191–200 of 201 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe it would help remove useless and harmful tech from schools. Books don't need batteries.
Seems AI use at younger ages has detrimental effects. Let’s remove that from schools while we are at it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Of the data center rollouts I've been contracted to do safety systems for, ALL of them have gas turbines as part of their power infrastructure on property. They don't solely have gas, but they are mixed Solar/Gas every time. A few of them in the future pipeline swear they will have nuclear but I don't see that coming to fruition soon.
And is that datacenter bypassing air quality regulation and backing up to a housing development? Most/all of the construction I have tracked meets air quality guidelines and fairly remote but I know that is not always the case!
This is texas, they can't even form regulations that don't different between counties, or figure out zoning laws in Houston.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you want to pretend the only source of information on this subject is the linked article I'm sure you can find many users here to debate within your arbitrary parameters. Same goes for proof, which I'm sure would exclude power flow models if they were available for said debate. Edit: We can agree the article is not comprehensive, and doesn't have data PJM and utilities have not published.
I’ve linked analyses explaining why PJM’s forward capacity market has been a major driver of recent retail rate increases, not just in this one county. SemiAnalysis: https://newsletter.semianalysis.com/p/are-ai-datacenters-inc... LBNL: https://emp.lbl.gov/publications/factors-influencing-recent-... If you disagree, point to the analysis or data. Suggesting I’m “pretending” doesn’t address the argument. The article ch…
You can't 8760 where and when overloads happen elsewhere, unplanned downtime can't be identified in (or out of) the ISO, you can't forcast demand, you can't plan pre-purchasing of power before it's on demand. You can't speculate on if reconductoring could save money, or remove overloads.
You want to look at rate increases as the core driver. So much so you dump it on replies to others comments. Too many variables are opaque for me to have a discussion about what is the 'largest' factor when each item on the above list could represent 10 million to 8 billion+ in cost.
But I can tell you I won't be convinced that new large loads, and who approved them are not a contributing factor because no one has "proven" it in real time. That's the kind of logical falacy that results in dismissal of real issues.
You want to use a lot of electricity? Great! We sell electricity. We will need cash in advance to handle some upgrades, rather than passing those costs on to other rate payers.
> passing those costs on to other rate payers. You are describing the normal process of purchasing things and how prices work. There is no nefarious passing on. We should redistribute money from the wealthy to households, but I'm not sure if rate price controls beyond what already exists is the correct way to do it. The real issue with these data centers is tax jurisdiction shopping.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> passing those costs on to other rate payers. You are describing the normal process of purchasing things and how prices work. There is no nefarious passing on. We should redistribute money from the wealthy to households, but I'm not sure if rate price controls beyond what already exists is the correct way to do it. The real issue with these data centers is tax jurisdiction shopping.
If "passing those costs on to other rate payers" is "the normal process of purchasing things" then the "normal process" is thoroughly and completely FUBAR-ed. That's a lot worse than some single, isolated case.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Potholes aren’t really the core of the annoyance, just like the lights, it’s the control mechanisms around them. Potholes are going to occur yet there’s no proactive repair response. Massive potholes you’re describing rarely show up over night, and it’s very likely many city employees drive over them daily (trash trucks, police, code compliance, water services, etc).
Oh, see, you must be a city slicker. I grew up in the country where city employees absolutely did not drive over the roads daily if weekly if monthly. In fact, I didn't even live in a city as the area was just unincorporated county land, so there were no city employees. Every now and then, sheriff deputies might roll through. The country roads that met up to the "big" 2 lane FM where I grew up were all posted 20mph.…
Funny how your mom got pulled over by a police officer serving around potholes that he never noticed because public officials never used those roads. That silly city slicker stuff I suppose. But my point was about control mechanisms and you probably also fail to understand that in a rural setting you were the control mechanism. You are responsible for reporting the potholes. Even us city slickers have that ability. If that information is not acted on or there’s no budget for repairs; well that’s a whole different issue and you should consider that potholes was used as a weak analogy in this discussion about lighting. You keep wanting to argue purely about potholes, which is actually quite annoying.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Their job is to represent their company. It's like calling a defence or prosecution lawyer an asshole for taking their client's side. It's the judge's job to be impartial, not theirs. And it's the regulator's job to be impartial, not the lobbyist's.
You're assuming these people know what a lobbyist does beyond the edgey cynical definition they learned about when they were 13.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's no reason not to blame lobbyists as well. A lobbyist saying "it's just business," doesn't excuse them for being assholes.
Their job is to represent their company. It's like calling a defence or prosecution lawyer an asshole for taking their client's side. It's the judge's job to be impartial, not theirs. And it's the regulator's job to be impartial, not the lobbyist's.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If "passing those costs on to other rate payers" is "the normal process of purchasing things" then the "normal process" is thoroughly and completely FUBAR-ed. That's a lot worse than some single, isolated case.
If I hire a local babysitter in my area and thus bid up the price of babysitters, is some babysitter cartel “passing the costs” on to other parents or are we describing the standard approach of how buying and selling things works
We're talking about capital and interest expenses for the benefit of a single customer but paid for by all other customers too. And also about Billions of $$ of commercial risk shifted to the shoulders of the public.