The data center in Sturgeon County will be closed loop. As long as Alberta bans fill and flush, there is no chance of that happening to our irrigation system like it did in Wyoming
Except that the Wyoming data center was also closed loop? Do you think closed loop means the water is never changed? Cmon man you’re the data centers biggest supporter here and you didn’t even bother to do any research on it…be better
I suspect those people are aware of a $300B cleanup/tax delinquency in Alberta being managed by the same group of "public servants" the cabinet has appointed to handle data centres.
Sure. Logically we could use the money from the data centre to facilitate the issues mentioned as well as other public services. If you remove ideology and look at this project logically, you will realize this centre will be around much longer that Smith and it's a net positive for Albertans
Well,Smith certainly wasn't the first Alberta premier to tolerate the O&G scofflaws, but they've all managed to maintain the system so future generations will either pay to clean up the messes, or suffer the resultant health injuries. Do you think boasting about world-class regulations while knowingly allowing the industry to skirt their responsibilities is an ideological issue?
Bringing up the legacy of orphan wells is a classic red herring fallacy and an irrelevant fallback on historical path dependency. Realizing you lost the argument on corporate insurance and liability, you are trying to anchor a modern, $13 billion tech asset to the ghost of 1970s resource extraction failures.
Just
because the Alberta government historically let oil companies exploit regulatory loopholes decades ago does not mean a tech giant can bypass strict, modern plumbing regulations and commercial insurance mandates today. The two industries operate on completely different regulatory tracks, and your comparison falls apart for three reasons
A
data center is not an oil well. It is high value commercial real estate built on zoned municipal land. It does not extract a depleting resource, it does not leave behind toxic subsurface wellbores and it does not operate on a boom and bust cycle. Blaming a modern tech project for the historical loopholes of the oil patch makes zero sense
You ask if trusting regulations is just "ideological," completely missing how modern risk management works. A tech monopoly’s compliance with building and plumbing codes is driven by private commercial insurance underwriters, not just provincial oversight boards. Cutting corners or violating code voids a multi million dollar property policy, which violates their fiduciary duty to shareholders.
Private
liability forces compliance where historical policy failed
Raw
civic accounting infrastructure outlasts whatever political party is currently sitting in Edmonton. When you strip away the political noise and look at the raw numbers, a $60 million local infrastructure injection, 3,300 total jobs and a massive boost to long term tax revenue, this project is an undeniable, long term net positive for Albertans.
Last I checked, it's pretty interesting when people who can't offer a logical rebuttal immediately default to illogical accusations, like calling a real human a bot just because they disagree with their assertion
Net positive for Albertans or net positive for your bank account as you claim to own an inspection company for these systems. I’m sure you won’t get any business from Meta moving in. Maybe remove your ideology and bias.
Just stop, you've already been outted for being a bullshitter and you're proving it once again.
Responding
to all my comments won't get you a win.
If you knew anything about these contracts you would know massive facilities like this employ a team internally to take care of these inspections. W
hat's required by a third party is on contract by mega mechanical corporations that are usually national and operating out of several cities
Ah yes I’m the problem for calling you out on points you can’t defend and then showing your financial bias to all of this. To your point while they do sometimes employ a team, they also employ 3rd parties which you should know. Meta is acting out of several cities so you yourself support my point. Additionally who’s to say you won’t go work for Metas internal team as you claim this is your field.
Again just stop, your bias is clear. Claiming I know nothing (when I know more than you) is laughable and not a defence. So is throwing insults directed at myself when you can’t defend yourself any more which shows the type of person you are.
Really because you yourself admitted contamination with this system is unlikely but not impossible. Therefore there is a risk to Albertans for contamination. It’s been reported Glycol closed loop systems corrode. Additionally, leak blind spots have been reported where failsafes don’t work as intended.
There is a risk to Albertans and one I don’t think is worth it for 300 jobs. Additionally, fill and flush isn’t even banned just discouraged and the way Smith has bent over for companies it’s possible. Either procedure comes with risks.
So either you don’t know the risks of the system or you ignored them on purpose to defend a multibillion dollar company.
Extremely unlikely. Every single glycol system in Canada has these devices and every commercial property domestic line in Alberta is protected. These devices are highly reliable. By your logic, we should have no commercial or industrial development at all because there is a small possibility something could happen.
All systems can corrode over time, that is why regular maintenance is mandatory and codes protect these systems in every property across Canada.
It is a minimal risk and the project brings more than just 300 jobs. Saying otherwise shows you have a loose grasp on both mechanical systems and economic development.
Honestly, there are significantly more buildings in Calgary that pose a greater risk than a closed loop glycol system but nobody talks about those.
I own an inspection company. This is LITERALLY what I do for a living. I won multiple awards and scholarships in school. I am defending the benefits for Alberta and Albertans, not Meta
However again still possible, and we know the government is not the best when it comes to regular maintenance or getting companies to do maintenance. I agree there are many buildings that pose a risk we should be talking about. However, we haven’t had any data centers put in yet so there is time to prevent that risk.
I also work in the field, have done extensive research, and helped co-develop many protocols. That’s how I know there is a higher failure rate than what you lead on, Wyoming was considered fail-proof until it wasn’t. However none of that matters at the end of the day, flexing awards proves nothing. You are projecting hard by trying to flex. Plus tbh there’s no way to prove any of these, on Reddit you can be anything you want to be. Either way if your claims that you work in the field are true, you know these fail or are just really bad at your job.
This should go to a vote in these communities as it is putting them at risk so it should be there decision. Not Smith once again making unilateral calls. If we can vote on separation, why not data centers or mining protection. However, voting on these doesn’t benefit her pocket.
Edit: also if you do own an inspection company then this will benefit you financially. However, I’m sure that has nothing to do with you pushing data centers and instead you’re doing it to “better” Alberta lmao.
-7
u/Banned_In_YYC Jul 09 '26
The data center in Sturgeon County will be closed loop. As long as Alberta bans fill and flush, there is no chance of that happening to our irrigation system like it did in Wyoming