This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
The problem with this is the electricity rate increases haven't actually materialized. They're all projections. And future impacts, in theory and in practice, fairly easy to avoid; the permitting authority has to structure things so the data center pays their own way. This should not be that hard, the data center builders currently have a lot of cash to throw around. So it amounts to a opposition talking point, like the water.
'No, in fact, you do have to give us the tax break we demanded first, or else we will sue you into the ground'.
Good luck with that one Nybbler, so long as deep pockets can hire shark lawyers to tie things up in court for years.
Now, they do have the soothing messaging out about how they won't use water, drive up energy costs, will provide tons of jobs, etc. and I'd be more inclined to believe them if they hadn't first gone for "we'll sue you into the ground and destroy you and leave you penniless if you don't zone this land for a data centre".
A guy who assures me he was only joking about cutting my throat when he had the knife to my neck may be telling the truth, but he's not going to convince me he loved me and had my best interests at heart when he threatened to cut my throat.
The lawsuit documents indicate that the situation is more complicated than that. As alleged by the company:
(1) The company buys a bunch of farmland in an agricultural zone, and applies for "conditional rezoning" to a light industrial zone with special restrictions to prevent any industry other than a data center. Apparently, conditional rezoning is, not some unusual and onerous demand, but merely Michigan's equivalent to the "conditional use" or "special exception" that one might see in Pennsylvania or New Jersey.
(2) The municipal planning commission fails to make a legitimate consideration of the application, but merely recommends in an arbitrary and capricious manner that the municipal council reject it.
(3) The municipal council rejects the application by a vote of four to one. All five members participate in the vote, even though the chair previously recused himself from discussions on this topic due to a conflict of interest.
(4) The company sues the municipal govt., under state precedent that forbids "exclusionary zoning" of a use from land that is suitable for that use. The municipal govt. settles, agreeing to approve both the conditional rezoning and a 12-year "industrial development district" tax exemption.
(5) The municipal govt. approves the tax exemption, but then removes it, in what certainly seems like an obvious contravention of the lawsuit settlement.
More options
Context Copy link
That has nothing to do with this. Nybbler is saying ‘there is no need for data centres to use public electricity as long as the public authority lets them build generators’.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I work in energy (electricity) and this is part true and part untrue. Yes, electricity prices have gone up modestly, with bigger increases projected in the next 5 years.
The reasons prices are set to increase is that we are really slow to put new generation on the grid. And the amount of data centers under construction, let alone planned, is much bigger than what is already operational.
It’s a very simple supply and demand function. Load increases faster than supply. DCs buy power through PPA contracts directly with generators. But that crowds out offtake from the generators that would otherwise go to merchant markets or supply agreements with utilities.
We are average at best at building new power supply.
I expect retail electricity prices to be electoral politics by 2030, maybe even 2028.
This feels somewhat constrained to the local regulatory environment. We can just make investments in the grid faster. In the last two decades, total US nameplate capacity is up 20-30%, while ERCOT (Texas) is up over 100%. They don't want you to know this, but you can just build things: Texas is more friendly to renewables than California these days!
But Abbot says there's too many applications for new power connections so he's not going to consider any of them. Brilliant move. Politically, anyway
I think Abbott is at least partially swaying with the political winds here, but ERCOT's 100% increase in the last two decades pales in comparison to their forecast of 300% growth in the next 6 years. I think there are probably legitimate questions of capacity buildout at much higher rates than baseline, and "not committing to anything further" doesn't sound entirely foolish.
On the third (gripping) hand, I really question the hyperscaler economic case where they're able to pay N times the current price for huge amounts of energy, but the proles will still have enough money to pay them for AI services and for utilities. I don't know about everyone else, but "paying to chat with Claude/Gemini/ChatGPT" falls pretty low on Maslow's heirarchy of needs for me, well behind "keep the lights on and HVAC going". Even if they expect B2B to pay the bills, consumers are still an important part (ultimately, the endpoint) of the economy: it can't be B2B all the way down. Models are getting more efficient and I somewhat expect that quite a few use cases need less hardware than currently forecast.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Existing electricity price increases aren't correlated to data center builds, however. And of course we're slow to put new generation on the grid; environmentalists.
Making datacenters build grid improvements is a real idea that's been floated around.
If you make them build grid improvements (which amounts to money and partnerships with existing firms which do such things; they're not going to do the actual grid improvements any more than Microsoft is restarting TMI), but don't LET them build grid improvements (because environment, safety, union work rules, etc), you've just banned them in a more complicated way.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
It’s worse than environmentalists. If it was just that I’d have some hope. It’s the bureaucracy, regulation, cost disease, NIMBYism, and a general atrophy of industrial construction capacity.
I don’t understand your point. Please elaborate. Evan assuming your point is accurate, I don’t think it matters.
You talked about how there has been no (little?) electricity price increase increase to date and that it’s only future price projections that have increased. I can assure you that when a power plant in 2026 is signing a 15-25 year power purchase agreement, those future energy price projections are the #1 thing they’re basing their price negotiations on. There’s a handful of companies that put out these projections and everyone makes long term financials decisions on them. The feedback loop on how these contracts affect the current price of power should be obvious, but I can elaborate if needed.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link