We worried about power grids, water shortages, and pollution. Now there’s a new question nobody saw coming... Are AI data centers quietly shaking nearby communities sick?
A suggestion for those wanting to follow this, consider checking out Erin Brockovich. Yes, that Erin Brockovich. She's here on substack and she's already on the data center case.
She’s been digging into the data center issue and raising questions about environmental and health impacts long before most people were paying attention.
Worth following if this topic interests you.
Sometimes the people who spot the smoke early are worth listening to.
Very informative post Fred! It had me thinking back to times when people were being advised not to build homes near power grids, because they were potentially cancer causing. These centers far exceed power grids, so ya, people shouldn't be so anxious to want them in their cities. I don't want any near me, however, when visiting other provinces, exposure is more likely. Sounds very risky to me. I have lived in cities, but, tiny towns are sounding more & more inviting to me. We have managed a long time without AI, I'm sure we can still manage. Then the water factor, will our Great Lakes be at risk? Oh, & I swam in ALL The Great Lakes haha
Haha… swimming in all the Great Lakes gives you official Canadian bragging rights, Patsy 😄
And yes, I remember those concerns around power lines too.
I’m not anti-AI, but I am pro-asking tough questions before we rush ahead full speed.
Power, water, noise, now possibly health effects... feels like common sense to study the impacts properly before every town starts competing to host these things.
Oh, I DO brag on the Great Lakes swims Fred haha. When I swam in one, I decided I had to swim in them all...bucket lists, you know haha. I agree with you Fred, we need more information, studies results, etc., before we run us all into a poor-house, or graveyard on excitement alone.
Is this similar to the Havana Syndrome, first reported around 2016-2017? There have been over 200 cases reported by staff at US Embassies in Cuba, Paris, Geneva, Serbia, Berlin and Vienna.
The outcomes for many of these people have been catastrophic to their lives and careers.
If Data Centres emit the same or similar low-level noise emissions, the fallout may affect thousands.
You are right, the "build now, study later" mentality has a lot to answer for - but by then the data centre owners will have made their money. Bet none of them live near one!
Some people have raised similar questions because both involve symptoms people feel more than hear... dizziness, headaches, nausea, anxiety, neurological issues.
But at this point, I’d be careful about saying they’re the same thing.
Havana Syndrome is still debated, and the causes remain controversial.
That said, your bigger point lands... if low-frequency emissions from data centres turn out to have measurable health effects, we’re talking about exposure on a much larger scale.
Which is exactly why ‘build first, study later’ makes people nervous.
Fair questions deserve real answers... before the concrete gets poured.”
Sort of similar -- that scenario is targeted attack, specifically intended and designed to do physical damage. This is more of a "background thing". But arguably, similar physiological effects. But over the past 2-3 years, I remember reading several anecdotal journalistic reports of such symptoms with people living near cryptocurrency centres (same thing, conceptually).
From what I’ve read, the big difference seems to be intentional exposure vs environmental exposure.
Havana Syndrome was discussed as a targeted event, while this sounds more like chronic background exposure people can’t escape from if they live nearby.
But the overlap in reported symptoms is definitely interesting.
And yes... I remember those crypto mining stories too.
Same basic idea...
massive computing power, industrial cooling systems, lots of complaints...
about vibration, noise, headaches, and people feeling ‘off’ without knowing why.
Sometimes anecdotal reports turn out to be nothing… and sometimes they’re the early warning system nobody listened to.
What a timely article, Fred. I recently read that some CEOs are complaining that we're too slow here in Canada building data centres. Other than Alberta, of course, where Danielle Smith subscribes to the principle that you need to do something first, and ask questions later. Seems to me that it's a good thing that we're moving much slower than our neighbour to the south. Your recent article about AI in general links seamlessly with this new article. Low frequency vibrations that are below the normal audible range for humans can be, as the anecdotal evidence and basis research indicates, very harmful. When I was younger and working at Canadian General Electric as the engineer in charge of the 25-inch colour television production line, I recall being able to hear the horizontal oscillator at a frequency of 15,750 Hz. However as one ages, their high frequency response drops off. Nonetheless, it's possible that there are a few folks who can actually hear these very low frequencies, and would really suffer if in proximity of a data centre. . Apparently in China, they're developing offshore data centres to mitigate the enormous water needs. Other than probable effects on fish which would be undesirable, the fact that people would be living far from the data centre would be a good thing. Certainly more extensive research needs to be done!
I thought that China’s use of underwater data centers sounded like a good idea, but I failed to consider the impact on our precious marine wildlife who rely on sonar. There has to be something else that can be done.
Thanks Fred! This is a topic that has been frighteningly not spoken about enough- there were a few neighbourhoods in Alberta a few yrs ago close to data mines using orphan wells. Think around Edmonton.The noise was awful. At the time I immediately thought of the wildlife, migratory birds ..haven’t heard about any research on that either. We absolutely do need data sovereignty- but - harmful effects on life near these things needs to be addressed
We talk a lot about energy and water use, but wildlife impacts barely seem to get mentioned.
Migratory birds, animals sensitive to vibration, even ecosystems around cooling systems... fair questions that deserve answers.
And I agree with you on the bigger picture... data sovereignty matters, especially for Canada.
But that can’t mean build first, ask questions later.
We should be able to support Canadian infrastructure and insist on proper research into health and environmental impacts before these things start popping up beside neighbourhoods.
A suggestion for those wanting to follow this, consider checking out Erin Brockovich. Yes, that Erin Brockovich. She's here on substack and she's already on the data center case.
Good tip, Karen. And yes... that Erin Brockovich.
She’s been digging into the data center issue and raising questions about environmental and health impacts long before most people were paying attention.
Worth following if this topic interests you.
Sometimes the people who spot the smoke early are worth listening to.
Very informative post Fred! It had me thinking back to times when people were being advised not to build homes near power grids, because they were potentially cancer causing. These centers far exceed power grids, so ya, people shouldn't be so anxious to want them in their cities. I don't want any near me, however, when visiting other provinces, exposure is more likely. Sounds very risky to me. I have lived in cities, but, tiny towns are sounding more & more inviting to me. We have managed a long time without AI, I'm sure we can still manage. Then the water factor, will our Great Lakes be at risk? Oh, & I swam in ALL The Great Lakes haha
Haha… swimming in all the Great Lakes gives you official Canadian bragging rights, Patsy 😄
And yes, I remember those concerns around power lines too.
I’m not anti-AI, but I am pro-asking tough questions before we rush ahead full speed.
Power, water, noise, now possibly health effects... feels like common sense to study the impacts properly before every town starts competing to host these things.
Oh, I DO brag on the Great Lakes swims Fred haha. When I swam in one, I decided I had to swim in them all...bucket lists, you know haha. I agree with you Fred, we need more information, studies results, etc., before we run us all into a poor-house, or graveyard on excitement alone.
Thanks again for the info. Will add it to my research on AI.
Is this similar to the Havana Syndrome, first reported around 2016-2017? There have been over 200 cases reported by staff at US Embassies in Cuba, Paris, Geneva, Serbia, Berlin and Vienna.
The outcomes for many of these people have been catastrophic to their lives and careers.
If Data Centres emit the same or similar low-level noise emissions, the fallout may affect thousands.
You are right, the "build now, study later" mentality has a lot to answer for - but by then the data centre owners will have made their money. Bet none of them live near one!
Interesting comparison, Celtic Lady.
Some people have raised similar questions because both involve symptoms people feel more than hear... dizziness, headaches, nausea, anxiety, neurological issues.
But at this point, I’d be careful about saying they’re the same thing.
Havana Syndrome is still debated, and the causes remain controversial.
That said, your bigger point lands... if low-frequency emissions from data centres turn out to have measurable health effects, we’re talking about exposure on a much larger scale.
Which is exactly why ‘build first, study later’ makes people nervous.
Fair questions deserve real answers... before the concrete gets poured.”
Sort of similar -- that scenario is targeted attack, specifically intended and designed to do physical damage. This is more of a "background thing". But arguably, similar physiological effects. But over the past 2-3 years, I remember reading several anecdotal journalistic reports of such symptoms with people living near cryptocurrency centres (same thing, conceptually).
Good point, Grant.
From what I’ve read, the big difference seems to be intentional exposure vs environmental exposure.
Havana Syndrome was discussed as a targeted event, while this sounds more like chronic background exposure people can’t escape from if they live nearby.
But the overlap in reported symptoms is definitely interesting.
And yes... I remember those crypto mining stories too.
Same basic idea...
massive computing power, industrial cooling systems, lots of complaints...
about vibration, noise, headaches, and people feeling ‘off’ without knowing why.
Sometimes anecdotal reports turn out to be nothing… and sometimes they’re the early warning system nobody listened to.
What a timely article, Fred. I recently read that some CEOs are complaining that we're too slow here in Canada building data centres. Other than Alberta, of course, where Danielle Smith subscribes to the principle that you need to do something first, and ask questions later. Seems to me that it's a good thing that we're moving much slower than our neighbour to the south. Your recent article about AI in general links seamlessly with this new article. Low frequency vibrations that are below the normal audible range for humans can be, as the anecdotal evidence and basis research indicates, very harmful. When I was younger and working at Canadian General Electric as the engineer in charge of the 25-inch colour television production line, I recall being able to hear the horizontal oscillator at a frequency of 15,750 Hz. However as one ages, their high frequency response drops off. Nonetheless, it's possible that there are a few folks who can actually hear these very low frequencies, and would really suffer if in proximity of a data centre. . Apparently in China, they're developing offshore data centres to mitigate the enormous water needs. Other than probable effects on fish which would be undesirable, the fact that people would be living far from the data centre would be a good thing. Certainly more extensive research needs to be done!
Great comment, Jerry... and I love the engineering perspective.
You’re absolutely right that age changes what frequencies we hear (or don’t hear).
And your point about Canada moving slower may actually turn out to be an advantage for once... sometimes cautious beats fast.
The offshore data centre idea is fascinating too...
especially if it reduces pressure on communities and freshwater systems.
But like you said, that just shifts the question to environmental impact elsewhere.
Fish probably don’t get much say in the planning meetings 😄
Feels like one of those moments where more research before mass rollout is just plain common sense.
I thought that China’s use of underwater data centers sounded like a good idea, but I failed to consider the impact on our precious marine wildlife who rely on sonar. There has to be something else that can be done.
The power and greed leaders should be locked in a data center 24/7! Or maybe locked just outside, so we can see them suffer!
Thanks Fred! This is a topic that has been frighteningly not spoken about enough- there were a few neighbourhoods in Alberta a few yrs ago close to data mines using orphan wells. Think around Edmonton.The noise was awful. At the time I immediately thought of the wildlife, migratory birds ..haven’t heard about any research on that either. We absolutely do need data sovereignty- but - harmful effects on life near these things needs to be addressed
Excellent point, Shelley.
We talk a lot about energy and water use, but wildlife impacts barely seem to get mentioned.
Migratory birds, animals sensitive to vibration, even ecosystems around cooling systems... fair questions that deserve answers.
And I agree with you on the bigger picture... data sovereignty matters, especially for Canada.
But that can’t mean build first, ask questions later.
We should be able to support Canadian infrastructure and insist on proper research into health and environmental impacts before these things start popping up beside neighbourhoods.