Five other states have introduced similar bills recently as data center development skyrockets:
On Friday, New York State Senators Liz Krueger and Kristen Gonzales introduced a bill that would stop the issuance of permits for new data centers for at least three years and ninety days to give time for impact assessments and to update regulations. The bill would require the Department of Environmental Conservation and Public Service Commissions to issue impact statements and reports during the pause, along with any new orders or regulations that they deem necessary to minimize data centers' impacts on the environment and consumers in New York.
The bill would require these departments to study data centers' water, electricity and gas usage, and their impact on the rates of these resources, among other things. The bill, citing a Bloomberg analysis, notes that, "Nationally, household electricity rates increased 13 percent in 2025, largely driven by the development of data centers." New York is the sixth state this year to introduce a bill aiming to put the brakes on data centers, following in the footsteps of Georgia, Maryland, Oklahoma, Vermont and Virginia, according to Wired. It's still very much in the early stages, and is now with the Senate Environmental Conservation Committee for consideration.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Barenflimski on Monday February 09, @11:23PM (7 children)
These politicians may as well just put up a large sign that says, "Take Your Money Elsewhere". This is the kind of leading by headline that ties anything useful up in knots, makes everyones life more expensive and helps nobody.
3 years added to a project can double the cost and the implementation time. When you're spending real money, you'll simply look at everywhere BUT this place. I figure these folks are upset at the AI headlines, but when the people of New York actually need a data center for their own things, it'll take forever and cost twice as much just because of the bureaucracy.
I'd propose these brilliant politicians figure out how to bring down the the cost of energy while promising to build a better infrastructure for any and all players.
For water and space, there are already huge bureaucracies in place that can handle an extra work item or two, to make sure there is enough for everyone.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Monday February 09, @11:46PM (1 child)
Among other things, these data centers should construct their own electrical infrastructure, and generate their own electricity. Everywhere data centers are built, the local electrical rates jump. Make the owners foot the bill, they aren't going to share the profits with taxpayers and home owners. Can't afford all of that? Well, no data center for you!
We're gonna be able to vacation in Gaza, Cuba, Venezuela, Iran and maybe Minnesota soon. Incredible times.
(Score: 4, Informative) by optotronic on Tuesday February 10, @02:29AM
Ohio encourages on-site or next-door electricity generation for data centers, but they make it harder (takes much longer to get permits) to use renewables. So, we have a new natural gas power generation plant going in next to the new Meta data center 5 miles from us. Maybe it'll be cheaper in the short term, but long term there'll be more environmental and health impacts. Of course, Meta won't have to pay to address those.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by ikanreed on Monday February 09, @11:58PM (1 child)
Yeah, but not all money is money you want.
Data centers provide very few jobs per spend. Given the externalities on grid/water, it's not really a win for the local economy. The money that "comes in" to the owner of these places isn't spending it locally. The chips are manufactured elsewhere, there's no jobs, and while they are paying for energy, that tends to make the rest of the businesses in the area less profitable, and the lives of citizens less affordable.
(Score: 2) by aafcac on Wednesday February 11, @12:42AM
Same thing goes for billionaires, they're a massive part of most things wrong with the US, and yet people seem to think that if they leave that nobody will replace them. Or that if we tax them down to only being worth hundreds of millions that it will discourage them from doing whatever justifies that.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 10, @12:23AM (2 children)
Three years delay sounds about right, put the brakes on for now, plenty of time for the AI bubble to pop. After that crash, there will be more than enough data centers to serve the country--for quite a few years.
It's sort of like the huge push to install fiber optic everywhere...and just now (after, what, 20 years?) it's starting to reach capacity.
I'm in NY State (300 miles/500Km from NY City) and I think this is a good move. NY also banned fracking for natural gas and has saved the state a lot of environmental problems that are now all over Pennsylvania, for one example. The NY natural gas is still there, and maybe some day the frackers will clean up their act enough that they will be allowed here.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Bentonite on Tuesday February 10, @01:49AM (1 child)
Full gigabit fibre installation in the USA still hasn't been completed, even though ISP's have been paid 400+ billion USD to do so, which was more than enough to cover install costs several times over (according to "THE BOOK OF BROKEN PROMISES: $400 BILLION BROADBAND SCANDAL & FREE THE NET").
There's still dark fibre in many places available and when capacity is reached, you don't need to replace the fibre - you swap out the transceivers with faster ones and re-use the old ones elsewhere.
It is impossible to cleanly frack - once those proprietary fracking fluids are pumped down, they eventually end up in the water table, as well as whatever contaminants are in the gas too (it turns out that fracturing rock puts fractures in what used to be impermeable rock).
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 10, @02:05AM
https://www.texasmonthly.com/news-politics/permian-fracking-recycling-produced-water/ [texasmonthly.com]
Even Texas is concerned about fracking waste products.