Previously Published in The Messenger
Like any nationalized, hot-button issue, Long Island is almost certain to have its own place in the conversation.
This week’s model is none other than the Artificial Intelligence (AI) data center argument. Proponents say these facilities are necessary to keep up with changing times and to keep the American economy internationally competitive. They add that the fear of job displacement is no different than the same concerns around the Dot-Com Boom and the Industrial Revolution.
Opponents take issue with the massive blight and affront to nature that these data centers pose. More importantly, they haven’t been satisfied with the lack of substantive projections on just what jobs AI will create. They fear not only a loss of industries undercut by machines, but also a loss of creativity and purpose that drives the human race.
Two Suffolk towns have already taken substantive steps to not put the cart before the horse. Brookhaven and Islip have passed 18-month moratoria against all data center facilities within their towns. Both towns passed their measures unanimously and with little-to-no opposition from the citizens.
This Editorial Board has tried to be open-minded about the possibility of a new technological era, one in which humans and robots can coexist with minimal long-term disruptions to the economy. The sheer progress at stake is undeniable; serious illnesses, injuries, and birth defects could become a thing of the past, while research and transparency could reach unfathomable heights.
But we’re reasonably skeptical just as millions of Americans are. We’ve already seen first-hand reports of less nature, less bugs, and less wildlife in areas where data centers have been constructed, on top of constant humming noises, pollution from diesel generators used through loopholes in municipal law, and, above all, no substantive direction on just how the economy will shift in response.
It seems to us that the data centers are being pushed by the technocrats and billionaires in a de facto “arms race” – who can control most of the new technology first and therefore set the terms of use. Even they’re not entirely sure of just how good or bad this technology will be.
The American people cannot be blamed for being skeptical and even outraged that this is being passively accepted without nearly as much forethought and caution as such a proposal would normally entail.
But for Long Island, there’s a fairly easy question to answer: is this the place for these facilities?
The answer, we think, is a resounding no.
Large data centers, like the one proposed in Yaphank that was later halted by Brookhaven’s moratorium, can consume between 300,000 and 5 million gallons of water per day. The supercomputing power requires many servers that require immense cooling power. Even a mid-sized data center can consume as much water in a day as 1,000 households do.
Long Island’s foremost problem for decades has been our sole-source aquifer. It’s the cornerstone of any water quality and infrastructure projects on our densely-populated sandbar. Data centers are being pushed to operate a closed-loop system, one in which they provide their own electricity and water without touching the municipal supply.
That sounds good on paper, but there have already been instances where these modern robber barons, in our opinion, have been caught violating that deal. In Cheyenne, Wyoming, a data center backed by Mark Zuckerberg’s Meta was found to have contaminated the local sewer system with a rare bacterium by illegally dumping their wastewater.
In northern Virginia, schools this summer experienced rolling blackouts due to the unparalleled power draw these facilities require.
Moreover, developers of these facilities are seeking tax breaks from local Industrial Development Agencies (IDAs).
Why would any municipality be required to foot the bill for a data center that many people largely don’t want, for a product of which many are skeptical, at best, or downright oppose, at worst, when those same facilities are constructed by billionaires who are notorious for playing nicely in the sandbox regardless of which party controls Washington?
The other issue is land usage. The now-dead-in-the-water Yaphank proposal was slated to be 71 acres on the corner of Sills Road and the Long Island Expressway. The 549,000-square-foot facility, while perhaps not located in an area of prime real estate, does take away conceivable acreage for single-family homes and/or services that are required to cool the housing market and perhaps keep those services closer to home to moderately quell local traffic problems.
We already have a suburban sprawl problem, but the “last house on the block” mentality is also a problem. Long Island only has so much space; we can’t expand into the flatlands like the cities in the Texas Triangle can. Why waste it on a massive facility that may very well already be obsolete if fractal quantum computing has anything to say on the matter?
Another problem we find, the Yaphank facility would have cost at least $1 billion, but only to produce 50 permanent jobs. That’s a trade-off we can’t rationalize with all other variables considered.
If New York wants this in their economy, there’s plenty of land Upstate. If the U.S. wants it, there’s plenty of land elsewhere. Long Island doesn’t have the infrastructure, low density, housing stock, environmental security, and risk tolerance for these types of facilities.
We believe Islip and Brookhaven made the correct move in passing moratoria. We can only hope that after their 18 months of research are complete, they find that Long Island is no place for the next frontier – regardless of how correct or incorrect the critics might be.