Did you read the article? It's about Loudoun County, the wealthiest county in the US. The people "affected" both are the ones making the decision about where to put the data centers and the ones profiting off them. Don't lose sleep.
Also, those same people have the most ability to live wherever they want, and can leave. This isn't mountaintop removal in coal country. This is wealthy DC lobbyists being a little annoyed about a hum.
The fact that there's even an article about it is evidence of the fact that the affected are wealthy. The article is their voice. The wealth that allows them to live in Loudoun County is their voice.
Current and long-time loudoun county resident here.
We mostly don't like them, we mostly do feel disenfranchised, and people are trying to mobilize more political awareness of which politicians are cozying up to data-centers.
One of the biggest complaints isn't the data-centers themselves, but that they use so much electricity that these heinously ugly power-lines have to get put up in what is one of the most beautiful nature areas of the country (i.e. "blue ridge mountains / Shennandoah river / country roads").
> Also, those same people have the most ability to live wherever they want, and can leave.
That's a ludicrous suggestion. The tax alone on selling your house is at a minimum 10%, aside from every other cost, that's basically a 6 figure loss plus all your close family and friends.
> This is wealthy DC lobbyists being a little annoyed about a hum.
No. It's mostly the residents who predate the datacenters who are the most opposed. Western Loudoun was actually mostly farmland one generation ago, and actually had a bit of hippie / homeschooler energy.
---
Instead datacenters should be required by law to build underground with noise limits, and required by law to not increase electricity prices and not drain the grid around them. If they can't be profitable without negative externalities then they aren't worth having.
You're only taxed on capital gains. For it to be a six figure "loss" implies a minimum of $1M in gains alone. It really is ludicrous how entitled property owners act about their unearned windfalls.
Requiring data centers to be built underground would dramatically increase the cost. Imagine if we made the same requirement for roads, which are much louder and more dangerous!
On second thought, this negative externality thing really should be applied to roads, especially in cities. Guess I'm on board.
I hadn't heard of Loudoun County before. I also did read the article and here's a sentence from it.
> But while most locals the BBC spoke to opposed the data centres, the industry has many powerful proponents, including US President Donald Trump.
Also moving isn't something to take lightly.
> "I never thought that a data centre would be built across the street from my house," she said. "I would not have bought this house if I had known what was going in across the street."
> "I never thought that a data centre would be built across the street from my house," she said. "I would not have bought this house if I had known what was going in across the street."
and let this be a lesson to anyone looking to buy with vacant land within whatever radius you want to apply. if you think you might be upset by something that could be developed in the future, you can do some basic research on what zoning the lot(s) have, if they are owned by someone/thing that is discernible and not a shell company (if it is a shell company that's probably an indication you won't like what's coming), etc. sure, the ultimate developer of the think you won't like might only purchase the lot just before they are ready to build (specifically to avoid this), ultimately they will have to file for plans. it's possible those plans have already been filed, but if you don't look into it, it's really on you since you have the problem with it.
If I'm correct that the data center shown is on Belfort and Glenn Dr, then you don't even have to "research" zoning, just look across the street.
In 2021/2022 before it was built:
* Here is what that lot looked like [1]. To assume something wouldn't be built there is optimistic at best. (And there was precedent for data centers at the time - there was already a data center less than half mile away on Vantage Data Plz across the street from Tart Lumber.)
* If you look across the street, ie if the video would have panned to the left, you would have seen the "US Customs and Border Patrol" building - not winning any architectural design awards [2].
For someone who bought their house decades ago, then yes - the area has transformed drastically. But grouping someone who purchased recently with someone who purchased decades ago is a bit muddled.
[1]: https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9991758,-77.4300191,3a,75y,1...
[2]: https://www.google.com/maps/place/IAD146/@38.9981504,-77.428...
The best research one can do is only going to be so useful. Zoning laws might stop an average person or corporation from building something undesirable, but entities with enough wealth and connections can get those changed. Lately the conventional wisdom seems to be that NIMBYs have too much power, but in all of the cases I'm personally familiar with a single wealthy person or corporation was able to re-zone property however they wanted over the overwhelming objections of the longtime residents nearby.
Just because you bought the place doesn't mean everything is finished. If you want to be a NIMBY, then you have to keep up with what's going on around you. If someone wants to rezone a plot, there's normally some sort of cursory public notice about it giving a small window to voice concerns. take advantage of them or not, but if you want to keep the status quo, you have to fight for it. the world is constantly changing