Readers write

PSC needs new requirements

Before any utility rate hikes are approved, several requirements need to be met.

One, a project needs to define the benefits to the customer. Two, what will be the cost for the project? Three, what is the timeline for the project’s completion? Additionally, this data should be provided to the customer for review and allow all to contact the Public Service Commission with concerns.

PSC commissioners must have an engineering background and be able to interpret data from utilities. They should not be political.

This will hold utilities accountable and justify any rate hikes. It is time for utilities to use the profits they generate from their customers to fund the projects.

LARRY O. BOST, MARIETTA

Here’s a better idea for data center placement

Maybe before Georgia constructs data centers all over the state, we should pause and consider an idea from China. Scientific American reports that they are building a data center that will be placed in the ocean, about six miles off the coast of Shanghai. This may sound crazy, but let us see some reasons for it.

A data center on land uses electricity for two purposes. A little more than half operate a bank of computers, which generate a lot of heat, and the rest then cool them. The advantage of having the data center at sea is that it is surrounded by cool water. This would save half of the electricity and all of the water. Electricity would still be needed to power the computers and pump the water around to cool them. This would be generated by wind.

The water and power for Georgia’s data centers need to come from the local community. Plans are already underway to build additional power plants that rely on fossil fuels, including coal, oil and natural gas. All of these are environmentally unfriendly as they contribute to global warming. And the water would be better used by people for drinking or agriculture.

RICHARD PATTERSON, DECATUR

EPA’s new plan is a bet against earth’s future

To President Trump and his administration, in response to “EPA drafting a plan to end its ability to fight climate change,” AJC July 24.

It appears that you have a difference of opinion about the scientific studies that have proven that the planet earth and its inhabitants are in grave danger due to global warming and want the EPA to rescind the “2009 endangerment finding” and worse yet, that you and your administration want to “prevent future administrations from trying to tackle climate change, with lasting implications.”

The promotion of the burning of oil, gas and coal will add to this problem, and stifling the growth of clean energy and electric vehicles is not the solution either.

Sirs, I just have one question for all of you?

What if you are wrong?