Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

EPA says power for data centers can sidestep pollution laws

epa.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 262 posts

Re: EPA says power for data centers can sidestep pollution laws

#71

Post by cooggog »

sailfast wrote: post #49
lanstin wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Allowing more carbon dioxide sources is going to be distinctly harmful to profits in the mid-term. As with racial bias, strict gender roles, anti-vaxxing, and being anti-science, being pro-carbon burn is ultimately a foolish anti-truth stance as silly and ill-outcomed as any three year old insisting that they can stay up all night.

Do the octogenarians in power not remember when they couldn’t breathe because of the lead in the gas in the 60s and the lack of emissions controls on everything? Do they yearn for the mines and coal dust of early industrial England? Everybody loves clean air and water but apparently forget why they have it in the first place.

> Do the octogenarians in power not remember when they couldn’t breathe because of the lead in the gas in the 60s

No, lead poisoning makes you a brain damaged retard. They can probably hardly remember shit.

Re: EPA says power for data centers can sidestep pollution laws

#72

Post by lovich »

iso1631 wrote: post #56
wilburx3 wrote: post #24

What a disgrace. Abysmal leadership in this country.

This is exactly what the leadership wanted. And as they won the election. Not like in 2016 (where more people voted for the other guy but they won due to the difference in power of votes), or in 2020 (where they lost), they won a clear outright victory, it's exactly what the USA wanted.

Is there a word for this behavior where a politician wins by the slimmest of margins in a first past the post election and then spins it as a mandate from The People instead of an incredibly tight split?

Re: EPA says power for data centers can sidestep pollution laws

#73

Post by shimman »

bayindirh wrote: post #39
shimman wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems pretty inline with our leadership tho. This country has always put profits above people.

> This country has always put profits above people. Please, the correct word is "value". Using the word p-word makes people understand and get irritated.

The easiest way to radicalize workers is to simply tell them what profit is.

Re: EPA says power for data centers can sidestep pollution laws

#74

Post by jjuel »

iso1631 wrote: post #56
wilburx3 wrote: post #24

What a disgrace. Abysmal leadership in this country.

This is exactly what the leadership wanted. And as they won the election. Not like in 2016 (where more people voted for the other guy but they won due to the difference in power of votes), or in 2020 (where they lost), they won a clear outright victory, it's exactly what the USA wanted.

If you are talking about the billionaires and trillionaire who spent as much as they could to get this elected then you are correct it is what THEY wanted.

Re: EPA says power for data centers can sidestep pollution laws

#75

Post by sensanaty »

pyrophane wrote: post #37

> Clean Air Act (CAA) Acid Rain Program (ARP) does not apply to power generation facilities that are not connected to a public electricity grid, commonly referred to as “islanded” power generation facilities. This of course makes no sense whatever, as whether or not a power generator is connected to the grid has nothing to do with its environmental impact.

It literally is just a cartoon villain plan. The AI companies look at something called the "Acid Rain Program" and think to themselves "Fuck that, what's a bit of acid rain going to do?". I truly cannot comprehend the mindset here as hard as I try

Re: EPA says power for data centers can sidestep pollution laws

#76

Post by adamgordonbell »

techpression wrote: post #48
pyrophane wrote: post #37

> Clean Air Act (CAA) Acid Rain Program (ARP) does not apply to power generation facilities that are not connected to a public electricity grid, commonly referred to as “islanded” power generation facilities. This of course makes no sense whatever, as whether or not a power generator is connected to the grid has nothing to do with its environmental impact.

Pretty insane, expect data center to be data center + coal power plant soon, why bother with generators or the pesky local grid.

Somebody mentioned that a solar panel field to power a data center requires a lot of impact assessment paper work and approvals.

Whereas natural gas generators do not.

Hence the runs on gas turbines, while solar panels are plentiful. ( Although I'd guess the consistency of power is a bigger issue. )

Running existing coal is now supposedly more expensive then putting in new wind or solar ... all else being equal.

Re: EPA says power for data centers can sidestep pollution laws

#77

Post by rpdillon »

MisterTea wrote: post #21
tastyfreeze wrote: post #10

Hmm... rules for thee but not for me. Sounds like the beginning of the end for the EPA. Two tiered rules breed resentment. There are already plenty of people that don't like the EPA. Making exceptions just makes it easier to argue the EPA is useless or just a tool for oppressing the little guy.

> There are already plenty of people that don't like the EPA. Rich assholes who are upset they can't throw their trash on the ground. Anyone else is parroting propaganda generated by said rich assholes.

I don't think that's true. There's probably a valid critique that they're doing their job badly.

Re: EPA says power for data centers can sidestep pollution laws

#78

Post by ceejayoz »

cucumber3732842 wrote: post #51
MisterTea wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There are already plenty of people that don't like the EPA. Rich assholes who are upset they can't throw their trash on the ground. Anyone else is parroting propaganda generated by said rich assholes.

>Rich assholes who are upset they can't throw their trash on the ground. Anyone else is parroting propaganda generated by said rich assholes. Yeah, that guy who owns a liquor store on 7-mil and can't make the $100k underground stormwater treatment it would take to pave his dirt parking lot pencil out and that city in the rust belt who saw a major manufacturer pack up and leave for a desert state because environmental…

> that city in the rust belt who saw a major manufacturer pack up and leave for a desert state because environmental compliance precluded expanding their site

The one that's about to whine and demand Federal assistance when their water gets cut off because it ran out?

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/21/climate/colorado-river-wa...

Re: EPA says power for data centers can sidestep pollution laws

#79

Post by Avicebron »

sensanaty wrote: post #75
pyrophane wrote: post #37

> Clean Air Act (CAA) Acid Rain Program (ARP) does not apply to power generation facilities that are not connected to a public electricity grid, commonly referred to as “islanded” power generation facilities. This of course makes no sense whatever, as whether or not a power generator is connected to the grid has nothing to do with its environmental impact.

It literally is just a cartoon villain plan. The AI companies look at something called the "Acid Rain Program" and think to themselves "Fuck that, what's a bit of acid rain going to do?". I truly cannot comprehend the mindset here as hard as I try

I think you nailed the mindset with the "cartoon villain".

Re: EPA says power for data centers can sidestep pollution laws

#80

Post by msandford »

gwbas1c wrote: post #45

What's frustrating is that the title in this thread is very misleading. This is the way the laws have been: Separate laws for generators feeding into the grid. Why this is, I don't know. I suspect it's because the vast, vast, majority of non-connected generators were, (until now,) backup generators that only ran occasionally. I even have a "fancy" portable generator in my garage that probably emits way more pollution…

I suspected that this was the case as the president can't just invent new laws on a whim. They have a fair amount of leeway on their interpretation of laws re: directions to the administration on how/when to do things but they can't just invent a law from thin air.

Also I mean what constitutes a generator if it isn't something connected to the grid? If my car has an engine and it also has a small inverter and an AC outlet is that now a generator and subject to generator laws in addition to car laws?

Post reply on HN