4 ms·
> We need to build and maintain vast AI infrastructure and the energy to power it. To do that, we will continue to reject radical climate dogma > This initial
by baron816 1y ago
> We need to build and maintain vast AI infrastructure and the energy to power it. To do that, we will continue to reject radical climate dogma
> This initial phase acknowledges the need to safeguard existing assets and ensures an uninterrupted and affordable supply of power. The United States must prevent the premature decommissioning of critical power generation resources
Yeah, they're going to do all they can to block cheap renewables and give handouts to fossil fuel companies.
- wredcoll 1y agoWhen I think "vast new sources of energy for ai", my mind immediately goes to Coal Power!
- jiggawatts 1y ago"But we do know it was us that scorched the sky." -- Morpheus
- giantg2 1y agoThey're restarting some nuke plants too. This seems like a decent idea given the power demands of data centers.
- oxryly1 1y agoWhich ones? AFAIK the nuke plants that shut down are very cost ineffective.
- giantg2 1y agoI believe Three Mile Island is restarting specifically to power planned data centers.
- philipkglass 1y agoHN story from last year: "Three Mile Island nuclear plant restart in Microsoft AI power deal" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41601443 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41601443
- dismalpedigree 1y agoPalisades in Michigan is restarting also
- cowpig 1y agoWithin the scope of US energy, restarting old nuclear plants has a negligible impact. Less than 1% net gain. Building new ones will take 10+ years, and the climate crisis is a today problem. Also, at the rate technology is changing, building new nuclear plants seems silly.
- giantg2 1y ago"Building new ones will take 10+ years, and the climate crisis is a today problem. Also, at the rate technology is changing, building new nuclear plants seems silly." You're right, technology is changing quickly. There are plenty of new reactor options, including small modular types which would be faster to build. This doesn't seem silly.
- burkaman 1y agoFor example, today they defunded a critical transmission line in order to block renewable power from getting to people who need it: https://www.energy.gov/articles/department-energy-terminates-taxpayer-funded-financial-assistance-grain-belt-express https://www.energy.gov/articles/department-energy-terminates...
- giantg2 1y agoI wonder what the actual cutoffs are. The article is scarce on details but does seem to point to one political side or the other acting politically - either fast tracking approval for a fiscally irresponsible project, or pulling funding because they disagree with renewables.
- burkaman 1y agoThe "fast tracking" accusation is not credible without evidence. This loan took years to go through the LPO process, here's an example filing from 2022: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/12/16/2022-27099/notice-of-intent-to-prepare-an-environmental-impact-statement-for-the-grain-belt-express https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/12/16/2022-27....
- giantg2 1y ago"The "fast tracking" accusation is not credible without evidence." It was approved in a flury of approvals between the election and inauguration. So that's not direct evidence. However, do you have direct evidence that the revocation was just based on it being renewable? Sure, there's circumstantial evidence of it. If there's circumstantial evidence for both positions, we need some hard evidence to support either one.
- burkaman 1y ago> It was approved in a flury of approvals between the election and inauguration. Do you have evidence of this? Maybe a list of all LPO approvals so we can look for increased frequency after the election? It would also help to know the average LPO timeline, so we could look at when the grain belt express applied and see if it was approved unusually quickly. > However, do you have direct evidence that the revocation was just based on it being renewable? Not exclusively, but there is evidence that opposition to green energy was one of the major factors. See Josh Hawley's statements, where he repeatedly highlights the "green" aspects and likes to call it a "green scam": https://www.hawley.senate.gov/hawley-wins-cancelation-of-grain-belt-express/ https://www.hawley.senate.gov/hawley-wins-cancelation-of-gra..., https://x.com/HawleyMO/status/1943408766629650779 https://x.com/HawleyMO/status/1943408766629650779. The current Secretary of Energy is also strongly opposed to expansion of renewable energy, see this recent speech: https://www.energy.gov/articles/secretary-energy-chris-wright-delivers-keynote-remarks-ceraweek-2025 https://www.energy.gov/articles/secretary-energy-chris-wrigh....
- Workaccount2 1y agoSomeone needs to start naming the largest solar and wind farms after Trump. "We are proposing the largest solar farm in the world, in order to capture the sheer magnitude and capability of the most powerful solar plant to date, we propose calling it the Grand Trump Energy Generation Field" The dudes ego would prevent him from blocking it.
- andsoitis 1y agoAt first I thought your plan is brilliant. But then I realized he will try sue for unlicensed use of the brand OR defamation OR both.
- burkaman 1y agoWouldn't work because the announcement of the name is what makes him happy, he doesn't care about following through to make the thing actually succeed. Nearly every business with his name on it has failed.
- neverrroot 1y ago[flagged]
- bigyabai 1y agoChina and India are going to be subject to direct sanctions because of their energy dependencies. If the Western world shared their frugality, we'd be bankrolling both sides of Ukraine's war.
- neverrroot 1y agoWho’s going to sanction them? In what way?
- andsoitis 1y agoWhat’s your point?
- neverrroot 1y agoNuclear, not renewables
- debugnik 1y ago> Then we have Spain, that after the blackout, suddenly burns a lot more gas (41% more). The Spain blackout wasn't a problem inherent to renewables, our grid simply lacks the storage and voltage control needed for the mix we intend. So, to keep the grid stable until we solve it, we'll need a more realistic mix for our current grid, burning more gas, yes. Engineers apparently knew this was needed for years, but our industries are experts at kicking cans down the road. The blackout could have been preventable with the right investments.
- cyberax 1y ago> The Spain blackout wasn't a problem inherent to renewables, our grid simply lacks the storage and voltage control needed for the mix we intend. Which is a problem inherent for renewables. Because they can't scale without a significant amount of storage, which is expensive.
- andsoitis 1y ago> Yeah, they're going to do all they can to block cheap renewables and give handouts to fossil fuel companies. Many AI people in positions of influence have argued that AI will all but solve the climate crisis. Viewed from that angle, it would make sense that you wouldn’t care about how dirty the sources of energy is on the way to AGI because once there, the climate crisis will be magically solved. Somehow.
- Henchman21 1y agoSome people really need to re-watch The Matrix
- dwaltrip 1y agoThey aren't neutral on energy sources or simply agnostic to environmental impact. They are anti-renewable, because renewable = woke. Tribal politics at its best.
- andsoitis 1y ago> They Who is the “they” in your sentence?
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- dwaltrip 1y agoThe current administration, maga folks, the freshly anti-woke techies. Etc Top level comment was referencing the energy policies mentioned in the linked site, which of course left out renewables entirely.