re: For Those Of You Opposed To Data Centers, What Is Your Plan?

You seem to imply that we don’t need them?[/quote]

Not implying anything. Supporting technological innovation does not mean giving a blank check to how its infrastructure is deployed.

quote:

---

I'm fine with it if you want them built next to your house. Just keep them away from mine.

---

What does this mean? Do you think they're building these things in residential neighborhoods?

What if there's a lot of acreage behind your nearest Lowes and Walmart? Is that acceptable? Or does that depend on how far it is from your house?

What if it's built out by your nearest power plant? Is that acceptable? Or does that too depend on how far it is from your house?

quote:

---

No to data centers?

Yes to nuclear power plants?

---

It's not as cut and dry as a no to data centers. I personally love AI. I'm training an AI right now. I have AI workers that do research for me on a schedule and other tasks also.

I'm against AI as part of a surveillance state.

And always yes to nuclear power plants.

quote:

---

Environmental impacts are a secondary concern that may be able to be mitigated(data centers in space maybe) . The main concern is that the human race is marching towards building something that could end our species.

---

Even if we assume this is correct, how does opposing datacenters prevent the end of humanity?

You think China is going to stop?

quote:

---

Sure, Xan. All of the guys working on AI development 24/7, who are saying the exact opposite, don’t know what they are talking about.

---

Exactly how much data do you think the world has? Especially trainable data.

I pointed out the actual bottlenecks in AI development in another post and what actually requires so much power and water in training.

I'm only opposed to data centers that will drive up costs for residents. If they bring more power production and water infrastructure with them, bring 'em on everywhere.

quote:

---

Strawman argument.

---

I don’t think anyone had a problem with them until it was realized states were acting like they discovered Hollywood movie credits 2.0…now featuring NDAs and even less transparency.

There is an astronomical amount of power demand being reported, with major discrepancies, at least in Texas. Many grid operators believe these figures are unrealistic, suggesting that some data center developers are submitting inflated estimates, or what is being called “ghost demand.” There are reportedly 474 GW of new power requests in the queue, while Texas’s record peak demand was 91.1 GW as of July 2026. Taken at face value, these requests would represent an unrealistic 420 percent increase over current peak demand by 2032. Power supply is a genuine bottleneck, and the Texas grid cannot deliver anything close to that amount. This will likely force developers to revise their projected power needs downward.

Texas currently has roughly 7.5 to 10 GW of active data center capacity connected to the grid. A more realistic estimate is that the state may be able to accommodate 10 to 30 GW of additional physical load. Texas researcher Dr. Joshua Rhodes has mentioned in briefings that many developers have not submitted even basic engineering and planning studies. This lack of preparation means that a significant number of these speculative projects may disappear on their own, without any government intervention, because the developers have not completed the preliminary work required to properly establish their projects.

There are also concerns about who will ultimately pay for the required infrastructure. Normally, utilities will not begin major transmission construction until binding contracts are signed that clearly assign financial responsibility for the costs. From the perspective of ordinary Texans, this unvetted demand leads some to a concern that threatens to drive up consumer electricity prices. While most residents would see little benefit from the data centers’ or any capitalization of their upside profits, therefore everyday citizens should not be expected to serve as a downside buffer or be avenue to socialize their losses with higher electricity prices.

It is reasonable to require data centers to act responsibly: BYOP, Bring Your Own Power, pay for and and provide their own reliable power (temporary and permanent), use local water resources responsibly, and fully cooperate with grid operators and planners who are assessing long term grid capacity and demand. They need to pay upfront for any additional infrastructure they require. They need to pay for property taxes like any other private local business owner that provides jobs in the community (no free lunches). The corporations, owners, and hyperscalers involved need to ensure that their planned private gains or (lack thereof) don't become socialized losses for every day citizens. They should also actively give back to the communities that host them rather than extracting value from them.

Well, I got google earth open right now. That road isn't very long. There is already a giant Amazon Sortation Center, an Amazon warehouse, and a Club Car LLC (which seems like a very large operation.. going by building size). I wonder why they were okay with these things being right next door?

I have no issue with people opposing this. That's their right. Maybe they simply don't want more large industrial type facilities in the area. But they have no real leg to stand on it seems.

The people in the article you linked seem more butthurt than anything else. Their reasoning is all sentimental (not that it really matters, I suppose). I'd not be surprised if they themselves aren't the ones who sold their land to Amazon after it being in their family for over a century.

Also, while I am always in favor of protecting the smallest minority (which is ONE), this is more a case of a dozen or so homeowners spread out along a country road, rather than what most people would consider a "neighborhood".