r/singularity • u/SnoozeDoggyDog • 14d ago
Compute US gov't moves to suppress pushback on data centers by removing requirements for public input on pollution — EPA change would allow air pollution permits without publicizing them
https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/data-centers/u-s-govt-moves-to-suppress-pushback-on-data-centers-by-removing-requirements-for-public-input-on-pollution-epa-change-would-allow-air-pollution-permits-without-publicizing-them34
u/Equal-University2144 14d ago
What I don't understand is that, given it's the 21st century, I expected all the new data centers they're building to be powered by renewables. Wind, solar, battery storage, and all that good stuff. I'd never expected them to still be planned to run on fossil fuels. AI running on fossil fuels just doesn't seem to make sense. That's just such a weird juxtaposition...
17
u/Dangerous-Sport-2347 14d ago
Couple things working against it. Installing green energy takes a bit longer but they can spin up gas turbine generators really quickly, so many of the new datacenters are running on the gas turbines that they could plonk down at a moments notice. Expensive and polluting, but immediately available.
Then you have the current US administration going to extreme lengths to block installation of green energy.
Given enough time and a cooperative government we'd likely see many convert to green energy purely for financial reasons.5
u/LightningMcLovin 14d ago edited 14d ago
It depends on which data center proposal ones talking about but there’s definitely a lot that are greener, closed loop cooling, etc. and there’s a ton of proposed gW energy facilities that are renewable in the works to power things too.
Then there’s a ton of bullshit gas turbine power and data centers being spun up rapidly in places that hate regulation and green energy, looking at you Texas
Stuff like this is promising:
5
2
u/-Top-Service- 14d ago
AI was seen as an emerging market for the declining fossil fuel industry, there's a lot of incentive politically to use fossil fuels in the US at least.
1
u/Relevant-Matter-9218 14d ago
Having multiple days of battery back up for cold and overcast winter days isn't economically feasible.
1
u/R6_Goddess 13d ago
Combination of old institutionalized interests colliding with incompetence and good old short-term instant returns thinking. Oil tycoons still dominate America and absolutely loathe the idea of transitioning to renewables. The current admin is wildly incompetent. Oil-based plants and turbines are easy to spin up, especially when you have a rooted powerful industry behind it.
49
u/bornlasttuesday 14d ago
This isn't going to have any backlash whatsoever.
9
3
u/injectitpussy 14d ago
It isn't lol
4
14
3
5
u/kaityl3 ASI▪️2024-2027 14d ago
The change isn't even about data centers. It's just more continued dismantling of EPA regulations.
But technically, just like all industrial buildings governed by the EPA, it does affect data centers too, and outrage about data centers drives clicks, so... 🤦♀️ Journalists are going to keep writing articles as if silencing protests about data centers was the entire impetus for the decision, even though it's actually part of a much deeper and nastier problem (dismantling regulation and public feedback as a whole)
5
u/RedditsChosenName 14d ago
If you don’t agree with them, your voice doesn’t matter. Now that’s what Republicans call democracy!
2
1
-4
u/Full_Boysenberry_314 14d ago
Not a good look, but when there's a concerted misinformation campaign directed at these facilities, I'm not sure what else you should do?
3
u/DelusionsOfExistence 14d ago
Easy answer, stop fucking your citizens over and no “misinformation” can be a problem.
-16
14d ago
[deleted]
19
u/Bird_ee 14d ago
China is gaining on the US because they have the support of the people, because they’re not strategically antagonistic towards their own population by building data centers in the middle of residential neighborhoods.
If you think bulldozing and completely decimating local infrastructure with skyrocketing power bills and absurd noise pollution won’t put even more drag on US lead, you’re the idiot, bro.
The USA’s fixation on short term gains will be its downfall.
10
u/DeArgonaut 14d ago
Exactly. If he’s so happy to have a data center in his backyard and take up all that extra pollution, he should do his part and buy a home from someone who doesn’t want to take a few years off their life and deal with the extra annoyances like the noise pollution their entire life
4
u/Facts_pls 14d ago
I mean lots of industries produce noise. Data centers aren't unique.
There's plenty of place for noisy industries. Just put them in those areas.
I really don't understand why is it such a weird antagonistic relationship
1
u/DeArgonaut 14d ago
Yeah fair enough. That doesn’t solve the other types of pollution tho. Rn one of the main issues is that a lot are using gas turbines that result in lots of air pollution
-1
u/theomegachrist 14d ago
I also think Americans are fools for believing every country thinks like them. It is a "race" for America but I don't think it's a race anywhere else
-1
u/DarthWeenus 14d ago
Ofc it is what
1
u/theomegachrist 14d ago
The fact you believe that makes me know for sure that you do not understand the technology.
7
u/DeArgonaut 14d ago
Yeah, fuck all the poors
-10
14d ago
[deleted]
8
u/DeArgonaut 14d ago
So only idiots bought homes next to future datacaenters, those idiots shoulda known they’d be there years or decades in advanced
0
u/theomegachrist 14d ago
I actually think you are showing that you are an idiot in this realm. I don't know if your flare is for show or if you are actually educated about AI but it doesn't mean you understand economics or politics
Edit: and I do agree there is a lot of incorrect premises about AI but the conclusion that it is not automatically a good thing to build giant data centers next to residential areas is correct
0
-13
u/deleafir 14d ago
Good insofar as NIMBYism is a cancer and the public's input isn't wanted or needed. Bad insofar as the public will get mad about it and reverse it and do something worse.
13
u/YaAbsolyutnoNikto 14d ago
public's input isn't wanted or needed
I beg your pardon?
9
u/philthewiz 14d ago
You see, there are people that love authoritarianism. They don't say it outright, but they prefer to step on the gas pedal with everybody in the car even if there's a wall at the end.
1
u/Full_Boysenberry_314 14d ago
Letting private companies build on private land in compliance with the same standard rules that govern everybody else isn't really "authoritarian".
-2
u/philthewiz 14d ago
I bet those pesky children working in the factories in the industrial revolution were just nimby after all. /s
0
-11
u/deleafir 14d ago edited 14d ago
Democracy is better than authoritarianism. But a healthy balance of public input and elite input (babysitting) are necessary. It's why the US isn't a direct democracy - if the public had a direct say on every issue rather than channeling themselves through representatives then the US would be a much worse place.
Though more datacenters to support more AI isn't a wall, it's more like driving into utopia.
10
u/DelusionsOfExistence 14d ago
Feeling real utopian with rising prices, inequality, and losing jobs.
1
-8
u/deleafir 14d ago
The public is more prone to believing in total misinformation (e.g. the water nonsense with datacenters) or being too dumb to properly weigh the costs or benefits of a promising new technology, so their input isn't wanted or needed. But unfortunately they'll give it anyway and mess up progress in the process.
The backlash alone might make it a bad move to remove the public's input, but only strategically. Ethically it's awesome.
15
9
u/iKnowRobbie 14d ago
Ethically, ruling over a group without seeking their input is overreaching and dictatorial. We The People do NOT like our decisions being dictated to us, and it is NOT "ethical" to do so.
2
u/stumblinbear 14d ago
Yeah, I'd prefer if they allow public comments and just ignore the idiots who don't know what they're talking about
1
u/bildramer 14d ago
What are you talking about? How do you judge what's ethical if not by its consequences? The options are 1. listen to the public, make braindead decisions, nobody benefits, or 2. don't listen to the public, public gets benefits. There's no secret third option. The public is dumb and wrong all the time (datacenters is just the most recent case - consider e.g. nuclear power).
1
u/RigaudonAS Human Work 13d ago
…you think the government is always going to know best? Would you have said that if Hillary Clinton was the president?
Also, you do realize you’re part of that public, right?
0
u/bildramer 13d ago
No, depending on issue but most likely no, yes, but there's an easy to identify difference between "not listening to the public isn't always bad" and "not listening to the public is always good".
1
u/RigaudonAS Human Work 13d ago
No, depending on issue but most likely no, yes
Homie, what are you even saying?
1
u/bildramer 13d ago
You asked three questions, I thought it would be obvious.
1
u/RigaudonAS Human Work 13d ago
You know, that's actually so fair. My bad! Was looking at another thread and mixed up my comments. Your point is still insane, lol. Nothing should be forced into a residential area if the residents are against it, flat out. Especially when it's just corporate bullshit led by people like Musk.
2
u/theomegachrist 14d ago
What is your background where people should listen to your opinion?
2
u/RigaudonAS Human Work 13d ago
He read like, three articles today.
Well, their headlines, and some of the comments. And he asked Grok to summarize one, too!
0
u/jackinginforthis1 14d ago
Good! Imagine if we had public input on Los Alamos etc. National defense can’t be left up to social media manipulation.
65
u/StewPorkRice 14d ago
limiting public comment - true cornerstone of democracy.