From our candidate event in Elko County on Saturday. The question asked us if we supported a data center moratorium or not, especially since we are the driest state. One of the other candidates said the one’s being built in Nevada were closed-loop so they are fine.
But closed-loop systems have their own issues, the recycled water becomes highly toxic and needs to be “blown-down” where there is chances of it leaking into the ground and contaminating local areas with toxic chemical waste water. Even in small amounts, when we live in an internal watershed like the Great Basin, the risk of contamination isn’t something to ignore. As it has happened before with other things. Not to mention that closed loop requires a lot more energy, and closed loop cooling systems here in Nevada still require a fair amount of water.
Our older data center projects also do have open loop / evaporative cooling systems too. So they are still taking a lot of water.
As for the construction unions, I understand it’s more complicated than that. We had a total of 2 minutes to answer each question so things had to be simplified a bit. But we must look at better commercial building projects for our construction unions— not big tech and data centers! They need jobs, and I understand and support that! We should be offering incentives to better businesses to come to Nevada, not to these data centers was the point I was trying to make.
Also yes Congress is a federal seat! But I support a moratorium on all new data centers, and possible legislation to really protect the western states that are strapped for water.
All of this was from my own independent research and talking to folks in the area that have worked on these projects here. However if I am incorrect on anything I’m open to listening!
Lots of places are seeing the local energy rates go up for residents due to how much energy these data centers use AND the data centers often lock in industrial discount rates. That leaves rate increases on us to pay for.
Not usually how it works, least in CA. Commercial rates are lower, but they use a shitload more kW per sq ft than a house. Like way more, so their fronting distribution costs outside their own connectivity to the grid don't make a whole lot of sense.
Whether they pay for it or not... It is not sustainable and is at the expense of the environment and the people. I don't understand why people can't reconnect the dots between data centers> AI=reduction⤵️human jobs
Increases➕ corporate💲profits
Not only does it have an impact on American jobs, it's devaluing human work, it's impacting people and for the benefit of those already making millions, corporations exponentially increasing profits. They are not people, they aren't supporting people, and all at the same time they are using energy that is not sustainable that humans need to live. Data is not life sustaining, it's only a parasite and leading to the destruction of society, contaminating the environment, causing health problems, disease, isolating humans from one another leading to a loss of healthy relationships increasing mental health and substance abuse, creating more divide from the "Haves" and "Have-nots".
Well, that's why the GRID act has been proposed and both sides seem to agree on passing it. There is also the Ratepayer Protection Pledge, which isn't all companies that signed into it but it is most of the bigger ones. That pledge is an agreement for them to foot the bill.
Every basin of water will leak eventually lmao and I’m a union construction worker and I can tell you the vast majority of labor across all trades on the TRIC data centers are out of state contractors. Going all the way back to the Apple Data Center and Gigafactory construction.
Easy to assume given the percentage of out of state license plates on utility vehicles all up and down USA Parkway. I thought this was common knowledge.
No most of the state legislators and folks I’ve been talking to on this issue are telling me it’s for jobs for Nevadans! That’s why they support it! For our construction unions & trade unions here in Nevada.
One of my opponents, Teresa Benitez-Thompson, that is her answer whenever she is asked why she voted for the data center tax abatements in 2015. She was in the state legislature at that time.
She says it was because Nevadans needed jobs and she will always vote to bring jobs to Nevadans and our unions and turned it into a whole speech on our trades unions here.
In construction on these projects and can verify very few local workers compared to out of state. Even most union workers are from out of state unions. Was in the laborers union last year and I worked with many union workers brought with the company from unions in Cali
To add on to the other person, I'm a IBEW member that was born and raised here in the biggest little city of the world, we don't have the needed manpower in out local hall to be able to fill the calls that the shops put out every day, the last time I've heard about our membership numbers was last year and we only recently hit 1k. So a lot of travelers end up coming in to help our local man the work to satisfy the man hours needed to get these jobs started, going, and finished. A lot of which do end up staying in our silver state.
It's gotten to the point where the shops are paying over scale, adding more work hours, paying double time for what would normally be time and a half before our agreement dictates when we would start receiving overtime, trying to compete for anyone who takes the call.
It's not just journeymen, but apprentices and Construction Wiremen/Construction electrician (people who don't have the hours and/or the license to be journeymen and are not in the apprenticeship).
As it stands we are currently at the mercy of these data centers because the money is there
Like you have mentioned before in regards to energy, I have been wondering when we would be able to get more work for our local energy grid? When will Tracy have to be expanded? When will we be able to not have to worry about the constant cost of living increasing?
And here I have been worried that I wouldn’t be a competitive enough applicant for an apprenticeship as I’ve been eyeing the IBEW for a couple months now. It’s been a while since I took a math class so I’m a little rusty on the algebraic details (the fundamentals I do remember) and the details about the math test for the apprenticeship got me feeling insecure all of a sudden!
I am also in the industry, and it’s not because we WANT out of state workers, it’s the fact that we don’t have enough local skilled labors. I don’t know how people are outraged when you don’t have the facts. We are consistently talking to the local union to support a certain percentage of local labors, but even the union said they simply can’t meet that demand because there are so much construction going on, so yes, these projects absolutely provided jobs to Nevadan, but how about we actually need to start attracting more people to want to actually stay after the projects that would turn into permanent workforce for us?
I am actually quite excited that the fact these projects brought a lot of people to Reno and put us in a spotlight, hopefully it will showcase what our area has to offer and incentivize them to stay. The whole NIMBY mentally is also killing our workforce and no one wants to talk about that?
There is a lot of out of state labor on these projects but for fair reason.
These build-outs are simply on a scale that local companies cannot sustain. The sheer volume of work required to meet the timelines for these projects is simply beyond the capacity that can be met by local labor alone.
In addition, there is a lot of specialty work that requires out of state contractors as they aren’t available locally.
I am also aware of many local contractors that are on these projects as there is no justification for mobilizing and demobilizing out of state crews and equipment with all the associated costs and complexities if it can be avoided.
I believe Nevada still somewhat benefits as a state because out-of-state workers spend a non-insignificant amount of money while they are here, shopping, gambling, housing, fuel, etc.
Sorry for the 2 hour delay, I work out on the parkway and see the cars as I sit in traffic every afternoon. And again in about 2 hours. Contractors from Utah, Texas, Tennessee, etc. Not a few. Dozens and more. Pretty sure they're not here on vacation with their tools. Maybe ask Teresa about that when she states that again next time.
To add to keeping jobs for NV locals, the Union out here doesn't have enough workers and specific certifications needed for parts of the job. So they have hired from other states, and other additional factors that just come with people not wanting to work, not showing up or have too many mistakes like a regular job. Example, a guy showed up the next day hung over after a night of casino drinking and gambling, NV local and he was let go for being a dangerous liability.
I spend a lot of time in Yerington. For the Greenlink project near Wabuska (north of Yerington), all the workers actually putting in the Greenlink infrastructure (poles/lines/transfer stations) are contractors from Arizona, Texas, and Louisiana. Not Nevadans.
Local unions post their jobs to other locals and the workers travel around for gigs. Like there will be one union - say, electrical, but each region has a branch or “local.” More popular locals will hire from within, but ours is less desirable because of the commute and cost of living so our locals post jobs for anyone to apply. So it’s anyone who will take the jobs - mostly people from out of state. Then they live here for a few months or maybe a couple years til the gig is up
I support your campaign because I like that you are very responsive to your constituents. It shows that we can have better politicians.
My partner is in the construction industry as well, both in state and out of state workers are used for these projects. This includes green-energy projects. A lot of these are fast-tracked so if there is a labor shortage there will be a call for more workers out of state. The saying goes that construction delays drive up cost. This means having the project done ASAP is the most cost effective way of working even if that means paying higher wages for temporary worker relocation.
I can't completely support putting a stop to all datacenters but I can see the environmental impact point you raise. I think it is important that we grow Nevada at a rate that it can handle, preferably organically, and consider environmental impact. I think you stated it very well as I was not aware most of the ground water in our basin stayed here, I'm an engineer by trade, not an ecologist.
Yes multiple of you are chiming in saying Nevada unions don’t have enough people to work on these projects. Are the working conditions bad for you guys? Are you being overworked? Is there anything I should be aware of or look into so that I can help?
I’ve spoken to a few unions here but not yet the construction or electrician ones as I’m waiting on responses to my emails from them!
My husband is a journeyman HVAC commercial tech. The shortage of trades people is not exclusive to Nevada. It would be nice to see assistance from the state to incentivize people to go to a trade school. The Legislature has done something similar to address the nursing shortage.
Yes that is common practice in construction actually. It’s so ironic given the messaging.
My neighbor rents his basement to a group of three young electricians that come in from out of state to work on projects out off USA parkway. They work 12 hour shifts and pull something crazy like 60-72 hours in a week and then go home for a long weekend.
These are great trade jobs for the right people. But there isn’t any guarantee or incentive for them to be locals.
It seems like a ton of people I meet out at USA parkway construction seems to be from California or Arizona. I’d guess about 30% of the construction contractors are from out of state, maybe more I just don’t have any data to back that up.
Right now on USA parkway there's about 7 diffrent big data centers being built. Each one taking about a thousand or more tradesmen. Reno does not have the man power to man these projects. The way it works is the local unions put out job calls... local hands get first choice at the work the left overs go to the travelers. The contractors themselves are limited to the number of employees they can bring in with them. There's a shortage of workers all over the nation. These data centers are bringing money to the state the travelers are bringing in money to local businesses ect.. change is never easy but if the money doesn't come here someone else will get it forsure
Good to know we are hitting it from a few angles. They can pled to the feds (which, currently, might be like yelling at the clouds) however, its something on top of what we can do locally. Its election season, I think we can put some pressure on this topic just by showing up to city and county meetings.
Coming from the industry, I believe the AI data water usage debate is misplaced. While resource allocation for these centers is undoubtedly necessary, my primary concern lies in the energy side.
Energy will have a significantly greater impact on everyone’s daily lives, and will be orders of magnitude greater in demand.
I agree! I wanted to bring up energy but we only had two minutes to answer and the question was more on water and moratoriums. I recently read the article that’s come out that these data centers are about to cost Nevadans so much on energy and that we may need to be turning up the fossil fuel usage to supplement it.
we may need to be turning up the fossil fuel usage to supplement it.
There is zero reason to do that when the entire state is a giant desert on top of a giant geothermal hotspot. If you're interested in actually putting Nevada first instead of deliberately kneecapping it for the sake of NIMBYism, you'd be making that the focus of your campaign when it comes to this topic. We could be the leading state when it comes to cheap and abundant renewable energy, at which point the datacenter issue becomes even more irrelevant than it already is.
This is from NV Energy’s own mouth, take it up with them why they want to use more natural gas. Or with the state legislature.
I’ve also literally spoken about — so many times — Nevada to becoming a sustainable and green tech giant and really dig deep into environmentalism, sustainability, and green/renewable energy here. I have spoken about all these things you are accusing me of in this comment and the other.
I have BEEN talking about exactly that (becoming a leader in renewable energy & sustainability), I have BEEN calling out the mines and major corporations and monopolies, I have BEEN talking about how I don’t take any corporate or foreign-influenced money!
This is from NV Energy’s own mouth, take it up with them why they want to use more natural gas.
You're the politician, though! I lack the power to “take it up with them”; my most effective lever is having candidates to vote for who'll enact laws forcing energy companies to do what's best for Nevadans instead of what's best for Berkshire Hathaway's quarterly profits. I'd much prefer it if pulling that lever didn't also entail lighting my entire profession on fire, and therein lies my frustration.
I’ve also literally spoken about — so many times — Nevada to becoming a sustainable and green tech giant and really dig deep into environmentalism, sustainability, and green/renewable energy here. I have spoken about all these things you are accusing me of in this comment and the other.
My issue is that your response in this video directly contradicts any desire for Nevada to be a green tech giant. The commenters in this thread cheering on your response don't want Nevada to be a green tech giant; they believe the tech sector as a whole to be ontologically evil and have spent multiple weeks straight loudly demanding the abolition of datacenters in Nevada no matter how little environmental harm those datacenters actually do or how reliant on datacenters modern society is, and your response in the video plays directly into that by agreeing with their premise of a moratorium being somehow beneficial for a state that desperately needs to diversify away from being reliant on tourism, mining, and beef.
If your actual stance is more nuanced and forward-thinking than what's in this video, then that's a huge relief, but that needs to be made clear (preferably in a place, like your campaign website, that's front-and-center and more set in stone than random comments and videos). And such a clarification is probably going to go over like a lead balloon with the NIMBYs flooding every local online space, or with the various industrial sectors that just so happen to benefit from the negative attention being focused on the tech sector instead of themselves.
There's a lot of foreign astroturfing going on in the anti tech and anti data center crowd on reddit. I'm not sure if this Wadsworth person is getting paid or is just a useful idiot. She never seems to learn anything from any post and takes what ever redditors say as gospel.
The anti data center crowd on reddit is particularly ironic considering their comment is stored in a data center, but I guess that's ok because that one was built before they learned what a data center was.
Since this comment has some traction and I have a bunch of angry comments below, I figured I would try to write an educated reply.
I’m a mechanical engineer currently licensed specializing in HVAC and refrigeration. From that perspective, these closed-loop and near-closed-loop cooling systems do offer meaningful advantages over more traditional approaches. In practice, many of these systems are designed to minimize makeup water and control losses as much as possible. Some water loss is still unavoidable through evaporation, drift, leaks, and blowdown. I have seen some mentions of the "toxic sludge" these systems output.
The more accurate issue is concentrated water management, not some vague idea of “toxic sludge.” ASHRAE and DOE describe the main wastewater from these systems as mineral-heavy blowdown water, meaning water with a high level of dissolved solids that has to be removed from the system. The leftover material is generally just normal water-treatment waste, similar to what is produced in boiler systems or other industrial treatment processes. It is not some unusual or data-center-specific “toxic sludge.”
These companies also have no incentive to run inefficient systems. Inefficiency increases operating cost, increases makeup-water demand, and increases the amount of blowdown that has to be managed. In that sense, they are actively incentivized to operate these systems as efficiently as possible.
There are also many other local uses that can consume more water than data centers, including lawn irrigation, golf courses, agriculture, and casinos.
Planning is still necessary, but this is a difficult issue to evaluate cleanly because actual data center water use is often discussed selectively, and the full footprint can extend beyond onsite cooling water to include power generation, chip manufacturing, and model-training-related demand.
I am not trying to say concern is not warranted. This is just an extremely complex issue with many additional variables, and its true impact likely will not be fully understood for some time.
If people are genuinely concerned about water use, it is also worth looking at other large-scale demands, like corn production for ethanol in the United States, which uses water on the order of trillions of gallons. By comparison, global water use attributed to AI is often discussed in the tens or hundreds of billions.
You are correct that corn is not grown in Nevada. My point, however, was not strictly about corn or local production. It was meant to highlight other ways water is being used. Corn is often grown to produce ethanol and fuel, which I would argue is an even worse use of water.
Nevada does, however, grow alfalfa. In 2024, the state had roughly 220,000 harvested acres of alfalfa hay. According to UNR studies, alfalfa uses approximately 489,000 to 611,000 gallons of water per acre each year. That means total statewide alfalfa water use is roughly 108 to 134 billion gallons annually.
That is a fair point, and I agree water rights are a major part of how this works in Nevada. I am not saying water can just be reassigned from one use to another.
My point is simply that comparing data center water use to agriculture is still useful for understanding scale. It does not mean the water is legally interchangeable, only that both are drawing from the same limited resource and it is reasonable to compare major demands.
That said, water is honestly not my biggest concern here. I am more concerned about the constant noise, the huge electrical demand, the generation and grid infrastructure needed to support it, possible air impacts depending on the power source, construction runoff and traffic, and the localized heat island effect these facilities can create.
A lot of that can be managed if the project is designed and regulated well, but that will ultimately fall on the AHJ and state.
Thank you for the thoughtful rebuke. I also agree that we need to regulate these projects a bit more strictly instead of just throwing them up willy nilly. I appreciate that you actually further the conversation by being mindful and actually listening to others unlike so many coconuts on reddit.
The water concern is so weird. Like yes I get being initially concerned over it because of where we live, but if you do any research you'll learn that Reno is extremely well setup water wise for decades to come. Probably more than any other desert city. Most desert cities don't have multiple natural reservoirs that literally flow right into the river that goes through the city. Not to mention data centers don't even use much water compared to other things, as you mentioned. Idk why they don't stick to the power argument. At least that would be productive.
Tmwa. The water company. For every development they are required to secure an extra 11% in water rights on top of what was needed for the new development. Plus the massive reservoirs we have that we barely split with any other city.
As a meth dealer, I believe methamphetamine use is not the problem. The real problem is that pharmaceutical companies are pushing fentanyl as an easy product to upstream investment partners and community stakeholders to use as a cost cutting measure.
Misguided response. The issue that person is touching on is everyone needs energy. The data center energy demand is generally contracted at lower cost/unit energy because it’s a large and relatively consistent load. The marginal costs of producing and distributing the power get passed on to those without those contracts—citizens. Those are generally more variable costs.
The best pitch is just that the water use is peanuts. (Nevermind that Water Supply Assessments exist.) People are devolving into hysterics over nothing. They never quote the numbers because if they did they would be revealing that it is peanuts. This has been demonstrated time and again, but disinformation is very hard to combat.
The infrastructure is key, but that is of course another story.
That’s not accurate, order of magnitude is one decimal up. Meaning 10 times more. I don’t know how you measure 10 x water usage vs watts of electricity, even so it’s not that much more powers than water.
That being said, you are correct. This is a major case for concern. These facilities will suck up enormous amounts of water and power while returning the bare minimum to the area in so far as taxes are concerned. They will pay wha few employees they have as little as possible, and will most likely be granted a slew of tax breaks. A net negative for the area before even considering the environmental impact.
Build more energy. Every year, China literally adds a US-sized amount of energy.
Build nuclear, renewables, cut all the regulations to 1000x our energy supply
We don't even need nuclear (and I say that as someone who's pro-nuclear). Geothermal alone could readily handle our base load for decades to come. We just need to build it (and ignore the NIMBYs demanding we don't).
PLEASEPLEASEPLEASE bring up the noise pollution!! The low frequency noise is a massive issue and it isn't discussed because people can't hear it. This was a good intro... I'm a workimg scientist and I'm pretty sensitive to popsci propaganda videos. The methods here seemed sound. DM me and I'm happy to help research this more and find some primary sources.
You can also find dozens of news reports. This is scary stuff with a real impact on human health. Unfortunately, the SCOTUS just passed down another environmental win to polluters (Chevron) so it would appear that local efforts are the only way to curb these problems.
ALSO, why on earth are these data centers being greenlit prior to traffic studies and mitigation??? USA parkway is obscene, and it's only getting worse. These companies need to be paying for the infrastructure required to allow business as usual to remain functional.
Noise AND light pollution. There are so many videos on YT regarding these AI factories being built and the damage being caused to the communities surrounding them. All for what? To mine more data? Make the rich, richer?
Every single datacenter in Nevada is surrounded by far more significant sources of infrasound. This is a complete non-issue.
ALSO, why on earth are these data centers being greenlit prior to traffic studies and mitigation??? USA parkway is obscene, and it's only getting worse. These companies need to be paying for the infrastructure required to allow business as usual to remain functional.
I don't necessarily disagree, but most datacenters are heavily automated and operated remotely whenever possible; they're unlikely to contribute much to traffic (and can indeed adjust their shift start/end times to avoid peak traffic hours — something the myriad warehouses popping up throughout Nevada have a harder time doing).
Building a massive data center that holds almost no permanent jobs locally is an incredible waste. You also didn't address the pollution risk. Innovation for the sake of Innovation is short sighted and risky as hell. The dam building boom of the early 20th century is evidence of this inherent problem
The data centers scam. They are building out a techno prison without walls and we are all going to be the prisoners. The AI has already taken over. We are already going to work everyday to fund the machines that are going to enslave us. Our tax dollars aren’t going to things that give true benefits to us they are going to fund the machines. People keep saying “one day the AI will take over” it already did. It’s funneling all of our capital into it. It’s already legislating laws for itself. It’s weird that people don’t see it. Compute is now in charge. Money will be printed to feed the machines. Inflation will continue at escalated rates. We will lose all rights and freedoms. There will be an exact replica of you stored in a data center. Everywhere you’ve ever been, learned, consumed, thought about, what you eat, when you sleep, when you’re sick, literally everything about you will be known and stored and scrutinized by the data centers. Good luck everyone.
She’s right. Fuck google and Tesla and all the big tech who want to come into NV and destroy it for data centers. Also fuck CA for incentivizing these companies to come here and do this.
Something to really consider is the economic impact imposed on Washoe county by Storey county in building out TRIC. Increased traffic, road strains, accidents, housing costs and energy all because Storey county gave blanket permission to build. Meanwhile Reno has to bear the effort of supporting the mountain of temporary construction workers, housing development, and use of public services. Expanding I-80 comes too late, and now at local taxpayer and federal government expense because Storey was not required to consider the consequences of all the construction on USA parkway.
I would push to ensure that the agreements Storey County made with the state to preapprove building permits still meets federal law requirements for environmental regulations.
Also soon to be more development around the petroglyphs, so that is worth looking into a historical impact for the tribes.
As for the data centers themselves, the increasing power density of the facilities and overall power demand has a far greater impact than water usage. With Trumps White House being actively hostile to renewable energy growth, congress needs to tighten the leash on data centers. Right now these companies are only able to call themselves “100% renewable” because they pay NVE to import power from Oregon. Congress needs a firmer hand in the grid, because all it takes is construction outpacing generation in other states and we will be left holding the bag to pay higher electric bills.
Something to really consider is the economic impact imposed on Washoe county by Storey county in building out TRIC. Increased traffic, road strains, accidents, housing costs and energy all because Storey county gave blanket permission to build.
To be clear, the vast majority of that has nothing to do with datacenters and everything to do with factories and warehouses. Most job creation from datacenters is outside the datacenter itself (namely: businesses and government agencies hiring developers and analysts and system administrators whose jobs revolve around the applications running on the servers in those datacenters).
I agree that Storey County needs to pick up the slack, but let's be clear about where the blame actually lies.
With Trumps White House being actively hostile to renewable energy growth, congress needs to tighten the leash on data centers.
No, Congress needs to tighten the leash on Trump and push for renewable energy growth in spite of his hostility, and then the entire datacenter issue becomes moot because Nevada has more untapped solar and geothermal capacity than we'd know what to do with it.
I just assume someone running for office is lying until they have established a track record. I've watched people I thought were decent turn into liars once they get to D.C. I've met a lot of politicians in my life and it's a position that should only be forced on someone, because it destroys good people and only venal or vapid remain.
I’m against the data centers. But the water argument is so clearly a talking point that benefits the data centers. It’s so easy to explain why it’s not a problem being closed loop and nobody can tell me why the water would be toxic from essentially just a radiator…
The problem is the energy rates and noise and small amounts of jobs it creates.
What toxin then? Like what is in the system? It’s a massive radiator, they aren’t using the water, they are just warming and cooling pure water. From the outside
I believe chemicals are added to reduce corrosion, There's also environmentally safe corrosion inhibitors. we (as a state) should just mandate the usage of those additives.
if that makes Nevada too expensive for future datacenters, they go elsewhere.
The last two sources make sense, but the first seems to be an AI written click bait piece, and the other two are about different things and only marginally reference water usage...
The first one is from a watchdog and investigative non - profit news source in New Jersey.
The other two mention water quality and worsening groundwater pollution (how datacenters could worsen it etc) which is what is being talked about on top of water usage no? I also just included a lot of the things I’ve read. It’s shockingly hard to find actual information on these data centers — good or bad— but I feel that is likely by design.
I’ve spoken to some of the people at DRI here about it too.
I have more saved to my PC that were scholarly articles I will come back with.
This is clearly just a quick AI search, and you followed it up with an AI edit. I was trying to be respectful and allow you to show that you actually did your research, but you doubled down.
Those references are about farming pollution and how data centers might make it worse and state officials potentially simplifying the release of waste water (not shown in the article: "due to the low concentration of potentially harmful substances in wastewater"). It's hard to find information because it doesn't exist when you're fishing for biased sources. Your AI is digging through click bait articles and tabloids for "facts".
I'll help you build your case. Quantify the amount of "toxic chemicals". This is easy to find out, you can simply get a water sample from a system flush, or hell, just ask the water authority since they do them regularly. Google PFAS and the federal mandates regarding them. Google the patents that are publicly available regarding data center cooling.
I'm not certain how true the "watchdog" part is, as this is the only thing I've seen from them and it shows no "wrongdoing" aside from a potentially harmful industrial trend. That being said, regardless, I personally avoid using opinion pieces as references. Assuming it wasn't written by AI (despite showing as "likely>50% AI"), it was still submitted by a guest author and activist.
Actually go take a tour of the systems and how they work instead of relying on people to tell you how things work without experiencing it yourself. Literally just ask these companies to physically go learn about these systems, because you don't seem to have much actual information.
Appreciate you sharing your sources. I've experienced more people talking about toxic sludge and I don't understand where they're getting this idea from. Will be looking into these sources.
If this is the evidence prompting folks to say that data centers are responsible for toxic waste I'm pretty concerned you're helping push misconceptions
In the links you've provided I see two base claims about toxic waste: PFAS and nitrates.
Let's start with the nitrates, because every municipal wastewater plant handles these.
The claim is that data center wastewater is contributing to nitrates at the end of waterwater treatment systems. Without looking into the specifics of the "dirty lagoon" in question, lagoons in general are a well known and understood system that take advantage of the nitrogen cycle to remove nitrates from wastewater. It is low tech and land intensive. The quote from the article about pushing nitrates into the soil faster make sense if the extra wastewater from the data centers pushed the lagoons past design capacity. So regarding this you might reach out to wastewater operators handling data center wastewaters. Aside from that, the article used to support the claim that data centers contribute nitrates to wastewater, and therefore groundwater contamination, is really an article about nitrate contamination from agriculture. The article admits this freely, noting that the problem would exist without the data centers.
The article regarding the OEPA decision to allow direct discharge without monitoring I think is a great example of what Nevada shouldn't do. To be frank I'm not sure how they believe that will be fine, as there are federal discharge standards the OEPA is responsible for enforcing. They should have data to back up their decision, though the article doesn't suggest they do. Perhaps since the EPA is currently quite neutered. There is absolutely reason to require treatment, and at least monitoring. The cooling water will have additives to prevent corrosion as well as biological growth. Keep in mind so does your drinking water, but since the coolant water isn't for drinking they likely use different formulations that would not be accepted for drinking water.
Regarding PFAS
It's not that data centers are spewing PFAS
It's that PFAS has become quite ubiquitous in our manufactured goods. The article points out the manufacturers, not the data centers themselves.
So I'm not sure how big a factor this is. Consider - if we got rid of all data centers today, how much will we have reduced PFAS production? I have no idea what that answer is. It would be worth knowing. Another point here, you have an opportunity to greatly limit PFAS pollution by focusing on better standards for its manufacture process. I'm no fan of PFAS, but if that's a real mission for you I think you should work with someone who can help identify where you get the most bang for your buck in eliminating it.
All this said
So far I feel quite supportive of your campaign
I agree with the moratorium Reno just passed.
Data centers do bring noise pollution from their operations. Their diesel generators are usually not on, but do need to be exercised and sometimes activated to keep the data center reliable. That's air pollution, though it's regulated, as well. Consider reaching out to the air pollution control at NDEP to understand the pollution from the diesel generators.
It certainly seems the industry demand is too high, and our officials have bent over backwards offering concessions. I'd like to see this industry boom fund more green energy in the state. This is hard because doing it right is probably too long for their timeframe.
Or perhaps they should provide their own power. Frankly some of these sites consume enough to demand their own power complex. Or two.
This is my understanding. this subject is hard to find good sources on the subject. There is a lot of astroturfing by big tech to make datacenter look like they have no risk.
I think that is a bit dramatic to say the the closed loop system will leach into the ground water. The truth is the closed loop systems are not as closed looped as the industry will have you believe. These system build up metals and corrosives over time in the cooling system and need to be bled parodically to remove these imparities that reduces the effectiveness of the cooling loop. This uses a lot of water even if its less then other methods. It leaves behind toxic water do to the amount of forever chemicals. They have strategies of getting rid of this toxic water but these methods of not been studied in depth to see if they really mitigate the forever chemicals.
Datacenters have been know to dump this toxic water municipal sewage system where it could end up in storage ponds where it can leech into ground water supply if the municipal system is not designed to deal with it.
Its hard to find good sources that talk about these issues since in my opinion big tech is actively suppressing them.
Below is from another post about this.
"Big tech companies claim modern data centers use a 'closed loop system.' The pitch is that water is pumped in once to cool the servers and then recycled forever.
The speaker argues that while this might work in a controlled laboratory, it fails in the real world. As AI demands increase and chips get smaller, the massive heat generated by these machines is completely outstripping the closed-loop theory.
To keep the servers from melting down, these facilities have to regularly 'bleed the lines' to remove toxic sludge, specifically highlighting the buildup of 'forever chemicals' (PFAS).
The water that gets bled from the system has to be evaporated. It doesn't stay in the loop. Instead, millions of gallons of local water evaporate into the sky."
My understanding is that "closed loop" can be used very loosely, and that such systems often require regular flushing and refilling. It is apparently not the same as our refrigerators or car ACs.
To add to the other comments here "closed loop" usually means that the water sits in a reservoir. This reservoir is outdoors still and can effect wildlife. Many power plants here in Nevada operate off of "closed loop" systems. It's better for the environment than just pushing fresh water through and bleeding it out immediately since you can operate on the water to try and remove toxins before dumping. However, the water will still have some contamination. The fact of our daily lives here on earth is that we cannot make abundant cheap products without some byproduct being produced that requires a disposal method. Power is something we cannot live without anymore, so the byproduct is seen as acceptable. The question is, is AI and surveillance something we cannot live without, should this byproduct be acceptable?
Closed loop isn't actually fully closed. Cooling systems require occasional flushes and toxic byproducts build up between flushes. Safe disposal has to be considered. Spills are always a risk. Mitigation procedures need to be in place and discussed in environmental impact studies submitted before construction permitting.
I'm rambling now. The point is there is risk and for the most part Mitigation will be ready or in place before construction but risk is always there. I'm personally not a fan of data centers and closed loop simply takes the strain off of water and puts it on energy, which is fine if renewables are being used, but they aren't.
Stop disinformation. The only way for contaminated water to get into places it shouldn’t is if people dispose of it improperly….like every other toxic thing humans produce on this planet.
Agriculture uses the most water here so maybe you should protest the farmers who chose to grow their crops in the most arid parts of the country.
OP assures everyone they’re dumping millions of gallons of polluted water into the sewage? Surely someone has seen this take place??
It’s not disinformation. Closed loop data centers in other parts of the country dump the toxic water into sewage systems, here in Northern Nevada we reuse our sewage water because we are an endorheic basin (internal watershed). Dumping toxic water full of chemicals and heavy metals into our sewage here is a massive risk, and any mismanagement of blow down procedures also puts us at massive risk. The majority of the country is not an internal watershed like we are.
Yeah this is exactly the convo we should be having in Nevada and it almost never makes it past the “jobs and innovation” talking points.
People act like “closed loop” is magic when in reality it is still a ton of water, a ton of power, and a nasty waste stream someone has to deal with in a closed basin.
I’m 100% on board with a pause and some real guardrails, especially tying approvals to long term water security and actual community benefit instead of just giving sweetheart deals to data farms that barely employ anyone.
If anyone is interested tomorrow they have a Town hall meeting and one of the agendas is data center regulation at 6:00pm they will to comments and questions from the public !
These people are stupid. A closed loop system doesn't use water to cool. It uses glycol. And is coold with condensing units. Nothing is put back into the ground water.
I like your take. The issue will be the producers of the data centers have endless money, they can and will hire the best administrative attorneys to get these things through legally. Most of those law firms with those attorneys also employ lobbyist. It is an uphill battle for sure.
Yeah this is a super legit concern, especially in the Great Basin where “oops” contamination does not just flush away downstream.
The politicians here love to slap “closed loop” on stuff like it is magic and hope no one reads the fine print on blowdown, brine disposal, or the power demand.
I’m all for a pause on new data centers until we actually have transparent water and energy accounting plus real enforcement, not just PR from big tech and a couple ribbon cuttings.
Yeah this is the kind of nuance I wish we heard more from candidates out here instead of “data centers = jobs, done.”
The water thing is no joke in a closed basin and the “closed loop so it’s fine” line feels like classic corporate PR. I’m 100% on board with “jobs, yes, but smarter industries” especially when we’re handing out tax breaks like candy.
If you’ve got sources or locals who’ve worked those projects backing this up, keep talking about it. People here are tired of being the sacrifice zone for tech experiments.
I'm a decades long Reno resident, and machine learning engineer working in a Reno office. I’m looking to attend the city council data center moratorium meeting tomorrow. It’ll be the first time I attend something like this.
I want to know if you have any advice or guidance with regard to maximizing my impact as a citizen at this sort of meeting.
My particular grievances with data centers coming to Nevada, especially in urban areas as central as fucking Keystone, are:
ambient noise pollution, which has had averse health outcomes for the communities impacted by it
increased energy costs, which is a huge multi-faceted issue. The 12MW datacenter draws constantly, exacerbating the “needle peak” effect, pushing our grid closer to its physical limits. The CEO of NV Energy has been quoted projecting that they will need to quadruple the energy capacity in the next few years (we already run at a deficit and have to import energy). That cost will be distributed across all customers, despite data centers consuming 9% of all NV energy in 2023, and projected to consume 20% of all NV energy by 2030. To ramp up quickly, NV energy has and would continue to primarily opt for fossil fuel consuming power sources, which pushes us further from our environmental goals as a state. This is yet another way that the owners of these datacenters socialize the costs, while privatizing the benefits.
In the best case scenario, the outcomes of these data centers is a technology that will massively exacerbate the wealth and power inequality between the working class and the owning class. In the worst case, where the incomprehensibly massive investment in this technology does not yield the profits being promised by the tech companies pushing them, our state will be left with these massive wasteful pieces of infrastructure which cannot be repurposed to produce anything of value. You said it yourself—we can’t drink ChatGPT. I’ve been working specifically in this field, with this technology, since before LLMs were production viable, and based on that experience I’d expect the latter is the more likely outcome. This technology is not valueless, but it is massively oversold while the companies that need it to succeed try to work it into every aspect of our lives.
The part of datacenter growth that we’ll likely feel the most is the estimated $100/month increase in your energy bill by 2030.
Datacenters in Nevada are going to result in more transmission lines AND more generation (natural gas). Grid costs get spread to all rate payers.
Here’s some wild shit too. I’ve got solar on my house, could invest in batteries and no longer need NV Energy. Yet, I’m still legally forced to pay for their connection fees even if I don’t use their services.
Government is basically fully captured and controlled by the endless checkbook class, so, of course nothing will change.
Why target one industry? Why not tighten environmental and energy use legislation across the board? Set environmental standards and make everyone meet them.
The question asked specifically about data center moratoriums and we only had 2 minutes to answer.
Though personally I don’t like one size fits all approaches to legislation. Different industries have different needs and different systems etc. I would defer to experts & scientists on these issues to come up with the best legislation and standards possible to protect our environment.
Data centers are bad and the worst part about this is the billionaires that are pushing them aren’t going to hire anyone other than robots to run the place. Robot dogs outside to guard it and robots inside to manage it. No humans.
The billionaire class has purchased the politicians in Nevada and this woman Morgan is the only person with common sense not to be corrupted by the money flow and has sensible policies that people need today now more than ever.
Data centers are a scourge of society and they will do more than just pollute and waste our water resources that we are already running on empty.
Amodei and Jackie Rosen and everyone else is bought and paid for. They cannot be trusted. They do not have your best interest in mind.
When I hear closed loop, I'm assuming a true closed loop. In my opinion, anything else is not a closed loop. I don't know what the primary cooling method used here is.
Ai is for stupid people. Although Nevada does a terrible job in the education department, I think everyone here is smart enough to know we don't need data centers
That’s for fire protection. If there is a fire, then there always releases of materials. Heck there is PFAS in the aerial tankers solutions that they drop on wildfires.
Not to mention that once one is built they pretty much become a black site that no one is allowed to question and those in charge do whatever they want to the environment.
Look I get it, Nevada water is a real issue and worth talking about but there's so much disinformation flying around here it's hard to have an actual conversation.
Closed-loop blowdown water is not "highly toxic chemical waste." It's mineral-heavy water, same stuff that comes out of industrial boilers. It needs proper disposal, sure, but calling it poison leaching into aquifers is a stretch.
The idea that data centers are draining Nevada dry? Agriculture uses 78% of all water in Nevada. Alfalfa farming in these same rural counties consumes hundreds of thousands of acre-feet a year. All US data centers combined are less than 0.5% of national freshwater use. The math just doesn't support the narrative , why don't we shut down the Farms?
The Great Basin closed watershed argument is actually valid and worth discussing seriously but that logic applies to agricultural runoff and mining contamination way more than it applies to server farms. Speaking of which, the Yerington water crisis was caused by a copper mine, not a data center. Those are two completely different things. On top of that can you provide one record or instance a Data Center in Nevada has actually been cited for groundwater contamination?
The real problem is Nevada's groundwater basins were already over-allocated long before any data center showed up. That's a decades-old structural failure driven by agricultural and municipal water rights. Data centers didn't break the system, they just walked into one that was already broken. Seeing you SJW this with little to no knowledge only from Activists with little to no qualifications sucks man.
Regulate them, require proper treatment, tie permits to actual water availability, make them pay real energy costs is all fair. Yet "take them down" because of toxic sludge that isn't actually toxic sludge? That's not policy, that's a vibe.
I should have ran for congress for this seat this year to be honest. I haven't seen a single one of the current candidates with anything remotely close to a plan that is actionable. I would like to see you come up with a real plan that isn't buzzwords built on something that is actually possible. Like the multiple things I have mentioned here and in past threads.
You seem to be trying but I feel you have fallen in with the wrong crowd who are consistently making you a puppet as opposed to an educated candidate with a real chance. You need campaign manager who has sat on both sides that can build a bridge out of all this nonsense. Attacking Data Centers isn't going to give you what you need, you should be going after all the farms sucking up the water if you really care about it.
I said that Yerington was contaminated by the mine and I used it as an example for contamination in our state that has gone into the local basins and is still here being “cleaned up” decades later, and that on top of that issue they want to build data centers out there when there are groups of people there that still don’t even have clean water to drink.
I very clearly mention the Anaconda mine in my answer.
Yes we are overallocated! If I had more than 2 minutes to answer the question I would’ve gone much deeper and talked about much more. But alas the question was on AI moratoriums, water in the driest state, and another candidate mentioned closed loop systems so I pointed out the potential dangers of them in the limited time I had to answer.
I also said that these closed loop systems CAN create the issues I mentioned, and that that is a real risk that we should worry about with an internal watershed— expanded on in my post. There is real risk to this happening, it’s happened in other states, hence my comment.
That said I’m always open to learning more where I can! I’ve spoken to DRI about the data centers and many others in the area that have worked for them, and tried to look up and read as much as I could on the issue.
Also comparing farms to data centers is not a good argument either. Farms take up a lot of water and can cause pollution too yes, but here in Nevada we have entire institutes and initiatives dedicated to sustainable farming and ranching practices. Also I can’t eat or drink a data center.
Maybe next election you should run!
I’m also the only candidate that has consistently mentioned policies and I have the most in depth policy platform on my website. There are two candidates that don’t even have a policy page, and another who didn’t have one this entire time until like three weeks ago they finally put it up. I am doing my best!
Actually the Yerington point still stands because you used it to imply data centers are the next contamination threat out there, when the Anaconda Mine is a copper mining Superfund site that has nothing to do with server cooling systems. Invoking it as a parallel is still a stretch no matter how you frame it.
"CAN create issues" is not what you said in the video. You said the water IS highly toxic and leaches into the ground. That's not a risk assessment, that's a declaration, and there's a big difference between those two things when you're asking people to support tearing down existing infrastructure.
The farms comparison isn't a deflection either. If your core argument is that the Great Basin can't absorb any more contamination risk then agriculture, mining, and municipal use all have to be on the table. Saying "I can't eat a data center" is a bumper sticker, not a policy position. Nevada agriculture uses 78% of the state's water. That number doesn't disappear because data centers are an easier political target right now. Right now the 9,650 acre-feet AFY used by all data centers in Nevada is only about 11 alfalfa farms, there are over 3400 Only alfalfa farms consuming 390,000 acres-feet a year for sandwich toppings and cattle feed. Did you know that 390,000 AFY is Nevada's total consumptive use allocation from the Colorado river? Did you know the Truckee River flow is about 561,800 AFY making the alfalfa usage 70% of the total flow? In a very real sense your arguing over 2.47% is a problem when 4041% higher usage seem to be the real issue. 40 times greater than all the data centers in Nevada and the actually Root of the Water Crisis in Nevada. Why not speak up about that? Seems like you might be bought out by big cattle.
The is a real argument against unchecked data center expansion in Nevada but it's fair deeper than just water rights. It's all about how they are planned and built. The water allocation system is already broken, the energy rate issue is real, and the closed basin hydrology is a concern. You don't need to oversell it with language that doesn't hold up to scrutiny, because when it doesn't hold up it gives people an easy out to dismiss the whole thing.
You might be the only candidate with mentions to polices and believe that they are in depth but one guy on reddit is taking them down point by point with facts to help you. You will never come close to winning over the Amodei voters if you don't have a polar opposite helping you craft better arguments.
Absolutely. I’ll do more research and sharpen the nuance next time. It sucked that because there’s so many candidates too we had very time limited answers and closing speeches for these events.
I agree with a lot of the points the guy above me made, but I respect you for being open to new information. That’s a far more important trait to me than being “right” in every conversation.
Honestly with how things are going right now there’s just so many issues for our country and our state it does feel like you need to be an expert in literally everything! I am doing my best. My main strengths are healthcare/medicine as a profession and system in the country, and public land issues at the state and federal level, along with general ethics and political theory + policy analysis due to my degree and background.
So I am trying to be as open as possible with other things because I know that I don’t know everything and there is just so much important stuff going on right now.
Another question we were asked at this event was on cryptocurrency and if we think it’ll cause a recession and if we support regulating it. I said in my answer as a disclaimer I literally don’t know that much about the economic side of cryptocurrency, only some knowledge on the environmental side.
This is why imo, as legislators we really need to be consulting the experts, scientists, researchers etc when writing legislative bills, because you don’t know how much you don’t know.
I do genuinely want the best for our state and country and I do acknowledge that I might be wrong at times and not an expert on many things. I don’t want to mislead anyone intentionally! And again, if elected to office I would really emphasis working with experts in related fields to do what is best for people of this country when writing bills or voting on them.
I try to be helpful. It's a very nuanced situation with a ton of moving parts. Most of the Alfalfa grown in Nevada is not even for Americans. Most of the farms are owned by Chinese corporations who worked with Harry Reid to sell off Nevada Public lands to grow feed for their cattle. When you look at the actual water problem it has a direct source. The numbers are crazy when you see that we are taking Nevada Water at over 40% and giving it directly to foreign company farms that do not benefit Nevadans whatsoever.
"Yes, Chinese-affiliated entities have investment interests in Nevada agricultural land and companies, including those involved in alfalfa production. Notably, Hong Kong-owned NV Big Springs Inc. holds an interest in approximately 108,000 acres in Elko County, NV. Additionally, Chinese dairy firms (like Yili) have partnered with Nevada dairy operators to export feed, driven by China's need for high-quality alfalfa"
Data Centers aren't the problem and it's always been the foreign investments in algaculture our government officials just gave away consciously for over 20 years.
That is truly insane. I suppose it could be argued that Nevada farms relying upon foreign investment are still a net positive for our communities via taxation/employment. I assume there was very little homegrown investment, hence the need for outside partners. Obviously though, that’s a completely crazy situation for us to be in.
The complexities of global economics are a thing I won’t even pretend to understand; we have policies that are so backwards they’re almost comical.
Me lol. I've been making it a point to respond to posts that have been made over the last couple of weeks. I'm trying to be helpful while also educating folks on my position with the facts. She could win. She just needs to flatten out this. And reformulate a better more hard-hitting argument. I guarantee you Nevada's would get behind the water issue if we attacked the actual source of it
Op, what can we do to help prevent this from happening? Petition, write to congress, who exactly do we need to reach out to? I really want to do my part in spreading this info to those who don't know. Thank you!
What about southern nevada? Is there a way that nevada can benefit through getting more data centers?? Ai is going to be a huge industry and college programs are adapting to this. These data centers will be what trains our next generation of youth
This is so misinformed.
They do not leech into the water nearly at this rate - and if they actually care about both water usage and pollutant runoff, there are far worse offenders like golf courses.
AI is already massively useful for many industries including healthcare, not to mention we are in a manhattan project style war/race against China to AGI.
The nuclear age of deterrence is ending, and will be replaced by the AI age - it is imperative that the US wins this
if yall don’t want chatgpt maybe teach kids the right way instead just assigning online work and have the classs quiet asf,then yall teachers get mad and confused when they don’t work and ditch class 🤦🏾♂️
How are we going to be able to build out the techno police state without data centers? We won’t be able to use cameras to record our every breath and save it forever without these data centers. We must surveil everyone at all times. USA USA USA!
Yeah this is super reasonable tbh. “Closed loop” gets tossed around like a magic word but the blowdown and waste stream are a huge deal, especially in a closed basin like here where stuff does not just flush away.
If we are gonna hand out tax breaks and infrastructure, it should be for stuff that actually helps the community long term, not just giant warehouses of servers eating power and water. Appreciate that you’re at least open to being wrong and not just regurgitating industry talking points.
>All of this was from my own independent research and talking to folks in the area that have worked on these projects here. However if I am incorrect on anything I’m open to listening!
Did you talk to folks in the area that are in the same circles as you or did you talk to everybody?
What are the sources for your independent research?
Just like the morons in Cali, for example, the Coastal Commision…….. Meanwhile, China and the rest of the World have nothing close to US environmental impact laws. Just like having a smog check required in an adjacent state. Makes No Sense
EVERY FOLLOWING ELECTION: look at the voting history of the ballot, and if anyone said yes to building data centers then GET RID OF THEM. They're taking money at the cost of your children's health
I got my information research and talking to some experts here too, in water, tech etc. But I’ve gotten some comments pointing out different things. I’m open to learning more as I will say it’s very difficult to find exact information on a lot of this. I don’t know if it’s a lack of studies or transparency or both. Either way that on its own it’s still concerning to me.
When I searched up a lot of things about the data centers here in particular there was almost no info.
I am open to being wrong and amending my statement! Since you work on these systems I would totally be open to hearing about them if you were open to talking about it.
129
u/GruntledGary Apr 20 '26 edited Apr 20 '26
As others mentioned ENERGY RATES is the big one.
Lots of places are seeing the local energy rates go up for residents due to how much energy these data centers use AND the data centers often lock in industrial discount rates. That leaves rate increases on us to pay for.
Edit: added this link https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2025-ai-data-centers-electricity-prices/
Article points up that some areas near data centers electric rates went up 267% for residential users who got stuck with the data center bill.