Thanks Terry! I can understand that it’s important to build out rules for situations like this. However, from my perspective I don’t think anyone in Apex wants this data center, so why don’t we just say no thanks? Why are we trying to make this work?
We’re obligated to follow our process once someone applies. If we vary from our process, it could be grounds for a lawsuit to overturn the outcome. Due process and all that.
Why are these data centers not using Nuclear? The technology has come a LONG way, and now there are companies like Nano Nuclear and Nuscale Power that are developing "small modular reactor" technology, (SMR). These reactors are portable, and could power a city with a reactor the size of a refrigerator. This is a no-brainer.
Optimistic projections (from IEA, Urenco/Lucid, and some developers) see SMR LCOE dropping to $40–$90/MWh by the 2030s–2040s under "breakout" or "transformation" scenarios with mass manufacturing and standardized deployment.
In Apex, I'm currently paying ~$145.80/MWh, and the national average is ~$180–$200/MWh, but you're missing the point. SMR's wouldn't impact residents at all, would be carbon-free, and with multiple SMR's, Data centers WOULDN'T REQUIRE GENERATORS.
Tech companies like Google are actively pursuing SMRs for reliable, carbon-free baseload power:
Google signed a deal with Kairos Power (via TVA) for up to 500 MW total from multiple SMRs (starting ~2030, with the first ~50 MW unit online then, scaling to 500 MW by ~2035). This could power significant portions of their AI data centers in regions like Tennessee/Alabama.
I hope all the people saying “no data centers anywhere” don’t use any services that require datacenters. No social media, no ChatGPT, no Gemini… right?
Maybe your next post can explain how you have to give applicants a fair hearing and what laws you have to follow so the "just say no" people can see why you can't just say no.
Thanks for taking our concerns seriously. No one in Apex seems to want a data center. There are a lot of down sides and they don't actually bring jobs to the area so I'm not sure what up side there is to the community.
Providing your concerns regarding the data center is appreciated. But in the interest of environmental, health, and financial issues that will negatively affect the citizens in Apex, the data center, regardless of the size, should not be approved. The citizens of Apex believe the Council will do what’s best for the people and not for profit or gain.
Absolutely not, no, no, no. Like another commenter stated, "in the interest of environmental, health, and financial issues that will negatively affect the citizens in Apex, the data center, regardless of the size, should not be approved. The citizens of Apex believe the Council will do what’s best for the people and not for profit or gain." You bring one of those beasts into this community and my vote will change immediately. - Amanda Murphy
There is a lot to take in, but I think we can find case studies all over the U.S. where the impacts of these data centers have been substantial, without providing any reasonably measurable economic benefit locally that measures up to the costs and burden put on everyone. I understand datacenters are necessary otherwise many services would not be available, but tech companies need to be more responsible. The issue here is tech companies are racing against each other to be "the winner" not taking into consideration the damaging effects their actions might have. Promises of AI that quite frankly are still mostly unproven, except to produce more lies and BS creating more noise than value across the internet.
If the town were to reject the New Hill data center, quite honestly, we would lose nothing. Tax revenue is not a reason to do anything, assuming there would even be any substantial gains in that area. I've heard mention of taxing the datacenter to give back to residents to offset the burdens it would put on the cost of living for residents, but the problem there is, quite frankly, taxes should never be a solution to a problem. Furthermore, this data center will affect not just Apex, but all of Wake County, and to some degree, neighboring counties. Due is aiming to raise rates across the board (even while still showing $5 billion profit). There just isn't much to gain but a lot to lose. I've given my ideas several times on different forums and Apex specific social media pages.
In a nutshell, make them provide their own power and water sources to start with OR they invest heavily in the local infrastructure (expanding Shearon Harris to add more reactors). For noise move as much infrastructure underground. Also, going deep enough underground helps with cooling and can reduce the amount of water consumption. Noise is more difficult, unless the generators are under ground in specialized rooms with proper ventilation. The problem is these datacenters don't try to be creative in their designs. They want a piece of land and the most simplistic infrastructure possible. They do not design for people comfort, because the majority of the place will be uninhabited by people.
Regulations may be necessary, although it is impossible to think of everything. Then there’s the “they say they are going to conform, but then they don’t scenario. And the “what personnel are available to monitor, do we have to hire more people” unexpected costs. And I continue to ask, what is the benefit to having a data center, mega or otherwise, in our town. I’ve yet to hear any compelling accurate benefits.
I too am very leery of a Data Center. Thanks for your explanations of commitment to keeping Apex a safe and healthy place to live. My hope is that there is no sliding backwards and making concessions to the health and livelihood of the Apex community in order to have any size Data Center.
Terry, thank you for taking the time to share this information!
I do have a question about the distinction between light and heavy industrial zoning in regards to the town’s Unified Development Ordinance. Is there language in the UDO which specifically addresses whether a data center project would be considered light or heavy industrial? Or is that going to be open to interpretation?
It’s a semantic difference, that though useful as a planning tool loses its importance once a concrete project is proposed. Once that happens the project needs to be judged on its own merits.
Thanks Terry! Who will the data center serve? Large Corporations. How much will it cost Apex? In addition to local residents paying for the 'upgrade', there are environmental impacts (which you are calling out). Water, coal, noise pollution.... and let's face it, Data Centers do NOT employee a significantly large workforce - nor will they significant;y contribute to our tax base etc. Corporations wants to dump data centers in 'cheap' location and let that municipality and its citizens pay all the burdens. No thank you!
I appreciate you looking into the concerns about the data centers but we simply do not want it.
Noted
Thanks Terry! I can understand that it’s important to build out rules for situations like this. However, from my perspective I don’t think anyone in Apex wants this data center, so why don’t we just say no thanks? Why are we trying to make this work?
We’re obligated to follow our process once someone applies. If we vary from our process, it could be grounds for a lawsuit to overturn the outcome. Due process and all that.
Copy that, thanks.
Why are these data centers not using Nuclear? The technology has come a LONG way, and now there are companies like Nano Nuclear and Nuscale Power that are developing "small modular reactor" technology, (SMR). These reactors are portable, and could power a city with a reactor the size of a refrigerator. This is a no-brainer.
Would love to see the commercialization of SMRs, but I’m not sure if it’ll be economical in my lifetime.
Not according to Grok...
Optimistic projections (from IEA, Urenco/Lucid, and some developers) see SMR LCOE dropping to $40–$90/MWh by the 2030s–2040s under "breakout" or "transformation" scenarios with mass manufacturing and standardized deployment.
In Apex, I'm currently paying ~$145.80/MWh, and the national average is ~$180–$200/MWh, but you're missing the point. SMR's wouldn't impact residents at all, would be carbon-free, and with multiple SMR's, Data centers WOULDN'T REQUIRE GENERATORS.
Tech companies like Google are actively pursuing SMRs for reliable, carbon-free baseload power:
Google signed a deal with Kairos Power (via TVA) for up to 500 MW total from multiple SMRs (starting ~2030, with the first ~50 MW unit online then, scaling to 500 MW by ~2035). This could power significant portions of their AI data centers in regions like Tennessee/Alabama.
I hope you’re right
Thank you for looking into all aspects of this. I am leery of the whole idea.
I wonder if Bill 288 prohibits Duke from issuing dividends or stock buybacks while they pad their coffers for a new energy plant?
Would love to explore SMRs as well, though that is probably a ways off.
Appreciate the detailed write up. Useful info to have an informed opinion.
I have been reading on these ‘data centers’. I truly hope we won’t get one here - or anywhere, for that matter. Thank you, Terry.
I hope all the people saying “no data centers anywhere” don’t use any services that require datacenters. No social media, no ChatGPT, no Gemini… right?
Maybe your next post can explain how you have to give applicants a fair hearing and what laws you have to follow so the "just say no" people can see why you can't just say no.
Thanks for taking our concerns seriously. No one in Apex seems to want a data center. There are a lot of down sides and they don't actually bring jobs to the area so I'm not sure what up side there is to the community.
Providing your concerns regarding the data center is appreciated. But in the interest of environmental, health, and financial issues that will negatively affect the citizens in Apex, the data center, regardless of the size, should not be approved. The citizens of Apex believe the Council will do what’s best for the people and not for profit or gain.
Absolutely not, no, no, no. Like another commenter stated, "in the interest of environmental, health, and financial issues that will negatively affect the citizens in Apex, the data center, regardless of the size, should not be approved. The citizens of Apex believe the Council will do what’s best for the people and not for profit or gain." You bring one of those beasts into this community and my vote will change immediately. - Amanda Murphy
There is a lot to take in, but I think we can find case studies all over the U.S. where the impacts of these data centers have been substantial, without providing any reasonably measurable economic benefit locally that measures up to the costs and burden put on everyone. I understand datacenters are necessary otherwise many services would not be available, but tech companies need to be more responsible. The issue here is tech companies are racing against each other to be "the winner" not taking into consideration the damaging effects their actions might have. Promises of AI that quite frankly are still mostly unproven, except to produce more lies and BS creating more noise than value across the internet.
If the town were to reject the New Hill data center, quite honestly, we would lose nothing. Tax revenue is not a reason to do anything, assuming there would even be any substantial gains in that area. I've heard mention of taxing the datacenter to give back to residents to offset the burdens it would put on the cost of living for residents, but the problem there is, quite frankly, taxes should never be a solution to a problem. Furthermore, this data center will affect not just Apex, but all of Wake County, and to some degree, neighboring counties. Due is aiming to raise rates across the board (even while still showing $5 billion profit). There just isn't much to gain but a lot to lose. I've given my ideas several times on different forums and Apex specific social media pages.
In a nutshell, make them provide their own power and water sources to start with OR they invest heavily in the local infrastructure (expanding Shearon Harris to add more reactors). For noise move as much infrastructure underground. Also, going deep enough underground helps with cooling and can reduce the amount of water consumption. Noise is more difficult, unless the generators are under ground in specialized rooms with proper ventilation. The problem is these datacenters don't try to be creative in their designs. They want a piece of land and the most simplistic infrastructure possible. They do not design for people comfort, because the majority of the place will be uninhabited by people.
Regulations may be necessary, although it is impossible to think of everything. Then there’s the “they say they are going to conform, but then they don’t scenario. And the “what personnel are available to monitor, do we have to hire more people” unexpected costs. And I continue to ask, what is the benefit to having a data center, mega or otherwise, in our town. I’ve yet to hear any compelling accurate benefits.
I too am very leery of a Data Center. Thanks for your explanations of commitment to keeping Apex a safe and healthy place to live. My hope is that there is no sliding backwards and making concessions to the health and livelihood of the Apex community in order to have any size Data Center.
Terry, thank you for taking the time to share this information!
I do have a question about the distinction between light and heavy industrial zoning in regards to the town’s Unified Development Ordinance. Is there language in the UDO which specifically addresses whether a data center project would be considered light or heavy industrial? Or is that going to be open to interpretation?
It’s a semantic difference, that though useful as a planning tool loses its importance once a concrete project is proposed. Once that happens the project needs to be judged on its own merits.
Thanks Terry! Who will the data center serve? Large Corporations. How much will it cost Apex? In addition to local residents paying for the 'upgrade', there are environmental impacts (which you are calling out). Water, coal, noise pollution.... and let's face it, Data Centers do NOT employee a significantly large workforce - nor will they significant;y contribute to our tax base etc. Corporations wants to dump data centers in 'cheap' location and let that municipality and its citizens pay all the burdens. No thank you!
No to data centers especially if it raises the rates to consumers.