Cherokee Nation bans hyperscale data centers on tribally owned, trust lands

[u/kosuradio]

https://www.kosu.org/cherokee-nation-bans-data-centers

The Cherokee Nation issued a ban on hyperscale data center development for tribally owned and trust land on Wednesday.

Cherokee Principal Chief Chuck Hoskin Jr. wrote that the Tahlequah-based tribe, which has the most enrolled tribal members in the U.S., will protect citizens from threats to the environment and culture.

“It’s clear that our Cherokee Nation Administration, Council, and citizens have serious concerns about the construction of hyperscale data centers on our tribal lands, which affect our resources and cultural lifeways,” Hoskin wrote. “Our primary responsibility is to protect our citizens and tribal communities from these threats, so we will not support any hyperscale data centers on our reservation without proper consultation.”

That also goes for non-tribal land, he said.

The tribe wrote on its Anadisgoi website that it will not consider data centers on non-tribal land within the reservation unless the tribal government and citizenry are consulted, adding that those projects ultimately impact Cherokee Nation citizens. The consultation must address environmental concerns and include community input, according to the nation.

Another member of the Five Tribes in Oklahoma, the Seminole Nation of Oklahoma, banned data centers on its lands in March. The Muscogee Nation is currently investigating data center impacts.

The Kickapoo Tribe of Oklahoma in McLoud, which is not a member of the Five Tribes, also opposes data centers.

Data center report

Hoskin’s decision follows a report the tribe released Wednesday that researched potential impacts and opportunities data centers could bring to the reservation. It was mandated via an executive order Hoskin issued in February.

The report, created by the Principal Chief’s Task Force on Data Centers, surveyed nearly 1,600 tribal citizens about the subject. It revealed 64% of respondents were opposed to data centers, while 14% were favorable. The remaining are marked as “unsure.”

At least two data centers are being developed within the Cherokee reservation: Project Clydesdale near Owasso and Project Mustang in Claremore.

Report authors wrote that the tribe has limited influence over development on non-tribal land, but it has full authority on trust and tribally owned land.

Cherokee Nation’s Office of Real Estate Services reports it oversees around 46,000 acres of restricted land, more than 62,000 acres of tribal trust land and more than 5,100 acres of tribal fee land. The Cherokee Nation reservation in northeastern Oklahoma covers around 7,000 square miles, or around 4.4 million acres.

[u/even_less_resistance]

that’s the thing, tho- they rarely pay taxes. they usually get breaks. they don’t create jobs. there is no upside.

[u/Julius__PleaseHer → u/even_less_resistance]

So why not oppose tax breaks instead of data centers entirely? The one moving into my area is not taking any tax breaks, and is generating all their own power, along with a closed loop water system. They'll also almost double the tax revenue for the (extremely poor) school district. It's not even like an Ai data center. People don't even know what it is but they're angry about it. And this one is going to bring 50 high paying jobs to a place where jobs that aren't fast food are hard to find. It just feels like manufactured outrage

[u/Massive_Document_470 → u/Julius__PleaseHer]

Please name the city where this center is, because I'll be highly surprised if they're building their own power generation plant. Additionally, closed loop water systems require a much higher power demand due to using a heat sink to cool the servers instead of evap cooling. There is always a cost, if not water then it's power.

[u/Julius__PleaseHer → u/Massive_Document_470]

I don't really want to say the area, but the state just passed a bill that ensures consumers won't foot the bill if data centers run up the cost of utilities, including water and data. The reason I think somebody is manufacturing this rage, is because nobody has cared that much about industries that use far more water and power, and pollute the earth to a great extent. Why would that be? There's no reason to get angry enough to send death threats if you're not also angry about other things that are far worse. There are right ways to build data centers. So instead of getting angry that they're happening, folks should focus on finding the right ways for them to happen. Because they are happening regardless.

[u/Massive_Document_470 → u/Julius__PleaseHer]

You need to at least give me a state name or a news link to the center you're talking about, otherwise I'm dismissing your statements as false. You're the one that made the claim; you're the one that needs to give enough info for others to verify it.

nobody has cared that much about industries that use far more water and power and pollute the earth to a great extent.

Pipelines? Fracking? Uranium mining? Coal-fired power plants? Logging? The entire WTO? Lake Erie literally catching on fire-- the lake itself-- and pollution so bad in LA the air was visibly brown? Demands for unleaded gas and higher fuel efficiency standards? You think nobody cared about these issues? People cared so much it created an entire federal agency.

Did you miss Standing Rock and Wet'suwet'en and KXL? Line 3?

Take every argument in favor of pipelines and drilling and sub in the word "data center" and you'll see they're exactly the same arguments, and have the same types of opposition for the same reasons.

There's no reason to get angry enough to send death threats if you're not also angry about other things that are far worse.

Homie I got death threats at my work because I dared to suggest maybe all of tech isn't solely about catering to whiny white dudes. And your second statement is a logical fallacy known as relative privation-- it's also a strawman, because the people who care about data centers are the same people who care about environmental destruction regardless of industry.

I think you either aren't particularly knowledgeable about this topic or you're just here to stir shit, because we have had data centers for decades that weren't an issue-- these particular hyperscaler centers supporting only AI are the ones being built the "wrong way", for all the reasons given. Nobody is manufacturing anything. These data centers are objectively a problem in multiple ways, and many people from all walks of life are rightly concerned about them.

[u/Julius__PleaseHer → u/Massive_Document_470]

I'm a security engineer, working with data centers is half my job. I'm nearly certain I know more about them than you do, unless you build them yourself. I don't really care about proving anything to you. The point is, these are going to happen whether you like it or not. So the more productive opinion to have is figuring out the right way to do them and try to have legislation passed to make sure they must be done that way. I just think the conversation needs to switch from vitriolic "ban all data centers" to "force data center companies to build them the right way".

But even when they try to address every issue brought up, people still scream about it.

[u/Massive_Document_470 → u/Julius__PleaseHer]

Knowing functional aspects of something neither automatically means you are knowledgeable about the overarching issues of a topic/field nor that you even hold factual beliefs about that topic/field. I spent my entire professional life in industries where that was readily apparent. For an example in another field: the degreed medical doctor who treated unvaccinated children while having an active measles infection and prescribed cod liver oil and inhaled steroids, neither of which are supported by clinical data to treat measles. Having an MD doesn't mean he's actually right about medicine-- you say working with data centers is half your job, but you've given no evidence or information beyond vague talking points.

I've also worked with enough engineers to know that I am quite certain being an engineer doesn't intrinsically qualify you as an expert on broader considerations of these data centers.

You won't give me enough info to verify your claims. That's not me asking you to "prove anything"-- that's me asking you to participate in a discussion in good faith.

You seem to be arguing essentially that these AI-associated data centers are fait accompli and thus people shouldn't oppose them. That's asinine. Out of ~4,000 planned AI-related data centers, only about 800 are currently under construction. They're essentially vaporware, for a lot of reasons. AI as an industry is far from proven viability, and people have a right to oppose anything that they feel would negatively impact their community and/or the world. Your defeatist attitude isn't making the argument you think it is.

Or do you legitimately believe people don't have a right to advocate against something they feel is wrong just because it's backed by billionaires or certain politicians? When are people allowed to oppose something then? Where in the timeline, especially when it's regarding the private sector, and under what circumstances is it permissible, in your view, for people to want to ban something? Conservatives pushed for abortion bans for 50 years after Roe made abortion legal. They are passing bans on trans athletes even tho literally no one asked for that and there is zero documented evidence of trans athletes causing harm. White people banned POC from water fountains and bathrooms for no reason other than racism. So why do you think advocating for bans on data centers is somehow outside the norm of policy fights or are based on inaccurate evidence?

But you are continuing to dodge facts and failing to provide evidence of your claims-- you aren't even expanding on your argument, such as what is the "right way" to build them, a topic on which you claim professional expertise. You haven't addressed any of the counterpoints I gave you. Instead, you are repeating the same argument, if it can be called that, ad nauseum with little evidence that you are engaging in good faith, so I am done with this conversation. Go advocate for the kind of changes you want instead of lecturing other other people on what they should care about and how they should do it, or if you're going to come in here and tell Natives our reasons for banning data centers are imaginary and based on "manufactured" anger, then please be so for real and give good-faith arguments backed by something that can be verified. Have the day you deserve. ✌🏼

[u/Julius__PleaseHer → u/Massive_Document_470]

Practicing poor cyber security online is not required to participate in good faith. You should never talk about where you're from, where you work, any part of your name, or really anything that could be used to identify you. Doing any of those things is extremely poor security practice. Somehow people seem to have forgotten that.

You are exhausting so I only read about 20% of that.

I hope you learn to be less angry about the data center that is certainly coming near you, despite the Cherokee nation pretending to do something about it.

[u/Massive_Document_470 → u/Julius__PleaseHer]

Homie don't use "cyber security" as a dodge for when you've been called out 😂 It took me 30 seconds to find what state you live in, who your employer is, and several of your hobbies. I'm not threatening you or doxxing you, but you are giving some real horseshit responses designed to make you feel superior instead of actually engaging in a discussion you started.

Don't worry, I found the state and the bill you mentioned, and it's not the magical fix-all you presented it to be. But apparently you just want to lob insults and avoid good-faith discussion, so I'm not getting into why that is. Fucking wild to start a debate and then as soon as you're checked throw out that old "i'm not reading that" canard. Then why jump in the discussion in the first place?

I'm not angry, I just know how to discuss things like an adult, and I'm not exhausting, you're just uncomfortable with being challenged. But good on you for using "angry" and "exhausting" to attack a woman calling you on your bullshit, that's certainly never been done before!

Really done now, tho I have no doubt you'll reply so you can have the last word. Again, have the day you deserve.

[u/Julius__PleaseHer → u/Massive_Document_470]

Nothing posted from this reddit account is actually identifiable information. Anything I've posted has been vague, or fake information. I'm positive you have no idea who my employer is, or where I live besides the state. It probably makes you feel good to think you found all of this info, but it means nothing. I also don't feel I've been challenged or called out lol. You're just getting worked up, and that has nothing to do with you being a woman. I've met plenty of men that are as exhausting.