3 ms·

Why can’t these idiots just mandate that you have to build out clean energy to power the data centers. It’s such a simple bit of legislation that they just will

Why can’t these idiots just mandate that you have to build out clean energy to power the data centers. It’s such a simple bit of legislation that they just will not do.

polski-g 2mo ago
Because the federal government made it effectively illegal to build nuclear reactors, and there are no more rivers to be dammed.
- andsoitis 2mo ago
  [flagged]
- WarmWash 2mo ago
  People will run to point to the spate of new nuclear plans, but the point be made here is that nuclear regulation is so suffocating and costs so extreme that it's "effectively illegal" to build reactors.
  - amanaplanacanal 2mo ago
    Is it safety regulation that makes nuclear so hard, or is it just that we can't seem to do large projects of any kind any more?
    - polski-g 2mo ago
      Musk can. Everyone else? Not so much.
    - WarmWash 2mo ago
      I can tell you from second hand direct experience that the regulations are absolutely over the top, and then doubled for good measure. It almost makes aviation look like running a lemonade stand.
      - sensanaty 2mo ago
        > It almost makes aviation look like running a lemonade stand. I'm about as pro-nuclear as you can be, but that's probably a good thing. Modern reactor designs are amazingly safe, and the industry itself has a really amazing track record, but there should be no room for the usual corner cutting shenanigans when it comes to nuclear. I do genuinely believe that the West at large has lost the capability of getting any kind of large infrastructure project built due to hilariously blatant corruption. Even France, the poster child for nuclear energy and how much of a success story it can be, is struggling with their latest nuclear expansion because we let the private entity ghouls come in and suck everyone dry for every penny they can manage.
        WarmWash 2mo ago
        Say your 1979 Chevy is in need of a new 12V battery, but your car (for the purpose of the example) is under the NRC regulatory regime. Can you just go to the auto parts store and buy a new lead acid standard issue battery? Definitely not. Well then ok, lets buy the most top shelf high-performance 2026 grade one. Also no. The only battery you can use is the original one that came with the car in 1979. That's it. So now you have to pay a factory to produce a battery with a design from 1974. This battery easily costs $750k for all the custom engineering and low volume needed. And it is objectively worse by every measure to what is available at Walmart today for $50. So why do we have to use the original one? Because that is the battery that was certified, and certifying a new battery would take 10 years and tens of millions. Again, I have pretty direct experience with this (a division of my company), and the situation above is a "translated" example of what goes down. Maybe you call it "corner cutting" to use a new battery, but frankly I think you might be just speaking from the hip.
        amanaplanacanal 2mo ago
        We are supposed to have new streamlined rules by November of this year per executive order 14300. I guess we'll see if that actually improves the process, or if nuclear is still unable to compete with wind and solar.
    - fzeroracer 2mo ago
      The US has long gone in the direction of abject mistrust in government agencies, which means large projects are just not feasible. Companies can't pick up the slack either; if they can't build out a new shopping mall without falling over themselves and cutting extreme corners then we shouldn't expect them to handle nuclear power either.
- dyauspitr 2mo ago
  Plenty of solar and wind with batteries are available. Data centers and renewable energy are a match made in heaven. They can be in the middle of nowhere where land is cheap.
kdheiwns 2mo ago
To answer your question: Texas. Running on a platform of clean energy is political suicide in half of America, particularly in the south.
- polski-g 2mo ago
  Counterpoint: you're wrong https://texas2036.org/news-analysis/gale-force-growth-texas-wind-energy-2000-2025/ https://texas2036.org/news-analysis/gale-force-growth-texas-...
  - kdheiwns 2mo ago
    I'm not. Business operate in Texas. I never said that they don't. But major politicians are not making it part of their platform.
- browningstreet 2mo ago
  Clean energy development was doing well, was powering more than half our needs, and was creating more jobs than oil. Guess that wasn’t good enough. Oh and it reduced our green house gas emissions. That was the catch. (I got coal rolled just yesterday, in Tahoe. Who knew that was still a thing…)
- rstupek 2mo ago
  You don't seem to realize Texas has huge number clean energy build outs and has been for quite a few years. They lead in wind generation and commercial solar generation.
  - kdheiwns 2mo ago
    I very much realize it. I know companies are doing it. But the angry responses to my comment shows that literacy is lacking in Texas because I said it's political suicide to run on it as a platform. Ken Paxton, who is running for Senate and currently serves as attorney general, proudly announced cracking down on "solar scams": https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/news/releases/attorney-general-ken-paxton-launches-major-initiative-combat-widespread-fraud-companies-selling https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/news/releases/attorney-... Plus his campaign site makes no mention of supporting clean energy: https://www.kenpaxton.com/ https://www.kenpaxton.com/ I will repeat: it's political suicide to run on a platform of clean energy or education in Texas. That does not mean companies are not building clean energy. But politicians will not make it part of their platform during elections.
refneb 2mo ago
Oil companies squash all kinds of clean energy regulation.
vendiddy 2mo ago
This seems like a good idea to me. I wonder what the hold up is.
kodablah 2mo ago
While I would like this, my guess is it is hard to reconcile with all the other commercial ventures in the state (including datacenters) that aren't subject to such a requirement.
newsoftheday 2mo ago
https://www.texastribune.org/2026/08/03/texas-data-center-project-audit-greg-abbott/ https://www.texastribune.org/2026/08/03/texas-data-center-pr... "Abbott is asking the Public Utility Commission of Texas and the Electric Reliability Council of Texas to ensure data center developers provide information on tax breaks they will receive; power use and generation; water use and cooling operations; efforts to reduce impacts on local communities; and ownership of the facility. Any projects that fail Abbott’s ordered “comprehensive verification and audit” should be denied connection to the grid, the governor said." https://gov.texas.gov/news/post/governor-abbott-directs-comprehensive-data-center-audit https://gov.texas.gov/news/post/governor-abbott-directs-comp... "“Our top priority is to protect Texans’ safety and quality of life,” said Governor Abbott. “Any project that fails to comply with the requirements set forth by the PUCT and ERCOT, and by state law, must be denied connection to the Texas grid. Simply put, Texans must come first.”" https://environmentamerica.org/texas/center/media-center/new-data-texas-gets-more-than-one-third-of-electricity-from-renewables/ https://environmentamerica.org/texas/center/media-center/new... "The Lone Star State generated the equivalent of 37% of its electricity from solar, wind and geothermal power in 2025"
preisschild 2mo ago
Honestly, that sounds kind of arbitrary. Why should companies that use electricity be required to also produce electricity? This is what the market is for, so other Companies can produce electricity for money and other Companies buy that electricity. And to which companies would this apply? Only Datacenters? There are other energy intensive industries too, should this also apply to them? And what is the cutoff for that? Does every bigger 21st century company also need to be an electricity company? It would be less arbitrary if all negative externalities would be taxed (for example, carbon tax or noise pollution tax) and maybe prioritize households on the public grid.
- dyauspitr 2mo ago
  Who cares how it works out as long as they come to the table with funded power generation for their constituent centers.
- tancop 2mo ago
  why are arbitrary rules a problem? if some company starts opening steel mills and its causing problems for the grid then the state can make all new steel mills build power generation. right now the problem is data centers so new rules are aimed at data centers. carbon taxes dont work because all they do is make production more expensive, and businesses are always happy to pass on any extra costs to their customers. its the same with noise pollution and water use. the only way to actually stop them is direct regulation. buying land does not give you the right to do whatever you want with it. stop worshipping property and markets and focus on real problems like limited number of business licenses, exclusivity contracts, long or lifetime post employment terms, weak competition rules and long waiting times at government offices. all of them go against the right to buy what you want, work for anyone who wants to take you or to start a business. thats the real economic freedom that is in danger today.
kmeisthax 2mo ago
Because up until recently all the big hyperscalars were already committed to buying or building renewables to meet their energy demand. Then AI happened and they all collectively realized they needed to build as many datacenters as possible to fit as many GPUs as possible to chase the bubble. All those clean energy commitments got tossed by the wayside. Hell, half the time these companies fire people just to free up cashflow to buy more GPUs!
0xbadcafebee 2mo ago
It's more time consuming, expensive, politically fraught, logistically difficult, and hard to acquire land + permits for, than new gas generators and maintaining coal plants. Renewables are a worse idea in the short term, and all they want is short term solutions. They're on a half-trillion-dollar clock.

Why can’t these idiots just mandate that you have to build out clean energy to power the data centers. It’s such a simple bit of legislation that they just will not do.

polski-g 2mo ago

Because the federal government made it effectively illegal to build nuclear reactors, and there are no more rivers to be dammed.

andsoitis 2mo ago
[flagged]
WarmWash 2mo ago
People will run to point to the spate of new nuclear plans, but the point be made here is that nuclear regulation is so suffocating and costs so extreme that it's "effectively illegal" to build reactors.
- amanaplanacanal 2mo ago
  Is it safety regulation that makes nuclear so hard, or is it just that we can't seem to do large projects of any kind any more?
  - polski-g 2mo ago
    Musk can. Everyone else? Not so much.
  - WarmWash 2mo ago
    I can tell you from second hand direct experience that the regulations are absolutely over the top, and then doubled for good measure. It almost makes aviation look like running a lemonade stand.
    - sensanaty 2mo ago
      > It almost makes aviation look like running a lemonade stand. I'm about as pro-nuclear as you can be, but that's probably a good thing. Modern reactor designs are amazingly safe, and the industry itself has a really amazing track record, but there should be no room for the usual corner cutting shenanigans when it comes to nuclear. I do genuinely believe that the West at large has lost the capability of getting any kind of large infrastructure project built due to hilariously blatant corruption. Even France, the poster child for nuclear energy and how much of a success story it can be, is struggling with their latest nuclear expansion because we let the private entity ghouls come in and suck everyone dry for every penny they can manage.
      - WarmWash 2mo ago
        Say your 1979 Chevy is in need of a new 12V battery, but your car (for the purpose of the example) is under the NRC regulatory regime. Can you just go to the auto parts store and buy a new lead acid standard issue battery? Definitely not. Well then ok, lets buy the most top shelf high-performance 2026 grade one. Also no. The only battery you can use is the original one that came with the car in 1979. That's it. So now you have to pay a factory to produce a battery with a design from 1974. This battery easily costs $750k for all the custom engineering and low volume needed. And it is objectively worse by every measure to what is available at Walmart today for $50. So why do we have to use the original one? Because that is the battery that was certified, and certifying a new battery would take 10 years and tens of millions. Again, I have pretty direct experience with this (a division of my company), and the situation above is a "translated" example of what goes down. Maybe you call it "corner cutting" to use a new battery, but frankly I think you might be just speaking from the hip.
        amanaplanacanal 2mo ago
        We are supposed to have new streamlined rules by November of this year per executive order 14300. I guess we'll see if that actually improves the process, or if nuclear is still unable to compete with wind and solar.
  - fzeroracer 2mo ago
    The US has long gone in the direction of abject mistrust in government agencies, which means large projects are just not feasible. Companies can't pick up the slack either; if they can't build out a new shopping mall without falling over themselves and cutting extreme corners then we shouldn't expect them to handle nuclear power either.
dyauspitr 2mo ago
Plenty of solar and wind with batteries are available. Data centers and renewable energy are a match made in heaven. They can be in the middle of nowhere where land is cheap.

kdheiwns 2mo ago

To answer your question: Texas. Running on a platform of clean energy is political suicide in half of America, particularly in the south.

polski-g 2mo ago
Counterpoint: you're wrong https://texas2036.org/news-analysis/gale-force-growth-texas-wind-energy-2000-2025/ https://texas2036.org/news-analysis/gale-force-growth-texas-...
- kdheiwns 2mo ago
  I'm not. Business operate in Texas. I never said that they don't. But major politicians are not making it part of their platform.
browningstreet 2mo ago
Clean energy development was doing well, was powering more than half our needs, and was creating more jobs than oil. Guess that wasn’t good enough. Oh and it reduced our green house gas emissions. That was the catch. (I got coal rolled just yesterday, in Tahoe. Who knew that was still a thing…)
rstupek 2mo ago
You don't seem to realize Texas has huge number clean energy build outs and has been for quite a few years. They lead in wind generation and commercial solar generation.
- kdheiwns 2mo ago
  I very much realize it. I know companies are doing it. But the angry responses to my comment shows that literacy is lacking in Texas because I said it's political suicide to run on it as a platform. Ken Paxton, who is running for Senate and currently serves as attorney general, proudly announced cracking down on "solar scams": https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/news/releases/attorney-general-ken-paxton-launches-major-initiative-combat-widespread-fraud-companies-selling https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/news/releases/attorney-... Plus his campaign site makes no mention of supporting clean energy: https://www.kenpaxton.com/ https://www.kenpaxton.com/ I will repeat: it's political suicide to run on a platform of clean energy or education in Texas. That does not mean companies are not building clean energy. But politicians will not make it part of their platform during elections.

refneb 2mo ago

Oil companies squash all kinds of clean energy regulation.

vendiddy 2mo ago

This seems like a good idea to me. I wonder what the hold up is.

kodablah 2mo ago

While I would like this, my guess is it is hard to reconcile with all the other commercial ventures in the state (including datacenters) that aren't subject to such a requirement.

newsoftheday 2mo ago

https://www.texastribune.org/2026/08/03/texas-data-center-project-audit-greg-abbott/ https://www.texastribune.org/2026/08/03/texas-data-center-pr... "Abbott is asking the Public Utility Commission of Texas and the Electric Reliability Council of Texas to ensure data center developers provide information on tax breaks they will receive; power use and generation; water use and cooling operations; efforts to reduce impacts on local communities; and ownership of the facility. Any projects that fail Abbott’s ordered “comprehensive verification and audit” should be denied connection to the grid, the governor said." https://gov.texas.gov/news/post/governor-abbott-directs-comprehensive-data-center-audit https://gov.texas.gov/news/post/governor-abbott-directs-comp... "“Our top priority is to protect Texans’ safety and quality of life,” said Governor Abbott. “Any project that fails to comply with the requirements set forth by the PUCT and ERCOT, and by state law, must be denied connection to the Texas grid. Simply put, Texans must come first.”" https://environmentamerica.org/texas/center/media-center/new-data-texas-gets-more-than-one-third-of-electricity-from-renewables/ https://environmentamerica.org/texas/center/media-center/new... "The Lone Star State generated the equivalent of 37% of its electricity from solar, wind and geothermal power in 2025"

preisschild 2mo ago

Honestly, that sounds kind of arbitrary. Why should companies that use electricity be required to also produce electricity? This is what the market is for, so other Companies can produce electricity for money and other Companies buy that electricity. And to which companies would this apply? Only Datacenters? There are other energy intensive industries too, should this also apply to them? And what is the cutoff for that? Does every bigger 21st century company also need to be an electricity company? It would be less arbitrary if all negative externalities would be taxed (for example, carbon tax or noise pollution tax) and maybe prioritize households on the public grid.

dyauspitr 2mo ago
Who cares how it works out as long as they come to the table with funded power generation for their constituent centers.
tancop 2mo ago
why are arbitrary rules a problem? if some company starts opening steel mills and its causing problems for the grid then the state can make all new steel mills build power generation. right now the problem is data centers so new rules are aimed at data centers. carbon taxes dont work because all they do is make production more expensive, and businesses are always happy to pass on any extra costs to their customers. its the same with noise pollution and water use. the only way to actually stop them is direct regulation. buying land does not give you the right to do whatever you want with it. stop worshipping property and markets and focus on real problems like limited number of business licenses, exclusivity contracts, long or lifetime post employment terms, weak competition rules and long waiting times at government offices. all of them go against the right to buy what you want, work for anyone who wants to take you or to start a business. thats the real economic freedom that is in danger today.

kmeisthax 2mo ago

Because up until recently all the big hyperscalars were already committed to buying or building renewables to meet their energy demand. Then AI happened and they all collectively realized they needed to build as many datacenters as possible to fit as many GPUs as possible to chase the bubble. All those clean energy commitments got tossed by the wayside. Hell, half the time these companies fire people just to free up cashflow to buy more GPUs!

0xbadcafebee 2mo ago

It's more time consuming, expensive, politically fraught, logistically difficult, and hard to acquire land + permits for, than new gas generators and maintaining coal plants. Renewables are a worse idea in the short term, and all they want is short term solutions. They're on a half-trillion-dollar clock.