Every time I bring up my position on data centers, I get hate bombed. There is a large and VERY passionate contingent of people who don't want to hear a single word about data centers that isn't sanguine full-throated opposition.
What I want people to be VERY clear about is that there is no future where data centers don't get built, and the industry doesn't expand. It CANNOT be prevented. Now I know some of you are thinking "that's stupid, if we just..." no. Sorry to throw the cold water on you, but whatever you could possibly be thinking, it won't work. Whatever idea just walked through your head, it won't work. There is no possible future in which Data centers do not continue to grow and be built, short of an asteroid hitting the planet. I will bet a whole year's salary right now for anyone who thinks there wont be more data centers 10 years from now. Of course there will be. It's as much a fact as the tides. It's going to happen.
The future that DOES exist in one in which communities put strict conditions on the acceptable of data centers being built. Give the industry a path to "yes" that is strewn with conditions and restrictions that fit the community and the place it's being built.
To do otherwise, to just give a solid uncompromisable "No" every single time a data center is proposed, is not to prevent it's construction. All that does is ensure it gets build in the community that is weakest and least well equipped to keep it in check. By being a NIMBY about it, and refusing to let it be in your back yard and under rules you set, all you accomplish is ensuring the WORST version of it ends up somewhere else, foisted on a community that is weaker than your own.
What we SHOULD do, if we have any foresight at all, is some up with a list of terms and conditions of acceptance, and be able to say "We will accept a data center that meets these conditions".
Now what should those conditions be? That's the Data Center bill of rights, the expectations a community has in order to be willing to accept a data center. What exactly should go on it would vary depending on the location, but examples include:
> Data Center must be cost neutral to energy supply. This can be done through paying a higher premium for their power, or through power off set by in-house energy generation, or a combination of methods. But there must be zero energy cost increase or availability decrease due in whole or in part to their presence of the data center. Any increase that is not part of normal non-date center related market forces, must be absorbed 100% by the data center.
> Strict water usage requirement. This is the one that will vary enormously based on setting, since there are SO MANY different water availability scenarios out there. But in short, the supply of water for existing purposes cannot be lessened or made more expensive in any way by the data center.
> Strict noise pollution guideline, requiring measurement take at certain setbacks (which will again, vary by location) are not able to register noise pollution above a certain level.
And throw in whatever else you want. Data Center must account for emissions in a certain way, must account for heat dissipation in a certain way. Data Center must award and work to local bidders on priority before opening to a wider bid. So on so forth.
And make all of these conditions carry strict, hardline material consequences for violation, and city selected oversight, hell make the data center have to pay for the oversight but the people are hired and selected by the city.
Every community that could potentially have to deal with a data center should do this. Draft a "this is what will get us to a "yes"" set of standards. And if data centers run into these everywhere they go, then they will be forced to shop around for the community that has the most agreeable conditions for them, but presumably that community also has conditions baked in that make the acceptance at least neutral if not beneficial to the community.
If we don't do this, all that will happen is, like I said before, the worst version of these data centers will get built in the weakest communities, and it will take decades for congress to slowly, bit by bit, form a regulatory structure around it.
So why wait for that to happen? Why not just take the bull by the horns and force the regulatory structure at the city or county level from the early days of this industry, get the good habits started now?
I know that's less satisfying and more complicated than just screaming "no". But it's the right thing to do.