Data centers require electricity.
And as we have talked about before, total electricity consumption by US data centers is forecasted to reach somewhere between 6.7 - 12% of total consumption by 2028 (figure from the US Department of Energy). Last year, Goldman Sachs also estimated that data center power demand would grow 160% by 2030.
I kind of wonder if these numbers might be understated — given our current AI bubble — but whatever the case may be, we're going to need a lot more electricity going forward. There's no such thing as a wealthy, low-energy nation.
Given all of this, I'm struggling to understand why the US would move to cancel what would have been the largest solar project in North America. Esmeralda 7, which was to be located on 62,300 acres of federal land to the north-west of Las Vegas, was expected to be a 6.2 gigawatt project — enough to power nearly 2 million homes.
Instead, the Department of the Interior seems to be determined to accelerate fossil fuel projects, and help China maintain its clear dominance in renewables. I guess that makes sense in some world if you think renewal energy projects are a "scam."
Cover photo by American Public Power Association on Unsplash
The H-1B visa is a nonimmigrant employer-sponsored program that allows US companies to hire foreign nationals in "specialty occupations," typically requiring a bachelor's degree or higher. The vast majority of these occupations are computer-related (69% of petition filings according to 2017 data). And they are disproportionately filled with high-skilled talent coming from two countries: China and India (85% of filings for the same time period).
So this week's announcement that H-1B visas will now require employers to pay $100,000 per year per visa is a direct way of saying, "we want fewer people from China and India working in tech in the US."
But as with most economic policies, it's more than that. And we already have the research. In 2020 (and then in 2023), Britta Glennon of the University of Pennsylvania (my alma mater) studied the effects of restricting high-skilled labor on offshoring. More specifically, she looked at two visa supply shock periods: the first being a 2004 cap that lowered H-1B visas by 70% and the second being a 2008–2009 lottery program which generated a random negative shock.
What she uncovered in the first case was that the 2004 policy change increased foreign affiliate employment by 27%! And in the second case, a random one-percentage-point drop in H-1B visa supply caused an increase in the foreign affiliate growth rate of between 12 and 16%. Said differently, when H-1B visas become harder to get, US tech companies simply hire more people in other countries.
More specifically, they ramp up hiring in these three countries: China, India, and Canada. China and India are what you might call a direct channel. The company just opens or expands an existing office by hiring the people that would have otherwise come to the US. Canada, on the other hand, largely serves as an indirect channel. We become a conveniently-located conduit through which US firms can hire the same high-skilled humans from China and India (because we don't restrict high-skilled talent in the same way).
So another way to interpret this week's announcement is that the US is making deliberate moves to increase high-skilled tech employment in Canada, China, and India. That's a good thing for these countries. Of course, the real opportunity is not as an affiliate or back-office location for US firms. The real opportunity is to harness this high-skilled talent and empower them to start their own companies in the countries where they will now live.
Next to the US, China is likely in the best position to do that. But it’s also Canada’s opportunity to squander.
Update: After clearly stating that it would be an annual fee of $100k and that the big tech companies all "love it," it appears the US has backpedaled. It will now be a one-time fee of $100k paid at the time of petition filing. This is still a lot. Currently, the fees are in the hundreds of dollars.

Based on a recent study by the National Association of Realtors (which is a study based on realtor surveys), foreign buyers bought approximately $56 billion worth of residential real estate in the US between April 2024 and March 2025. This represents about 2.5% of all existing-home sales and is the first year-over-year increase since 2017.

Data centers require electricity.
And as we have talked about before, total electricity consumption by US data centers is forecasted to reach somewhere between 6.7 - 12% of total consumption by 2028 (figure from the US Department of Energy). Last year, Goldman Sachs also estimated that data center power demand would grow 160% by 2030.
I kind of wonder if these numbers might be understated — given our current AI bubble — but whatever the case may be, we're going to need a lot more electricity going forward. There's no such thing as a wealthy, low-energy nation.
Given all of this, I'm struggling to understand why the US would move to cancel what would have been the largest solar project in North America. Esmeralda 7, which was to be located on 62,300 acres of federal land to the north-west of Las Vegas, was expected to be a 6.2 gigawatt project — enough to power nearly 2 million homes.
Instead, the Department of the Interior seems to be determined to accelerate fossil fuel projects, and help China maintain its clear dominance in renewables. I guess that makes sense in some world if you think renewal energy projects are a "scam."
Cover photo by American Public Power Association on Unsplash
The H-1B visa is a nonimmigrant employer-sponsored program that allows US companies to hire foreign nationals in "specialty occupations," typically requiring a bachelor's degree or higher. The vast majority of these occupations are computer-related (69% of petition filings according to 2017 data). And they are disproportionately filled with high-skilled talent coming from two countries: China and India (85% of filings for the same time period).
So this week's announcement that H-1B visas will now require employers to pay $100,000 per year per visa is a direct way of saying, "we want fewer people from China and India working in tech in the US."
But as with most economic policies, it's more than that. And we already have the research. In 2020 (and then in 2023), Britta Glennon of the University of Pennsylvania (my alma mater) studied the effects of restricting high-skilled labor on offshoring. More specifically, she looked at two visa supply shock periods: the first being a 2004 cap that lowered H-1B visas by 70% and the second being a 2008–2009 lottery program which generated a random negative shock.
What she uncovered in the first case was that the 2004 policy change increased foreign affiliate employment by 27%! And in the second case, a random one-percentage-point drop in H-1B visa supply caused an increase in the foreign affiliate growth rate of between 12 and 16%. Said differently, when H-1B visas become harder to get, US tech companies simply hire more people in other countries.
More specifically, they ramp up hiring in these three countries: China, India, and Canada. China and India are what you might call a direct channel. The company just opens or expands an existing office by hiring the people that would have otherwise come to the US. Canada, on the other hand, largely serves as an indirect channel. We become a conveniently-located conduit through which US firms can hire the same high-skilled humans from China and India (because we don't restrict high-skilled talent in the same way).
So another way to interpret this week's announcement is that the US is making deliberate moves to increase high-skilled tech employment in Canada, China, and India. That's a good thing for these countries. Of course, the real opportunity is not as an affiliate or back-office location for US firms. The real opportunity is to harness this high-skilled talent and empower them to start their own companies in the countries where they will now live.
Next to the US, China is likely in the best position to do that. But it’s also Canada’s opportunity to squander.
Update: After clearly stating that it would be an annual fee of $100k and that the big tech companies all "love it," it appears the US has backpedaled. It will now be a one-time fee of $100k paid at the time of petition filing. This is still a lot. Currently, the fees are in the hundreds of dollars.

Based on a recent study by the National Association of Realtors (which is a study based on realtor surveys), foreign buyers bought approximately $56 billion worth of residential real estate in the US between April 2024 and March 2025. This represents about 2.5% of all existing-home sales and is the first year-over-year increase since 2017.

56% of these purchases were by people who legally reside in the US but who are not US citizens. And the remaining 44% were by foreign buyers who live abroad.
Here are the top 5 countries of origin:
China: 15%; 11,700; $13.7 billion
Canada: 14%; 10,900; $6.2 billion
Mexico: 8%; 6,200; $4.4 billion
India: 6%; 4,700; $2.2 billion
United Kingdom: 4%; 3,100; $2 billion
And here are the top 5 destinations:
Florida: 21%
California: 15%
Texas: 10%
New York: 7%
Arizona: 5%
What is clear is that foreign demand has fallen dramatically since 2017. This is likely due to stronger capital controls on money leaving China, a stronger US dollar, rising home prices, and other factors. It's worth noting that this data is up until March 2025 — so right before "Liberation Day." It'll be interesting to see the effects of the current geopolitical climate on next year's data.
Also interesting is the fact that if you go back to the 2008 financial crisis, Canadians made up almost a quarter of all foreign buyers. Let's call it 2008 to 2013. This is not surprising. Our economy fared better during the crisis and the Canadian and US dollars were near parity. It was an ideal time for Canadians to buy and, those who did, ultimately benefited from USD appreciation.

Foreigners buying homes tends not to be politically popular, especially when people are concerned about housing affordability. So I can't imagine that too many people are fussed by the fall off in demand since 2017. Still, it's a bellwether for global capital flows, confidence in the US economy, and wealth being created — or not be created — abroad.
Charts from the National Association of Realtors; cover photo by Colin Lloyd on Unsplash
56% of these purchases were by people who legally reside in the US but who are not US citizens. And the remaining 44% were by foreign buyers who live abroad.
Here are the top 5 countries of origin:
China: 15%; 11,700; $13.7 billion
Canada: 14%; 10,900; $6.2 billion
Mexico: 8%; 6,200; $4.4 billion
India: 6%; 4,700; $2.2 billion
United Kingdom: 4%; 3,100; $2 billion
And here are the top 5 destinations:
Florida: 21%
California: 15%
Texas: 10%
New York: 7%
Arizona: 5%
What is clear is that foreign demand has fallen dramatically since 2017. This is likely due to stronger capital controls on money leaving China, a stronger US dollar, rising home prices, and other factors. It's worth noting that this data is up until March 2025 — so right before "Liberation Day." It'll be interesting to see the effects of the current geopolitical climate on next year's data.
Also interesting is the fact that if you go back to the 2008 financial crisis, Canadians made up almost a quarter of all foreign buyers. Let's call it 2008 to 2013. This is not surprising. Our economy fared better during the crisis and the Canadian and US dollars were near parity. It was an ideal time for Canadians to buy and, those who did, ultimately benefited from USD appreciation.

Foreigners buying homes tends not to be politically popular, especially when people are concerned about housing affordability. So I can't imagine that too many people are fussed by the fall off in demand since 2017. Still, it's a bellwether for global capital flows, confidence in the US economy, and wealth being created — or not be created — abroad.
Charts from the National Association of Realtors; cover photo by Colin Lloyd on Unsplash
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog