Isn't this the same as saying "utility regulators delaying connecting new power to the grid hiked electricity prices on the public by $23B?" When my apples are expensive, I don't generally grumble about all the demand from pie makers. If they demand more apples, new suppliers should come in to restore the price, right?
Data centers have hiked electricity prices on the public by $23B
21–30 of 132 posts
Re: Data centers have hiked electricity prices on the public by $23B
#22Isn't this the same as saying "utility regulators delaying connecting new power to the grid hiked electricity prices on the public by $23B?" When my apples are expensive, I don't generally grumble about all the demand from pie makers. If they demand more apples, new suppliers should come in to restore the price, right?
Re: Data centers have hiked electricity prices on the public by $23B
#23> But what if the power company needs to upgrade the substation to handle the increased needs of the data center? Or secure additional sources of electricity? In these cases, the investments are part of the electricity grid that everyone uses. These costs will likely be shared among all customers. Okay but this is a policy choice. It doesn’t have to be that way.
Where I live, if a developer wants to build a subdivision, they pay for the water and sewer lines. They pay to connect those lines to the city infrastructure. If the city infrastructure needs to be upgraded to handle the new volumes, they pay for at least a proportionate share of that too. The ongoing maintenance becomes part of the city's budget eventually, but not the costs of the build out. All those costs go into…
You know what you do if you want an affordable car? You buy used. I think most people understand Ford is never going to build another a car that costs $10k brand new, and the last new car near that price barely sold because it was so stripped.
Re: Data centers have hiked electricity prices on the public by $23B
#24[1] or whatever other "superfood" that explodes in popularity
Re: Data centers have hiked electricity prices on the public by $23B
#25Perhaps I'm just spoiled because I live in the PNW, where are best use for overcapacity was to ship power off to California. But in the past, cheap hydro attracted aluminum production that then attracted also attracted a whole airplane production industry.
I think most people are just debating whether the extra demand generated by AI is worth it, they weren't necessarily debating the same thing when it came aluminum or airplane production (albeit in the 1930s).
Re: Data centers have hiked electricity prices on the public by $23B
#26The problem is, there are insane and dumb regulatory barriers to adding power plants or interconnects. THESE ARE THE SAME PROBLEMS FACTORIES FACE WHEN RESHORING PRODUCTION, you should treat datacenters as the face of reindustrialization. Instead of complaining about using resources, we need to focus on solving our inability to provide infrastructure needed to support economic growth.
Re: Data centers have hiked electricity prices on the public by $23B
#27Every tech company building out datacenters would pay in a heartbeat to add commensurate power to the grid. The cost is not an objection. The problem is, there are insane and dumb regulatory barriers to adding power plants or interconnects. THESE ARE THE SAME PROBLEMS FACTORIES FACE WHEN RESHORING PRODUCTION, you should treat datacenters as the face of reindustrialization. Instead of complaining about using resources…
Yeah. I'm going to need a source on this claim.
Re: Data centers have hiked electricity prices on the public by $23B
#28> But what if the power company needs to upgrade the substation to handle the increased needs of the data center? Or secure additional sources of electricity? In these cases, the investments are part of the electricity grid that everyone uses. These costs will likely be shared among all customers. Okay but this is a policy choice. It doesn’t have to be that way.
Re: Data centers have hiked electricity prices on the public by $23B
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
Where I live, if a developer wants to build a subdivision, they pay for the water and sewer lines. They pay to connect those lines to the city infrastructure. If the city infrastructure needs to be upgraded to handle the new volumes, they pay for at least a proportionate share of that too. The ongoing maintenance becomes part of the city's budget eventually, but not the costs of the build out. All those costs go into…
The “affordable” housing thing seems like such a misdirection. I can’t help but daydream that some moneyed interest somewhere fans those flames, as it looks like a dead end that can absorb endless fervor. You know what you do if you want an affordable car? You buy used. I think most people understand Ford is never going to build another a car that costs $10k brand new, and the last new car near that price barely sold…
Do you really need a conspiracy by "moneyed interest" when the general public is perfectly happy to support similarly bad policies like rent control?