19 comments

  • GolfPopper 57 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.
    • cucumber3732842 9 minutes ago
      >(well, except the high priests of the LLMs / nascent Cthulhoid godlings

      This is good news for everyone who wants to do anything less dirty than a datacenter (so like warehouses and other comparable boxes with less going on inside) because they'll probably be able to get the precedent extended to them in the next decade or so. The people and communities that make money off that sort of stuff will probably do well.

  • schainks 5 minutes ago
    This is really bad news. Here's a good look at what infrasound is doing to humans near datacenters: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bP80DEAbuo
  • 59percentmore 35 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.

  • JohnFen 1 hour ago
    That's in line with the EPA's new mission of ensuring environmental degradation.
  • awakeasleep 40 minutes ago
    I wonder if you could open any type of business as a datacenter now, to avoid the review.
    • 0cf8612b2e1e 9 minutes ago
      Hilarious legal maneuver. Soon to see, Jack’s Slaughterhouse Datacenter, Dean’s Nuclear Waste Repo and Datacenter, et

      I can surely squirrel away a couple of GPUs into any random closet and rent out the capacity.

  • twsted 17 minutes ago
    I can’t believe we’re seeing so much bad news coming from EPA. Why all this backtracking from an agency that used to be so effective and well organized? Well, I guess we know the reason.
  • millerm 34 minutes ago
    Executive Protection Agency
  • childofhedgehog 48 minutes ago
    Probably an oversimplified question but how do we actually stop this?
    • JohnFen 42 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 21 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.

        • 0cf8612b2e1e 6 minutes ago
          I am so Le tired of hearing people give a damn about the state of the world. Why can’t you all just be more passive non voters like myself?

          The world has not literally ended yet, so all concerns are overblown.

          • kelseyfrog 3 minutes ago
            Exactly! We should only work to prevent the end of the world after it has ended.
        • cucumber3732842 6 minutes ago
          So long as new voters are created faster than old ones wise up....
    • Y-bar 40 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.

      • anigbrowl 4 minutes ago
        [delayed]
      • scottyah 9 minutes ago
        This doesn't seem like a very effective method. I would expect something more along the lines of developing laws around noise pollution or something. Literally shouting at a data center seems more cathartic than helpful.
        • RankingMember 3 minutes ago
          It's about numbers. A small group isn't going to do anything directly to the data center, but it can raise awareness that other people do indeed care. This, in turn, can slowly (over multiple demonstrations) grow the size of the demonstrations to a critical mass that cannot be ignored.
    • pfdietz 18 minutes ago
      If such reviews are required by legislation then you stop it in the courts; approvals without legally required steps are invalid.

      If they are not required by legislation then you just deal with the change.

      While you're thinking about this, realize even the Democrats are annoyed at how weaponized things like NEPA have become to slow down necessary changes.

    • schainks 3 minutes ago
      1. Vote

      2. Vote

      3. Vote

      4. Find every publicly accessible local forum with _your_ representatives at every level, and get on the mic. Tell your reps they will lose your vote and the votes of your entire network for complicity in harm against society on behalf of the billionaire class. Follow through on that threat.

      Extreme option: Run for election yourself on the platform and get voted into office. The bar is lower than ever in some places.

    • idontwantthis 37 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 28 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.

        • RankingMember 2 minutes ago
          We need ranked choice like yesterday. It's not a magic fix-it solution, but it is a giant step in the right direction. I'm so tired of the whiplash between these two parties.
        • idontwantthis 25 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.

          • elomnusk 10 minutes ago
            We usually have had less than 30% participation for the local Democratic primary in off years (Republican primary in off-years is not much better). The complete lack of civic-mindedness is why the only strategy that works at the general election is "vote for the lesser evil." Note: that only include 2 viable candidates, a third party will never win the Presidential election without elimination of the parties themselves or implementation of rank-choice voting by a majority of states to counteract the anti-democratic (that's small "d") bias of the Electoral College.
          • scottyah 4 minutes ago
            If you still trust anyone just because they claim to be a Democrat, you haven't been paying enough attention.
          • cogman10 16 minutes ago
            > The time to vote out an incumbent was the primary.

            I agree, that's why I'm saying you should be involved in the primary and not just the general. Because, as I said, it's not the default position of the democrat party to be for regulating datacenters. I gave an explicit example of that where a dem is completely aligned with the republicans on DCs.

            Dems win power, but they are still beholden to OpenAI, then they'll be no better than the republicans on this issue.

            It's too late for 2026 and IMO you should vote for Ds wherever you are at. But if you want to affect change on DCs then voting in the primary for anti-dc dems is what you have to do. It's not enough to just vote in the general elections.

            • idontwantthis 11 minutes ago
              You're not wrong, but you are muddying the waters. The sides are clear and bringing up primaries when it's too late is irrelevant.

              > they'll be no better than the republicans on this issue.

              There is no reason to think this is true. I will eat a gas generator if a Democrat president orders his EPA administrator to break established rules and precedent like the current one is doing.

      • palmotea 14 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.

        It's not that simple. The Democrats are shit, and lost to Trump twice because of that shittiness. Perversely, Trump has allowed them to convince themselves that they don't have to reform.

        I don't expect anything to change if the Democrats gain power, they'll curb only the most egregious abuses curbed a bit, while leaving the overall thing intact. Then they'll lose again because they're shit.

    • crawfordcomeaux 37 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 50 minutes ago
  • drop_star 42 minutes ago
    which reality show host is running the EPA now?
  • ck2 31 minutes ago
    "for the next 800 days"

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

    • aqme28 29 minutes ago
      So-- basically until the next administration. Interesting timing.
  • Simulacra 16 minutes ago
    Well, that's not gonna happen, under the administrative procedures act they'll have to open it up for public comment, which opens it up for lawsuits.
  • paimapi 1 hour 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 48 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?
  • Analemma_ 39 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.
  • dyauspitr 55 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.
  • jeffbee 48 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 20 minutes 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.

      • scottyah 2 minutes ago
        I figured that one was non-serious and just used as anchoring and to take the heat whilst other large ones were ok to go under the radar.
      • LeBit 10 minutes ago
        I have no idea and one can trace a parallel between the construction of resource hungry data centers and 5G crack pots.
  • 2OEH8eoCRo0 7 minutes ago
    Gee I wonder why people hate datacenters so much. /s
  • WarmWash 59 minutes ago
    First of all, what is datacenter pollution?

    Second, why is the article trying so hard to make datacenters out as racist?

    • standeven 52 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.

      • WarmWash 13 minutes ago
        CO2? The stuff we naturally exhale? Water vapor? The stuff we drink?
    • Geof25 51 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 42 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 29 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 57 minutes ago
      • WarmWash 53 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 51 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 47 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 42 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.

          • pc86 15 minutes ago
            You're not responding to their point, though. If data centers were built only in poor areas because of classism, they're correct that there probably wouldn't be a lot of data centers in one of the richest areas in the country. And there are. So if you want to make a convincing argument that data centers are classist you should probably have a response to that beyond "well you just don't have any empathy."
        • georgemcbay 43 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.
  • palmotea 19 minutes ago
    Perhaps the next administration will drop a few cluster bombs on some hyperscaler data centers. The air force needs targets to practice on, after all. Then throughout the land there will be much rejoicing and feelings of justice done, as trillions of dollars of GPUs go up in smoke.