Back to News
Advertisement
Advertisement

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

80% Positive

Analyzed from 1543 words in the discussion.

Trending Topics

#maryland#power#more#data#electricity#infrastructure#prices#utility#charge#grid

Discussion (42 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

anonymousiam•about 1 hour ago
It seems that big money can overrule local government regulators at will.

Here in Nevada, (Warran Buffet owned) NV Energy already has approval for a "Demand Charge" that will increase rates for everyone, and further reduce the ridiculously low amount of money that consumers get for selling their excess solar power back to the grid.

The regulators didn't even resist, but there has now been so much backlash that they're finally scheduling public hearings after the fact. The announcement doesn't even mention the Demand Charge by name, and many consumers aren't even aware they they're about to be screwed.

One of the more obscene things about this new charge is that people with PV arrays will pay a fee for demanding more power from their own grid-tied systems.

https://www.nvenergy.com/publish/content/dam/nvenergy/bill_i...

timmg•about 2 hours ago
It's not clear from the article whether this is just datacenters -- or if that is just the convenient boogeyman.

The grid operator for the northeast, according to my Governor, has been well-behind in building out infrastructure. Of course new datacenters cause more load. But so do new houses (we're building as many as we can) and electric cars, etc.

3eb7988a1663•12 minutes ago
It is not entirely wrong. Annual electricity consumption per capita consumption in Maryland has been falling since 2005[0]. Unless a bunch of aluminum smelting plants have come online in the past 18 months, data centers do seem the appropriate root cause leading to a surge in demand.

[0] https://www.eia.gov/states/MD/data/dashboard/electricity cannot drop a direct link, but you can expand the "Total electricity consumption per capita, annual" chart

UqWBcuFx6NV4r•about 1 hour ago
There is so much FUD going around SPECIFICALLY about data centers lately, that i’m dubious of anything i hear. it’s such a weird cultural phenomenon. Chronically online teenagers on Instagram making increasingly incorrect and absurd-sounding claims about water / energy usage. Comparatively barely anyone knew what a data center was 1-2 years ago.
lostlogin•43 minutes ago
> increasingly incorrect and absurd-sounding claims about water

Wait till they hear about big Ag and how they use, abuse and ‘pay’ for water, while farming deserts.

rockskon•13 minutes ago
Somehow I don't see arguments comparing powering AI with producing food to go over well with them.

Many opponents to AI do not view the tech as having a net benefit. Comparing it to food production would serve to make you look more the fool to them despite their claims about water consumption frequently being wacky.

tempaccount5050•about 1 hour ago
Yep. 10000 gallons per query, spews out toxic water, contaminates the water supply, uses more power than an entire state, and on and on. I'm convinced it's a psyop to prevent the US's progress in tech. It's so over the top crazy and obviously false, but everyone I know is falling for it.
jamescrowley•about 1 hour ago
‘More power than an entire state’. Yep - take the Stratos data center project in Utah, the first phase of which is expected to consume 3GW and at full capacity is expected to be 9GW. By comparison, the entire state of Utah currently uses about 4GW.
jorvi•about 1 hour ago
They might be wrong on this one, but check the history on cancer alley, or the legalized massive PFAS dumping in rivers the world over, that has now polluted the earth so thoroughly you cannot escape going over the maximum recommended body serum. Same for microplastics.

It is absolutely justified to be extremely suspicious of big corporate. They've earned it.

Teever•24 minutes ago
That's a take. But let's stop and ask ourselves -- Cui bono?

Another take is that the same companies that are pushing for datacentres are often the same companies that control social media and traditional media outlets and are using this control to foster datacentres onto thee average person who is either wildly unenthusiastic about or at best ambivalent about.

It's all pretty moot anyways.

Big tech oligarchs have gotten pretty much everything they want over the years, it's not like the average person in bum-fuck nowhere is really going to be able to stop them from destroying their watersheds, poisoning their air and jacking up electrical prices.

I wouldn't get too upset about opposition to datacentres if I were you.

Money is King and the King has spoken.

There will be datacentres where ever the tech oligarchs want there isn't anything anyone can do about it.

claw-el•about 3 hours ago
I am curious how electricity is priced. Why are more and more utility providers charge based on ‘infrastructure cost’ or ‘fixed platform fee’ instead of usage fee?
twunde•about 2 hours ago
Within the US, energy prices for are typically split into supply and distribution rates with taxes and fees added to each of these. There are typically a large number of these fees that are passed through to the consumer, but just are bundled together to reduce confusion. An example fee is one for keeping power plants idle as extra capacity for when it's needed. Electricity has a nationwide market with different prices for spot prices vs long term although if you are big enough you can also get a direct contract to hedge your energy supply prices.

The complaint here is that PJM is spending money on upgrading the long range wires and passing that fee in a way that's not calculated for usage but instead it's likely divided evenly amongst member states. If you're upgrading wires in PA why should Maryland pay for that? These would taking in new/higher fees being passed to consumers.

The long range transmission lines are different than short term transmission lines. The long range ones appear someone to hit electricity from a power plant in California for a business in Baltimore.

Avshalom•about 3 hours ago
because as part of their legal monopolies they are only allowed to charge a "reasonable" usage fee.

ETA: utility companies make profit on capex, not opex

rayiner•about 2 hours ago
That's mostly incorrect. In Maryland, like in most places in the country, the distribution infrastructure is controlled by regulated monopolies that buy power on the market from generators. Your bills separate out the fees for usage and the fees for distribution, and the Maryland PSC has to approve both.
fooqux•about 1 hour ago
Yes, but the cost per kilowatt is at least partially based on capex recovery. That might be approved by the PSC but what they approve are capex projects and the recovery of them.
claw-el•about 3 hours ago
Only allowed to charge “reasonable” usage fee means no other non-usage fee allowed or it is purposely designed to allow other kinds of fees?
Avshalom•about 2 hours ago
https://www.nrdc.org/bio/jc-kibbey/utility-accountability-10... To be clear this only about some utility companies.
morkalork•about 2 hours ago
Perhaps utilities should be state owned where any profits are used to offset the tax load on the citizens..
fooqux•about 1 hour ago
Because there's this belief that a for-profit company will naturally be more efficient. No idea if that's actually true in practice though. Or if efficiency > the profits the company takes.

I don't know of any large community ran utilities, just small ones. I'm guessing the scale starts being a problem eventually.

TrackerFF•about 2 hours ago
I'm not familiar with the Maryland power grid, but I've observed in other places that putting data centers in places with older / inadequate grids can / will require upgrades to handle the new load.
CPLX•about 2 hours ago
aprilthird2021•about 2 hours ago
Kind of stuff that can radicalize a young family struggling to make ends meet...
vjvjvjvjghv•29 minutes ago
Maybe the AI guys should use the AI first to develop fusion reactors they can then use to power the data centers.

I honestly think they should pay fully for the infrastructure that provides power for them. It's not fair to have regular users pay for this.

luxuryballs•about 3 hours ago
who is actually signing off on these agreements to build it, knowing the bill goes to the locals? seems openly shady
reactordev•about 3 hours ago
Those closest to the beltway…
bilbo0s•about 2 hours ago
Apparently not. Maryland residents didn’t sign any of these agreements in other states. Nor did their elected representatives. They were just presented with the bill to support the infrastructure in the other states because, you know, they’re so cool. And it doesn’t get any closer to the beltway than Maryland.

What’s crazy is the utility company admits that the infrastructure is for the growth in the other states. They admit Maryland won’t grow as fast. They concede Maryland needs less infrastructure. But still saddled Maryland residents with the extra bills for out of state data centers?

I mean, at least say it’s for Maryland. Just to make it look good? I don’t know? Make some kind of attempt to make it palatable.

I’m wondering if it’s just easier to pass the cost on to people in Maryland than it is in other states? Like is the regulatory environment with respect to this kind of thing more lax or something?

There has to be some kind of explanation. Because on the face of it, this just doesn’t look good. It makes ai and tech industry just seem like robber barons. And tech guys don’t need that right now.

jfengel•about 2 hours ago
It's for "the grid", of which Maryland is a part, so it supposedly derives some benefit.

And since the grid is being updated to accommodate new paying customers, Maryland will benefit from lower future prices. Right? Right?

jmyeet•about 2 hours ago
We've been here before [1]. In that case, extra load on the grid meant the municipality needed to purchase more power (at higher prices), which raised everybody's prices.

Electricity supply is highly regulated. Prices for electricity are constrained and often set by state regulators. These are so-called "usage fees". But beyond that the utility is allowed to charge customers for infrastructure and transmissio and those fees are out of control. We recently had a court case where a North Carolina utility illegally overcharged customers but the judge didn't assign damages because legally the utility could just charge customers for those damages [2]. And the legislature passed laws to protect the utility as well.

This is going to get worse too because private equity is rapidly moving into this market and they know that capex can be entirely pushed onto customers with no recourse.

So the data centers tend to get sweetheart deals on electricity too. So while the total cost of electricity has gone up (per Mwh), they pay less pushing even more burden onto everyone else. Plus they get discounts on property taxes, energy tariffs and other taxes, as in the case of Kevin O'Leary's mega-DC in Utah.

But this state interconnect bill is another level of evil because it's pushing the costs onto states that have nothing to do with the data center and won't get any "benefit" (there is no benefit) anyway.

What we need are laws that make these projects pay for their own infrastructure. This might cause them to build near power sources. Great. Away from people, mostly.

The level of regulatory corruption here is actually sickening. Take Elon's Grok DC in Memphis that exploits local laws against clean air by using "mobile" gas turbines in the city of Memphis.

[1]: https://newsroom.haas.berkeley.edu/research/power-hungry-cry...

[2]: https://www.wcnc.com/article/news/local/no-refunds-for-duke-...

SOLAR_FIELDS•about 2 hours ago
I'll be the first to complain about Texas being on its own energy grid and the dumpster fire of resultant things that happen because of it, but it is worthwhile to call out that this sort of thing is not possible in Texas because of that.