It literally is just a cartoon villain plan. The AI companies look at something called the "Acid Rain Program" and think to themselves "Fuck that, what's a bit of acid rain going to do?". I truly cannot comprehend the mindset here as hard as I try

Most generators not connected to the grid are for emergency backup purposes. Granted, this carve out is now clearly being abused, but the original intent is quite rational.

If we enforced strict regulations on all generators without any exceptions at all, your sewage lift station might not have a backup source anymore.

I think its so that like people don't need to do an EPA assessment for their home backup generator right? They are very common where I live due to the instability of the power grid.

This program targets acid rain. It only applies to coal and diesel. No one is building off-grid coal power plants.

Diesel generators are the standard for power generation where a grid connection is not readily available and/or the power needs are temporary (e.g. emergency backups). Cheap, easy logistics, and durable. This use case has always been allowed in practice because there is no practical alternative. Many industries rely on diesel generators for reliable site power.

It doesn't apply to natural gas power plants such as those used in data center builds at all because they don't produce this type of pollution.

I fail to see the big deal. This guidance appears to clarify the language so that it matches actual practice and intent.

It seems pretty much how law (specifically common law) has always worked though. If Congress thinks the law should apply to them, then Congress's job is to write a law that applies to them. The president and judicial branches are not supposed to make new laws, but rather to enforce the laws as written.

My reading of the EPA's statement here is they also wanted to mildly warn the companies that if they ever in the future want to contemplate connecting to the grid (eg. to bring down costs), they should be aware that bypassing compliance now could have expensive consequences for them later. Of course, Congress (local or federal) could also change the law in the much shorter term, so there's risk to them either way if they design without any forward thought for how to comply. On the other hand, if this inquiry to the EPA was merely requesting clarity on whether they are exempt from the reporting paperwork, but are using otherwise standard and compliant designs, then maybe the law is already working generally as intended.

The effects of this will be reduced by the realization that these regulations can be changed in the future. No one will make a large capital investment if it could be shut down in a few years.

It does make some sense. There are some semi-reasonable scenarios where not that much power is needed and you use electricity.

Still they make no sense with data centres and there should be reasonably sensible name plate capacity on it.

But it does have to do with whether it's interstate commerce!

At this point, they can just disband the EPA, what a bunch of crooks.

No, no, no you don't understand it's beyond the environment, it's not in an environment, it's been towed beyond the environment.

You are being confused by the names. A general name doesn't mean it is a general law that applies to everyone.

Pretty insane, expect data center to be data center + coal power plant soon, why bother with generators or the pesky local grid.

> There are already plenty of people that don't like the EPA.

Rich assholes who are upset they can't throw their trash on the ground. Anyone else is parroting propaganda generated by said rich assholes.

>There are already plenty of people that don't like the EPA

And those people are the ones making these bifurcated rules undermining the EPA. The destruction is the purpose, it's not incidental

It’s literally the playbook from project 2025. FWIW it’s not the beginning, that has been a process at play since day 1 of the 2nd trump admin

Edit: actually since the 1st term as mentioned below

> Sounds like the beginning of the end for the EPA

The beginning of the end of the EPA started the day Trump was sworn in. In the last few years several cases have been decided by this Supreme Court that have effectively reduced the EPA to an advisory board, like a group of consultants that have no real authority over anything.

And this same behavior is how Republicans prove their own theory that the Government is useless and evil and bad. Because they do everything in their power to actually make it useless and evil and bad. Do not blame this on the "EPA" as an agency. Put the blame where it goes: conservatives actively sabotaging government programs.

You're neithersidesing an issue where clearly one partisan group is doing evil things to actively make the situation worse and then "see, told you!"

It's consistent leadership. Malevolent and stupid, but consistent.

This seems pretty inline with our leadership tho. This country has always put profits above people.

This is exactly what the leadership wanted. And as they won the election. Not like in 2016 (where more people voted for the other guy but they won due to the difference in power of votes), or in 2020 (where they lost), they won a clear outright victory, it's exactly what the USA wanted.

Thank you. This seems like a pretty straight-forward clarification of current law. The current thread title (OP said taken from Reuters) saying this side-steps the law seems misleading.

This is so amateurish. This document misquotes its own authorities, with grade-school grammar mistakes:

> "In particular, while a “utility” under ARP regulations includes any person that sells electricity, the 1990 edition of DOE Form 860 only covers those electricity generators who sell “electric energy primary [sic] for use by the public.”

Said "1990 edition of DOE Form 860" is included on page 8 of the pdf, and it very clearly reads "primarily"; not "primary". As is proper English.

That's partly a result of having 50 states writing laws for themselves instead having all statues living under federal laws for everything. The line between what is acceptable to be regulated by federal laws and what is not is something I, not being a lawyer, have never studied. Power and water type utilities does feel like it might be something that could benefit from same rules/regulations every where, but basing regulations on feelings is probably not the best bit of logic

> It is more cost efficient

Depends. Getting a grid connection, and all the equipment to connect and step down with negotiating prices is not always fun. Especially as there is a limited amount of power on the grid. its not a free lunch and takes time.

Its far easier to just slap shitty local generators on and live off the crappy noisy electricity they provide.

Those regulations are there for a reason though. I’ll never understand this logic. We have regulations so things are clean and safe. Yes, it would be easier to not have those regulations and just have dirty and unsafe electricity. But that’s the cost of having a business and also having a clean and safe society. Corporations love to externalize costs and that’s what’s happening here again.

The bipartisan opinion shift towards absolute hate for data centers was extremely fast.

Just adding more fuel to one of the brightest fires out there in politics right now. Expect it to continue and grow as people feel even less heard, and any negative media towards data centers gets lots of clicks.

The AI companies and Trump seem to be doing everything they can to encourage this.

Right, I can only imagine the most foolish DC operators are excited about this. Just more gas on the political fire, when DCs should be boring and out of public politics, even if they rank 15th for water consumption and 8th for energy consumption.

> About that P in your acronym...

For the next couple of years (at least) it stands for "Pollution" or "Poisoning".

"Profit" or "Plunder" would seem to fit.

"privatization"

I suspected that this was the case as the president can't just invent new laws on a whim. They have a fair amount of leeway on their interpretation of laws re: directions to the administration on how/when to do things but they can't just invent a law from thin air.

Also I mean what constitutes a generator if it isn't something connected to the grid? If my car has an engine and it also has a small inverter and an AC outlet is that now a generator and subject to generator laws in addition to car laws?

>The problem was never power or water

Correct. The problem isn't just data centers or power or water, it's that left unchecked these greedy people will risk the power grid, drain rivers/reservoirs/aquifers, and destroy our natural environment (and cities) with pollution because it's more profitable than doing things the right way. I think more than anything we want responsible, friendly neighbors who are mindful of the impact they have in the areas where they operate.

They're callous, reckless, have no concern for anything but their money. And "self-funded" isn't even true, the tax breaks and negative externalities of these data centers will be paid by the people (see: xAI and Memphis.)

inb4 i'm a chinese operative because I mentioned water. Get bent, I think grass farmers in the desert should be forced to get real jobs instead of exporting our water to China/Saudi Arabia as cattle feed. And people who farm real crops should be forced to convert to less water-intensive methods or shut down.

I'm trying to build a torment nexus and these negative ninnies complained that it used up all the electricity, so I made a machine that turns breathable air into toxic smoke to power the nexus and they don't like that ether!

Aluminum smelters have run their own power generation for ages and don’t get to skip epa regulations.

It is not a new problem. Look at Musk's Tennessee data centers to see the problems with off-grid data centers that don't have good pollution controls.

Second, in many places power is a problem with AI data centers that do want grid power. I don't think you realize just how many new AI data center projects there are and how much more power they use than a normal data center. Combined with the short timeline these projects want they need grid expansion far beyond what anyone had in their long term grid planning.

The environmental impacts of how that power is generated is not a sudden or new concern, it was a concern even if the power was delivered via the grid or not and the fact that the power is generated on site or whatever does not alleviate that concern

You're saying multiple wrong ways to do a thing is evidence that the thing is undesirable?

Why don't you want an auto repair shop in the house next door, and why won't you let them pour old engine oil on your lawn? Are you anti-car-repair? All your "noise and pollution" complaints sound like psy ops to me, paid for by the Chinese EV industry.

^ that's what you sound like.

The most ironic part of this is that data center pollution will impact Trump supporters the most. In 5-to-10 years, after swimming in the same river their parents and grandparents swam in, kids will start develop breathing complications or their teeth will fall out, and there won't be anything anyone can do about it. Congratulations, MAGA, you played yourself.

70 years of very successful propaganda techniques. Republicans are the GOATs of propaganda and manipulation of public opinion.

They really accel at making people their supporters don't like, angry. To gleefully rub your hands together while your enemies cry is a dream for some.

$$$ Hangers on looking to scoop up some of the loose change overflowing the rich asshole's pockets

Everyone is doing it all around you. We can mostly blame the people who make AI but we also have to blame everyone who’s using it. We can boycott AI until they make it safe and clean to use. Until then, everyone’s to blame that uses it or builds it.

The administration and Republicans get paid off, right wing billionaires produce propaganda news, voters consume said news.

According to this administration, there isn't one. They have told us this for years, but I guess nobody believed them??? It just took someone willing to not give a damn about working with others and just forcing their will upon others. After all, the people elected them and they are just carrying through with their well advertised plans.

I don't really care about 'future & children', but even I find this absurd.

None of what you say is true to real life