4 ms·

Don't they pay for the energy they use? Isn't there a price for the energy that would make it appealing for the community to have them there?

by mhb 5y ago

reaperducer 5y ago
If Facebook paid its electric bill to the neighbors, sure. But it doesn't. We live in an age of energy scarcity. So even if people think about the electricity it uses, people probably see a data center as slurping up energy, causing prices for regular people to rise.
dspillett 5y ago
If the local grid can't provide that then upgrades are needed. They may pay enough for that but then the energy needs to be sourced, which may mean extra fossil fuels and potentially breaking promises made on move-in towards a higher % renewable use. It can be about more than the financial price. Even if it was about the cost of sourcing and provision, someone that big will bargain down close to the minimum. There will be little benefit to share around elsewhere, unless of course this is made specifically part of the bargain (they can build, in exchange _they_ improve local infrastructure to cope, as greenly as the locals desire, with stated benefits for the area with compensation clauses for if said benefits don't turn up).
david38 5y ago
Energy is their #1 cost so they bargain heavily for large subsidies.
- lucb1e 5y ago
  So the problem is whoever is in charge to say yes to discounts? Genuinely wondering because I keep not understanding this situation and I'm Dutch. Indeed, if people worry about that it'll use up all the green energy then let facebook pay for replacement renewable infrastructure that supplies MW equal to what they use, to be placed and functional anywhere in NL within X (1?) year(s) after the datacenter is turned on (we're not that big, we can swallow those transmission losses).
  - hetspookjee 5y ago
    The way energy consumption is taxed is in a staffled manner. In the highest staffel the consumer wouldn’t pay any taxes on their top use. The plants thet hit these amounts are for example the reffineries. It’s not as straight forward as just paying more unfortunately as the rules are so much in favour of big consumers one first needs to change those rules before you have the ground to ask them to pay more.
    - lucb1e 5y ago
      Do I understand you correct that the highest tax bracket for energy is actually the lowest tax bracket? It works inversely to how income taxes work?
      - hetspookjee 5y ago
        That is, how absurd is may sound, entirely correct. I belief on a yearly basis we subsidise about 18B on just big energy consumers. Here is the source at the bottom table: https://www.belastingdienst.nl/wps/wcm/connect/bldcontentnl/belastingdienst/zakelijk/overige_belastingen/belastingen_op_milieugrondslag/tarieven_milieubelastingen/tabellen_tarieven_milieubelastingen https://www.belastingdienst.nl/wps/wcm/connect/bldcontentnl/...
  - stingraycharles 5y ago
    It’s not even about “saying yes” to discounts, it’s trying to actively persuade Facebook et al to build their DCs in NL, and using subsidies and discounts to entice them. See also an article that explains in more detail that it actually required a lot of lobbying to get Facebook interested: https://tweakers.net/reviews/9690/facebook-in-de-polder-metas-megadatacenter-bij-zeewolde.html https://tweakers.net/reviews/9690/facebook-in-de-polder-meta...
  - Scarblac 5y ago
    I suspect our laws say that they just have to be given access to the grid at the same terms as any other company. And we're having to transition to green energy, and having great difficulty doing so, as you know. So a new thing that adds 10% extra national electricity usage isn't exactly welcome right now, imo.
paxys 5y ago
Selling electricity is never good business. Governments are at most going to recover costs of transmission and some ongoing operation, never the huge up-front investments they need to make in the sector.
analog31 5y ago
I don't think it's necessarily that simple, if the community doesn't agree to it. The community might have a different idea about the appropriate use of electricity generation, other than selling all available capacity to the highest bidder, and then (probably) having to build out more capacity at greater expense. The community may have other expectations, such as phasing out of fossil fuels or other public goods.
ls15 5y ago
> Isn't there a price for the energy that would make it appealing for the community to have them there? The EU is in the middle of an energy crisis right now, so that might make that harder to sell.
jbverschoor 5y ago
No. They get lots of subsidies. Besides the energy, there simply is not a lot of space here in NL, and a huge datacenter won’t add anything to the country. Jobs, nature, view, spatial planning. The only reason it was allowed before is that politician get a hard on from dealing with big tech. Aka corruption

Don't they pay for the energy they use? Isn't there a price for the energy that would make it appealing for the community to have them there?

by mhb 5y ago

Don't they pay for the energy they use? Isn't there a price for the energy that would make it appealing for the community to have them there?

reaperducer 5y ago

If Facebook paid its electric bill to the neighbors, sure. But it doesn't. We live in an age of energy scarcity. So even if people think about the electricity it uses, people probably see a data center as slurping up energy, causing prices for regular people to rise.

dspillett 5y ago

If the local grid can't provide that then upgrades are needed. They may pay enough for that but then the energy needs to be sourced, which may mean extra fossil fuels and potentially breaking promises made on move-in towards a higher % renewable use. It can be about more than the financial price. Even if it was about the cost of sourcing and provision, someone that big will bargain down close to the minimum. There will be little benefit to share around elsewhere, unless of course this is made specifically part of the bargain (they can build, in exchange _they_ improve local infrastructure to cope, as greenly as the locals desire, with stated benefits for the area with compensation clauses for if said benefits don't turn up).

david38 5y ago

Energy is their #1 cost so they bargain heavily for large subsidies.

lucb1e 5y ago
So the problem is whoever is in charge to say yes to discounts? Genuinely wondering because I keep not understanding this situation and I'm Dutch. Indeed, if people worry about that it'll use up all the green energy then let facebook pay for replacement renewable infrastructure that supplies MW equal to what they use, to be placed and functional anywhere in NL within X (1?) year(s) after the datacenter is turned on (we're not that big, we can swallow those transmission losses).
- hetspookjee 5y ago
  The way energy consumption is taxed is in a staffled manner. In the highest staffel the consumer wouldn’t pay any taxes on their top use. The plants thet hit these amounts are for example the reffineries. It’s not as straight forward as just paying more unfortunately as the rules are so much in favour of big consumers one first needs to change those rules before you have the ground to ask them to pay more.
  - lucb1e 5y ago
    Do I understand you correct that the highest tax bracket for energy is actually the lowest tax bracket? It works inversely to how income taxes work?
    - hetspookjee 5y ago
      That is, how absurd is may sound, entirely correct. I belief on a yearly basis we subsidise about 18B on just big energy consumers. Here is the source at the bottom table: https://www.belastingdienst.nl/wps/wcm/connect/bldcontentnl/belastingdienst/zakelijk/overige_belastingen/belastingen_op_milieugrondslag/tarieven_milieubelastingen/tabellen_tarieven_milieubelastingen https://www.belastingdienst.nl/wps/wcm/connect/bldcontentnl/...
- stingraycharles 5y ago
  It’s not even about “saying yes” to discounts, it’s trying to actively persuade Facebook et al to build their DCs in NL, and using subsidies and discounts to entice them. See also an article that explains in more detail that it actually required a lot of lobbying to get Facebook interested: https://tweakers.net/reviews/9690/facebook-in-de-polder-metas-megadatacenter-bij-zeewolde.html https://tweakers.net/reviews/9690/facebook-in-de-polder-meta...
- Scarblac 5y ago
  I suspect our laws say that they just have to be given access to the grid at the same terms as any other company. And we're having to transition to green energy, and having great difficulty doing so, as you know. So a new thing that adds 10% extra national electricity usage isn't exactly welcome right now, imo.

paxys 5y ago

Selling electricity is never good business. Governments are at most going to recover costs of transmission and some ongoing operation, never the huge up-front investments they need to make in the sector.

analog31 5y ago

I don't think it's necessarily that simple, if the community doesn't agree to it. The community might have a different idea about the appropriate use of electricity generation, other than selling all available capacity to the highest bidder, and then (probably) having to build out more capacity at greater expense. The community may have other expectations, such as phasing out of fossil fuels or other public goods.

ls15 5y ago

> Isn't there a price for the energy that would make it appealing for the community to have them there? The EU is in the middle of an energy crisis right now, so that might make that harder to sell.

jbverschoor 5y ago

No. They get lots of subsidies. Besides the energy, there simply is not a lot of space here in NL, and a huge datacenter won’t add anything to the country. Jobs, nature, view, spatial planning. The only reason it was allowed before is that politician get a hard on from dealing with big tech. Aka corruption