Four-step evaluation method
The protocol ensures that every published case study is source-backed, structurally consistent, and transparent about what was and was not evaluated.
Every case study begins with a publicly verifiable source: a company announcement, regulatory filing, utility document, academic publication, or government record. LGAI does not fabricate scenarios or use unverifiable claims.
Required criteria
The project is decomposed into its infrastructure layers: power and grid, BESS and storage, cooling and water, fiber and connectivity, site and land, community and workforce. Each layer is evaluated against what is publicly known.
Required criteria
Each case study is mapped against the LGAI five-layer framework to identify what the project does well, where gaps exist, and what questions remain unanswered. The analysis is structured, not promotional.
Required criteria
Every case study includes explicit boundaries: what LGAI evaluated, what it did not, what remains unverified, and what the reader should confirm independently. No case study implies a partnership, endorsement, or commercial relationship.
Required criteria
Published case studies
LG-CS-001
Google Saint-Ghislain BESS
READ STUDY →
LG-CS-002
SpaceX xAI Memphis BESS & Gas Turbines
READ STUDY →
LG-CS-006
Meta Project Waterworth Fiber Capacity
READ STUDY →
LG-CS-007
Meta Hyperion Rapid AI Campus
READ STUDY →
LG-CS-008
UC San Diego Campus Microgrid
READ STUDY →
LG-CS-009
CU Boulder Campus Energy Digital Twin
READ STUDY →
Structured evaluation