As Data Centers for AI Strain the Power Grid, Bills Rise for Everyday Customers (msn.com) 57
While Amazon, Google, and other companies build new data centers — sometimes for their AI projects — parts of America "are facing higher electric bills," reports the Washington Post:
The facilities' extraordinary demand for electricity to power and cool computers inside can drive up the price local utilities pay for energy and require significant improvements to electric grid transmission systems. As a result, costs have already begun going up for customers — or are about to in the near future, according to utility planning documents and energy industry analysts. Some regulators are concerned that the tech companies aren't paying their fair share, while leaving customers from homeowners to small businesses on the hook.
In Oregon, electric utilities are warning regulators that consumers need protections from rising rates caused by data centers. From Virginia to Ohio and South Carolina, companies are battling over the extent of their responsibility for increases, attempting to fend off anger from customers. In the Mid-Atlantic, the regional power grid's energy costs shot up dramatically, and data centers are cited as among root causes of rate increases of up to 20 percent expected in 2025...
The tech firms and several of the power companies serving them strongly deny they are burdening others. They say higher utility bills are paying for overdue improvements to the power grid that benefit all customers. In some cases, they said in response to criticism from consumer and business advocates that they are committed to covering additional costs. But regulators — and even some utilities — are growing skeptical.
A jarring example of fallout on consumers is playing out on the Mid-Atlantic regional power grid, called PJM Interconnection, which serves 13 states and D.C. The recent auction to secure power for the grid during periods of extreme weather and high demand resulted in an 800 percent jump in the price that the grid's member utilities had to pay. The impact will be felt by millions by the spring, according to public records. Power bills will increase as much as 20 percent for customers of a dozen utilities in Maryland, Ohio, Pennsylvania, New Jersey and West Virginia, regulatory filings show. That includes households in the Baltimore area, where annual bills will increase an average of $192, said Maryland People's Counsel David Lapp, a state appointee who monitors utilities. The next auction, in 2025, could be more painful, Lapp said, leaving customers potentially "looking at increases of as much as $40 to $50 a month...."
Advocates cite another source of cost-shifting onto consumers: discounted rates that power companies and local government officials use to entice tech companies to build data centers... Google worked out a deal with Dominion Energy, blessed by regulators, to pay 6 cents per kilowatt hour for its power. That is less than half of what residential customers pay, as well as substantially less than is paid by businesses...
The article points out that in Pennsylvania, "Amazon's novel plan to fuel a data center from a reactor at the nearby Susquehanna nuclear plant is now in jeopardy, after regulators blocked it Friday. They cited potential impact on consumers as among their concerns. The plan threatens to leave other ratepayers stuck with a bill of $50 million to $140 million, according to testimony from [power utility] AEP and utility conglomerate Exelon."
And meanwhile, one Virginia retiree complained about a proposed $54 million transmission line and substation for an Amazon data center. "They are already making money hand over fist, and now they want us to pay for this?
The tech firms and several of the power companies serving them strongly deny they are burdening others. They say higher utility bills are paying for overdue improvements to the power grid that benefit all customers. In some cases, they said in response to criticism from consumer and business advocates that they are committed to covering additional costs. But regulators — and even some utilities — are growing skeptical.
A jarring example of fallout on consumers is playing out on the Mid-Atlantic regional power grid, called PJM Interconnection, which serves 13 states and D.C. The recent auction to secure power for the grid during periods of extreme weather and high demand resulted in an 800 percent jump in the price that the grid's member utilities had to pay. The impact will be felt by millions by the spring, according to public records. Power bills will increase as much as 20 percent for customers of a dozen utilities in Maryland, Ohio, Pennsylvania, New Jersey and West Virginia, regulatory filings show. That includes households in the Baltimore area, where annual bills will increase an average of $192, said Maryland People's Counsel David Lapp, a state appointee who monitors utilities. The next auction, in 2025, could be more painful, Lapp said, leaving customers potentially "looking at increases of as much as $40 to $50 a month...."
Advocates cite another source of cost-shifting onto consumers: discounted rates that power companies and local government officials use to entice tech companies to build data centers... Google worked out a deal with Dominion Energy, blessed by regulators, to pay 6 cents per kilowatt hour for its power. That is less than half of what residential customers pay, as well as substantially less than is paid by businesses...
The article points out that in Pennsylvania, "Amazon's novel plan to fuel a data center from a reactor at the nearby Susquehanna nuclear plant is now in jeopardy, after regulators blocked it Friday. They cited potential impact on consumers as among their concerns. The plan threatens to leave other ratepayers stuck with a bill of $50 million to $140 million, according to testimony from [power utility] AEP and utility conglomerate Exelon."
And meanwhile, one Virginia retiree complained about a proposed $54 million transmission line and substation for an Amazon data center. "They are already making money hand over fist, and now they want us to pay for this?
False dichotomy (Score:1, Troll)
And it would be completely foolish and unnecessary and counterproductive because we could just build out more wind and solar instead.
What you're trying to do is find a free market solution where there is none. That's why t
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
What makes you think that the TVA [wikipedia.org] went away? It's still there, doing the same job it always has. Of course, given your reluctance to check your facts or proofread your posts, I'm not surprised.
Re: (Score:1)
come on bro, a good faith reading would simply in your brain understand where they said "existed" when they mean "exists".
you can dislike and disagree with the guy but this is just bad faith pettiness
Re: (Score:2)
Call out the political nature of these things (Score:2)
These news stories should just call out the political party taking action.
The (political party name) regulators did this at the national level. The (political party name) appointed regulators at the state level.
Bob X an expert in the electrical grid infrastructure, who served as undersecretary in the (political party) administration's Department of Energy, said "..."
- This lack of transparency of political affiliations in news reporting is not a sign of a free and independent press.
- The omission of showin
Re: (Score:2)
Free market solutions need profit and lots of it and it has to be short-term.
The reason it has to be short-term is the risk of the government taxing or regulating your Great New Idea(tm) out of existence. This is especially true if your Great New Idea threatens the profitability of those who pay the government for protection from upstart new businesses (aka lobbying). You need to be sure of making your profit before there's time for this to happen.
No that's not correct (Score:2)
When you have something that costs hundreds of billions or sometimes even trillions of dollars to do no matter how profitable it's going to be in 50 to 100 years that doesn't matter to you because you're going to be dead.
Human beings just aren't capable of thinking on those
Re: (Score:2)
Human beings just aren't capable of thinking on those scales.
You should tell the people who built European cathedrals that took 100+ years. The architects new they wouldn't live to see the completion.
We absolutely CAN think long term but we're sold out by profiteers most of the time.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
nothing false about the reality of classism nor corruption, if people can't see how bad it's because, people aren't looking
the complicit are blind to the problems they create
Re: (Score:2)
What's your describing would crash the entire US economy.
If done immediately and without consideration then, yes. However, if only new buildings were on priced this way while other others where slowly shifted over a longer period (e.g. a decade) then it would have the desired effect. Change is not an all-or-nothing proposition.
in particular if you took electricity away from rural communities, then sure you could do what you're talking about.
Why would anyone do that? Rural communities are not high in electricity use. I mean, if you're talking about electric arc smelting then you could always exempt industries deemed vital. Nothing is black-and-white.
What you're trying to do is find a free market solution
No, what this would do is d
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Electricity rates are bogus. (Score:4, Interesting)
nobody gives a damn is right, all greedy and entitled people care about is having more and more because they appreciate it all less and less
hoarding is pathological, classism is rooted in mental illness, our leaders are totally addicted to affluence and power
money is power, power corrupts and our governments are all completely corrupted by self-interest, welcome to our corporatocracy
Not one dime (Score:5, Insightful)
The tech firms should be paying for any and all of this work and a for a huge future cleanup and maintenance fund -- UP FRONT. Regulators should ensure that there is ZERO chance of anyone else getting stuck with the bill when this goes bust. And this still applies to "AI now" believers, since even if they are right, improvements in efficiency could still massively change the situation at some point.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Same with EVs.
Re:Not one dime (Score:5, Interesting)
Make it similar to a reclamation bond in mining. The data center pays up front for the new capacity, and the decommissioning and cleanup funds go into an escrow account. When the site gets scrapped or the company goes bankrupt the escrow account will cover the cost. If there is any left over it goes the creditors.
At one mine I worked at the power company did a cost share. They were sure the mine would be around long enough to amortize the investment, and they were right.
Mining the Commons (Score:5, Insightful)
This is just another example of how easy it is to "mine" common public services for profits. Instead of building a power plant, you buy a share of cheap existing public power and force everyone to pay for the additional power you will need.
This is not fixable in our current political system. We each get one vote to influence the selection of one member of congress. Those with money can spend unlimited amounts to influence the selection of all 435 members.
Re: (Score:1)
Those with unlimited money can simply pay off voters $1 million at a time.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't get a choice for voting. You're getting a pre-selected person who is bankrolled by one of the existing power structures and has already been vetted and confirmed for compliance. Everyone else is left unfunded and fades away. That's the reality. Voting is a joke in the US.
Re: (Score:2)
How are nominees chosen?
Most of them are independently wealthy and look after their own interests, or have a track record of addressing the concerns of corporations over the electorate whenever they can get away with it.. The also need money for re-election campaigns, and special interests have deep pockets for that.
I don't care how you vote for as long as I get to do the nominating - Boss Tweed
Re: (Score:1)
If Boss tweed's nominations don't get the votes, they will not be elected, no matter how much money is spent. The voters have the power to devalue each campaign dollar to zero, or even a negative value as an unrecoverable expense. You are practicing learned helplessness.
Re: (Score:2)
How do you explain a failed owner of a failed restaurant where she poisoned people by the dozens [wikipedia.org] getting into Congress?
After paying off debts the restaurant was making, most the money her husband was earning [apnews.com] was gone.
She couldn't have taken ALL her voters to see Beetlejuice The Musical with her.
Or how about that other chick [wikipedia.org] that worked the bar while running her campaign - against the guy with money AND the party behind him?
Don't look now... but that's two women from lower-middle and middle class from both m
Re: (Score:1)
You obviously don't know how elections really work. If you don't have money, you have no way to inform voters or persuade them. And voters don't vote for people they have never heard of, nor should they.
But it goes beyond that. Its not just that they have heard of you but what they have heard and how often. There is the example of a group funding pro Harris ads extolling her support for Israel, in heavily Arab areas of Michigan, and her support for Palestinians, in heavily Jewish areas in Pennsylvania. S
Crypto mining contributions. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Crypto mining contributions. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Shit, piss, fuck, cunt, cocksucker, motherfucker, and tits.
Sincerely,
George Carlin
Re: (Score:1)
Shit, piss, fuck, cunt, cocksucker, motherfucker, and tits. Sincerely, George Carlin
Booger !
Dr. Johnny Fever
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I'm getting real tired of all the censoring, too. They've started censoring common words like suicide or death, presumably because someone, somewhere might feel uncomfortable... as if it was the word and not the concept it describes that brings discomfort and as if su*c*de seriously changed anything about that...
Nuclear power and data centres (Score:2)
I can see some good reasons for siting data centers near nuclear power stations.
1) Data center power consumption is pretty constant, and nuclear power is well suited to constant loads. You can't just start and stop a reactor.
2) Nuclear plants are situated where there is abundant cooling water, that's good for data centers too
3) Nobody wants to live or work near a nuclear plant, that means lower land costs for building the data center and fewer nimbys.
4) Less cost installing h
Re:Nuclear power and data centres (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Data centers are sited near major communication centers. i.e. Northern VA is ground zero for these things.
Milliseconds matter to them so as close as possible to network backbones. Idaho ain't viable.
Cart before the horse (Score:5, Interesting)
In California, utilities are regulated. The rules dictate what the utilities can and can't do, with an eye toward trying to maintain stable prices at a benefit to consumers.
Unfortunately, because of how the rules are written... the utilities are incentivized in ways to make more money within that framework, rather than actually benefit consumers.
https://www.nrdc.org/bio/jc-ki... [nrdc.org]
(the NRDC example uses Illinois, but from what I have gathered, California works in a very similar manner)
"Utilities can collect their spending on operating expenses from you and me, on our bills. In practice, they almost always cover their costs, but they don’t get anything extra beyond what they spent. So, if a utility spends $100 on operating expenses, it collects $100 back, spread out across all the bills people pay to that utility. They don’t profit.
But with capital expenses—that is, physical infrastructure, like poles and wires—utilities can collect the money they invested plus an additional percentage they keep as profit. So, if a utility spends $100 on capital expenses, they might collect $110 on our bills, with $100 paying for the wires and poles and $10 going towards profits..."
"...On the other hand, the only way utilities make profits is by spending money on physical infrastructure (e.g., poles and wires). The law says they should spend the least they can while providing quality, environmentally safe service, but when it comes to their bottom line, utilities are incentivized to make more costly investments. The more they spend on physical infrastructure, the more profit they stand to make..."
So yes, large data centers (as with any major industrial customer) buying electricity on the open market, has the potential of raising prices for residential users (and other industrial and commercial users). But the problem is not the datacenters. Any effort to re-industrialize America (and bring back jobs exported overseas) is going to to require energy. Hell, building more housing is going to require more energy. The problem is, the utilities are not incentivized to ever lower rates.
"...Here’s a hypothetical example that highlights the issue: several large new apartment buildings have been built in a neighborhood, so the area is now using more electricity than the local electric grid is able to provide. There are two ways to address this: one is a $50 million project that brings more power into the neighborhood by building new high-tension wires and new substations; the other is a $10 million project to reduce demand by implementing energy efficiency measures and installing batteries. For this example, let’s say the utility has a return on equity of 10%, meaning that they make a 10% profit on whatever they spend on capital expenses.
If the utility chooses to build the $10 million project, it would make $1 million in profit, and meet their public charge of providing “least-cost” service. But if it chooses the $50 million project, it will make $5 million in profit. They haven’t provided the “least-cost” solution, but they’ve made more money. Their shareholders will probably like this better, but it will also leave customers paying more than they should...."
I don't know if there's a way around this, absent reforming the regulations to incentivize behavior that leads to less expensive, more reliable power for all users, or allowing the formation of power companies that are not regulated, and can operate outside of the the existing regulatory structure. People/businesses who install their own batteries and solar panels, for example, are de-facto example of independent power companies, who can decide whether they want to to flow power back to the local utility, or pull power from the utility, depending on what makes sense. They also have the option of completely cutting ties with the local power utilit
Re: (Score:2)
Regarding discounted rates:
"Advocates cite another source of cost-shifting onto consumers: discounted rates that power companies and local government officials use to entice tech companies to build data centers... Google worked out a deal with Dominion Energy, blessed by regulators, to pay 6 cents per kilowatt hour for its power. That is less than half of what residential customers pay, as well as substantially less than is paid by businesses... "
This sounds super fishy unless Google is underwriting the add
Re: (Score:3)
I also want to point out that just 7 years ago, the LA Times was running an article about a glut of power in California (and the corresponding rise in costs borne by ratepayers), due to overinvestment in new power generation facilities by regulated utilities...
https://www.latimes.com/projec... [latimes.com]
"...California regulators have for years allowed power companies to go on a building spree, vastly expanding the potential electricity supply in the state. Indeed, even as electricity demand has fallen since 2008, Cali
Re: Cart before the horse (Score:1)
Yes, but what people donâ(TM)t mention is that nameplate capacity on solar/wind does not add that capacity. So for every GW of clean burning nat gas and nuclear you replace with solar/wind, you get at best 12-18% (in aggregate) although some days that will be 100% and some days near 0 and the state isnâ(TM)t geographically large enough that weather on one end doesnâ(TM)t affect the other side.
The companies and government are intentionally misleading about these numbers leading to much less st
Re: (Score:2)
Granted it's no longer a full house and I live meagerly. Your price made me feel better, perhaps use some of those Biden IRA rebates to upgrade the house - oh wait our state doesn't have any of those rebates available yet until next Spring.
Re: (Score:2)
there's no way that's a real post. They'd be using more power in October than my 5 bedroom house with AC, dryer and water heater use in the peak of summer.
Re: My bill (Score:1)
I live in a modest 2-family, 3 and 5 bedrooms respectively, I rent out the other part, we are all-electric (25yo heat pumps, backup heat coils, electric cooktops & ovens, electric dryers etc a 1kW bitcoin rig) - we are straining at the 200A power supply but it is supplied by unregulated company from nearby nuclear (basically our electric company is owned by the homeowners in the area, you get a share according to your property) for the baseload of 2000kWh/month, beyond that gets backfilled by hydro, gas
Re: (Score:2)
I call BS
Avg Pittsburgh rate is $0.2466/kwh. https://findenergy.com/pa/pitt... [findenergy.com]
in DC/VA in peak summer in a 5 bedroom house with a 10+ yr old AC unit, electric dryer and water heater, we only top 1700 kwh/month in the hottest month of the year. This month it's half that.
$445 means you're using 1800kwh/month - 60 kwh/day in October? Not hardly unless you're running some serious computer resources in home.
Or you're wildly overpaying for your power compared to others in Pittsburgh.
regardless, not an exa
Install home solar (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Export rates for solar have become a pittance to what they once were.
NEM3 in California destroyed any advantage of solar-only installations.
The only alternative solution to utility power would be solar+batteries+emergency generator. This is not something the average person would want to undertake.
Re: (Score:3)
Yah... There's pretty much no point to solar in California anymore unless it's for the house you're going to retire to and live in for the rest of your life. It's goddamned disgusting for the state that's supposedly trying hardest to "go green" to nerf solar in the name of PG&E's share price. But government wouldn't be government it it weren't infested with crooks in the pocket of the fossil fuel industry.
Thank goodness ... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Have they gotten to your State yet?
They're here now. The aforementioned initiative is a move to block regulations limiting the use of natural gas for heating and cooking.
The "whackos" are actually led by a utility that burns the natural gas in turbines and then sells the energy at 4 times the price as electricity. The useful idiots with man-buns and sandals haven't figured this out yet.
Farm AI (Score:3)
Yes, that million dollar equipment will be idling a lot then... Yes, it will be more chaotic. Yes we will not get what we want instantly. The horror.
We already see this with Bitcoin Mining (Score:3)
Our electric rates are 60% higher after the BitCoin Bros showed up and started hoovering up as much power as they can get their hands on.
It's simple really:
Excessive energy use by a minority of users drives up demand for an already limited supply which increases rates.
How using Iceland as data center location? (Score:2)
I kid you not. Reason: Iceland has plentiful untapped geothermal power, and that could be really useful to powering large AI data centers that could be located on that island. And Iceland could be connected to North America and Europe using a number of very high-speed underwater cable links.