Microsoft pulls plug on plans for 244-acre data center in Caledonia (2025)

Most sites can probably make do with ddos mitigation from their hosting provider.

Larger hosting providers may have enough bandwidth to accept and drop most inbound volumetric DDoS. Smaller providers often contract with a DDoS mitigation service; during an attack the mitigation service BGP announces the attacked range, filters out problematic traffic and forwards the rest.

It's been at least 7 years since I ran servers that routinely saw DDoS... at that time, we didn't tend to attract attacks anywhere near 10Gbps, so having 10G connections for severs likely to be targetted did most of the work. I'm sure it's worse now, so 10G might not cover easy attacks but 100G servers aren't hard to find. Attacks do get larger than 100G, but most sites won't be hit with a large attack.

For a small site, taking an outage during a DDoS is often an acceptable alternative too.

Stormwater ponds are the bare minimum, not a deal sweetener. A deal sweetener would be an ecological management plan which demonstrates a true desire to limit the environmental impacts of this development as much as possible. And no, a storm pond company that just pours chemicals into the water to control algae and plants invasive privets around does not demonstrate that.

You're saying the data center has a small footprint, but it does not. You don't need that much stormwater pond if you don't have giant impervious surfaces.

Deal sweetener is footprint (buildings, parking lots, and substation) being 1/6 of the land with the other 5/6 dedicated to nature preservation.

Not all wide open space is created equal. If it's wide open space with Eurasian grasses that get cut every few weeks, it's useless and has 0 benefit to the local ecology. Even if they weren't cut, they're still do very little for the ecology in the area.

If those forests don't have keystone tree species, then it's the same.

The people running these companies are so incompetent, they can't even do greenwashng right.

It helps if the land is currently an eyesore and you’re the first to do something with it.

Datacenters rarely get mothballed after 10 years, they’re usually 15-year depreciation schedules in terms of the building and the plant. Equipment within them like servers typically depreciates over 72 months but is rarely removed by hyperscalers promptly after 6 years. More typically it’s around Year 8.

So you won’t see the building cease being useful for about 20 years. You’re getting usually two full cycles of “the servers inside” before a renovation program (or potentially asset/building disposal to another party, or demolition, depending what changes in those 20 years really).

What’s often happening around these tax agreements is they are a mixture of incentive and an offset of prepaid improvement costs to the city/county for developing mains water, sewer, roads, schools, fire and police, and other infrastructure, sufficient to support the 100s of families who may move here to take the post-commissioning jobs, etc.

Often money out the door for the hyperscaler is about the same over 20 years, it’s just some number of $M’s is paid upfront as an “Contribution to Improvements”. That’s actually good for the municipality involved, too.

Municipalities typically know or are told these aren’t tax rebate for 10 years and then it’s getting bulldozed. They’re sophisticated enough and well advised to understand this is a 20+ year investment in their town.

It’s true it costs money to then hopefully make it. :)

Architecture, civil engineering, and other design and permitting fees can easily be 7–10% of the overall cost of smaller projects. Even in large projects they’re often 4-5% or more, and the number of billable hours for complex impervious surface and stormwater management adds up fast, as do engineering stamped plans for structural and other factors.

Most cost here is also incurred fairly early before you have any vertical construction done — Phase 2 in a program after land acquisition. So you feel like you’re spending a ton on paperwork and you can’t see anything yet.

You CAN spend a bit of money even before land acquisition on quick feasibility studies but in U.S. terms for something like a residential, small commercial or light industrial project every parcel you go “I like that, can it work?” you are dropping $15-50k during a 45-120 feasibility period. Should it 100% not work out you are NOT getting reimbursed that by the selling party. You’re out the money. Even within 90 days you may find some uncertainties like SEPA approval won’t close before you have to say deal or no deal on the parcel acquisition. This is quite unlike massive companies doing business where the land may not change hands until essentially every approval is locked in (but should it not work out the buyer may be out millions in engineering fees paid to try and make it work).

Borrowing to buy land and then borrowing more to build something is also treated very differently by most lenders. It carries tremendous uncertainty versus you buying a preexisting lot and structures which they know how to value. That’s fundamentally something that causes unwillingness to lend, or changes the rates and down payment or security terms. In contrast with a conforming mortgage for a SFR (single family residence) at 6%, borrowing to build (a construction loan) can be 10-14% APR, often secured via personal guarantee and other assets you possess, and then you have to convert to a personal or commercial mortgage after you complete building what you wanted.

Borrowing to buy the land is even more complicated again — you very often must be able to pay cash for land, and then just borrow to do the construction. Borrowing for both especially with limited assets to secure against will always be a polite “Sorry; we can’t help.”