AIBU to point out that datacentres don't provide local employment?

[SadiraOfTyr]

The government appears to be making a big deal about datacentres (AI or not) being a huge growth area. The reality is that datacentres, once built, employ virtually no-one - a handful of security guards and that's it. Maintenance, repairs, cooling and power, racking and cabling of servers, storage, and networking kit is intermittent and done by specialists brought in for the job. Most of the time datacentres are a (very noisy) ghost town.

Datacentres are all managed and run remotely by SREs (site reliability engineers) who can be stationed hundreds of miles away, and often in a different country.

YABU: Datacentres will provide thousands of high quality jobs in neglected parts of the country long after construction.
YANBU: The government is having the wool pulled over its eyes by big tech companies who, even if all these datacentres are completed, will never employ more than a handful of locals in low pay occupations such as security and cleaning.

Are the government claiming the datacentres will provide long-term employment?

How long-term?

Well, since datacentres will make places unliveable anyway it probably doesn't matter.

They provide plenty of employment during the construction phase, and jobs, which is the short term approach of a desperate Government with no long term approach to the economy ;)

Our local one employs a few security guards. But they also fund a huge training scheme with the local council, which has offered amazing opportunities apparently.

As an example, the Scottish government has claimed that the new Lanarkshire 500MW datacentre will provide 3400 long-term (i.e. post-construction) jobs. Which is hilarious considering that Datavita, the company behind it, has fewer than 100 employees.

In what way?

Are you sure they mean to staff the data centres?

I assume, data centres 'create jobs' by encouraging / making it possible for other businesses to operate?

You're entirely right, OP - though I'm not sure the government is being fooled as you suggest. The jury is very much out on whether AI will grow the economy overall, but it certainly won't do it where the data centres are. That dynamic is already playing out in the US, where they're further ahead with building them - deprived, rural areas are getting all the environmental damage but none of the benefits.

Data centres are a bit of a problem for modern globalisation, as the countries whose regimes will normally do any amount of damage to their land for money are mostly climatically unsuited to it, or not places you want to control vital infrastructure. So the tech billionaires have to persuade politicians outsource it to the poor parts of their own country rather than outsourcing to somewhere less developed like normal. They do it in the most disingenous ways. I heard Sam Altman being asked why the people of Utah would want a data centre bigger than Manhattan and that uses more than twice the electricity the whole state does currently, and he said that they would benefit if AI cures cancer...

You're right, but they're deliberately being a bit fuzzy about these jobs because even if a new data centre does create 3400 jobs (very unproven) they won't be in Lanarkshire.

Surely they're also completely environmentally unfriendly and energy and water intensive? Their existence seems to completely contradict everything we are told about reducing our energy footprint and industry causing climate change. How will they actually benefit normal people and how will their energy and water use impact sustainability and climate change?

Yeah, I guess it's impossible to predict where those jobs will be.

We do all benefit from economic growth through and if a growing economy needs data centres then the local community benefits indirectly.

It's always a challenge to find places for these big infrastructure projects. Obviously local people don't like them (which I understand). I wonder if the government is 'compensating' the local community at all with extra spending / investment. I doubt it would make the project popular but might help offset some of the objections.

Meant to quote @TheRealMagic

They are not like nuclear power stations that need constant water, they are more like a closed system in a car. It’s the same water circulating being cooled in radiators then being pumped about and warmed by the cpus then cooled again by the radiators.

I think many people see datacentres as a bit like Amazon warehouses - huge buildings which contain presumably thousands of busy employees.

Whereas in reality they are more like telephone exchanges, other than maintenance and installation of new kit, no-one actually needs to be there.

Here's a photo of what is currently the largest datacentre complex in the UK. Check out the size of the carparks, and the number of cars there, to get an idea of how many people actually work there (the carpark on the other side of the road in the bottom right is for other businesses, not the datacentres).

Ironically, this is on the site of the National Gas Turbine Establishment which at it's peak employed 1600 people mostly in well paid engineering roles.

They are very energy intensive but all the ones being built in the UK operate closed loop cooling as far as I know. The Lanarkshire ones certainly do. So the water is cycles round, like your car engine's cooling system.

It's really not impossible to predict what these jobs will be. We've had datacentres in the UK for decades - we know exactly how they are run and who they employ.

I'm not talking about those directly employed by the data centres, I was responding to a post by TheRealMagic (I forgot to quote so probably wasn't obvious) and we were discussing indirect employment.

My understanding is that closed loop cooling is being moved towards, but that we're still building data centres that don't have it now, and also the trade-off for closed-loop is that it uses far less water but also much more electricity.

Ah yes, sorry, missed that. Looking at Datavita's page they claim 3400 jobs but don't say where these jobs will be of course. They are simply letting the Scottish Government and the local council run with it and imply that these will be local jobs. They could be SREs based in India for all we know.

Datavita have said the Lanarkshire development will be closed loop and while they might spin lies about how many jobs will be created locally I really can't see them getting away with one that big.

Yes I am sure you are right and governments should be honest about this. Unfortunately these things are so politically contentious that I suspect there is a tendency to massage the truth to try and get it built.

We are all suffering due to poor economic growth in this country and our trajectory (with the additional challenge of an aging population / falling birth rate) is pretty dire. Infrastructure is obviously important to growth but that's obviously quite abstract for local people vs the very real and present disruption.

I have sympathy for local people but I also have sympathy for governments trying to grown an economy with so much local objection to projects which will hopefully help the economy overall.

Thanks for this thread.

There's a proposal for a datacentre local to me, and I've been wondering whether the trade-off of local job creation would make it worth the sacrifice of having the development.

Clearly not!

I just googled the Lanarkshire one specifically and found this - https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/jul/06/lanarkshire-scotland-ai-datacentre-project-renewable-energy

Which suggests it will be closed loop, but that they haven't actually solved the problem this then causes, that it will absolutely guzzle electricity instead of water, which is my understanding of why the move to closed loop hasn't been as fast as predicted at one point.

@TheRealMagic yep - they've also suggested they will build 500MW of solar capacity nearby which is likely equally nonsense. I suppose the one good thing about all these AI DC proposals is the majority will never be built.

@TheRealMagic ”I heard Sam Altman being asked why the people of Utah would want a data centre bigger than Manhattan and that uses more than twice the electricity the whole state does currently, and he said that they would benefit if AI cures cancer”

I work for a massive pharmaceutical company specializing in oncology.
AI has already sped up (some) product development 5x, and they are still getting going with understanding what it can do. The scientists and researchers are delighted.

Sam does have a point.

What is the sacrifice you will be making?