This is a reductive framing of the problem. The power grid fuel mix is what determines most of this. There are some cases of on-site generation (which is definitely not ideal), but this can also be addressed with a better grid.
You can argue that the data centers shouldn't be built until the grid can catch up, which I think is probably the most defensible argument a Luddite could offer right now. I'd get on board with that one if it was presented rationally. However, it does appear that the environmental arguments are merely a means to and end for some. Quotes like this make it hard to not see the underlying goals.
GuestFAUniverse 8 hours ago [-]
When the grid is the main factor, what's the problem with providing other metrics like water usage, etc.?
Your argument doesn't convince me. Sounds more like lobbying.
vrganj 8 hours ago [-]
I believe it is your framing that is reductive. We don't know if those centres get all their energy from the grid.
This is a reductive framing of the problem. The power grid fuel mix is what determines most of this. There are some cases of on-site generation (which is definitely not ideal), but this can also be addressed with a better grid.
You can argue that the data centers shouldn't be built until the grid can catch up, which I think is probably the most defensible argument a Luddite could offer right now. I'd get on board with that one if it was presented rationally. However, it does appear that the environmental arguments are merely a means to and end for some. Quotes like this make it hard to not see the underlying goals.
Your argument doesn't convince me. Sounds more like lobbying.
Think of the horrible pollution caused by the gas turbines of X as a counterexample: https://www.selc.org/news/resistance-against-elon-musks-xai-...
More news at 11.