Tell the White House: Big tech’s data centers are a threat to climate progress
NTIA
Data centers – where Big Tech runs its servers – use so much electricity that they’re actually taking us backwards on our climate progress, with coal plants staying open and nuclear energy being explored just to supply their massive energy demands. A single data center can use as much electricity as 900,000 households, and needs the same amount of water as a city of 30 - 50,000 people.
So far, Amazon and other tech corporations have avoided paying the full cost of that energy by negotiating tax breaks and subsidies with local governments and utilities – all while passing the costs on to people in the form of higher utility bills, dirtier air, and a stalled transition to renewable energy.
Now, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) is asking for input on addressing data centers’ exploding energy demands. Fill out the form and submit your comment telling them to:
- Make sure data centers are actually powered by renewable energy sources and that they don't drag us backward on a clean energy transition
- Make tech companies pay the real cost of these projects and not utility customers, the government, or the public
- Give local residents more chances to weigh in on these projects before they’re greenlit
Sponsored by
To:
NTIA
From:
[Your Name]
Re: Request for comment NTIA–2024–0002
Dear Assistant Secretary Alan Davidson,
I’m urging the NTIA to prioritize our climate and utility customers when considering data center expansion and infrastructure.
A data center can use as much energy as 900,000 households, and as much water as a city of 50,000 people. The new AI data centers being proposed today will use ten times that much energy. The resulting stress on the power grid is already forcing our communities to stay reliant on fossil fuels, and threatens to reverse the country’s progress toward its climate goals. Further, despite the fact that data centers can raise utility bills for consumers like me, these projects are often greenlit via closed-door deals with zero input from the public.
Data centers also don’t create nearly enough jobs to justify the billions in tax breaks and subsidies that tech companies have negotiated from local governments. A 2016 analysis showed that they cost almost $2 million in government handouts per job created.
On top of these taxpayer-funded handouts, regular utility customers like me are likely to foot the bill for big tech’s infrastructure needs. In Virginia, for example, a single package of transmission line projects recently approved to meet data center energy demands is expected to cost $5.2 billion and is being funded by ratepayers. Meanwhile, the increased demand, costly delayed retirement of coal facilities, and expensive construction of new methane gas infrastructure are set to increase electric bills even further.
And while tech giants like Amazon do PR about their climate goals, they are actually underreporting their emissions and lobbying for weaker climate standards, globally and in states. To make things worse, investor-owned utility monopolies are padding their pockets by serving big tech’s data centers over the public interest.
Federal agencies should ensure that we prioritize low-cost, renewable energy for the public, not for wealthy corporations – and that dirty data centers’ energy demands can’t sabotage a renewable energy transition. The administration should also ensure that tech giants pay for green infrastructure and costs are not passed to utility customers, and it should ensure greater transparency into energy demands and deals. Finally, the administration should examine the negative impacts of local tax breaks, utility deals, and other subsidies being paid to tech giants like Amazon.
Thank you,