Opinion: Data Center Opposition in US is Bipartisan
Erick Erickson argues that while foreign entities initially fueled data center opposition, it's now a widespread, bipartisan movement in the US, partly due to poor communication from AI/data center leaders like those from Anthropic and OpenAI. He contrasts this with Meta's successful community engagement and addresses common concerns like water and power usage. The piece highlights the need for Americans to understand the benefits of data centers to maintain a technological advantage.
Erick Erickson, writing in The Northern Virginia Daily, asserts that while foreign entities like China initially stirred opposition to data center growth in the United States, the movement has now become organic, bipartisan, and widespread among Americans. Erickson criticizes prominent AI and data center spokesmen, citing Dario Amodei of Anthropic and Sam Altman of OpenAI, for their perceived negative messaging that alienates the public. He contrasts their approach with Meta, which he commends for successful community engagement, offering blue-collar jobs, and generating significant property tax revenue that benefits local infrastructure and reduces citizen taxes.
Erickson also points to the industry's secrecy regarding operations, such as water intake, which fuels public distrust, despite claims that data centers use less water than golf courses and recycle much of it. He dismisses false claims about data center vibrations causing miscarriages but acknowledges concerns about low-frequency hums and power consumption. He notes that while power rates have decreased in states with many data centers, they are rising in highly regulated progressive states with fewer.
The columnist argues that China actively funds data center development, power plant construction, and anti-data center propaganda in the U.S., posing a threat to America's future technological advantage. Erickson concludes by urging Americans to understand the necessity of data centers for modern life, expressing frustration that the industry's own spokesmen, coupled with amplified fears from opponents, are undermining public support for a critical technology.