Original comment: https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/comments/1uyyywv/comment/oy3cgd7/
Trees vs. Data Centers
Photo 1: Memphis, TN (top)
Photo 2: Sandston, VA
Photo 3: Abilene, Texas
Photo 4: New Albany, OH
Photo 5: Fayetteville, GA
Is there a /c/extremelydepressing? This would go perfectly there.
I wouldn’t really categorize rampant ecological destruction as something calling for merely mild annoyance
Yeah it needs to be c/extremelyinfuriating
c/pants-shittinglymaddening
Agree
It’s a bit unfortunate the second xAI is taken in the winter, so we can’t really see how much of the trees are gone, but looks like a lot.
Just zoom I’m, you can see where it is bare ground and how winter pic still has trees in the other areas. Don’t go just by colour itself but the shapes of the masses
I’m genuinely confused about why the season matters?!
To be fair. This isn’t an AI issue. Or a data center issue. It’s an everywhere issue. If there is a plot of land, it will be leveled and something will be built. Strip mall. Gas station. Houses. So many houses. It’s never ending. If that piece of land can make money, it will be clear cut and built on.
The use of passive voice throughout your comment is almost impressive.
What do those other buildings provide that data centers don’t?
I get what you are saying. I know. But that strip mall is gonna have a parking lot the size Montana. It will contain 2 mattress stores, a noodle place and a denture store. The noodle place will go out of business and shutdown. The other 3 will remain open for the next 12 years by magic or something, cause you never see a single person there. We need housing yes. Affordable housing. The houses that the forest was cleared for will be 500k plus, contractor grade, where you get to choose from 3 designs, and its built off a two lane road that is never improved to handle a 1000 home neighborhood. At least, that is all that is popping up around me.
Id rather have the forest any day.
Not OP, but houses provide housing. Strip malls provide spaces for local businesses. Data center literally provide nothing to the local community they are built in other than stress on existing utilities. It’s not like factories of yore where 1k jobs would be created and lives were built around it.
Winner, winner, chicken dinner!
Haha yeah that’s exactly what I was getting at.
Traffic and excessive stormwater runoff.
Not true. The normal issue is bad. The data center issue so insanely worse, as they are not just taking up a single plot but also much more for their power production. Like, entire forests for biofuel power plants for example. Then there is the water consumption and pollution, on top of all the air pollution. Then there the case of an entire plot of land being used for zero housing, meaning other plots of land need to be converted into housing instead. Data centers solve nothing, they just create loads of issues. Housing solve the housing crisis.
What you’re saying is that a gunshot to the heart is similar to a papercut in your finger.
My solution would be to create better public transportation and pedestrian / cycling infrastructure so massive parkinglots can be redeveloped into housing. Please note there are no data centers in my proposed solution.
This disgusts me and angers me beyond words
This is violence against the bulk of humanity
To me, the problem seems to be bad regulators. They could have mandated that data centers have solar panels on their roof. They could have mandated a certain amount of greenery around the warehouse, so that the area was less impactful. It’s been a known issue that unregulated Capitalism will cause mass destruction quite frequently for decades if not centuries. You can’t expect every business to ‘do the right thing’ every time…that would be stupidly optimistic of regulators.
-
Summer vs winter picture, not a very honest take
-
It would look the same for any commercial building - a warehouse, shopping center (would be even worse), etc.
No need to be disingenuous, it just weakens the argument and gives someone who disagrees with you valid ammunition.
Destroying a forest area for a concrete jungle is never a good thing
I guess the point would be what does the local area get in exchange for losing their forest?
A lot of other developments at least provide the local populace some service or jobs. These are just “give me your land, your power, and water and we will use it to advance our business interests and do nothing for the locals”, oh and btw, give us a tax break for the privilege of having us build a datacenter in your area.
Now I’m being bombarded by ads saying ‘um, actually datacenters give you tons of permanent jobs and makes power cheaper’, so they are just flat out lying instead of actually doing anything to make it worth the local community. Well, except key people on local town councils who somehow end up with NDAs forbidding them from disclosing what conversations they are having with these developers…
Housing developments and apartment blocks are built on former forests in a similar timeframe too
At least here in the US the people arguing against data centers are also against housing developments and want to reduce urban sprawl (by say tearing down all the empty malls and building apartments there for example). At least that’s what it seems like to me, someone against the never ending suburbia.
Same
Summer vs winter picture, not a very honest take
How so? Not like the data center will wilted away after the winter and trees grow back on spring.
-
Makes me sad
Let’s just all die
And still no jobs…
Some day, the people may rise up… And maybe all of these will burn.
I like to think the employees will do it. Who knows, though…
I just know it needs to be done.
the people can just stop using the services to get rid of these. there is no need to get violent lol
This is not mild. This is infuriating.
Honestly amazing that these tech companies are able to make a building full of computers look like an open strip mine. They don’t even try to beautify the campuses or anything, just bare dirt and ponds full of acrid water. I live in taconite country and have seen active mining operations put in more care for the communities they invade then big tech does
I don’t agree with how data centers are being built out, but I also don’t think your assessment is accurate. The New Albany and Fayetteville sites look to preserve most of the existing trees. Abilene and Sandstone appear to be active construction.
Are these places extremely patrolled and secure? I’m just surprised people aren’t burning them to the ground or disrupting them some way or somehow
Controversial opinion: this is not the problem of the data centers, but the missing laws protecting the land containing a forest. Currently data centers are trendy, but they would also have made room for a regular factory. Now think about how much forest gets deforested in total, not just by data centers, each year.
Your argument is the difference between reactive and proactive legislation, and it’s what we need to do to actually succeed. We are constantly on the back foot because we are trying to stop one problem at a time, i.e. Data Center deforestation. Data Centers are a problem, but not the problem. Destruction of natural, irreplaceable resources is the real problem. Sure, it would be great to stop all data centers from ever being built, but then something else will just take its place. We need to protect our resources first, then it won’t matter what they want to build because they won’t be able to. Getting mad about data centers is good, we should be mad, but let’s make that anger work for us in the best way.
The caveat is that a lot of these protections can just be stripped away by whoever is in the oval office, as we’ve seen with this administration. When they don’t give a damn about poll numbers, they just do whatever they want with impunity. That’s why these need to be written into state constitutions and not just statutes, things that a Washington signature can’t undo. They need to be guarded in land trusts and conservation easements. Put too many stops between the bastards and their prize.
