How far do we go? Data centers and other nasty things?

Apparently a massive data center project in Virginia has been withdrawn, when a major sponsor of the project withdrew support. Many opponents of data centers are cheering this “victory” although it had nothing directly to do with their opposition. A TPOL correspondent shared that new, and like him, we think this is good news for many reasons. But there are many questions, and it is really hard to tell the truth.

The general consensus seems that the reason for the explosion in data centers is to increase the powers and ability of the surveillence state and its “private business” partners. But is that really the truth or just the propaganda that creates the most anger and reaction?

We already know that some of the claims made about the impact of data centers on water systems, electrical power, noise, and other issues that are pushed by opponents are either exaggerated, just plain lies, or already addressed by the companies and their contractors.

But often that information never makes it into any media, but is only available from person-to-person contacts. Or, we must ask, are our contacts also being fed falsehoods or corrupt?

We’ve seen this same situation in the past few years, in South Dakota, Colorado, and Wyoming. 

In the Dakotas (a few years back), the Keystone XL pipeline project was killed due to public pressure, based on a massive campaign against it.

Much of what was stated by the opponents were lies, and known to be, but when you scream them loud enough, the truth no longer matters. First, it was stated that the Alberta tar sands oil had to be heated so much (so that it would flow) that its temperature would weaken and melt the stainless steel of the pipeline itself. And therefore cause massive oil spills and contamination of the soil and water. This is (and was) false: the temperatures at which steel is weakened, and at which it melts, are much MUCH higher than the temperature the Alberta oil had to be to flow.

But almost the next point that the opponents made was that when the pipeline melted and failed, the oil in it would spread out and contaminate hundreds of acres, and soak into the ground to contaminate ground water (and wells) and flow into ditches and creeks to pollute them. This was a bit harder to recognize as the flat-out lie it was: even if the oil were heated enough to melt steel, as soon as it was exposed to ambient conditions (yep, even 110F weather we’ve just gone through in the big heat dome), it cools and hardens and STOPS flowing! Much less soaking into the ground. At most even a spil of 10s of thousands of gallons of the Alberta oil would have covered a few acres, and would actually contain itself since the pipeline would shut down.

One way to explain this to many people is to point out that the Alberta oil is very similar to AC (asphaltic cement) oil: oil which is mixed with gravel to use in paving roads! Tanks of AC Oil at a paving plant don’t have to have secondary containment because if the heaters shut down, or if the hot oil leaks out of the tank, the oil hardens up and does not flow! (Yes, you have some volatile compounds that evaporate into the air, but even a large plant and tens of thousands of gallons of AC oil produce less air pollutants than the truck and car traffic (burning gasoline and diesel) produce in a dozen miles of that highway being paved.)

In the last six years, several sand and gravel producers in SW Colorado have been defeated five times in getting gravel pits in two of the counties. Every time, the State approved the mining (some as small as five to ten acres, and some up to forty or sixty acres). In three of the cases, the County commissioners gave in to strong, organized (and well-financed) opposition. And in all five cases, the opposition lied about the projects and made outrageous claims.

But the key is, tall tales were created (or invented out of whole cloth), and used to arouse and anger people. Some to the point of threatening violence.

A similar matter took place last month right in the Black Hills of South Dakota. A local, family-owned company withdrew its application to drill to determine how much graphite might be available to be mined on mining claims that they owned, because of the intense opposition and apparently, threats against them. The claims were based on (and continue to be based on) the idea that any mining at all will use up or permanently pollute water supplies in the Black Hills, that the noise will disturb “sacred sites” miles away, and that companies will make profits. Again, all exaggerations or outright lies.

So what we hear about data centers may be the same sort of exaggerations and false claims, including the purpose of these data centers. But how can we know the truth? And who is telling the truth? We tend to believe those who are “against the establishment” (Which we define however, whatever angers us the most.) Especially when many of the opponents apparently believe that more government, more regulation, are the answers. And do not recognize the unholy alliance which may exist between the owners and operators of data centers and governments.

The theme is obvious: private business is evil. Meanwhile, people let government get away with just about anything, from the cop doing 90 mph in a 70 mph zone, to a city inspector issuing a $200 fine because the grass is 13 inches high instead of 12 inches, and steal money away from us to go bomb Russia or Iran or Venezuela or Yemen. 

Again, we submit that education is key to stopping this sort of madness.

We will likely discuss these things more in later commentaries.

READ MORE

Source: https://freedombunker.com/2026/07/30/how-far-do-we-go-data-centers-and-other-nasty-things/