Texas has the space for solar and data centers. So why the resistance?
Regarding “Texas grid experiments with new ideas amid data center boom,” (April 8): It is clear Texas needs to address the “not in my backyard” problem. We all agree that power plants are a good thing, in someone else’s neighborhood, that is. But drive along Loop 8 south of town, and you will see dozens of huge warehouses, thousands of acres of flat rooftops, all begging to be covered in solar arrays.
After all, if Texas farmers can see the value of another income stream on their grazing land, why not warehouse owners? And with all those warehouses already cluttering up the landscape, who would even notice another large facility full of computers? And if you want to move the electric power somewhere else, look at all the common-carrier railroad rights-of-way. Have Texas and New Mexico cut a deal with Union Pacific for the public good. Texas, stop complaining and get creative. The Texas “pro-business” Republicans have all that power, but not the brains to use it for all our advantage. Lead, follow or get out of the way.
Joe Williams, League City
Regarding “The world should be optimistic about our fossil fuel future | Opinion,” (March 30): The author conveniently ignores the strategic and economic vulnerabilities that come with continued dependence on a globally traded commodity. Recent tensions and blockades near the Strait of Hormuz show how easily hostile actors can disrupt supply and send prices soaring regardless of domestic production levels.
Bradley also argues that fossil fuels guarantee reliability, yet the industry itself is facing constraints. Utilities across the country report multi‑year delays in obtaining natural‑gas turbines, with manufacturers warning of backlogs that can push new plant construction years behind schedule, along with cost overruns typically paid by ratepayers. In contrast, cheaper utility‑scale solar can be built in as little as 18 months, giving communities faster, predictable capacity additions without exposure to global supply checkpoints.
Texas has already learned that over‑reliance on any single fuel, especially one vulnerable to freeze‑offs, price spikes and geopolitical shocks, creates fragility, not resilience. A diversified grid built on renewables, battery storage and efficiency reduces both physical and geopolitical risk.
True optimism comes from building an energy system that is more resilient, affordable and secure, not one that leaves us vulnerable to the next crisis in the Strait of Hormuz or the next turbine shortage.
Electric trucks are a relatively proven advancement and pose limited new safety concerns. Autonomous trucks, however, are a different matter entirely. Their safety, reliability, and readiness, especially on some of Texas’ busiest highways, have yet to be fully validated.
Across the country, autonomous vehicles, particularly robotaxis, have already caused serious traffic issues. In cities like San Francisco, driverless vehicles have stalled in intersections and interfered with emergency responders. These are real-world failures that raise important safety questions.
As a traffic safety attorney, I know that an 80,000-pound 18-wheeler presents far greater risks than a passenger vehicle. Even a small error by an autonomous system could have catastrophic consequences.
Before placing autonomous trucks on some of Texas’ most congested highways, it is fair to ask whether adequate, independently verified safety standards are in place and whether they are truly effective.