Ask A Genius 1264: AI and Energy Demands, and Pete Hegseth
Author(s): Rick Rosner and Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Ask A Genius
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/02/14
Rick Rosner: Now, regarding Pete HegSeth, a guy who was confirmed by a tied Senate vote of 54–50, with JD Vance (the Vice President) breaking the tie—he was confirmed as Secretary of Defense by the smallest margin in history. However, he has well-documented alcohol problems and even paid off a woman $50,000 who had accused him of sexual assault. Moreover, he was only a major; he was in and out of the reserves and retired with that rank. In the officer ranks, one progresses from second lieutenant to first lieutenant, then captain and major. There are further ranks beyond major—lieutenant colonel, colonel, and then the higher echelons—but he never advanced past major. Previous Secretaries of Defense, such as Lloyd Austin (the outgoing Secretary), had extensive military careers: Austin served 40 years, and the two before him each served 21 years.
Hegseth has eight years on and off. I hope we don’t have to evaluate whether he’s good at his job, but it seems like a travesty. As for the presidency, Biden was far too quiet; he seemed to want people to discover the good things his administration was doing without any promotion. Part of the problem is that he appeared unwell and aged. Consider this: Harrison Ford is roughly the same age as Biden (around 80 or 81), yet he stars as a superhero president in an upcoming Marvel movie and still looks vibrant. Also in his late 70s or 80s, Tom Selleck sports a full head of hair and doesn’t show that paper-thin, aged skin—he’s still articulate and spry.
In contrast, Biden looked and sounded lacklustre; his team should have done more to improve his presentation, perhaps even considering steroids or plastic surgery (he has already had hair transplants and may have had an eyelift) if they hadn’t been so indecisive. Meanwhile, Trump took an entirely different approach by saying a great deal and proposing many ideas—many of them ridiculous and some even effective enough to be spun as successes, even if only superficially.
For example, the idea of turning Canada into the 51st state is absurd. Canada isn’t a single state; it comprises ten provinces—British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Newfoundland, and Labrador—plus territories. Each province is comparable to a U.S. state, so Canada would, if ever divided, yield multiple states. Moreover, the proposal that the U.S. should impose a 25% tariff on Canadian goods to halt issues like fentanyl trafficking or illegal immigration is misguided since very few fentanyl and few illegal entrants come through Canada.
Also, Meta has announced a two‐gigawatt computing facility in rural Louisiana. The facility is planned to have about 4,000,000 square feet of interior space—though that’s not even a full square mile—while the entire campus might cover a couple of square miles and supply two gigawatts of power. Meta intends to invest roughly $10 billion in this project, a substantial sum in an era of billions and trillions in circulation. Two gigawatts is enough electricity to power roughly one million homes, and the facility is being built in Richland Parish in northeast Louisiana, about 10 to 15 miles from the Mississippi River. This raises the question: won’t they have to use nuclear power to meet such a huge energy demand?
While some—like Eric Schmidt—suggest using Canadian hydroelectric power, running hydro from Canada 1,400 miles south seems impractical. It appears more likely that nuclear power will be employed, especially since northeastern Louisiana is a swampy area near the Mississippi, and new-generation reactors may not require as much water cooling. Meta’s overall investment might eventually reach about $65 billion.
In contrast, the initiative Trump claimed credit for yesterday was a $500 billion push to develop AI in America—a plan I support. However, the required infrastructure is equally disruptive. Suppose we assume that one gigawatt is needed for every $5 billion in AI development. In that case, we’re looking at roughly 100 gigawatts in total. Since each gigawatt can power about one million homes, that’s enough energy for 100 million homes. However, based on Statista, there are approximately 145 million homes in the U.S., meaning the power required for this AI development would be roughly equivalent to supplying electricity to about one-third of all American households. Please note the source for the 145 million figure—while some sites like HouseGrail are unreliable, Statista provides more credible data.
If that includes apartments and similar dwellings, it covers any dwellings. That’s a tremendous amount of energy. And providing that energy is going to be disruptive.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
In-Sight Publishing 