Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Maine Said No to New Data Centers. Other States Are Racing to Follow

motherjones.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–28 of 28 posts

Re: Maine Said No to New Data Centers. Other States Are Racing to Follow

#21

Post by Epa095 »

ericd wrote: post #8

This is a major reason I think SpaceX’s space DCs aren’t insane, this is a pretty clear trend. These things don’t bring durable employment, they concentrate costs on infrastructure locally, and their benefits go to the world, so the only way I’ve seen the calculus work for a local community are if they levy property tax on the contents of the DC, use it to subsidize your local property taxes/infrastructure, and then…

The world is large. There is still infinite room left on earth closer than space.

The reason the DC want to be placed in proximity to people is to get access to the infrastructure, electricity grid and roads. I think the next natural step is to just put the DC further away from existing infrastructure and pay for the connect, not move to space.

Re: Maine Said No to New Data Centers. Other States Are Racing to Follow

#22

Post by xg15 »

Tanoc wrote: post #7
xorvoid wrote: post #5

I live in a town in the Midwest that just voted down a data center project. Personally I think it's mostly a proxy vote against bigtech/social-media. People are pretty fed up with their practices but don't have power to act at a national level. But, they DO have power at the local level to show up to town council and talk directly (in-person) to their representatives. I think the other side of this is that there's th…

One argument I've heard that people try to use as proponents of these datacenters is that they bring in employment in construction and electrical engineering even if it's temporary. Their argument falls apart very quickly when it's pointed out that because of the specialization many owners of these locations hire specific firms and contractors willing to travel across the nation for the work instead of hiring a local…

Even if it were true, I don't understand how this argument makes sense: So assume the construction were entirely done by local businesses/hires. That gets a short-term employment boost while the facility is being built. And then what? The construction is finished, the employment dries up again, but the data center is still there, with all the downsides.

Also, you could get the exact same short-term boost by building something else, e.g. housing.

Offsetting long-term costs with short-term benefits doesn't seem like a good strategy.

Re: Maine Said No to New Data Centers. Other States Are Racing to Follow

#23

Post by xg15 »

bastawhiz wrote: post #2

I've been interested in understanding what would make people more amenable to data centers. We kind of need them, though arguably many of the ones being built now are motivated by foolish AI bubble incentives. Quieter? Lower water use? Lower energy use? Mandatory accessory green spaces? Property taxes that reflect the value being derived relative to inconvenience/pain inflicted on the community? Jobs programs? I thin…

> We kind of need them, though arguably many of the ones being built now are motivated by foolish AI bubble incentives.

I think the purpose is important. People understand the need for power stations or garbage dumps or waste treatment plants. However:

- Those are clearly understood to be a negative for the immediate environment. No one wants to live next to a garbage dump.

- They are just as clearly understood to be a benefit or even necessity for overall society, including the people having to live close by: Everyone wants pickup and processing of their garbage working smoothly.

With AI datacenters, the situation is weirdly turned on its head:

- The overall necessity of AI is still deeply questionable. Businesses and governments are pushing it and yes, there are a lot of users, but overall sentiment of the population seems to be ambivalent to strongly negative. There is everything from warnings of addiction and AI psychosis to AI simply destroying most peoples' livelihood. So there is no "greater cause" for which someone should tolerate an AI datacenter in their neighborhood, the way they might tolerate a wind turbine.

- To make up for this, AI proponents seem to try and conjure up some ostensible direct benefits the data center (and not the AI wave in general) would have for the neighborhood, like jobs or followup businesses. It increasingly gets clear that this is just a ruse, maybe an exploitation of people who confuse a data center with a research campus.

It's like trying to sell a fentanyl factory by saying its exhausts contain CO2 and so might stimulate local plant life.

So my feel is, data centers will always have some negative effects on the neighborhood. But how far the neighborhood is willing to tolerate those effects is directly dependant on its view of AI in general.

Re: Maine Said No to New Data Centers. Other States Are Racing to Follow

#24

Post by xg15 »

thepryz wrote: post #4
bastawhiz wrote: post #2

I've been interested in understanding what would make people more amenable to data centers. We kind of need them, though arguably many of the ones being built now are motivated by foolish AI bubble incentives. Quieter? Lower water use? Lower energy use? Mandatory accessory green spaces? Property taxes that reflect the value being derived relative to inconvenience/pain inflicted on the community? Jobs programs? I thin…

To start, there is a lot of misinformation out there and the NDAs that surround data center construction and operation don't help. People will cite water consumption as a huge problem when modern hyperscalers use substantially less water because they're now using closed loop cooling instead of evaporative cooling. You'll see people cite noise because they saw a video online of a crypto mining grifter who bought a bun…

> the people in the communities who continue to elect politicians who, time and time again, make decisions counter to the best interests of their community.

I wonder where all the politicians are who would make decisions for their communities instead...

Re: Maine Said No to New Data Centers. Other States Are Racing to Follow

#25

Post by ericd »

Epa095 wrote: post #21
ericd wrote: post #8

This is a major reason I think SpaceX’s space DCs aren’t insane, this is a pretty clear trend. These things don’t bring durable employment, they concentrate costs on infrastructure locally, and their benefits go to the world, so the only way I’ve seen the calculus work for a local community are if they levy property tax on the contents of the DC, use it to subsidize your local property taxes/infrastructure, and then…

The world is large. There is still infinite room left on earth closer than space. The reason the DC want to be placed in proximity to people is to get access to the infrastructure, electricity grid and roads. I think the next natural step is to just put the DC further away from existing infrastructure and pay for the connect, not move to space.

The concern isn't at all about physical space, DCs are compact, it's about limitations of the infrastructure you're talking about. Turbines currently have a multi-year backlog. The interconnection queue for new generation is an even longer backlog in many grid regions. And there's a general populist backlash against them.

Re: Maine Said No to New Data Centers. Other States Are Racing to Follow

#26

Post by patmorgan23 »

xorvoid wrote: post #5

I live in a town in the Midwest that just voted down a data center project. Personally I think it's mostly a proxy vote against bigtech/social-media. People are pretty fed up with their practices but don't have power to act at a national level. But, they DO have power at the local level to show up to town council and talk directly (in-person) to their representatives. I think the other side of this is that there's th…

If your local governments are funded by property taxes, Data centers can bring in new revenue while requiring few services. Which could be used to shore up stressed public budgets or fund other economic development activities to bring in jobs.

These projects can be developed and located responsibly, and every project is different. I don't think a blanket ban is good policy.

Re: Maine Said No to New Data Centers. Other States Are Racing to Follow

#27

Post by patmorgan23 »

JuniperMesos wrote: post #20
ivraatiems wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no good reason to build datacenters in many of the places people are trying to build them. Look at all the ones they're trying to build in Phoenix or Tucson, Arizona, or in New Mexico. These are deserts! They're the exact opposite of a place where it makes sense to build a datacenter. It's not enough to offer incentives. You have to explain why you even need to do it in the first place, and the answer better…

These are good places to build a data center if you're planning on operating it entirely off-grid with a photovoltaic solar panel array (or even just augmenting grid power with PV solar generated onsite). Your cooling costs increase somewhat compared to a cooler outdoor climate, but the desert southwest is basically the best place in the US to put solar panels.

Off grid doesn't make sense (computers ramp up and down extremely quickly which makes balancing an islanded DC challenging), DCs function a lot better if they can utilize the inertia of the grid.

Many projects are bringing their own generation, but still trying to get an interconnection.

Re: Maine Said No to New Data Centers. Other States Are Racing to Follow

#28

Post by thepryz »

xg15 wrote: post #24
thepryz wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To start, there is a lot of misinformation out there and the NDAs that surround data center construction and operation don't help. People will cite water consumption as a huge problem when modern hyperscalers use substantially less water because they're now using closed loop cooling instead of evaporative cooling. You'll see people cite noise because they saw a video online of a crypto mining grifter who bought a bun…

> the people in the communities who continue to elect politicians who, time and time again, make decisions counter to the best interests of their community. I wonder where all the politicians are who would make decisions for their communities instead...

The core issue is that most Americans aren't civically engaged. They don't take the effort to track what's happening within their government which then means that they don't know and are unable to hold their elected officials accountable.

Communities can have more effective politicians, but that means voting out individuals who make bad decisions or decisions that are counter the will good of the community they serve.

Post reply on HN