When the first wave of these datacenter stories came out, the utilities complained that they couldn't finance the work because the data centers refused to commit to paying for them over the longer term, leaving other ratepayers on the hook for the investment.

This seems to further confirm that, though now the data centers are being portrayed as the victims in this.

The sentence immediately following your quote:

> securing grid-connected power now often requires developers to post substantial letters of credit, security deposits, or sign take-or-pay commitments to fund the generation built to serve their load.

The question is, if they couldn't commit to paying the utility, how can they finance building their own independant grid equivalent? Did they find some other sucker to take on the risk?

> The grid is a shared resource, used by enterprise and individuals. If some class of consumers demand an outsized share of that resource, they should pay an outsized share of its maintenance and development. I don't see that happening.

That makes sense up until you realize that the data centers aren't just burning watts for fun. They're providing a service that is in extremely high demand to a very high amount of those other electricity customers.

> It's as if trucking companies flooded the highways with so many trucks that people couldn't commute to work anymore.

And those trucks are delivering products to the stores those commuters shop at.