Forty mayors from around the world have signed onto a pact announced Tuesday to try to shape how urban data centers are built and operated.
It’s their vision for how urban data center development can be done sustainably — and not at the expense of their cities’ natural resources, energy prices or climate targets. C40 Cities, an alliance of nearly 100 cities seeking to impact climate change, launched it during London Climate Action Week.
Many new data centers are coming to rural areas for cheap land. Experts at C40 say metropolitan areas are under tremendous pressure too, with about 1,700 data centers located in their network of cities so far. Development of data centers is expected to grow by over 40% in 50 of those cities.
C40 got involved because the mayors of Phoenix and Melbourne, Australia, came together over worries about data centers using a lot of their cities’ electricity and water, and competing with housing developers for available land.
“We found out that the challenges in every region around the world were very similar,” said Cassie Sutherland, a managing director at C40. “Our approach was to say OK, how do we now use a global mayoral voice to come together with the conditions under which they will accept data centers.”
Data centers are built in cities to be close to firms that want systems powered by artificial intelligence to respond instantaneously. Major companies locate data centers in cities to be near their business operations. And data centers tend to be built in clusters, forming ecosystems in metropolitan areas that might outweigh factors like land costs. It’s just more recently that data centers have moved out into rural areas, said Andrew Batson, global head of data center research at JLL.
Political and local opposition has been growing because of fears about blackouts, rising electricity bills and the centers’ voracious water needs. Some states are suspending tax breaks or considering moratoriums on data center construction.
While I agree, the reality is space constraints. Renewables take a lot of space (mostly solar) and data centers benifit from sharing resources. The reason northern Virginia is such a magnet for them is that box was opened 2 decades ago and they get to share resources, your house pets like to sit around the warm things dont they?
The regulatory failure is that data centers are not treated like the heavy industrial buildings that they are. Foundries take a cartoonish amount of resources to run, but you dont see towns letting them set up shop near homes. Furthermore, almost no data center gives themselves the space to run the generators and not violate half a dozen ordanences, because they either run twice a year for testing (fines are the cost of doing business) or are on 24/7 because the grid cant handle their demands. Its the latter group where the managment needs to be drawn and quartered.
My proposed regulation would be that new buildings have a land requirment based on the amount of power they intend to consume (not what is provided from the grid, they can make their own power if needed). This would force hyperscaler build outs (who already have more money than sence because these are rush jobs for AI nonsense) to buy land buffers around their noisy polluting buildings. In theory, it would protect residents better and would curb the worst of the proposed plans, like that BS in Utah.
Both our ideas require legislators and relgulators to get off their asses and sharpen their axes, and of all the things discussed, that seems the most unrealistic unfortunatly…