Quote:
Not good neighbors, not good jobs, but use tons and tons or water and electricity to line the pockets of some out of state investors or a private equity group. Not to mention the noise aspect.
MiMi said:Quote:
Not good neighbors, not good jobs, but use tons and tons or water and electricity to line the pockets of some out of state investors or a private equity group. Not to mention the noise aspect.
Agreed. We should not move forward with this project.
Reload84 said:
This is insane and very irresponsible. The settlement with A&M and the cities and county on the water wells in Robertson County only cut the amount of water to be pumped by 50% through a settlement agreement. It came no where near what was needed to protect our aquifers and long term water availability.
Our council members who support this Data Center Plan are signing us all up for a water and electricity crisis with constantly escalating utility bills to cover the enormous infrastructure costs necessary to support a facility like this. Not to mention curtailment of available electricity at peak times and never ending restricted water supplies during times of hot weather and drought. Also, will a new wastewater plant be necessary? All this for only about as many jobs as a new restaurant. The only upside could be new tax money to feed the local bureaucracy. Don't think for a second this will reduce taxes for any homeowners or business people. Heck, they'll probably give the data center folks a tax abatement package for 20 years so they don't have to pay property or business taxes. Once, the precedent is set these things will multiply like rabbits.
Feel sorry for anyone who lives or works near this thing and the "no-go" zone it would create in what was designated to be an attractive area of the city for low-impact businesses. Cannot believe this is even being considered for this prime location--most data centers are being built in more remote rural areas----but remember big money talks!
Folks need to get vocal and stop this.....
Reload84 said:
This is insane and very irresponsible. The settlement with A&M and the cities and county on the water wells in Robertson County only cut the amount of water to be pumped by 50% through a settlement agreement. It came no where near what was needed to protect our aquifers and long term water availability.
Our council members who support this Data Center Plan are signing us all up for a water and electricity crisis with constantly escalating utility bills to cover the enormous infrastructure costs necessary to support a facility like this. Not to mention curtailment of available electricity at peak times and never ending restricted water supplies during times of hot weather and drought. Also, will a new wastewater plant be necessary? All this for only about as many jobs as a new restaurant. The only upside could be new tax money to feed the local bureaucracy. Don't think for a second this will reduce taxes for any homeowners or business people. Heck, they'll probably give the data center folks a tax abatement package for 20 years so they don't have to pay property or business taxes. Once, the precedent is set these things will multiply like rabbits.
Feel sorry for anyone who lives or works near this thing and the "no-go" zone it would create in what was designated to be an attractive area of the city for low-impact businesses. Cannot believe this is even being considered for this prime location--most data centers are being built in more remote rural areas----but remember big money talks!
Folks need to get vocal and stop this.....
Bob Yancy said:Hornbeck said:
That's right down Midtown Dr from the power substation. Will that need to be expanded to accommodate this, or is there enough capacity?
My understanding is, they will need their own in addition to that on the property itself.
Respectfully
Yancy '95
Quote:
My research indicates the proposed buyer is a best-in-class electric utility contractor that builds and manages substations and overhead utilities servicing on a variety of commercial use projects, including data centers, but have never built a data center themselves.
The company was acquired by an investor last summer with the apparent intent to leverage their electrical utility capability, which is considerable, in a repurposing toward data centers.
By my research, and I could be wrong, the proposed buyer of the property may be acquiring the property for a "powered land flip." This is when land for a data center is acquired with limited encumbrances and necessary entitlements, electric energized to make it shovel ready, and then sold at a much higher price to a data center developer.
Valen said:
I'm a masters student at the Bush school and in my second year which means I have a year long capstone. My capstone conveniently is on data centers and resource management for local municipalities. So by no means am I an expert, but here are my thoughts.
1. There is 100% a way to protect city assets when it comes to power and water, but that contract would have to be bulletproof. Leading to my first opinion, I'd be more comfortable with a project of this size if the contract was public and we ALL got to read it.
2. I deeply agree with the sentiment that more due diligence needs to take place. Housing an AI data center (most popular right now) compared to bitcoin mining is substantially important for I think any concerned/informed citizen.
3. While the tax benefits and revenue would be substantial for the community here and now I wonder about the future. What I mean is like said above about the worker count. If that area is developed into shops, restaurants, townhomes etc. You may never get the 30M in revenue, but you could have up to 100's of jobs out there from box stores, restaurants, etc.
So for me the question comes down to are we more focused on community or are we more focused on revenue. These centers could show that we're as a city open for business of the future, but they could take away from quality of life. Then obviously vice versa.
Lastly, the research shows so far that it really is hit or miss with what ended happening to the community with one of these "in the neighborhood" I would have to be greatly convinced that these builders of this center have the infrastructure to truly not be an burdensome impact on the community.
These are my own opinions and not of the Bush School, but my program by nature gives me the opportunity to talk to experts and dive into this topic specifically due to my capstone.
Valen said:
For my master's program, the capstone is a year-long (2-semester) project with the same team where you work with a client to solve a real-world problem. It pulls expertise from the top level on the topic we're researching and allows us hands-on learning to tackle big issues. My year-long project is on this exact topic of AI data centers in the state.
ElephantRider said:Quote:
My research indicates the proposed buyer is a best-in-class electric utility contractor that builds and manages substations and overhead utilities servicing on a variety of commercial use projects, including data centers, but have never built a data center themselves.
The company was acquired by an investor last summer with the apparent intent to leverage their electrical utility capability, which is considerable, in a repurposing toward data centers.
By my research, and I could be wrong, the proposed buyer of the property may be acquiring the property for a "powered land flip." This is when land for a data center is acquired with limited encumbrances and necessary entitlements, electric energized to make it shovel ready, and then sold at a much higher price to a data center developer.
Are you able to share the name of the company? I work in power development and am probably familiar with them. I would almost guarantee that whoever you are working with will not actually construct the site. They will acquire site control, negotiate the interconnection, get everything permitted, and clean up the title before selling it. I have solar and wind clients that do the same thing; they've never actually built anything.
I have my doubts that our local grid can support that much new load, but I'll leave that to CSU. We're completely reliant on a few 138kV lines coming into town. No 345kV, which is usually what these data centers look for
BBQ said:
If one would be in a twitter over possible data centers in your immediate vicinity, what would the idea of nuclear reactors in your immediate vicinity do? Just asking out of curiosity.
Stucco said:
A few thoughts.
After Uri Abbott started courting Bitcoin farms, touting them as the answer to the outages. The idea was that they would drive increased energy production and could then be turned off in severe weather events or other power emergencies. I doubt the same option would be available for AI.
Is there enough water? For now, yes, but probably not for our kids. The water in the aquifer below us does not belong to us just because we are one of hundreds of communities above it. This data center and many more like it will be built here or somewhere near here and will use the water with or without the involvement of CSU. The only question is, with water and electric, is the CSU infrastructure sufficient to pump and carry the load without improvements, and if not, who will pay for those improvements? As the owners of CSU we should care. This is supposed to save us money right?
The location seems bad, but if it knocks 30m expense off then ok, I guess. What happens to the midtown special tax district when there will no longer be a midtown?
Can they use the Macy's? Like the Woolworth's in downtown Bryan. Talk about two birds.
I love the idea of outside money funneling into BCS.
mason12 said:
Why would they build in the middle of a city and not out in the county?
Hornbeck said:
The video is kinda long, but this is in Granbury, Texas.
The title is "I Live 500 Feet From A Bitcoin Mine. My Life Is Hell."
whoop1995 said:
Bob
How is this good for the city other than the $30 million? But is the $30 million worth it?
The city cant negotiate the deal until after it is signed, is that really true? People are fearing water and power increases and there are no substantial jobs to the community?
mason12 said:
Why would they build in the middle of a city and not out in the county?
Texarkana said:
1. Since CSU is a municipal utility CSU has an obligation to serve load, I do not think you can just say no. You can effectively say no to these guys by proposing a more expensive rate.
2. Do not subsidize them at all no rate breaks, no property tax breaks, no aid in construction, nothing. These guys need to pay their share of absolutely everything Utilities, ROI, GFT, etc
3. Talk to CSU's energy supplier and understand financially how the data center will be served.
4. Realize a new large load will impact CSU's financials
a. Days cash on hand
b. Credit rating agencies view utilities with 1 massive customer as riskier
c. Credit exposure with ERCOT will go up dramatically and thus credit postings, they need to post a ton of cash with CSU
I will probably post more later
Quote:
There's no telling what they'd try to spend it on.
ElephantRider said:Texarkana said:
1. Since CSU is a municipal utility CSU has an obligation to serve load, I do not think you can just say no. You can effectively say no to these guys by proposing a more expensive rate.
2. Do not subsidize them at all no rate breaks, no property tax breaks, no aid in construction, nothing. These guys need to pay their share of absolutely everything Utilities, ROI, GFT, etc
3. Talk to CSU's energy supplier and understand financially how the data center will be served.
4. Realize a new large load will impact CSU's financials
a. Days cash on hand
b. Credit rating agencies view utilities with 1 massive customer as riskier
c. Credit exposure with ERCOT will go up dramatically and thus credit postings, they need to post a ton of cash with CSU
I will probably post more later
1. As a public utility, CSU can't say no to serving customers. The City of College Station can absolutely choose not to engage with the developer and kill this whole thing before it ever gets to that point.
2. Agreed
3. BCS only has two real import paths, both from TMPA: 138kV from Gibbons (multiple lines) and a 138kV from the Jack Creek in Edge. Without Gibbons Creek, TMPA has no generation. We have a few other connections, but that's where our base load power is coming from.
I know CSU has a PPA with a wind farm in West Texas, but other than that and BTU I'm not sure who all they have agreements with. BTU does have Dansby, but if I'm not mistaken it's a peaker and does not provide base load.
There are already reliability concerns for BCS with limited import capacity. I would think something like this would force someone to build a new import path and bring 345kV to BCS. That's going to be a big bill for someone to foot
I'm on the fence. It's going to suck having it there and there are legitimate resource concerns, but on the flip side that's a lot of money for the city. Then again, do we really trust Yancy & Co. with that money? There's no telling what they'd try to spend it on.
