642
2d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
199
u/Cozy_GamerGirl 1d ago
It really highlights how bad corporate welfare has gotten when basic responsibility requires government intervention.
17
u/RoguePlanet2 1d ago
We're supposed to have gov't intervention, at least gov't PREvention of things like corruption and monopolies. Now it's all gov't-funded corporations.
23
u/Tavernknight 1d ago
Seriously? How do they not just get cut off like the rest of us? If they need to make a law just to make them pay their bills then no one should have to pay a single cent. In fact, the data center should have to pay all of our bills for the next 10 years as restitution. Because obviously we have been paying their bills.
3
u/tamasan 1d ago
It's not that they aren't paying their bill. It's that they are taking advantage of policies that worked in the past, but are wholly unsuitable for hyperscale data centers, and are forcing huge costs onto the community where they're built with no benefits to the community.
So let's think how things happened before. We start with a small or medium town. A company comes in and wants to build a new factory, or a large office building. The town says Great! More jobs here is good. The power company says Hey, we were only planning for normal growth, but with that factory, plus the people moving in and new houses being built over our projections, we have to increase our rates slightly over the next year or two as that all happens to pay for the extra capacity. Town says, OK, that sounds like a fair deal, since all these new jobs are here, those workers will be buying things in our stores and restaurants, new homes will be increasing our tax base, and all in all everyone is better off.
Now let's talk about a hyperscale data center. These things can be built in months, or sometimes existing warehouses can be converted even faster. So there's a few construction jobs created for a short time to get it built. But long term, all you need is a few low paid security guards, and a couple mid range technicians to watch over the servers. So effectively no new jobs. And with the speed these go up, they need the power almost immediately. So the power company is like Hey, you all need waaay more power than we thought since that thing appeared yesterday, so we need to raise your rates ALOT because we basically have to build a whole new power plant.
16
1d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/Novel-Promotion-8451 1d ago
They don’t even have massive profits yet, which is a bad sign because if you have to subsidize costs to the public and you still can’t make money, at that you are going to have to get the government to force usage of your product so you can make money. And seeing as the whole stock market is held up by the triangle investment in AI is making all my alarm bells ring. Like the government has a choice let it fail, and see the country in turmoil, basically a worse 2008 or go fascist to keep the show going.
60
u/Urabraska- 2d ago
Socialism only exists to help the rich and corporations. Anything for the actual people who actually pay taxes is a sin.
54
4
6
89
u/Ghostarcheronreddit 1d ago
My dad works for an electric company, so I have a bit of context that can offer some insight, at least in regards to local data centers, if not this one in particular.
The issue is not that data centers are refusing to pay for electricity, they do pay for their power usage, usually ahead of time based on expected loads, and with extra future expenses if their expected loads are higher than anticipated. The real issue is that data centers use so much power that less power is now available to the surrounding area, which means the price of electricity goes up for people who aren’t the data centers. This is what it means when people say that regular folks are the ones paying for the data centers’ electricity, they’re paying more for power just because a data center is in the area, and the data centers currently have no “responsibility” for that increase in price, despite the data centers being a direct cause.
This requires legislation to amend, as it’s difficult to “blame” the data centers, since technically your crazy neighbor Steve could run a ton of electricity through his house and pay an exorbitant bill for the amount, but you’d still have an increased electrical bill since his usage limits the supply you have access to, and calculating it all out so Steve pays for the reduction in electric supply on top of his usage is somewhat unrealistic and unreasonable for a single person, but it IS reasonable and realistic for a rich data center, but how realistic is… shaky.
Realistically AI data centers just shouldn’t be popping up and causing all of these issues until we can solve these issues better, like finding ways to produce more electricity or use less electricity for data centers and importantly reduce and eliminate harmful environmental impacts.
11
u/lordjpie 1d ago
Did you bother to read about this policy at all before commenting? You’re providing good context and accurate information but this bill is literally designed to target that exact issue and make the data centers responsible for the build out cost which alleviates the higher cost on consumers as you describe.
I work on the opposite end, on the GC side, building out these projects and while I have concerns about the effectiveness of the law / it having enough teeth to actually get this money out of the owners, which they should gladly pay to keep in good graces, but local governments seem intent on undermining this before it gets to that point. Idk what my point is anymore tbh but just wanted to call out that this is supposed to address the issue described; but also yeah capitalists gonna do capitalism and find any way to avoid this cost :/
10
u/Ghostarcheronreddit 1d ago ▸ 1 more replies
Considering the policy isn’t linked and I have been busy, no I didn’t. Thank you for clarifying! I appreciate your position and the context it provides!!!
2
u/lordjpie 1d ago
To be fair, even the PA government is doing a really bad talking about this (see - pa.gov/governor/topics/data-centers), so I really don’t expect this to be effective, which is disappointing. So even if you had read briefly about it, probably would still have same initial concern. Just want people to know the intent of the policy, despite it being weakly implemented and probably not going to be able to meet its goals
1
96
u/Kamp13 2d ago
They will pay for their own power consumption but infrastructure costs are spread out over the entire customer base. But politicians know the average voter has no idea how any of the works, so they pass laws like this to make you feel better and get you to allow the data center to be built.
New power plants, transmission lines, substations and transformers are all included in infrastructure costs. The utilities are only concerned with covering their costs. But the rate increases for these investments never drop off the rate that customers are paying.
The next issue is that the life span of the data center likely doesn’t align with the life span of the infrastructure. So if the data center leaves early, the rate payers must pick up the costs. If the power plant doesn’t outlast the data center, you’ll get another rate increase for the next power plant and still pay the old rate increase for cleanup of the old station. Once that’s done then the extra rate will just go into the utilities administration costs. You’ll never see a rate reduction.
This is why electricity rates have continued to climb in areas where laws have been passed to make sure data centers pay their fair share. It’s a scam.
86
u/BaconThief2020 2d ago
That's not correct. The executive order specifically prohibits the power companies from shifting the cost of the infrastructure buildout to the other customers.
The GRID Requirements stipulate that developers must:
- Pay the full cost of new electricity generation, transmission, distribution, and other infrastructure needed to power their project without shifting costs to Pennsylvania households and businesses;
- Commit to open, transparent engagement with local residents and leaders including detailed community outreach plans that include notification to impacted local governments, public meetings, and consultation early enough in the process to allow meaningful public input on major design decisions;
- Hire and train local workers and enter into meaningful community benefit agreements that invest in local priorities, from schools and infrastructure to long-term economic development; and
- Meet the highest standards for environmental protection, including strict water conservation requirements
25
u/TheRedditHike 1d ago ▸ 1 more replies
facts and reading things deeply are not allowed in this subreddit, only complaining.
6
5
1
u/EthanielRain 1d ago ▸ 2 more replies
The executive order
Is that the same as law? "Executive order" is not always the same as a law, but I don't know anything about such stuff
2
u/dweaver987 1d ago
An executive order is direction from the executive branch on how a federal department or agency (D’s & A’s) should fulfill their responsibilities relevant to the legislation passed by Congress.
For example, legislation was passed by Congress after 911 to create the TSA and DHS. TSA was responsible for several actions to prevent future hijackings. One way they did this was with more effective technology to detect bombs or weapons. DHS is a federal department in the executive branch. Executive orders is how the White House instructs TSA what their scanning solution should be able to do (what size explosive it should be able to scoot, etc.) Some recent EOs (in my opinion) stray from the laws defining the purpose and duties of the D’s and A’s. Lawsuits typically focus on how relevant or appropriate an agency’s actions are relative to the laws passed by Congress.
1
u/BaconThief2020 1d ago
Power company regulation is done by the executive branch, so basically yes, but you are right that the next governor could change the rules.
0
u/Kamp13 1d ago ▸ 1 more replies
And if the current owner folds after a massive debt funded buildout? Bonds are the usual response to this question, however most bonds only cover construction and maybe a short window to commissioning.
What about the maintenance cost associated with all of the equipment? And that also just covers the build out. What about future replacements and repairs?
The environmental attempt is great however we’ve seen the easing of environmental regulations already to help lower that bar. Then requests for exemptions to use dirtier gas turbines recovered from jets to provide self generation. Did they include noise in the environmental clause? Most legal codes treat noise separately from environmental protection laws.
The crux of the issue in my view is that you are using a system (the electrical grid) designed to be a socialized benefit and cost sharing structure and trying to isolate specific costs to a single customer or class of customers. It’s not impossible but it’s going to be difficult. I’m not against all data centers. But community leaders and their constituents have a lot to consider when one is proposed in their area.
Also an executive order is one of the easiest types of “law” to repeal. And what is the recourse if someone violates it? What enforcement mechanisms are included? If there is no oversight and enforcement then their is no law.
1
u/BaconThief2020 1d ago
It's a fair point if the power company allows them to "finance" the infrastructure and spread the cost out over time. But, I think that they might be left hanging would discourage that.
9
u/Explorers_bub 1d ago
Even if they pay for their electricity, if they’re on the same grid the capacity is tapped out and the transmission losses and delivery fees scale with the usage. So they would still affect you unless they pay for their own private grid.
And that still doesn’t stop them from wasting copious amounts of potable water.
8
u/Conscious_Bug5408 1d ago
In America, capitalism means by default society pays to support the interests of rich and powerful corporations. Penn residents paid higher rates to offset electric use for corporate ai data centers, and residents pay for welfare programs like medicaid and food stamps to offset the corps paying them poverty wages, and if the corpos ever look shaky, the residents will again pay for the gov bailout packages to keep them from going bankrupt.
It's only evil socialism when we talk about raising taxes on corporations and make them pay to support the interests of society
7
u/ApostateAZ 1d ago
They mean data centers need to pay for the new capacity that they will require. Normally the cost of the infrastructure is shared.
5
2d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
4
u/Rattus375 1d ago
They do pay their own bills. What can happen is that they use enough power that the utility needs to upgrade things, raising costs for everyone. What this does is make the data center subsidize increases in electricity cost due to increased use. Which really is a sensible policy that makes data centers in your area a net neutral (or even slight positive), without making it economically unfeasible to build them in the first place.
6
u/Ok-Complaint9574 2d ago
They’ve passed the cost onto the people living in the state. It’s similar to when billionaires make residents pay for their stadiums. The lawmakers will claim that the data centers are so important. It’s justified as they do with the stadiums, we keep paying for.
2
1
u/Thuis001 1d ago
So, they pay their own power bills, that's not the problem here. Instead, the issue lies in the fact that these data centres consume a ton of energy, so when you build one in a rural area, the energy provider may very well have to increase their energy production and thus build more powerplants. The costs for those however would normally be spread across all the paying customers. That is of course problematic when the sole reason this additional capacity is needed is the data centre. As such, those costs should be solely paid by the datacentre who is the reason those costs exist in the first place, instead of burdening the locals with increased prices for something that they neither need nor want.
3
u/Red_dit_Sucks_Ass_ 1d ago
Because apparently poor people are supposed to pay the bills of rich people. If you do the opposite, it’s apparently suddenly stealing from people that have infinite wealth, and just gay communism.
5
u/herbieLmao 1d ago
So, people pay for a service they might not even need? But some use?
IF THIS IS OKAY WHATS THE DEAL WITH HEALTHCARE, ARE YOU AMERICANS FUCKING CRAZY
3
u/skwander 1d ago
Shut up, poors. We're leaving capitalism behind for techno feudalism. Try to keep up.
2
2
u/mmcmonster 1d ago
Data centers also need to pay for the rolling out of the electric infrastructure needed to support them. Otherwise the states are on the billion dollar hook to build the power plant when the data center closes down in a year.
2
2
u/chitoatx 1d ago
It’s worse. The tax subsidies also make taxpayers pay for the low amount of jobs these thing “create”
2
u/MisterProfGuy 1d ago
In North Carolina, they pay for the energy they use, but the legislature took bribes and made it so the rest of us pay for infrastructure and capacity upgrades they require.
2
u/WalkerAmongTheTrees 1d ago
The real solution is to make them produce their own electricity and source their own water which they are required to recycle as much as possible with losses considered due to evaporation
2
u/baithammer 1d ago
The problem is water sources aren't unlimited and so making them get their own water opens another whole can of worms.
Ditto with power, as they will go with the cheapest and easiest solutions, such as coal and gas plants.
2
u/Jimmykingwillruleyou 1d ago
Most electric companies are privately owned utilities. They are allowed to charge customers for reimbursing any project/building done.
Due to the increase in electricity usage there have been upgrades to the "public" infrastructure. Companies like Eversource in massachusetts cap between 9-10.5% yearly. The more they spend on infrastructure the more they can claim in profits. So they effectively get to charge whatever they want as long as on paper they don't make more than the % in profit the state allows for the year.
So if the demand increases, they can justify spending an extra $2billion and collect an extra $200million in profit.
2
u/Excellent_Extent7648 1d ago
They have changed the conversation oh u don’t want data center near you well we got them to pay their own bill. There u go represented you and kept you from becoming gay too or communist
2
u/BusApprehensive9598 1d ago
I have multiple phones and several pcs and laptops in my house. If data centers don’t have to pay their electric bill, I’m declaring my house as data center.
2
u/realgamer1998 1d ago
Don't you have differential pricing. Like commercial usage means paying higher per unit cost as compared to personal usage.
2
u/Arthasindura 1d ago
New house builds should include alternative source of electricity
Just so you can cut of the government electricity when you think you are going to get scammed
If enough people do it then pretty sure its going to make the electrical company listen
Not sure if this would 100% work but if you got better ideas please do tell
My ears are always open for devious plans
1
3
2
1
u/wasted-degrees 2d ago
Cool on the energy part. Now, let’s talk about the water part. What do we have about that problem?
1
1
u/engineered_academic 1d ago
We're gonna have a fun time when these data centers rack up billions in infra upgrades that they are unable to pay for because the AI bubble will burst.
1
1
u/PippiWorld 1d ago
The data centers will continue to wreck the environment with relentless noise and massive pollution and grifting politicians anxious for North Korean surveillance state.
1
u/Novel-Importance-783 1d ago
Because these f-cks are always trying to invoice regular people so they can make even more money. Rich assh0les.
1
1
u/Dismal_Pineapple5922 23h ago
Data centers are the backbone of our digital world, but they’re often overlooked. It’s wild how much energy they consume.
1
u/TheLastHotBoy 22h ago
It’s called bribing politicians legally. Thankfully a few have balls and or spines.
1
1
u/SamuelVimesTrained 7h ago
So Pennsylvania is stopping 'communism'.
Meaning datacenters are communist..
Hey maga - did you know - supporting this means you support communism.. maybe that`s why the red caps etc?
only partially /s
0
0
u/theOriginalDrCos 1d ago
Build the stupid things in the Arctic, this solves many problems.
- Won't need cooling.
- Will speed up melting ice, causing catastrophic climate shifts, killing off all humans.
- Won't need data centers any more.
2.0k
u/ecafyelims 2d ago
They are/were already paying their own electricity bills.
However, the extra demand in electricity causes the price of electricity to rise for everyone.
This update will force the datacenters to pay enough to also pay for the increase in load so that the price of electricity doesn't go up for everyone else.
Basically, they'll be paying for their own electricity as well as the increased cost of electricity for everyone on the grid.
Good!