Wisconsin city passes nation’s first anti-data center referendum https://t.co/D2ImrIHZzT
— POLITICO (@politico) April 8, 2026
The future automation of the workforce
116,503 Views |
1670 Replies |
Last: 10 hrs ago by boognish_bear
Luddites shytting their nest.
whiterock said:
Luddites shytting their nest.
You still throwing that tantrum?
Oldbear83 said:whiterock said:
Luddites shytting their nest.
You still throwing that tantrum?
not a tantrum at all. Just calling it what it is. The negative reaction to data centers is completely illogical. Almost every complaint is mostly or wholly the opposite of the truth, one unsupported allegation after another piled on top of ignorance about industrial water use and water infrastructure, multiplied by exponential misunderstanding about the realities private property rights and economic development.
The actual situation is this: the demand for data storage is infinite, while the supply of data storage is quite limited. Supply & demand being what it is, it now pencils out to bring in necessary infrastructure to raw properties well outside of existing urban development. This is transformatively positive for the areas being developed, bringing electrical, water and sewer infrastructure to areas that would not otherwise see such for decades. That generates unprecedented amounts of tax base for the dollars and gallons invested by the public. To the extent you think public debt is a problem, tax base matters a little bit.
Most important: It's going to happen. The tech companies are going to build their data centers. So where do we want them to be? China will let them put as many DCs as they want anywhere they want. Are we somehow better off if all our data is housed in China? Do we really improve anything by letting all the AI development occur under Chinese regulation?
We are going to build them here. For obvious reasons. WE will manage all the problems, and WE will reap all the benefits. And WE will do a better job of addressing your concerns than China will. Just insanity to think that saying no to the construction of data centers here to fight the advance of AI is going to do anything other than send all the DCs and AI development abroad, and that such is somehow a better model than building them here.
whiterock said:cowboycwr said:whiterock said:cowboycwr said:whiterock said:cowboycwr said:boognish_bear said:WOW 🚨 A new Data Center is being built in the Texas Panhandle that will use more power than ALL THE HOMES IN TEXAS COMBINED TIMES 2
— Wall Street Apes (@WallStreetApes) April 4, 2026
- It’ll be the largest data center in the world, at 18 million square feet
- The site will span over 6,000+ acres (9 square miles)
- It will use… pic.twitter.com/Z6XZ28Pffx
The tweet and video don't match. One says 9 square miles and the other says 5.
who cares how much energy it uses. As long as they produce their own energy, there's no downside. It's just more tax base, more jobs, more economic growth, etc.....
Our tech companies want more data centers. They will go to wherever, whomever builds them. Better to build them here.
If they build their own energy and water then yes. But so far the one already built haven't.
Trump has issued an executive order requiring it.
And the job thing and tax base has already been shown to you to be false claims. Provide a link if you have evidence of them providing tax base and jobs to an area. As in jobs to the locals already there. No a handful of jobs that have to be brought in. Provide links.
Not my job to provide you links to things you should already know.
Most of the data centers in operation today were nestled into available space in urban areas. Quite a bit smaller units, on average, compared to those in the coming wave. We're talking things that fit into existing commercial and industrial parks. Some, particularly those focused on bitcoin, can fit into existing office buildings.
The next wave is quite a bit different. Partly, it's because a high percentage of available urban sites & infrastructure has already been occupied. Secondly, there is a need for the efficiencies of the "hyperscale DC." So what you will tend to see in the new DCs that have just finished or are just starting up is DCs looking for large tracts of land (500-1500 acres....by definition rural areas) and then bringing the needed infrastructure to the site. That creates a defacto new industrial park. People all around it can tap into the new infrastructure (as long as local officials plan well). Just look at the projects you see, and you will see most of them fitting that basic template. They're locating in places fenced in barbed wire, that have very light duty rural roads, and are in small water systems with only a few hundred meters. (but is close to other more expensive infrastructure - electrical transmission lines & transformer stations, large/long rights of way already in place.)
The DC model itself has changed, too. Trial & error. Emphasis now is on quieter, dryer, self-generated. Virginia is a leader in the civil planning. They've got several large new DCs nestled in between housing subdivisions and golf courses. Driving thru it....you'd know there were large buildings back behind the trees, but would have no idea it was a DC.
No rivers have gone dry because of DCs. Water, you see, is a cycle. DCs release every drop they use back into the environment as water vapor, which will fall somewhere where it will flow again to collection point to be reused by plants, animals, and humans. That's basic elementary school knowledge. The new phase of DCs are not much more water-consumptive than garden variety industrial operations. And when you examine the dollars of tax base created per gallon of water, you quickly see DCs absolutely crushing all other industrial operations, by like 10x or more. (and I would expect that ratio to climb, as DCs get more and more efficient with water use).
No DCs have polluted land, air, or water. They are on the cleanest end of industrial operations. The raw materials enter the plant in a wire (electrical cable). The finished product leaves the plant in a wire (fiber optic cable). The machinery is metal boxes containing circuit boards of inert plastics and metals connected by electrical wiring. Just nothing there capable of contaminating anything.
and on and on and on...... There's just not a lot of substance behind the allegations. But people believe what they want to believe. If you want to educate yourself, start here:
https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/public-sector/our-insights/the-data-center-balance-how-us-states-can-navigate-the-opportunities-and-challenges
Yes it is your job to provide links. When you make claims you need to back them up. That is how it works. You don't do that because the links don't exist.
But you continue to ignore the things you can't argue against, even after I have pointed it out to you multiple times, like the water pollution posted about in this thread.
What is really funny is you claim it isn't your job to provide links...... in a post where you finally give a link.
But of course it is nothing more than propaganda put out by a data center company about how great they are.
Your argument that the water is returned is just stupid. yes the water evaporates and eventually falls somewhere else. But to claim it won't run the river dry or drain a pond, lake, etc. is stupid and fails to address reality. There have been many rivers and lakes drained due to this type of thinking with water for agriculture. Heck look at the disappearance of an entire Sea for drastic evidence of this.
Provide links or just stop with your claims. The evidence has been shown to you that they do none of what you say and all you come back with it the child like argument of "yeah huh"
Provide links
More disinformation. Here's a good one for you to educate yourself.
https://www.fwpcoa.org/content.aspx?page_id=5&club_id=859275&item_id=130961
You have provided no links to any widespread or even localized data center water pollution. (because there is none). There is no data center superfund site. They are less risky pollution sources than most other industrial operations. Totally contrived crisis.
What????? Are you serious? NO links???
I have provided links.... by replying to a POST IN THIS THREAD and constantly referring back to it that was about water pollution. Yet you have ignored it and simply keep saying "there is no water pollution."
Simply saying it means nothing. There is a link provided in this thread that shows there is. You have provided no links. NONE. to refute it.
And you still have provided zero links about the job claims. None.
You have provided now 2 links that are nothing more than DC pushers that put out propaganda. Of course the water agency that is getting massive kickbacks from a DC will produce a report that shows them to be good.
Provide links or just shut up because all you do is keep saying "I say so and anyone who doesn't agree with me will be called names."
whiterock said:cowboycwr said:EatMoreSalmon said:FLBear5630 said:cowboycwr said:whiterock said:cowboycwr said:boognish_bear said:WOW 🚨 A new Data Center is being built in the Texas Panhandle that will use more power than ALL THE HOMES IN TEXAS COMBINED TIMES 2
— Wall Street Apes (@WallStreetApes) April 4, 2026
- It’ll be the largest data center in the world, at 18 million square feet
- The site will span over 6,000+ acres (9 square miles)
- It will use… pic.twitter.com/Z6XZ28Pffx
The tweet and video don't match. One says 9 square miles and the other says 5.
who cares how much energy it uses. As long as they produce their own energy, there's no downside. It's just more tax base, more jobs, more economic growth, etc.....
Our tech companies want more data centers. They will go to wherever, whomever builds them. Better to build them here.
If they build their own energy and water then yes. But so far the one already built haven't.
And the job thing and tax base has already been shown to you to be false claims. Provide a link if you have evidence of them providing tax base and jobs to an area. As in jobs to the locals already there. No a handful of jobs that have to be brought in. Provide links.
You dont have to speculate look at Virginia's experience.
Info Centers are very similar to the gambling surge in the 90's. Local areas try to control them, but the investment becomes so big that the tail ultimately wags the dog. In order for them to stay, the community will end up giving whatever they ask. Gambling was operations hours and transportation, Data Centers will be water and utilities.
With the tax breaks, subsidies and low employment data centers have a negative ROI
for local communities. Communities are rethinking whether they are worth the cost, they typically require subsidies and improvements to come.
Was curious and found this article about the data center proposed for Fort Worth near Benbrook area.
https://fortworthreport.org/2026/03/31/enough-concern-today-1b-data-center-stalls-city-residents-raise-questions-about-tax-break/
Financial numbers from the article.
"Planned near the intersection of Interstate 20 and FM 2871 near Benbrook, the data center's tax break would cost Fort Worth $16 million in property taxes but bring in $47 million over the life of the agreement, according to city documents. "
Also found this to compare to active tarrant county abatements.
https://www.tarrantcountytx.gov/content/dam/main/OpenBooks/transparencystarsfy23/EconomicDevelopmentSpreadsheet(2).pdf
That are has a lot of housing construction. A data center doesn't seem like a good idea there. Especially if the complaints over them creating a constant him or noise is accurate.
Northern VA has some developments where DCs, residences, and golf courses are all nestled together. Loudon Co has a 60db noise limit on DCs at property boundary. That's like an electric toothbrush. At the boundary of the property.
It's easy to make DCs quiet. It just costs the DCs a lot more in investment to make it so.
https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/northern-virginia/neighbors-raise-concerns-about-noisy-data-center-in-loudoun/4080249/
And yet this proves you wrong, yet again.
Oh and another one
https://www.politico.com/news/2026/03/11/data-centers-ai-electricity-virginia-00815219
And a third....
https://www.the-sun.com/news/16129542/data-center-noise-complaints-us/
But I am sure these are all just "luddites" as you keep saying and they don't know. That noise they hear is all made up. The decibel reading is fake. They just need someone like you to come tell them it is all good and to trust you because you work with DC and know all about it and they don't.
whiterock said:FLBear5630 said:cowboycwr said:whiterock said:cowboycwr said:boognish_bear said:WOW 🚨 A new Data Center is being built in the Texas Panhandle that will use more power than ALL THE HOMES IN TEXAS COMBINED TIMES 2
— Wall Street Apes (@WallStreetApes) April 4, 2026
- It’ll be the largest data center in the world, at 18 million square feet
- The site will span over 6,000+ acres (9 square miles)
- It will use… pic.twitter.com/Z6XZ28Pffx
The tweet and video don't match. One says 9 square miles and the other says 5.
who cares how much energy it uses. As long as they produce their own energy, there's no downside. It's just more tax base, more jobs, more economic growth, etc.....
Our tech companies want more data centers. They will go to wherever, whomever builds them. Better to build them here.
If they build their own energy and water then yes. But so far the one already built haven't.
And the job thing and tax base has already been shown to you to be false claims. Provide a link if you have evidence of them providing tax base and jobs to an area. As in jobs to the locals already there. No a handful of jobs that have to be brought in. Provide links.
You dont have to speculate look at Virginia's experience.
Info Centers are very similar to the gambling surge in the 90's. Local areas try to control them, but the investment becomes so big that the tail ultimately wags the dog. In order for them to stay, the community will end up giving whatever they ask. Gambling was operations hours and transportation, Data Centers will be water and utilities.
With the tax breaks, subsidies and low employment data centers have a negative ROI
for local communities. Communities are rethinking whether they are worth the cost, they typically require subsidies and improvements to come.
No, they're don't have negative ROI. We will be giving no abatements. And the DCs will be paying for all the infrastructure.
We have a $10m annual budget. We will have zero debt involved with the DC. We estimate tax receipts from the DC to be approx $50m (before franchise fees). Not even you could F that up.
Oh look more links to prove you wrong (yet again).
https://www.wsls.com/news/local/2026/03/18/budget-stalemate-data-center-tax-breaks-stall-virginia-spending-plan/
https://itep.org/states-are-opening-a-pandoras-box-of-data-centers/
https://goodjobsfirst.org/cloudy-with-a-loss-of-spending-control-how-data-centers-are-endangering-state-budgets/
whiterock said:
Luddites shytting their nest.
Go build your house next to one if you love them so much.
Then provide some facts and links to prove any of it wrong.
Sorry but there is not a nationwide push back against these things because of "misinformation" or people being dumb, not informed, or anything like that.
Whiterock: " The negative reaction to data centers is completely illogical."
You believe it's illogical to protest the loss of jobs, the passed-on costs for utilities, the loss of water needed other places like farms?
The harm is known, but you blow it off.
That sort of thing tends to magnify protest, not resolve it.
You believe it's illogical to protest the loss of jobs, the passed-on costs for utilities, the loss of water needed other places like farms?
The harm is known, but you blow it off.
That sort of thing tends to magnify protest, not resolve it.
whiterock said:Oldbear83 said:whiterock said:
Luddites shytting their nest.
You still throwing that tantrum?
not a tantrum at all. Just calling it what it is. The negative reaction to data centers is completely illogical. Almost every complaint is mostly or wholly the opposite of the truth, one unsupported allegation after another piled on top of ignorance about industrial water use and water infrastructure, multiplied by exponential misunderstanding about the realities private property rights and economic development.
The actual situation is this: the demand for data storage is infinite, while the supply of data storage is quite limited. Supply & demand being what it is, it now pencils out to bring in necessary infrastructure to raw properties well outside of existing urban development. This is transformatively positive for the areas being developed, bringing electrical, water and sewer infrastructure to areas that would not otherwise see such for decades. That generates unprecedented amounts of tax base for the dollars and gallons invested by the public. To the extent you think public debt is a problem, tax base matters a little bit.
Most important: It's going to happen. The tech companies are going to build their data centers. So where do we want them to be? China will let them put as many DCs as they want anywhere they want. Are we somehow better off if all our data is housed in China? Do we really improve anything by letting all the AI development occur under Chinese regulation?
We are going to build them here. For obvious reasons. WE will manage all the problems, and WE will reap all the benefits. And WE will do a better job of addressing your concerns than China will. Just insanity to think that saying no to the construction of data centers here to fight the advance of AI is going to do anything other than send all the DCs and AI development abroad, and that such is somehow a better model than building them here.
Just insanity to not fight Iran. Insanity to not support Ukraine. Insanity to not kidnap Maduro. Insanity to not build DCs.
So the sane person is Nicki Haley. You think like Nicki Haley.
JUST IN: Amazon will invest $25,000,000,000.00 to build data centers in Mississippi.
— Polymarket (@Polymarket) April 9, 2026
Today, we launched an investigation into OpenAI and ChatGPT.
— Attorney General James Uthmeier (@AGJamesUthmeier) April 9, 2026
AI should advance mankind, not destroy it. We’re demanding answers on OpenAI’s activities that have hurt kids, endangered Americans, and facilitated the recent FSU mass shooting.
Wrongdoers must be held accountable. pic.twitter.com/vRVCqIYKnB
BREAKING: Scott Bessent & Jerome Powell urgently summoned Wall Street leaders to discuss systemic risks from Anthropic’s new Mythos model.
— Polymarket (@Polymarket) April 10, 2026
cowboycwr said:whiterock said:cowboycwr said:whiterock said:cowboycwr said:whiterock said:cowboycwr said:boognish_bear said:WOW 🚨 A new Data Center is being built in the Texas Panhandle that will use more power than ALL THE HOMES IN TEXAS COMBINED TIMES 2
— Wall Street Apes (@WallStreetApes) April 4, 2026
- It’ll be the largest data center in the world, at 18 million square feet
- The site will span over 6,000+ acres (9 square miles)
- It will use… pic.twitter.com/Z6XZ28Pffx
The tweet and video don't match. One says 9 square miles and the other says 5.
who cares how much energy it uses. As long as they produce their own energy, there's no downside. It's just more tax base, more jobs, more economic growth, etc.....
Our tech companies want more data centers. They will go to wherever, whomever builds them. Better to build them here.
If they build their own energy and water then yes. But so far the one already built haven't.
Trump has issued an executive order requiring it.
And the job thing and tax base has already been shown to you to be false claims. Provide a link if you have evidence of them providing tax base and jobs to an area. As in jobs to the locals already there. No a handful of jobs that have to be brought in. Provide links.
Not my job to provide you links to things you should already know.
Most of the data centers in operation today were nestled into available space in urban areas. Quite a bit smaller units, on average, compared to those in the coming wave. We're talking things that fit into existing commercial and industrial parks. Some, particularly those focused on bitcoin, can fit into existing office buildings.
The next wave is quite a bit different. Partly, it's because a high percentage of available urban sites & infrastructure has already been occupied. Secondly, there is a need for the efficiencies of the "hyperscale DC." So what you will tend to see in the new DCs that have just finished or are just starting up is DCs looking for large tracts of land (500-1500 acres....by definition rural areas) and then bringing the needed infrastructure to the site. That creates a defacto new industrial park. People all around it can tap into the new infrastructure (as long as local officials plan well). Just look at the projects you see, and you will see most of them fitting that basic template. They're locating in places fenced in barbed wire, that have very light duty rural roads, and are in small water systems with only a few hundred meters. (but is close to other more expensive infrastructure - electrical transmission lines & transformer stations, large/long rights of way already in place.)
The DC model itself has changed, too. Trial & error. Emphasis now is on quieter, dryer, self-generated. Virginia is a leader in the civil planning. They've got several large new DCs nestled in between housing subdivisions and golf courses. Driving thru it....you'd know there were large buildings back behind the trees, but would have no idea it was a DC.
No rivers have gone dry because of DCs. Water, you see, is a cycle. DCs release every drop they use back into the environment as water vapor, which will fall somewhere where it will flow again to collection point to be reused by plants, animals, and humans. That's basic elementary school knowledge. The new phase of DCs are not much more water-consumptive than garden variety industrial operations. And when you examine the dollars of tax base created per gallon of water, you quickly see DCs absolutely crushing all other industrial operations, by like 10x or more. (and I would expect that ratio to climb, as DCs get more and more efficient with water use).
No DCs have polluted land, air, or water. They are on the cleanest end of industrial operations. The raw materials enter the plant in a wire (electrical cable). The finished product leaves the plant in a wire (fiber optic cable). The machinery is metal boxes containing circuit boards of inert plastics and metals connected by electrical wiring. Just nothing there capable of contaminating anything.
and on and on and on...... There's just not a lot of substance behind the allegations. But people believe what they want to believe. If you want to educate yourself, start here:
https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/public-sector/our-insights/the-data-center-balance-how-us-states-can-navigate-the-opportunities-and-challenges
Yes it is your job to provide links. When you make claims you need to back them up. That is how it works. You don't do that because the links don't exist.
But you continue to ignore the things you can't argue against, even after I have pointed it out to you multiple times, like the water pollution posted about in this thread.
What is really funny is you claim it isn't your job to provide links...... in a post where you finally give a link.
But of course it is nothing more than propaganda put out by a data center company about how great they are.
Your argument that the water is returned is just stupid. yes the water evaporates and eventually falls somewhere else. But to claim it won't run the river dry or drain a pond, lake, etc. is stupid and fails to address reality. There have been many rivers and lakes drained due to this type of thinking with water for agriculture. Heck look at the disappearance of an entire Sea for drastic evidence of this.
Provide links or just stop with your claims. The evidence has been shown to you that they do none of what you say and all you come back with it the child like argument of "yeah huh"
Provide links
More disinformation. Here's a good one for you to educate yourself.
https://www.fwpcoa.org/content.aspx?page_id=5&club_id=859275&item_id=130961
You have provided no links to any widespread or even localized data center water pollution. (because there is none). There is no data center superfund site. They are less risky pollution sources than most other industrial operations. Totally contrived crisis.
What????? Are you serious? NO links???
I have provided links.... by replying to a POST IN THIS THREAD and constantly referring back to it that was about water pollution. Yet you have ignored it and simply keep saying "there is no water pollution."
Simply saying it means nothing. There is a link provided in this thread that shows there is. You have provided no links. NONE. to refute it.
And you still have provided zero links about the job claims. None.
You have provided now 2 links that are nothing more than DC pushers that put out propaganda. Of course the water agency that is getting massive kickbacks from a DC will produce a report that shows them to be good.
Provide links or just shut up because all you do is keep saying "I say so and anyone who doesn't agree with me will be called names."
show me links that the sun will come up tomorrow.
There is no water pollution from DCs all over the country. There is a lady with a well that isn't working right after all the infrastructure work in the area. There is low water pressure in places. But there is no radioactive water from DCs. There is no DC water discharge killing wildlife, causing kids to be born with 6 toes & 3 ears. No river has gone full Cuyahoga and caught on fire. Just not happening. DC water loss is almost exclusively to evaporation, not runoff.
The new wave of DCs are quieter, which requires closed loop water systems, which means great expense to ensure zero water discharge and max effort on recapture/reuse. That in return require on site water processing (to prevent accumulation of minerals that might scale up the system. The solids are hauled off to appropriate landfill. Absolutely nothing remarkable about that kind of process. Other industrial businesses have done it for decades....collecting their own wastewater and treating it on site for reuse.
I did provide you a link.
You obviously did not read it.
(because it did not confirm your bias).
Think it thru.
Is the computer in your home a biohazard? (of course not).
Then how can a few million of them all in the same building at the same time become a biohazard?
Your assertions are flatly preposterous.
cowboycwr said:whiterock said:
Luddites shytting their nest.
Go build your house next to one if you love them so much.
Then provide some facts and links to prove any of it wrong.
Sorry but there is not a nationwide push back against these things because of "misinformation" or people being dumb, not informed, or anything like that.
Sorry. Luddite argument.
Here's a link for you. It's exactly the kind of thing Luddites will do....cite allegations that are completely unsupported, then demand links to disprove something that didn't happen didn't happen. In particular, note how this article alleges water pollution, then proceeds to cite water use statistics as evidence. But NOT ONE actual example of a significant discharge of pollutants into a waterway or acquifer. As we see you and others doing here, it instead raises all kinds of "concerns" about future problems that are then cited by opponents as evidence of actual pollution.
https://sustainabilitydialogue.uchicago.edu/news/data-centers-pollution-and-the-communities-left-behind/
Post one link of a DC discharging millions of gallons of toxic waste into a waterway and then we can have a reasonable conversation.
FLBear5630 said:whiterock said:Oldbear83 said:whiterock said:
Luddites shytting their nest.
You still throwing that tantrum?
not a tantrum at all. Just calling it what it is. The negative reaction to data centers is completely illogical. Almost every complaint is mostly or wholly the opposite of the truth, one unsupported allegation after another piled on top of ignorance about industrial water use and water infrastructure, multiplied by exponential misunderstanding about the realities private property rights and economic development.
The actual situation is this: the demand for data storage is infinite, while the supply of data storage is quite limited. Supply & demand being what it is, it now pencils out to bring in necessary infrastructure to raw properties well outside of existing urban development. This is transformatively positive for the areas being developed, bringing electrical, water and sewer infrastructure to areas that would not otherwise see such for decades. That generates unprecedented amounts of tax base for the dollars and gallons invested by the public. To the extent you think public debt is a problem, tax base matters a little bit.
Most important: It's going to happen. The tech companies are going to build their data centers. So where do we want them to be? China will let them put as many DCs as they want anywhere they want. Are we somehow better off if all our data is housed in China? Do we really improve anything by letting all the AI development occur under Chinese regulation?
We are going to build them here. For obvious reasons. WE will manage all the problems, and WE will reap all the benefits. And WE will do a better job of addressing your concerns than China will. Just insanity to think that saying no to the construction of data centers here to fight the advance of AI is going to do anything other than send all the DCs and AI development abroad, and that such is somehow a better model than building them here.
Just insanity to not fight Iran. Insanity to not support Ukraine. Insanity to not kidnap Maduro. Insanity to not build DCs.
All true.
Tell us how we'd have been better off letting Iran build nukes and launch terror attacks via proxy.
Tell us how we'd have been better off letting Russia roll over Ukraine.
Tell us how we'd have been better off letting Maduro stay in power (with Iranian advisors and Chinese money).
Tell us how we'll be better off letting China host all our data.
So the sane person is Nicki Haley. You think like Nicki Haley.
On some things, yes.
On some things, no.
I'm like that.
You're not a very good troll, ya know.....
whiterock said:FLBear5630 said:whiterock said:Oldbear83 said:whiterock said:
Luddites shytting their nest.
You still throwing that tantrum?
not a tantrum at all. Just calling it what it is. The negative reaction to data centers is completely illogical. Almost every complaint is mostly or wholly the opposite of the truth, one unsupported allegation after another piled on top of ignorance about industrial water use and water infrastructure, multiplied by exponential misunderstanding about the realities private property rights and economic development.
The actual situation is this: the demand for data storage is infinite, while the supply of data storage is quite limited. Supply & demand being what it is, it now pencils out to bring in necessary infrastructure to raw properties well outside of existing urban development. This is transformatively positive for the areas being developed, bringing electrical, water and sewer infrastructure to areas that would not otherwise see such for decades. That generates unprecedented amounts of tax base for the dollars and gallons invested by the public. To the extent you think public debt is a problem, tax base matters a little bit.
Most important: It's going to happen. The tech companies are going to build their data centers. So where do we want them to be? China will let them put as many DCs as they want anywhere they want. Are we somehow better off if all our data is housed in China? Do we really improve anything by letting all the AI development occur under Chinese regulation?
We are going to build them here. For obvious reasons. WE will manage all the problems, and WE will reap all the benefits. And WE will do a better job of addressing your concerns than China will. Just insanity to think that saying no to the construction of data centers here to fight the advance of AI is going to do anything other than send all the DCs and AI development abroad, and that such is somehow a better model than building them here.
Just insanity to not fight Iran. Insanity to not support Ukraine. Insanity to not kidnap Maduro. Insanity to not build DCs.
All true.
Tell us how we'd have been better off letting Iran build nukes and launch terror attacks via proxy.
Tell us how we'd have been better off letting Russia roll over Ukraine.
Tell us how we'd have been better off letting Maduro stay in power (with Iranian advisors and Chinese money).
Tell us how we'll be better off letting China host all our data.
So the sane person is Nicki Haley. You think like Nicki Haley.
On some things, yes.
On some things, no.
I'm like that.
You're not a very good troll, ya know.....
Yeah, I have seen this show before. Anyone that disagrees with you fits into one of three categories.
1 - They just don't know, so you have to educate them. Once you do, they will naturally agree with you.
2 - They are just too stupid to understand, because if they did they were smart they would naturally agree with you.
3 - The are a troll. Because any rational person would naturally agree with you. Afterall, your you and use simple formulas...
Actually, if i were a troll. I am pretty good I have kept you engaged for over a year and afterall, you are you...
Oldbear should be along shortly.
whiterock said:cowboycwr said:whiterock said:cowboycwr said:whiterock said:cowboycwr said:whiterock said:cowboycwr said:boognish_bear said:WOW 🚨 A new Data Center is being built in the Texas Panhandle that will use more power than ALL THE HOMES IN TEXAS COMBINED TIMES 2
— Wall Street Apes (@WallStreetApes) April 4, 2026
- It’ll be the largest data center in the world, at 18 million square feet
- The site will span over 6,000+ acres (9 square miles)
- It will use… pic.twitter.com/Z6XZ28Pffx
The tweet and video don't match. One says 9 square miles and the other says 5.
who cares how much energy it uses. As long as they produce their own energy, there's no downside. It's just more tax base, more jobs, more economic growth, etc.....
Our tech companies want more data centers. They will go to wherever, whomever builds them. Better to build them here.
If they build their own energy and water then yes. But so far the one already built haven't.
Trump has issued an executive order requiring it.
And the job thing and tax base has already been shown to you to be false claims. Provide a link if you have evidence of them providing tax base and jobs to an area. As in jobs to the locals already there. No a handful of jobs that have to be brought in. Provide links.
Not my job to provide you links to things you should already know.
Most of the data centers in operation today were nestled into available space in urban areas. Quite a bit smaller units, on average, compared to those in the coming wave. We're talking things that fit into existing commercial and industrial parks. Some, particularly those focused on bitcoin, can fit into existing office buildings.
The next wave is quite a bit different. Partly, it's because a high percentage of available urban sites & infrastructure has already been occupied. Secondly, there is a need for the efficiencies of the "hyperscale DC." So what you will tend to see in the new DCs that have just finished or are just starting up is DCs looking for large tracts of land (500-1500 acres....by definition rural areas) and then bringing the needed infrastructure to the site. That creates a defacto new industrial park. People all around it can tap into the new infrastructure (as long as local officials plan well). Just look at the projects you see, and you will see most of them fitting that basic template. They're locating in places fenced in barbed wire, that have very light duty rural roads, and are in small water systems with only a few hundred meters. (but is close to other more expensive infrastructure - electrical transmission lines & transformer stations, large/long rights of way already in place.)
The DC model itself has changed, too. Trial & error. Emphasis now is on quieter, dryer, self-generated. Virginia is a leader in the civil planning. They've got several large new DCs nestled in between housing subdivisions and golf courses. Driving thru it....you'd know there were large buildings back behind the trees, but would have no idea it was a DC.
No rivers have gone dry because of DCs. Water, you see, is a cycle. DCs release every drop they use back into the environment as water vapor, which will fall somewhere where it will flow again to collection point to be reused by plants, animals, and humans. That's basic elementary school knowledge. The new phase of DCs are not much more water-consumptive than garden variety industrial operations. And when you examine the dollars of tax base created per gallon of water, you quickly see DCs absolutely crushing all other industrial operations, by like 10x or more. (and I would expect that ratio to climb, as DCs get more and more efficient with water use).
No DCs have polluted land, air, or water. They are on the cleanest end of industrial operations. The raw materials enter the plant in a wire (electrical cable). The finished product leaves the plant in a wire (fiber optic cable). The machinery is metal boxes containing circuit boards of inert plastics and metals connected by electrical wiring. Just nothing there capable of contaminating anything.
and on and on and on...... There's just not a lot of substance behind the allegations. But people believe what they want to believe. If you want to educate yourself, start here:
https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/public-sector/our-insights/the-data-center-balance-how-us-states-can-navigate-the-opportunities-and-challenges
Yes it is your job to provide links. When you make claims you need to back them up. That is how it works. You don't do that because the links don't exist.
But you continue to ignore the things you can't argue against, even after I have pointed it out to you multiple times, like the water pollution posted about in this thread.
What is really funny is you claim it isn't your job to provide links...... in a post where you finally give a link.
But of course it is nothing more than propaganda put out by a data center company about how great they are.
Your argument that the water is returned is just stupid. yes the water evaporates and eventually falls somewhere else. But to claim it won't run the river dry or drain a pond, lake, etc. is stupid and fails to address reality. There have been many rivers and lakes drained due to this type of thinking with water for agriculture. Heck look at the disappearance of an entire Sea for drastic evidence of this.
Provide links or just stop with your claims. The evidence has been shown to you that they do none of what you say and all you come back with it the child like argument of "yeah huh"
Provide links
More disinformation. Here's a good one for you to educate yourself.
https://www.fwpcoa.org/content.aspx?page_id=5&club_id=859275&item_id=130961
You have provided no links to any widespread or even localized data center water pollution. (because there is none). There is no data center superfund site. They are less risky pollution sources than most other industrial operations. Totally contrived crisis.
What????? Are you serious? NO links???
I have provided links.... by replying to a POST IN THIS THREAD and constantly referring back to it that was about water pollution. Yet you have ignored it and simply keep saying "there is no water pollution."
Simply saying it means nothing. There is a link provided in this thread that shows there is. You have provided no links. NONE. to refute it.
And you still have provided zero links about the job claims. None.
You have provided now 2 links that are nothing more than DC pushers that put out propaganda. Of course the water agency that is getting massive kickbacks from a DC will produce a report that shows them to be good.
Provide links or just shut up because all you do is keep saying "I say so and anyone who doesn't agree with me will be called names."
show me links that the sun will come up tomorrow.
There is no water pollution from DCs all over the country. There is a lady with a well that isn't working right after all the infrastructure work in the area. There is low water pressure in places. But there is no radioactive water from DCs. There is no DC water discharge killing wildlife, causing kids to be born with 6 toes & 3 ears. No river has gone full Cuyahoga and caught on fire. Just not happening. DC water loss is almost exclusively to evaporation, not runoff.
The new wave of DCs are quieter, which requires closed loop water systems, which means great expense to ensure zero water discharge and max effort on recapture/reuse. That in return require on site water processing (to prevent accumulation of minerals that might scale up the system. The solids are hauled off to appropriate landfill. Absolutely nothing remarkable about that kind of process. Other industrial businesses have done it for decades....collecting their own wastewater and treating it on site for reuse.
I did provide you a link.
You obviously did not read it.
(because it did not confirm your bias).
Think it thru.
Is the computer in your home a biohazard? (of course not).
Then how can a few million of them all in the same building at the same time become a biohazard?
Your assertions are flatly preposterous.
Provide links Or shut up.
whiterock said:cowboycwr said:whiterock said:
Luddites shytting their nest.
Go build your house next to one if you love them so much.
Then provide some facts and links to prove any of it wrong.
Sorry but there is not a nationwide push back against these things because of "misinformation" or people being dumb, not informed, or anything like that.
Sorry. Luddite argument.
Here's a link for you. It's exactly the kind of thing Luddites will do....cite allegations that are completely unsupported, then demand links to disprove something that didn't happen didn't happen. In particular, note how this article alleges water pollution, then proceeds to cite water use statistics as evidence. But NOT ONE actual example of a significant discharge of pollutants into a waterway or acquifer. As we see you and others doing here, it instead raises all kinds of "concerns" about future problems that are then cited by opponents as evidence of actual pollution.
https://sustainabilitydialogue.uchicago.edu/news/data-centers-pollution-and-the-communities-left-behind/
Post one link of a DC discharging millions of gallons of toxic waste into a waterway and then we can have a reasonable conversation.
LOL. When you finally post a link it supports my claims.
whiterock said:FLBear5630 said:whiterock said:Oldbear83 said:whiterock said:
Luddites shytting their nest.
You still throwing that tantrum?
not a tantrum at all. Just calling it what it is. The negative reaction to data centers is completely illogical. Almost every complaint is mostly or wholly the opposite of the truth, one unsupported allegation after another piled on top of ignorance about industrial water use and water infrastructure, multiplied by exponential misunderstanding about the realities private property rights and economic development.
The actual situation is this: the demand for data storage is infinite, while the supply of data storage is quite limited. Supply & demand being what it is, it now pencils out to bring in necessary infrastructure to raw properties well outside of existing urban development. This is transformatively positive for the areas being developed, bringing electrical, water and sewer infrastructure to areas that would not otherwise see such for decades. That generates unprecedented amounts of tax base for the dollars and gallons invested by the public. To the extent you think public debt is a problem, tax base matters a little bit.
Most important: It's going to happen. The tech companies are going to build their data centers. So where do we want them to be? China will let them put as many DCs as they want anywhere they want. Are we somehow better off if all our data is housed in China? Do we really improve anything by letting all the AI development occur under Chinese regulation?
We are going to build them here. For obvious reasons. WE will manage all the problems, and WE will reap all the benefits. And WE will do a better job of addressing your concerns than China will. Just insanity to think that saying no to the construction of data centers here to fight the advance of AI is going to do anything other than send all the DCs and AI development abroad, and that such is somehow a better model than building them here.
Just insanity to not fight Iran. Insanity to not support Ukraine. Insanity to not kidnap Maduro. Insanity to not build DCs.
All true.
Tell us how we'd have been better off letting Iran build nukes and launch terror attacks via proxy.
Tell us how we'd have been better off letting Russia roll over Ukraine.
Tell us how we'd have been better off letting Maduro stay in power (with Iranian advisors and Chinese money).
Tell us how we'll be better off letting China host all our data.
So the sane person is Nicki Haley. You think like Nicki Haley.
On some things, yes.
On some things, no.
I'm like that.
You're not a very good troll, ya know.....
I notice you conveniently ignored the posts of mine with links. Address those links and prove any of them wrong.
You can't so you will continue to ignore them.
FLBear5630 said:whiterock said:FLBear5630 said:whiterock said:Oldbear83 said:whiterock said:
Luddites shytting their nest.
You still throwing that tantrum?
not a tantrum at all. Just calling it what it is. The negative reaction to data centers is completely illogical. Almost every complaint is mostly or wholly the opposite of the truth, one unsupported allegation after another piled on top of ignorance about industrial water use and water infrastructure, multiplied by exponential misunderstanding about the realities private property rights and economic development.
The actual situation is this: the demand for data storage is infinite, while the supply of data storage is quite limited. Supply & demand being what it is, it now pencils out to bring in necessary infrastructure to raw properties well outside of existing urban development. This is transformatively positive for the areas being developed, bringing electrical, water and sewer infrastructure to areas that would not otherwise see such for decades. That generates unprecedented amounts of tax base for the dollars and gallons invested by the public. To the extent you think public debt is a problem, tax base matters a little bit.
Most important: It's going to happen. The tech companies are going to build their data centers. So where do we want them to be? China will let them put as many DCs as they want anywhere they want. Are we somehow better off if all our data is housed in China? Do we really improve anything by letting all the AI development occur under Chinese regulation?
We are going to build them here. For obvious reasons. WE will manage all the problems, and WE will reap all the benefits. And WE will do a better job of addressing your concerns than China will. Just insanity to think that saying no to the construction of data centers here to fight the advance of AI is going to do anything other than send all the DCs and AI development abroad, and that such is somehow a better model than building them here.
Just insanity to not fight Iran. Insanity to not support Ukraine. Insanity to not kidnap Maduro. Insanity to not build DCs.
All true.
Tell us how we'd have been better off letting Iran build nukes and launch terror attacks via proxy.
Tell us how we'd have been better off letting Russia roll over Ukraine.
Tell us how we'd have been better off letting Maduro stay in power (with Iranian advisors and Chinese money).
Tell us how we'll be better off letting China host all our data.
So the sane person is Nicki Haley. You think like Nicki Haley.
On some things, yes.
On some things, no.
I'm like that.
You're not a very good troll, ya know.....
Yeah, I have seen this show before. Anyone that disagrees with you fits into one of three categories.
1 - They just don't know, so you have to educate them. Once you do, they will naturally agree with you.
2 - They are just too stupid to understand, because if they did they were smart they would naturally agree with you.
3 - The are a troll. Because any rational person would naturally agree with you. Afterall, your you and use simple formulas...
Actually, if i were a troll. I am pretty good I have kept you engaged for over a year and afterall, you are you...
Oldbear should be along shortly.
I note that you did not tell us how we'd be better letting Russia roll over Ukraine, or how we'd be better off with Maduro in power in Venezeula, or how we'd be better off letting China host all of our data.
cowboycwr said:whiterock said:FLBear5630 said:whiterock said:Oldbear83 said:whiterock said:
Luddites shytting their nest.
You still throwing that tantrum?
not a tantrum at all. Just calling it what it is. The negative reaction to data centers is completely illogical. Almost every complaint is mostly or wholly the opposite of the truth, one unsupported allegation after another piled on top of ignorance about industrial water use and water infrastructure, multiplied by exponential misunderstanding about the realities private property rights and economic development.
The actual situation is this: the demand for data storage is infinite, while the supply of data storage is quite limited. Supply & demand being what it is, it now pencils out to bring in necessary infrastructure to raw properties well outside of existing urban development. This is transformatively positive for the areas being developed, bringing electrical, water and sewer infrastructure to areas that would not otherwise see such for decades. That generates unprecedented amounts of tax base for the dollars and gallons invested by the public. To the extent you think public debt is a problem, tax base matters a little bit.
Most important: It's going to happen. The tech companies are going to build their data centers. So where do we want them to be? China will let them put as many DCs as they want anywhere they want. Are we somehow better off if all our data is housed in China? Do we really improve anything by letting all the AI development occur under Chinese regulation?
We are going to build them here. For obvious reasons. WE will manage all the problems, and WE will reap all the benefits. And WE will do a better job of addressing your concerns than China will. Just insanity to think that saying no to the construction of data centers here to fight the advance of AI is going to do anything other than send all the DCs and AI development abroad, and that such is somehow a better model than building them here.
Just insanity to not fight Iran. Insanity to not support Ukraine. Insanity to not kidnap Maduro. Insanity to not build DCs.
All true.
Tell us how we'd have been better off letting Iran build nukes and launch terror attacks via proxy.
Tell us how we'd have been better off letting Russia roll over Ukraine.
Tell us how we'd have been better off letting Maduro stay in power (with Iranian advisors and Chinese money).
Tell us how we'll be better off letting China host all our data.
So the sane person is Nicki Haley. You think like Nicki Haley.
On some things, yes.
On some things, no.
I'm like that.
You're not a very good troll, ya know.....
I notice you conveniently ignored the posts of mine with links. Address those links and prove any of them wrong.
You can't so you will continue to ignore them.
Google up: "data center water pollution examples."
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=data+center+water+pollution+examples&atb=v405-1&ia=web
You will see none. Just allegations of what could happen, maybe, perhaps, et......
DC operations do not pollute water. You have not cited a single instance. Because it's not there.
whiterock said:FLBear5630 said:whiterock said:FLBear5630 said:whiterock said:Oldbear83 said:whiterock said:
Luddites shytting their nest.
You still throwing that tantrum?
not a tantrum at all. Just calling it what it is. The negative reaction to data centers is completely illogical. Almost every complaint is mostly or wholly the opposite of the truth, one unsupported allegation after another piled on top of ignorance about industrial water use and water infrastructure, multiplied by exponential misunderstanding about the realities private property rights and economic development.
The actual situation is this: the demand for data storage is infinite, while the supply of data storage is quite limited. Supply & demand being what it is, it now pencils out to bring in necessary infrastructure to raw properties well outside of existing urban development. This is transformatively positive for the areas being developed, bringing electrical, water and sewer infrastructure to areas that would not otherwise see such for decades. That generates unprecedented amounts of tax base for the dollars and gallons invested by the public. To the extent you think public debt is a problem, tax base matters a little bit.
Most important: It's going to happen. The tech companies are going to build their data centers. So where do we want them to be? China will let them put as many DCs as they want anywhere they want. Are we somehow better off if all our data is housed in China? Do we really improve anything by letting all the AI development occur under Chinese regulation?
We are going to build them here. For obvious reasons. WE will manage all the problems, and WE will reap all the benefits. And WE will do a better job of addressing your concerns than China will. Just insanity to think that saying no to the construction of data centers here to fight the advance of AI is going to do anything other than send all the DCs and AI development abroad, and that such is somehow a better model than building them here.
Just insanity to not fight Iran. Insanity to not support Ukraine. Insanity to not kidnap Maduro. Insanity to not build DCs.
All true.
Tell us how we'd have been better off letting Iran build nukes and launch terror attacks via proxy.
Tell us how we'd have been better off letting Russia roll over Ukraine.
Tell us how we'd have been better off letting Maduro stay in power (with Iranian advisors and Chinese money).
Tell us how we'll be better off letting China host all our data.
So the sane person is Nicki Haley. You think like Nicki Haley.
On some things, yes.
On some things, no.
I'm like that.
You're not a very good troll, ya know.....
Yeah, I have seen this show before. Anyone that disagrees with you fits into one of three categories.
1 - They just don't know, so you have to educate them. Once you do, they will naturally agree with you.
2 - They are just too stupid to understand, because if they did they were smart they would naturally agree with you.
3 - The are a troll. Because any rational person would naturally agree with you. Afterall, your you and use simple formulas...
Actually, if i were a troll. I am pretty good I have kept you engaged for over a year and afterall, you are you...
Oldbear should be along shortly.
I note that you did not tell us how we'd be better letting Russia roll over Ukraine, or how we'd be better off with Maduro in power in Venezeula, or how we'd be better off letting China host all of our data.
I agreed with Ukraine, we were on the same side there. I can look past that Biden was behind it. If it is a good idea, it is a good idea. I don't care who came up with it. Also, the sitting President is responsible for how it gets done. Biden was an atrocity in Afghanistan. Just like Trump was in MN. Trump's texting is embarrassing, just like Biden's dementia or Obama's apologies.
I said Venezuela raid was well done and tipped my cap. That is not the same as Hegseth blowing up speed boats with Hellfires as law enforcement. They are two very different acts.
You think that if we build the Data Centers that our data is not going to China or India? As I have said to you before, until the reward structure changes from the current "operational efficiency" equals CEO/Exec Bonuses to something that reflects a more well rounded approach if it is cheaper to go to India or China it will go. All that will be here is Government data paying a higher rate, which should set you and DOGE off. It is all connected.
whiterock said:cowboycwr said:whiterock said:FLBear5630 said:whiterock said:Oldbear83 said:whiterock said:
Luddites shytting their nest.
You still throwing that tantrum?
not a tantrum at all. Just calling it what it is. The negative reaction to data centers is completely illogical. Almost every complaint is mostly or wholly the opposite of the truth, one unsupported allegation after another piled on top of ignorance about industrial water use and water infrastructure, multiplied by exponential misunderstanding about the realities private property rights and economic development.
The actual situation is this: the demand for data storage is infinite, while the supply of data storage is quite limited. Supply & demand being what it is, it now pencils out to bring in necessary infrastructure to raw properties well outside of existing urban development. This is transformatively positive for the areas being developed, bringing electrical, water and sewer infrastructure to areas that would not otherwise see such for decades. That generates unprecedented amounts of tax base for the dollars and gallons invested by the public. To the extent you think public debt is a problem, tax base matters a little bit.
Most important: It's going to happen. The tech companies are going to build their data centers. So where do we want them to be? China will let them put as many DCs as they want anywhere they want. Are we somehow better off if all our data is housed in China? Do we really improve anything by letting all the AI development occur under Chinese regulation?
We are going to build them here. For obvious reasons. WE will manage all the problems, and WE will reap all the benefits. And WE will do a better job of addressing your concerns than China will. Just insanity to think that saying no to the construction of data centers here to fight the advance of AI is going to do anything other than send all the DCs and AI development abroad, and that such is somehow a better model than building them here.
Just insanity to not fight Iran. Insanity to not support Ukraine. Insanity to not kidnap Maduro. Insanity to not build DCs.
All true.
Tell us how we'd have been better off letting Iran build nukes and launch terror attacks via proxy.
Tell us how we'd have been better off letting Russia roll over Ukraine.
Tell us how we'd have been better off letting Maduro stay in power (with Iranian advisors and Chinese money).
Tell us how we'll be better off letting China host all our data.
So the sane person is Nicki Haley. You think like Nicki Haley.
On some things, yes.
On some things, no.
I'm like that.
You're not a very good troll, ya know.....
I notice you conveniently ignored the posts of mine with links. Address those links and prove any of them wrong.
You can't so you will continue to ignore them.
Google up: "data center water pollution examples."
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=data+center+water+pollution+examples&atb=v405-1&ia=web
You will see none. Just allegations of what could happen, maybe, perhaps, et......
DC operations do not pollute water. You have not cited a single instance. Because it's not there.
Again. I have. There was a post IN THIS THREAD. But you have ignored it.
But here is a link about it. And in fact the link shows Amazon is going to pay for the pollution…. Why would they pay if they didn't cause it?????
https://www.oregonlive.com/silicon-forest/2026/03/amazon-will-pay-205-million-to-settle-oregon-data-center-pollution-allegations.html
So there is one. I could find more. But you will brush this off without providing proof or addressing the one from this thread.
Just as you have ignored the links I have provided, fail to address those, provide no links yourself and have been called out by multiple people on the lack of jobs or tax money created and simply just ignore it.
Provide links.
cowboycwr said:whiterock said:cowboycwr said:whiterock said:FLBear5630 said:whiterock said:Oldbear83 said:whiterock said:
Luddites shytting their nest.
You still throwing that tantrum?
not a tantrum at all. Just calling it what it is. The negative reaction to data centers is completely illogical. Almost every complaint is mostly or wholly the opposite of the truth, one unsupported allegation after another piled on top of ignorance about industrial water use and water infrastructure, multiplied by exponential misunderstanding about the realities private property rights and economic development.
The actual situation is this: the demand for data storage is infinite, while the supply of data storage is quite limited. Supply & demand being what it is, it now pencils out to bring in necessary infrastructure to raw properties well outside of existing urban development. This is transformatively positive for the areas being developed, bringing electrical, water and sewer infrastructure to areas that would not otherwise see such for decades. That generates unprecedented amounts of tax base for the dollars and gallons invested by the public. To the extent you think public debt is a problem, tax base matters a little bit.
Most important: It's going to happen. The tech companies are going to build their data centers. So where do we want them to be? China will let them put as many DCs as they want anywhere they want. Are we somehow better off if all our data is housed in China? Do we really improve anything by letting all the AI development occur under Chinese regulation?
We are going to build them here. For obvious reasons. WE will manage all the problems, and WE will reap all the benefits. And WE will do a better job of addressing your concerns than China will. Just insanity to think that saying no to the construction of data centers here to fight the advance of AI is going to do anything other than send all the DCs and AI development abroad, and that such is somehow a better model than building them here.
Just insanity to not fight Iran. Insanity to not support Ukraine. Insanity to not kidnap Maduro. Insanity to not build DCs.
All true.
Tell us how we'd have been better off letting Iran build nukes and launch terror attacks via proxy.
Tell us how we'd have been better off letting Russia roll over Ukraine.
Tell us how we'd have been better off letting Maduro stay in power (with Iranian advisors and Chinese money).
Tell us how we'll be better off letting China host all our data.
So the sane person is Nicki Haley. You think like Nicki Haley.
On some things, yes.
On some things, no.
I'm like that.
You're not a very good troll, ya know.....
I notice you conveniently ignored the posts of mine with links. Address those links and prove any of them wrong.
You can't so you will continue to ignore them.
Google up: "data center water pollution examples."
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=data+center+water+pollution+examples&atb=v405-1&ia=web
You will see none. Just allegations of what could happen, maybe, perhaps, et......
DC operations do not pollute water. You have not cited a single instance. Because it's not there.
Again. I have. There was a post IN THIS THREAD. But you have ignored it.
But here is a link about it. And in fact the link shows Amazon is going to pay for the pollution…. Why would they pay if they didn't cause it?????
https://www.oregonlive.com/silicon-forest/2026/03/amazon-will-pay-205-million-to-settle-oregon-data-center-pollution-allegations.html
So there is one. I could find more. But you will brush this off without providing proof or addressing the one from this thread.
Just as you have ignored the links I have provided, fail to address those, provide no links yourself and have been called out by multiple people on the lack of jobs or tax money created and simply just ignore it.
Provide links.
Please read carefully this portion of your link. It completely undermines your assertion:
"Amazon wasn't the origin of the nitrate pollution, and denies wrongdoing, but critics have alleged the company exacerbated the crisis with concentrated runoff from its data centers. A lawsuit continues on behalf of local residents against food processors, farms, utilities and the Port of Morrow."
Translation: Amazon did not pollute the groundwater. The suit alleges the runoff from the DC moved existing pollution around a little bit. Not discharge of water from operations, mind you, but runoff from roofs & parking lots of the DC. Amazon settled to extricate itself from a larger lawsuit (i.e. to make the issue go away for them). That DC is a $12B investment; a $20m settlement is a rounding error, precisely 0.00166666666667 to the total, to be exact. A nuisance lawsuit settlement.
Google up this search term: "lawsuits against data centers water."
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=lawsuits+against+data+centes+water&atb=v405-1&ia=web
Below is what the results say (i.e. exactly what I've been saying - DC's do not pollute water; nearly all narrative to that effect is allegations of POTENTIAL problems, not actual problems. The overwhelming body of narrative on DCs and water is over the quantity of water they use, not the quality of any water they may discharge.) And to that end, note the final portion below about "water positive." DC developers are all over that. I'm working with one that intends to use strictly effluent for cooling....reused water that would be otherwise discharged into a public waterway You will see more and more of that, as well as other cooling tech I've mentioned here - like generators that can cool themselves with water distilled from air intake. And the infrastructure needed to take the effluent to the plant? It will be available for other industrial businesses to tap into - proving again what I've said: DCs are bringing the pipe.....they are not going to strain existing infrastructure; they're going to bring a whole new wave of infrastructure that will benefit everyone.
Bottom line, please educate yourself on this issue. You are repeating completely unsubstantiated allegations. I am literally under the hood of a few DC developments. There is no DC superfund site. And there's not likely to be. Other than the cooling systems, there are no contaminants in a DC. Just billions of dollars of chemically inert metal and wire. They are the cleanest industrial facility imaginable. Virtually all of the new wave of DCs have closed-loop water systems. All water loss will be to evaporation.
-----------------start of quote------------------------
Overview of Lawsuits Against Data Centers
Lawsuits targeting data centers primarily focus on their substantial water usage, especially in regions already facing water scarcity. Local communities and officials are increasingly concerned about the environmental impact of these facilities.
Key Issues in Litigation
- Resource Depletion: Data centers consume large amounts of water, which can strain local supplies.
- Environmental Impact: Communities argue that the approval of new data centers can exacerbate existing water shortages and harm local ecosystems.
Location
Case Description
Key Concerns
Virginia
Officials are exploring legal options to limit water strain from data centers.
High water usage and local resource depletion.
Chile
Municipality of Cerrillos challenged a Google data center's approval.
Potential water use and climate impact.
Ireland
Friends of the Irish Environment challenged a proposed data center.
Violation of climate targets and biodiversity concerns.
Broader Context
The rapid expansion of data centers, driven by the demand for digital services and AI, has led to increased scrutiny. Many new facilities are being built in water-stressed areas, raising alarms about their sustainability.
Industry Response
Tech companies like Microsoft, Google, and Amazon have pledged to become "water positive" by 2030, aiming to replenish more water than they consume. However, critics argue that these commitments often rely on offsetting strategies that do not effectively address local shortages.
The growing trend of litigation against data centers reflects a significant shift in public awareness and policy regarding the environmental impacts of digital infrastructure.
the criticisms of water QUANTITY usage is a far stronger case. DCs do use more water than most industrial businesses, comparable or slightly greater than other water-intensive industrial concerns like food production, beverage production, paper production, cardboard production, etc..... The debate there is about ROI - do the DCs generate enough general welfare to justify the investment required in water. If one prioritizes job creation, then the DCs do not stack up as well as many other industries. But if one prioritizes tax base, DCs blow all other industrial concerns out of the water by orders of magnitude.
I insist pitting jobs vs tax base is a false dilemma. We need BOTH. And if we project out into the future, I would submit that the tax base argument has more gravity than the jobs argument. Our birth rate is negative; government spending is not. No way to fix budget deficits without more revenue.
DCs and AI are the new "industrial revolution." It's going to happen whether you like it or not.
I insist pitting jobs vs tax base is a false dilemma. We need BOTH. And if we project out into the future, I would submit that the tax base argument has more gravity than the jobs argument. Our birth rate is negative; government spending is not. No way to fix budget deficits without more revenue.
DCs and AI are the new "industrial revolution." It's going to happen whether you like it or not.
This will slow AI buildout more than any chip shortage. Software scales with a deploy, physical infrastructure scales through zoning boards. Most people in tech haven't figured this out yet.
— Jonas Hernlund (@jonashernlund) April 12, 2026
North Carolina Hospitals have deployed these telepresence robots
— Wall Street Apes (@WallStreetApes) April 12, 2026
These allow doctors to interact remotely with patients. A real human doctor is operating this remotely and speaking with patients
Yes, this is real. This is so dystopian
North Carolina hospitals deployed these to… pic.twitter.com/QyTnxtWs6v
whiterock said:cowboycwr said:whiterock said:cowboycwr said:whiterock said:FLBear5630 said:whiterock said:Oldbear83 said:whiterock said:
Luddites shytting their nest.
You still throwing that tantrum?
not a tantrum at all. Just calling it what it is. The negative reaction to data centers is completely illogical. Almost every complaint is mostly or wholly the opposite of the truth, one unsupported allegation after another piled on top of ignorance about industrial water use and water infrastructure, multiplied by exponential misunderstanding about the realities private property rights and economic development.
The actual situation is this: the demand for data storage is infinite, while the supply of data storage is quite limited. Supply & demand being what it is, it now pencils out to bring in necessary infrastructure to raw properties well outside of existing urban development. This is transformatively positive for the areas being developed, bringing electrical, water and sewer infrastructure to areas that would not otherwise see such for decades. That generates unprecedented amounts of tax base for the dollars and gallons invested by the public. To the extent you think public debt is a problem, tax base matters a little bit.
Most important: It's going to happen. The tech companies are going to build their data centers. So where do we want them to be? China will let them put as many DCs as they want anywhere they want. Are we somehow better off if all our data is housed in China? Do we really improve anything by letting all the AI development occur under Chinese regulation?
We are going to build them here. For obvious reasons. WE will manage all the problems, and WE will reap all the benefits. And WE will do a better job of addressing your concerns than China will. Just insanity to think that saying no to the construction of data centers here to fight the advance of AI is going to do anything other than send all the DCs and AI development abroad, and that such is somehow a better model than building them here.
Just insanity to not fight Iran. Insanity to not support Ukraine. Insanity to not kidnap Maduro. Insanity to not build DCs.
All true.
Tell us how we'd have been better off letting Iran build nukes and launch terror attacks via proxy.
Tell us how we'd have been better off letting Russia roll over Ukraine.
Tell us how we'd have been better off letting Maduro stay in power (with Iranian advisors and Chinese money).
Tell us how we'll be better off letting China host all our data.
So the sane person is Nicki Haley. You think like Nicki Haley.
On some things, yes.
On some things, no.
I'm like that.
You're not a very good troll, ya know.....
I notice you conveniently ignored the posts of mine with links. Address those links and prove any of them wrong.
You can't so you will continue to ignore them.
Google up: "data center water pollution examples."
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=data+center+water+pollution+examples&atb=v405-1&ia=web
You will see none. Just allegations of what could happen, maybe, perhaps, et......
DC operations do not pollute water. You have not cited a single instance. Because it's not there.
Again. I have. There was a post IN THIS THREAD. But you have ignored it.
But here is a link about it. And in fact the link shows Amazon is going to pay for the pollution…. Why would they pay if they didn't cause it?????
https://www.oregonlive.com/silicon-forest/2026/03/amazon-will-pay-205-million-to-settle-oregon-data-center-pollution-allegations.html
So there is one. I could find more. But you will brush this off without providing proof or addressing the one from this thread.
Just as you have ignored the links I have provided, fail to address those, provide no links yourself and have been called out by multiple people on the lack of jobs or tax money created and simply just ignore it.
Provide links.
Please read carefully this portion of your link. It completely undermines your assertion:
"Amazon wasn't the origin of the nitrate pollution, and denies wrongdoing, but critics have alleged the company exacerbated the crisis with concentrated runoff from its data centers. A lawsuit continues on behalf of local residents against food processors, farms, utilities and the Port of Morrow."
Translation: Amazon did not pollute the groundwater. The suit alleges the runoff from the DC moved existing pollution around a little bit. Not discharge of water from operations, mind you, but runoff from roofs & parking lots of the DC. Amazon settled to extricate itself from a larger lawsuit (i.e. to make the issue go away for them). That DC is a $12B investment; a $20m settlement is a rounding error, precisely 0.00166666666667 to the total, to be exact. A nuisance lawsuit settlement.
Google up this search term: "lawsuits against data centers water."
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=lawsuits+against+data+centes+water&atb=v405-1&ia=web
Below is what the results say (i.e. exactly what I've been saying - DC's do not pollute water; nearly all narrative to that effect is allegations of POTENTIAL problems, not actual problems. The overwhelming body of narrative on DCs and water is over the quantity of water they use, not the quality of any water they may discharge.) And to that end, note the final portion below about "water positive." DC developers are all over that. I'm working with one that intends to use strictly effluent for cooling....reused water that would be otherwise discharged into a public waterway You will see more and more of that, as well as other cooling tech I've mentioned here - like generators that can cool themselves with water distilled from air intake. And the infrastructure needed to take the effluent to the plant? It will be available for other industrial businesses to tap into - proving again what I've said: DCs are bringing the pipe.....they are not going to strain existing infrastructure; they're going to bring a whole new wave of infrastructure that will benefit everyone.
Bottom line, please educate yourself on this issue. You are repeating completely unsubstantiated allegations. I am literally under the hood of a few DC developments. There is no DC superfund site. And there's not likely to be. Other than the cooling systems, there are no contaminants in a DC. Just billions of dollars of chemically inert metal and wire. They are the cleanest industrial facility imaginable. Virtually all of the new wave of DCs have closed-loop water systems. All water loss will be to evaporation.
-----------------start of quote------------------------
Overview of Lawsuits Against Data Centers
Lawsuits targeting data centers primarily focus on their substantial water usage, especially in regions already facing water scarcity. Local communities and officials are increasingly concerned about the environmental impact of these facilities.
Key Issues in LitigationNotable Cases
- Resource Depletion: Data centers consume large amounts of water, which can strain local supplies.
- Environmental Impact: Communities argue that the approval of new data centers can exacerbate existing water shortages and harm local ecosystems.
Location
Case Description
Key Concerns
Virginia
Officials are exploring legal options to limit water strain from data centers.
High water usage and local resource depletion.
Chile
Municipality of Cerrillos challenged a Google data center's approval.
Potential water use and climate impact.
Ireland
Friends of the Irish Environment challenged a proposed data center.
Violation of climate targets and biodiversity concerns.
Broader Context
The rapid expansion of data centers, driven by the demand for digital services and AI, has led to increased scrutiny. Many new facilities are being built in water-stressed areas, raising alarms about their sustainability.
Industry Response
Tech companies like Microsoft, Google, and Amazon have pledged to become "water positive" by 2030, aiming to replenish more water than they consume. However, critics argue that these commitments often rely on offsetting strategies that do not effectively address local shortages.
The growing trend of litigation against data centers reflects a significant shift in public awareness and policy regarding the environmental impacts of digital infrastructure.
Provide links.
whiterock said:
the criticisms of water QUANTITY usage is a far stronger case. DCs do use more water than most industrial businesses, comparable or slightly greater than other water-intensive industrial concerns like food production, beverage production, paper production, cardboard production, etc..... The debate there is about ROI - do the DCs generate enough general welfare to justify the investment required in water. If one prioritizes job creation, then the DCs do not stack up as well as many other industries. But if one prioritizes tax base, DCs blow all other industrial concerns out of the water by orders of magnitude.
I insist pitting jobs vs tax base is a false dilemma. We need BOTH. And if we project out into the future, I would submit that the tax base argument has more gravity than the jobs argument. Our birth rate is negative; government spending is not. No way to fix budget deficits without more revenue.
DCs and AI are the new "industrial revolution." It's going to happen whether you like it or not.
Provide links.
Many DCs will be the empty strip malls of the future, so it's right to be wary when evaluating projects. The market is currently valuing almost all data center square footage as premium real estate. The reality is that the vast majority of it is highly vulnerable to becoming technologically stranded. The tech is leading us there as it will address the infrastructural issues through consolidation and lower power/heat requirements for higher computing output. Ai will also trend toward distributed autonomy long term. We're in the "brute force" inefficient scaling phase driven by first mover motivation, hype, and some economic opportunism (public and private).
boognish_bear said:North Carolina Hospitals have deployed these telepresence robots
— Wall Street Apes (@WallStreetApes) April 12, 2026
These allow doctors to interact remotely with patients. A real human doctor is operating this remotely and speaking with patients
Yes, this is real. This is so dystopian
North Carolina hospitals deployed these to… pic.twitter.com/QyTnxtWs6v
When the doctor starts saying, "Danger, danger!" then it will be real.
cowboycwr said:whiterock said:cowboycwr said:whiterock said:cowboycwr said:whiterock said:FLBear5630 said:whiterock said:Oldbear83 said:whiterock said:
Luddites shytting their nest.
You still throwing that tantrum?
not a tantrum at all. Just calling it what it is. The negative reaction to data centers is completely illogical. Almost every complaint is mostly or wholly the opposite of the truth, one unsupported allegation after another piled on top of ignorance about industrial water use and water infrastructure, multiplied by exponential misunderstanding about the realities private property rights and economic development.
The actual situation is this: the demand for data storage is infinite, while the supply of data storage is quite limited. Supply & demand being what it is, it now pencils out to bring in necessary infrastructure to raw properties well outside of existing urban development. This is transformatively positive for the areas being developed, bringing electrical, water and sewer infrastructure to areas that would not otherwise see such for decades. That generates unprecedented amounts of tax base for the dollars and gallons invested by the public. To the extent you think public debt is a problem, tax base matters a little bit.
Most important: It's going to happen. The tech companies are going to build their data centers. So where do we want them to be? China will let them put as many DCs as they want anywhere they want. Are we somehow better off if all our data is housed in China? Do we really improve anything by letting all the AI development occur under Chinese regulation?
We are going to build them here. For obvious reasons. WE will manage all the problems, and WE will reap all the benefits. And WE will do a better job of addressing your concerns than China will. Just insanity to think that saying no to the construction of data centers here to fight the advance of AI is going to do anything other than send all the DCs and AI development abroad, and that such is somehow a better model than building them here.
Just insanity to not fight Iran. Insanity to not support Ukraine. Insanity to not kidnap Maduro. Insanity to not build DCs.
All true.
Tell us how we'd have been better off letting Iran build nukes and launch terror attacks via proxy.
Tell us how we'd have been better off letting Russia roll over Ukraine.
Tell us how we'd have been better off letting Maduro stay in power (with Iranian advisors and Chinese money).
Tell us how we'll be better off letting China host all our data.
So the sane person is Nicki Haley. You think like Nicki Haley.
On some things, yes.
On some things, no.
I'm like that.
You're not a very good troll, ya know.....
I notice you conveniently ignored the posts of mine with links. Address those links and prove any of them wrong.
You can't so you will continue to ignore them.
Google up: "data center water pollution examples."
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=data+center+water+pollution+examples&atb=v405-1&ia=web
You will see none. Just allegations of what could happen, maybe, perhaps, et......
DC operations do not pollute water. You have not cited a single instance. Because it's not there.
Again. I have. There was a post IN THIS THREAD. But you have ignored it.
But here is a link about it. And in fact the link shows Amazon is going to pay for the pollution…. Why would they pay if they didn't cause it?????
https://www.oregonlive.com/silicon-forest/2026/03/amazon-will-pay-205-million-to-settle-oregon-data-center-pollution-allegations.html
So there is one. I could find more. But you will brush this off without providing proof or addressing the one from this thread.
Just as you have ignored the links I have provided, fail to address those, provide no links yourself and have been called out by multiple people on the lack of jobs or tax money created and simply just ignore it.
Provide links.
Please read carefully this portion of your link. It completely undermines your assertion:
"Amazon wasn't the origin of the nitrate pollution, and denies wrongdoing, but critics have alleged the company exacerbated the crisis with concentrated runoff from its data centers. A lawsuit continues on behalf of local residents against food processors, farms, utilities and the Port of Morrow."
Translation: Amazon did not pollute the groundwater. The suit alleges the runoff from the DC moved existing pollution around a little bit. Not discharge of water from operations, mind you, but runoff from roofs & parking lots of the DC. Amazon settled to extricate itself from a larger lawsuit (i.e. to make the issue go away for them). That DC is a $12B investment; a $20m settlement is a rounding error, precisely 0.00166666666667 to the total, to be exact. A nuisance lawsuit settlement.
Google up this search term: "lawsuits against data centers water."
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=lawsuits+against+data+centes+water&atb=v405-1&ia=web
Below is what the results say (i.e. exactly what I've been saying - DC's do not pollute water; nearly all narrative to that effect is allegations of POTENTIAL problems, not actual problems. The overwhelming body of narrative on DCs and water is over the quantity of water they use, not the quality of any water they may discharge.) And to that end, note the final portion below about "water positive." DC developers are all over that. I'm working with one that intends to use strictly effluent for cooling....reused water that would be otherwise discharged into a public waterway You will see more and more of that, as well as other cooling tech I've mentioned here - like generators that can cool themselves with water distilled from air intake. And the infrastructure needed to take the effluent to the plant? It will be available for other industrial businesses to tap into - proving again what I've said: DCs are bringing the pipe.....they are not going to strain existing infrastructure; they're going to bring a whole new wave of infrastructure that will benefit everyone.
Bottom line, please educate yourself on this issue. You are repeating completely unsubstantiated allegations. I am literally under the hood of a few DC developments. There is no DC superfund site. And there's not likely to be. Other than the cooling systems, there are no contaminants in a DC. Just billions of dollars of chemically inert metal and wire. They are the cleanest industrial facility imaginable. Virtually all of the new wave of DCs have closed-loop water systems. All water loss will be to evaporation.
-----------------start of quote------------------------
Overview of Lawsuits Against Data Centers
Lawsuits targeting data centers primarily focus on their substantial water usage, especially in regions already facing water scarcity. Local communities and officials are increasingly concerned about the environmental impact of these facilities.
Key Issues in LitigationNotable Cases
- Resource Depletion: Data centers consume large amounts of water, which can strain local supplies.
- Environmental Impact: Communities argue that the approval of new data centers can exacerbate existing water shortages and harm local ecosystems.
Location
Case Description
Key Concerns
Virginia
Officials are exploring legal options to limit water strain from data centers.
High water usage and local resource depletion.
Chile
Municipality of Cerrillos challenged a Google data center's approval.
Potential water use and climate impact.
Ireland
Friends of the Irish Environment challenged a proposed data center.
Violation of climate targets and biodiversity concerns.
Broader Context
The rapid expansion of data centers, driven by the demand for digital services and AI, has led to increased scrutiny. Many new facilities are being built in water-stressed areas, raising alarms about their sustainability.
Industry Response
Tech companies like Microsoft, Google, and Amazon have pledged to become "water positive" by 2030, aiming to replenish more water than they consume. However, critics argue that these commitments often rely on offsetting strategies that do not effectively address local shortages.
The growing trend of litigation against data centers reflects a significant shift in public awareness and policy regarding the environmental impacts of digital infrastructure.
Provide links.
I did. You just didn't read it, apparently. that's why I posted the results, which you apparently cannot understand.
ATL Bear said:
Many DCs will be the empty strip malls of the future, so it's right to be wary when evaluating projects. The market is currently valuing almost all data center square footage as premium real estate. The reality is that the vast majority of it is highly vulnerable to becoming technologically stranded. The tech is leading us there as it will address the infrastructural issues through consolidation and lower power/heat requirements for higher computing output. Ai will also trend toward distributed autonomy long term. We're in the "brute force" inefficient scaling phase driven by first mover motivation, hype, and some economic opportunism (public and private).
So the risk is to do it right going in and be prepared for change.
-force DCs to bring their own pipe. (easy. they are).
-do not encumber the new tax base with long-term debt. (very easy for smaller cities to do...it's all new tax base).
-prepare for change.
On that last portion..... The ad valorem value of a CD is roughly 25% concrete & steel building, and 75% tech equipment. There is already a well-worn path of precedent to set the equipment on a 5yr depreciation, and to flat-line an value over that term. That makes budgeting easier for both taxing entities and businesses. Also allows municipalities to prepare for the first big transition, 4-5yrs down the line - when the "brute force" phase is winding down and there are broader options for available space. Since we are not having to compete to get a DC located in our city, we are not offering much in the way of abatements. That plus our conservative approach to use of the new tax base means we will have room to maneuver when those businesses come back to us 5yrs from now and demand abatements in order to stay with us. Doing other stuff, too.....
Bottom line: most cities do a good job on such issues. it's the failures of planning that make the news.
whiterock said:cowboycwr said:whiterock said:cowboycwr said:whiterock said:cowboycwr said:whiterock said:FLBear5630 said:whiterock said:Oldbear83 said:whiterock said:
Luddites shytting their nest.
You still throwing that tantrum?
not a tantrum at all. Just calling it what it is. The negative reaction to data centers is completely illogical. Almost every complaint is mostly or wholly the opposite of the truth, one unsupported allegation after another piled on top of ignorance about industrial water use and water infrastructure, multiplied by exponential misunderstanding about the realities private property rights and economic development.
The actual situation is this: the demand for data storage is infinite, while the supply of data storage is quite limited. Supply & demand being what it is, it now pencils out to bring in necessary infrastructure to raw properties well outside of existing urban development. This is transformatively positive for the areas being developed, bringing electrical, water and sewer infrastructure to areas that would not otherwise see such for decades. That generates unprecedented amounts of tax base for the dollars and gallons invested by the public. To the extent you think public debt is a problem, tax base matters a little bit.
Most important: It's going to happen. The tech companies are going to build their data centers. So where do we want them to be? China will let them put as many DCs as they want anywhere they want. Are we somehow better off if all our data is housed in China? Do we really improve anything by letting all the AI development occur under Chinese regulation?
We are going to build them here. For obvious reasons. WE will manage all the problems, and WE will reap all the benefits. And WE will do a better job of addressing your concerns than China will. Just insanity to think that saying no to the construction of data centers here to fight the advance of AI is going to do anything other than send all the DCs and AI development abroad, and that such is somehow a better model than building them here.
Just insanity to not fight Iran. Insanity to not support Ukraine. Insanity to not kidnap Maduro. Insanity to not build DCs.
All true.
Tell us how we'd have been better off letting Iran build nukes and launch terror attacks via proxy.
Tell us how we'd have been better off letting Russia roll over Ukraine.
Tell us how we'd have been better off letting Maduro stay in power (with Iranian advisors and Chinese money).
Tell us how we'll be better off letting China host all our data.
So the sane person is Nicki Haley. You think like Nicki Haley.
On some things, yes.
On some things, no.
I'm like that.
You're not a very good troll, ya know.....
I notice you conveniently ignored the posts of mine with links. Address those links and prove any of them wrong.
You can't so you will continue to ignore them.
Google up: "data center water pollution examples."
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=data+center+water+pollution+examples&atb=v405-1&ia=web
You will see none. Just allegations of what could happen, maybe, perhaps, et......
DC operations do not pollute water. You have not cited a single instance. Because it's not there.
Again. I have. There was a post IN THIS THREAD. But you have ignored it.
But here is a link about it. And in fact the link shows Amazon is going to pay for the pollution…. Why would they pay if they didn't cause it?????
https://www.oregonlive.com/silicon-forest/2026/03/amazon-will-pay-205-million-to-settle-oregon-data-center-pollution-allegations.html
So there is one. I could find more. But you will brush this off without providing proof or addressing the one from this thread.
Just as you have ignored the links I have provided, fail to address those, provide no links yourself and have been called out by multiple people on the lack of jobs or tax money created and simply just ignore it.
Provide links.
Please read carefully this portion of your link. It completely undermines your assertion:
"Amazon wasn't the origin of the nitrate pollution, and denies wrongdoing, but critics have alleged the company exacerbated the crisis with concentrated runoff from its data centers. A lawsuit continues on behalf of local residents against food processors, farms, utilities and the Port of Morrow."
Translation: Amazon did not pollute the groundwater. The suit alleges the runoff from the DC moved existing pollution around a little bit. Not discharge of water from operations, mind you, but runoff from roofs & parking lots of the DC. Amazon settled to extricate itself from a larger lawsuit (i.e. to make the issue go away for them). That DC is a $12B investment; a $20m settlement is a rounding error, precisely 0.00166666666667 to the total, to be exact. A nuisance lawsuit settlement.
Google up this search term: "lawsuits against data centers water."
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=lawsuits+against+data+centes+water&atb=v405-1&ia=web
Below is what the results say (i.e. exactly what I've been saying - DC's do not pollute water; nearly all narrative to that effect is allegations of POTENTIAL problems, not actual problems. The overwhelming body of narrative on DCs and water is over the quantity of water they use, not the quality of any water they may discharge.) And to that end, note the final portion below about "water positive." DC developers are all over that. I'm working with one that intends to use strictly effluent for cooling....reused water that would be otherwise discharged into a public waterway You will see more and more of that, as well as other cooling tech I've mentioned here - like generators that can cool themselves with water distilled from air intake. And the infrastructure needed to take the effluent to the plant? It will be available for other industrial businesses to tap into - proving again what I've said: DCs are bringing the pipe.....they are not going to strain existing infrastructure; they're going to bring a whole new wave of infrastructure that will benefit everyone.
Bottom line, please educate yourself on this issue. You are repeating completely unsubstantiated allegations. I am literally under the hood of a few DC developments. There is no DC superfund site. And there's not likely to be. Other than the cooling systems, there are no contaminants in a DC. Just billions of dollars of chemically inert metal and wire. They are the cleanest industrial facility imaginable. Virtually all of the new wave of DCs have closed-loop water systems. All water loss will be to evaporation.
-----------------start of quote------------------------
Overview of Lawsuits Against Data Centers
Lawsuits targeting data centers primarily focus on their substantial water usage, especially in regions already facing water scarcity. Local communities and officials are increasingly concerned about the environmental impact of these facilities.
Key Issues in LitigationNotable Cases
- Resource Depletion: Data centers consume large amounts of water, which can strain local supplies.
- Environmental Impact: Communities argue that the approval of new data centers can exacerbate existing water shortages and harm local ecosystems.
Location
Case Description
Key Concerns
Virginia
Officials are exploring legal options to limit water strain from data centers.
High water usage and local resource depletion.
Chile
Municipality of Cerrillos challenged a Google data center's approval.
Potential water use and climate impact.
Ireland
Friends of the Irish Environment challenged a proposed data center.
Violation of climate targets and biodiversity concerns.
Broader Context
The rapid expansion of data centers, driven by the demand for digital services and AI, has led to increased scrutiny. Many new facilities are being built in water-stressed areas, raising alarms about their sustainability.
Industry Response
Tech companies like Microsoft, Google, and Amazon have pledged to become "water positive" by 2030, aiming to replenish more water than they consume. However, critics argue that these commitments often rely on offsetting strategies that do not effectively address local shortages.
The growing trend of litigation against data centers reflects a significant shift in public awareness and policy regarding the environmental impacts of digital infrastructure.
Provide links.
I did. You just didn't read it, apparently. that's why I posted the results, which you apparently cannot understand.
No you did not.
I said provide linkS. That is plural. You provided one. You still ignore the link provided earlier in the thread. Until you address that one and any of the other links and questions I have posted that you have just ignored I am done.
Provide LINKS. LINKS