Loobying is bribery.
There was an article I read a while ago that kind of explained it. Basically, the increased datacenter demand forces the grid operator to build more capacity, which requires money. I think there are meetings where they decide how it is distributed across all their corporate and resident ratepayers. Basically the lobbyists argue that the since this new capacity technically benefits rate payers in the form of more capacity, they should take a share of it. Even though none of us are actually going to be using that capacity…
And it doesn’t help at all that the grid companies are monopolies
Depends on the market too, some US states have a requirement that if the power company has to increase capacity, it’s on the power company’s dime.
But correct me if I’m wrong if the data centers are the cause of the electrical increase then shouldn’t they be offering to relieve the city of the cost because they’re the source? Like if I wanted to run 3kw of electricity on a 220v outlet with a laboratory grade vacuum pump for an hour, I would need to pay more for my electrical bill for my house only, right? My neighbors wouldn’t see a spike, I would see a spike.
My neighbors using their central air have a higher bill than me because they use more, that’s always how it’s been.
If they’re the cause they should have to pay more than the rest of us. If they’re using more energy, they should have to pay more, if they can’t pay to do upfront costs with the energy companies maybe they shouldn’t be building them. 🤣🤣🤣🤣 It makes you wonder who the hell is selling these people predatory contracts.
They’re paying for every gigawatt-hour they use, same as us. They are just a different ‘class’ of ratepayer (i.e. a bigger customer). The reason prices go up is not entirely just because of demand, but because there’s not enough supply, and the prices go up to cover for the cost to build it. The way I understand it is that some board has to decide how to distribute the increase in rates across their customers in order to meet the extra revenue, and the higher classes of ratepayers know that if their rate went up, that would be millions lost. So they hire lobbyists to convince the grid company to shift the cost to residential tax payers, and since neither you are me is going to march to the electric company and demand a fairer distribution, they end up shifting ‘some’ of it to us.
You have always paid for millionaires/billionaires projects. The government spends your taxes and gives it to their corporations to build infrastructure and weapons. How do you think we built railroads and space shuttles and tanks?
So, this looks like “Something awful, that I don’t need, is increasing my energy prices”. A more accurate version would probably look like “Something really useful that I use all the time is increasing my energy prices”.
Whenever you see social media posts that demonise data centers just bear in mind all the foreign powers who are working hard to make you hate data centers.
“Using facts that happen to be true”
Domestic powers are working hard to make you love data centers
Oh fuck off. Don’t tell me we’ve got corpo shill bots on Lemmy too now💀
Won’t someone please think of the data centers.
*links to a “Bitcoin Policy Institute”
sounds legit.
:-/
LMFAO
yeah that’s about as hilarious an article as I expected from an outlet called “btcpolicy”
To anyone with an interest in critical thinking just Google who the Bitcoin Policy Institute is and make your own mind up. Or you know… go with the glib soundbite. Up to you lol
You think a Bitcoin based outlet is not biased on power usage and individual economic growth over society’s? Good critical thinking
Google “are foreign powers trying to turn people against data centers?” I’ll wait…
I’m cheering for them, yea. If you think it’s those pesky Chinese and Russians, those “foreign powers” include the UN and most other countries btw.
But I’m sure it’s just because they don’t understand the American economic genius. Anyway all of this is not a problem because the real solution is datacenters in space right?
Again, there’s a lot of crap on Google.
There’s a lot of crap on Google, but no article about this “Bitcoin Policy Institute” in WP.
So I did as commanded
“BPI provides the research, education, and expertise necessary to help America lead in the digital asset revolution while protecting consumers and preserving individual liberty.”
They sound just lovely and definitely have all our best interests at heart. And totally not bitcoin shills, nosiree.
Nice cherry picking… Allow me:
BPI operates as a 501©(3) nonprofit with research and editorial independence. The core team consists of around 25 fellows, advisors, and full-time professionals, including:
Grant McCarty: Executive Director
Matthew Pines: Director of Special Programs / Senior Fellow
Sam Lyman: Head of Research (formerly of the U.S. Treasury Department)
David Zell: PresidentThe institute acts as an educational and advisory resource for lawmakers, regulators, and the media.
Direct Engagement: BPI regularly briefs Congressional members and agency staff, provides expert testimonies, and shapes federal and state legislation.
Congressional Fellowship: BPI operates a fellowship program to train policymakers and their staff on the fundamentals of Bitcoin technology and policy.
Bitcoin Policy Summit: BPI hosts an annual flagship conference in Washington, D.C., that brings together regulators, researchers, and industry leaders to discuss digital asset policy.
Is this cherry picking too? 682df013e55cf277195c3034_BPI Policy Manifesto 20 May 2025.pdf https://share.google/fUP3qeJbPSQI0yCuP in which the title is literally “BITCOIN POLICY INSTITUTE A Comprehensive Policy Framework for U.S. Leadership on Bitcoin Zack Shapiro” sorry about the Google share, can’t find it linked anywhere else. In this policy recommendation they advocate for establishing a US Bitcoin strategic reserve. C’mon now, spin that one as it being for protection of the little guy.
Who funds them?
The fossil fuel industry, crypto bros, Kevin O’Leary, and other MAGA riff-raff?
Shilling for data centers puts you on the same dumbass level as Kevin O’Leary and Peter Thiel who spout bullshit like “the Pope is serving the Chinese communist agenda for doubting AI”.
Classic mischaracterization of my intent there. Keep going lol
What is your intent?
Well it isn’t to “Shill for data centers” but I suspect you knew that already. Honestly, nobody is reading this anymore unless it’s their job, so this is just a conversation between us. I get fed up with these echo chambers. They’re so pointless since everyone already agrees with each other and sensible people just stay away anyway, but it’s still annoying that so few people challenge these talking points. “Data center bad”, “Won’t someone think of the water?!”, “AI is secretly a plan to enslave us all” etc.
My intent was to challenge these things and see who would respond genuinely and who would just stick to the script. It’s been quite interesting. Also, honestly it felt good not to be intimidated or spun out in a thread full of sarcasm, ridicule, ad hominem attacks etc.
As for the downvotes, oh well… Most of the rest of my time here is generally positive. Sometimes though it feels good to stand up and say what I think, even if it costs some fake internet points lol
What does responding genuinely mean to you? Is it so hard to believe that people, especially those on here, hate data centers? To me it seems like your intent was just to confirm your view that the place is an echo chamber. Hearing “yeah it’s all Chinese bots everything is actually great 👍” is what you wanted to find?
“Won’t someone think of the water?!”
I… Did you really type that sentence?
Okay.
The thing is that I’m in Toronto—the same city that Kevin O’Leary’s from—and while my view of him was never great, it took a deep dive in 2024 when IIUC he agreed that Canada should join the US, and now he’s going on about critics of data centers being fronts for the Chinese (even though I’m sure he’s dealt with the Chinese in preference to North American businesses at times).
Further, as one who for the most part doesn’t agree with “intellectual property” I’m kind of with the Chinese on this one as I don’t consider the “theft” of IP a big problem, and resent the US government insisting that we (Canada) should tighten up (I think we should go far in the opposite direction);
and while I’m anti-CPC, I tire of the Sinophobia, such as O’Leary’s use of it, so when you started to sound like him, I, and probably others here, thought, “Oh no, here we go again.”
(btw, I didn’t downvote you: I rarely downvote people)
Egg the diesel, sugar the concrete.
Everything is worth what someone is willing to pay.
Data centers that can’t run, don’t eat up electricity
More luigi will save us power fantasies for our nightly coping routine?
It would take millions of luigis
The US has ≥330 million people. 😁 🙂
Or a few kids with a map of datacenters and a willingness to vandalize some power poles and turn off some water valves.
Or a group of people willing to look to the future when corporstions won’t … dissolve the corporations that bribe the people who will get run out of town for taking those bribes!
There’s usually usually a power pole near them feeding them with electricity. Shame if something were to happen to it.
It is only aluminum wire after all
Don’t you have something like an energy board to protect your citizens against price hikes by power companies.
If we did, it would be populated by MAGAs who would take bribes to let the power company put ALL the costs on the residential consumers. Except for the wealthy neighborhood. They deserve a break, because they’re better.
Sounds like getting politically involved is a MAGA-exclusive thing in your country.
People with wealth have more time on their hands and are also more likely to have a mentality that they deserve what they have more than others. Many of them are obsessed with hierarchy whether they realize it or not, allowing them to dismiss the troubles of the commoners with talk of personal responsibility.
You don’t need wealth, just using your spare time getting involved is enough to boost the ranks.
Unpopular opinion, but when competing for a scarce resource, everyone pays more because it is more scarce. Then more gets created (at least in the case of power) and the system equalizes.
It would be better if there was a provision to cover the spike for ratepayers for some number of years.
businesses actually pay less for electricity than residentials, they get bulk discounts, residents get hikes.
Quebec has it right, citizens pay the cost of production and their price is protected. The power sold to Americans is sold at market price.
Large data centers often pay less than home users (due to economies to scale)
Time to molatov cocktail the AI daracenter. A sudden unexpected fire happened. Dunno how 🤷♀️
I don’t really get how the fig leaf of “due to data-centers” is even supposed to work.
They get more demand, so more revenue. Then the fixed costs of the business are spread over more revenue, which is supposed to make the prices better not worse.
I know the profit motive is just extracting whatever the market will bear, but could anyone still explain the reasoning they are trying to make customers believe?
but could anyone still explain the reasoning they are trying to make customers believe?
That’s the neat part, they don’t have to bother with that!
I don’t really get how the fig leaf of “due to data-centers” is even supposed to work.
It let’s them increase their extortionary price hike by more, and blame it on a different extortionist.
Somewhere at the energy company is a person or small team responsible for that message. And those are regular people who also are getting fucked in the ass. Carefully crafted to keep their job (shifting the blame away from the utility slightly), while also letting everyone know who’s dick it is in their bumbum
It can depend, also this little snippet doesn’t say if it’s energy or delivery. Some utilities really like expanding delivery because the projects are revenue, and they don’t make much, if any, on the delivery. But in some cases those delivery expansion projects have a long payback time, so they avoid them until they’re critical, and also lose if after building the demand they were serving goes down.
It also varies a ton by state (Texas being the most extreme example). As well as, someone noted below, how the energy purchase goes. In my state there’s an independent not for profit that is not the utility, and not the energy producer, that just coordinates purchase of power from the broader region (across multiple states). They’ll mix whats coming into the grid in the state going “call Ohio and buy XXYY megawatts for ZZ hrs from that coal fire joint”. The control room is cool as hell. They seem pretty ethically clean, but purchasing that power is a bidding process (like, real time), and your bid has to be competitive.
probably need to build new power plants while the existing ones are in overdrive
they could handle that diffeently, bug fleecing regular joe is more fun
that’s socialism
Data centers have lobbying force the citizens lack, they can negotiate for better prices.
Data centers also force power grid upgrades, the cost of which gets unfairly distributed to consumers.
And, data centers have the technology to take advantage of peak pricing, running on low power when electricity costs more and amping up when the price is more favorable.
People need to fight back in force, write their representatives, their energy companies, show up to town halls and increase public pressure to make sure data centers are paying their fair share.
I emailed the department of energy asking it why the cost of the data centers energy is being pushed onto the people and I also mentioned how it seems like a direct conflict of interest.
You think those clowns care about your email?? Probably got put in the trash as soon as it arrived.
Still worth a try asking, right?
A data center that has been burned down won’t need power
How’s all that freedom, 'Murica?
