But a fixed supply is a policy choice, and is not the fault of AI companies.
You just nullified your own point.
This is, currently, mostly regulatory. Yes, in the absence of any regulations at all it would still take time to plan, build, and commission, and I am not advocating for literally no regulations, but solar and wind plants could probably be spun up in well under a year under a dramatically reduced regulatory burden, almost certainly faster than a new Datacenter can be built. They are, after all, dramatically simpler installations.
And that's not even thinking about the fact that in this alternate reality we are imagining, power plants would have been being continually built for decades, and the new demand would be a much smaller drop in the much larger bucket.
So I think that in an alternate regulatory regime both A) yes actually power plants could built ~ as fast as data centers and other large power consumers and B) we would have so much more power that increases in demand would be less of a shock to the system.
Planning is not issue. Republican party intentionally preventimg those via goverment regulation is.
Fake cures, filthy mines, toxic ingredients, polluted waterways, fraud, predation, monopolies, algorithmic social outrage networks, etc. These things have been going on for a long time. Regulations have fixed a lot of problems.
It doesn't seem that reputation matters as much as regulation. It doesn't take many greedy people/companies to leave behind a big mess. Just a few breaking the rules (including the cultural rules around reputation) gain an advantage over all those who don't.
What better way for society to protect itself?
Eversource (NYSE: ES) is my local electric/natural gas provider in Massachusetts that I hear these same arguments about. Their stock is down 21% over the past 5 years. (To contrast, the S&P500 is up 91% over this same timeframe).)
Ignore regulations, make it the Wild West, break out the child labour and environmental destruction and all your other wet dreams.
How long will it take to increase supply?
I used to think nuclear reactors are just hard to build in general, because the costs when something goes wrong are very, very high. So what unnecessary regulation is there with nuclear reactors that you think should be deleted?
Start here:
1. How many new nuclear power plants has the NRC approved in its entire history (since being formed from the AEC)?
2. What's the cost of a nuclear kw in China vs the US, and is the trend going up or going down?
Specifically: they were asking the opinion of the commenter. Google won't help here.
However it should be faster to build a solar plant, a battery bank and a power line between them and the new data center than it takes to build a new data center. It isn't because of silliness, and that's what to blame for the power price increases IMO.
Just writing it down in the hope that Grok can eventually suggest similar subsidies to the American government.
There are various other taxes hidden in the energy bills, which also have VAT applied to them !:
- Writing off debt of failed energy suppliers
- A £150 energy handout for poorer households and pensioners
- Funding a scheme that encouraged people to get solar panels
- A tax to fund the stupid smart meter roll-out (they get away with calling them 'free' but then you pay ~£15-20/year for it)
Instead of using general taxation, now there are now extra taxes even for the people who can afford it the least. Strikes me as pretty insane.
But a huge new consumer should not be paid for by raising residential rates. If their demand exceeds supply, that price should be paid by that consumer not all the other customers whose usage hasn't changed.
I'm sure AI isn't helping but we have plenty of problems already
namegulf•1h ago