5 ms·

>The same process is pricing regular people out of the energy they need to power their air conditioner during those heat waves and the technology it enables is

>The same process is pricing regular people out of the energy they need to power their air conditioner during those heat waves and the technology it enables is pushing them out of the labor market and into poverty. I don't see evidence this is true, and the critical mass of data centers is making electricity cheaper. Economies of scale -> more energy = bigger electric plants = cheaper energy. https://netchoice.org/new-study-confirms-what-weve-been-saying-data-centers-are-lowering-your-electric-bill/ https://netchoice.org/new-study-confirms-what-weve-been-sayi...

usrbinbash 2mo ago
> Economies of scale -> more energy = bigger electric plants = cheaper energy. Problem is; power plants are not something that can be spun up with a kubectl invocation. Power plants need to be built. This process takes YEARS, and in some cases over a decade. And that's just the plants themselves. The grid also has to be built out to be able to handle the new load. And while this potentially +10year process is ongoing, the current supply is gobbled up, and prices for consumers skyrocket. Yes, eventuelly, market forces may solve the issue. By then however, it will already be too late for many areas, with residents being priced out of a basic utility. Or worse, the markets may not solve the issue at all. Because; all this building out of electrical gear and power plants, requires very specific resources and talent. Whta if the markets decide that these resources are much better allocated (at least from the PoV of company shareholders), in building power generation capacity exclusively for datacenters, and the consumer market is simply ignored?
- rcxdude 2mo ago
  The largest build-out, which is in renewables, features plants that can go up very quickly, at least. The grid upgrades are the bigger bottleneck.
  - ethbr1 2mo ago
    > largest build-out, which is in renewables Yes and... it's still a projected ~50/50 split of future datacenter energy growth being met by renewables or coal (China) + natural gas (US). https://www.iea.org/reports/energy-and-ai/energy-supply-for-ai https://www.iea.org/reports/energy-and-ai/energy-supply-for-...
berkes 2mo ago
> Economies of scale -> more energy = bigger electric plants = cheaper energy. This isn't true. Certainly not globally. Because electricity in 2026 is converting finite and scares resources. Plants need fuel to burn, water to cool, material to build, land to sit on, etc. Yes, even Nuclear plants¹ need increasingly more scarce resources like "coolant". What has been bringing electricity prices down is renewables: insane amounts of solar and wind being installed hourly. But even with that, we are still lagging, globally: energy prices are -on average- rising, projects halted or stalled because of lack of electrical capacity and ever increasing amounts of CO2 pumped into the atmosphere. Not less. Not cheaper. Not more supply. ¹ https://www.france24.com/en/france/20260712-france-temporarily-shuts-down-three-nuclear-reactors-over-heatwave https://www.france24.com/en/france/20260712-france-temporari...
- logancbrown 2mo ago
  It is true globally as well, but there are certainty anecdotes where confounding factors makes it not true like what you've highlighted with specific France Nuclear reactors. We should be cognizant of the environmental impact of producing more energy, but it still remains true that making more energy means cheaper energy across the resources we have today.
  - berkes 2mo ago
    No, sorry. It's simply not true. Energy prices, and electricity prices are rising, indexed for inflation. For households and for commerce. E.g. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=UUeu https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=UUeu
stonogo 2mo ago
Yeah, I wouldn't have that paper peer reviewed either. Garbage methodology.
andersonpico 2mo ago
netchoice is a lobbying organization for the hyperscalers, you're straight up sharing a propaganda piece
- logancbrown 2mo ago
  Which metric do you disagree with presented on the site?
Magicrafter13 2mo ago
> I don't see evidence this is true One does not need to look very far. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/may/13/utah-approves-datacenter-backlash https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/may/13/utah-approve... > The facility will require about 9GW of power, which is more than the entire state of Utah currently consumes

usrbinbash 2mo ago

> Economies of scale -> more energy = bigger electric plants = cheaper energy. Problem is; power plants are not something that can be spun up with a kubectl invocation. Power plants need to be built. This process takes YEARS, and in some cases over a decade. And that's just the plants themselves. The grid also has to be built out to be able to handle the new load. And while this potentially +10year process is ongoing, the current supply is gobbled up, and prices for consumers skyrocket. Yes, eventuelly, market forces may solve the issue. By then however, it will already be too late for many areas, with residents being priced out of a basic utility. Or worse, the markets may not solve the issue at all. Because; all this building out of electrical gear and power plants, requires very specific resources and talent. Whta if the markets decide that these resources are much better allocated (at least from the PoV of company shareholders), in building power generation capacity exclusively for datacenters, and the consumer market is simply ignored?

rcxdude 2mo ago
The largest build-out, which is in renewables, features plants that can go up very quickly, at least. The grid upgrades are the bigger bottleneck.
- ethbr1 2mo ago
  > largest build-out, which is in renewables Yes and... it's still a projected ~50/50 split of future datacenter energy growth being met by renewables or coal (China) + natural gas (US). https://www.iea.org/reports/energy-and-ai/energy-supply-for-ai https://www.iea.org/reports/energy-and-ai/energy-supply-for-...

berkes 2mo ago

> Economies of scale -> more energy = bigger electric plants = cheaper energy. This isn't true. Certainly not globally. Because electricity in 2026 is converting finite and scares resources. Plants need fuel to burn, water to cool, material to build, land to sit on, etc. Yes, even Nuclear plants¹ need increasingly more scarce resources like "coolant". What has been bringing electricity prices down is renewables: insane amounts of solar and wind being installed hourly. But even with that, we are still lagging, globally: energy prices are -on average- rising, projects halted or stalled because of lack of electrical capacity and ever increasing amounts of CO2 pumped into the atmosphere. Not less. Not cheaper. Not more supply. ¹ https://www.france24.com/en/france/20260712-france-temporarily-shuts-down-three-nuclear-reactors-over-heatwave https://www.france24.com/en/france/20260712-france-temporari...

logancbrown 2mo ago
It is true globally as well, but there are certainty anecdotes where confounding factors makes it not true like what you've highlighted with specific France Nuclear reactors. We should be cognizant of the environmental impact of producing more energy, but it still remains true that making more energy means cheaper energy across the resources we have today.
- berkes 2mo ago
  No, sorry. It's simply not true. Energy prices, and electricity prices are rising, indexed for inflation. For households and for commerce. E.g. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=UUeu https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=UUeu

stonogo 2mo ago

Yeah, I wouldn't have that paper peer reviewed either. Garbage methodology.

andersonpico 2mo ago

netchoice is a lobbying organization for the hyperscalers, you're straight up sharing a propaganda piece

logancbrown 2mo ago
Which metric do you disagree with presented on the site?

Magicrafter13 2mo ago

> I don't see evidence this is true One does not need to look very far. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/may/13/utah-approves-datacenter-backlash https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/may/13/utah-approve... > The facility will require about 9GW of power, which is more than the entire state of Utah currently consumes