Illinois mulls pros and cons of data centers
Why it matters: While data centers can bring temporary jobs and property tax revenue, they also come with largely unreported energy and water demands and relatively few permanent jobs.
Case in point: Building a 250,000-square-foot data center employs up to 1,500 local employees for 12-18 months. But that declines to 50 full-time workers, half of them contracted, according to a 2023 state-commissioned report in Virginia, the country's data center hub.
The big picture: Data centers used 4.4% of U.S. electricity in 2023 and could consume up to 12% by 2028, per the U.S. Department of Energy.
Construction of these facilities, which house computer systems, servers and storage infrastructure, is at an all-time high, increasing 69% year over year from 2023 to 2024, per CBRE, a commercial real estate firm.
They can be "hypescalers" — serving the needs of one big client — or "colocation" centers that rent out space to several companies.
Zoom in: The Midwest, with its relatively cheap land, cooler temps and proximity to Great Lakes water, offers some big advantages over other parts of the country.
By the numbers: The Chicago metro area hosts 154 data centers, with 222 across the state, creating about 20,000 jobs and $3.5 billion in direct labor revenue in 2023, per a data center industry-commissioned report.
The state's Data Centers Investment Program dispensed more than $650 million in tax incentives between 2020 and 2023, yielding $11 billion in total investments and 469 new permanent jobs, per a state report.
Yes, but:"We want a better sense of their water and energy usage and how it will impact costs, consumer prices and consumption," state Sen. Steve Stadelman, a Democrat, tells Axios. "There really hasn't been a lot of insight into this because it's still a relatively new trend."
He's sponsoring Senate Bill 2181, which would require greater energy and water transparency. It's expected to be included in an omnibus energy package in Springfield next month along with another measure instituting " build your own new clean energy" provisions, or B-YONCE, for new data centers.
The other side: Laurance Lewis of Metro Edge Development Partners, which works with data center projects, tells Capitol News Illinois that the legislation could be "unduly burdensome" for collocation centers with multiple clients, "whose energy and water consumption may not be metered precisely."
Between the lines: Data center proponents say their growth is being driven by consumer demand, noting a Deloitte survey that shows the average U.S. household owned 21 digital devices in 2023.
As companies build to meet that surging demand, energy is a "significant cost driver," so it's in their best interests to be efficient, Dan Diorio of the Data Center Coalition, tells Axios.
What's next: State measures on data centers should become clearer in late May as bills get consolidated and modified near the end of the legislative session.
What we're watching: Announcements for more data center projects.
"I know that there are a number of entities that are exploring different locations in Chicago," Mayor Brandon Johnson tells Axios.
"Those conversations have been relatively productive, and there's still a lot to learn to determine of ... not just the footprint, but the type of job opportunities that are provided. ... But, again, we're still looking to figure out what the footprint looks like and whether Chicago is the ultimate viable place for some of these locations."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
As Trump eyes election changes, Secretary Bellows warns of fallout
Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows in downtown Portland in August following the conference of the National Association of Secretaries of State. (Emma Davis/ Maine Morning Star) 'What are the consequences?' This is the question Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows kept asking during discussions of President Donald Trump's efforts to change the voting process at the conference of the National Association of Secretaries of State, the oldest nonpartisan professional organization for public officials, in Biloxi, Mississippi earlier this month. The day after it ended, Aug. 8, Bellows officially responded to the U.S. Department of Justice's request for sweeping voter data, questioning the federal agency's intentions and asking that the request be withdrawn. She has yet to receive a response. 'What we're seeing right now is a dramatic expansion in federal power, coming from the Trump administration, over the states and the people that upends the very concept of our democratic republic,' Bellows said in a sit-down with Maine Morning Star after the conference. 'Anyone who cares about states' rights and individual freedom should be concerned about federal agencies engaged in an unprecedented power grab.' Bellows, a Democrat who is running for governor in 2026, said she was reassured to hear from secretaries on both sides of the aisle who are concerned about federal intrusion into elections, which are administered by the states, not the federal government, under the U.S. Constitution. But she returned from the conference with more questions than answers regarding the Trump administration's intentions and the repercussions of some secretaries embracing the federal requests. Trump wants Congress to pass a national proof of citizenship voter registration requirement and in March tried to unilaterally impose one for federal elections through executive order, but the legislation stalled and the order was halted by the courts. Some states have individually passed laws to require documented proof of citizenship to vote, including New Hampshire and Wyoming, whose secretaries of state presented at the conference. A federal judge dismissed a lawsuit against Wyoming's law in July. Two lawsuits filed against New Hampshire's law are still pending in federal district court. 'All of us agree that only citizens should vote in federal elections. That's in the Constitution. That's not the debate,' Bellows said. Rather, Bellows' concern is how added requirements would work in practice and, she expects, could create barriers for legitimate voters, particularly in a state like Maine with sizable rural, low-income and senior populations. Already, people registering to vote must sign a statement affirming they are citizens under penalty of perjury. Noncitizens who register to vote or cast a ballot face criminal penalties and deportation. One study of the 2016 election estimated the prevalence of noncitizen voting at 0.0001% of votes cast. However, conservatives in Maine and elsewhere have shared unsubstantiated claims of noncitizen voting. 'Then the concern becomes, from a very practical place, what is the impact on actual citizens and their constitutional right to vote?' Bellows said. In New Hampshire, some legitimate voters have been turned away due to the new requirements. Bellows, who oversees Maine's Bureau of Motors Vehicles, says insight into potential impact in Maine can be gleaned from the rollout of Real ID requirements, which she says have tripped up long-time Mainers while being easier for new citizens who have their documents readily available. For example, she said, some people who grew up in Aroostook or Washington counties were born in Canada because the nearest hospital was across the border, so birth certificates aren't a document they can use for citizenship proof. 'We have heard from dozens of customers who have complained that it has sometimes taken them many months or almost a year to get certified birth certificates from other states if they were born out of state,' Bellows said, 'or marriage information from other states. Particularly people who've experienced both marriage and divorce, those documents may not be documents that they have kept.' Seniors are the least likely to have that documented proof, partly because of higher likelihood of misplacement or damage over time, Bellows said, plus the added barrier of having to pay to get new copies. 'Ironically, some of these policies are most likely to disproportionately impact senior citizens living in rural areas, which predominantly voted for Trump in the last election,' she said. With federal legislation and the executive order stalled, the Trump administration is attempting a backdoor way to accomplish its goal of requiring documented proof of citizenship for voting, Maine Morning Star's partner outlet Stateline reports. The Trump administration is urging states to use an existing federal immigration database, called the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) program, that it has refashioned into a platform to verify voters' citizenship. Originally intended to help state and local officials verify the immigration status of people seeking government benefits, searching one name at a time, SAVE can now do bulk searches, allowing for the scanning of full voter rolls. These changes also come as the U.S. Department of Justice is asking Maine and other states for copies of their voter rolls. Bellows told Stateline she had a recent phone call with officials at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security who said the agency planned to retain SAVE data for 10 years for 'audit purposes only.' 'Just like the [Justice Department] is asking us to hand over an electronic file of all the voters in our state, it seems like the Department of Homeland Security is through this backdoor system also asking us to share voter information about every voter in our state,' Bellows told Stateline. Another possible change to elections discussed at the conference was also part of Trump's executive order but hasn't drawn as much attention: directing the independent Election Assistance Commission to amend a set of security benchmarks for voting machines. Donald Palmer, commissioner of the Election Assistance Commission who was nominated to the role by Trump in 2019, gave a presentation on how the commission is trying to implement the order by amending the Voluntary Voting System Guidelines to require paper ballots and remove bar codes and QR codes, which could lead to the decertification of certain voting systems. 'The concern about that is that seems to be a path to decertifying the election or challenging legitimate election results held by the states,' Bellows said. Bellows sees the move as a way the Trump administration is setting the stage for more federal intervention in future elections. As a member of the elections committee of National Association of Secretaries of State, Bellows said she and other secretaries continue to meet every other week, sometimes more frequently as issues emerge, to press state and federal officials on the reasoning behind voting and election changes. When asked about other proactive measures she is taking, Bellows said she hopes to keep the state on its current path. 'Our greatest defense against what the federal government seems to be trying to do to undermine voter confidence and take over aspects of our elections is to continue to run really great elections,' she said. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Here's how Trump could throw a ‘wrench' into Hill funding negotiations as shutdown looms
President Donald Trump's budget director has talked about attempting the ultimate override of Congress' funding prerogatives during the final 45 days of the fiscal year — and that time is now. With six weeks left until Oct. 1, lawmakers are staring down a government shutdown deadline alongside the threat of a 'pocket rescission,' a controversial White House tactic to cancel federal cash without the consent of Congress. It's also a ploy that the government's top watchdog, along with key lawmakers from both parties, say is illegal. 'The money evaporates at the end of the fiscal year,' White House budget chief Russ Vought said last month in defense of the gambit, adding it has 'been used before.' Lawmakers anticipate Trump will send Congress a formal rescissions request to claw back billions of dollars in federal funding as soon as lawmakers return from recess in September. Already, the threat of the White House then unilaterally canceling the funding in October — regardless of Congress' response to the request — is straining negotiations between Democrats and Republicans desperately trying to head off a shutdown with bipartisan negotiations, which Vought is also actively seeking to undermine. 'He is trying to throw a wrench in this by introducing or sending to us a second rescission bill — by trying to do pocket rescissions,' Delaware Sen. Chris Coons, the top Democrat on the appropriations panel that funds the military, said of Vought in an interview. It also would undoubtedly throw Republicans into another politically dicey balancing act of trying not to buck their president while answering to constituents who are feeling the effects of the administration's mass gutting of widely used government programs. Congress cleared an initial rescissions package of $9 billion in cuts to public broadcasting and foreign aid in July. The White House has stayed publicly mum on what sort of programming it would seek to slash next, but officials have previously signaled the Department of Education will be the target of a second package, which could align with Trump's controversial goal of eventually eliminating the agency altogether. As for the size of this upcoming clawbacks request, Republicans have mixed predictions. Last month, Speaker Mike Johnson told members that a second package would be less than the $9 billion, but other GOP lawmakers said they expect to be asked to revoke much more money than that. Under decades-old budget law, the White House is allowed to send Congress a rescissions request and then withhold the cash for 45 days while lawmakers consider whether to approve, reject or ignore the proposal. If lawmakers don't pass the rescissions bill, the administration must spend the money as Congress intended. These were the conditions under which the administration transmitted its most recent plan. Now, with less than 45 days before the current fiscal year comes to a close, top Trump administration officials argue the White House can send another rescissions package and then treat the funding as expired come midnight on Sept. 30 — regardless of congressional action. And if the White House moves forward with the plan, it could do more than just cause political headaches. It very likely would kick off a high-stakes legal battle over Congress' funding power and whether a presidential administration must spend all of the money prescribed by law or whether the spending levels are simply 'a ceiling,' as Vought has contended. The Government Accountability Office has said repeatedly that pocket rescissions are against the law and would 'cede Congress's power of the purse by allowing a president to, in effect, change the law by shortening the period of availability for fixed-period funds.' Vought has taken aim at the watchdog, and Mark Paoletta, the Office of Management and Budget general counsel, piled on this month. 'Trump Derangement Syndrome is on full display' at GAO, Paoletta said on social media, and 'wrong on pocket rescissions.' 'Congress is well aware' that the law allows the maneuver, he added, pointing out that lawmakers did not bother heeding GAO's urging 50 years ago to fix a loophole leaving the legality question open to interpretation. Yet even some of the Republican lawmakers who are hungry for more chances to kill funding are wary of the Trump administration using the rescissions process to undermine Congress' funding power under Article I of the Constitution. Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), who reluctantly voted in support of the rescissions request last month, said he won't support more clawback packages if the White House doesn't provide account-by-account details of how the funding would be cut. 'I'm just not going to aid and abet moving appropriations decisions over to the Article II branch,' Tillis said in an interview. Trump 'just happens to be a Republican,' Tillis continued, but 'we could regret this, just as Democrats would, if they are tempted to do the same thing. That's why you've got to draw lines here institutionally.' Concerns about precedent, legality and political appetite are converging on the reality for members of both parties that Republicans can't afford to alienate Democrats, whose votes they likely need to pass any government funding bill to avoid a shutdown next month. Senate Majority Leader John Thune, when asked about a second rescissions package, stressed he would prefer to handle any more cuts through the regular appropriations process. 'My hope would be that that's the way we deal with a lot of these issues,' he said. Democrats hope so too, and they have warned that any Trump administration effort to claw back money already approved by Congress — 'pocket' or otherwise — would undermine lawmakers' ability to work across party lines to avoid a shutdown. In remarks late last month alongside House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and his party's senior appropriators, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said Democrats would try to reach a compromise with Republicans despite GOP lawmakers' approval of the latest $9 billion rescissions package. But, he added, 'Republicans are making it extremely difficult to do that … by talking about rescissions, pocket rescissions, impoundment — which would undo anything that we did in the budgets.'
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
License plate flippers outlawed in Illinois under new law starting Jan. 1
A new law banning license plate flippers was signed and is expected to take effect Jan. 1, 2026, according to a community announcement. The measure, introduced by State Sen. Steve Stadelman, D-Loves Park, was designed to address concerns about drivers using devices to hide or switch license plates and avoid legal consequences. The law clarifies that using tape, flippers or any device to obscure registration plates or evidence of registration issued by the Illinois Secretary of State is illegal, according to the announcement. 'All drivers need to be held to the same standards on the road,' Stadelman said in the announcement. 'People shouldn't be using plate flippers to skip tolls, dodge cameras or evade police." Illinois joins other states in outlawing license plate flippers, which are often used to avoid identification during traffic violations. Senate Bill 1883 was signed into law in July. This story was created by reporter Abreanna Blose, ablose@ with the assistance of Artificial Intelligence (AI). Journalists were involved in every step of the information gathering, review, editing and publishing process. Learn more at This article originally appeared on Rockford Register Star: Illinois bans license plate flippers starting in 2026 Solve the daily Crossword
