Nashville uses eminent domain to block data center near zoo • Hacker News Board

Re: Nashville uses eminent domain to block data center near zoo

#211

Post by Barrin92 » Thu, Aug 06, 2026, 6:08 AM UTC

godwinson__4-8 wrote: post #141

Barrin92 wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>You think the standard of life you enjoy today is because of the triumph of local parochialism? My standard of life involves democracy and self-determination. Americans are 'pathetic' about that because it turns out at the end of the day liberty is a bit more durable of an idea than buying yet another pile of junk. If you think you can just throw fortune cookie economic slogans at people to convince them they want t…

[flagged]

>He's so evil but the vast majority of Americans can't give up his products? Is he forcing people to login to Instagram or Facebook?

People are perfectly fine with him making products, what they aren't fine with is he (and his peers) starting to think they're kings and trying to overrule the citizens of a state he doesn't live in. If it comes down to a chatbot and the latter they'll chose the latter. The datacenter opposition, of which there are by the way hundreds at this point across the country generally attract 70/30 if not higher majorities.

I'm also not sure what I'm not supposed to support in those paragraphs because, as to your point about inflation, that is currently the consequence of America's ongoing military action in the world, as unpopular as the datacenters, and as the founders were fond to point out the reason for ever more higher levels of taxation, increased state size and lower prosperity. As true today as it was back then.

Re: Nashville uses eminent domain to block data center near zoo

#212

Post by culi » Thu, Aug 06, 2026, 6:08 AM UTC

kortilla wrote: post #3

[flagged]

Conversely, the pro-data center camp seems so deeply misled about water usage. 90% of current existing data centers are indeed open loop and use evaporative cooling which use SIGNIFICANTLY more water per acre than even farmland or golf courses. Unlike residential use, where 80% of the water is reclaimed, open loop data centers allow almost all the water to evaporate. And unlike agricultural use which is dispersed over a wide area, data centers draw water from a single pipe, usually drawing from municipal sources. Golf courses usually use recycled, grey, or non-potable water while data centers need really pure water

The water grievances are absolutely valid and so many folks here seem to have drunk the industry koolaid on it.

Closed loop systems aren't exactly green either. That water has to be pumped with anti-corrosives, anti-fungals, non-stick chemicals, etc. Eventually it turns into a toxic sludge that has to be bled about once a month. They also require significantly more electricity than open loop facilities.

Re: Nashville uses eminent domain to block data center near zoo

#213

Post by lovich » Thu, Aug 06, 2026, 6:08 AM UTC

locknitpicker wrote: post #156

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Opposition to data centers is like 90% hatred of Silicon Valley and its obstinate elites. One they amplified by trying to build these things sneakily.

> Opposition to data centers is like 90% hatred of Silicon Valley and its obstinate elites. One they amplified by trying to build these things sneakily. This is utter nonsense, and reeks of a desperate and deep denial. I mean, you might as well rationalize your denial by claiming they don't like you because they don't like you. Have you tried actually listening to what critics have to say? Nimby doesn't just pop up o…

Nah, I back the Abundance movement and have voted for building new housing complexes in my town against groups who claimed it would ruin the character of our town to have a 60 acre plot near an old industrial center turned into neighborhoods.

Even so, given no other data I would default to no for any data center. Too many of them are doing the “move fast and break things” model while not paying for any of their externalities. If they really want to build in my location they can pay for the extra costs up front instead of claiming that somehow miraculously the economics will work out and they will definitely employ the same amount of people to maintain the building as they did to make the building.

Re: Nashville uses eminent domain to block data center near zoo

#214

Post by bryan_w » Thu, Aug 06, 2026, 6:10 AM UTC

throwaway2037 wrote: post #107

If anyone is curious, from the photograph in the article, I have geolocated the existing business park property here: https://maps.app.goo.gl/kYyHuEWcAZkrypWa7 The whole area is (1) office parks (including large parking lots), (2) warehouses/light manuf'ing/"big box" stores, (3) enormous(!) rail yard (freight trains), (4) the Nashville Zoo. I don't have any skin in this fight, but I think it is a missed opportunity.…

One of the guys leading the effort is active on threads (probably twitter too). He has no interest in negotiating. He is gloating over his win hardcore and has very absolutist views when it comes to datacenters

Re: Nashville uses eminent domain to block data center near zoo

#215

Post by lovich » Thu, Aug 06, 2026, 6:11 AM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #171

jrflowers wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait are you saying office buildings bring less to the community because so, so, so many more people work in them than in data centers Do you think a community is your house

The office buildings next to the CyrusOne data centers in the western suburbs are not filled with people from Aurora. They're filled with commuters.

Do they not eat lunch? Or do any local shopping?

The literal foot traffic of office workers was a major reason brought up by cities trying to force companies to RTO post pandemic.

Re: Nashville uses eminent domain to block data center near zoo

#216

Post by rtpg » Thu, Aug 06, 2026, 6:12 AM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #203

rtpg wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Drastically less parking, so way less jobs in the local area right? Like maybe the municipality doesn't care because a lot of jobs are filled by people coming in from an hour away, but surely the inverse of "I am sad because closed" is "I am happy because opened", right? I get what you're saying about the buildings themselves. I just think that, in the abstract and all else being equal (it isn't of course!) "big box…

First, no, all these buildings have wildly overprovisioned parking. Most of the lots are empty. I'd encourage people wondering about this to just go drive out to an office complex in a suburb near them and look. Second, no, these jobs are not generally filled by neighbors of the office complexes, or even people from the muni where the office complex is situated. The big box for 50 jobs is also a nicer building to hav…

> Most of the lots are empty.

Is this not the same for the data centers? Have data centers solved parking provisioning in a way office parks haven't?

> Second, no, these jobs are not generally filled by neighbors of the office complexes, or even people from the muni where the office complex is situated.

I mean again... are the data center jobs like ... guaranteed to be people in the local area? Isn't the nature of the job provisioning going to be the same with both buildings, roughly? What is special about the data center jobs to not have parking/traffic/etc?

I saw the pics of the data center you're talking about, with nice trees. I get what you're saying, it looks nice!

But it's not like if I made a nice park buffer around my office park that you would be like "oh they're the same" now right?

Is your argument "if you have a data center and an office park of the same size, the data center will generate less traffic and be less of an eyesore"? Then that means less jobs right? Why is the "cost to municipality per job" lower with the data center? Or maybe your argument is simply based on value to the specific municipality, and that the jobs are not worth much to your eyes in any case/in fact are negative, and so it's about (glibly) damage reduction?

(in other words: if you're going to a council meeting to fight a data center being built, you probably should be going to the council meeting to fight the office building being built...?)

(Serious question, I want to understand the dynamics here better)

Re: Nashville uses eminent domain to block data center near zoo

#217

Post by kube-system » Thu, Aug 06, 2026, 6:14 AM UTC

otherme123 wrote: post #210

kube-system wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> what’s the argument for placing them in populated areas to begin with? Colos advertise their proximity to populated areas. It is desirable for physical access, latency, and connectivity.

That makes no sense: are they going to use this datacenter exclusively for Nashville people use? We regularly access data from datacenters thousands of kilometers away, and the latency is acceptable. Not even pro-gamers would notice the latency increase if the datacenter moved 10 kilometers further in any direction, which is virtually empty in Nashville. I live in Spain, and my latency to my VPS at Germany, 3,000 kil…

If it’s a colo… yes, it would be primarily local customers. Data centers are not just for consumer B2C services. There’s a lot of stuff that runs in data centers that are both more important and more sensitive to latency or connectivity than video games.

Even for something as simple as a business that needs somewhere to run critical VDI hosts — then yes, they need low latency and somewhere that their techs can physically get to if they need to fix something.

You may also need interconnects to specific physical networks that are only available in certain places. You may need direct connections to partner equipment. This requires physical presence.

Colo space is not something you rent if a VPS is good enough for what you’re doing.

Re: Nashville uses eminent domain to block data center near zoo

#218

Post by tommica » Thu, Aug 06, 2026, 6:15 AM UTC

namdnay wrote: post #209

DANmode wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The water thing is, I think, baloney It’s legal/permitted in most cases, but it’s certainly a problem, what these specific data centers are dispensing into the water table in certain places. What exactly are you saying is baloney?

The water sediment thing had nothing to do with the building being a data center I think? Any form of construction would interfere with people drinking well water next to it

Isn't that enough to rethink the construction - it takes a while to build a data center, and I would not be happy that I have to suffer with shitty water because a data center is being built for years.

Re: Nashville uses eminent domain to block data center near zoo

#219

Post by culi » Thu, Aug 06, 2026, 6:15 AM UTC

bulbar wrote: post #118

kortilla wrote: post #3

[flagged]

> water usage despite being less than golf courses, etc This sounds like a pretty good argument against golf courses. Not sure why you think this comparison put the water consumption of DCs into perspective, to me it just puts the water consumption of golf courses into perspective.

It's also wrong. The industry is pushing this PR talking point really hard and not enough people are pushing back.

Per acre, data centers absolutely use way more water. But even then its apples to oranges. Golf courses use non-potable/recycled/grey water while data centers require really pure water (drinking water). The demand is also extremely concentrated in one spot instead of being disbursed. And, at least in agricultural land, 30-40% of the water used returns to the water table. With evaporative cooling, all of that water goes into the atmosphere.

Re: Nashville uses eminent domain to block data center near zoo

#220

Post by MrDrMcCoy » Thu, Aug 06, 2026, 6:15 AM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #190

MrDrMcCoy wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Office buildings employ considerably more people, support nearby restaurants, consume less power and water, produce virtually no infrasound, and are more attractive than data centers. I'd rather have an office building next to my house than a data center, especially if they would not be providing me colocation services at a steep discount.

Office buildings are not more attractive than data centers; that's my whole argument. In format, massing, and design, data centers essentially are office buildings, just with drastically less parking. Asphalt is the biggest eyesore in commercial real estate. (Data centers consume immaterial amounts of water.)

You'd take a featureless, opaque warehouse over a structure with windows and architecture that was intended to stand out? The asphalt doesn't have to be an eyesore if planned well, either. Copious vegetation woven throughout, painted teal or with murals instead of black, a policy of "after the following hours, locals are allowed to play roller-hockey and tennis here.", host regular farmer's markets, etc.