The AI & Data Center Thread

[Lazaran]

*Needed" and selling land rights including already encroaching on National Park land while on pace for a ridiculous amount more are two very different things.

Other people know things too, .

There’s also this:

Search Assist

Data centers significantly contribute to climate change due to their high energy consumption, which is often powered by fossil fuels, leading to increased greenhouse gas emissions. The rapid growth of AI and data centers is expected to double their energy use by 2030, further intensifying their environmental impact.
https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/ip3/www.staxengineering.com.ico staxengineering.comhttps://external-content.duckduckgo.com/ip3/climate.mit.edu.ico Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Impact of Data Centers on Climate Change​

Data centers are a major contributor to climate change due to their substantial energy consumption. This energy is frequently sourced from fossil fuels, which results in significant greenhouse gas emissions.

Energy Consumption Trends​

• Current Usage: Data centers currently consume about 1.5% to 2% of global electricity.
• Future Projections: By 2030, energy use is expected to double, driven largely by the expansion of AI technologies.

Environmental Consequences​

• Greenhouse Gas Emissions: The energy required to operate data centers primarily comes from fossil fuels, leading to increased carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions.
• Water Usage: Many data centers rely on water-based cooling systems, which can strain local water resources, especially in drought-prone areas.

AI's Role in Energy Demand​

The rise of AI has intensified the energy demands of data centers. AI data centers are significantly more energy-intensive than traditional ones, with some estimates suggesting they can use up to ten times more energy for certain tasks compared to standard data processing.

Conclusion​

The rapid growth of data centers, particularly those supporting AI, poses a serious challenge to climate action efforts. Without significant changes in energy sourcing and efficiency, their expansion will likely exacerbate climate change.
https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/ip3/www.staxengineering.com.ico staxengineering.comhttps://external-content.duckduckgo.com/ip3/britishprogress.org.ico britishprogress.org



And there are obviously other dangers posed by AI that is powered by data centers….



And then there is the looming AI bubble that is bound to burst…



We. Told. Them. So.

 

[coati]

It seems odd that the people complaining the most about data centers don't even recognize or understand why they're needed or even are capable of understanding that they are needed.

It's like they saw one tiktok complaining about emissions or water and decided they knew it all.

^^^Typical generalizing elitist. Surely those challenging the degree of societal benefit are simply not as "capable" as him to do so.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

There’s also this:

Search Assist

Data centers significantly contribute to climate change due to their high energy consumption, which is often powered by fossil fuels, leading to increased greenhouse gas emissions. The rapid growth of AI and data centers is expected to double their energy use by 2030, further intensifying their environmental impact.
https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/ip3/www.staxengineering.com.ico staxengineering.comhttps://external-content.duckduckgo.com/ip3/climate.mit.edu.ico Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Impact of Data Centers on Climate Change​

Data centers are a major contributor to climate change due to their substantial energy consumption. This energy is frequently sourced from fossil fuels, which results in significant greenhouse gas emissions.

Energy Consumption Trends​

• Current Usage: Data centers currently consume about 1.5% to 2% of global electricity.
• Future Projections: By 2030, energy use is expected to double, driven largely by the expansion of AI technologies.

Environmental Consequences​

• Greenhouse Gas Emissions: The energy required to operate data centers primarily comes from fossil fuels, leading to increased carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions.
• Water Usage: Many data centers rely on water-based cooling systems, which can strain local water resources, especially in drought-prone areas.

AI's Role in Energy Demand​

The rise of AI has intensified the energy demands of data centers. AI data centers are significantly more energy-intensive than traditional ones, with some estimates suggesting they can use up to ten times more energy for certain tasks compared to standard data processing.

Conclusion​

The rapid growth of data centers, particularly those supporting AI, poses a serious challenge to climate action efforts. Without significant changes in energy sourcing and efficiency, their expansion will likely exacerbate climate change.
https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/ip3/www.staxengineering.com.ico staxengineering.comhttps://external-content.duckduckgo.com/ip3/britishprogress.org.ico britishprogress.org



And there are obviously other dangers posed by AI that is powered by data centers….



And then there is the looming AI bubble that is bound to burst…



We. Told. Them. So.

Hypothetically, suppose you’re on your county Board of Supervisors. A planning department recommendation to approve a data center in your district comes before you. What are the top three questions you ask of the applicant?

 

[ll74]

^^^Typical generalizing elitist. Surely those challenging the degree of societal benefit are simply not as "capable" as him to do so.

That's not what I said, so we're good.

 

[coati]

That's not what I said, so we're good.

Yes it is. You have taken the position on this thread that opposition is based on the concerns of NIMBYs who are ignorant of the need for data centers.

The strongest opposition to the frenzied data center construction bubble is based on whether society benefits to the degree that mega-corporations benefit.

How dare these peon NIMBYs challenge the invisible hand of the "free" market! Don't they know that whatever benefit the oligarchs benefits every living thing on Earth?

 

[ll74]

Yes it is.

Nope
Re read perhaps

You have taken the position on this thread that opposition is based on the concerns of NIMBYs who are ignorant of the need for data centers.

Most of it is

The strongest opposition to the frenzied data center construction bubble is based on whether society benefits to the degree that mega-corporations benefit.

The nuanced.arguments perhaps

How dare these peon NIMBYs challenge the invisible hand of the "free" market! Don't they know that whatever benefit the oligarchs benefits every living thing on Earth?

Liberty is a thing for some

 

[coati]

Liberty is a thing for some

No, liberty is a thing for everybody. The impacts of hyperscale data centers extend far beyond their physical property boundaries, affecting the liberty of others.

It is perfectly legitimate for citizens to limit the extent of data center development, just as we do coal plants and drug distribution networks.

 

[ll74]

No, liberty is a thing for everybody. The impacts of hyperspace data centers extend far beyond their physical property boundaries, affecting the liberty of others.

It is perfectly legitimate for citizens to limit the extent of data center development, just as we do coal plants and drug distribution networks.

Yes, but how and why do you limit it where you do limit them?

If a company has demand to build one.....why shouldn't they do so where they are able?

 

[coati]

Yes, but how and why do you limit it where you do limit them?

If a company has demand to build one.....why shouldn't they do so where they are able?

Their assessment of demand is not the only factor to consider. Citizens have the right to make cost-benefit assessments of their own and limit negative impacts to society.

The largest new data center development proposal in Arizona (Vermaland) was just denied a key permit because of citizens making such a cost-benefit assessment. That still leaves another 116 data centers currently operating in Arizona, but it is a sign of citizens drawing the line on resource exploitation in Arizona.

 

[ll74]

Their assessment of demand is not the only factor to consider. Citizens have the right to make cost-benefit assessments of their own and limit negative impacts to society.

Yes, for a company, their need to build a data center is based on their demand to have another one.

I haven't suggested that citizens don't have a right to have a say in where they are built

The largest new data center development proposal in Arizona (Vermaland) was just denied a key permit because of citizens making such a cost-benefit assessment. That still leaves another 116 data centers currently operating in Arizona, but it is a sign of citizens drawing the line on resource exploitation in Arizona.

How many of them have an objective understanding of resources that are actually being used by the 116? Id appreciate that to be 100%, but I think it's likely 10%.

As I mentioned - this entire blowback for data center building is artificial. It happened too quickly and is based on a ton of misinformation.

 

[coati]

How many of them have an objective understanding of resources that are actually being used by the 116? Id appreciate that to be 100%, but I think it's likely 10%.
As I mentioned - this entire blowback for data center building is artificial. It happened too quickly and is based on a ton of misinformation.

As an Ohio urban snob living in an online bubble, you apparently have no concept about how data centers have already been abused by corporations in many significant ways.

Citizens out here are not fools. They know that supercomputing can be used for both good and bad purposes. We already have seen this on a large scale in our state, as well as experiencing the ecological and cultural impacts.

Citizens are rightly advocating for regulation of this industry, no matter how many snobby statements are made by online know-it-alls.

 

[ll74]

As an Ohio urban snob living in an online bubble, you apparently have no concept about how data centers have already been abused by corporations in many significant ways.

I do. But I'm not also ignoring why and how they came to be.

Citizens out here are not fools.

Depends on the topic.

They know that supercomputing can be used for both good and bad purposes. We already have seen this on a large scale in our state, as well as experiencing the ecological and cultural impacts.

My community has seen a huge rise in electricity costs. That doesn't mean stop all data centers...that means work on how the cost is propagated and push more cost to the data center companies. That's difficult with the laws enacted years ago that basically gave a free pass for those companies.

Citizens are rightly advocating for regulation of this industry, no matter how many snobby statements are made by online know-it-alls.

Your disposition isn't that. You're anti data center from top to bottom.

I'm fine with more regulation. I'm fine with data centers being built.

 

[dmallord]

We’ll see how much demand remains when people actually have to pay for it. It’s easy to get people to consume something if you give it away for free.

People are subscribing to cable TV and are consumed by it. Consumed by cellphones. Enthralled by online movies. Seems every kid has a cellphone in their pocket. AI consumption will be no different than these kinds of addictions. That’s pretty much a foregone conclusion.

 

[dmallord]

It doesn't have to be in their back yard. There are legitimate concerns and they have to be dealt with. Politicians need to depoliticize this issue and work together with big tech, state and local entities. There are millions of acres to build these data centers and in places where nuclear power plants and data centers can work together to serve the American people. People are skeptical of these data centers because the media is creating this monster image fed by Chinese propaganda. People need to do the research, big tech needs to sell it better and politicians need to stop politicizing the issue.

Holy shit. Some common ground. What happened to you?

 

[MajorRewrite]

Utah planned the world’s biggest data center. Then came the bipartisan pushback.

The basic specs describe an endeavor unlike anything on Earth. The Stratos Project is set to take over 20,000 acres of desert brush and farmland in Box Elder County, abutting the Great Salt Lake. Even at this reduced size (the original plan was 40,000 acres), the site would be bigger than Manhattan. At full build, the Stratos Project estimates it would consume 9 gigawatts of electricity, more than twice the amount used to power the rest of the state.

They thought they’d get no resistance in a red part of the state. Oh boy, were they wrong …

But many assumptions that Stratos’ investors or Utah politicians might have had about Box Elder County – about either the acquiescence of its people or the barrenness of its landscape – have been proved wrong over the past few months. County commission meetings have been moved to the local fairgrounds for space, some of the most powerful local politicians have been voted out of office, and efforts to save the ever-shrinking Great Salt Lake have seen a surge of interest. If data center opposition has scrambled politics and electoral stereotypes across the country over the past few months, Box Elder County has shown that to be true even in the unlikeliest of places.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Tech companies as well as state and local governments are failing to understand how concerned and confused the public is with regard to data centers.

Many citizens think of data centers as homogeneous projects. They’re either all bad or all good. There are huge differences in scale, power sources, cooling systems, water usage, and associated byproducts like noise level, water consumption, air pollution, grid impacts, etc.

Local governments are approving them the same way they have traditionally approved industrial use permits. They need to be hyper aggressive in public outreach and communication about permit applications, public hearings, and data center standards. The alternative is getting used to angry residents screaming at city council and BOS meetings.

 

[dmallord]

Tech companies as well as state and local governments are failing to understand how concerned and confused the public is with regard to data centers.

Many citizens think of data centers as homogeneous projects. They’re either all bad or all good. There are huge differences in scale, power sources, cooling systems, water usage, and associated byproducts like noise level, water consumption, air pollution, grid impacts, etc.

Local governments are approving them the same way they have traditionally approved industrial use permits. They need to be hyper aggressive in public outreach and communication about permit applications, public hearings, and data center standards. The alternative is getting used to angry residents screaming at city council and BOS meetings.

So, giving the people an appropriate education and letting them choose is a good thing. Though the companies choosing their sites ahead of that education seems to be the way it’s going. Kinda bassackwards approach like so many other big business deals in the works.

 

[Lazaran]

Tech companies as well as state and local governments are failing to understand how concerned and confused the public is with regard to data centers.

Many citizens think of data centers as homogeneous projects. They’re either all bad or all good. There are huge differences in scale, power sources, cooling systems, water usage, and associated byproducts like noise level, water consumption, air pollution, grid impacts, etc.

Local governments are approving them the same way they have traditionally approved industrial use permits. They need to be hyper aggressive in public outreach and communication about permit applications, public hearings, and data center standards. The alternative is getting used to angry residents screaming at city council and BOS meetings.

BabyBoozer is stuck in “Gaslighting Mode”:

1) Investors / companies need to recoup their ridiculous outlays in AI and data centers, so they are NOT going to do communities any REAL favors when they set up shop.

2) Talk of these companies building their own power generation projects is ridiculous, as that would put them further in the red. The same goes for water projects.

3) Communities SHOULD be highly skeptical of the promises being made by these companies. Communities have historically been left holding the bag when fly by night schemes / operations inevitably / invariably… fly by night… (And AI data centers are the mother of all fly by night schemes / operations, imho. I do NOT see how the VAST MAJORITY of these schemes / operations will pan out).

4) The hidden costs of AI data centers are also a HUGE concern, as they look to be MAJOR contributors to anthropogenic climate change (AI data centers use TEN TIMES THE ENERGY of standard data centers) right as the anthropogenic climate crisis is approaching a critical stage (the tipping point?).

5) The demand versus the supply related to AI data centers, etc, is also out of whack. The supply is currently FAR outpacing demand. Massive stocks of AI chips are currently sitting in warehouses waiting for data centers that may never be built - or data centers that will be built years from now when those AI chips are obsolete. (Of course, if the AI chips are obsolete for data centers, they can still be repurposed for autonomous hunter-killer drones, etc…).

6) Communities getting out in front of this issue seems perfectly reasonable, / sensible / pragmatic, imho - but I suspect that it is already too late for the most part: We are in another situation where A REPUBLICAN CONTROLLED FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND REPUBLICAN CONTROLLED STATES ARE GOING TO TRASH THE ECONOMY, THE ENVIRONMENT, AND SOCIETY… AGAIN.



Hope that ^ helps.



BabyBoozer



WE. TOLD. THEM. SO.

 

[Chernosoth]

Trump has been dead wrong on a few issues: covid shots, Iran war, and now AI. This is costing him some of his political capital.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

BabyBoozer is stuck in “Gaslighting Mode”:

1) Investors / companies need to recoup their ridiculous outlays in AI and data centers, so they are NOT going to do communities any REAL favors when they set up shop.

2) Talk of these companies building their own power generation projects is ridiculous, as that would put them further in the red. The same goes for water projects.

3) Communities SHOULD be highly skeptical of the promises being made by these companies. Communities have historically been left holding the bag when fly by night schemes / operations inevitably / invariably… fly by night… (And AI data centers are the mother of all fly by night schemes / operations, imho. I do NOT see how the VAST MAJORITY of these schemes / operations will pan out).

4) The hidden costs of AI data centers are also a HUGE concern, as they look to be MAJOR contributors to anthropogenic climate change (AI data centers use TEN TIMES THE ENERGY of standard data centers) right as the anthropogenic climate crisis is approaching a critical stage (the tipping point?).

5) The demand versus the supply related to AI data centers, etc, is also out of whack. The supply is currently FAR outpacing demand. Massive stocks of AI chips are currently sitting in warehouses waiting for data centers that may never be built - or data centers that will be built years from now when those AI chips are obsolete. (Of course, if the AI chips are obsolete for data centers, they can still be repurposed for autonomous hunter-killer drones, etc…).

6) Communities getting out in front of this issue seems perfectly reasonable, / sensible / pragmatic, imho - but I suspect that it is already too late for the most part: We are in another situation where A REPUBLICAN CONTROLLED FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND REPUBLICAN CONTROLLED STATES ARE GOING TO TRASH THE ECONOMY, THE ENVIRONMENT, AND SOCIETY… AGAIN.



Hope that ^ helps.



BabyBoozer



WE. TOLD. THEM. SO.

Data centers are approved at the local level so the environmental reviews, zoning, externalities and standards are different. It’s largely on states and local jurisdictions to get it right.

The “bring your own power” concept is being deployed at some hyper scale projects. Obviously those kinds of projects need to be vetted with the public and the process needs to be fully transparent. Most use LNG generators, however Microsoft is reopening Three Mile Island to power one of its facilities.

Data centers are in the US and more are coming. It’s not a question of “if.” It’s about where and how.

 

[icanhelp1]

Data centers are approved at the local level so the environmental reviews, zoning, externalities and standards are different. It’s largely on states and local jurisdictions to get it right.

The “bring your own power” concept is being deployed at some hyper scale projects. Obviously those kinds of projects need to be vetted with the public and the process needs to be fully transparent. Most use LNG generators, however Microsoft is reopening Three Mile Island to power one of its facilities.

Data centers are in the US and more are coming. It’s not a question of “if.” It’s about where and how.

The arguments here seem to always project negativity. When discussing the issues of A/I and DATA centers there should be a PRO/CON style discussion deliberating the who...what...where... and why. Before people make a nimdy decision those affected need to be educated on the subject mater. How does the deployment of these centers affect them personally. All these problems can be solves and decisions made with the help of accurate information and not based on propaganda. There needs to be a collective agreement, personal, political, technical and environmental. If people don't buy into it, well, we have enough divisive issues facing this country.

Are huge solar farms as eco friendly as climate alarmist would have you believe? Are wind farms as effiecient and effective as climate zealots would have you believe?

 

[whiskeytangofoxtrot]

Build them in southern Florida.