
This situation has not come about for lack of effort on the part of the several electricity markets that have been trying to get new natural gas generation on the grid. PJM, for example, has been working to entice new supply, but even following a record auction for power capacity that paid out billions to natural gas plants, few producers have indicated their willingness to make large new investments. Texas has established a multibillion-dollar loan fund to provide low-cost financing to new natural gas plants.
While several large technology companies have announced their intention to buy nuclear power from refurbished or new plants, those deals will take at least several years to actually get any new electrons on the grid.
That leads data center developers like CoreWeave scrambling to find what power they can. In interviews, the company’s chief strategy officer Brian Venturo told Wired that they are avoiding Northern Virginia’s “data center alley” precisely because it’s “a food fight to get power.”
“There's a lot of growing backlash in that market around power usage,” he told Bloomberg. “We're kind of siting our plants and markets where our data centers and markets where we think the grid infrastructure is capable of handling it.”
And what better place than where the power already is.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
The spinoff of Lawrence Livermore National Lab has a new 10-point plan to get onto the grid by the 2030s.
One of fusion energy’s newest startups, Inertia Enterprises, is betting that the fastest route to commercial fusion runs through one of the field’s oldest ideas. The company, which raised a $450 million Series A earlier this year, plans to build a power plant based on the laser-driven fusion system pioneered at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory’s — the only tech yet to have produced more energy from a fusion reaction than it took to initiate it. Now, Inertia has shared its commercialization roadmap exclusively with Heatmap, detailing the 10 near-term capabilities it must demonstrate before this landmark experiment can become a grid-scale power plant by the mid-2030s.
The roadmap offers a route from the national lab’s impressive but commercially impractical fusion demonstrations to an economical power plant capable of producing electricity for the grid. At its core are a set of milestones — mostly aimed at developing cheap, mass-manufacturable components — that Inertia says it must clear before those individual systems can be integrated into a working plant. This road is not necessarily linear, however, as various teams will likely be working on many of these goals simultaneously.
At least the physics of Inertia’s approach are already proven, the startup’s CEO Jeff Lawson told me, pointing to the fusion experiments at Lawrence Livermore’s National Ignition Facility as a proof-of-concept. The lab’s demonstration of net energy gain caps more than six decades and $30 billion (in 2026 dollars) of U.S. fusion research. The remaining challenges, he argued, are all engineering-related, requiring “elbow grease, hard work, and smart people” rather than breakthroughs in fusion science.
"It seems to us like a startup or a commercial company of any variety should be focused on commercializing a proven scientific result, as opposed to actually trying to demonstrate the basic science to begin with," Lawson told me. Basic science, he argues, is better left to national labs and universities, where researchers can pursue "unbounded problems" that don’t align with the expectations and timelines of venture-backed startups.
Indeed, no fusion startup has yet achieved scientific breakeven, the milestone Lawrence Livermore first hit in 2022, and has since repeated numerous times. But leading players such as Commonwealth Fusion Systems and Helion Energy maintain that it’s only a matter of time before they validate the physics behind their own reactor designs, which they claim will be highly cost-competitive.
Lawson, on the other hand, readily acknowledged that Lawrence Livermore’s tech is uneconomical in its current form. His bet is simply that the more predictable path to a commercial reactor is to drive down the cost of the lab’s validated fusion approach, known as inertial confinement. This system relies on high-powered lasers firing at a millimeter-scale pellet of fusion fuel, compressing it to extreme temperatures and pressures until the atoms fuse. Today, the National Ignition Facility makes each individual fusion target by hand, a workable solution given that it only uses about a dozen per year.
That production model, however, isn’t remotely plausible for a grid-scale power plant. Because each fusion reaction lasts just a fraction of a billionth of a second, a commercial facility must fire its lasers at a fresh target about 10 times per second to generate continuous electricity — requiring the production of hundreds of millions of targets each year.
Scaling production to roughly a million pellets per day and making them inexpensive enough for commercial operation without compromising the strength or precision required for fusion ignition is central to Inertia’s roadmap. That includes goals five, seven, eight and nine — industrializing the manufacturing of the carbon shells that hold the fusion fuel, making the thin films that hold those carbon shells both durable and cheap, scaling up and automating fusion target assembly, and speeding up how fast targets are filled with the requisite deuterium-tritium fuel.
The other central focus of the roadmap is the laser system, which will ultimately consist of 1,000 individual units operating in concert to compress and heat the fusion fuel. Key priorities include reducing the system’s cost (goal two), dramatically increasing its firing cadence (goal three), and bolstering its durability to withstand high-intensity operations (goal four). Goal six also complements these efforts, calling for the development of a control system capable of tracking moving fusion targets to precisely align each laser shot.
Goals one and 10 bookend the journey with some broader milestones. The first focuses on increasing the fusion target’s energy gain — the ratio of fusion energy produced to laser energy delivered — to more than 25 times ignition. Today, the National Ignition Facility’s best-performing laser shot has yielded a gain of just over four times what it took to start the reaction. Goal 10 then zooms out to the ultimate objective: integrating all these technologies into a commercially viable power plant that can deliver either electricity or industrial heat to end customers.
To reach that point, Inertia has embarked on an industrial engineering hiring spree, recruiting folks with experience taking complex hardware systems from prototype to mass production, “not unlike the processes that are used in the semiconductor or consumer electronics world,” Lawson explained. The company has been making progress on its component development goals since the beginning of the year, he told me, and expects to announce the successful demonstration of a few of these milestones in the coming months. Lawson ultimately expects Inertia to complete the core components of its laser and target manufacturing systems by the middle of next year.
The team will spend the next two to three years integrating these individual pieces into two fully operational subsystems, a prototype laser system and a target manufacturing line. Around 2030, the company will begin combining those subsystems into a first-of-a-kind fusion power plant, which will also serve as the proving ground for the target chamber, tritium fuel breeding system, and power conversion system that turns fusion heat into electricity. By the middle of the next decade, Inertia aims to be generating power from this first plant, setting the stage for the company to build and connect additional grid-scale commercial power plants.
There are plenty of engineering trade-offs that the company will have to solve for. Take the decision around how to size the target chamber, for example. “If you make it bigger, your walls have an easier time and survive longer, but it’s more expensive. If you make it smaller, your walls have a tougher time because they’re closer to all the heat and energy that the fusion reaction is creating, but now your power plant costs less to build.”
But to Lawson, this represents exactly the type of problem Inertia was built to solve: complex engineering issues that come to the fore once scientists have demonstrated the fundamental physics are sound. He thinks other fusion companies may someday reach this stage, as well — though he’s unwilling to hazard a guess on exactly what approach or startup is best positioned to do so.
“There have been generations of scientists who’ve made their predictions about fusion energy and gotten it wrong,” he told me. “I’m not going to pretend to be smarter than them. All I’m here to say is, just knowing that one did work, we can commercialize it.”