- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 7/23/26 at 10:25 am to lsu777
quote:
they are saying its a chinese pys-op because
they are saying its a Chinese psy-op because thae people that have massive financial investments in AI told them it was a Chinse psy-op
thats it
Posted on 7/23/26 at 10:25 am to lsu777
quote:
it will not be driven by renewables. they can pour whatever the frick they want it to it. renewables are shite and cost way more.
go watch the scene in landman. yea its fake but pretty much everything he said is correct. renewables are dog shite. Nuke power is the future period.
i agree EV is the future on cars but not anytime soon in america as we prefer to drive longer distances. let market forces handle that.
i really give two fricks what china does in terms of EV or renewables, i wish they would go more towards that as it cleans up air more. but overall that shite doesnt affect me much. being anti AI data centers will though
What do you do in O&G?
Posted on 7/23/26 at 10:25 am to lsu777
quote:
upfront it is but over time that normalizes. nuclear power cost trends down over a 25 year span
Not really. Your cost of capital trends down but O&M trends up at a higher rate.
quote:
i get the cost per Kwh but mini nuclear reactors are the future imo.
Maybe, but not anytime soon.
Posted on 7/23/26 at 10:32 am to lsu777
quote:
you sure they are using recirculating water?
It is advertised as such, but who knows how evaporation works in these systems? They say they will truck in the water, but from where?
Posted on 7/23/26 at 11:11 am to terriblegreen
quote:
Your whole post was opinion and factually incorrect.
It’s one or the other, buddy. Those two are mutually exclusive.
quote:
There are many issues which have been pointed out already in this thread. If you choose not to acknowledge them, that's up to you.
Of course there are issues. There are issues with every development. The question is: Are there excessive issues? And the answer is plainly: No. Data centers are fairly benign industrial developments.
The issues that sometimes arise - excessive noise, effect on the cost of electricity, excessive water use - can easily be addressed in the approval process. Data centers can be made to agree that there generators won’t run except for in loss of power situations. I suspect that the few data centers that are always running their generators are doing so while the permanent power is being built. There is no need for a community to agree to that.
And if politicians made an agreement with data centers that causes residents electricity costs to rise (this is seldom the case) then shame on them.
Water usage is of zero concern in many places but is a big problem in others. In those places the local politicians should make deals that include revenue, from taxes on the data center, that pay for water infrastructure - dams and reservoirs in some places, desalination in others.
But none of these is an inherent issue with data centers that, in most cases, can’t be easily mitigated in the approval process. And when it can’t be? Simply don’t approve it. The issue is with crappy politicians who make bad deals, which they are equally likely to do with any other industry.
Posted on 7/23/26 at 11:47 am to Penrod
I agree that, compared with a refinery, chemical plant, or nuclear facility, an AI data center is relatively benign. Fine, fair point. But “unlikely to explode or leak benzene” is not the only standard a community should use when approving a massive industrial development.
Those traditional facilities generally provide a clear local return. They create substantial permanent employment, support contractors and suppliers, produce energy or physical goods, and contribute directly to the surrounding economy.
A hyperscale data center can consume enormous amounts of electricity and water, occupy hundreds of acres, create constant mechanical noise, require new transmission and utility infrastructure, and still employ relatively few people once construction ends. The community absorbs the footprint and resource burden, while the primary benefit is remote computing capacity for one of the richest corporations on Earth.
Then local officials often sweeten the arrangement with tax abatements and other incentives, meaning residents may not even receive the full tax benefit that supposedly justifies the project.
So the questions are not whether a data center is worse than a chemical plant. It is much simpler:
What exactly is the durable payoff for the people who must live beside it?
Why do we need this?
....you can't say that about the other industrial complexes you are comparing it to.
If the answer is a handful of jobs, higher utility demands, more infrastructure costs, and a giant tax-favored windowless box nobody voted for, skepticism seems perfectly reasonable. Does it not?
Those traditional facilities generally provide a clear local return. They create substantial permanent employment, support contractors and suppliers, produce energy or physical goods, and contribute directly to the surrounding economy.
A hyperscale data center can consume enormous amounts of electricity and water, occupy hundreds of acres, create constant mechanical noise, require new transmission and utility infrastructure, and still employ relatively few people once construction ends. The community absorbs the footprint and resource burden, while the primary benefit is remote computing capacity for one of the richest corporations on Earth.
Then local officials often sweeten the arrangement with tax abatements and other incentives, meaning residents may not even receive the full tax benefit that supposedly justifies the project.
So the questions are not whether a data center is worse than a chemical plant. It is much simpler:
What exactly is the durable payoff for the people who must live beside it?
Why do we need this?
....you can't say that about the other industrial complexes you are comparing it to.
If the answer is a handful of jobs, higher utility demands, more infrastructure costs, and a giant tax-favored windowless box nobody voted for, skepticism seems perfectly reasonable. Does it not?
This post was edited on 7/23/26 at 11:50 am
Posted on 7/23/26 at 11:57 am to Salmon
you dont have to use ai if you dont want to
Posted on 7/23/26 at 11:58 am to lsu777
quote:
you dont have to use ai if you dont want to
Tell that to my employer.
And our government.
Posted on 7/23/26 at 11:59 am to JohnnyKilroy
quote:
What do you do in O&G?
civil over all civil/structural refinery assets for a major.
This post was edited on 7/23/26 at 12:00 pm
Posted on 7/23/26 at 12:00 pm to theliontamer
I have no idea other than they are nearly obsolete when finished and will be within 4-5 years of completion - there is a lot of data that suggests that nary a one will ever recoup the cost of construction which is a BAD thing if true considering how many are being built and the price tag coupled with the companies who are "too big to fail" and will therefore have to be bailed out by the taxpayer.
That said most of the opposition seems to be based on land use issues. There is a solution to that....buy the land. The seller doesn't care who buys it...whoever can pony up the most money will, most likely, wind up the proud owner and can do what they want with it, within the parameters established by the AHJ if there is one. I made this point at a hearing here about 2 years ago and you'd have thought I farted in church. I made the comment that if folks didn't want data centers in the county that they could raise property taxes and earmark the revenue for land acquisition. Them folks were apoplectic....they wanted to tell the current owner what they could and couldn't do but if it meant costing them some money they wanted to change the subject....
That said most of the opposition seems to be based on land use issues. There is a solution to that....buy the land. The seller doesn't care who buys it...whoever can pony up the most money will, most likely, wind up the proud owner and can do what they want with it, within the parameters established by the AHJ if there is one. I made this point at a hearing here about 2 years ago and you'd have thought I farted in church. I made the comment that if folks didn't want data centers in the county that they could raise property taxes and earmark the revenue for land acquisition. Them folks were apoplectic....they wanted to tell the current owner what they could and couldn't do but if it meant costing them some money they wanted to change the subject....
Posted on 7/23/26 at 12:05 pm to Penrod
quote:
or the occasional cases in which the power company begs them to run them so that YOU don’t lose power.
This isn't an occasional thing, it is usually daily during peak demand hours. If neighbors don't want them in their backyard the neighbors ought to have bought the land when it was for sale. Thats the answer for "not in my backyard"...make your backyard inclusive of everything for sale around you. Otherwise accept the fact that you did not buy the land, for whatever reason, and the new owner ought to be able to use their private property as they see fit....it don't get much more free market than that. If you are into such things....
Posted on 7/23/26 at 12:08 pm to Klark Kent
quote:
I agree that, compared with a refinery, chemical plant, or nuclear facility, an AI data center is relatively benign. Fine, fair point. But “unlikely to explode or leak benzene” is not the only standard a community should use when approving a massive industrial development.
Those traditional facilities generally provide a clear local return. They create substantial permanent employment, support contractors and suppliers, produce energy or physical goods, and contribute directly to the surrounding economy.
A hyperscale data center can consume enormous amounts of electricity and water, occupy hundreds of acres, create constant mechanical noise, require new transmission and utility infrastructure, and still employ relatively few people once construction ends. The community absorbs the footprint and resource burden, while the primary benefit is remote computing capacity for one of the richest corporations on Earth.
Then local officials often sweeten the arrangement with tax abatements and other incentives, meaning residents may not even receive the full tax benefit that supposedly justifies the project.
So the questions are not whether a data center is worse than a chemical plant. It is much simpler:
What exactly is the durable payoff for the people who must live beside it?
Why do we need this?
....you can't say that about the other industrial complexes you are comparing it to.
If the answer is a handful of jobs, higher utility demands, more infrastructure costs, and a giant tax-favored windowless box nobody voted for, skepticism seems perfectly reasonable. Does it not?
they pay for the infrastructure, even if initially they get a giant tax break, over time.
do you have proof it makes electrical cost go up? because they normally pay all the upgrades etc.
water is recirculated, how many times do yall have to be told this? that has already been fixed. and the only real noise is mainly generators which shouldnt be running except when absolutely needed.
again like it or not AI is coming. period and it will make our lives way easier and make us much more efficient.
knowing that...where the frick should they be built? if it isnt rural farm area...where? should we force them to china so they can control our economy in the future and shut down much of our defense capabilities?
like at what point do we get to tell the NIMBY people to frick off?
as far as the pay off....it is going to revolutionize the economy over the next 2 decades. like it or not the people who know how to use AI are going to be on top. fight it if you want, nobody cares but its like pushing against a tidal wave
guess what..the horse and buggy people felt the same way about car plants and refineries...look what happened there. just because you may not be able to understand the use cases doesnt mean there arent any.
Posted on 7/23/26 at 12:08 pm to Salmon
quote:
Tell that to my employer.
And our government.
why would you not want to be able to use it at work? makes you life much easier and make you a much better and efficient worker
Posted on 7/23/26 at 12:10 pm to theliontamer
Yes, that it allows individuals to create those stupid arse AI videos with gorillas doing dumb shite. All i got.
Posted on 7/23/26 at 12:14 pm to lsu777
quote:
why would you not want to be able to use it at work?
Its the forcing that I don't like nor trust. It feels...inorganic.
quote:
makes you life much easier and make you a much better and efficient worker
It also makes every email now feel even more robotic and corporate. Engineers sending me calcs without any checks.
And I work in O&G. I know what "efficiencies'" mean.
Posted on 7/23/26 at 12:15 pm to lsu777
settle down little fella, no reason to get upset. I didn't say anything inflamatory or devisive.
You are arguing against points I never made.
Nobody said AI is not coming, AI has no useful applications, or America should surrender the industry to China. The question is whether every proposed data center automatically deserves local approval, public incentives, and unlimited access to local resources simply because somebody says “AI is the future.” Again, maybe you won't gloss over my question again: what is the benefit to the local community?
“They usually pay for upgrades” is not the same as proving residents never absorb higher grid, water, infrastructure, or opportunity costs. “Water is recirculated” does not mean it consumes no water. And claiming the only meaningful noise comes from emergency generators is awfully convenient for anyone who has never lived beside industrial cooling equipment.
You also keep answering a local cost and benefit question with a national economic prediction. AI might revolutionize the economy over the next twenty years. Great. That still does not explain why a particular community should trade land, electricity, water, tax concessions, and quality of life for a facility that may create relatively few permanent jobs.
Calling every objection “NIMBY” is just a way to avoid doing the math.
The burden is not on residents to prove AI is worthless.
The burden is on the developer and local government to prove this specific project produces enough local benefit to justify its local costs.
You are arguing against points I never made.
Nobody said AI is not coming, AI has no useful applications, or America should surrender the industry to China. The question is whether every proposed data center automatically deserves local approval, public incentives, and unlimited access to local resources simply because somebody says “AI is the future.” Again, maybe you won't gloss over my question again: what is the benefit to the local community?
“They usually pay for upgrades” is not the same as proving residents never absorb higher grid, water, infrastructure, or opportunity costs. “Water is recirculated” does not mean it consumes no water. And claiming the only meaningful noise comes from emergency generators is awfully convenient for anyone who has never lived beside industrial cooling equipment.
You also keep answering a local cost and benefit question with a national economic prediction. AI might revolutionize the economy over the next twenty years. Great. That still does not explain why a particular community should trade land, electricity, water, tax concessions, and quality of life for a facility that may create relatively few permanent jobs.
Calling every objection “NIMBY” is just a way to avoid doing the math.
The burden is not on residents to prove AI is worthless.
The burden is on the developer and local government to prove this specific project produces enough local benefit to justify its local costs.
This post was edited on 7/23/26 at 12:18 pm
Posted on 7/23/26 at 12:18 pm to Salmon
quote:
It also makes every email now feel even more robotic and corporate. Engineers sending me calcs without any checks.
And I work in O&G. I know what "efficiencies'" mean.
bro if your engineers are not running the checks on the calcs thats on them. we have had machine learning on the engineering side for close to 2 decades now and they should know better
and yea i agree shouldnt be forced.
as far as the emails....are yall forced to use it for that? if so thats weird.
Posted on 7/23/26 at 12:21 pm to Klark Kent
if the local community doesnt want it built...buy the land instead.
first prove there is a local cost. i actually agree with you in principle in many ways but at some point we need to understand the average citizen in LA has an IQ under 100. they do not understand any of this and scream not in my back yard over and over
we see this with existing facilities. people move in close to them and then constantly complain and try to sue. its insane.
quote:
The burden is not on residents to prove AI is worthless.
The burden is on the developer and local government to prove this specific project produces enough local benefit to justify its local costs
first prove there is a local cost. i actually agree with you in principle in many ways but at some point we need to understand the average citizen in LA has an IQ under 100. they do not understand any of this and scream not in my back yard over and over
we see this with existing facilities. people move in close to them and then constantly complain and try to sue. its insane.
Posted on 7/23/26 at 12:25 pm to lsu777
quote:
why would you not want to be able to use it at work? makes you life much easier and make you a much better and efficient worker
Yeah, it’s that simple. Those same employers would never lay folks off and expect you to make up for it…you know, since your job is easier and it can be done more efficiently.
Page 8 of 11
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News