Its supply and demand. The AI data centers are paying their electric bills, but at the same time they represent a significant increase in demand for electricity, so electric companies can raise their prices.
this post was submitted on 28 Dec 2025
56 points (96.7% liked)
No Stupid Questions
44957 readers
770 users here now
No such thing. Ask away!
!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.
Credits
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Expanding on that: in competitive electricity markets, in theory, total demand is met by the cheapest plants (by "marginal price": how much does an additional unit of electricity cost?) that are available.
The marginal price of PV, wind and hydropower is pretty much zero.
The next cheapest are usually older nuclear fission plants and coal power plants.
Then is a huge gap and then come newer nuclear plants and gas fired power plants.
But all of these plants aren't built over night. So maybe before all of the datacenters, total demand may have mostly been met by renewables and coal and gas power plants only operated a few hundred hours per year. Now, total demand rises and those plants need to operate more often. That's why the prices rise just because of demand increase. Other effects (e.g. changes in regulation, corporate greed, ...) might be at play as well.
Sure, but the companies driving the increased demand should be paying for the increased capacity directly instead of having the general public subsidize it.
No no no! It’s cheaper for them to pay off politicians for special rates and then pass on the cost to the consumer! Won’t you think of the poor billionaires!
Think of the shareholders!
How would that work? With a flat fee or depending on whether ai companies are tipping the scale to a more expensive marginal price within a price period?
Colombia has price discrimination for residential areas: households in richer areas have to pay more than those in poorer areas. I don't know how good the actual implementation works out for the people there, but it was in effect when I was there more than 10 years ago and it still seems to be (see "estratos" here: https://www.enel.com.co/content/dam/enel-co/espa%C3%B1ol/personas/1-17-1/2025/pliego-tarifario-enel-diciembre-2025.pdf). If that is possible for different areas of one city, of course we could make data centers pay more for 1 kWh than a private consumer would.
It just won't happen in our hyper-capitalist north american and european countries.
I don't know how wide spread smart meters are in the US, but it should be fairly simple so have an extra tariff on these kind of consumers, or perhaps just tariffs during peak periods.
At least it could be enforced that the surplus heat from data centers had to be reused in some way, could be residental heating or ptx.
The AI data centers are paying their electric bills
This bears repeating. Datacenters do have to pay the light bill. Even when the VC money dries up. It's a beautiful thing.
But their rates are significantly lower then consumers
In certain periods they might have cheaper prices than regular consumers and in other periods it might be more expensive. They just have a fixed price agreement. No producer of electricity hands out free power.
The problem is that because of that, consumer prices have to rise.
And usually the company in charge of power delivery can change their rates regardless of a fixed price agreement from the power generation company.
I don't think it's all bad in the long run. A higher base load also give higher incentives to install renewable energy. In Denmark we have issues with the cannibalisation effect, i.e. We have reach a point where it's no longer financially viable to install more renewable assets. We often see negative power prices on windy and sunny days, which forces the renewable asset owners to either turn off their assets during these periods, or pay the negative spot price.
Naw, they'll just declare bankruptcy and the municipalities will foot the bills for the infrastructure debt.
Basically, have you even seen the Simpsons monorail episode? It's that.
Yep. It's the same reason everyone has to pay more for RAM now, even though consumers didn't cause the shortage.
When there is a finite amount of something and someone with more money wants it, it makes the price of it for everyone go up to make it so that some people can no longer afford to compete for the resource, making it available for the higher spender. (Yes there's also infrastructure being built, but they will out compete us for that too)
Same thing with land & property on it, the working class can't afford to buy housing now, because rich people want to use housing as an investment vehicle.
Food is another (though also tied to land ownership)
Ultimately it's the same problem across the board and the solution is generally a wealth tax to prevent densely concentrated capital from distorting the market.
Specifically for these companies, they're simply too big. They need to be broken up and need to be prevented from getting this size again. If they truly cannot be broken up, they should be nationalised.
Failure to address these issues will result in these companies and people holding a total monopoly on all the resources available. More expensive electricity is only the beginning.
The same way you pay more for gas in summer or when the economy is doing well: demand is higher so prices go up.
Don't forget that when the bubble pops companies holding the bag will be trying to recoup their initial capital so the price won't go down.
I'm not sure about that. The way I see it, there will be more supply for the below-expectation demand, which would make prices go down
They can turn off some generators and adjust the supply down for ideal revenue/profits, reduce staffing levels, and extend equipment life. There's no reason for them to charge you $50 for something once you've told them you'll pay $100 for it.
You should listen to some of the recordings of the energy traders at Enron. They did this stuff all the time.
Still nothing terribly new here. Energy has always had inelastic demand, meaning usage doesn't change much with price. Whether gas costs 1, 3, or 5 dollars people still need to get to work and will still buy stuff. Maybe people will start to combine trips or whatever with higher prices, but nothing huge.
Exactly, so there's never a reason to bring down the price. If anything you'd bring down the supply (e.g. Enron during the California energy crisis).
Ah, but you are forgetting about corporate greed and industry collusion.
Which wasn't a factor before? 😉
This is the part where I tell you that residential electricity costs are higher to basically subsidize commercialized electricity!! This is how it's always been even without AI. Not defending it, I definitely think it's bullshit
AI, and more locally, a windfarm, that they've already anlnounced a rate hike ok .15 $/kw to subsidize (this is why i hate say it, but im glad trump canceled wind)
Are why the residential solar company Im working for is more or less booked 2 years out right now, despite the tarifs.
5 years ago, our clientele was people doing it for ideological/ environmental reasons, rich prepper types, or just techy nerd types. Now its small buisness owners and middle class families who know they can afford the next price hike but dont think theyll be able to afford the one after. Trust in the utility is gone.
Or is it building the infrastructure to accommodate them the issue?
It's this, but that's only part of the story.
Datacenter companies are very efficient at building new ones now, once they have all the proper permits and can start building it can go from an empty lot to fully functional in a year or two. Maybe longer for the huge hyperscalar ones.
Once they are online, their power demand is comparable to a small city, coming online all at once. But the local utility never had this demand in its plan, so they have to build more capacity to service it, and building a new power plant takes much longer. In the meantime, the demand will outstrip their capacity and the utility will have to buy more power on the open market. This drives up costs for all their customers unless the utility is allowed to charge these customers (whose existence has blown up all their capacity planning) more.
As a side note, they often get advantages and tax breaks because they promise to bring jobs to the area. And the initial construction jobs usually are significant. But once the place is built, it's ongoing operations only requires a few dozen positions, many of them low-tech and outsourced like site security. The higher-tech jobs (like the network engineering) is often not on-site anyway. A shopping plaza would generate more jobs than a datacenter.
It's worse than that. While the power company starts making plans for the additional load that's already there, datacenter developers bring in gas turbine generators. This adds to the noise and pollution. The local municipality may fine them a few hundred dollars a month for violations, but that's the cost of doing business.
Why would the companies pay the bill? What are we gonna do, not have electricity or go use the other company that either doesn't exist or is raising rates for the same reason? Folks like you are just now noticing that this whole system is a scam, but unfortunately the time for action was 30 years ago.
Conversly, accorsing to most of these responses it sounds like if your nearby data center were to mysteriously vanish, your electric bill would go down.
~~Take with a grain of salt, but I’ve heard it’s not the AI data centers it’s actually all the cuts from the trump admin to green energy projects~~
edit: I couldn’t find any supporting articles on this when I checked for things, disregard
edit2: here’s an AP article maybe answering your original question link
Republicans.