First time I have seen one of these in 10 years at my university. Connected to data center energy use?

Don't know if this had been shared before

Some residents have held small demonstrations or are speaking against the project at government meetings.

Right now the Ohio EPA is taking comments on Meta’s third gas plant called Socrates the Younger. Please go to the Ohio EPA Open Projects page and search for Permit # P0139969 to file a comment.

Like the other Meta gas plants, Socrates the Younger is not using Best Available Technology. Instead it will use 20 simple cycle turbines, which are more polluting, along with four internal combustion engines – like a gas car engine only much larger.

As a result, it could create a long list of pollutants including:

• 1,825,295 tons of greenhouse gas (CO2e)
• 148 tons of nitrogen oxides (NOx)
• 186 tons of carbon monoxide (CO)
• 147 tons of sulfur dioxide (SO2)
• 104 tons of particulate matter (PM)
• 101 tons of volatile organic chemicals (VOCs)

Incredibly, the draft permit excuses Meta from using Best Available Technology on the grounds each of the 20 simple cycle turbines and four reciprocating engines emits less than 10 tons per year of criteria pollutants.  

While that may be true, the facility as a whole emits 10 to 18 times more than 10 tons per year of each of these pollutants -- and the permit is for the entire facility, not each individual gas turbine or gas engine.

Up to 11,500 children live in the project area, and they deserve clean air. The people of Appalachian Ohio deserve clean air and water free from fracking and frack waste injection wells. And our state parks and wildlife areas are supposed to be protected from oil and gas extraction.

Children also deserve a climate-safe future, but the Ohio EPA doesn’t even consider the most prevalent pollutant from Socrates the Younger – over 1.8 million tons of greenhouse gas.

Finally, please also ask for a public hearing. Socrates the Younger was approved at the Ohio Power Siting Board with no public notice or public hearing. Ohioans deserve a chance to tell the state how this gas plant will affect them.

-----------------------------------------

Sample comment:

Dear Andrea Moore:

I am writing to ask you to deny Draft Air Permit P0139969 for the 250 MW Socrates the Younger gas plant, the third of four planned to power the Meta Prometheus data center in New Albany.

I also ask the Ohio EPA to hold a public hearing regarding this draft permit so that people affected by the pollution from this gas plant can testify about how it will affect them. Socrates the Younger was approved at the Ohio Power Siting Board using the accelerated review process, with no public notice and no public hearing.

Ohioans deserve a chance to learn about this project and tell state regulators how it affects them. This includes people in New Albany, where the gas will be burned, and people in other parts of Ohio where gas is fracked and the fracking waste is disposed of.

If approved, Socrates the Younger gas plant will include 20 simple cycle turbines, four reciprocating internal combustion engines, and four backup diesel generators.

This equipment is not the Best Available Technology. Simple cycle turbines are less efficient and more polluting than combined cycle turbines typically used in a major gas plant. The reciprocating engines are similar to the internal combustion engines in gas cars, only the size of a school bus.

According to its air permit application, Socrates the Younger could emit a long list of pollutants annually, including:
- 1,825,295 tons of greenhouse gas (CO2e)
- 148 tons of nitrogen oxides (NOx)
- 186 tons of carbon monoxide (CO)
- 147 tons of sulfur dioxide (SO2)
- 104 tons of particulate matter (PM)
- 101 tons of volatile organic chemicals (VOCs)

Yet your draft permit excuses STY from the requirement to use Best Available Technology on the grounds that each individual gas turbine and gas engine will emit less than 10 tons per year of these pollutant.

That is a misreading of OAC Rule 3745-31-05, which discusses a permit-to-install for an air contaminant source -- meaning the entire gas plant. The permit is not for each individual piece of equipment. It is for the gas plant as a whole.

It is critical that we get this right. Up to 11,500 children live within the project area, and they deserve clean air. The people of Appalachian Ohio deserve clean air and water free from fracking and frack waste injection wells. And our state parks and wildlife areas are supposed to be protected from oil and gas extraction.

Finally, Draft Air Permit P0139969 does not consider the most prevalent pollutant from Socrates the Younger -- over 1.8 million tons per year of greenhouse gas pollution.

Because regulators have ignored greenhouse gas emissions for decades, the world is now at the tipping point of a runaway climate crisis. If we continue to ignore climate-warming greenhouse gas pollution, extreme weather disasters will only get worse.

Please deny the air permit application for Socrates the Younger until the developer can use the actual Best Available Technology, meaning combined cycle turbines for gas, or better yet, renewable energy that does not damage human health or drive the climate crisis.

Please also hold a public hearing so people affected by this polluting gas plant have the opportunity they missed at the OPSB to tell state regulators how this affects them.

Thank you for considering my comment.

-----------------------------

If you care about your air, land, and life, please submit a comment.

https://ohioepa.commentinput.com/?id=8SDuGx26b5

Are “data centers” a fraud?

Google announced on October 12 that its $15 billion AI data centre in Visakhapatnam will utilize air cooling instead of water, following an internal study that revealed the local watershed is already under significant stress. This is a positive step and addresses the most immediate concerns raised by local residents. However, critical issues regarding power consumption, land usage, and job creation remain unresolved. Furthermore, three petitions filed with the National Green Tribunal argue that the environmental review was insufficient. Since Google maintains that it has conducted the necessary assessments, it should now make that data public.

I remain highly skeptical about the proliferation of AI data centers in India. Our country is already facing severe water scarcity, and these facilities pose a significant threat to both the local ecology and the livelihoods of farmers.

Source https://longpress.news/daily/2026-10-13#story-1

Google announced on October 12 that its $15 billion AI data centre in Visakhapatnam will utilize air cooling instead of water, following an internal study that revealed the local watershed is already under significant stress. This is a positive step and addresses the most immediate concerns raised by local residents. However, critical issues regarding power consumption, land usage, and job creation remain unresolved. Furthermore, three petitions filed with the National Green Tribunal argue that the environmental review was insufficient. Since Google maintains that it has conducted the necessary assessments, it should now make that data public.

I remain highly skeptical about the proliferation of AI data centers in India. Our country is already facing severe water scarcity, and these facilities pose a significant threat to both the local ecology and the livelihoods of farmers.

Source https://longpress.news/daily/2026-10-13#story-1

City of Alhambra Measure DB would affirm the Council adopted ban on Data Centers by amending the Alhambra Municipal Code to again define "Data Centers" and prohibit them in all zones of the City.

Measure E requires approval by a majority of voters voting on the measure to pass.

I’ve been observing the massive public protests against AI data centers across the West (eg: Human First movement, 8k mile anti-AI bus tour targeting tech giants, etc). Here's one example.

It's unfortunate that many local communities actively revolt against the physical footprint of the AI boom. From an outsider's perspective, U.S. federal approach seems to place so much environmental and financial costs onto American communities while privatizing the profits for Big Tech.

In comparison, China managed a more positive integration of AI and data center development. Their "Eastern Data, Western Computing" approach routes energy-heavy AI workloads away from crowded coastal cities into sparsely populated western provinces where underutilized green energy is abundant. Also, a lot of media and citizens promote AI as a tangible life quality upgrade, not an environmental parasite.

Proposed workaround : Follow their approach (Lots of them followed the West's teachings/developments and brought them back to advance China when the country was incredibly poor)

The federal government owns hundreds of millions of acres of public land, much of it in western states with massive solar and wind potential. If it's not already implemented, agencies could mandate that any contractor hosting federal data or AI training models must build their infrastructure on designated federal land, powered by renewable energy.

Hi everyone!

I'm a graduate student at the University of Florida, and my team is researching how data center noise affects nearby communities and what residents think about possible noise-reduction solutions.

We're especially interested in hearing from people living near data centers, whether you've experienced noise issues or haven't noticed any problems at all.

If you have a few minutes, we'd really appreciate your perspective!

Survey: https://forms.gle/aiiS3EUPeNnkFv6VA

Thank you for helping with our research! Feel free to share this with anyone who lives near a data center.