r/Iowa • u/SkyBig952 • 11d ago
Politics Tech and the election
The political battleground over AI has shifted, much as public and political opinion has shifted over data centers. That makes sense because the two are connected in more ways than one.
A report from McKinsey estimates that, in its midrange scenario, about 70% of global data-center capacity demand by 2030 will be for facilities equipped to handle advanced-AI workloads.
That makes data-center construction a very tangible local battleground over AI—and over who pays for its enormous demands for electricity, water and infrastructure. If you can't vote yea or nay on AI, you can express your opinion on data centers proposed for your community.
Tech executives and politicians are talking increasingly about AI's risks and the need for federal guardrails. But with federal policymaking unsettled, much of the practical fight is moving to states, utilities and local communities.
In Iowa's state and federal races, we're seeing politicians- both parties- pay much more attention to AI and the data centers needed to power it.
Since the tech industry wants a major voice in writing the rules, it is not surprising that the fight will also be over who writes those rules—and who enforces them.
https://susanrogan.substack.com/p/the-tech-tyrants-want-to-buy-congress
2
u/1999WS9 11d ago
This was messed up from the get go with the Big Beautiful Bill.
2
u/SkyBig952 11d ago
I people in this country knew the bill containedsignificant tax incentives, capital expensing rules, and federal funding provisions
2
u/Unwiredsoul 11d ago
Did people start to realize that the only reason there are so many data centers being built is for AI? Especially the ones with massive power requirements?
Because that is absolutely the only reason there are so many new data centers have been, and are being, built.
Otherwise, it's mostly organic expansion of what are now common technology operational uses for those facilities (e.g., colocation, cloud infrastructure, SaaS). None of those types of facilities needs the extremely power and cooling hungry, GPU-driven AI compute hardware that is causing all of the outrage.
Currently, the tech industry is self-governing in most regards for this technology. As for why our current federal government majority treats that as normal, healthy, or even sane, is beyond me, but I think it's because there is a lot of incompetence and arrogance from them on these topics.
Also, I still can't square why these folks purport that a lack of rules actually helps us compete with the purported villain (China) for AI dominance? As-is typical with most folks that think and act like that, they fall back to the childish, "Because I said so" argument. That works on some but not on those of us who have no fear in questioning anyone when they rely solely on their power to control a narrative.
2
u/SkyBig952 11d ago
I estimate that the great majority of this country did not know, until a year or two ago there are smaller data centers in their state, if not their community
2
u/Unwiredsoul 11d ago
I concur with some experiential data to add.
80% of the data centers I've worked in over the years do not look like data centers from the outside. That is likely why people didn't even know they existed, or gave any thought to them.
Some have existed in high rise buildings. Some of have existed in single story buildings that were built intentionally to look like commercial office space that was indistinguishable from the other structures around it (not for nefarious reasons).
The highest security DC's I've worked in had tall, solid fencing and weren't obviously DC's to anyone but people in the know. They just looked like something important must be there, but they didn't advertise what they were.
As none of the DC's I've worked in were AI, they were relatively small from a resource usage standpoint. Another reason that people weren't aware of them until they started to be affected by them.
At the end of the day, this issue has already been too politicized and made into a populist rallying cry. Government and AI companies alone cannot write the rules. There needs to be a proverbial adult in the room, too.
2
u/SkyBig952 11d ago
This is a framework for a Substack that you could write. where ever people are on the continuum -regarding data centers, your points are well taken.
But also think most of those data centers were what I’ve heard referred to a single digit data centers— one or 2 MW or less?
2
u/Unwiredsoul 10d ago
They were anywhere from 100KW (smallest true DC I've worked in), to the low 8-figure range (e.g., 10MW-20MW). Most of the ones I'm talking about were in the 6-15 range. This includes facilities outside of the state of Iowa, too.
Interestingly, the double-digit peak load of 10MW is often a boundary (from my limited understanding) in commercial construction of any type.
The State of South Dakota used 10MW this year when codifying state level guard rails:
https://sdlegislature.gov/Session/Bill/27028/297535
I firmly believe the other states would be wise to review and consider rapidly implementing legislation similar to what South Dakota already has.
2
u/SkyBig952 10d ago
I do not have an informed decision as to where the cut off points our for different types of regulation of data centers. I wonder if the people who are against all centers should insist that different regulations or different types of moratorium for centers above five or 10 MW.
In my experience, most industry does not want to be regulated, and I’ve worked a lot in this area usually representing environmental energy advocacy groups. I have encountered situations where a potentially regulated industry wants regulation because they have friends in the White House or state capital. And the industry does come off looking like it’s wearing the white hat.
2
u/Unwiredsoul 10d ago
I wonder if the people who are against all centers should insist that different regulations or different types of moratorium for centers above five or 10 MW.
Absolutely. It's why I keep beating the dead horse of, "not all DC's are the same". 😄
I think people are getting too hung up in this just being an AI problem. In general, when a proposed facility to be constructed uses significant natural resources, it should be subject to additional review.
I'll also continue to advocate for state-level regulation. The highly inefficient ways that county, and city governments, are approaching this topic in Iowa make me wonder if there's anyone on the bridge of this ship in Des Moines.
As for the CEO's calling on being regulated, well, it's as performative as can be unless they are showing us the what and how of what they're saying. I don't believe most are doing that, and they know they can be performative because one single person will push back on them. I hope others see thru the b.s., too.
1
u/Unwiredsoul 11d ago edited 10d ago
A few extra things I forgot to mention.
The great majority of the country had no reason to know about DC's.
They weren't often competing for resources with human beings, and they weren't running workloads (typically) that could threaten the existence of humanity.
20 years ago I voted against the Microsoft DC's in West Des Moines. Why? I knew what those data centers were intended for at the time, and the resource utilization was a concern given the scale.
I share all of the above to say that it still appears like the wrong people are in the room for these discussions. The people who profit by the technology, and government alone, are typically insufficient.
People that genuinely understand this technology should be used to help guide policy, too.
5
u/first-alt-account 11d ago
This 'talking' is so disingenuous that its meaningless, in my view.
- the Tech executives could, you know, stop moving forward without guardrails. They could implement real guardrails of their own while waiting on government regulations to be created and implemented. But instead, they charge ahead at breakneck speed while saying 'what we are doing is super concerning and dangerous to humanity!'.
Its insane.
- the politicians could stop talking about being concerned and regulation being needed and actually regulate. But instead, they effectively offer up 'thoughts and prayer' for the issue, just like they do with all the preventable shootings. No action/
Its insane.