[xorvoid]

I live in a town in the Midwest that just voted down a data center project.

Personally I think it's mostly a proxy vote against bigtech/social-media. People are pretty fed up with their practices but don't have power to act at a national level. But, they DO have power at the local level to show up to town council and talk directly (in-person) to their representatives.

I think the other side of this is that there's this old idea (mostly correct) that municipalities partnering with businesses is good for the community because it brings positive side-effects: jobs, more cashflow in the local economy, etc. This is much less true for data centers. It's just a building that uses power and produces heat/by-products. Generally, employment gains are tiny compared with the old "automaker" labor model of the 1960s-1980s

People recognize this and they're not happy. They don't think it's a good deal for their communities.

[Tanoc]

One argument I've heard that people try to use as proponents of these datacenters is that they bring in employment in construction and electrical engineering even if it's temporary. Their argument falls apart very quickly when it's pointed out that because of the specialization many owners of these locations hire specific firms and contractors willing to travel across the nation for the work instead of hiring a local construction company or an on-site engineer. Some locations are managed entirely remotely where one engineer handles multiple sites, and the only people actually there are security, maintenance, and cleaning staff who might also be traveling contractors that move between locations in a circuit. That's like six people for something with a footprint the size of fifty family homes.

[xg15]

Even if it were true, I don't understand how this argument makes sense: So assume the construction were entirely done by local businesses/hires. That gets a short-term employment boost while the facility is being built. And then what? The construction is finished, the employment dries up again, but the data center is still there, with all the downsides.

Also, you could get the exact same short-term boost by building something else, e.g. housing.

Offsetting long-term costs with short-term benefits doesn't seem like a good strategy.

[tylerchilds]

This is a good take.

Put a different way, some companies have made a lot of money with business models that hinge on victims never being able to reach a human.

Those same companies want to set up phone centers in the neighborhoods of the people they’ve neglected that also will not take their calls.

Town hall it is.

[patmorgan23]

If your local governments are funded by property taxes, Data centers can bring in new revenue while requiring few services. Which could be used to shore up stressed public budgets or fund other economic development activities to bring in jobs.

These projects can be developed and located responsibly, and every project is different. I don't think a blanket ban is good policy.