Company ordered to stop work at two sites in country, which has found itself at forefront of tech firms’ latest push

Behind a wire fence lies a vast gaping wound of earth. Before Google’s arrival a few months ago, an estimated quarter of a million trees occupied the 330 hectares (815 acres) of forest near the town of Muhos in rural northern Finland. Now they are all gone.

After the tech company illegally stripped the entire area to build a datacentre – taking even the top soil with it – all that remains is a vast expanse of mud indented with the trail marks of machinery, puddles and mounds of earth, roots and branches. Residents say that brown water flowing off the site is going into a stream that feeds the Oulujoki River.

• Google CEO Sundar Pichai said no when Trump asked him to rename the Atlantic Ocean, the president said.
• Trump has floated the idea of renaming either the Atlantic or the Pacific to the "Trump Ocean."
• Earlier this year, he issued orders to change the names of the Gulf of Mexico and Lake Ontario.

President Donald Trump's plan to rename the Atlantic Ocean hit choppy waters when he took it to Google.

At a Wednesday rally in South Carolina, Trump said he considered putting his name or "America" on one of the two oceans that flank the US: the Atlantic and the Pacific.

"I’m not going to put either Trump or America on any other ocean but these two," he told the crowd.

Then, he said, he called Google to ask about making the change on Google Maps.

The tech giant had previously changed its US labels for the Gulf of Mexico and Lake Ontario to the Gulf of America and Lake America after executive orders from the president.

"I spoke to a brilliant guy, Sundar. He heads all of Google," Trump said, referring to CEO Sundar Pichai. He also praised Google cofounder Sergey Brin, calling both men "totally brilliant guys," before joking that they were "still rattled from the Gulf."

Trump recounted putting his idea directly to Pichai: "Sundar, I’m thinking of the Atlantic Ocean. Can you handle it?"

"No, no, no. This time I’m not doing it," Trump quoted Pichai as replying. "Oceans are different, sir. They cover really a lot of countries. Please don't ask us to do that."

"So I'll probably pass," Trump told the crowd. "Should I pass it?" He then answered his own question: "I think let's keep it the Atlantic Ocean."

Google did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

It was not Trump's first ocean pitch. At a Tennessee rally in early October, he floated "Trump Ocean" or "Ocean of the Americas" for the Atlantic or Pacific.

He has also mused about renaming a river, calling New Mexico "New America," and rechristening the Strait of Hormuz the "Trump Strait."

While those ideas remain proposals, Google Maps did adopt "Gulf of America" and "Lake America" for US users after the names changed in federal records. Users in Mexico and Canada still see the original names for the gulf and lake, respectively. Users in the rest of the world see the original names, followed by Trump's new names in brackets.

The changes have created a dilemma for people who make maps for an international audience. "The issue of international acceptance is also a factor, as some nations may not accept it," Joseph Wright, CEO of Replogle Globes, told Business Insider's Joshua Nelken-Zitser after the lake order.

"We sell globes worldwide."

For now, Trump's Atlantic idea appears to have sunk before it reached Google Maps.

O presidente dos Estados Unidos, Donald Trump, afirmou que Sundar Pichai, CEO do Google, recusou seu pedido para renomear o Oceano Atlântico como “Oceano Americano”.

“Eu só gosto de dois oceanos, o Oceano Atlântico e o Oceano Pacífico. Não vou colocar nem Trump nem América no nome de nenhum outro oceano além desses dois. Então, analisamos seriamente o Oceano Atlântico, e liguei para o Google Maps, que foi realmente ótimo com o lago e muito bom também com o golfo”, afirmou o presidente americano durante comício na Carolina do Sul nesta quarta-feira (21).

Segundo Trump, a empresa explicou que os oceanos “são diferentes” porque abrangem muitos países.

“Eu disse: ‘Sundar, estou pensando no Oceano Atlântico. Você consegue fazer isso?’ ‘Não, não, não, desta vez não vou fazer isso.’ Ele disse: ‘Os oceanos são diferentes, senhor. Eles abrangem muitos países. Muitos mesmo. Por favor, não nos peça para fazer isso.’”

O Google, controlado pela Alphabet, mudou o nome do Golfo do México para “Golfo da América” em seus mapas para usuários nos Estados Unidos depois que Trump ordenou a alteração, em janeiro de 2025.

Trump assina decreto para renomear o Lago Ontário como Lago América | LIVE CNN

• Newcomers like Kevin O'Leary face skepticism due to a lack of experience in data center development.
• Bernstein analysts dubbed O'Leary and others "bragawatts."
• Most announced projects will never happen. "Press releases are cheap…concrete is not."

The AI industry has a problem with bragging.

Companies are announcing enormous new data centers to power the AI boom. Some promise facilities bigger than anything the industry has built before.

There's just one problem: Most of these projects may never happen.

Bernstein Research analyzed thousands of planned US data centers and concluded that only about 35% of the announced capacity is likely to get built. That's roughly 170 gigawatts of data center capacity out of a total of almost 500 gigawatts.

The rest? A significant chunk of it belongs to a category the industry has a wonderfully dismissive name for: "Bragawatts." These are ambitious announcements, often from newcomers with little experience building data centers, that have a slim chance of becoming reality.

"Press releases are cheap…concrete is not," Bernstein analysts wrote in a research note.

Bernstein began its analysis with more than 7,000 data center projects across North America, drawing on information from Aterio, a company that tracks construction through satellite imagery, permits, and other records. The analysts narrowed that to more than 5,000 projects (partly by excluding those already canceled).

Then they assessed the chances of these remaining projects being completed. The analysts considered factors such as whether construction had started, whether electricity was available, and whether the companies involved had successfully built data centers before.

The results revealed a striking divide.

The 'bragawatt brigade'

Experienced operators including Amazon, Google, Microsoft, and Meta landed at the top. Bernstein gave these companies perfect scores of 5 out of 5 for their development credentials. Other data center specialists, such as Digital Realty, Equinix, and CoreSite, got top marks, too.

O'Leary Digital, associated with celebrity investor Kevin O'Leary, ended up at the bottom, with a credibility score of 0.35 out of 5, according to Bernstein. His company has announced 15 gigawatts of data center projects, and Bernstein estimates that only 489 megawatts, or about 3%, will actually materialize.

"Sorry, Kevin," the analysts wrote.

Although the term "bragawatts" has been doing the rounds in the data center industry lately, it's unclear who coined it, Bernstein analyst Madison Rezaei told me.

"I wish I could take credit for that," she said. "I believe I originally heard it from an Equinix executive, but I don't think he owned it either."

She said that while some ambitious newcomers could succeed, they haven't yet demonstrated they can deliver.

"It's not that all of these guys are sort of terrible and not going to deliver, but we just have lower confidence because we don't know them," Rezaei said.

O'Leary Digital responds

O'Leary Digital disputed Bernstein's assessment, saying the research doesn't account for substantial work that occurs before construction begins.

While acknowledging that O'Leary Digital is a young company, CEO Paul Palandjian said the team has decades of experience building major infrastructure projects and that its proposed 15 gigawatts of capacity would be built in stages over several years.

The company said it has secured binding agreements covering about 11,000 acres in Utah and 13,000 acres in Alberta, obtained a 30-year development agreement in Utah, and made progress on planning, engineering, and permits at both sites. It also said the projects would generate their own electricity.

The company said its early development work is funded, additional capital is committed to reaching key milestones, and experienced engineering and construction partners are involved.

"We would rather be judged on milestones than on a model," Palandjian said.

'An announcement in search of a project'

Other low scorers in the "bragawatt" brigade included Vermaland and Joule Capital Partners, according to Bernstein analysis based on Aterio data.

Joule has announced 50 data center projects with a combined capacity of 11.7 gigawatts. Bernstein estimates that only about 11% of that capacity will actually get built. Almost all of Joule's planned capacity remains at the announcement stage, with little evidence of construction progress or of major customers committing to use the facilities, Bernstein wrote in a July note to investors.

The analysts gave Joule a credibility score of 2.05 out of 5, placing it among the lowest-ranked developers in its database.

"An announcement in search of a project," the analysts wrote.

Vermaland has announced plans for a massive data center project in Arizona. Bernstein estimates that only 4% of its proposed 2.2 gigawatts of capacity will get built. The company is primarily a landowner, not a data center developer. Its proposed $33 billion La Osa project near Eloy had already been sharply scaled back amid local opposition and without construction approval. In late August, regulators formally rejected the project. Even before that, the analysts gave Vermaland a credibility score of 0.75 out of 5.

Joule and Vermaland didn't respond to emails seeking comment this week.

A yawning gap for data centers

Sergio Toro, CEO of Aterio, sees similar patterns in his firm's voluminous, detailed data.

Aterio's tracking shows that roughly 30 to 40 gigawatts of new data center capacity get announced each month. Yet only about 7 gigawatts begin construction each month, while 2 to 3 gigawatts actually start operating.

This leaves a yawning gap.

Many announced projects get withdrawn before construction begins — and before real money has been spent.

"They just make the announcement, but they didn't get their approvals. Or they make multiple filings in multiple locations to see which one gets selected," Toro told me. "That's why we track with satellite if there's real movement on the ground or not."

Indeed, Bernstein analysts wrote recently that the amount of "stranded" data center capacity has surged. These are projects that are either canceled, delayed, or not approved.

The AI boom's three tiers

Toro sees three broad groups competing to build AI infrastructure.

At the top are the established technology giants, including Amazon, Microsoft, and Google. They've built data centers for decades and generally deliver on their commitments. Most of their projects will get done, he said.

In the middle are "neoclouds," newer companies such as CoreWeave that rent out computing power specifically for AI. Although they're more vulnerable to financing problems and delays, many are making solid progress, especially because some of these players already have access to electricity.

"We see them advancing quite well," Toro said. "Sometimes we see some delays, but it's not something significant or any kind of big capacity that is at risk."

Then come the newcomers making extraordinary promises. That's where most delays and cancellations happen, Toro said.

Even Amazon needs a backup plan

Not every project that disappears was a fantasy, though. Even a top player like Amazon struggles sometimes to secure electricity and other supplies on time for these huge projects.

Business Insider's Eugene Kim reported exclusively this week on the challenges Amazon faces with its record AI buildout.

The biggest, most experienced tech companies deliberately pursue more potential data center capacity than they need because they know some developments will fail or get delayed.

Major AI companies were committing to three or four times the space and electricity they needed over the following two years, Jeffrey Moerdler, a data center lawyer, estimated during an interview with Bernstein analysts.

His reasoning: Of data center projects that haven't started construction, roughly a third will arrive on schedule, another third will be delayed, and the remainder won't happen.

Rezaei and Toro estimate that the top players don't over-commit that much — more like double the capacity they need at most.

The strategy provides a "Plan B," as Toro put it, in case of delays involving electricity, equipment, permits, local opposition, or other factors.

Texas has a ghost problem

This helps explain another extraordinary number.

Data center companies have requested connections for roughly 450 gigawatts of electricity demand on Texas' main power grid, more than five times the grid's roughly 85 gigawatts of existing capacity, according to Toro and others. 

Many of those requests are placeholders rather than firm construction plans. Toro calls them "ghost projects."

These speculative projects clog the waiting lists for electricity connections, making the electricity shortage look a lot worse than it actually is.

"Developers routinely spam projects across several sites, and many are speculative builds with no customer yet," Ryan McEntush, a partner at venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, wrote in a recent blog. "Often these new developers have never even plugged in a GPU, let alone a power plant."

Texas has paused applications to review and weed out projects that aren't serious. Toro, from Aterio, expects this to favor the established players at the expense of the bragawatts.

The real AI boom

None of this means the AI infrastructure boom is imaginary.

Aterio tracks thousands of buildings, including major projects already under construction. Bernstein estimates that nearly 80% of the capacity the largest technology companies are directly developing is credible.

And when speculative projects disappear, Rezaei doesn't expect a wave of unpaid debt. Many will fail before building begins, the stage when developers borrow serious money through project financing.

Some of those missing data centers were never really coming in the first place.

Sign up for the AI Insider newsletter here. Reach out to me via email at abarr@businessinsider.com

• Sundar Pichai said he uses AI agents to track Google's model development and internal discussions.
• The bots summarize updates and monitor how Google's computing resources are used.
• Pichai said humans still make consequential decisions about resource allocation.

Even Google's CEO needs help keeping up with Google.

On the Sources podcast released Wednesday, Sundar Pichai described to host Alex Heath how he delegates some of the information-gathering that comes with running the tech giant.

“It could easily take me an hour a day to kind of catch up, what's happened in the last 24 hours, right?" Pichai said. "But now I have agents running which summarize and bring that information to me. I can still go deeper, and I do so often."

Pichai said that his AI agents give him a way to "understand the model development arc," figure out how Google's computing resources are being used, and follow threads spread across numerous internal chat groups without having to read through every conversation himself.

“Similarly, there are agents with telemetry into our compute usage by product area, efficiency, utilization, and giving me inputs and insights, you know," Pichai added. "I think it's made all of us, you know, be better at what we do."

That doesn't mean Pichai has handed over the important calls to AI. He said humans — including himself — remain directly involved in consequential decisions about allocating computing resources.

Managing agents is becoming a skill in its own right, giving some workers a new set of headaches, from checking the bots' output to preventing them from duplicating work or straying beyond their assignments. Business Insider previously reported that the need to manage agents is making everyone a boss without higher pay.

Delegating to bots doesn't necessarily make work easier, either. A Cisco engineering director who manages more than 10 agents told Business Insider that overseeing them involves more task switching and can make work feel more intense without shortening his days.

For the Google CEO, however, continuous work is a plus.

"So because your agents, they're running in the cloud, they're running 24/7, they have your context, and so they can pick up things where you left off," Pichai said. "It's a continuum there. By the time it's doing that, you would be applying yourself to the next problem and so on."