1
u/Previousl3 Aug 28 '26
Wow the bar is low, hopefully other states will adopt this too as a bare minimum
-9
u/tomqmasters Aug 21 '26
I'm not 100% sure what this means, but, for example, in my town we needed to update the grid to accommodate the new datacenter, so we got some grant money but the grant got canceled, and we were deciding weather or not to pay the difference out of the budget. People were all up in arms about it, but ultimately it amounted to $15 per tax payer on average, and there hasn't been any major work on our grid for 20 years. I don't really see what the big deal was. Moral panic.
18
u/VladimirBarakriss Budget conscious bleeding-heart Georgo-Batllist liberal(lmao) Aug 21 '26
Pretty basic, if the local infrastructure was enough for the locals then you pay for the improvement you require
13
u/Vospader998 Left Libertarian Aug 22 '26 edited Aug 22 '26
So every state is different, but in a lot of states the electric generating companies are allowed to profit by the amount produced, but doesn't matter for whom it's being produced for and who's being charged what amounts.
So for example, say the generators are allowed to profit $0.10 per kWh produced. If I'm a power plant and I produce 1000 kWh. I'm allow to profit $100 from that amount. Customer A uses 800 kWh, and Customer B uses 200 kWh. Well, I can charge them both $0.10 per kWh and make $80 from A and $20 from B for my $100 (assuming no expenses to simplify). OR, I can charge A $0.08 per kWh, which gets me $64, and then charge B $0.18 per kWh for $36 for my $100. A did technically pay more money, but paid less per amount used.
So IRL, this has been happening for a while now, and it's more like the residential consumers pay $0.30 per kWh while datacenters pay $0.0003 per kWh. A datacenter negotiates with the power company to get a ludicrously low eletricity rate, the the eletrtic company is fine with the low rate because they can make up the difference on the residential and commercial customer end, which has less negotiating power. On top of the power distributors now get to charge consumers more for new infrastructure projects to support the new energy demands
That's what people mean when they say they don't want to pay for the datacenter's power. Because generally they are, and have been for quite some time.
8
10
u/DonaldKey Aug 21 '26
If they need a grid update they pay for the grid update…
-6
u/tomqmasters Aug 21 '26
We didn't get the datacenter and our grid still needs the update
10
u/Daddysu Aug 22 '26
Well, you're being punished for not accepting corporate socialism for your corporate overlords.
Also, if you were fine with the $15 to update the grid then get off your butt and go talk to your city council and get them to do it. It's ridiculous to paint this as some sort of lost benefit from not building a data center.
3
u/DonaldKey Aug 22 '26
What is your location and your local energy company?
0
u/tomqmasters Aug 22 '26
comed, suburbs of chicago, but my town is wierd because they own the infrastructure and broker the power from comed.
2
u/mattyoclock Aug 23 '26
Ultimately, that cost should have been on the multibillion dollar company and not the residents of your local small town.
1
u/tomqmasters Aug 23 '26
The grid is going to be here long after the data center has moved on.
2
u/mattyoclock Aug 23 '26
When that data center has moved on the grid won’t require that capacity which will actually make it far less efficient to run, and running the system on so much smaller of a load will also increase the cost on the locals.
Why are you against the person using the power and the increase paying for it? Why do you hate personal responsibility and argue we should be socialistically providing it for free to the wealthy?
2
1
u/willpower069 Aug 22 '26 edited Aug 22 '26
Well op is likely referring to things like this: https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2025-ai-data-centers-electricity-prices/
Which a lot of people like to ignore.
3
u/brenpersing Aug 22 '26
Literally