Rendering of the data center and power plant The Data Centers proposed to build on the University of Delaware's STAR campus in Newark, Delaware. (Image: The Data Centers)

Rendering of the data center and power plant The Data Centers proposed to build on the University of Delaware's STAR campus in Newark, Delaware. (Image: The Data Centers)

NIMBY and the Data Center: Lessons From the Battle of Newark

3 comments

When you announce your next project, will it be greeted with praise or protest? That’s an important question for data center developers in the wake of the collapse of a controversial project in Delaware.

On July 10 the University of Delaware terminated its lease with The Data Centers LLC, which had planned to build a large data center supported by a 279-megawatt energy generation facility featuring combined heat and power (CHP) that would allow it to operate “off the grid.” It was heralded as a forward-looking data center cogeneration project that would bring jobs and up to $1 billion in investment to the town of Newark.

The project was met with resistance by members of the local community, which coalesced into Newark Residents Against the Power Plant, a grass-roots group that made masterful use of social media to drive an alternate narrative: that the power plant was a threat, and developers were hiding critical facts about their plan. This scrutiny was a major factor in the university’s decision to back out of the project.

Lessons for future projects

It would be easy for the industry to view the “Battle of Newark” as an isolated incident involving a unique project, with limited relevance to other developments. But data center developers should pay close attention, as the Delaware debate introduced a new scenario: the data center as a political hot potato.

It’s instructive to examine the tactics adopted by NRAPP in mobilizing opposition to The Data Centers’ project:

  • The group quickly deployed a web site and built a following through an e-newsletter, Facebook and Twitter.
  • NRAPP tracked every development on its web site and social channels, posting 150 documents, hours of videos of local meetings and maps of the data center site and the surrounding neighborhood.
  • It assigned “neighborhood captains” to distribute yard signs, T-shirts and door hangers and hand out flyers and fact sheets about the project.
  • The group mobilized support from other organizations, including the Delaware Audubon Society, The Sierra Club, student groups, university faculty, the Delaware Coalition for Open Government and various environmental groups.
  • NRAPP tapped the skills of professionals in its membership, using the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to gain access to documents, and filing a Superior Court lawsuit to oppose the project.

“We have proven that the very concept of the ‘done deal’ is now dead,” the group said in a statement. “The community’s voice is powerful in shaping our future.  The significance of this effort extends beyond the power plant and will have a positive impact on our community for years to come. It also serves as a powerful example for other communities facing similar challenges.”

That last sentence is worth considering, as NRAPP has created a template for future efforts to mobilize opposition to data center projects. So how do developers avoid a protracted battle over future projects? There are several “lessons learned” from the Newark fiasco they should keep in mind.

‘Power plants’ are problematic

Data centers don’t usually freak people out. But power plants do.

There haven’t been many NIMBY (Not In My Backyard) disputes about data centers. Staffing is minimal, so they don’t place a burden on local traffic or schools. Noise and emissions can usually be contained on site. These projects boost the tax base and are seen as symbols of the new economy. That’s why many data center builds are announced by the governor at a press conference.

But when a power plant wants to move into the neighborhood, it can prompt a very different reaction. The on-site power project developed by The Data Centers was innovative for the data center industry. It’s fair to say that the developers expected their project to be welcomed as a data center. But the neighbors looked at the plans and saw a power plant.

This is a power-obsessed industry. On-site power is being included in more and more data centers, albeit rarely at the scale attempted in Newark. Large banks of diesel backup generators sometimes attract scrutiny, as was the case in Quincy, Washington. But this equipment is well known and understood by most homeowners.

Developers implementing new approaches to on-site power generation would do well to either build in remote areas or be prepared to take time to explain the technology to local officials and residents. Which brings us to our next “lesson learned.”

Pages: 1 2

About the Author

Rich Miller is the founder and editor at large of Data Center Knowledge, and has been reporting on the data center sector since 2000. He has tracked the growing impact of high-density computing on the power and cooling of data centers, and the resulting push for improved energy efficiency in these facilities.

Add Your Comments

  • (will not be published)

3 Comments

  1. Mrs. R

    This company should NEVER be allowed to build anywhere. It was nothing but deception and lies. "This is not a power plant folks." Gene Kern at the first and only public meeting. 279 megawatts and 10 165 stacks - yes it is a power plant with a data center attached. They should be run out of the state!

  2. djaymick

    This is nothing but climate idiots killing this project. Please remember that Chrysler used to own this site to manufacture autos. It had its own paint plant. Anyone who thinks the data center will create more "climate destruction" doesn't know the facts. Plus, the trustees of Delaware also voted this down by unanimous vote. They have no powers. Now, the trustees can look forward to a huge lawsuit for breach of contract. If people want to see the politics of Delaware, look no further than the port expansion project. A company was willing to invest $5B to bring in new jobs and benefits, but the Democratic politics killed that project, too. The state loves to tout new initiatives, only to kill them due to political pressure from their preferred donors. Last, Delaware touts itself as a STEM education state. Killing off high paying technology jobs is just the opposite of what they preach.

  3. Mr. F

    Yes, I am sure TDC with their incredibly deep pockets that provided such detailed plans to potential investors and landlords as well as funding a crack media campaign have it in them to fund what would surely be a ludicrously expensive court fight against the University. And while we wait for the laughter to stop, let's consider what was recently revealed via an FOIA against DEMEC (the Delaware Municipal Electric Corporation that TDC was trying to negotiate a PPA with in order to finance their plan) by the citizens group that fought this monstrosity to a standstill: acknowledgment by DEMEC's president Patrick McCullar in an email dated July 9, 2013 that TDC was "marketing a Power Plant to their investors, not a Data Center" based on the terms they were looking for in their PPA. You can find the email here http://www.nonewarkpowerplant.org/2014/07/27/foia-update-delaware-municipal-electric-corporation/2013-07-10-email-houck-001/