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

131–140 of 266 posts

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

#131

Post by tclancy »

btbuildem wrote: post #100
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

> truly cannot comprehend the mindset The mindset is "if I could harvest your organs for profit I absolutely would, and I would make it illegal to protest against it"

That’s completely unfair. They would also rent the organs back to us on a subscription plan.

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

#132

Post by malfist »

Schlagbohrer wrote: post #113
consensus1 wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Government beauracracy, which provides things like democratic oversight, environmental protection, enforcing power grid standards and interoperability, construction regulations, etc? Would you rather we just didn't have those things?

You're not thinking like a techbro. My startup shouldn't have to adhere to those regulations, but everyone else should. In fact, once my startup gets established we should make even more regulations

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

#133

Post by miltonlost »

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.

And this same behavior is how Republicans prove their own theory that the Government is useless and evil and bad. Because they do everything in their power to actually make it useless and evil and bad. Do not blame this on the "EPA" as an agency. Put the blame where it goes: conservatives actively sabotaging government programs.

You're neithersidesing an issue where clearly one partisan group is doing evil things to actively make the situation worse and then "see, told you!"

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

#134

Post by Ekaros »

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?

My reasonable guess is that they did not want to make those case that need off-grid generation too hard to build. And never considered that anyone would build any actually significant amount of off-grid capacity. At certain threshold grid just makes economic sense. So rational actors would never do that.

Sadly AI companies are entirely irrational actors so this really was rather hard to foresee...

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

#135

Post by inigyou »

lovich wrote: post #72
iso1631 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

FPP voting

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

#136

Post by pfdietz »

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.

The effects of this will be reduced by the realization that these regulations can be changed in the future. No one will make a large capital investment if it could be shut down in a few years.

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

#137

Post by inigyou »

jjuel wrote: post #74
iso1631 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

They got what they wanted by making half the country's idiots want it too

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

#138

Post by inigyou »

abracadaniel wrote: post #128
phonon wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

of electric energy to the public

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

#139

Post by inigyou »

msandford wrote: post #80
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 o…

They can, however, just refuse to enforce a law, or start enforcing the opposite of a law. While they may not be able to change the words on the page, the effect is identical.

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

#140

Post by Ekaros »

tclancy wrote: post #131
btbuildem wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> truly cannot comprehend the mindset The mindset is "if I could harvest your organs for profit I absolutely would, and I would make it illegal to protest against it"

That’s completely unfair. They would also rent the organs back to us on a subscription plan.

Do not forget loans with APR starting at 24%. Recourse of course. With the collateral taken back if payments fail.
Post reply on HN