I work every day with AI. Currently, I’m working on an AI-based file processing project at work, and every day I use Claude as my main development tool. It’s now as critical to my daily work as my Integrated Development Environment (IDE). Beyond that, I use ChatGPT heavily, with several automations set up to alert me to various news stories, local developments, city council agendas, etc.
Despite this, I think the Suffolk City Council is making a good decision by moving to restrict the development of data centers in the city. While I think that AI itself is a very useful tool, the development of data centers has often occurred without adequate regard for the impact on local residents. Large data centers rely on backup diesel generators that pollute the local air, and some facilities, like Vantage’s in Loudoun County, have even relied on fossil-fuel generators for their primary power. They use loud cooling systems that can disrupt a household, exposing previously quiet neighborhoods to constant noise that can approach the levels of highway traffic. And the large energy demands of data centers contribute to rising energy prices, especially when the required electrical infrastructure to supply them is not developed alongside them.
A permanent ban may even be appropriate in a place like Suffolk, where housing is scattered in such a way that it is difficult to find a location where there would be few or no homes impacted by the development of a large data center.
That being said, some of these problems can be mitigated or even eliminated. It is possible to regulate the use of dirty backup power sources, mandating that data centers do not appreciably pollute their surrounding air when running on generators. Noise regulations can ensure that any new facilities do not impact the peace and quality of life of nearby residents, either through sound-dampening systems or by ensuring a certain distance from residential areas. New facilities can be required to be developed alongside the electrical infrastructure required to supply them, either along existing high-voltage lines or by requiring the necessary new transmission and generation infrastructure to be in place before the facility is active.
These aren’t new problems. Suffolk has many facilities that pose similar threats to residents: factories, chemical plants, landfills, rail interchanges, etc. While a lot of these industries are not perfect, through regulation the impacts they have on residents are significantly mitigated compared to data center development, where regulations have struggled to keep up with the industry.
This does lead into another point, though. We talk about this issue as “data centers,” which is in itself an overly broad way to address the issue. “Data centers” is functionally not much different from “manufacturers” in that it can mean a broad number of different types of facilities. A peanut packaging facility, a furniture factory, a paper mill, a sheet metal fabricator, a chemical manufacturer. All of these can be classified as different types of manufacturing facilities, but it would be foolish to regulate each of them as if they are exactly the same. Each brings different threats and different benefits to the city.
Similarly, data centers can be broken up by their function. Large AI data centers are among the biggest concerns. They are packed with extremely powerful GPUs that require enormous amounts of power and generate enormous amounts of heat. But there are other facilities: cloud web services, business data storage, enterprise on-premises data centers, edge centers, CDN nodes, all of which are critical infrastructure for our modern society AND may even be considered good neighbors, generating little traffic, little noise, and little disruption in everyday life while paying a good amount of taxes to the city.
For now, I think Suffolk is making the right choice. I hope that as time goes on, cities and states find ways to regulate data centers holistically, taking into account that they serve different purposes and have different impacts.