Something on the lines of if your company facility is using over X amount of energy the majority of that has to be from a green source such as solar power. What would happen and is this feasible or am I totally thinking about this wrong

  • TootSweet@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    10 months ago

    Why not just pass a law that no one can generate electricity except from green sources? It sounds so easy when I put it like that.

    Are you thinking that sprinkling the buzzwords “AI” and “Crypto” on an “only green energy” kind of provision would allow lawmakers to leverage hype to cut through right-wing resistence to green energy mandates in a way that a more blanket (or even just not-Crypto/AI-focused) provision couldn’t?

    • abhibeckert@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Why not just pass a law that no one can generate electricity except from green sources? It sounds so easy when I put it like that.

      Um - those laws have been passed in many countries. Usually with a reasonable approach such as “you can continue operating the coal plants that were already built, but no more can be built”.

      What’s actually happening around the world though is those plants are becoming too expensive to run, so they’re shutting down even if they are allowed to continue to operate. Renewable power is just cheaper.

      About two thirds of global electricity production is zero emission now and it’ll be around 95% in a 25 years or so.

      Source (note: this is a “renewables” article, not a “zero emission” article. Some non-renewable energy produces zero emissions and there’s not expected to be much movement on that in the foreseeable future): https://renewablesnow.com/news/renewables-produce-85-of-global-power-nearly-50-of-energy-in-2050-582235/

      • TootSweet@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        Um - those laws have been passed in many countries.

        Yeah, I know. I just wondered what putting a “but only for AI and crypto applications” as OP said added to the conversation.

        In civilized places, e.g. not the U.S. (it’s cool, I’m American), where it’s not a struggle to get any environmental legislation passed, adding “AI and crypto” to the conversation is unnecessary. In the U.S. where the minority of conspiracy theorists get what they want through cheating, I doubt adding AI and crypto to the conversation is going to help any.