-
There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.
Yay datacenters...driving up electricity costs
- Thread starter Climber
- Start date
I'm not saying you're wrong, but I have yet to see real proof that utilities are performing investment that results in residential ratepayers subsidizing special interests. Sure, it's a talking point that is thrown around a lot, but that doesn't necessarily mean anything. Just as Panthera pointed out with the supposed extreme water usage being a very common, but largely fabricated narrative.
If anything, adding more load to a regional grid should reduce operating expenses on a per kw/hr basis, which would mean that any required initial investment, longer-term, would likely pencil out favorably for everyone.
Blankpage
alien
When the AI bubble bursts some of those structures will make for awesome indoor karting tracks.
Hopefully gas powered karts over electric please.
Hopefully gas powered karts over electric please.
Climber
Well-known member
Too bad it hasn't worked out that way.
Yea, rates have not exactly been trending down. But isn't it likely that's being driven by all the uber expensive grid hardening and deferred maintenance to provide utility grade power to the hinterlands?
I've been thinking about about the weird special interest dysfunctions that pop up when it comes to large-scale public infrastructure. You see it with the delta water tunnels, the California high speed rail project, and with the preservation of all this outdated grid infrastructure. We seem to struggle with the idea that sometimes the best infrastructure decision is to not build it, or abandon it.
Admittedly everything I'm saying here seems to contradict what I said above. What I should've said above, is that I haven't seen any evidence that rural residential power users are subsidizing anyone. Delivering grid reliability to rural residential users is a big turd of an infrastructure investment that never pencils out. But if you're going to maintain it, adding demand should, over time, reduce avg kw/hr delivery cost. Bigger picture, urban residential power users, meanwhile, are subsidizing everyone.
Last edited:
Climber
Well-known member
The problem is that lowering costs in today's US often doesn't lower prices, they've gotten greedy and raise costs even as economy of scale means they aren't paying as much.
The old supply and demand models don't really apply anymore, especially with the consolidation of monopolies.
Look at hos shipping has gone up substantially even as shipping has increased, but the big companies get much better rates and individuals get left holding the bag and paying much higher shipping costs.
The old supply and demand models don't really apply anymore, especially with the consolidation of monopolies.
Look at hos shipping has gone up substantially even as shipping has increased, but the big companies get much better rates and individuals get left holding the bag and paying much higher shipping costs.
So what you're saying is, a little governmental regulation adding cost to commercial power to decrease the cost of residential power might be desirable?
That we don't want Joe America competing for resources with Elon Musk, because Joe's competitiveness is orders of magnitude smaller than Elon's?
So we shall tax commercial power and subsidize residential power? I think that's a so shall ism.
That we don't want Joe America competing for resources with Elon Musk, because Joe's competitiveness is orders of magnitude smaller than Elon's?
So we shall tax commercial power and subsidize residential power? I think that's a so shall ism.
I think all our problems could be handled by grid devolution back to municipal control. Just break PG&E up and force divestiture. SF is trying to join their ranks, and recently was trying to push a bill through to accelerate the process. It was defeated by PG&E and frickin farmers/ranchers, who love gulping down power subsidized by SF rate payers. 12 of the 17 committee members failed to even vote on it.
I would like to see PG&E broken up too, but this sentiment is kinda shitty…where does your food come from, it certainly doesn’t come from farms and ranches in San Francisco.
Who was the Barf'er that had all the electrical power info? I used to love reading his insights. Haven't seen him in awhile.
edit: it's wazzuFreddo
edit: it's wazzuFreddo
There's a lot of farmers growing export crops. e.g, almonds. These don't really benefit California residents that much. But for most of their needs, they can invest in solar/batteries. Run your pumps and water your damn crops when the sun is out.
Abacinator
Unholy Blasphemies
Alfalfa consumes a shitload of water and nearly all of it is exported to China
easy wind
Member
About half the water intensive rice grown in semi arid CA is exported. Makes zero eco-sense just agro-cents.
My point still stands. You don’t produce your own food. Your food probably isn’t even grown within 50 or even 100 miles of your home. Same with your electricity. It isn’t produced within your city for NIMBY reasons. It comes from rural areas. And those rural areas are supported by rural communities. I made my comment because people like to complain about their subsidies to rural areas but without those rural areas, city folk would have to do their own dirty work.
Climber
Well-known member
It's not that simple.
Yes, food is produced in rural areas, but not by the many companies that take more than their fair share of water and export most if not all of their produce out of the country.
I get that there is a whole other side to the food chain but again, even if the corporate, make a bunch of money exporting food didn’t exist people would still complain about subsidies to rural areas.
An so I’m clear I don’t support the AI or crypto energy and water grab In rural areas.
An so I’m clear I don’t support the AI or crypto energy and water grab In rural areas.
Consolidation of agriculture is a complex mess. Part of our problems come from the consumer, that everything has to be perfect and cheap. You only get perfect and cheap through large piece of shit corps. The waste alone from fussy consumers is insane. The fact that it has to look perfect has these places using terrible chemicals. The low cost needs causes the need for huge facilities that most communities don't want.
easy wind
Member
I agree. What I’ve seen is that the large producers only harvest the perfect veg/fruit, about 70%. They finish picking at twilight and are plowing under a significant percentage of perfectly watered, tended and good food at dawn without any opportunity for gleaners to retrieve it for the hungry. I once watched several hundred acres of beautiful peppers grow to ripeness then be unceremoniously plowed under because the price wasn’t right. We have serious waste issues and ought to be ashamed.
Blankpage
alien
I avoid US produce whenever I can simply because of the excessive amount of chemicals allowed in the food chain. Which has only gotten much worse now that the FDA & EPA has been neutered.
wazzuFreddo
WuTang is 4 the children
You rang?
I've worked at PG&E and AWS, I must be part of the problem
There is kind of an arms race in AI right now and anyone and everyone is throwing whatever they can at the wall proposing data centers all over the place. My personal opinion is that this is already a moot point and is going to be won by the large companies that are already heavily invested (AWS, Google, Meta, xAI, etc). Most large scale electrical equipment takes 48-52 weeks at a minimum to get, if you're not already buying in those supply chains, best of luck to you.