Presenting the hyperscale data center!
Enormous edifices, housing thousands of dedicated computer chips operating simultaneously to carry out the intricate computations demanded by sophisticated AI systems. A solitary facility can span millions of square feet, constructed with millions of pounds of steel, aluminum, and concrete; boasting hundreds of miles of wiring, linking some hundreds of thousands of top-tier GPU chips, and consuming hundreds of megawatt-hours of electricity. These centers generate such heat from their computing capabilities that their cooling mechanisms are triumphs of engineering ingenuity by themselves. Yet the highlight is those chips with their cutting-edge processors. A single chip within these extensive arrays can cost more than $30,000. Together and synchronously working, they handle hundreds of thousands of tokens—the fundamental elements of an AI model—every second. Incredible.
Now, let’s journey to Georgia. The most intensely purple of states. A state featuring both liberal urban centers and magnified suburban and rural MAGA areas. The land of Stacey Abrams and Newt Gingrich. If there’s one consensus seemingly shared among most residents, it’s that they’ve had enough of data centers.
Last year, the state’s Public Service Commission election came down to the wire, resulting in a surprising defeat for incumbent Republican commissioners. Although national political dynamics likely influenced the outcome (voters leaned Democratic during a cycle favorable to that party), the fundamental issue was the soaring power bills. This inflation in electricity costs was frequently attributed to a data center construction surge rivaling Virginia’s.
This surge did not occur randomly. At one stage, Georgia was interested in data centers. Or at least its political leaders were. In 2018, the state’s General Assembly enacted laws that provided tax incentives for data centers concerning their computer systems and cooling infrastructure, added tax benefits for job creation, and even more tax incentives for property taxes. And then… boom!
However, events haven’t unfolded as the Assembly and other elected leaders might have anticipated.
Travel with me now to Bolingbroke, Georgia. Located just outside of Atlanta, in Monroe County (population 27,954), county officials were weighing the rezoning of 900 acres to accommodate a new data center near Bolingbroke (population 492). Data centers have emerged throughout the state, particularly near Atlanta. Public sentiment is often disregarded. In nearby Twiggs County, despite substantial and well-organized opposition, officials approved a 300-acre data center project. Yet, at a crowded meeting about the Bolingbroke proposal, around 900 individuals turned out to express nearly unanimous resistance to the anticipated data center, according to Macon, Georgia’s The Telegraph. Sensing the prevailing winds, the Monroe county commission rejected it last August.
The proposed developers asserted it would generate millions for the county. They claimed it would remain out of sight. That it would “adhere to the highest environmental standards.” That it would foster jobs and prosperity. Yet, despite that, the opposition persisted.
Why!? Data centers have existed for years. So why the sudden animosity towards them?
What is it about these engineering wonders that promise to create AI that could cure diseases, bring unmatched wealth, and even circumvent death (if you subscribe to what the AI marketers proclaim) that incenses their neighboring communities?
There are evident reasons. The foremost is the speed and magnitude of their establishment, which has affected power systems. No one enjoys witnessing their electricity costs rise. The rate increases that so angered Georgians serve as monthly reminders that the unsightly structure in their vicinity enriches billionaires in California at their expense, using their grid. In Wyoming, for instance, a planned Meta data center will demand more electricity than all households in the state, combined. To satisfy the energy requirements of these voracious data centers, utilities are augmenting grid capacity. But while that additional capacity might favor tech corporations, the expenses are borne by local consumers.
Likewise, there are ecological issues. To fulfill their energy demands, data centers frequently rely on polluting forms of energy. For example, xAI notably utilized several polluting methane generators at its Memphis data center. Although nuclear energy is often proposed as a greener alternative, conventional plants take a decade or longer to construct; even innovative and faster reactors will require years to become operational. Additionally, data centers often consume vast quantities of water. However, the volume can differ significantly between facilities and is frequently kept confidential. (Several states are trying to mandate the disclosure of water consumption by facilities.)
Another kind of environmental impact from data centers is their noise pollution. A persistent machine hum. Not merely occasionally, but perpetually. 24/7/365. “A highway that never halts.”
As for the employment opportunities they bring to communities. Well, I have some unfortunate news regarding that aspect too. Once the construction phase concludes, they typically offer very few jobs, particularly for such resource-heavy operations.
These are all rational reasons to oppose data centers. Yet, I suspect there’s an additional, emotional factor at play. And it resonates with a sentiment we’ve seen previously.
Over a decade ago, the large tech corporations from Silicon Valley began using buses to transport employees from San Francisco and other locations in the Bay Area to their campuses. Like data centers, these buses utilized shared infrastructure, such as public roadways, without, many felt, contributing their fair share. Protests erupted. While those protests were certainly about shared resource usage, they also encompassed something much larger.
Tech firms, both big and small, were reshaping San Francisco. The early 2010s ushered in rapid gentrification in the city. Moreover, the tech sector itself was altering societal norms. Smartphones had recently become ubiquitous. The manner in which people interacted with their environment was changing fundamentally, leaving individuals largely powerless to intervene. You couldn’t halt Google.
But you could obstruct a Google bus.
You could position yourself in front of it and block its route. You could shout at the individuals boarding it. You could confront your elected representatives and demand action. And in San Francisco, citizens did. The buses eventually faced regulation.
The backlash against data centers carries a similar essence. AI, we are informed, is transforming society. It is now omnipresent. Even if you choose not to engage with ChatGPT or Claude or Gemini, generative AI is increasingly integrated into virtually every application and service you likely use. People are anxious that AI will seize jobs in the upcoming years. Or even endanger our lives. And for what? As of now, the outcomes have certainly not met the expectations.
You can’t halt Google. But perhaps, just perhaps, you can prevent a Google data center.
However, perhaps not. The tech buses in San Francisco, though now regulated, are still prevalent. And the city has become more gentrified than ever. Meanwhile, in Monroe County, life continues as usual. In October, Google confirmed the acquisition of 950 acres near the interstate. Plans are in motion to establish a data center there.
