Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

hatrack

(63,813 posts)
Sun Oct 19, 2025, 09:05 AM Sunday

GOP-Led Public Service Comm In Georgia Pushing For 10 GW New Generation - 80% For AI, W. Ratepayers Footing The Bill

Georgia is facing the largest demand for electricity in its history, driven by nation-leading datacenter construction. The Georgia Power company has made an unprecedented bid to the agency that oversees the utility for about 10 additional gigawatts of energy in the coming years – enough to power 8.3m homes, at an estimated cost of nearly $16bn, according to the Southern Environmental Law Center.

But those huge numbers are not primarily for homes or local businesses in Georgia. Instead about 80% of the company’s ask is driven by datacenters, primarily for artificial intelligence, according to Tom Krause, spokesperson for the state’s public service commission, or PSC. It is the largest increase ever considered by the commission in a multiyear plan and comes as the Atlanta metro area led the nation in datacenter construction last year – a phenomenon playing out across the US and increasingly sparking protests and pushback. The PSC’s five members will be charged with deciding how much energy the state needs, when it’s needed and the best way to meet that need, Krause said.

EDIT

State senator ​​Chuck Hufstetler introduced legislation earlier this year to force datacenters to shoulder more of the cost and to prohibit the PSC from raising utility bills due to increased electricity needs. The PSC has passed a rule to this effect, but in the absence of a law governing the issue, “it’s hard to know what their definitions of ‘costs’ is”, Hufstetler said. “They have secret contracts that the public doesn’t see.” As with others concerned about the issue, the legislator said he doesn’t see datacenters “as something that’s not needed. We just need to make sure they pay the costs of electricity and water,” he said.

Daniel Blackman, a regional administrator for the Environmental Protection Agency under the Biden administration, plans to provide public comment at the hearings. “The thing about datacenters is, it’s no longer ‘Are they coming?’” he said. “They’re already here. They’re no longer confined to rural areas.” What is needed, he said, is “bad actor legislation” – to provide some guardrails on companies behind datacenters.

EDIT

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/oct/19/georgia-electricity-datacenters

9 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
GOP-Led Public Service Comm In Georgia Pushing For 10 GW New Generation - 80% For AI, W. Ratepayers Footing The Bill (Original Post) hatrack Sunday OP
Are data centers the new crypto farms? BlueWaveNeverEnd Sunday #1
Two flavors of the same bullshit . . . hatrack Sunday #2
If tech bros want all the electricity in the world, it may spur investment in Wind & Solar. thought crime Sunday #3
Sure. Let's trash the world for the tech bros. hunter Sunday #4
The use of fossil fuel is trashing the world. thought crime Tuesday #5
Wind and solar are entirely dependent on fossil fuels for their economic viability. hunter Tuesday #6
I disagree... Finishline42 Tuesday #7
If nuclear power was scaled up to "displace fossil fuel entirely" thought crime Tuesday #8
Well fuck all, they are both useless and the world will burn. hunter Tuesday #9

hatrack

(63,813 posts)
2. Two flavors of the same bullshit . . .
Sun Oct 19, 2025, 12:57 PM
Sunday

AI has at least some useful applications, as opposed to a straight-up scam like crypto.

In both cases, it's just another manifestation of Big Thing Grow Fast Money, waiting for the inevitable pin-prick, but demanding all the electricity in the world in the meantime.

thought crime

(868 posts)
3. If tech bros want all the electricity in the world, it may spur investment in Wind & Solar.
Sun Oct 19, 2025, 08:13 PM
Sunday

I hate to think like a capitalist, but limitless Wind & Solar energy is available via the development and use of floating offshore facilities to generate electricity and transmit to shore or convert to hydrogen for transport over long distances. AI & Data Science may offer enough reward to spur this development.

thought crime

(868 posts)
5. The use of fossil fuel is trashing the world.
Tue Oct 21, 2025, 01:04 AM
Tuesday

If AI causes increase in CO2 output then Bad.
If AI spurs growth in Clean Energy then Good.

hunter

(40,102 posts)
6. Wind and solar are entirely dependent on fossil fuels for their economic viability.
Tue Oct 21, 2025, 01:34 AM
Tuesday

They cannot displace fossil fuels entirely and will do NOTHING, absolutely nothing to reduce the total amount of fossil fuels wastes human beings ultimately dump into the earth's atmosphere and oceans.

Like it or not, the only energy resource capable of displacing fossil fuels entirely is nuclear power. If we build nuclear power plants we don't need environmentally destructive fossil fuel dependent industrial scale wind and solar development.

There is nothing "green" about destroying previously undeveloped landscapes and seascapes with short-lived solar and wind crap.

90% or more of AI applications are crap too, not just for the environmental destruction they are causing, but for the social damage they cause as well.

Finishline42

(1,157 posts)
7. I disagree...
Tue Oct 21, 2025, 07:40 PM
Tuesday

HVDC transmission lines and BESS address the intermittency of wind and solar, maybe not completely but better than waiting on new construction of nuclear reactors.

BTW, the US currently has 94 reactors at 54 plants providing 19% of our electricity. The only realistic hope of adding more reactors is at current operating plants as they did at Vogtle in GA. The reactors they were building in South Carolina failed because of the cost that rate payers didn't want to pay while in construction (also the projected demand wasn't happening). Building reactors at current plants deals with two issues:

1) The site has already been approved for nuclear reactors.

2) The operating reactors generate income to lessen the impact of construction costs.

Just to double nuclear output to 40% would require way more than we are going to build.

If we use the cost to build Vogtle #3 and #4 as a guide ($36.8 Billion over 15 years) we are talking about close to a $Trillion. I don't see it...

thought crime

(868 posts)
8. If nuclear power was scaled up to "displace fossil fuel entirely"
Tue Oct 21, 2025, 08:40 PM
Tuesday

There would be huge issues with uranium extraction (e.g. supply, radioactive mine tailings, transport and refinement of ore, "destruction of previously undeveloped landscapes&quot . There would be vastly increased safety risk, and a greatly increased burden of managing radioactive waste - forever. Nuclear is a non-starter, but is favored by the extraction industry as a false argument against renewable energy.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»GOP-Led Public Service Co...