What does "it works" mean in this context? Are we prioritizing short-term political wins at cost of long-term competitiveness? Why are non-Western populations so excited by Ai while the West is eating fud?
I suspect the data center thing has become popular because it's been a long time since people have felt like they can effect change in government policy. Details and nuance are irrelevant, there are larger, underlying forces at work
I know in Singapore that they're pretty excited. They're teaching it in schools and the public is generally responding well, according to someone I know who's a citizen there.
This idea that people are somehow compelled to like Ai because they lack political power seems a false hubris. Do you know the CCP lets people protest some things, though certainly not party control?
Non-Western populations (really, talking about China here) do not live in a democracy. The government centrally plans where they build things like data centers and homes and there is very little the populace can do about it. You cannot own land in China, you can only lease it. You can't even really talk politics in China in anything close to the same way you're allowed to in the US.
People in China are also generally more excited about progress since it has actively improved their livelihood and wealth over the last few decades rather than slowly eroding it like it has in many Western countries. The government there makes legitimate investments in very visible and beneficial public works projects. Why would you be unenthusiastic about progress when you've been getting subways and high speed rail and cheap luxurious EVs everywhere for the last 20 years?
I find this article incredibly weak, glossing over a number of legitimate concerns brought up by data center opponents. This sentence in particular is pretty egregious:
> In any case, even the noise worry is overstated: many viral videos of supposed AI data centre noise are really Bitcoin mines, not state-of-the-art hyperscaler facilities.
Really? You think people are building Bitcoin mines, in 2026? Please.
Let's also be clear here: AI data centers could be a wonderful thing if we had a government that was legitimately focused on shoring up the national grid, transitioning to renewable energy, and building nuclear power plants. You know who is doing that? China: with more nuclear power plant projects underway than the rest of the world combined.
Instead, the US has an administration that started another middle east war for no reason resulting in higher oil prices, cancels renewable energy projects and permits left and right, and seems hell-bent on moving backwards in every way possible. Electricity prices in many states have gone up by double digit percentages. I don't see that happening in China. I don't blame anyone for being against data centers, even if it is "FUD."
I'm not sure where you are pulling that bitcoin statement from, presenting it as a quote, but it is my mine. My understanding is the gas turbine generators are the thing creating noise. We've had data centers for decades, noise is only a problem this year, so something new is going on, extrapolation from isolated incidents to broad brush strokes
The West is not a single monolith. Attitudes towards data centers vary from country to country. As does the perception of how much influence people have over the government.
The actual issue, as far as I see it, is the financialization of capitalism. When businesses prioritize creating value to the shareholders over creating value to the society, people naturally care less about their success. The degree of financialization also varies from country to country.
I actually happen to know a lot about this! I have been in and around datacenters for ~16yrs and I work on direct liquid cooled hardware at $DAY_JOB.
Back when I was running my own startup I moved to Mascot, Sydney to be near Equinix SY3 that was being built which we had bought a decent chunk of committed capacity in. Mascot was originally an industrial area but was gentrified a lot over the last 20ish years but the datacenters, meat packers etc are all still there. It really adds to the charm of the place in a lot of ways, warehouses/factories that have been converted to cafes and breweries.
Which is to say I don't think living near a DC is bad at all, they aren't very loud and they just look like big warehouses with lots of lights, cameras and no windows. Oh and security dudes.
Anyways. Yes. The hardware I am working at $DAY_JOB is all direct liquid cooled.
The coolant that actually cools the hardware is closed loop, it's not expended. Which means you don't actually use any of it and it's considered good for the entire life of the hardware.
I normally don't directly talk about $DAY_JOB things because there are pretty strict rules so I can only use publically referenced sources but you can read a little bit about the coolant we use in this article [1].
The facility loop though is usually what people are worried about. A lot of datacentres that were built in low humidity environments use evaporative cooling which does indeed use a ton of water. However most data centers in more humid environments don't and either use loops that recycle the water but dump the heat (i.e rivers/lakes) or use closed loop systems with radiators etc.
It's worth mentioning though that evaporative cooling is extremely power efficient vs most closed loop solutions so there is a tradeoff here. I don't think Google could achieve their fleetwide PUE (Power Usage Efficiency, basically measurement of how much power goes to things in a DC that isn't a computer) numbers without relying on it heavily.
Given the difficulties getting DCs approved in much of the world right now and the backlog on generation capacity (i.e power) almost all modern DCs are being built to use as little water as possible.
To give you an idea I think evaporative cooling of the type you would find in a state of the art Google DC with a PUE of ~1.1ish might use 1-1.1L of water for every kWh of actual equipment load (this is a back of the napkin estimate, don't hold me to it).
Conversely true closed loop will use approximately zero.
So yeah, evaporative is a big waster of water especially at GW scale.
Noise and air pollution are valid concerns with a lot of these datacentres being built as well. Some of these recent datacentres have been built close to residential areas, and the health harms are far more worrying than the property valuations IMO.
They need power and a lot of it. The one in Memphis built by Musk & co. currently uses 350MW & they are planning to expand it to 950MW. But these aren't even that bad because Google has data centers that use upwards of 2GW or more (Project Tembo (Wyoming)).
I think a large part is being close enough to existing utilities to save the installation costs of 40 miles of cable, telecomms etc (all duplicated of course). However, some data centres are built in the middle of nowhere but that is potentially then a nature problem because why spoil this nice countryside with a massive non-descript building?
I like Copenhill (https://www.visitcopenhagen.com/copenhagen/planning/copenhil...), where they decided that waste handling is not nice so why not make it nice by building a ski slope on it. I suspect that a bit more creativity could make people want data centres (free heating and hot water anybody? Hot spring baths? Free hosting for local schools and charities?)
> NIMBYs are the enemy of all that is good in the world.
Also see the Green parties / Greenpeace and the decline of nuclear power stations. We could have had clean, cheap energy across Europe and America, but the fear of nuclear is fully embedded in the public psyche.
“Moral panic” is just an academic jargon term for “settle down peasants.”
“A backlash fuelled by misinformation and misunderstanding” is also just an academic jargon term for “my vision is superior, anyone who disagrees is out of stupidity, if they understood me they would agree.”
> “Moral panic” is just an academic jargon term for “settle down peasants.”
The irony of this that it portrays everything referred to as a moral panic as something worthy of legitimate worry and/or outrage that was brushed aside by more influential socioeconomic groups.
Which now makes me wonder how many of the examples listed here qualify.
The banks will continue financing their construction so it doesn't matter how much people morally panic about it unless it becomes illegal to sell corporate bonds to banks they (Microsoft, Google, Oracle, etc) will continue building data centers.
I don't know where you live, but at least around here you don't build anything bigger than a garden shed without the municipality's permission. Something massive and externality-y like a data center is going to go through all the municipal planning steps, a multi-year process, even if wherever you want to build it is already zoned for industrial use.
Still don't see what that has to do with what I wrote? Texas has a pipeline of these things set up to go & the Memphis one is still out of code because of the gas turbines they're using. They're going to keep building them because the banks keep financing them regardless of the regulatory burden.
I have a lot of left leaning non-tech friends. They are all very much against AI data centers. I've built AI data centers, and I keep trying to educate them, but they just won't listen.
The water is mostly part of a closed system. Sure, you need a lot to build one, but once it's running it's pretty water efficient. The power is a problem, but as the article points out, you now have a large customer subsidizing the base cost of delivery, since they are only one delivery point. And they are financing new sources of power.
The noise is an issue, I will admit that. As is the fact that a lot of the power is coming from non-green sources. But the government could easily fix these problems with regulations that apply broadly, not just to datacenters.
Show me actual statistics that a supermajority of new and proposed datacenters either are currently using (for new), or plan to use, with clear financial projections for how (for proposed), closed-loop cooling systems, and I'll consider conceding this point. Until and unless someone can do that, you can point to the option of such systems until you're blue in the face, but it's meaningless.
> But the government could easily fix these problems with regulations that apply broadly, not just to datacenters.
Even if you can get legislators to pass regulation, enforcing it is a constant battle, and odds are they'll just pay a fine and keep on violating the regulations.
It's a much easier fight to keep a DC out of your community to begin with.
Local outrage over construction is the only protest people have against their wholesale replacement at work. They're totally fucked, and you know it. And you aren't. Have empathy.
Memo to anyone in the tech community who doesn’t agree with this:
People fucking hate you and don’t trust you and are convinced, not without reason, that you have the specific goal and intention of destroying their way of life and ability to provide for their families. They also feel like they were never consulted in any of this and that nobody is representing their interests.
You can agree or disagree with that point of view, but unless you thrive on ignorance you might as well get your head around the fact that it’s likely a majority view in this country by now.
Consider for a moment trying to figure out why that is the case rather than pretending it’s not true or that it’s a mass delusion.
Lets say I like AI it makes my life easy and I don't mind datacenters.
You seem to have a problem with capitalism. Not AI or datacenters. Capitalism isnt working right now. Ask for that to be abolished. Don't point your finger at a genuinely useful and accessible technology.
> just about everything in modern life, from streaming Netflix to running a dishwasher, consumes water at levels that can be portrayed as wasteful by hair-shirt environmentalists.
Ad-hominems in an Economist article. This reads more like an opinion piece than reporting. There are plenty of documented problems with water usage of data centres. Some can use it efficiently but it costs more to do so and many (most?) do not.
We are also in a time when most people would prefer to use that water for drinking, washing, cleaning… basically anything except data centres.
Don’t think many people are going to read this and think, “Gosh, I was a fool!”
> We are also in a time when most people would prefer to use that water for drinking, washing, cleaning… basically anything except data centres.
That is not what is indicated by consumer behavior.
Though it isn't healthiest, people prefer sugar water and so the sugar water companies have been able to afford to acquire water rights and they have driven up the cost of water.
Drilling holes through aquifers and not capping them, over-grazing and over-tilling, and wasteful industry production processes have driven up the cost of water.
Given a low-enough energy cost and basically unlimited salt water from the oceans, we shouldn't be out of water. There should not be coastal water scarcity.
> We are also in a time when most people would prefer to use that water for drinking, washing, cleaning… basically anything except data centres.
And those people are stupid or to be charitable "ignorant."
Full stop.
I'm not trying to be an ass here, I mean it genuinely. Those people are ignorant at best. Email runs on datacenters, Google runs on datacenters, netflix needs them. Delta airlines uses data centers to route flights and host their massive amounts of data (and so do all the other operations out there). The NWS is using super computers (and big data) to predict the weather. The good, the bad, everything runs on giant clusters of data centers, compute, and power. How many datacenters host the most popular steam games and movies? Indeed, the very message of "Data Center BAD!" is hosted on data centers. You think this wild anti-progress ideology could exist in a world without them? Of course not.
Our modern life is enabled by these damn near miraculous technical tools and the people screaming about water or anything else are seldom against the things that they like. Plenty of people shit-talk data centers then go fly to Paris on vacation. Plenty of the same people water their lawns and drive to work when they could walk. In my experience, "DATA BAD" is just code for "AI BAD" - they're really against AI. You talk to these people, and the same thing always comes up, "well, AI is bad for artists" or "AI is going to take over all the jobs" or something along those lines. It's always some scifi fueled Yudkowskian fever dream or fear of losing their jobs or "Elon/Bezos/Gates/Whoever = BAD!" Very little of it is based in any sort of actual evaluation of the world.
And I'm not necessarily arguing with them on these guys being jackasses. But the world is not just a black and white thing typically, and the complaints about all of these changes (and that's what all this is, a fear of the new and complaints about change) are reactionary grasps yearning for a prior era. It's terminally (and ironically) online people complaining that they can no longer find meaning in an increasingly competitive work place. It's fear!
I've now seen this with many people I know. I've seen this in a huge amount of online spaces. I've seen it in the real world. This is "millenials getting conservative but not realizing it." It's people being afraid of change. Watching the biggest pirates I've known suddenly talk about "defending artists" and strengthening copyright is amusing, but it points to a bigger problem. People being unwilling or unable to adjust to change and it is at it's core a conservative mindset despite the liberal (not leftist mind you) costume it wears.
Logic and reason aren't going to convince these folks of anything, they didn't get to their views with logic, they're not going to logic their way out of them. It's modern liberalism's version of climate denial, and it's literally a reactionary way of viewing the world.
To your point, very few of these people are likely to read the economist and think "whoa, I was wrong." You're spot on there - but I also don't think that people know where their water comes from, their food comes from, their power comes from, their Net Flix comes from, their medication comes from, or really anything else. They're thinking "I DON'T LIKE X, X NEEDS Y, THEREFORE Y BAD!" That's it typically.
The radical leftist position should be "seizing the means of computation" and "man the barricades, this is OUR data center now!" Not, "WE NEED BETTER LAWS TO PROTECT PROPERTY RIGHTS IN THE SPACE OF IDEAS TO PROTECT JOBS MAKING LOGOS AND WRITING AD COPY!" This is millenials getting older and confusing reactionary nostalgia for "a better world."
> Watching the biggest pirates I've known suddenly talk about "defending artists" and strengthening copyright is amusing, but it points to a bigger problem.
Millenial here, hello. Yes, we were the biggest pirates, because we had no means to buy the music we liked, period. CDs were kidney-money (if the album we liked available at all), digital distribution was non-existent and cassettes were sounding worse than first generation shellac records in some cases.
I personally bought most of the music I used to pirate. I buy the eBooks I like, and keep a backup copy for myself. Heck I even hounded a CD from a disbanded group for a couple of years and ordered it online because the music was good and they deserved another sale.
Because for us, piracy was about the service at first. We went to concerts, bought merch, etc. to support them.
Also this brings me to the second point: You miss the point entirely about datacenters & AI datacenters. Second, you miss the point between AI, the tech and the building of AI the tech.
First, datacenters is nothing new, and nobody is opposed to "normal" datacenters. The difference between a standard datacenter and AI datacenter is almost night and day (power density, compute load, hardware portfolio, etc.). I always talk about AI datacenters, because I work at a datacenter. I know how these things can be made more environmentally friendly, but no, everybody has to move fast and break things. In this case, we're mostly breaking down our planet, accelerating water stress and global warming related side effects while destroying livelihoods of communities as a whole.
Second is AI as a tech vs. how it's built as a tech. Heck, I'm not even opposed to copyrighted works used as training data, many of us want consent. Control over whether their works are used for training or not. Not compensation, not money, but consent. Not to be seen as slave of these AI providers to feed them.
For artists, compensation is their right. Have you ever composed music, or performed even? Do you know how much effort goes into doing this (hint: We used to rehearse for 10 hours/week for 14 weeks to give a 90 minute concert)? Same for writing. Did you read Hyperion Cantos, Lord of the Rings, Neuromancer, Zones of Thought, etc.? I mean, even the fact checking in Ready Player One could easily take a year. These books created worlds, changed minds and the authors of these books and others deserve some fair compensation for this.
You may find graphic design, art and photography mundane, but when you're not taking selfies and shooting stories or taking videos of a concert which you won't be able to enjoy because of the video-grabbing session for likes, these can be very powerful mediums for storytelling or getting your message across.
Not everyone is against AI as the tech. I am not. I have developed agent-based systems with emergent intelligence before people knew the term autonomous agent.
Yes, we need better laws to protect property rights in the space of ideas, but not to solely protect the jobs, but TO PROTECT THE DIGNITY OF THE HUMANS AND THEIR FREEDOM TO CREATE AND OWN THE THINGS THEY HAVE CREATED.
"You'll own nothing and be happy" is a drug to make masses comply, and unfortunately, you're apparently one of the flag carriers of that crowd.
This post is written with a real brain, approximately 10 fingers, at 1x by a physical human you can talk with.
Compare data centers to golf courses. But many people like golf courses
Compare data centers to refrigerators. But almost everyone likes refrigerators
Compare data centers to dishwashers. But many people like dishwashers
Compare data centers to almond trees. But many people like almonds
It goes on and on
If people really liked "AI" the way they like golf, refrigerators, dishwashers, almonds, etc., then data centers might be an easier sell
I don't think this opposition to data centers is "environmentalism", it has too much broad support. I think this is simply lack of enthusiasm for "AI". Silicon Valley and Redmond can effectively force people to use certain software but cannot make people like it
This third era of "AI" is probably going to end like the last two. Even if every news organisation becomes a cheerleader for "AI", reality will return eventually
Perhaps the story of "AI" data centers will find its way into a future edition of the "Wisdom of the Crowds" book
I agree that the growth of new data centers could be problematic in some areas especially as the infra build-out ramps up. But as many sibbling comments imply, that water can be put to much more economically valuable tasks in data centers than other, drastically more water-hungry uses like golf courses.
Only need JS for the Datadome domains in order to get the Datadome cookie. No JS is required to read economist.com and ad blockers do not need to be disabled
I was actually pretty worried that the anti-datacenter backlash would stunt and important industry (for the US).
But I think the effect will be that the companies building them will "sweeten" the deal for the local towns where they are building -- probably by way of taxes. And while that will be a drag on their development (by adding costs), the scale won't be bad enough to really hurt.
And in that sense, everyone wins. The locales will be happy to have the extra resources. And the ones that don't take the "bribe" -- or whatever you want to call it -- won't get datacenters.
(But I do agree that panic is overblown and counterproductive.)
As someone who’s lived in and near Loudoun county for well over two decades, it’s very difficult to take the anti-data center arguments at all seriously. It’s all coming from people who never heard the phrase “data center” before six months ago.
But TL;DR - sounds like in the northeast / PJM it's load increases, in North Dakota increased load is causing drops in prices, California it's mostly from wildfire mitigation + insurance, natural gas oscillating across the US is causing price changes as well.
I think the hatred towards the data centers stems from the anger and frustration that has been caused by the white collar job replacement done by AI.
We have an entire generation of young people that went to college and got a degree hoping that they would be able to get a good job and live a comfortable life. However, that's not the case anymore and the fact that almost all entry level jobs are replaced by AI has created this sentiment among people that somehow AI is evil.
The problem is not that AI is evil, but most of the people would have to learn new skills and adapt because the profession or job they trained at college doesn't exists anymore.
Data Centers have existed way before mainstream AI. Everyone would binge watch the latest season of popular shows of Netflix and won't even bat an eye thinking how much water that has wasted.
> The problem is not that AI is evil, but most of the people would have to learn new skills and adapt because the profession or job they trained at college doesn't exists anymore.
isn't the problem then capitalism? the promise of AI is to deliver efficiencies, leverage, and consequent surplus. AI does not itself allocate the surplus.
Nope, capitalism is not perfect, but it has lifted billions of people out of poverty and elevated their living standards. The hatred towards capitalism is as irrational as the hatred towards data centers. If you really want to find something to hate and blame all your problems, then blame it on corruption and incompetent politicians.
What you're saying is exactly the question isn't it? I've seen polling on opposition to data centers and "I hate AI" isn't a majority reason. It's more like 15%.
The reasons people give are higher electric bills, water shortages, and environmental damage.
I think that those reasons are spurious but I also think that for some issues facts don't make much difference. People will have opinions about things that are totally at odds with facts.
I think one thing that muddles this in online discussions is that there are many voices saying many things about AI, Data Centers, etc. It's easy believe that everyone involved in obstructing data centers is some sort of NIMBY crank that believes fake news about electricity or water usage. But if you look at reporting from people like Jasmine Sun who visited these towns, the actual activists are a lot more sophisticated than tech forums think.
There's a lot of examples of companies failing to deliver things they promised at this level like the FoxConn complex in Wisconsin. Making city leaders sign NDAs doesn't help this. People are more skeptical of future tax revenue claims and it's hard to sell a direct benefit of the AI itself when you spent two years talking about eliminating all white collar jobs. The trust just isn't there.
Given the classical liberal philosophy of The Economist, this just reads like scolding when their world-view is falling out of favor. Luckily for AI boosters, I think data center builders are adapting to reality.
86 comments
[ 0.24 ms ] story [ 5.1 ms ] threadI suspect the data center thing has become popular because it's been a long time since people have felt like they can effect change in government policy. Details and nuance are irrelevant, there are larger, underlying forces at work
Are they excited? Or do they just not have political control at a local level?
People in China are also generally more excited about progress since it has actively improved their livelihood and wealth over the last few decades rather than slowly eroding it like it has in many Western countries. The government there makes legitimate investments in very visible and beneficial public works projects. Why would you be unenthusiastic about progress when you've been getting subways and high speed rail and cheap luxurious EVs everywhere for the last 20 years?
I find this article incredibly weak, glossing over a number of legitimate concerns brought up by data center opponents. This sentence in particular is pretty egregious:
> In any case, even the noise worry is overstated: many viral videos of supposed AI data centre noise are really Bitcoin mines, not state-of-the-art hyperscaler facilities.
Really? You think people are building Bitcoin mines, in 2026? Please.
Let's also be clear here: AI data centers could be a wonderful thing if we had a government that was legitimately focused on shoring up the national grid, transitioning to renewable energy, and building nuclear power plants. You know who is doing that? China: with more nuclear power plant projects underway than the rest of the world combined.
Instead, the US has an administration that started another middle east war for no reason resulting in higher oil prices, cancels renewable energy projects and permits left and right, and seems hell-bent on moving backwards in every way possible. Electricity prices in many states have gone up by double digit percentages. I don't see that happening in China. I don't blame anyone for being against data centers, even if it is "FUD."
The actual issue, as far as I see it, is the financialization of capitalism. When businesses prioritize creating value to the shareholders over creating value to the society, people naturally care less about their success. The degree of financialization also varies from country to country.
There are a lot of fools out there, and their favorite recreational activity, besides being fooled, is voting.
No datacenters isn't about AI or even resources like water or power, it's mostly about real-estate and housing prices as usual.
I wonder, do you know how much energy or water is required to run a datacenter with direct liquid cooled systems?
Not the SOTA AI data centers which are popping up like mushrooms, a general ballpark is enough.
This is not a loaded question. Given your knowledge, you must be knowing much more than majority of HN.
Back when I was running my own startup I moved to Mascot, Sydney to be near Equinix SY3 that was being built which we had bought a decent chunk of committed capacity in. Mascot was originally an industrial area but was gentrified a lot over the last 20ish years but the datacenters, meat packers etc are all still there. It really adds to the charm of the place in a lot of ways, warehouses/factories that have been converted to cafes and breweries. Which is to say I don't think living near a DC is bad at all, they aren't very loud and they just look like big warehouses with lots of lights, cameras and no windows. Oh and security dudes.
Anyways. Yes. The hardware I am working at $DAY_JOB is all direct liquid cooled. The coolant that actually cools the hardware is closed loop, it's not expended. Which means you don't actually use any of it and it's considered good for the entire life of the hardware.
I normally don't directly talk about $DAY_JOB things because there are pretty strict rules so I can only use publically referenced sources but you can read a little bit about the coolant we use in this article [1].
The facility loop though is usually what people are worried about. A lot of datacentres that were built in low humidity environments use evaporative cooling which does indeed use a ton of water. However most data centers in more humid environments don't and either use loops that recycle the water but dump the heat (i.e rivers/lakes) or use closed loop systems with radiators etc. It's worth mentioning though that evaporative cooling is extremely power efficient vs most closed loop solutions so there is a tradeoff here. I don't think Google could achieve their fleetwide PUE (Power Usage Efficiency, basically measurement of how much power goes to things in a DC that isn't a computer) numbers without relying on it heavily.
Given the difficulties getting DCs approved in much of the world right now and the backlog on generation capacity (i.e power) almost all modern DCs are being built to use as little water as possible.
To give you an idea I think evaporative cooling of the type you would find in a state of the art Google DC with a PUE of ~1.1ish might use 1-1.1L of water for every kWh of actual equipment load (this is a back of the napkin estimate, don't hold me to it).
Conversely true closed loop will use approximately zero.
So yeah, evaporative is a big waster of water especially at GW scale.
1: https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/data-centers/nvid...
I like Copenhill (https://www.visitcopenhagen.com/copenhagen/planning/copenhil...), where they decided that waste handling is not nice so why not make it nice by building a ski slope on it. I suspect that a bit more creativity could make people want data centres (free heating and hot water anybody? Hot spring baths? Free hosting for local schools and charities?)
It’s only NIMBYs and YIYBYs
Also see the Green parties / Greenpeace and the decline of nuclear power stations. We could have had clean, cheap energy across Europe and America, but the fear of nuclear is fully embedded in the public psyche.
“A backlash fuelled by misinformation and misunderstanding” is also just an academic jargon term for “my vision is superior, anyone who disagrees is out of stupidity, if they understood me they would agree.”
The irony of this that it portrays everything referred to as a moral panic as something worthy of legitimate worry and/or outrage that was brushed aside by more influential socioeconomic groups.
Which now makes me wonder how many of the examples listed here qualify.
If I'm understanding you correct.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_panic#Historic_examples
just an anecdote but what exactly do local residents gain here? a handful of permanent maintenance jobs?
The water is mostly part of a closed system. Sure, you need a lot to build one, but once it's running it's pretty water efficient. The power is a problem, but as the article points out, you now have a large customer subsidizing the base cost of delivery, since they are only one delivery point. And they are financing new sources of power.
The noise is an issue, I will admit that. As is the fact that a lot of the power is coming from non-green sources. But the government could easily fix these problems with regulations that apply broadly, not just to datacenters.
But that's more expensive to operate.
So most of them don't do it.
Show me actual statistics that a supermajority of new and proposed datacenters either are currently using (for new), or plan to use, with clear financial projections for how (for proposed), closed-loop cooling systems, and I'll consider conceding this point. Until and unless someone can do that, you can point to the option of such systems until you're blue in the face, but it's meaningless.
Even if you can get legislators to pass regulation, enforcing it is a constant battle, and odds are they'll just pay a fine and keep on violating the regulations.
It's a much easier fight to keep a DC out of your community to begin with.
Isn't that just the definition of left or right leaning? People who don't listen.
"The moral panic over data centres is foolish, filthy peasants!"
People fucking hate you and don’t trust you and are convinced, not without reason, that you have the specific goal and intention of destroying their way of life and ability to provide for their families. They also feel like they were never consulted in any of this and that nobody is representing their interests.
You can agree or disagree with that point of view, but unless you thrive on ignorance you might as well get your head around the fact that it’s likely a majority view in this country by now.
Consider for a moment trying to figure out why that is the case rather than pretending it’s not true or that it’s a mass delusion.
You seem to have a problem with capitalism. Not AI or datacenters. Capitalism isnt working right now. Ask for that to be abolished. Don't point your finger at a genuinely useful and accessible technology.
Ad-hominems in an Economist article. This reads more like an opinion piece than reporting. There are plenty of documented problems with water usage of data centres. Some can use it efficiently but it costs more to do so and many (most?) do not.
We are also in a time when most people would prefer to use that water for drinking, washing, cleaning… basically anything except data centres.
Don’t think many people are going to read this and think, “Gosh, I was a fool!”
As expected - that source rarely publishes anything else. Here's another pearl [1], where they're rejoicing over the kettle's burned color.
In both cases The Economist is totally blind about the economic foundations of the problems and there's no hint of a solution.
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49580174 America has a whopping debt. But Europe has the whopping debt problem
That is not what is indicated by consumer behavior.
Though it isn't healthiest, people prefer sugar water and so the sugar water companies have been able to afford to acquire water rights and they have driven up the cost of water.
Drilling holes through aquifers and not capping them, over-grazing and over-tilling, and wasteful industry production processes have driven up the cost of water.
Given a low-enough energy cost and basically unlimited salt water from the oceans, we shouldn't be out of water. There should not be coastal water scarcity.
Golf course, chip factory, almonds, fracking, lawns, swimming pools, or purple pipe golf course water?
And those people are stupid or to be charitable "ignorant."
Full stop.
I'm not trying to be an ass here, I mean it genuinely. Those people are ignorant at best. Email runs on datacenters, Google runs on datacenters, netflix needs them. Delta airlines uses data centers to route flights and host their massive amounts of data (and so do all the other operations out there). The NWS is using super computers (and big data) to predict the weather. The good, the bad, everything runs on giant clusters of data centers, compute, and power. How many datacenters host the most popular steam games and movies? Indeed, the very message of "Data Center BAD!" is hosted on data centers. You think this wild anti-progress ideology could exist in a world without them? Of course not.
Our modern life is enabled by these damn near miraculous technical tools and the people screaming about water or anything else are seldom against the things that they like. Plenty of people shit-talk data centers then go fly to Paris on vacation. Plenty of the same people water their lawns and drive to work when they could walk. In my experience, "DATA BAD" is just code for "AI BAD" - they're really against AI. You talk to these people, and the same thing always comes up, "well, AI is bad for artists" or "AI is going to take over all the jobs" or something along those lines. It's always some scifi fueled Yudkowskian fever dream or fear of losing their jobs or "Elon/Bezos/Gates/Whoever = BAD!" Very little of it is based in any sort of actual evaluation of the world.
And I'm not necessarily arguing with them on these guys being jackasses. But the world is not just a black and white thing typically, and the complaints about all of these changes (and that's what all this is, a fear of the new and complaints about change) are reactionary grasps yearning for a prior era. It's terminally (and ironically) online people complaining that they can no longer find meaning in an increasingly competitive work place. It's fear!
I've now seen this with many people I know. I've seen this in a huge amount of online spaces. I've seen it in the real world. This is "millenials getting conservative but not realizing it." It's people being afraid of change. Watching the biggest pirates I've known suddenly talk about "defending artists" and strengthening copyright is amusing, but it points to a bigger problem. People being unwilling or unable to adjust to change and it is at it's core a conservative mindset despite the liberal (not leftist mind you) costume it wears.
Logic and reason aren't going to convince these folks of anything, they didn't get to their views with logic, they're not going to logic their way out of them. It's modern liberalism's version of climate denial, and it's literally a reactionary way of viewing the world.
To your point, very few of these people are likely to read the economist and think "whoa, I was wrong." You're spot on there - but I also don't think that people know where their water comes from, their food comes from, their power comes from, their Net Flix comes from, their medication comes from, or really anything else. They're thinking "I DON'T LIKE X, X NEEDS Y, THEREFORE Y BAD!" That's it typically.
The radical leftist position should be "seizing the means of computation" and "man the barricades, this is OUR data center now!" Not, "WE NEED BETTER LAWS TO PROTECT PROPERTY RIGHTS IN THE SPACE OF IDEAS TO PROTECT JOBS MAKING LOGOS AND WRITING AD COPY!" This is millenials getting older and confusing reactionary nostalgia for "a better world."
Millenial here, hello. Yes, we were the biggest pirates, because we had no means to buy the music we liked, period. CDs were kidney-money (if the album we liked available at all), digital distribution was non-existent and cassettes were sounding worse than first generation shellac records in some cases.
I personally bought most of the music I used to pirate. I buy the eBooks I like, and keep a backup copy for myself. Heck I even hounded a CD from a disbanded group for a couple of years and ordered it online because the music was good and they deserved another sale.
Because for us, piracy was about the service at first. We went to concerts, bought merch, etc. to support them.
Also this brings me to the second point: You miss the point entirely about datacenters & AI datacenters. Second, you miss the point between AI, the tech and the building of AI the tech.
First, datacenters is nothing new, and nobody is opposed to "normal" datacenters. The difference between a standard datacenter and AI datacenter is almost night and day (power density, compute load, hardware portfolio, etc.). I always talk about AI datacenters, because I work at a datacenter. I know how these things can be made more environmentally friendly, but no, everybody has to move fast and break things. In this case, we're mostly breaking down our planet, accelerating water stress and global warming related side effects while destroying livelihoods of communities as a whole.
Second is AI as a tech vs. how it's built as a tech. Heck, I'm not even opposed to copyrighted works used as training data, many of us want consent. Control over whether their works are used for training or not. Not compensation, not money, but consent. Not to be seen as slave of these AI providers to feed them.
For artists, compensation is their right. Have you ever composed music, or performed even? Do you know how much effort goes into doing this (hint: We used to rehearse for 10 hours/week for 14 weeks to give a 90 minute concert)? Same for writing. Did you read Hyperion Cantos, Lord of the Rings, Neuromancer, Zones of Thought, etc.? I mean, even the fact checking in Ready Player One could easily take a year. These books created worlds, changed minds and the authors of these books and others deserve some fair compensation for this.
You may find graphic design, art and photography mundane, but when you're not taking selfies and shooting stories or taking videos of a concert which you won't be able to enjoy because of the video-grabbing session for likes, these can be very powerful mediums for storytelling or getting your message across.
Not everyone is against AI as the tech. I am not. I have developed agent-based systems with emergent intelligence before people knew the term autonomous agent.
Yes, we need better laws to protect property rights in the space of ideas, but not to solely protect the jobs, but TO PROTECT THE DIGNITY OF THE HUMANS AND THEIR FREEDOM TO CREATE AND OWN THE THINGS THEY HAVE CREATED.
"You'll own nothing and be happy" is a drug to make masses comply, and unfortunately, you're apparently one of the flag carriers of that crowd.
This post is written with a real brain, approximately 10 fingers, at 1x by a physical human you can talk with.
Compare data centers to refrigerators. But almost everyone likes refrigerators
Compare data centers to dishwashers. But many people like dishwashers
Compare data centers to almond trees. But many people like almonds
It goes on and on
If people really liked "AI" the way they like golf, refrigerators, dishwashers, almonds, etc., then data centers might be an easier sell
I don't think this opposition to data centers is "environmentalism", it has too much broad support. I think this is simply lack of enthusiasm for "AI". Silicon Valley and Redmond can effectively force people to use certain software but cannot make people like it
This third era of "AI" is probably going to end like the last two. Even if every news organisation becomes a cheerleader for "AI", reality will return eventually
Perhaps the story of "AI" data centers will find its way into a future edition of the "Wisdom of the Crowds" book
Generations of them already know how
I would not be so sure, this article seems pretty comprehensive in questioning these supposed problems: https://andymasley.com/writing/the-ai-water-issue-is-fake/
I agree that the growth of new data centers could be problematic in some areas especially as the infra build-out ramps up. But as many sibbling comments imply, that water can be put to much more economically valuable tasks in data centers than other, drastically more water-hungry uses like golf courses.
The title already gives it away, calling it a “moral panic”. Casting your opponents as some sort of brain-damaged cranks is such a tired trope.
lol
Only need JS for the Datadome domains in order to get the Datadome cookie. No JS is required to read economist.com and ad blockers do not need to be disabled
JS is optional for reading economist.com
First of all, there are reasons apart from pollution, rising electricity prices and global warming:
These things make noise. Noise bad. Noise very bad for health. Maybe if post from Economist or Spectator villa no know noise!
Thanks for your attention to this matter and please continue to eat cake.
That's worked great for the datacenter misinformation so far.
There's not even an author on this article.
But you can listen to an ai narrated version of it.
The Economist has anonymous writers for almost every article.
But I think the effect will be that the companies building them will "sweeten" the deal for the local towns where they are building -- probably by way of taxes. And while that will be a drag on their development (by adding costs), the scale won't be bad enough to really hurt.
And in that sense, everyone wins. The locales will be happy to have the extra resources. And the ones that don't take the "bribe" -- or whatever you want to call it -- won't get datacenters.
(But I do agree that panic is overblown and counterproductive.)
US electricity is 40% more expensive since 2022 https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/APU000072610
Some AI datacenters can indeed be heard a mile away https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/aug/28/datacenters-...
Amazon's new Texas AI data center could become the biggest CO2 polluter in the US https://www.techradar.com/pro/amazons-new-texas-ai-data-cent...
Relative to data center growth, the correlation doesn't match - https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/monthly-spending-data-cen...
More analysis here - https://www.wri.org/insights/whats-driving-us-electricity-pr...
But TL;DR - sounds like in the northeast / PJM it's load increases, in North Dakota increased load is causing drops in prices, California it's mostly from wildfire mitigation + insurance, natural gas oscillating across the US is causing price changes as well.
We have an entire generation of young people that went to college and got a degree hoping that they would be able to get a good job and live a comfortable life. However, that's not the case anymore and the fact that almost all entry level jobs are replaced by AI has created this sentiment among people that somehow AI is evil.
The problem is not that AI is evil, but most of the people would have to learn new skills and adapt because the profession or job they trained at college doesn't exists anymore.
Data Centers have existed way before mainstream AI. Everyone would binge watch the latest season of popular shows of Netflix and won't even bat an eye thinking how much water that has wasted.
isn't the problem then capitalism? the promise of AI is to deliver efficiencies, leverage, and consequent surplus. AI does not itself allocate the surplus.
Nope, capitalism is not perfect, but it has lifted billions of people out of poverty and elevated their living standards. The hatred towards capitalism is as irrational as the hatred towards data centers. If you really want to find something to hate and blame all your problems, then blame it on corruption and incompetent politicians.
The reasons people give are higher electric bills, water shortages, and environmental damage.
I think that those reasons are spurious but I also think that for some issues facts don't make much difference. People will have opinions about things that are totally at odds with facts.
There's a lot of examples of companies failing to deliver things they promised at this level like the FoxConn complex in Wisconsin. Making city leaders sign NDAs doesn't help this. People are more skeptical of future tax revenue claims and it's hard to sell a direct benefit of the AI itself when you spent two years talking about eliminating all white collar jobs. The trust just isn't there.
Given the classical liberal philosophy of The Economist, this just reads like scolding when their world-view is falling out of favor. Luckily for AI boosters, I think data center builders are adapting to reality.