Photo courtesy of Taxpayers for Accountability for Our Groundwater
On Wednesday, Ridgecrest community members attended the city council meeting to oppose a proposed data center for Inyokern. The main reasons for the opposition were environmental factors such as water use and potential pollution.
Barbara Bane spoke, stating that she worked as a federal archaeologist and said she believes that there was a “bureaucratic sleight of hand” to avoid doing a thorough environmental review. She also mentioned a study by a professor from the University of Cambridge and several other researchers that found data centers can create heat islands, raising the temperature by two to four degrees.
“It’s going to raise the temperatures. We don’t need Inyokerrn to be two to four degrees hotter because of this data center. So, I urge you to stand with us and put out some kind of rejection of this thing for our community,” said Bane.
According to the California Energy Commission website, the proposed center would have 40 diesel-fired generator sets that would provide up to 99 megawatts of backup emergency generation. The U.S Energy Information Administration reported that in 2022, diesel fuel accounted for about 10 percent of the energy-related CO2 emissions.
James Wicker explained that he owns property in Inyokern and was concerned about the pollution, and that a “simple Google search” would show that data centers pollute the area, which can cause respiratory and cardiovascular issues in surrounding communities.
“Data centers are often placed in rural low-income areas or communities of color, creating disproportionate health risks and heat islands,” said Wicker. “The rapid growth of AI infrastructure is expected to produce up to 5 million tons of electronic waste between 2020 and 2030. AI growth could add 24 to 44 million metric tons of carbon dioxide to atmosphere annually. Air pollution from data centers is estimated to potentially cause over 600,000 asthma cases and 1300 premature deaths annually. A simple Google search speaks to the enormous intensity of this issue.”
Sarah Holly noted that, along with the pollution, the environmental disturbances can impact wildlife.
“The project’s immense energy demands and reported backup generation infrastructure raised concerns regarding air quality, noise pollution, and environmental health. Industrial-scale generator use and cooling systems may increase emissions, contribute to noise disturbances, and alter the quiet rural character that residents in highly specialized plant and animal communities uniquely adapted to this environment. Large industrial development can result in habitat fragmentation, disruption of migration corridors, increased light pollution, heat output, traffic, and noise. All of which can negatively affect native wildlife populations,” said Holly.
Jennifer Wood-Slayton stated that the data would significantly impact the community and that they can’t afford to give so much of their water to a data center.
“So, I’m looking at this data center, and it just feels like the time where you can’t stay silent anymore. This is something that would so fundamentally impact and influence the future of our community in so many ways,” said Wood-Slayton. “Water is the big thing I care about. I work over in the valley, as you know. Water is life. People here, I think, have really not grasped that for so long because you stuck a pipe in the ground and water came out of it. But if you were in Kingsman, if you’re in anywhere in the western side of the valley, water’s everything. And now it will be here, too. And we don’t have the water to waste on a new business when we’re fighting over it ourselves.”
Holly made a similar statement, adding that although she believes technological development and economic growth are important, she doesn’t think the data center aligns with long-term sustainability.
“Our community exists in a high desert ecosystem already facing serious limitations, most notably water scarcity. Indian Wells Valley has long struggled with groundwater overdraft, and any large-scale industrial project with significant cooling or operational demands introduces additional pressures already on an unsustainable system. Water is not an expendable resource in our region. It’s one of our most critical vulnerabilities,” said Holly.
Currently, the data center is under review to receive a Small Power Plant Exemption, which centers can qualify for if their megawatt capacity is under 100, and the proposed one is 99 megawatts. Being granted this exemption would mean that the facility was found not to have “substantial adverse impact on the environment or energy resources,” according to the California Energy Commission. Wood-Slayton stated that anyone living in the area would know that’s not true. She asked for a letter of public comment to be submitted, stating what the risks are by city council and approved by the community before being sent.
Community members also asked for the process to be transparent, such as a letter that breaks down the data center’s environmental report for public viewing. Wood-Slayton and other community members submitted letters of public comment between April 28 and May 6 as well, asking for the environmental review.
“The pipeline currently proposed to many to be unfeasible and depends on a State Water Project that delivered only 5% of contracted water in 2022 and sits at 30% for 2026. There is no margin for new large-scale groundwater demand at this time. I respectfully request a full environmental review with specific attention to water supply impacts, and that any approval require demonstrated water-neutral or dry cooling technology before construction begins,” wrote Wood-Slayton in the letter.
If the exemption is approved, final decisions will be made by the Kern County Board of Supervisors; however, community members asked the city council to speak against the center. The city council voted to discuss the center at the first meeting in June.
