5 ms·

the administration is allowing datacenters to be utilities and build their own power plants, nuclear or otherwise. the excess can be sold to the grid. it's re

the administration is allowing datacenters to be utilities and build their own power plants, nuclear or otherwise. the excess can be sold to the grid. it's really the only way forward. seems like a win/win.

testing22321 10mo ago
Even better, don’t just “allow”, but force them to create power plants equal in size to their usage. Must be renewable.
- theultdev 10mo ago
  I don't care what they use. Nuclear preferred but whatever works for the area. Natural gas is the main reason our emissions have gone down as it replaces coal. Also I don't think forcing is necessary. These datacenters want to, why impose more regulations.
  - deleted 10mo ago
    [deleted]
  - testing22321 10mo ago
    Your grandchildren will care if they use coal or natural gas. Aim higher. Do better.
    - theultdev 10mo ago
      Yes they will, they will prefer natural gas of those two. The main reason of emission reductions as we transition off of coal. I really hope we go all in on nuclear though, with some natural gas and get rid of the windmills. Solar, hydro, geothermal can stay where it makes sense. Unfortunately our skies and land are littered with windmills made out of unrecyclable polymers that are terrible for raptors. Queue someone quoting how many cats kill birds like competing with the top predator is a good thing, or ignoring the fact that we put these in raptors' wind streams and cats don't hunt those large birds (which are usually endangered) Our kids deserve nuclear.
      - LunaSea 10mo ago
        > Unfortunately our skies and land are littered with windmills made out of unrecyclable polymers that are terrible for raptors. Like our lands and oceans are not littered with drilling platforms and fracking stations already
        gowld 10mo ago
        non-responsive to the parent comment. Oil is not nuclear.
        LunaSea 10mo ago
        Incorrect, parent comment mentioned gas.
        theultdev 10mo ago
        Ideally we could get rid of everything for nuclear, but that's not today's reality. The truth is natural gas is needed to transition off of coal and has helped reduce emissions. That being said, I would like to reduce those drilling rigs. However I don't see their existence justification for more damage by putting up windmills. It's classic whataboutism. Both things can be harmful. Below is an exercise to help point it out. > Like our lands and oceans are not littered ... already Without the "what about" subject, this statement looks bad doesn't it? That reasoning is no different than the people who see trash on the ground and throw more because it's already trashed, so why not.
      - triceratops 10mo ago
        Aah a True Bird Lover. Wants to protect birds from windmills. Doesn't care how many bird habitats oil drilling destroys. Hasn't seen any pictures of oil coated birds from the Exxon Valdez or the Deepwater Horizon. > made out of unrecyclable polymers Does this mean you support banning plastic straws too? All plastics are essentially unrecyclable. > Our kids deserve nuclear. By all means. If it can be done as cheaply as wind and solar.
cactusplant7374 10mo ago
How many times has that happened so far?
- theultdev 10mo ago
  Google is working with Kairos Power for nuclear reactors at their datacenters. Microsoft struck a deal with Three Mile Island to get a reactor up. And Amazon is working with Talen Energy. Might be others I missed.
  - cactusplant7374 10mo ago
    So the public is expected to deal with higher prices after every data center build? The work can't be done in advance?
    - JumpCrisscross 10mo ago
      > the public is expected to deal with higher prices after every data center build? No. But the states that let companies put trillions of dollars of datacentre and power hardware in their borders will probably reap benefits from it for decades to come regardless of how AI pans out.
      - anthem2025 10mo ago
        [dead]
joelthelion 10mo ago
> it's really the only way forward. seems like a win/win. There is another way forward, which is not building these data centers, forcing AI companies to use power more efficiently, and use the excess energy production capacity towards the energy transition in order to avoid the worst consequences of climate change. It's not going to happen, at least not right now, but it's clearly what we ought to do. ChatGPT can wait.
- theultdev 10mo ago
  That's not a way forward, that's standing still. I'm all for more efficient usage, and it's in AI companies best interest to do so to minimize costs. ...but it's a growing industry, it will need more power.
  - joelthelion 10mo ago
    No, it's not standing still. It's setting the priorities straight. Completing the energy transition is an enormous undertaking. Building huge data centers is a distraction, not a way forward.
- pureagave 10mo ago
  I think you may be missing the whole national security part of the AI race. This isn't just about asking a computer what recipe you can cook tonight with the items in your fridge. In many ways it is similar to the race to build a nuclear bomb. We may individually not like that, but we might individually be best served to live in the nation that got there first.
  - joelthelion 10mo ago
    Building gigantic data centers doesn't help in that respect. The data centers are there to do inference at scale, not cutting edge research.
  - anthem2025 10mo ago
    [dead]
robotnikman 10mo ago
Oh nice, that basically solves the issue. I've been hearing horror stories of datacenters overloading existing grids and raising prices for the average person, If datacenters generate their own power that basically solves the issue. Out here in AZ, solar combined with battery would be perfect for datacenters.
- onemoresoop 10mo ago
  > If datacenters generate their own power that basically solves the issue. If they do so cleanly otherwise they'll dump their externalities on the rest of us.
ericmay 10mo ago
"Allowing" doesn't necessarily translate into "doing". Many people are seeing higher energy prices which are at least in part or wholly due to data center loads on local power grids. In Ohio, for example, we just skated by with a ruling from our Public Utilities Commission which effectively required data centers to pay for their impact on local grids [1]. Additionally, while these data centers do provide some jobs, where states are giving them grants, loans, infrastructure improvement, or otherwise they are ultimately extractive developments (like parking lots) where the wealth flows out from states like Ohio and flows in to states where the CEOs and HQ sit (California, New York, etc.). I can tell you that people in Ohio across the political spectrum are not happy. We are losing good farm land, utilizing water, and our power costs are going up for negligible benefits at best. But hey now our state representatives can say "Meta is coming to central Ohio". Meanwhile costs are going up and we still have to ship produce in from other countries and states. If our representatives and governors office thought about this all for about 2 seconds they would require any data center development to include 2x the number of corporate jobs over a certain income threshold or else not approve the development. If the developers balk, then fine it's not like we want them anyway. The Trump Administration (and for that matter probably any admin) isn't doing jack shit. [1] https://www.news5cleveland.com/news/state/ohio-regulators-turn-down-appeal-ok-utilitys-data-center-billing-plan https://www.news5cleveland.com/news/state/ohio-regulators-tu...
deleted 10mo ago
[deleted]
thinkingtoilet 10mo ago
The real win/win would be to require them to build enough solar to power the operation.
- nomel 10mo ago
  > to build enough solar to power the operation The most cost effective way to run a datacenter at some definition of "pedal to the metal", 24/7. This is not appropriate for solar, which is why these companies are looking into power sources that are most cost effective when they run pedal to the metal, 24/7, like nuclear.
Gigachad 10mo ago
And then the entire energy grid collapses with the AI bubble.
- Nevermark 10mo ago
  With all that extra cheap energy, we can start making more steel again. Desalinate water. There are a lot of things that can be done with vast amounts of underutilized cheap energy.

testing22321 10mo ago

Even better, don’t just “allow”, but force them to create power plants equal in size to their usage. Must be renewable.

theultdev 10mo ago
I don't care what they use. Nuclear preferred but whatever works for the area. Natural gas is the main reason our emissions have gone down as it replaces coal. Also I don't think forcing is necessary. These datacenters want to, why impose more regulations.
- deleted 10mo ago
  [deleted]
- testing22321 10mo ago
  Your grandchildren will care if they use coal or natural gas. Aim higher. Do better.
  - theultdev 10mo ago
    Yes they will, they will prefer natural gas of those two. The main reason of emission reductions as we transition off of coal. I really hope we go all in on nuclear though, with some natural gas and get rid of the windmills. Solar, hydro, geothermal can stay where it makes sense. Unfortunately our skies and land are littered with windmills made out of unrecyclable polymers that are terrible for raptors. Queue someone quoting how many cats kill birds like competing with the top predator is a good thing, or ignoring the fact that we put these in raptors' wind streams and cats don't hunt those large birds (which are usually endangered) Our kids deserve nuclear.
    - LunaSea 10mo ago
      > Unfortunately our skies and land are littered with windmills made out of unrecyclable polymers that are terrible for raptors. Like our lands and oceans are not littered with drilling platforms and fracking stations already
      - gowld 10mo ago
        non-responsive to the parent comment. Oil is not nuclear.
        LunaSea 10mo ago
        Incorrect, parent comment mentioned gas.
        theultdev 10mo ago
        Ideally we could get rid of everything for nuclear, but that's not today's reality. The truth is natural gas is needed to transition off of coal and has helped reduce emissions. That being said, I would like to reduce those drilling rigs. However I don't see their existence justification for more damage by putting up windmills. It's classic whataboutism. Both things can be harmful. Below is an exercise to help point it out. > Like our lands and oceans are not littered ... already Without the "what about" subject, this statement looks bad doesn't it? That reasoning is no different than the people who see trash on the ground and throw more because it's already trashed, so why not.
    - triceratops 10mo ago
      Aah a True Bird Lover. Wants to protect birds from windmills. Doesn't care how many bird habitats oil drilling destroys. Hasn't seen any pictures of oil coated birds from the Exxon Valdez or the Deepwater Horizon. > made out of unrecyclable polymers Does this mean you support banning plastic straws too? All plastics are essentially unrecyclable. > Our kids deserve nuclear. By all means. If it can be done as cheaply as wind and solar.

cactusplant7374 10mo ago

How many times has that happened so far?

theultdev 10mo ago
Google is working with Kairos Power for nuclear reactors at their datacenters. Microsoft struck a deal with Three Mile Island to get a reactor up. And Amazon is working with Talen Energy. Might be others I missed.
- cactusplant7374 10mo ago
  So the public is expected to deal with higher prices after every data center build? The work can't be done in advance?
  - JumpCrisscross 10mo ago
    > the public is expected to deal with higher prices after every data center build? No. But the states that let companies put trillions of dollars of datacentre and power hardware in their borders will probably reap benefits from it for decades to come regardless of how AI pans out.
    - anthem2025 10mo ago
      [dead]

joelthelion 10mo ago

> it's really the only way forward. seems like a win/win. There is another way forward, which is not building these data centers, forcing AI companies to use power more efficiently, and use the excess energy production capacity towards the energy transition in order to avoid the worst consequences of climate change. It's not going to happen, at least not right now, but it's clearly what we ought to do. ChatGPT can wait.

theultdev 10mo ago
That's not a way forward, that's standing still. I'm all for more efficient usage, and it's in AI companies best interest to do so to minimize costs. ...but it's a growing industry, it will need more power.
- joelthelion 10mo ago
  No, it's not standing still. It's setting the priorities straight. Completing the energy transition is an enormous undertaking. Building huge data centers is a distraction, not a way forward.
pureagave 10mo ago
I think you may be missing the whole national security part of the AI race. This isn't just about asking a computer what recipe you can cook tonight with the items in your fridge. In many ways it is similar to the race to build a nuclear bomb. We may individually not like that, but we might individually be best served to live in the nation that got there first.
- joelthelion 10mo ago
  Building gigantic data centers doesn't help in that respect. The data centers are there to do inference at scale, not cutting edge research.
- anthem2025 10mo ago
  [dead]

robotnikman 10mo ago

Oh nice, that basically solves the issue. I've been hearing horror stories of datacenters overloading existing grids and raising prices for the average person, If datacenters generate their own power that basically solves the issue. Out here in AZ, solar combined with battery would be perfect for datacenters.

onemoresoop 10mo ago
> If datacenters generate their own power that basically solves the issue. If they do so cleanly otherwise they'll dump their externalities on the rest of us.

ericmay 10mo ago

"Allowing" doesn't necessarily translate into "doing". Many people are seeing higher energy prices which are at least in part or wholly due to data center loads on local power grids. In Ohio, for example, we just skated by with a ruling from our Public Utilities Commission which effectively required data centers to pay for their impact on local grids [1]. Additionally, while these data centers do provide some jobs, where states are giving them grants, loans, infrastructure improvement, or otherwise they are ultimately extractive developments (like parking lots) where the wealth flows out from states like Ohio and flows in to states where the CEOs and HQ sit (California, New York, etc.). I can tell you that people in Ohio across the political spectrum are not happy. We are losing good farm land, utilizing water, and our power costs are going up for negligible benefits at best. But hey now our state representatives can say "Meta is coming to central Ohio". Meanwhile costs are going up and we still have to ship produce in from other countries and states. If our representatives and governors office thought about this all for about 2 seconds they would require any data center development to include 2x the number of corporate jobs over a certain income threshold or else not approve the development. If the developers balk, then fine it's not like we want them anyway. The Trump Administration (and for that matter probably any admin) isn't doing jack shit. [1] https://www.news5cleveland.com/news/state/ohio-regulators-turn-down-appeal-ok-utilitys-data-center-billing-plan https://www.news5cleveland.com/news/state/ohio-regulators-tu...

deleted 10mo ago

[deleted]

thinkingtoilet 10mo ago

The real win/win would be to require them to build enough solar to power the operation.

nomel 10mo ago
> to build enough solar to power the operation The most cost effective way to run a datacenter at some definition of "pedal to the metal", 24/7. This is not appropriate for solar, which is why these companies are looking into power sources that are most cost effective when they run pedal to the metal, 24/7, like nuclear.

Gigachad 10mo ago

And then the entire energy grid collapses with the AI bubble.

Nevermark 10mo ago
With all that extra cheap energy, we can start making more steel again. Desalinate water. There are a lot of things that can be done with vast amounts of underutilized cheap energy.