I hope you're speaking tomorrow night

What is actually being voted on at the meeting on Thursday? The sale of the land, a noise study, a power study?

Edit: Seems like the sale of the land.

Hey! I see my house!

I see mine too.

I think there will be plenty of speakers tomorrow, do you have to sign up to attend?

I'm curious about the capacity of the council chamber. If everyone does turn out, will there be an overflow room available?

I wondered this too. What did they do for the Northgate meeting?

To attend, no. To speak, yes. Sign up on city website (someone posted above) by noon. You get three minutes individually. 10 mins if you have 5 or more you are representing.

ElephantRider said:

---

dubi said:

---

I received 2 responses.

---

Misleading statement by Nichols regarding power. They purchase their own power contracts, but they still have to use the local grid to consume it. That's the issue

---

I think there may be some truth to what Nichols is saying.

SB6 addresses this and as far as I can tell users of over 75MW must "contribute" to the cost of infrastructure and also add a shutoff for energy emergencies. ERCOT decides what is an emergency.

Large users can also sign up to voluntarily throttle and get compensated. We (ERCOT tax money) have already paid millions to data center companies to throttle. The rate structure and rules have not been set according to an AI response to my question.

Prompt #1 summarize SB6
Prompt #2 - Does sb6 talk about payment for volunteering to throttle usage?

The responses are below:

***Can someone with actual knowledge of this kind of regulation do a little more digging on SB6 and payments by ERCOT to users to throttle. My actual work is getting me right now***


Prompt #1
Summarize sb6

The "final version" of Texas Senate Bill 6 (SB 6) refers to the energy legislation that passed the Texas Legislature and was signed into law by Governor Greg Abbott on June 20, 2025
. The bill was enacted to address challenges to the state's electric grid, primarily driven by rapid load growth from large consumers like data centers and manufacturing plants.
The legislation imposes new requirements on large electricity users and provides more authority to the Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUCT) and the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT).
Key provisions of the final SB 6

• Cost sharing for large loads: Large electrical customers, initially defined as those using 75 megawatts or more, must now contribute to the costs of new transmission and interconnection infrastructure. Utilities can no longer subsidize these costs using residential rates.
• Grid reliability measures: The bill requires new large electrical loads interconnected after December 31, 2025, to install equipment that allows them to be remotely curtailed during grid emergencies and firm load shed events.
• Demand management programs: ERCOT is directed to establish a competitive reliability service to procure demand reductions from large customers, which can be deployed to strengthen the grid during emergencies.
• Oversight of co-located generation: SB 6 increases regulatory oversight for facilities that combine large loads with on-site generation (such as a data center with its own power plant). These "net metering" arrangements are subject to review and potential conditions from the PUCT to ensure grid reliability.
• Transparency and planning: Large customers applying for a new interconnection must disclose information to ERCOT, including data on their backup generators, potential service locations, and whether they have submitted similar requests elsewhere in the state. This is intended to improve load forecasting and planning.
• Study of transmission costs: The PUCT must conduct an evaluation of the "four coincident peak" methodology used for calculating wholesale transmission costs. The study will determine whether the method is still fair and ensure that large customers pay their appropriate share.
• Backup generation deployment: In a grid emergency, ERCOT can direct certain large customers that use non-exporting backup generation to deploy their power or curtail their load. This action would be taken after all available market services have been exhausted.

Impact and implementation

• Effective date: The bill became effective immediately upon the Governor's signature on June 20, 2025.
• Implementation process: The PUCT is currently in the process of implementing the bill through a series of rulemakings, which will define specific standards for interconnection, demand response programs, and cost-sharing.
• Potential impacts: While the bill aims to stabilize the grid, industry observers note that the increased financial obligations and regulatory oversight could potentially slow down the development of new large industrial facilities, such as data centers, in Texas.

AI responses may include mistakes. For legal advice, consult a professional.


Prompt #2
does sb6 talk about payment for volunteering to throttle usage

Yes, Texas Senate Bill 6 (SB 6) includes provisions for payment related to voluntary usage throttling by large electrical customers
. It directs the Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUCT) to require the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) to develop a new "competitive reliability service".
Here are the key details regarding payment:

• A "competitive" service: The program is designed to competitively procure demand reductions from large customers, implying that ERCOT will pay participants for their reductions.
• For large load customers: The service specifically targets large loads with a demand of at least 75 megawatts, such as data centers and manufacturing facilities.
• Deployment during anticipated emergencies: The program is for voluntary curtailment during anticipated emergency conditions, such as those caused by extreme weather.
• Not a replacement for other programs: Large customers participating in this new reliability service cannot also participate in other ancillary services or curtail their usage in response to wholesale price signals.
• Rulemaking will define details: The exact payment structure and pricing for this service will be defined through PUCT rulemaking, which was still in progress as of July 2025.

This voluntary payment for throttling is a separate mechanism from the mandatory curtailment requirements that the bill also imposes on large customers during firm load shed events.
AI responses may include mistakes. For legal advice, consult a professional

That's the cost to interconnect them. They're not going to build new import transmission into BCS. That's our constraint

Koko Chingo said:

---

Thanks, trying to get my real work done and research all this garbage. its not like we even had 5 business days to prepare for tomorrow.....

We need some people to look into SB6 too

---

Same. I'm trying to use a lot of the facts I spelled out in my email the majority (thus far) didn't bother to respond to.

Koko Chingo said:

---

Drewmeister said:

---

I don't have a dog in this hunt, being a Bryan resident.

---

That's what you think.....

ERCOT paid a bitcoin miner $31.7 Million to shutdown for one month. At that time they made more money from ERCOT by shutting down versus operating. Unless you are off the grid; you helped pay for that.

ERCOT's primary funding comes from a System Administration Fee, a per-megawatt-hour charge paid by the entities that use the grid, which covers its operational costs. ERCOT sets the fee.

That means every Texans rate goes up to pay for these fees. In the new SB6; from what I gather users of data centers that consume over 75MW can sign up for volunteer throttling to have ERCOT pay them to throttle under high demand. ERCOT sets the rules and the payments.

So if we add a massive data center without adding generating capacity 20 miles south of Fort Stockton and have to pay them to throttle; our rates will probably go up.

For our local issue, College Station would sell land to an entity it cannot even regulate. That responsibility lies with ERCOT and the PUC.

As for noise, the council can create a special zone with different requirements. For example Northgate has higher limits than other areas.

ERCOT Pays BitCoin Miner to Throttle

---

Compared to the PUC raising the rates to $9,000/Mwh during Uri? The financial impacts were devastating, will take decades to recover from, and ultimately resulted in very little to no additional production. $31m seems like a bargain.

Maybe we can get peta involved.

I've seen hogs and deer cross Midtown Drive just north of Costco.

I have been struggling with the question of who exactly wants this deal. In the grand scheme of things, 30 million is peanuts. To reinforce this point, this would correspond to $250 per College Station resident, assuming Priority Power buys the entire lot.

Then, why would the city want a project like this? I think the obvious answer was given by Bob Yancy during the town hall. He described the city government as a service provider, offering services such as trash collection, water, and electricity. From this perspective, acquiring a client that would likely require more services than all of their current "customers" makes sense to them. The only issue here is that, unlike a private utility company, maximizing revenues is not consistent with maximizing the well-being of its stakeholders (us/residents of College Station). A simple example would be that the city could raise the cost of electricity tomorrow and likely generate more revenue, and most residents would not be better off.

Another reason to proceed with the sale is that the benefits from the transaction will be accrued soon, likely with this administration. In contrast, the costs will accrue in years to come, likely with another administration. Moreover, the current administration could always argue that they built in the correct measures into the contract, but their successors failed to regulate the data center/crypto mine effectively.