14 comments

  • GolfPopper 38 minutes ago
    This is bad news for everyone (well, except the high priests of the LLMs / nascent Cthulhoid godlings), but it certainly makes the communities who've successfully opposed data centers seem ever more justified in retrospect.
  • JohnFen 43 minutes ago
    That's in line with the EPA's new mission of ensuring environmental degradation.
  • millerm 15 minutes ago
    Executive Protection Agency
  • 59percentmore 16 minutes ago
    Antis are running out of time to stop what they wish to stop without resorting to destructive methods (bold and extreme action is already necessary).

    Pros are running out of time to square their ambitions with a public that's about to go from needing a leg up to a public that wants their heads.

  • awakeasleep 21 minutes ago
    I wonder if you could open any type of business as a datacenter now, to avoid the review.
  • childofhedgehog 29 minutes ago
    Probably an oversimplified question but how do we actually stop this?
    • JohnFen 23 minutes ago
      A good start is to vote in the midterms to reduce the amount of power that these antihuman criminals have. The US is currently in the midst of a serious political disaster and there will be no quick fix to any of this. But if we take every opportunity possible whenever we can to rid ourselves of these people and to stand in their way as much as possible, we can work our way back from the brink.
      • pc86 2 minutes ago
        I don't know about you but I've been hearing for two decades now that we "in the midst" of a political disaster. Every election is the most important election we've ever had! Just one more election going a certain way and surely things will start to get better! And then someone gets elected and they start "doing the work" or whatever but as soon as the wrong person gets elected we're right back "in the midst" of it again.

        It's all just so tiresome, but perhaps more importantly - it's not true. We are no more "on the brink" now than we were in 2020, or 2016, or 2008, or 2000, or 1996, or 1992. Or any of the elections in between those.

        Your hyperbolic "antihuman criminals" nonsense certainly isn't helping your point, either.

    • Y-bar 21 minutes ago
      Unfortunately the answer is ”it requires effort”, or in other words: Vote (and hold them accountable after the ballots have been counted), Shout (literally), Protest (including civil disobedience), join any civil or environmental movement, help file legal challenges.

      Democracy is for good and for worse not a one-and-done thing, it is a continuous fight.

    • idontwantthis 18 minutes ago
      Elections have consequences. Vote democrat in November and again in 2028. When someone tells you both sides are the same tell them no, it's only Republicans that are allowing Datacenters to sidestep the law in order to poison us more efficiently.
      • cogman10 9 minutes ago
        Vote strategically.

        Democrats aren't by default better on this issue vs republicans so you need to be more involved than just voting in the general.

        If you are in a D leaning district, then register as a D and vote in the D primary. Make sure the candidate you vote for is the most likely to win who isn't captured by big business.

        A good example of a datacenter friendly dem that just won by the skin of their teeth is Crowley for governor in Wisconson.

        • idontwantthis 6 minutes ago
          > Democrats aren't by default better on this issue vs republicans so you need to be more involved than just voting in the general.

          The only thing that matters is Democrats gaining control of Congress and state governments. The choice that isn't a democrat is the wrong one. The time to vote out an incumbent was the primary.

    • crawfordcomeaux 17 minutes ago
      Thousands of people marching on data centers and taking them over at the same time.

      Elections will never save you when the parties in power serve the billionaires.

  • l1n 31 minutes ago
  • drop_star 22 minutes ago
    which reality show host is running the EPA now?
  • ck2 12 minutes ago
    "for the next 800 days"

    but of course a lot of permanent damage can be set in motion in that time

    • aqme28 10 minutes ago
      So-- basically until the next administration. Interesting timing.
  • paimapi 44 minutes ago
    I love this line:

    >Last year, Lee Zeldin, who runs the EPA, said it was now the agency’s top priority to “make the United States the artificial intelligence capital of the world.” The 56-year-old agency was established in 1970 to protect the environment and public health.

    lol, reminds me of those videos where a host will say one thing and then the cameraman pans to reveal the lie

    • andai 29 minutes ago
      That's a very strange goal for the EPA to have. I mean, it's a worthy goal, but it sounds very much like not their department?
  • dyauspitr 36 minutes ago
    Goddamnit this is the worst possible administration to have while we’re having this massive buildup of data centers. Any reasonable government would have done what Massachusetts did and stipulated that you can build a data center, but it needs to be powered by renewable energy so build out your own energy sources, which would have been a win-win for everyone but instead we get this. Also, if the Democrats were in power, I hope they wouldn’t succumb to a minority in their base and just ban data centers and completely take us out of the race.
  • Analemma_ 20 minutes ago
    Funnily enough this probably the most safetyist thing the administration could do at the moment, since this will certainly autocatalyze more opposition to DC construction in a bunch of states and probably accelerate the state-level moratoriums. A big thank you to the White House for taking AI pause as such an urgent priority.
  • jeffbee 29 minutes ago
    I'm pro-information and believe generally that anti-data-center activists are chasing a Glonzo on par with anti-5G electrosensitives. That said given the tide of opinion I'm overjoyed that Trump and his allies want to step into the fusilade to defend the unpopular.
    • cogman10 1 minute ago
      That data centers need a lot of power and some cases a lot of water isn't some sort of conspiracy theory. When you have data centers like the box elder county DC that is planed to consume more power than the entire state of Utah and it wants to do that by burning natural gas, that's not some sort of conspiracy theory that it would be tremendously bad for the environment and the regional gas and electric bills (particularly since a decent amount of power already is generated via natural gas there).

      I'm not wholesale against data centers, but there are more than a few projects that are downright irresponsible.

  • WarmWash 40 minutes ago
    [flagged]
    • standeven 32 minutes ago
      The pollution is the immense amount of exhaust from the power generation equipment being installed on site at data centres.

      The article is from Capital B, which focuses on news affecting the Black community.

    • Geof25 32 minutes ago
      Pollution happens when you don't have enough power in the grid so you will bring either diesel generators or methane turbines to make power.

      Also noise is pollution too.

      • SoftTalker 23 minutes ago
        With diesel over $6/gallon now that's probably not too attractive. Natural gas probably more likely, and less polluting at least as far as particulates go. CO2 still created.

        Are all new data centers being built with on-site power generation (for regular operations, not just emergency backup)? I'd assume they'd prefer utility power where they could get it.

      • burnt-resistor 10 minutes ago
        Diesel generators are mostly for emergencies. Natural gas turbines (many of which are or are derived from jumbo jet engines) are for on-prem power generation.
    • MengerSponge 38 minutes ago
      • WarmWash 34 minutes ago
        Yeah, but just being a human is enough to qualify for not living in a smog cloud.

        Also the article is trying to connect gas turbines from 2 years ago with cancer rates..

    • georgemcbay 32 minutes ago
      > Second, why is the article trying so hard to make datacenters out as racist?

      AI Datacenters are classist.

      Because of their negative externalities they will always be constructed near the poor who have the least political power.

      Humans are racist.

      So there is a strong systemic correlation between that group of disenfranchised people and people of color.

      The most directly harmful impacts of datacenters are racist, transitively.

      • precision1k 27 minutes ago
        I live in Loudoun County, the wealthiest county in the United States. The amount of lamborghinis and Ferraris on the road around here is obscene. You know what else we have a lot of? Data centers. Loudoun County is also the data center capital of the US. Your idea that datacenters are racists transitively is woke slop.
        • datsci_est_2015 23 minutes ago
          > Your idea that datacenters are racists transitively is woke slop.

          Your knee jerk reaction to refer to something as “woke slop” belies your privileged distance from anything remotely resembling hardship (I LiVe iN LoUdOuN) and an underdeveloped sense of empathy.

          Anyway, we should be extremely skeptical of how infrastructure is built out in the US because of historical baggage. Poverty and industrial development create a vicious cycle that leads people to walk around with their thumb in their ass and claim that the poors just aren’t pulling themselves up by their bootstraps hard enough.

        • georgemcbay 24 minutes ago
          The pre-AI datacenters where you live are very different than the Colossus-style methane turbine and inadequately soundproofed AI datacenters that are being built today.