EPA says power for data centers can sidestep pollution laws • Hacker News Board

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

#121

Post by inigyou » Fri, Aug 28, 2026, 3:12 PM UTC

jaapz wrote: post #107

adamgordonbell wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

That might be a reason, but probably more relevant is the fact that when you want solar to provide all power for a data center, you need a lot of buffering capacity (batteries). And then you also need a back up for when the sun doesn't shine... Which is probably a gas generator. Easier to just install a gas generator then

AI training, not inference, seems like it would actually be a good application for a solar powered DC because you could just checkpoint and pause when it gets cloudy. It might end up worth it for the free electricity.

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

#122

Post by root_axis » Fri, Aug 28, 2026, 3:12 PM UTC

consensus1 wrote: post #95

sensanaty wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

The AI companies look at something called the "endless government bureaucracy" and they think to themselves "fuck that, I'm not waiting 10 years for all that bullshit, I'll just use the loophole." I truly cannot comprehend any other reaction because I would rather have my fingernails ripped out than deal with years of government bureaucracy.

What you label "government bureaucracy" is very often environmental protections working as intended.

One AI company's "bullshit" is another citizen's "clean air and water". Since the AI companies don't care about those negative externalities, the government can act help to mitigate the damage.

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

#123

Post by miltonlost » Fri, Aug 28, 2026, 3:12 PM UTC

manwe150 wrote: post #115

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 seems pretty much how law (specifically common law) has always worked though. If Congress thinks the law should apply to them, then Congress's job is to write a law that applies to them. The president and judicial branches are not supposed to make new laws, but rather to enforce the laws as written. My reading of the EPA's statement here is they also wanted to mildly warn the companies that if they ever in the fut…

Giving the benefit of the doubt to this President and his EPA that they are simply enforcing the laws as intended is foolish, irrational, and against all known evidence and their own words and policies and actions.

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

#124

Post by inigyou » Fri, Aug 28, 2026, 3:12 PM UTC

andsoitis wrote: post #104

techpression wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

> expect data center to be data center + coal power plant soon Why do you think that’s likely?

Because coal is the cheapest source of electricity that isn't banned in the USA.

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

#125

Post by bob1029 » Fri, Aug 28, 2026, 3:12 PM UTC

jaapz wrote: post #102

bob1029 wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most generators not connected to the grid are for emergency backup purposes. Granted, this carve out is now clearly being abused, but the original intent is quite rational. If we enforced strict regulations on all generators without any exceptions at all, your sewage lift station might not have a backup source anymore.

If that is the original intent, why did that not get added into the law? Explicitly specififying that the exception only applies to emergency backup situations would have solved this, right?

"Emergency" is a spectrum.

Would you be OK with one specific generation station temporarily emitting 3x more than legal limit (e.g., from the hours of 2pm to 6pm) if the alternative is a 5% increase in absolute probability of a multi-day regional blackout? What about a 10% increase? Where is your red line?

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

#126

Post by Muromec » Fri, Aug 28, 2026, 3:13 PM UTC

mk89 wrote: post #111

Noaidi wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those regulations are there for a reason though. I’ll never understand this logic. We have regulations so things are clean and safe. Yes, it would be easier to not have those regulations and just have dirty and unsafe electricity. But that’s the cost of having a business and also having a clean and safe society. Corporations love to externalize costs and that’s what’s happening here again.

Becoming and staying a leader in innovation sometimes requires shortcuts. You can also frame a law to make that exception specific for an industry, a field or a group so it doesn't become the norm (or time box it, if you want). You need innovation, there is no other way USA can lead in AI if you don't build these damn data centers. Come to live in Europe and you will see how nice it is to stagnate because rule A depe…

It is in fact very nice to live in Europe and stagnate. Can recommend.

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

#127

Post by inigyou » Fri, Aug 28, 2026, 3:14 PM UTC

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…

Did that happen?

The former sounds like a guy being told his trash needs to be picked up and not being able to afford it so not being allowed to generate trash, and the latter was provided with no details at all so I can't evaluate it.

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

#128

Post by abracadaniel » Fri, Aug 28, 2026, 3:14 PM UTC

phonon wrote: post #99

andsoitis wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In what way do you think the guidance is in contradiction to the law?

The entire argument rests on a 36-year-old survey form: "DOE Form 860 (1990) defines electric utility to mean 'a corporation, person, agency, authority, or other legal entity or instrumentality that owns and/or operates facilities within the United States for the generation, transmission, distribution, or sale of electric energy primarily for use by the public.'" So the leap is: an old survey form says "sale of elect…

It’s an “or”. Generation, transmission, or sale. Not exclusively sale.

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

#129

Post by inigyou » Fri, Aug 28, 2026, 3:14 PM UTC

claytongulick wrote: post #94

metalliqaz wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's consistent leadership. Malevolent and stupid, but consistent.

Are you sure you're aiming your ire in the right direction in this case? The EPA provided guidance that the CAA (Clean Air Act) itself was written to not apply in these cases. Shouldn't you be angry at the authors of the law?

The EPA is currently run by MAGA people.

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

#130

Post by lvspiff » Fri, Aug 28, 2026, 3:15 PM UTC

dgellow wrote: post #13

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.

It’s literally the playbook from project 2025. FWIW it’s not the beginning, that has been a process at play since day 1 of the 2nd trump admin Edit: actually since the 1st term as mentioned below

Right? This isnt the first chapter in a long story to come. This is the middle of the book where the villain has all but the final stone of the gauntlet but rather than put up a strong resistance we appear to have elected sycophants who are just watching and saying “dont let him get that stone”