Letters to Politicians
Dan Radin, from Facebook April 25, 2024
I wanted to share that I wrote to our legislators advocating for their vote in support of SB299, and that they ask for it to be raised within the current legislative session. Seven minutes after sending, Sen. Marx replied,
"Thank you Dan. Today I spoke with leadership, chair of the energy committee and the governor’s office, requesting SB 299 be raised. I am told by all that it will be. Every day I will make the same ask."
Here is my note, in case it's helpful for others who may want to contact our lawmakers.
Dear Lawmakers —
I am a constituent from Waterford, writing in support of your vote for SB299 (An Act Concerning Data Centers) and that you advocate for its vote within the current legislative session.
For context, I am pro-progress, pro-development, and a techno-optimist. I have served on, and been unanimously elected Chair of Waterford’s Economic Development Commission on these principles. I have also served on Waterford’s RTM, representing the district in which Millstone is located. Finally, I build and commercialize new software and connected hardware products for a living, and the services, tools, and applications my teams develop—which include various types of AI—run in the types of data centers contemplated in SB299.
Sufficient due diligence has been done neither by the Town of Waterford in the proposed hyperscale data centers at Millstone, nor by the General Assembly in passing the enabling legislation, HB6514, under questionable “emergency” auspices. Passing SB299 creates an opportunity to proceed through this one-way door with care, integrity, and humility.
Without seeking to understand the impact of hyperscale data centers on power system capacity and reliability, we risk even-more-expensive electric service for consumers as well as the increasing use of coal and fossil fuels to meet regional electricity demand.
Data centers are not high-upside stores of value; to the contrary, their value and utility declines over time unless they are continually upfitted with new servers. Connecticut lawmakers should be equally excited about providing tax breaks and subsidies on data centers as they are with installing sewers and power lines. Data centers are quite literally a bunch of computers in a warehouse.
Data centers do not have the capability to “transform Connecticut’s economy” or create a significant number of high-quality jobs. They do not have the capability to reposition Connecticut as “cutting edge”—or even business-friendly; the latter reputation has been earned through anti-development zoning regulations and the high cost of living and operating—and not the lack of in-state data centers. Data centers employ a small number of technicians to monitor and maintain operations. And those workers have higher rates of physical and mental health complications due to continuous, unrelenting noise and radiated emission exposure. That said, data centers are indeed valuable when viewed with a clear-eyed perspective: like any other infrastructure.
If we can summon the courage to pause, stop pretending we know what the hell we’re doing, and take the time and effort to build a genuine understanding of the benefits and drawbacks, we might find we like what we learn and are encouraged to proceed. Then again, we might discover we’ve let ourselves be blinded by the promise of annuity-like income from “tech,” and willfully buried our heads in the sand as environmental and quality-of-life risks have presented themselves.
Thank you for your time and attention to this important issue. I urge you to bring SB299 for a vote within the current legislative session, and that you vote in support of its passage.
Sincerely,
Dan Radin
March 2 nd , 2024
Dear Martha Marx,
I have great security concerns about the Hyperscale Data Center proposed for Dominion owned land with a direct connection to reactors 2 & 3. If allowed, it would be an attractive target for terrorists and a fire hazard adjacent to both reactors. Regarding physical security, choosing the right location should be a primary focus when building a data center. There are certain areas that
must be avoided because they present security and safety risks that can cause service interruptions or complete failures. These include power plants, areas within earthquake fault lines, areas prone to seasonal fires, flooding, and where Hurricanes are common.
There are many causes for data center fires that can cause grave damage. Is the Waterford Fire Department able to manage a substantial fire like this if it were to occur? www.dglinfra.com
Who will benefit the most from building a data center at Millstone? Not the residents of Waterford who love its natural resources, and nature preserves. The developers will not be around to hear the noise, observe the wildlife deterioration, and issues with our water temperatures that will endanger marine life.
In terms of construction it will take at least 2 years to build this data center which will make our Waterford and East Lyme a traffic nightmare.
Also our electric bills all over Connecticut will soar because of the down time between the Nuclear Plants energy supply. There are times when the towers 1 and 2 are shut down or not producing as much energy as needed and this will increase the cost of electric energy for all of Connecticut to bear.
Why should Waterford take the liability and the risk?
Caryn Kreitzer
Waterford, CT
06385
"Uncalled Amendment"
Tue, Jan 16 2024
to mae.flexer
Hello Senator Flexer,
I have been researching HB-6514, "An Act Concerning Incentives for Qualified Data Centers to Locate in the State" and see that you attempted to amend the Bill to include sensible measures for protecting the quality of life of Connecticut residents and the environment. I found it listed as LCO #4286 on a CT.gov site. (https://www.cga.ct.gov/asp/cgabillstatus/cgabillstatus.asp?selBillType=Bill&bill_num=HB06514&which_year=2021).
Your LCO #4286 resides under a heading titled Uncalled Amendments yet, I have no idea what that means so, I am writing to you to ask about that. What exactly is an uncalled amendment and if it is what I think it might be who was responsible for a decision to leave it as an uncalled amendment and, who decided to leave your LCO #4286 out of HB-6514?
While I await your reply I do want to let you know that I appreciate your valiant effort at attempting to include common sense rules into a Bill that does little to protect people's quality of life and the natural environment around us all. I think it's important to know exactly who was responsible for leaving that out. Your feedback about that detail would be greatly appreciated!
Yours Truly,
Bryan Sayles for
Concerned Citizens of Waterford and East Lyme (CCWEL)
RTM, Dec. 4, 2023, Town of Waterford
For Public Comment and Meeting Minutes
To be Copied: Gov. Lamont, Senator Martha Marx, and Representative Kathleen McCarty
Good evening, Town Representatives and fellow residents,
My name is Michèle Lewis O’Donnell. I atended the last RTM on Oct 2, 2023, and in my public comment expressed my grave concern regarding the lack of transparency with town residents about the proposed data center on the Dominion Millstone site. It was disconcerting to hear at the opening of that meeting in Oct, when so many residents showed up in opposition to the data center, that the RTM was in a “passive role” with litle authority to intervene.
The NE Edge atorney, Mr. McCoy, made it clear in his update that the host agreement was “contractual.” How did our town end up in this hog-tied position, without a town-wide information meeting, without the normal bidding process on the project, without the critical input of residents? We are not talking about a standard data center, but one that is hyperscaled, 1.5 million sq ft!
What does that really mean? I did a litle research to gain perspective. The standard large data center is 100,000 sq ft, so the proposed center is 15 times this size and larger than the square footage of 26 football fields. Let me repeat, 26 football fields! CT has 17 data centers and the largest is 168,000 sq ft (almost 9 times smaller) located in Stamford. Most are much smaller than this. NE Edge, LLC. has no track record in building any data center, let alone a hyperscaled one. It is not surprising that 5 towns, including Groton, have refused to negotiate with NE Edge for this and other reasons, some of which residents have elaborated in the last RTM. We should be taking careful note.
In fact, Groton Planning and Zoning Commission unanimously voted in June 2023 to approve regulations to limit the size of data centers to 12,500 square feet (that’s 120 times smaller than the proposed center in Waterford), a move that will prevent the development of hyperscale facilities in the town. This was after a one-year moratorium on data centers larger than only 5,000 sq. ft. to give the Groton commission time to decide on how best to regulate the sector. To quote the Town Manager John Burt, “I agree that it’s important to take their time to make sure there are sound rules in place to protect any of our residents should a data center request to locate here in the future.”
This was a wise course of action in the absence of much needed guidance for communities from the state level to accompany the bill (no. 6514) to incentivize large-scale data centers in CT. This bill was unwisely rushed through the legislature in early 2021.
While we all want to support economic development and sustainability in our community, this massive data center may have long-term implications for the town's economic stability. While there may be initial economic benefits, such as welcomed work to the construction sector for a period of two years, if the data center faces financial challenges or becomes obsolete due to technological advancements, our town may be left with crippling financial burdens.
Another concern, not much talked about, is the potential release of hazardous materials and chemicals used in data center operations which can pose a direct threat to public health and the environment. Data centers often employ substances like coolants and cleaning agents that, if mishandled or released into the environment, can contaminate water supplies and soil. This contamination could lead to long-term health problems for the local population, including the risk of serious illnesses and reproductive issues, not to mention the deleterious impact on the marine, flora, and fauna ecology and biodiversity.
To conclude, my family, which has continuously lived in Pleasure Beach for over 101 years, opposes this project and the way it has been handled. What could happen now to recalibrate future steps and decisions with inclusion and transparency.
1. I request again, along with many others, that a town-wide information meeting to clearly inform and delineate for residents what has transpired so far and what the process is going forward. An explanation of the GANTT Chart, requested by Bryan Sayles, would be a good starting point. This meeting should include a time of listening and discussion with residents to address their concerns. The many rational concerns, for example, raised by Atorney John Valliere in his correspondence (entered in the minutes of the Oct 2023 RTM) with both the siting council and RTM member, Dan Radin could be used as talking points, as well.
2. How could the Waterford Planning and Zoning Commission work to put regulations in place regarding data center applications and rules of engagement that would establish guardrails to guide town administrators and officials, involve residents, and protect the community? I underscore the question: How could and should residents collaborate in this process to establish “sound rules?” This initiative would also do well to elicit involvement at the state level so that general guidance applicable to all communities could be efficiently shared and developed. For instance, guidance around noise assessment and mitigation. It is well known hyperscaled data centers are not normally located close to residential areas due to the continuous noise they produce. The NE Edge proposal is only 2000 feet from the Millstone residents. The Dominion Millstone site is uniquely surrounded by water on three sides. How will this amplify the noise generated? How will this affect the marine environment. We don’t want Long Island Sound to become data center sound!
3. In a similar vein to the guidance suggested above, it would be crucial to call for the state of CT to establish a task force made up of town representatives, for example, to investigate the emerging and substantial evidence around data centers and their negative impact on mental health and well-being. Data centers are a long-term project and potentially a long-term nightmare, literally, if we don’t do the due diligence now. Let’s not be short-sighted.
Thank you for your attention,
Michèle Lewis O’Donnell, PsyD
19 Nichols Lane
Jan 18 2024
Dear Mr. Courtney,
The Concerned Citizens of Waterford and East Lyme are extremely upset that our state government would support the approval of HB6514 with such an obvious financial advantage to the business owner and not to the town, its residents, property value, environment, the impact to insects, wetlands, waterfowl, marine life, the huge amount of 24/7 light, and constant sound.
Due to HB 6514, our town is denied real estate and personal property taxes on equipment appropriate to its actual value.
This government body did not research the financial side in favor of the town's economic well-being by creating HB 6514.
You have disappointed us all in Southeastern Connecticut.
We will be attending all our town's zoning meetings in regards to the Data Center but our own state's treasurer should have done the math.
Anyone with fixed asset knowledge of the cost of IT equipment and the square footage they are requesting, even with different mill rates gets a baseline.
Any town would be looking at taxes in the millions yearly.
Thank you for your time.
Sincerely, Suzanne Bouffard-Mahon Waterford, CT
Senator Martha Marx
Legislative Building Room 2200
Hartford CT 06106-1591
February 2024
Dear Senator Marx,
I am concerned about the environmental and health impacts of the proposed data center in Waterford CT.
I feel the items below will negatively impact local residents and wildlife of our community:
Neurological and cognitive disorders, such as headache, tremor, dizziness, memory and concentration loss, and sleep disturbance due to RF-EMF are associated with data centers according to several epidemiological studies.
Data centers have thousands of IT devices that require massive amounts of electricity. The U.S. Department of Energy states data centers consume up to 50 more energy than similar sized office buildings.
An average data center consumes about 450,000 gallons of water per day, comparable to that used to irrigate 17 acres of lawn turf. There are concerns about water usage affecting Millstone Point waters.
The power required to run and cool the servers often results in substantial greenhouse gas emissions and contributes to global warming.
Building a data center requires clearing a significant amount of land, which is disruptive to ecosystems and disrupts biodiversity. Our community is sensitive to wildlife affecting birds, amphibians, mammals.
Light from data centers disrupts migratory birds, sea life, and humans.
The amount of radiation emitted from an average data center is comparable to that of any office building contributing to unhealthy conditions for people, wildlife.
Waterford and East Lyme property values will fall because of a data center and problems.
Please we ask you to protect our citizens, wildlife, and coastline by supporting our initiative to stop a data center from being built at the Dominion Energy site in Waterford CT. Thank you.
Sincerely,
J. Tarasevich
Concerned Citizens of Waterford CT
Dear Matt Ritter,
It came to my attention that you were a sponsor of HB6514, an emergency rushed bill to entice data centers to the state of Connecticut by offering them tax free status.
As a resident of Millstone Point, I am opposed to the building of several, huge data centers there by NE Edge for many reasons that may not have been thought about when it was drafted.
I would like to discuss with you the possibility of amendments and additions to HB6514 that would safeguard Waterford, East Lyme and Connecticut residents. If you could meet with me or the Concerned Citizens of Waterford/East Lyme group, it would be much appreciated. Here is a quote from the founder of that group, Bryan Sayles:
“HB6514 exemplifies corporate welfare without rules to protect residents and prevent corporate overeach and greed. As written into law, it’s a vehicle for Dominion leaders, NE Edge and Waterford’s first selectman to create and rubber stamp their plan rife with antitrust implications of monopolization, unfair energy pricing and unfair trade practices that will last thirty years.”
Please help us revisit this bill for the benefit of all Connecticut residents. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Kathleen Pavlick
Waterford, Connecticut
Emails to/Responses from Politicians
Date: April 22, 2024
From: Kathleen Pavlick
To: Norm.Needleman@cga.ct.gov
Subject: HB299 [Edit. SB299]
Happy Earth Day!
But is it really? We must all do our part to make the earth, and therefore ourselves, happier.
Upon retirement, we sought happiness through enjoying nature and the earth by buying a beachhouse on the CT shore. The proposed building of several mega data centers at Millstone in Waterford, threatens enjoyment of our earth for all CT residents, and even the world. Before we suffer irreplaceable losses, the effects of this huge project needs to be researched and studied by independent experts. Please pass HB299.
Global warming affects everyone, as does the subsequent increase in severe weather worldwide. Deforestation and carbon emissions, significant contributors to global warming, will be byproducts of data centers. Large tracts of forested Millstone property will be cleared, destroying habitats of many species designated as “ threatened“ by DEEP. Trees contribute to clean air by removing co2 and releasing oxygen. Trees reduce storm water runoff and flooding, reducing erosion and pollution in waterways like the surrounding Long Island Sound, Niantic and CT rivers. One way we can stop the climate crisis is to stop deforestation.
With huge data centers using huge amounts of energy from Millstone, the rest of us will be paying higher electric bills. It’s simple supply vs. demand. We just had another electric bill price hike, even before the data center effect. To prevent future reliance on cheaper greenhouse gas emitting resources like oil and coal, we need to increase availability to all to more clean, nuclear energy. Add more generators on that Millstone property instead of letting one, non taxable, big corporation use all that land and have preferential access to that energy.
Instead of just planting trees on Earth Day that take decades to mature, save the existing mature and essential trees we already have. Planting a trillion trees would only prevent .15 degrees Celsius of warming. You can help by passing HB299 and stop the data centers from polluting CT.
We can live without Bitcoin and AI. We cannot live without clean air, water and energy.
Kathleen Pavlick
Waterford, CT
Re: Subject: SB-00299 JOINT FAVORABLE DRAFT REPORT
From: CCWEL Bryan Sayles <concernedcitizens.waterford@gmail.com>
To: Rep. Aundre Bumgardner, Rep. Holly Cheeseman
Apr 22, 2024
Dear Representatives Bumgardner and Cheeseman,
As Founder of Concerned Citizens of Waterford and East Lyme, CCWEL, I want to extend my gratitude for your work on SB-00299 to study the impact of data centers on our state's electric grid, a.k.a. energy security. Many Connecticut citizens were prepared when SB-00299 was presented during a public hearing on March 7, and many stepped forward to add their own voices in support of your initiative.
https://www.cga.ct.gov/aspx/CGADisplayTestimonies/CGADisplayTestimony.aspx?bill=SB-00299&doc_year=2024 However, in reading the Energy and Technology Committee's JOINT FAVORABLE REPORT, it puzzles me as to why there are inconsistencies in it. https://www.cga.ct.gov/2024/JFR/S/PDF/2024SB-00299-R00ET-JFR.PDF
Hopefully, you can talk to someone about it. For example:
Eighty-two (82) confirmed to have checked SUPPORT and provided a personal statement to back it up however, Abigail Lockwood only notes forty-seven (47) from CCWEL. Why are thirty-five (35) SUPPORT votes and/or statements missing in her report? My own VOTE (Bryan Sayles) of support among the missing!
Some members of the public mistakenly selected the word "oppose" from the drop down box. A simple and recognizable mistake proven by the testimony they included. Because of that, the following eight (8) individuals are listed as OPPOSED to the bill without their statements listed that would have given context to their true position on the subject of SB-00299: Rick Durham, Patricia DeAngelis, Diane Gent, Geri Johnson-Reis, Andrea Montovani, Meghan Sheehan, Ellen Spalluto, Jennifer Taylor.
Individually, Kate Lynch is listed in opposition to SB-00299, even though her comments indicate that she too is opposed to a data center being built on Millstone property.
Why then, was Tony Sheridan of the Chamber of Commerce of Eastern Connecticut who mistakenly voted in SUPPORT, allowed his OPPOSING comments on page 2 of the report when Durham, DeAngelis, Gent, Johnson-Reis, Montovani, Sheehan, Spalluto, and Taylor were not afforded the same chance at reversal? Ditto for Kate Lynch.
If the purpose of the report is for information, summation and explanation, then this one falls short. As is, it discounts the voices of nearly half of the residents who made an effort to participate in what should be a democratic and unbiased process. As is, it effectively diminishes the public's sentiment about controversial data center developments. As such, this version of the JOINT FAVORABLE REPORT dated April 4, 2024, should be replaced with a more accurate accounting of the vote and redistributed to the members of the General Assembly.
Your neighbor in Quaker Hill,
Bryan Sayles
From: Bryan Sayles
To: martha.marx@cga.ct.gov cc: "Rep. Bumgardner, Aundre" <Aundre.Bumgardner@cga.ct.gov>, holly.cheeseman@housegop.ct.gov, Breanna.Horton@cga.ct.gov
Apr 22, 2024, 4:44 PM
Subject: SB-00299
Dear Martha Marx,
On April 9, SB-00299 made it out of committee on the wings of a strong "yes" vote (15) against "no's" (4) with one (1) "abstained" and since, has resided on the Senate calendar awaiting a Senate vote. As your constituent, I am writing you to ask you to bring SB-00299 to a vote in the Senate for it to advance to the House for a vote BEFORE May 8, 2024, which as I understand, is the end of the legislative session.
For a lack of regulation, egregious power use, and resultant environmental damage, each and every data center proposal needs to be evaluated. In particular, the NE Edge, LLC/Dominion/Waterford hyper-scale data center proposal poses a significant threat to statewide energy security.
Passing SB-00299 will correct what we know was lost in year 2021 by the exclusion of Senator Mae Flexer's LCO 4286, an amendment to study data center proposals for quality of life and environmental impact. This legislation setup reminds me of an old saying..."Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me!" I think you get what I'm saying!
Please, do not miss an opportunity to pass SB-00299 in time for it to be voted on in the House before the end of this session.
I am including a link to Concerned Citizens of Waterford and East Lyme Google Documents Resource Website where we have compiled information about data centers including my PowerPoint about energy security. https://www.sites.google.com/view/ccwel-resources/home
Your neighbor in Quaker Hill,
Bryan Sayles
RESPONSE
Sen. Marx, Martha
Apr 22, 2024
Thank you Brian. I spoke with Senator Needleman, chair of Energy Committee, today and we have a meeting tomorrow before session. I have made it clear to leadership that it is a priority for me.
From: Andrew Lassman
Sent: Friday, March 15, 2024
To: Sen. Marx, Martha <Martha.Marx@cga.ct.gov>
Subject: Please support Senate Bill 299 - An Act Concerning Data Centers
State Senator Martha Marx
Please support Senate Bill 299 - An Act Concerning Data Centers.
There is much needed oversight regarding the presence of data centers in our communities and the drain on our power grid.
Of course, data centers are important, no one is arguing that.
Also important are:
– A safe and efficient location for a data center.
– Beneficial for the hosting and surrounding communities.
– A developer who is experienced and trusted in building them.
– A proper study on how a large-scale data centers might affect the reliability of the state’s electric grid.
As Groton Councilor Portia Bordelon said, “It’s strictly process, transparency, liability and the financial cost that it can create for the town,” she said. “I have been looking at the track record (of Thomas Quinn) in front of me and it has not been to the level of rigor that I initially anticipated. I don’t think Groton should be the forerunners on that and take the liability and the risk.” http://www.datacenterdynamics.com/ February 22, 2022 by Dan Swinhoe
The building of a large-scale data center at the Millstone Nuclear Power Station in Waterford is the wrong location for it additionally Thomas Quinn / NE Eddge is the wrong develper.
Andy Lassman
RESPONSE
From: "Horton, Breanna"
Date: March 18, 2024
To: Andrew Lassman
Subject: RE: Please support Senate Bill 299 - An Act Concerning Data Centers
Good morning, Andrew,
I trust this email finds you well. Thank you so much for reaching out to Senator Martha Marx's office with this informative push of support and to be a strong voice in this process. This bill is currently being reviewed by the Energy & Technology Committee which Senator Marx does not sit on. However, if it makes it through committee and is in front of her on the Senate Floor, she will be sure to review all testimony to gauge any common patterns and make an informed decision for her community.
Senator Marx has met with Dominion as well as Tom Quinn who is a Center Developer, to be able to extract as much information as she can even though it is still slim. She will continue to ask questions, as she's done, to stay up to date and current with this proposal. As more information comes in, we will be sure to spread the knowledge. I hope this is beneficial and thank you again for contacting Senator Marx's office to raise your concerns. Do not hesitate to reach out in the future.
All the best,
Breanna Horton, MSW (She/They)
Legislative Aide – Senator Martha Marx
Legislative Office Building, Suite 2200
300 Capitol Ave, Hartford CT, 06106
Breanna.Horton@cga.ct.gov
From: Judith Leary
Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2024
To: Sen. Marx, Martha <Martha.Marx@cga.ct.gov>
Subject: The coast line
Dear Senator Marx, I am writing to express one of my many concerns about the proposed data center at Dominion. The coastline will be hampered by the noise and light of this massive construction. Fauna and flora will be destroyed. Migratory birds will be thrown off course, fatigue and die. The deer, coyote, foxes, etc. will seek refuge elsewhere. The waters will be polluted and heated so sea-life will die. The promise of jobs and money at the risk of our coastline is going to change our town of Waterford for the worse. The citizens do not want to see our town ruined. Certainly there are other places it can be built.
Respectfully, Judith E. Leary
RESPONSE
From: Horton, Breanna <Breanna.Horton@cga.ct.gov>
Date: Mon, Mar 18, 2024
Subject: RE: The coast line
To: Judith Leary
Good morning, Judith,
I trust this email finds you well. Thank you so much for reaching out to Senator Martha Marx's office with this informative push of support and to be a strong voice in this process. The bill regarding the Data Center, SB 299, is currently being reviewed by the Energy & Technology Committee which Senator Marx does not sit on. However, if it makes it through committee and is in front of her on the Senate Floor, she will be sure to review all testimony to gauge any common patterns and make an informed decision.
Senator Marx has met with Dominion as well as Tom Quinn who is a Center Developer, to be able to extract as much information as she can even though it is still slim. She will continue to ask questions, as she's done, to stay up to date and current with this proposal. As more information comes in, we will be sure to spread the knowledge. I hope this is beneficial and thank you again for contacting Senator Marx's office to raise your concerns. Do not hesitate to reach out in the future.
All the best,
Breanna Horton, MSW (She/They)
Legislative Aide – Senator Martha Marx
Legislative Office Building, Suite 2200
300 Capitol Ave, Hartford CT, 06106
Thu, Mar 14, 6:20 PM
to Martha.marx@cga.ct.gov
Dear Senator Marx:
This is written to request you support SB 299, which requests a study on data centers and energy usage. As you are aware, the data center issue arose from a hastily crafted emergency law passed a few years back, when you were not yet in the Senate.
Given that a data center at Millstone will usurp 15% of the output of Millstone/Dominion power, it will put a big crimp in the electricity supply for everyday consumers. Additionally, and more importantly, it will totally upset the balance of Connecticut's goal of a green energy policy. Three hundred megawatts per year of green energy will simply be siphoned off by the data center. The emergency bill for the development of data centers is squarely opposed to Connecticut's goal of green energy which has been in place for years. I assume that was not thought of at the time of the law's passage.
Frankly, I am still trying to figure out why a large-scale data center is so important to Connecticut. At the law's inception, Gov Lamont says we "must get in the game" of data centers. Ultimately, the proposed data center in Waterford will only employ about 120 persons after it is built. Yes, there will be union builders' jobs for the 2 years the data center is developed if it comes to fruition, but then they will be gone once it is complete. Those union building jobs would be better used to create electricity facilities than green energy depleting facilities, which will employ more persons and be a better economic engine. Data centers are not a good economic engine.
If SB 299 is passed, I think a study will show that plugging a data center into Dominion will not only affect the New England grid (ISO), but also affect a major source for Connecticut's green energy and ultimately increased costs for power for your constituents through simple economics of supply and demand.
Thank you for taking the time to read this email.
John C Valliere, Esq.
This is a copy of the email sent this morning to Martha Marx. [Posted on CCWEL Facebook page 3/13/2024]
LETTER TO MARTHA. .[Marx]
Good morning Martha. As you are aware I am in total support regarding SB 299. To stop and think about this bad location in Waterford at our nuclear power plant taking 10% of its generating capacity from all Connecticut residents. This is also going to cause a legal battle when another data center wants the same sweetheart deal to directly plug into a power generator. Unfair trade practice! Monopoly. Thank you,
Ronald Elkin
8 Doyle Road
Waterford
From: Geralyn McPhail
Date: Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 10:32 AM
Subject: Data center energy guzzlers.
To: <norm.needleman@gmail.com>
Dear Rep [ed. Sen] Needleman,
I am a citizen of Waterford. I am very concerned with the energy issues we are facing in Connecticut. We are 2nd highest in the US. When the elected officials passed the emergency HB6514 did they even know what the drain on our grid would be? I doubt it. Did they think of the residents that live within the 2.5 radius of the 1,500,000 ft.² proposed Data Center? I doubt it.
NE Edge LLC will drain up to 300MW of power. Just think , 100MW can supply up to 80,000 homes (US DOE 2020). Connecticut residents are facing a possible 19% rate hike. How do we justifying letting these power guzzling companies come into our State sucking power straight off nuclear, which is our cheapest source of energy. We the people will have to pay more to subsidize the usage they take off the plant.
Our town didn’t give us a say in this build. The carpenters union, the local high school all new about this, yet we are being told next to nothing. I’ve heard the Atty for NE Edge is telling people, “it’s a done deal” a done deal?
How about the environmental pollution? The constant hum from the cooling systems they need to cool the servers. The constant low hum, will be a problem for human brains to filter out. Never mind the animals that will be affected.
“In total they eat up more than 2% of the world’s electricity & emit roughly as much CO2 as the airline industry.” (E360.Yale.edu)
As far as I know the property at Millstone is for Nuclear use only! How are they going to skip around this issue? I’m sick of people calling us NIMBY’s! In our neighborhood we have 5G, Nuclear, Nuclear waste storage, railroad and now this.
Thank you for your time,
Geralyn McPhail
Waterford, CT
On Mar 9, 2024, at 9:45 AM, Judith Leary wrote to norm.needleman@gmail.com :
Hello. The citizens of Waterford and East Lyme do not want a data center built at Dominion. It should not be built near railroad tracks, flooding areas, or nuclear power plants. We need to consider the noise, the light, the increased security threats, and the environment. It will ruin our coastline. There are safer ways to provide energy and make money.
RESPONSE
From: Norm Needleman <norm.needleman@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, Mar 10, 2024 at 7:51 PM
Subject: Re: Data Center at Dominion
To: Judith Leary
Thanks Judith
Norman Needleman
to: heather.somers@cga.ct.gov
date: Mar 7, 2024
subject: HB-6514 Question
Hello Senator Somers,
I have been researching HB-6514, "An Act Concerning Incentives for Qualified Data Centers to Locate in the State" and see that you were a co-sponsor. As co-sponsor and thus, a prominent proponent of that bill, I was hoping you could answer a question about the legislative decision making that ultimately pushed it through. In HB-6514's history Senator Mae Flexer attempted to amend the Bill to include sensible measures for protecting the quality of life of Connecticut residents and the environment. I found her amendment listed as LCO #4286 on a CT.gov site. (https://www.cga.ct.gov/asp/cgabillstatus/cgabillstatus.asp?selBillType=Bill&bill_num=HB06514&which_year=2021).
LCO #4286 resides under a heading titled Uncalled Amendments yet, I have no idea what that means.
What exactly is an uncalled amendment and if it is what I think it might be who was responsible for a decision to leave it as an uncalled amendment leaving LCO #4286 out of HB-6514?
While I await your reply I can confirm that HB-6514 does nothing to protect people's quality of life and the natural environment around us all. I think it's important to know exactly who was responsible for leaving that out. Your feedback about that detail would be greatly appreciated!
Yours Truly,
Bryan Sayles for
Concerned Citizens of Waterford and East Lyme (CCWEL)
RESPONSE
from: Sen. Somers, Heather <Heather.Somers@cga.ct.gov>
date: Mar 7, 2024
subject: Re: HB-6514 Question
Dear Bryan:
I believe the original bill passed almost unanimously out of the legislature allowing municipalities to decide if they want to host data centers.
An uncalled amendment is an amendment that has been put on the bill but the introduced of the amendment decided to not call it for whatever reason on the floor when the bill was discussed.
I hope that answers you question-
Best,
Heather Somers