Datacenter developers are manipulating the EPA’s air pollution permitting process to avoid emission controls and scrutiny of their projects, environmental advocates allege.
asserted
advocates → manipulate → projects
Companies need federal permits to emit a range of pollutants.
asserted
Companies → need → pollutants
In their permit applications, some in big tech are avoiding “major” reviews by dividing their emissions sources into separate, multiple “minor” sources that require less regulatory oversight, the advocates say.
asserted
advocates → avoid → oversight
This helps datacenters avoid public scrutiny, and permit applications are typically approved much faster.
asserted
applications → help → scrutiny
It also likely saves tech companies money, and avoids the hassle and cost of potential pollution controls, advocates say.
asserted
advocates → save → controls
In North Carolina, Amazon and utility giant Duke Energy are installing 649 diesel generators to back up a new hyperscale center.
asserted
Amazon → instal → center
They submitted two permits, and avoided a major review despite being in a low income area that already suffers from high levels of air pollution.
asserted
that → submit → pollution
In New Mexico, the Project Jupiter datacenter developers attempted to circumvent a major review by proposing two natural gas “microgrids” for either side of the facility and submitting two “minor” permits.
asserted
developers → attempt → permits
The overall project would have released enough pollution to trigger a major review.
asserted
project → release → review
In Frederick, Maryland, four datacenters with separate minor permits, including one by Amazon, operate on a single campus with a master developer, regulatory documents show.
asserted
documents → include → developer
In other instances, data center developers have staggered minor permit requests over months that cumulatively emit as much pollution as a major source, advocates say.
asserted
advocates → stagger → source
These regulatory maneuvers make it less clear how much pollution residents living near the facilities are exposed to, and the move amounts to “lego permitting”, said Michael Koerber, a retired deputy director of the EPA’s Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, which worked on permitting.
“They want to fly under the radar,” said Koerber, who now volunteers with the Environmental Protection Network nonprofit.
asserted
who → make → nonprofit
“The more attention they have, the more difficult it gets to get the permit.
asserted
it → have → permit
They have consultants who are very good and know where the shortcuts are.”
asserted
shortcuts → have → consultants
Koerber noted that the situation is not unique to the data center industry.
asserted
situation → note → industry
Cheryl Vetter, a former EPA employee who worked with Koeber and left the agency last year, said it was not common for data centers to use this tactic until after she left.
asserted
she → work → tactic
In a statement, an Amazon spokesperson said the company “appropriately applied for and obtained an air permit for our datacenter project”.
asserted
company → say → project
Under the Clean Air Act, companies building a project that will be a “major” source of air pollution, like some hyperscale data centers, are typically supposed to undergo a more stringent air emissions review.
asserted
that → build → review
Among other protections, it is supposed to ensure that the pollution the facility would add to the local airshed would not violate air quality limits when combined with the air pollution already in the region.
asserted
facility → suppose → region
This process can be lengthy, may require pre-construction monitoring, and, if the proposed data center is found to violate limits, may require companies to take steps to limit their pollution, like adding scrubbers to their smokestacks.
uncertain
center → require → smokestacks
The Project Jupiter datacenter plans to divide its natural turbines into minor permits was “nothing short of preposterous”, attorneys with the New Mexico Environmental Law Center wrote in March comments submitted to state regulators.
asserted
attorneys → divide → regulators
The firm is representing community members who would be impacted by the proposed plans’ pollution.
asserted
who → represent → pollution
It in effect created a scenario in which one natural gas power plant would have operated with two minor permits, attorneys wrote.
asserted
attorneys → create → permits
The permit application points to why the data center’s developers, Austin-based BorderPlex, attempted to do two permits.
asserted
developers → point → permits
The project’s developers proposed releasing between 20.2 and 24.2 tons of hazardous air pollution from each of the grids, meaning that together they would have released as much as 44 tons of hazardous air pollution.
asserted
they → propose → pollution
In regulatory documents, Maslyn Locke, an attorney working on the case, wrote that the “audacious attempt to arbitrarily distinguish two halves of the same source is insulting to both [regulators] and community members, as it is so clearly an attempt to avoid air pollution control requirements.”
The developer withdrew the application in April amid fierce community pushback, Locke said.
asserted
Locke → work → pushback
The New Mexico environment department also opposed the proposal, a spokesperson told the Guardian.
asserted
spokesperson → oppose → Guardian
However, Locke told the Guardian there was no public evidence that regulators opposed it until now.
asserted
regulators → tell → it
New plans for the data center have been held up by the state supreme court over procedural problems, Locke said.
asserted
Locke → hold → problems
Vetter said the law allows for divided permits in some instances.
asserted
law → say → instances
Permits can be divided if two companies are polluting at the same location, but not if all the polluting activities are under common control.
asserted
activities → divide → control
The sources must also be adjacent, though the definition of “adjacent” can include those that do not share a border, but operate as part of the same facility.
asserted
that → include → facility
Amazon and Duke’s North Carolina plans call for nearly 250 tons per year of nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and volatile organic compounds.
asserted
Amazon → call → oxides
Amazon is proposing to emit about 98 tons of particulate matter annually, and 6.4 tons per year of hazardous air pollutants, including benzene and formaldehyde.
asserted
Amazon → propose → benzene
The heavily industrial region is already burdened by pollution from a Duke power plant and other plastic pellet factory, the Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC) wrote in comments to North Carolina state regulators.
asserted
Center → burden → regulators
Heart disease, cancer, and respiratory disease are among the leading causes of death in the region, and the datacenter’s diesel generators’ particulate matter and hazardous pollutants will almost certainly increase those problems, advocates warn.
asserted
advocates → lead → problems
It appears the companies split the permits to avoid a major review, Kathleen Sullivan, a SELC attorney, told the Guardian.
asserted
Sullivan → appear → Guardian
North Carolina regulators wrote that Duke’s generators are providing temporary power for about a year, and that Duke is operating them separately from Amazon’s generators.
asserted
Duke → write → generators
But the companies did not provide to regulators lease agreements and contracts, and some documents suggest Amazon controls all the generators, Sullivan alleged.
asserted
Sullivan → provide → generators
In its statement, Amazon said: “The separate permitting of Amazon’s and Duke’s respective projects reflects the actual ownership and operational structure.”
asserted
permitting → say → ownership
…and 4 more, not listed.
The Aporia
