The International Energy Agency (IEA) has just published a comprehensive report on the nexus between AI and energy consumption. I would encourage you all to give it a read, or, you know, use AI to summarize it for you. It represents our reality today.

The largest tech companies in the world spent over US$400 billion on data centres in 2025, and this number is expected to jump by 75% in 2026! The total capital expenditure of just five tech companies is right now larger than the entire global investment in oil and natural gas production.

This is the new fuel for the world economy, and we're going to need to figure out how to supply enough energy.

According to the report, an individual server rack within an advanced data centre might only be the size of a refrigerator. But by 2027, it is not inconceivable that it could have a peak power demand equivalent to that of 65 households.

The good news is that much of this demand is being met by renewables. Renewables are the fastest-growing source of electricity for data centres. The report estimates total generating capacity increasing at an average of 22% per year between 2024 and 2030, which will meet nearly 50% of the growth in data centre demand.

If you'd like to download a copy of the full report, go here.

Cover photo by Claudio Schwarz on Unsplash

As a developer, or other market participant, it's easy to be pessimistic about the current housing market in Toronto. It's a challenge to make new projects work. That's suboptimal from a business and city-building standpoint, and for Type A personalities who thrive on accomplishment. But today, let's look at some of the positives and opportunities that are already here or are likely to happen going forward.

• If you're a developer who has been doing the same thing for decades, now is the opportunity to rethink your model and innovate. Why? Because the old model isn't working, and who knows if it ever will again when the fun times return.

• Already, we are seeing a renewed focus on end-user buyers and renters. This is healthy for the market. It signals a return to fundamentals and a deeper focus on our customers. What kind of homes do people actually want to live in?

• At the same time, if you're in need of a home, now is an excellent time to buy or rent. Similarly, for developers, now is an excellent time to buy sites, provided you've found a project that works or you have the balance sheet to be patient.

• Modular construction and mass timber are getting a lot more airtime. They aren't a silver bullet in this market, but these things take time and it's positive that more developers and builders are exploring and testing out their options.

• Crisis forces the hand of government. Already, we have seen a new HST rebate, cuts to development charges, and other helpful measures. I also think cities are more receptive to negotiation. If you have a wild and crazy idea that just might work, go talk to them!

• As incumbents struggle with their legacy assets and deals, the market is creating more space for new entrants and fresh ideas. I have no doubt that we will see a new generation of developers and entrepreneurs emerge during the next cycle.

Never let a good crisis go to waste, as they say.

Would you add anything to this list?

Cover photo by Lennon Kong on Unsplash

One generalized truism is that European cities are walkable and transit-supportive, and North American cities are not. This is not universally true, but it's often thought to be directionally true. However, a recent paper called "Car Dependency in Urban Accessibility" reveals that this may not be as true as we think.

The study introduces something called a Car Dependency Index (or CDI). What it effectively does is compare accessibility to jobs and services within a city by car versus public transit. They did this for 18 European and North American cities, and here's what they found:

A positive score (red on the map) means that a car can access more opportunities than public transportation, and a negative score (blue on the map) means the opposite. What's not surprising is how car-dependent the outskirts of most cities are, including European cities. Car dependency was high in over 70% of the urban territories that they analyzed.

What is more surprising to me is that most cities don't have much, if any, blue. The best-case scenario seems to be a lot of white (which represents accessibility parity between cars and public transit). Hmm. Does Manhattan really not have any blue? The glaring exception is Paris and, to a lesser extent, Zurich, though keep in mind these are only city proper boundaries.

Another finding is that car dependency remains a primary driver of car ownership, even when accounting for income. What this means is that if you took two people with the exact same income, one living in transit-rich Paris and the other living in the suburbs of Rome, the person in Rome is much more likely to own a car.

Once again, this supports the obvious fact that if we design cities so that they're inconvenient to navigate without a car, well, then more people will get cars. It's not easy to build a transit network that can compete. Individual lines won't do it. The key word is "network." And you need the right land-use policies to support it.

Cover photo by Alessio Ferretti on Unsplash

Charts from "Car Dependency in Urban Accessibility."