Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | standeven's commentslogin

The pollution is the immense amount of exhaust from the power generation equipment being installed on site at data centres.

The article is from Capital B, which focuses on news affecting the Black community.


[flagged]


CO2, the stuff that has been buried for millions of years, and we're releasing all at once into the atmosphere? The stuff that is warming our planet faster than we, or nature, can adapt to? The stuff that is worsening global wildfires, flooding, retreating glaciers, heat waves, desertification, etc.?

Yeah, that stuff. And other nasty things in the exhaust as well.


The global problem of CO2 is something separate than the hyper local "problem" of CO2.

The "other stuff" is lower than the emissions in cars "other stuff".

If you are rallying behind "Natural gas generators are poisoning our town" you are 100% guaranteed to look dumb upon any rational analyses. Its a bad angle and should be abandoned. Go after noise if anything.


Right, but global CO2 is still a massive problem.

A data center drawing 5 GW is the equivalent power of 278,000 cars driving at highway speed. Even if these gas generators are cleaner (we don’t know because they are not regulated or measured), that is an insane amount of exhaust to locate near residential areas.


If you're gonna change the subject to global CO2, I can go ahead and change the subject to meat production, or using AC, or flying in airplanes because surely the high horse you're trying to ride on can only carry an AC free low impact vegan, right?

You gotta scale a lot of mountains before you can come down on DC emissions...


> Water vapor? The stuff we drink?

This is really obnoxious coming as people are still missing after historic flooding in Asia (via lots of concentrated water vapor, I guess).


no, we already abolished all rule making and review about CO2, this is removing the EPA requirement to install scrubbers for removal of NO and NO2 given sufficiently large outputs, which cause acid rain and are linked to respiratory problems. of course it all depends on the dose, which is why there there is a review process, which I guess was just too inconvenient

These are off-the-shelf generators, not bespoke built on-site. They typically have NOx emissions even lower than modern cars.

idk where you've been but the standard for AI datacenters buildouts right now is power-plant size turbine operations up to 1GW in size. not 2KVA Honda generators. notably they are single cycle and not combined cycle used in actual plants which requires burning up to 3x the methane for the same power output. none of this is a big secret.

1GW is around 6,000 cars.

There are probably twice that in the community complaining...

Also the stat is from GE Vernova, they make the generators used.

If you really want to argue without having the flex and bend to grasp at straws, just go with the noise argument, it actually is annoying to people nearby.



> 1GW is around 6,000 cars

How do you figure?


my only argument here is that there isn't really any reason to avoid going through an emissions review if required. or to require that scrubbers be installed if necessary. the decision to just make an exception to the process for datacenters is more of a political statement about deregulation than anything else.

I think a lot of people are desperate for tech giants to stand up to the current US administration.

People have nothing in common with tech giants. Tech giants support whoever is in power, because money. The current tech giants kicked the current President off of their platforms back in the day. Now these tech giants hang out at the White House. Funny how that works.

As long as tech companies make a stand against superficial culture war fights like this nobody will care that they've caved w.r.t privacy over the last two decades. Sad!

This is like building a gas powered car with a refinery attached to the roof.

Batteries exist. Solar panels add weight and design constraints. Why is this a thing? What am I missing?


This is clearly not a winning idea if you're a spreadsheet-loving engineer that can run the numbers, and is interested enough in clean tech to do so. But that's 5% of the population, tops.

To the 95% of people without the inclination or knowledge to check the figures, this looks great! It's a car with zero fuel costs, it's EV charging for people who don't have off-street parking, it's a fix for EVs sitting in workplace car parks at times of peak solar output, and it's most of the benefits of covering car parks in solar panels.


Solar panel efficiency has increased and they have made an extremely slippery vehicle. 4kWh/day and 10 miles per kWh gives 40 miles per day of driving range, enough for many people without ever plugging in.


> 4kWh/day

That's over-optimistic and you will probably only get that in a small handful of places in the world like the southwestern US or the Middle East and even then only for part of the year.

The hot, sunny, never-cloudy parts of the world also tend to be the ones where driving long distances is most necessary.


From some parts of SF to SJ is about 42 miles. Thats a very long distance that you’re likely to get completely on solar. For that long of a commute you probably need a bigger battery but you could easily have most of your costs met for free with minimal top ups. And that’s a very long daily commute.

Also temperature doesn’t matter too much. You just need sun. I bet it’s enough for most of California year round with minor exceptions that you need to use infrastructure charging.


> some parts of SF to SJ is about 42 miles.

That's pendantic. Add traffic, air conditioning, a shitton of traffic lights, a restroom stop, and a detour to buy groceries on the way. Oh and if your tires are at 38 instead of 42 psi you're going to lose some range there too. And then some wind, elevation changes. Roof rack bars, because people actually do go on outdoor trips (who would have thought?) And you probably want to arrive with 10-20% left, not 0. You're quickly looking at needing 84 miles of effective range to make the 42 miles safely. 168 miles for the round trip. Yeah, shit adds up fast.

My EV has a 363 mile "EPA rating" (whoever those charlatans are) but the realistic range I got from day 0 with a fresh battery in real life conditions is closer to 200-250 miles.


You’re thinking of this as a primary driving vehicle. I’m thinking of it purely as a secondary commuter vehicle / renting when you need to do a longer trip. And you’ve wildly intentionally inflated your estimates precisely to make it seem insane. There’s no roof rack on this (again - commuter vehicle, not a long distance camping vehicle). Also, this is intentionally a super tight distance and very few people are actually commuting from SFO to SJC. I’m intentionally highlighting how workable 42 miles is for a daily commute.

Also you should avoid keeping your roof rack on your vehicle if you don’t need it unless you’re constantly using it. They’re generally quick to take off and put on

The average daily commute in the US is 10-16miles.


Solar panel efficiency hasn’t gone up that much. It’s not like solar panel cars were just barely not worth it - the economics weren’t close to making sense.

10 miles/kWh is also insanely efficient, unbelievably so (well over 2x your average EV), and I don’t see where they back that claim up.


You’re missing that many people do not live in single-family homes with easy plug-in charging. Especially in big cities.

That’s one reason electric cars are a bit of a luxury item right now.


Charging is easy in dense cities. The problem is more that property managers are reluctant to get with the beat. Some legal intervention might be needed (e.g. make it a legal requirement to have at least 1/3 the amount of chargers as residents, in preparation for an electric car future) and let the unwilling property managers shut down.


The US will just do what they did with Chinese EVs: ban the superior technology to protect US companies.


a lot harder to ban software than hardware the size of EVs


More likely it’s because the title rule was broken. The original title was not used, and the new title is unclear.


The closing of Hormuz caused fuel prices to go up around the globe. Voting differently in the US could have prevented it.

So yeah, random shit far away can have significant effects, and sometimes you can do things about it.

That said, focusing on local news does sounds like a great approach, but international news still needs some attention.


You can vote against this trash and still not consume 99% of the "news" content people pretend is information. You don't need to know "the latest" about this second "administration". Consuming "news" is not a civic duty, it just is bad for you and a waste of your time. Don't be fooled.


I really don't think anyone voting against Trump was doing so with the Straight of Hormuz on mind.


Many said that the war with Iran was on their mind. You even have people in this thread saying that Harris being the war candidate was a factor


I don't think most Americans even knew what the strait of hormouz was, expecting them to vote differently based on that last November is wild. Trump constantly ran as the "no more wars" president and people fell for it. At that point, the blame is just for believing in that he was not lying. But strait of hormouz was a non topic for almost the entire world before the war.


It will impact how people vote this November though


but isn't expensive gas a local issue so local news will cover it regardless. That doesn't mean Americans will care about Hormouz in even an year imo. People only care when it affects their wallets.


November 2024 nobody could have reasonably predicted that the strait of Hormuz would be closed in February 2026 because Trump would declare war on Iran.

But they could have seen he was a fool and predicted that putting a fool in charge of the presidency would make something bad happen.

Last year we had stupid tariff wars, now we have stupid actual wars and a screw worm infestation. Who knows what's next? I don't, but I can predict it will be stupid.


I mean yes, but there are reasons why people vote for him even though it might seem stupid to you or me. Politics is a weird dirty game and its not just about good or bad or smart or stupid. It's mostly theatrics and media management. It kind of makes sense a reality TV actor can do well in these situations funny enough.


Only millionaires were driving Nissan Leafs and Chevy Volts?


Tesla Model S was apparently the best selling electric car then.


That was the first year it overtook the Nissan Leaf.


10% of the us population are millionaires. That’s 33 million people. Mostly boomers.


Isn’t GDP pretty easy to boost with deregulation and government overspending, at least in the short term? Neither of which benefits the people.


You can’t really keep that up over 35 years though, which is what Poland has achieved.


Deregulation does benefit the people, at least if it's done in ways that lead to sustained economic growth.


Value, performance, quality, and not being associated with Elon.


BY*D

*except Elon’s


Quality? I'm really interested into hard and extensive data about mechanical (drivetrain, suspension, brakes, etc...) engineering and quality control that would make me put them on the same level as the Japanese.

Lacking that, I must hold the preemptive view that they cut corners at least as much as the average make/


I've had LLMs regurgitate satire as fact many, many times.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: