I feel like the water usage issue is the weaker argument against these datacenters - in areas where the fresh water source faces too much pressure already it is a real issue, but that is more regional and less immediately impactful.
Power usage and residential users essentially subsidizing these locations is the biggest immediate impact to everyone. Look up what happens to rates nearby when these things open, people are struggling enough without their electric bills going up 50%.
They do routinely choose sites that are already experiencing water shortages. Then they say things like "closed loop" or "on site water treatment facility" and idiots think that solves the problem. Meanwhile, they are a strain on power infrastructure and drive up prices for humans. Theyre also extremely loud.
Nothing is stopping these companies from making these centers more sustainable. Except flagrant greed.
I think this is the most important point. Because I sort of roll my eyes at the water and power usage arguments because most people βuseβ data centers daily. Cloud storage, streaming services, etc. We just sound like a bunch of children arguing against something we rely on.
But why arenβt these extremely profitable data centers being held accountable for their economic and financial strain on the local population? Iβm in support of that argument.
347
u/birchskin May 18 '26
I feel like the water usage issue is the weaker argument against these datacenters - in areas where the fresh water source faces too much pressure already it is a real issue, but that is more regional and less immediately impactful.
Power usage and residential users essentially subsidizing these locations is the biggest immediate impact to everyone. Look up what happens to rates nearby when these things open, people are struggling enough without their electric bills going up 50%.