Tag Archives: Data Centers

Hermantown City Council was exploring the possibility of a super data center in the community but plans have been paused

Posted on by
Reply

Last month, the Hermantown City Council voted yes on a zoning change that open a door for a super data center to be built in the area. The very next day, the community, specifically a group called Stop the Hermantown Data Center, filed a petition with the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQB) that would delay progress.  Clearly there are two different views on what a data center could mean to the community of Hermantown.  

Last week, the developers “hit a pause button” with plans to hold an open house to address community concerns. “Hermantown’s Wicklund said if the city determines that additional environmental study is not required, the planning and zoning commission could take up the permits at its next meeting on Nov. 18.” That meeting has been cancelled and apparently the topic is no longer on the City Council’s agenda for its Dec. 1 meeting.

Data centers have been a controversial topic in a few other towns in Minnesota too, such as Farmington. Why is it controversial? There are pros and cons. For sake of brevity, I’ll just pull out two perspectives. (You can find many more, for both sides in the articles below.)

Proponents say:

  • From MPR: The city has not revealed who is behind the project, saying only that it is a “U.S.-based Fortune 50 company.” The $650 million project would be built over eight to ten years. Proponents say it would create hundreds of construction jobs and at least 40 permanent positions, while generating up to $1 million a year in commercial tax revenues, according to the city.

Opponents Say:

  • From WDIO: “The biggest concerns I have besides everything else people have said: property value going down. My kids are 9 and 7. My husband and I will not be there once they’re graduated. Last one graduates in 2036. Who’s going to want to buy my property if this building is, this big data center is there? Nobody. They might for a very nice price, but I’m not going to get my money’s worth.” said resident Anna Estep.

It seems that two other sticking points are that the potential owner of the data center has not been revealed. Also, the community seemed unaware of negotiations happening between the City Council and outside developer.

This is a story in its earlier chapters; I thought a timeline might help.

  • Jan 2, 2025: Hermantown lands $2 million grant for developing industrial park at former Superfund site
  • May 7, 2025: Mystery developer proposes 1.8M-square-foot industrial park in Duluth suburb
  • May 21, 2025: A massive development is proposed for a northeastern Minnesota city. Local officials aren’t saying what it is.
    “The industrial project proposed for Hermantown carries some hallmarks of a data center.”
  • May 27, 2025: Potential 200-acre industrial development proposed for Hermantown
    “Recent flyers asking Hermantown residents if they’d be willing to sell their properties is sparking questions about a new development that could be coming to the southwest part of the city.
    Roughly 200 acres of land west of Midway Road could become the site of a big industrial project, according to a preliminary environmental review document.
    The document released by the city states that the project could span a total of 1.8 million square feet of light industrial development.
    Hermantown city officials confirmed the city has signed a nondisclosure agreement with Minneapolis construction firm Mortenson.”
  • June 28, 2025: Reader’s View: Protect Minnesota resources from data centers
    A letter from a reader starts, “Hermantown officials seem to be stonewalling residents over an issue that could affect citizens around the region.”
  • September 9, 2025: The Herman Industrial  AUAR is published
    “This EAW form is being used to delineate the issues and analyses to be reviewed in an Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR). Where the AUAR guidance provided by the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQB) indicates that an AUAR response should differ notably from what is required for an EAW, the guidance is noted in italics.”
    This document includes a wealth of correspondence related to the proposed project including:
    March 24:      A memorandum from Kimley Horn, “Kimley-Horn was contracted by [redacted] to complete a level 1 desktop review of the Project Loon – Hermantown study area for potential wetlands and waterways.
    Sept 4:     Minnesota Department of Natural Resources writes to City of Hermantown- Community Development Director about the Hermantown Industrial Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR)
  • October 6, 2025: Hermantown OK’s data center review plan
    “On October 6, the city of Hermantown officially confirmed what’s been long speculated by the public: the possibility of a data center being built within the city – drawing both support and skepticism from the community.
    According to the Alternative Urban Area Review (AUAR), a 400-plus page document laying out details to be reviewed for the project, the proposed site being studied totals 403 acres, and could include over 1.8 million square feet in construction. The plot is located in the southwest part of the city, on Midway Road.”
  • October 20, 2025: Packed Hermantown meeting draws hundreds ahead of data center re-zoning vote
    This real-time report captures the mood in the room: “City officials say the project could create hundreds of jobs and generate millions in tax revenue for the region.
    But not everyone is on board. A crowd of more than 200 people filled City Hall to capacity Monday night, with many more gathered outside.
    Most who spoke during public comment opposed the proposal, raising concerns about noise, environmental impacts, and the loss of Hermantown’s rural character.”
  • October 21, 2025: Controversial northern Minnesota data center proposal advances despite opposition
    “A controversial proposed data center in northeast Minnesota received a key approval Monday evening, when the Hermantown City Council voted for a zoning change that allows the massive development to continue to move forward.
    The 4-0 vote to rezone the property about eight miles west of Duluth came after a marathon meeting that lasted nearly six hours and ended just before midnight. More than 50 residents of Hermantown and nearby communities addressed the council, most pleading with council members to reject the zoning change, or at least table it.” (The rezoning was required for the project to move forward.)
  • October 22, 2025: After contentious zoning approval, Hermantown now delays controversial data center’s permits
    Opponents (Stop the Hermantown Data Center)  “filed a request for additional environmental review of the proposal less than 24 hours after the Hermantown city council unanimously approved rezoning more than 200 acres for the project about eight miles west of Duluth.”

Data center projects in Minnesota are running into issues

Posted on by
Reply

The Minnesota Star Tribune reports…

A company has halted two large-scale data center projects in Minnesota, saying the state would take too long to permit backup generators.

Excelsior-based Oppidan has paused work on data centers in North Mankato and the small city of Hampton in Dakota County. While the company is moving ahead with a data center in Apple Valley, the announcement signals that concerns over Minnesota’s regulatory climate will slow an industry that had been poised for explosive growth in Minnesota.

In May, Amazon abandoned plans for a multibillion-dollar data center in Becker after Minnesota utility regulators ruled the company must get a major state permit for power infrastructure to install 250 diesel generators. Amazon cited uncertain development timelines for permitting and other issues for halting the project.

There are varying views on the impacts of data centers in Minnesota…

The influx of data centers has sparked debate over whether the facilities will help or hurt Minnesota’s ambitions for a carbon-free electric grid. Some data center projects have drawn local controversy for their proximity to houses, potential water use and secrecy. Backers of data centers say they bring construction jobs, tax revenue and, potentially, lower electric bills for everyone.

The Minnesota Legislature approved a package of ground rules for the burgeoning industry. The laws impose new rules on energy and water consumption and other measures meant to shield utility customers from paying for the costs of supplying power to data centers.

Lawmakers also extended lucrative sales tax exemptions, for computers, servers, software, cooling and energy equipment that were set to expire in 2042. But the Legislature eliminated a smaller subsidy, a tax break on buying electricity.

Those views were represented at a recent public meeting on data centers hosted by the Southern MN Initiative Foundation in North Mankato last week. As were views from various community members…

Data center developers are facing other obstacles in Minnesota. The nonprofit Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy has sued several cities considering data centers, saying they hid information about the projects and approved faulty environmental review. North Mankato officials have also said lack of available water for a data center could be a hurdle for projects in their city.

Data Center Forum Event Nov 12 in North Mankato: the start of a community discussion

Posted on by
Reply

Benya Kraus, from the Southern MN Initiative Foundation, introduced the day to a sold out crowd. Today is the start of the conversation; the Initiative Foundation has planned for at least two more events in the region. They have seen a growing interest in the impacts of data centers across the state. This is an economic disruption that communities are experiencing.

U of M is working on Data centers, energy and water Research to help communities address data centers

  • Looking at water and energy impacts of data centers
  • How can we create tools for communities to decide what to do with data centers?
  • They are looking at Zumbro & Root River watersheds. Interesting because the decisions are made in a silo despite the fact that a large community is impacted by the decisions.
  • Looking at collection decision making, taking into consideration multiple POVs
  • Iin terms of energy – communities have a range of energy companies and solutions and not much is yet known about the impact of data center
  • Hoping to have the research and tools out July-Sep 2026
  • Not for OR against but was to help people make the right decisions for their communities

Senator Frentz

  • He’s very excited to talk about data centers
  • Serves on Minnesota Senate Energy, Utilities, Environment, and Climate Committee
  • MN had 40 data centers before 2025
  • Minnesota made legislative decisions in 2025 –
  • Advantages of data center – economic
  • Energy needs will double in the next 10 years due largely to data centers
  • Data centers create jobs as they are being built
  • In Washington data centers came in with clean energy – but when the big data centers use clean energy that means the residents get edged to using fossil fuelts
  • In Virginia, they have a lot of data centers and they are having energy issues
  • IN MN, energy companies must serve the whole community
  • Data centers uses 100 million gallons of water a year
  • Data centers can be a push to get renewable energy and economic development.
  • New MN Legislation means:
    • Water: twice a year data centers have to report on water use. DNR and PUC issues permits. The data center becomes public once they apply for permits. But they can get pre-application information. Requires an aquifer test,
    • Utilities: need to get PUC cert of need. PUC won’t allow permits when a power company can’t prove that they can commit to serving the data center and the community. Still need to be focus on clean energy 2040 goals
    • Community benefit – data centers will help lower income residents with weatherization
    • Green building standards –
  • We should push for data centers in MN because we do have environmental requirements – unlike areas like Texas

PANEL

Dunham – repping commercial interests

  • Going to give the 101 on data centers; AFCOM is an organization that loves to talk about data centers
  • Data centers aren’t new – just a room full of computers
  • Almost all technology involves a data center
  • Types of data centers in order of size: enterprise, colocation, edge, hyperscale
  • AI is a big impact and it’s growing – and the heat used to run the computers needs to be cooled. They are coming up with new ways to cool the computers.
  • The Green Grid is a group that focuses on energy use
  • Water is hard. Hyperscalers will ask for as much land, water and power as possible. Evaporative cooling uses 15gpm/MW – Closed Air-Cooled Chiller uses none. Some data centers won’t need as much water.
  • Noise: better engineering can mitigate the noise
  • Pollution: energy generators are only used in emergencies
  • Traffic: 1,000 builders need to build a data center and they all drive to work
  • Jobs: trades jobs during 24 months (building. After that uses highly skilled IT workforce and trades jobs to maintain MEP equipment
  • Why are people interested in MN? Because MN has space and power. And MN First Stop.

Freshwater – repping environment

  • Does water research, policy and education – trying to bridge many sectors
  • The tension? Jobs versus water supply and ecosystem
  • Many industries use water.
  • Data centers need power and water. Decrease one means increasing the other.
  • A medium data centers use the same power as a small town
  • Need to focus on groundwater. SE MN is the part that has the large amounts of useable groundwater. Water in this area is more than 60,000 years old
  • Water is recyclable. It does renew but we are also looking at dipping into water from long ago.
  • Minnesota does monitor water use – and use that info while looking at permit – but only in the local community
  • Water is being used at a rate faster than it’s renewing
  • Changes in climate are also impacting water access.
  • Pumping of water impacts chemicals in the ground
  • Economic development teams were going straight to municipalities for permits – not involving the public.
  • Priority of Use Statute
  • Surface water is a good way to see and track water use
  • Looking to create a water use atlas for MN

Blue Earth Light and Water– repping communities

  • Blue Earth has water
  • Has an RO (reverse osmosis) water plant
  • City operates water and electricity
  • 3100 people 241,000 MWH – which is a good range
  • Population has been declining
  • They were approached by a third party interested in data center.
  • We have low cost energy. They have wind and solar.
  • They can handle a 6 and 15 MW data centers without additional work required.
  • They spent a year working on the data center.
  • They made sure that data centers utilities were isolated to protect local residents.
  • Worked with a number of partners.

Questions:

Communication is a big deal. Some cities have failed to notify the city council. How can we trust that the local government will share info?
Development is one thing – there’s also speculation. There’s a lot of talk that happens before anything is set in stone. Elected Officials do make decisions.
Public boards will share their agendas. In Blue Earth there were at least 20 steps they took to get things done.

How big is the footprint of the data centers in Blue earth?
Relatively small. The big center is 100×150.

What is negative pricing?
Think about how energy flows – it’s like running a boatload of generators into a funnel. Sometimes we need something to take energy away from the grid.

What about energy transmission? The permitters are looking to new federal regulation. How will that impact MN rules?
The federal government is shutting down projects in MN because of transmission rules. It will increase rates. We’re all going to pay for it.

What about impact of using water in closed loop system?
It’s pipe that goes from the building to the power generator. The water stays the same. In an open system, the water evaporates.

So this will be a balance of economic development and water. How is the use of water reporting? How many permanent jobs?
The buildings are large – and 1200 people will build it, which means a slew of people coming into work for a while.
Open loop doesn’t allow for much water reuse. Closed loop makes it more possible.
Usually people are specific about the proposed water/energy use – it is considered proprietary.
The new legislation requires reporting twice a year.
Blue Earth monitors energy use (no water is used).

Tools for Economic Developers

Great River Energy – wholesale power supplier coop

  • Working toward carbon free MN 2040 standards – about 44 percent today
  • Been working on data centers since 2010
  • Have had requests for more than 6 GW – the big hyperscalers
  • They have a member process to walk members through interactions with data centers and third party buyers. Look at feasibility to viability.
  • Challenges
    • Landowner control
    • Public perception
    • Long lead times
    • Regulatory and entitlements
    • Political support
  • Sustainable design means we work and require renewable energy
  • When working with third parties, they don’t always know who the actual tenant will be
  • 10 years ago the energy/water solutions were different
  • Opportunities require partnership, clarity of process, communication plan, education effort and stakeholder engagement

CURE

  • Nonprofit protecting landscapes and community
  • Working on data centers for a year
  • Law requires:
    • Nothing more required in terms of communication
    • Environmental and other reviews
    • Supposed to have public reviews – during permitting
    • Sales tax exemption – OK for equipment and software. Energy is not included.
    • Labor – must be paid prevailing wage
    • Must use green building standards
  • Going to local government can be difficult depending

Greater Mankato Growth

  • Chamber of commerce, economic developers et al
  • They help local businesses – and recruit businesses
  • Transparency if the law: once someone decides to move forward, there are many hoops to get through before things get permitted. Meeting notes and agendas are often available.
  • NDAs are rarely used – but have been used. Eventually, details will be known.
  • When does hypothetical become real in terms of communication with the pubic? We don’t always know who is really looking but we share what we can.

Questions:

How do you balance communication with need to work with businesses?
The public is frustrated – and projects that go wrong are becoming high profile. That’s been a learning experience.
We ask who will benefit? Who will pay consequences? Who will be impacted?

Cities do have leverage with permitting – how does that opportunity invite creativity? And what does it happen?
The hyperscale data centers are coming to the table with creative solutions. They want to create win/win solutions.
DNAs have been used forever. It’s the way things work. Projects will not happen because people refused NDAs.

Community benefit agreement? There are some great ones at Reimagine Appalachia.

How do you remain business friendly and new development?
We spend a lot of time planning for the future. We don’t like to make decisions on the fly. Citizens are required for citywide pans. People need to stay engaged and the cities want that help.
There are folks on fixed incomes. Prices are going up. We need to grow our tax bases to make sure that we can provide services in our communities.

Have you been approached by data centers? Have you had discussion with your members?
No approaches. We do talk to our members. We want to advocate for our members and our marketplace.

Development codes predicate when you have a public meeting. As an economic developer, you don’t have a project until you have an application.

There are two law suits related to data centers. How can we be more transparent with AUAR?
AUAR – there is a public comment period. Then there is a time for responses. The public comments won’t shut down a project.
You can always use data practices act to get information. Sometimes info is public but for practical purposes isn’t easy to access.
It helps for local deciders to have advance information on what the public wants.

AUAR: Alt urban area renewal – like an environmental review. It’s more for regional development. A complaint is that they are sometimes not as transparent as they should be.

What was the communication plans?
Sharing info in meetings. Social media. Local newspapers.

What are best practices for compliance?
It depends on whether they have plans or agreement.
There’s a case study in Centralia Washington on a project that garnered a community benefit trust fund.

What about sustainability?
There are a number of studies on data center designs – from green roofs and animals on campus.
Some folks are already including decommissioning clauses in the initial agreements.

Which comes first application or environment review?
Application is often for building permit.

We’ve heard that NDAs are tool. What about NDAs for businesses versus elected officials?
It does get murky when we look at public officials. Technically the applications process seems to be that moment.
The problem really comes up with hyperscale data centers.
Should people signing NDAs be the same people who get to make the final decisions.

EVENT Nov 13: Let’s Talk About Data Centers and Water Usage in Duluth

Posted on by
Reply

This looks like an interesting meeting from Minnesota Women’s Press…

Thursday, November 13, 2025 6:30 PM –  8:30 PM CT

Zeitgeist Zinema 1, 222 E Superior St, Duluth, MN 55802

Join us for an in-person viewing of a powerful conversation featuring CURE’s Sarah Mooradian, who will speak on the growing water demands of data centers—why it matters, how it affects rural and urban communities, and what we can do to ensure a more equitable and sustainable future. Don’t miss this critical conversation on technology, water, and justice. Come learn, connect, and be part of the change. Free and open to the public.

 

What about the early morning broadband outage? Some answers about the AWS issues

Posted on by
Reply

CNN reports…

Amazon Web Services (AWS), the cloud computing platform that powers much of the internet, went down for several hours Monday, making several majorwebsites and apps inoperable.

From banking services to social networks to airline booking sites to online shopping, thousands of services were disrupted as millions of people worldwide – many of whom were on their way to work on the US East Coast – were unable to mobile-order coffee or access key apps.

The latest outage serves as a reminder of how fragile the internet’s backbone can be, even if the disruption is brief, and how reliant the world has become on these online services.

Although AWS and its competitors are generally robust, the internet is a complex web of overlapping services that are only as reliable as their weakest code. The root cause of Monday’s outage remains unknown, but a service that converts friendly web names into IP addresses was unable to communicate with thousands of companies’ massive databases hosted by Amazon.

This isn’t a first occurrence…

Past outages on this scale have been caused by a wide variety of errors, including faulty updates, the accidental injection of bad code, or a change to third-party software that doesn’t play nicely with a service. Rarely, internet cable cuts, cyberattacks or direct denial of service attacks can bring down or overload servers that host key apps.

But the relative frequency of these events shows the lack of necessary redundancies and competitive services. Too often, some internet experts say, companies put all their eggs in one cloud services basket.

NPR talks about the pros and cons of big cloud computing options…

According to Synergy Research Group, AWS holds about 30% of the worldwide cloud computing market. Other big players are Microsoft and Google.

Betsy Cooper, a cybersecurity expert and the director of the Aspen Institute’s Policy Academy, says there are pros and cons to companies using Amazon or another big provider for cloud computing. They offer strong cybersecurity protections and convenience.

“We all have an incentive to use the big companies, because they’re so ubiquitous and it’s easier for us to access all of our data in one place.”

But, she says, there’s a downside.

“That’s great until something goes wrong, and then you really see just how dependent you are on a handful of those companies.”

Recent conference panel: How are new data center deployments driving additional fiber deployment?

Posted on by
Reply

Fierce Network reports…

Leaders from the data center and fiber industries came together in Austin, Texas this week as the Datacloud USA and Metro Connect conferences joined forces. And for good measure the conference organizers included the power generation companies, dubbing their 2025 show Datacloud Energy USA/Metro Connect Fall.

Fiber industry executives said they are getting plenty of requests from data center developers. But those developers are often pushing projects out of major metro areas in order to chase available power. So, they’re asking for fiber in places that don’t otherwise make economic sense for providers.

Sound familiar? Bringing fiber to remote areas is, of course, the goal of the government’s Broadband Equity, Access and Deployment (BEAD) program, which continues to evolve and so far has not resulted in many new connections.

Could the data center industry step in to connect parts of rural America? That depends in part on whether fiber providers are willing to take the terms offered by data center builders, primarily hyperscalers.

But there is some push back from the providers…

“Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should,” said David Kamphuis, VP carrier sales at fiber provider Segra, part of Cox Communications. “We have to do what is right, fiscally.”

Kamphuis was part of a panel at the Datacloud show entitled “How are new data center deployments driving additional fiber deployment?” moderated by Digital Bridge managing director Horace Zona. Some of the panel’s commentary sounded similar to the talking points fiber providers use when asked why government subsidies are needed to connect certain areas of the country.

“If it made sense on Day One to build it, it would have already been built. It hasn’t gotten built for a reason,” explained Dan Davis, CEO and co-founder of Arcadian Infracom.

So, what does it take to get fiber providers to commit to a data center build?  “You have to have a belief set not just in the one place, but all along these routes,” Davis said. He added that the cost of a fiber build is typically around $300 million, a fraction of the $2 billion to $3 billion a hyperscaler may be spending on the data center at the end of the route.

Economist Paul Krugman recognizes the tension between data needs and energy limitations

Posted on by
Reply

Earlier this week, Economist Paul Krugman discussed data centers in a recent column. Like Toto in The Wizard of Oz, he pulls back the curtain, so that we can see what’s powering the magic…

Many applications of information technology are, like the automats of yore, less miraculous than they seem. True, the user experience makes you feel as if you’ve transcended the material world. You click a button on Amazon’s web site and a day or two later the item you wanted magically appears on your porch. But behind that hands-free experience lie a million-strong workforce and a huge physical footprint of distribution centers and delivery vehicles.

And the disconnect between the trans-material feel of the consumer experience and the physical realities that deliver that experience is especially severe for the hot technology of the moment, AI. We’re constantly arguing about whether AI is a bubble, whether it can really live up to the hype. We don’t talk enough about AI’s massive use of physical resources, especially but not only electricity.

And we certainly don’t talk enough about (a) how U.S. electricity pricing effectively subsidizes AI and (b) the extent to which limitations on generating capacity may nonetheless severely limit the technology’s growth.

How much generating capacity are we talking about? The Department of Energy estimates that data centers already consumed 4.4 percent of U.S. electricity in 2023, and expects that to grow to as much as 12 percent by 2028:

Krugman also recognizes that there’s a disconnect between increasing energy needs and policies that help or hinder energy creation…

So suppose that AI really does consume vast quantities of electricity over the next few years. Where are all those kilowatt-hours supposed to come from?

America is, of course, adding generating capacity as you read this, and can accelerate that expansion if it chooses to. But there are two big obstacles to any attempt to keep up with the demand from AI.

The first is that in recent years growth in U.S. generating capacity has become increasingly dependent on growth in renewable energy. According to S&P Global, almost 90 percent of the generating capacity added in the first 8 months of 2024 came from solar and wind:

Krugman explains that this is a problem because the current Administration has eliminated many of the green energy subsidies and they have been trying to prevent future solar and wind projects. So as the graph above indicates, our energy generation is decreasing.

Krugman offers a possible solution…

Indeed, requiring that the AI industry take responsibility for the costs it imposes makes a lot of sense. It would by no means end progress in AI. As the website Tech Policy notes, there are many AI applications in which smaller, more focused models can perform almost as well as the bloated, all-in-one models currently dominating the field, while consuming far less energy. Until now there has been no incentive to take energy consumption into account, but there’s every reason to believe that we could achieve huge efficiency gains at very low cost.

But will we do the sensible thing? It’s obvious that any attempt to make AI more energy-efficient would lead to howls from tech bros who believe that they embody humanity’s future — and these bros have bought themselves a lot of political power.

So I don’t know how this will play out. I do know that your future electricity bills depend on the answer.

The White House smooths the path for data centers

Posted on by
Reply

I posted about the White House’s AI plan earlier this week, where they mentioned a plan for data centers. Here’s their new announcement on data centers specifically…

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered:

Section  1.  Policy and Purpose.  My Administration has inaugurated a golden age for American manufacturing and technological dominance.  We will pursue bold, large-scale industrial plans to vault the United States further into the lead on critical manufacturing processes and technologies that are essential to national security, economic prosperity, and scientific leadership.  These plans include artificial intelligence (AI) data centers and infrastructure that powers them, including high‑voltage transmission lines and other equipment.  It will be a priority of my Administration to facilitate the rapid and efficient buildout of this infrastructure by easing Federal regulatory burdens.

In addition, my Administration will utilize federally owned land and resources for the expeditious and orderly development of data centers.  This usage will be done in a manner consistent with the land’s intended purpose — to be used in service of the prosperity and security of the American people.

Sec. 2.  Definitions.  For purposes of this order:

(a)  “Data Center Project” means a facility that requires greater than 100 megawatts (MW) of new load dedicated to AI inference, training, simulation, or synthetic data generation.

(b)  “Covered Components” means materials, products, and infrastructure that are required to build Data Center Projects or otherwise upon which Data Center Projects depend, including:

(i)    energy infrastructure, such as transmission lines, natural gas pipelines or laterals, substations, switchyards, transformers, switchgear, and system protective facilities;

(ii)   natural gas turbines, coal power equipment, nuclear power equipment, geothermal power equipment, and any other dispatchable baseload energy sources, including electrical infrastructure (including backup power supply) constructed or otherwise used principally to serve a Data Center Project;

(iii)  semiconductors and semiconductor materials, such as wafers, dies, and packaged integrated circuits;

(iv)   networking equipment, such as switches and routers; and

(v)    data storage, such as hardware storage systems, software for data management and protection, and integrated services that work with public cloud providers.

(c)  “Covered Component Project” means infrastructure comprising Covered Components, or a facility with the primary purposes of manufacturing or otherwise producing Covered Components.

(d)  “Qualifying Project” means:

(i)    a Data Center Project or Covered Component Project for which the Project Sponsor has committed at least $500 million in capital expenditures as determined by the Secretary of Commerce;

(ii)   a Data Center Project or Covered Component Project involving an incremental electric load addition of greater than 100 MW;

(iii)  a Data Center Project or Covered Component Project that protects national security; or

(iv)   a Data Center Project or Covered Component Project that has otherwise been designated by the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of Commerce, or the Secretary of Energy as a “Qualifying Project”.

(e)  “Project Sponsor” means the lead sponsor providing financial and other support for a Data Center Project or Covered Component Project, as determined by the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of Commerce, or the Secretary of Energy, as appropriate.

(f)  “Superfund Site” means any site where action is being taken pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 9604, 9606, or 9620.

(g)  “Brownfield Site” means a site as defined in 42 U.S.C. 9601(39).

Sec.  3.  Encouraging Qualifying Projects.  The Secretary of Commerce, in consultation with the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) and other relevant executive departments and agencies (agencies), shall launch an initiative to provide financial support for Qualifying Projects, which could include loans and loan guarantees, grants, tax incentives, and offtake agreements.  All relevant agencies shall identify and submit to the Director of OSTP any such relevant existing financial support that can be used to assist Qualifying Projects, consistent with the protection of national security.

Sec. 4.  Revocation of Executive Order 14141.  Executive Order 14141 of January 14, 2025 (Advancing United States Leadership in Artificial Intelligence Infrastructure), is hereby revoked.

Sec.  5.  Efficient Environmental Reviews.  (a)  Within 10 days of the date of this order, each relevant agency shall identify to the Council on Environmental Quality any categorical exclusions already established or adopted by such agency pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), reliance on and adoption of which by agencies (pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 4336 and 4336c) could facilitate the construction of Qualifying Projects.

(b)  The Council on Environmental Quality shall coordinate with relevant agencies on the establishment of new categorical exclusions to cover actions related to Qualifying Projects that normally do not have a significant effect on the human environment.  Agencies shall, for purposes of establishing these categorical exclusions, rely on any sufficient basis to do so as each such agency determines.

(c)  Consistent with 42 U.S.C. 4336e(10)(B)(iii), loans, loan guarantees, grants, tax incentives, or other forms of Federal financial assistance for which an agency lacks substantial project-specific control and responsibility over the subsequent use of such financial assistance shall not be considered a “major Federal action” under NEPA.  For purposes of this order, Federal financial assistance representing less than 50 percent of total project costs shall be presumed not to constitute substantial Federal control and responsibility.

Sec.  6.  Efficiency and Transparency Through FAST‑41.  (a)  The Executive Director (Executive Director) of the Federal Permitting Improvement Steering Council (FPISC) may, within 30  days of the date that a project is identified to FPISC by a relevant agency, designate a Qualifying Project as a transparency project pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 4370m-2(b)(2)(A)(iii) and section 41003 of the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (Public Law 114-94, 129 Stat. 1312, 1747) (FAST-41).  Within 30 days of receiving such agency notification, the Executive Director may publish Qualifying Projects on the Permitting Dashboard established under section 41003(b) of FAST-41, including schedules for expedited review.

(b)  In consultation with Project Sponsors, the Executive Director shall expedite the transition of eligible Qualifying Projects from transparency projects to FAST-41 “covered projects” as defined by 42 U.S.C. 4370m(6)(A).  To the extent that a Qualifying Project does not meet the criteria set forth in 42 U.S.C. 4370m(6)(A)(i) or (iii), FPISC may consider all other available options to designate the project a covered project under 42 U.S.C. 4370m(6)(A)(iv).

Sec. 7.  Streamlining of Permitting Review.  (a)  The Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency shall assist in expediting permitting on Federal and non-Federal lands by developing or modifying regulations promulgated under the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.); the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.); the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.); the Toxic Substances Control Act (15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.); and other relevant applicable laws, in each case, that impact the development of Qualifying Projects.

(b)  The Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency shall, consistent with the Environmental Protection Agency’s statutory authorities, expeditiously identify Brownfield Sites and Superfund Sites for use by Qualifying Projects.  As part of this effort, within 180 days of the date of this order, the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency shall develop guidance to help expedite environmental reviews for qualified reuse and assist State governments and private parties to return such Brownfield Sites and Superfund Sites to productive use as expeditiously as possible.

Sec.  8.  Biological and Water Permitting Efficiencies.  (a)  Upon identification of sites by the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Energy as described in section 9 of this order, the action agency, as identified through the process described in the Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. 1531-1544) (ESA), shall initiate consultation under section 7 of the ESA with the Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of Commerce, or both with respect to common construction activities for Qualifying Projects that will occur over the next 10 years at a programmatic level.  The Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Commerce shall utilize programmatic consultation to ensure timely and efficient completion of such consultation.

(b)  Within 180 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of the Army, acting through the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works, shall review the nationwide permits issued under section 404 of the Clean Water Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1344) and section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Appropriation Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 403) to determine whether an activity-specific nationwide permit is needed to facilitate the efficient permitting of activities related to Qualifying Projects.

Sec. 9.  Federal Lands Availability.  (a)  The Department of the Interior and the Department of Energy shall, after consultation with industry and further in consultation with the Department of Commerce as to the Project Sponsors to which relevant authorizations shall be granted, offer appropriate authorizations for sites identified by the Secretary of the Interior or the Secretary of Energy, as applicable and appropriate for the relevant uses, consistent with 42 U.S.C. 2201, 42 U.S.C. 7256, 43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq., and all other applicable law.

(b)  The Secretary of Defense shall, pursuant to 10 U.S.C. 2667 or other applicable law and as and when the Secretary of Defense deems it necessary or desirable, identify suitable sites on military installations for Covered Component infrastructure uses and competitively lease available lands for Qualifying Projects to support the Department of Defense’s energy, workforce, and mission needs, subject to security and force protection considerations.

Sec. 10.  General Provisions.  (a)   Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i)   the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii)  the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b)  This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c)  This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

(d)  The costs for publication of this order shall be borne by the Department of Energy.

MN Legislators extend many tax breaks for tech companies but revoked data center tax breaks

Posted on by
Reply

The Minnesota Reformer reports…

The Legislature passed a bipartisan bill Monday that extends tax breaks for some of the country’s most profitable technology companies on their data centers up to the year 2077, in a win for both Big Tech and the trade unions that build the data warehouses.

The once boutique tax subsidy has exploded in cost in recent years, as tech companies chased the benefit to meet ever increasing demand for computing power. In fiscal year 2015, the state estimated a sales tax break for data center purchases of computers, servers and other equipment costs the state about $6 million. That number is projected to explode to $114 million in fiscal year 2025 — a 1,800% increase — according to state tax expenditure reports.

Minnesota currently has 42 data centers, with the majority spread across the metro. Nationwide, tech companies are rapidly building data centers — warehouses with computer servers used to power the internet and, increasingly, AI — to store and process data.

As Gov. Tim Walz and his fellow Democrats in the divided Legislature confronted a worsening fiscal outlook, however, they looked to the data center tax breaks. They settled on revoking the sales tax exemption on electricity bills, which are massive because of data center energy requirements.

Curbing this tax break alone will bring in an estimated $140 million over the next four years.

But lawmakers also gave Big Tech a win, extending the expiration of the state’s sales tax break for data centers on purchases of computers, servers, software and cooling and energy equipment.

Legislature agrees on budgets and bill in one-day special session – including increased in tax for data centers

Posted on by
Reply

The Minnesota Star Tribune reports…

After weeks of deliberations and a one-day special session, the Minnesota Legislature has finished its work.

There were impassioned speeches and some disagreements, but legislators mostly stayed on track and finished passing their agenda of 14 bills before a Tuesday morning deadline.

That included the remaining pieces of the state’s $66 billion budget, which needed to be finished by July 1 in order to avoid a partial government shutdown. The bills are on their way to Gov. Tim Walz’s desk for his signature.

That included increased taxes for data centers…

Data center regulations: Lawmakers approved new regulations for an influx of large-scale data centers. Data centers will have to pay for energy conservation work, and abide by policy meant to protect the state’s water and climate goals and ensure that the electric bills of other customers won’t rise because data centers use a huge amount of electricity. The Legislature also agreed to extend lucrative sales tax breaks for the industry on computers, servers, software, cooling and energy equipment, but eliminated an exemption for electricity use.

EVENT April 1: MN House Committee to discuss HF2928: water appropriation projects required … data centers exempted from making financial contributions to an energy conservation and optimization plan

Posted on by
Reply

MN House of Representatives reports…

Tuesday, April 1, 2025 , 1:00 PM

Energy Finance and Policy

Co-Chair: Rep. Patty Acomb holds the gavel
Co-Chair: Rep. Chris Swedzinski
Location: Capitol 123
Agenda:

HF2928 (Acomb) – Preapplication filings for large water appropriation projects required, permit application information for large water appropriation projects added, level of environmental review for data centers specified, data centers exempted from making financial contributions to an energy conservation and optimization plan, and other data center provisions modified.
HF2912 (Her) – Macalester College geothermal energy system funding provided, and money appropriated.
HF2297 (Myers) – Special license plate established for solar pollinator programs, and agrivoltaic solar sites made eligible for solar site management practices.
Revisor Code 25-04891 (Kraft) – Virtual power plants
***25-04891 is pending introduction

Items may be added or removed from the agenda.

MN House Committee discusses HF28: Data center energy generation redundancy

Posted on by
Reply

Today the MN House Environment and Natural Resources Finance and Policy Committee heard HF 28 on Data center energy generation redundancy.

A little background: The bill relates to data center energy generation redundancy. The goal is to get very large data centers to come to Minnesota. (I have also been following HF1227, relating to tax exemptions for very large data centers.) The means introduced here seems to be streamlining permitting of energy generation redundancy.

The original goal was to Re-refer to Ways and Means. Ther was a vote, that didn’t pass to lay down the bill until they get more answer on water use and reuse. But in the end the vote was to refer to general register.

Event: House Environment and Natural Resources Finance and Policy Committee

Agenda:

HF28 (Mekeland) Data center energy generation redundancy.

Rep Mekeland

  • Amendment A4 – global agreement on language once city completes AURA [environment review] review, then approvals can move ahead. You don’t need to re-review those projects in the future.
  • It is passed.

Q: So once local unit approves, the project construction can start?
Yes for projects that are covered to AUAR projects (so building permits).

Q: Why is that different?
It separates the difference between industrial review and AUAR review.

Re Mekeland

  • Looking for back up power generation

Testifiers Continue reading →

MN House hear testimony on HF1277 on Data centers sales and use tax exemption

Posted on by
Reply

Today the MN House Committee on Taxes discussed HF1277, a bill to extend and increase tax exemption. Actually, they heard from testifiers and will come back on Tuesday to ask questions.  The bill is laid over for possible inclusion.

HF1277(Davids)
Data centers sales and use tax exemption modified.

Bill description

  • Adding a new type of super large data centers
  • There is a certification program to qualify
  • Upfront tax exemptions for software, equipment and electricity
  • Extends exemptions has no sunset date

Testimony Continue reading →

MN SF0769: laid over for possible inclusion: bill to change data center tax incentive from refund to exemption

Posted on by
Reply

Today the MN Senate committee on Taxes heard testimony on MN SF0769: a bill that would modify existing tax incentives for large data centers from refund to tax exemption. The bill is laid over for possible consideration in omnibus tax bill.

Notes (mine), related documents (from presenters) and video below:

From the MN Senate:

S.F. 0769 HauschildCertain data centers tax exemption modification

scs0769a-2

SF 769 summary.2

sf0769(hf1277) Large Scale Data Centers_1

SF769 NetChoice Data Centers

SF769 Comparison Handout

SF769 Virginia Data Center Stats

SF769 Becker Support

SF769 – MnTech Letter of Support

SF 769 – 100% Advocacy Letter

SF 769_We Make MN Letter on Data Centers

Full notes: Continue reading →

Meta pays $70 million for land in Rosemount for new data center

Posted on by
Reply

The Pioneer Press reports…

A subsidiary of Facebook parent company Meta Platforms Inc. has closed on over 200 acres of land near the company’s $800 million data center in Rosemount.

Jimnist LLC, a company that was previously linked to Meta while the data center was still operating under the code name Project Bigfoot, purchased eight different parcels along County Road 42 for $70 million last week, according to records filed with the Minnesota Department of Revenue.

So, what will the land be used for? The explanation given on the sale records states just two words: data center.

“We occasionally purchase available land in the event that our future business needs may require it,” said Stacey Yip, a spokesperson for Meta, in an email on Wednesday. “We currently have no plans to build on this land.”

Rosemount Community Development Director Adam Kienberger confirmed via email that as of Wednesday, the city had not received any development applications for the recently acquired land.

The purchase, which was split into two sales and includes parcels north of County Road 42 and west of Blaine Avenue, closed Feb. 12.

The sellers, listed as RGA Holdings LLC and RADS Land Co. LLC, both have ties to Ames Construction in Burnsville. Ames did not respond to a Pioneer Press request for comment.

There is a bill in the MN legislature (being discussed at 12:30 today) to put limits on new data centers.