| ▲ | miyoji 13 hours ago |
| You can read the actual pledge at [0]. The executive order regarding it is at [1]. There's some speculation in the comments about what is or isn't in the pledge. I recommend reading it yourself. [0] https://www.whitehouse.gov/articles/2026/03/ratepayer-protec... [1] https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2026/03/rate... |
|
| ▲ | soared 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| This sounds really cool and all governmenty > IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this fourth day of March, in the year of our Lord two thousand twenty-six, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and fiftieth. |
|
| ▲ | AdieuToLogic 12 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| It is important to remember that clarifying the legal implications of "pledge" is entirely different than supporting and/or defending this instance of its usage. One can do the former whilst repudiating the latter and remain logically consistent. |
| |
| ▲ | trinsic2 an hour ago | parent [-] | | I'm not understanding why clarifying the legal implications is important if it's a smoke screen for everyone involved doing what they are going to do anyway. It seems more like a distraction away from the real problems. |
|
|
| ▲ | trinsic2 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| What is the point of reading it? Pledges mean nothing. |
|
| ▲ | dsl 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| It all seems like a backdoor to let tech companies build power generation on site without all the red tape and sell the excess power to consumers. This indirectly allows them to offload some of the fixed operational costs onto consumers. We just approved the first nuclear plant in 20 years to a company owned by Bill Gates and in a state that has basically nothing but farmland and a Microsoft datacenter. This absolutely cannot backfire. /s |
| |
| ▲ | terminalshort 18 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | Good. I want more power plants built, especially ones that don't emit CO2. | |
| ▲ | simianwords 10 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | What’s wrong with this? | | |
| ▲ | ipaddr 10 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Price of power goes up and the local people are not connected to the benefits. You might think they will receive a lot of money in taxes but you would be wrong because they have tax breaks. | | |
| ▲ | sparky_z 9 hours ago | parent [-] | | Why would adding a new supplier to the market cause the price of power to go up? | | |
| ▲ | myrmidon 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | Because on-site powerplants owned by datacenter operators are not "just another supplier". The threat is: This "datacenter power" disincentives buildout of "free" powerplants (by eating up significant demand at very low margins thanks to basically vertical integration); this slows down buildout of "normal" infrastructure (possibly both grid connectivity and power), and the electrical energy market becomes worse for consumers than it is now. I personally think all of this is very speculative for now, but allowing industry to rely on the grid (which they still would!) while almost exclusively "buying" their own power is a risky proposition from a consumer perspective. | | |
| ▲ | PunchyHamster 39 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | I'm sure power plant building companies won't say no to more business | |
| ▲ | soulofmischief 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Not to mention the danger of energy production, even nuclear, becoming resource-constrained to the point where datacenter power plants leave no room for municipal plants. We're seeing it happen with consumer hardware; make no mistake on who will get preference. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | tomrod 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Grid overload if they produce too much base load. Interconnection expenses. Same issues as with mining and large industrial clients generally. | | |
| ▲ | simianwords 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | so no companies should build anything even if they attempt to pay for the externalities. this is just nimbyism. | | |
| ▲ | jfengel 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | "Attempt" is doing a lot of work there. Companies are driven by a profit motive, and are practically required to renege on promises that are not legally enforced. In a different world they would have earned trust and deserve the benefit of the doubt. This is not that world. |
|
|
|
|
