[HN Gopher] Facebook owner Meta suspends Netherlands data center...
___________________________________________________________________
 
Facebook owner Meta suspends Netherlands data center due to
political pushback
 
Author : belter
Score  : 68 points
Date   : 2022-03-30 17:17 UTC (5 hours ago)
 
web link (www.datacenterdynamics.com)
w3m dump (www.datacenterdynamics.com)
 
| mistrial9 wrote:
 
| mrsuprawsm wrote:
| If Meta were to build enough new, carbon neutral, and green
| energy facilities to supply triple the energy costs of their
| facility and sell the remainder to the grid, I don't think anyone
| would have much of a problem with the facility.
| 
| As it stands, the data centre will use up much of the green
| energy that NL has created over the past few years, purely for
| Facebook to... sell more ads. That's not palatable.
 
| hankman86 wrote:
| Data centers are a necessity that I can accept if the services
| they host offer any utility. Facebook does not. It's a net
| negative for its users and society at large.
 
| user_7832 wrote:
| I'd like to recommend the wired article from Jan 22 for
| understanding why Facebook is getting so much pushback -
| https://www.wired.com/story/facebook-dutch-data-center/
 
| stingraycharles wrote:
| As a Dutch person, one of my biggest concerns with this
| datacenter is its green energy usage; from what I understand,
| it's going to use up a huge portion of all the green energy we
| managed to build the last years. The datacenter is huge: 166
| hectares.
| 
| To me, if that concern is addressed, I would be ok with it (a
| more suitable location would be nice though), and planting a few
| extra trees is not going to cut it.
 
  | Ferrotin wrote:
  | What's the point of developing green energy if not to use it?
 
    | mrsuprawsm wrote:
    | The point is to use it for existing energy consumption, and
    | only then start increasing energy consumption. If you add X
    | GW of green energy to your Y GW of non-green energy, and then
    | increase your usage by X, then the impact on the planet is
    | the same as the status quo, i.e. not good.
 
  | eunos wrote:
  | Levy more tax and use it to expand more green energy.
 
    | lmc wrote:
    | Or, quit Facebook and avoid needing to use any natural
    | resources at all.
 
    | contravariant wrote:
    | That's going to be tricky until we invent windmills powered
    | by hot air.
 
  | hetspookjee wrote:
  | Almost the entirety of Flevolands windmills would be used to
  | power this beast, if not more.
 
  | Bellend wrote:
  | The tree planting thing is embarrassing. That needs shot down
  | and it can't be used by any corporate body as a green
  | credential surely!
 
| holoduke wrote:
| Good thing. We don't need those (ugly power eating useless
| purpose) big buildings in our garden. If it were datacenters to
| cure cancer or something else meaningful then ok. But it's
| Facebook.
 
  | belval wrote:
  | I get the sentiment, but it's not like the Netherlands don't
  | use Facebook/Instagram/Whatsapp. There needs to be a data
  | center to address those requests and it will be built
  | somewhere. The NIMBY attitude is not really productive.
  | 
  | Compare the DC to a landfill. Do you want one in "your garden"?
  | Probably not, but it's not like you are going to convert to
  | zero waste and render the project irrelevant.
 
    | mschuster91 wrote:
    | The Netherlands are one of the most densely settled areas in
    | Europe and particularly prone to floods. Better to build a
    | datacenter somewhere in Germany or France's rural regions -
    | the real estate is cheaper.
 
      | googlryas wrote:
      | Yes the Netherlands is dense, but a vast majority of it is
      | still open space. You can see by just looking at a
      | satellite view of Zeewolde. It's almost entirely farmland.
 
      | openplatypus wrote:
      | > Better to build a data-center somewhere in Germany or
      | France
      | 
      | Hey hey, don't give them ideas. We don't want them here.
      | 
      | Plus, given current European energy struggles, when Germany
      | considers rationing power delivery, deploying Facebook
      | space heaters sucking 200MW is not only irresponsible, but
      | should be criminal.
 
        | hankman86 wrote:
        | Make it a condition that they supply all their power
        | through wind and solar on site. Can't do it? Then no data
        | centre for you.
 
    | hankman86 wrote:
    | Fair enough. I'd be OK if Facebook's data centres get
    | scrutinised over their energy use, waste of land, etc.
    | elsewhere as well. So yes, if other communities opt against
    | new Facebook data centres then it'll mean that their services
    | perform worse. So what? Society would be better off if
    | Facebook ceased to exist.
 
    | trasz wrote:
    | The majority of Google or Facebook infrastructure runs stuff
    | that's at best useless to their users, and it can be argued
    | that it's actually harmful. I suspect there wouldn't be a
    | problem with data centers if they were used for stuff that's
    | useful.
 
| naoqj wrote:
| Good for whatever other country welcomes them.
 
  | rpastuszak wrote:
  | Why, and are you sure?
 
| paxys wrote:
| Data centers are a hard sell in general because they don't really
| provide too much benefit to a community. They run on minimal
| labor, whether skilled or unskilled, so the job creation argument
| doesn't work. They have _huge_ energy requirements, which is a
| burden on the regional grid. And residents of an area won 't
| really care that the Facebook latency of all of Western Europe
| could improve by a few milliseconds because of their sacrifice.
 
  | fivea wrote:
  | > Data centers are a hard sell in general because they don't
  | really provide too much benefit to a community.
  | 
  | The Netherlands is already the home of some FANGs (AWS has a
  | few edge locations in Amsterdam) and dominant hosting providers
  | such as Cloudflare.
  | 
  | I'm sure they'll be able to overcome the loss of Facebook.
 
  | mhb wrote:
  | Don't they pay for the energy they use? Isn't there a price for
  | the energy that would make it appealing for the community to
  | have them there?
 
    | david38 wrote:
    | Energy is their #1 cost so they bargain heavily for large
    | subsidies.
 
    | paxys wrote:
    | Selling electricity is never good business. Governments are
    | at most going to recover costs of transmission and some
    | ongoing operation, never the huge up-front investments they
    | need to make in the sector.
 
    | reaperducer wrote:
    | If Facebook paid its electric bill to the neighbors, sure.
    | But it doesn't.
    | 
    | We live in an age of energy scarcity. So even if people think
    | about the electricity it uses, people probably see a data
    | center as slurping up energy, causing prices for regular
    | people to rise.
 
    | dspillett wrote:
    | If the local grid can't provide that then upgrades are
    | needed. They may pay enough for that but then the energy
    | needs to be sourced, which may mean extra fossil fuels and
    | potentially breaking promises made on move-in towards a
    | higher % renewable use. It can be about more than the
    | financial price.
    | 
    | Even if it was about the cost of sourcing and provision,
    | someone that big will bargain down close to the minimum.
    | There will be little benefit to share around elsewhere,
    | unless of course this is made specifically part of the
    | bargain (they can build, in exchange _they_ improve local
    | infrastructure to cope, as greenly as the locals desire, with
    | stated benefits for the area with compensation clauses for if
    | said benefits don't turn up).
 
  | ashtonkem wrote:
  | They tend to go through a lot of water too, which is the big
  | issue with the datacenter Meta wants to put in a town nearby to
  | me.
 
    | darknavi wrote:
    | I'm out of the loop on data center design. How do they "go
    | through" water? I'd imaging they pipe some in, use to cool,
    | and then pipe it out.
 
      | oh_sigh wrote:
      | Some percentage of it is lost to evaporation (fairly
      | obvious if you see a big steam cloud coming out of a
      | tower). How much that is...I have no idea. I don't think
      | any place on earth forces big tech companies to report on
      | the environmental impact and resource usage of their data
      | centers. In fact, I think a lot of companies view these
      | details as a competitive advantage and intentionally keep
      | these facts secret even from non-datacenter folk in the
      | same company.
 
| belval wrote:
| > "This is a purely political decision," Dutch Data Center
| Association managing director Stijn Grove said in a reaction sent
| to Reuters, adding that it had been made "largely because it is
| Facebook."
| 
| Conflicts with
| 
| > After the local council approved the project, party Leefbaar
| (Liveable) Zeewolde ran on a platform of opposition to the data
| center, citing environmental concerns and a lack of local input.
| 
| But then Facebook's response seems pretty reasonable to me:
| 
| > "We strongly believe in being good neighbors, so from day one
| of this journey we stressed a good fit between our project and
| the community is foremost among the criteria we consider when
| initiating and continuing our development processes," Meta said
| in a statement.
| 
| To me all parties involved seemed pretty reasonable, the previous
| administration was favourable to the project, but got
| subsequently voted out of office. Now they just want time to make
| sure that they didn't get voted out because of that project.
| Facebook seems to understand.
 
  | reacharavindh wrote:
  | > largely because it's Facebook.
  | 
  | Yes. If all the sorely needed renewable energy were to be used
  | for something useful,there wouldn't be this much opposition.
  | Using it for doom scrolling, ads, and waste of time - sure sane
  | people are against it. I'm happy that people see through the
  | bullshit for once.
  | 
  | IMO, They should be allowed in only if they produce 100% of the
  | renewable energy they could consume. Let Facebook pay the
  | millions in windmills and solar panels, and sure, they can be
  | part of the society.
 
  | user_7832 wrote:
  | > To me all parties involved seemed pretty reasonable, the
  | previous administration was favourable to the project, but got
  | subsequently voted out of office. Now they just want time to
  | make sure that they didn't get voted out because of that
  | project. Facebook seems to understand.
  | 
  | I'm assuming your comment is in good faith, and you're not from
  | Facebook's PR team. I don't think you're aware of the history
  | of the case. Local opposition to the project is nothing new -
  | starting with how Facebook hiding its identity with the locals.
  | 
  | The full list of reasons is much more than I can comfortably
  | type, I'd recommend reading this wired article instead -
  | https://www.wired.com/story/facebook-dutch-data-center/
 
  | hetspookjee wrote:
  | That data center association is just a huge lobby front. Just
  | the website in itself is a hilarious joke and a complete
  | cherrypicked representation of some numbers. Good luck finding
  | any numbers there that may possible harm their case.
  | 
  | This data center is ridiculous beyond belief in Dutch aspects
  | and that is even got this far in voting is solely due to the
  | prime ministers choice to push these responsibilities toward
  | local municipalities, a village of 30k inhabitants deciding if
  | a power consumer equivalent of 700k inhabitants would fit in
  | their region. The way they Facebook made their case was a joke
  | too as they, just like Google and Microsoft argued there'd be
  | many job opportunities and rest warmth.In addition they argued
  | they needed to have an exception to be added to the power net
  | which is already massively overburdened and lagging, just for
  | the sake that the reigning party can appease their consumer.
  | Even Eric Wiebes, the then minister of economics, meddled in
  | this business in favour of "getting it done". In the end our
  | prime minister Mark Rutte who was from the same party also
  | started to chime in to move things forward.
  | 
  | That this was shot down was only because, indeed, the entirety
  | of the Netherlands was against this data center and the local
  | municipality elections came by and destroyed all the parties
  | that voted in favour. All of a sudden the powerless Huge de
  | Groot found a way to block this thing.
  | 
  | It is more than a political decision but that this got blocked
  | in the end does move me slightly away from the extreme cynism
  | that is most apt as view on the whole of the Netherlands
  | policital theater.
 
    | Dylan16807 wrote:
    | > that is even got this far in voting is solely due to the
    | prime ministers choice to push these responsibilities toward
    | local municipalities, a village of 30k inhabitants deciding
    | if a power consumer equivalent of 700k inhabitants would fit
    | in their region.
    | 
    | I don't see why that's a problem?
    | 
    | > added to the power net which is already massively
    | overburdened and lagging
    | 
    | Is that being worked on? Is there a reason the electrical
    | payments from the datacenter couldn't be used to make the
    | power network net better? Charge them a higher rate for the
    | first x years if necessary.
 
      | colinmhayes wrote:
      | I think a large part of the problem is that they're
      | building renewable power as fast as they can, but are still
      | heavily reliant on Russian gas for electricity. So building
      | this data center would increase their reliance on Russia.
 
    | belval wrote:
    | To me that's just the system working as intended, if people
    | voted against it then that's that.
 
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-03-30 23:00 UTC)